Band 4.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 4.5 · 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 4.5)

The main purpose of scientific research should be make better peoples quality of time

science plays important role in modern life,and its main purpose should be make peoples life better.I strongly agree with this view because scientific development can mak every day life easy

i strongly agree that improving peoples life shuold be the main aim of science

Example

medical science has develope vaccines and new treatment that help to prevent diseses and save mny lives

HEALTH AND MEDICINES

one major reason why i agree with this view is tha science has greatly improved human health

scientific research have help many doctors to develope vaccines for the treatment of people thats why they live longer than before and have healtheier life than before

EXAMPLE

vaccines have help people to cure disease like polio,measles protecting millions of people around the word

Therefore, medical developments show how peoples life become better and can directly improve eoples life

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

The student attempts to address the prompt regarding whether the main aim of science should be to improve people's lives, expressing a clear agreement. However, the response falls severely short of the required 250-word minimum, containing only 155 words. This under-length severely limits the development of ideas, leading to repetitive statements such as 'I strongly agree with this view' appearing multiple times alongside fragmented phrases and capitalised headings like 'EXAMPLE' and 'HEALTH AND MEDICINES'. While the writer manages to introduce medical science and vaccines as a supporting point, the overall development remains extremely limited and under-developed due to the lack of sufficient length and extension. Consequently, the task is only partially addressed, which heavily impacts the score for this criterion.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 4.5

The response shows a basic attempt at organisation, using transition markers such as 'Therefore' and 'one major reason why i agree'. However, the structure is severely disrupted by disjointed fragments, repetitive restatements of the thesis, and unstructured headings like 'Example' and 'HEALTH AND MEDICINES'. There is no clear paragraph progression, and the text reads more like a collection of disconnected notes or rough draft ideas than a cohesive essay. Paragraphing is inappropriate, with many single-sentence lines that break the flow of the argument. Referencing and cohesive devices are inadequate or overused in a repetitive manner, leading to an overall arrangement that lacks logical progression and coherence.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

The lexical range is limited and repetitive, with basic vocabulary deployed throughout the text. Words such as 'science', 'life', 'people', and 'disease' are repeated frequently without variation. There are noticeable errors in word formation and choice, including 'develope' instead of 'developed', 'diseses' instead of 'diseases', 'mny' instead of 'many', and 'healtheier' instead of 'healthier'. While the student attempts some subject-specific vocabulary related to medicine such as 'vaccines', 'treatment', 'polio', and 'measles', the heavy presence of spelling and word-choice errors restricts the lexical score. The vocabulary used is minimally adequate to convey the basic topic, but fails to demonstrate flexibility or precision.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 4.0

The grammatical range is extremely limited, consisting mostly of simple sentences and faulty attempts at complex structures. Punctuation and capitalisation are largely neglected, with missing periods at the ends of sentences, missing apostrophes in words like 'peoples', and lowercase 'i' used for the pronoun. There are frequent grammatical errors, such as 'should be make better' instead of 'should make better' or 'should be to make better', and 'scientific research have help' instead of 'scientific research has helped'. These errors are frequent and often cause difficulty for the reader, pulling the score down into the lower band.

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.