Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-09-27

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

The most important aim of science should be to improve people’s lives. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Give reasons for your answers and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

 

Student answer (Band 5.0)

It is often argued by some people that the major goal of science should be to improved the humans lives. Although some might disagree with this notion, I completely agree. Not only because of improve medical field and improvement in education, but also because of better living stander.

There are multiple benefit associated with the science aim. Firstly, improve medical field. As science help in medical field to invent the treatment of the dangers disease and also invent the another treatment quickly. Take an example of China, the medical team invent the treatment of malaria with the help of science in 1967. Thus, science should be improve the medical field for humans.

Secondly, education improvement is the another benefit. As science develop the advance infrastructure of education for student. For instance, a survey conduct in Germany, most people said that science develop the advance infrastructure of the education. Hence, science should helped in education development.

Finally, science should improve the living stander of the people's. As they invent the advance machine for the help of people work and better life. For instance, in Japan, today better enjoy the better life stander with the help of science because science invent a different tool and machine and also improve the medical field. Thus, this is the helpful to improve people lives.

To sum up, I believe that improve the medical field, improvement in education and better stander is the most important aim of science which should help to improve the people's lives.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.0

The response addresses the prompt by taking a clear position that science should primarily aim to improve human lives. The writer attempts to support this viewpoint across three main body paragraphs by highlighting improvements in medicine, education, and living standards. However, the ideas are underdeveloped and rely heavily on simplistic generalisations and weak, unsupported examples, such as a vague reference to a survey in Germany or a discovery in China in 1967. While all parts of the task are addressed, the lack of fully developed arguments and specific, convincing evidence places this response firmly at Band 5.0 according to the task achievement descriptors.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0

The essay demonstrates some basic organisation with an introduction, three body paragraphs, and a conclusion, showing an awareness of paragraphing. However, there is a lack of clear overall progression, and the logical links between ideas are frequently mechanical or inadequate, using repetitive transitional phrases like 'Firstly', 'Secondly', and 'Finally'. Referencing is also problematic at times, and cohesive devices are often inaccurate or clumsy, as seen in sentences like 'As science help in medical field to invent the treatment'. These features correspond closely to the Band 5 descriptors for coherence and cohesion.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

The vocabulary used is limited and repetitive throughout the essay, with frequent errors in word formation and choice, such as 'improved the humans lives' instead of 'human lives', 'living stander' instead of 'standard', and 'dangers disease'. The writer attempts some less common vocabulary, like 'infrastructure' and 'associated', but these are often used inaccurately or inappropriately in context. Because the lexical range is narrow and noticeable errors cause some difficulty for the reader at times, this performance aligns with Band 5.0 for lexical resource.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The essay displays a very limited range of grammatical structures. Most complex sentences attempted are faulty and ungrammatical, characterised by frequent errors such as missing auxiliary verbs, incorrect verb forms ('science should be improve', 'science should helped'), and persistent punctuation and agreement issues. Simple sentences are also prone to basic errors. Because frequent grammatical errors impede fluency and cause difficulty for the reader, the appropriate band score for grammatical range and accuracy is 4.5, rounded to 5.0 based on positive marking for the overall attempt at sentence variety.

See this exact question answered at other band scores. The same prompt compared across bands.

Browse more IELTS Writing model answers or get your own writing scored by the same AI examiner.