Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-10-11

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 5.5)

The issue of whether the aim of science should be to improve people's lives has sparked considerable debate. I strongly agree that the objectives of science should be to upgrade the living standards of peoples, because science belongs to inventions. we should focus on solving problems of peoples lives by using technology e.g, in medicines, cure of diseases and many more.

One of the main reasons why objectives of science should be to improve people's lives is people are suffering with incurable diseases we should focus on to finding the solutions. The death rate is increasing day by day. another reason is the food. science is busy in lab making artificial food for future and it is very harmful. Scientist are producing genetical modified food which is affecting the fertility. They are destroying the nature by polluting the environment instead of doing better things for it.

In addition, scientist are thinking they are doing great work in the field of technology undoubtedly, it is correct but there are many consequences of it. as I mentioned above they are destroyig the environment. Our environment is in danger becuase of deforestation and raising threats of global warming. The earth's temperature is increasing and glaciers are melting increasing the risks of floods. These issues are increasing day by day while, Scientists are busy in technology more than environmental issues that is harming people's lives. They are upgrading the technology like chatgpt and other features.

From the above analyses, it is very clear that science is ignoring people's lives because their main focus is technology only not the environment and peoples. They are not doing things for humans that makes their lives better. In my point of view, the objectives of science should be to enhance people's lives rather than putting them into danger by polluting the environment.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

Your position is clear: you strongly agree that science should improve people’s lives, and you refer to health, food, pollution and climate change. These are relevant areas, but the response only partly develops the task because it often criticises current scientific priorities without explaining in detail how science could improve lives or weighing the broader purpose of scientific research. For example, the claim that genetically modified food affects fertility is presented without evidence or explanation, and the discussion of disease does not give a specific example of scientific progress. To strengthen the response, develop two or three central reasons with clear explanations and credible examples, and clarify whether you believe all science should serve this aim or that it should be its most important aim.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0

The essay has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, supporting paragraphs and a conclusion, and phrases such as “One of the main reasons” and “In addition” signal new points. However, the overall progression is not consistently clear: the second and third body paragraphs repeat concerns about environmental damage, while the discussion moves abruptly from disease to food and then to technology. Some links are also awkward or unclear, such as “These issues are increasing day by day while, Scientists are busy in technology.” Plan each paragraph around one distinct reason, connect each claim to its explanation or example, and use referencing carefully to show how ideas relate. This would reduce repetition and make the argument easier to follow.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use some topic-related vocabulary, including “incurable diseases,” “fertility,” “deforestation” and “global warming,” which helps communicate the subject. However, the range is limited by repeated general words such as “people,” “things” and “technology,” and several choices or forms are inaccurate or unnatural: “upgrade the living standards,” “science belongs to inventions,” and “genetical modified food.” Spelling errors such as “destroyig” and “becuase” also reduce accuracy. Aim for more precise, natural collocations and avoid claims whose wording is unclear. For instance, specify the scientific field or impact rather than repeatedly referring to technology in general; this will make your argument more exact and easier to understand.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and longer sentences, and the reader can generally identify your main position. However, the range is limited, and complex sentences are often faulty. Examples include “One of the main reasons … is people are suffering,” which needs a clearer clause structure, and “we should focus on to finding the solutions,” where the verb pattern is incorrect. There are also frequent problems with sentence boundaries and punctuation, as in “another reason is the food. science is busy…” and “undoubtedly, it is correct but…”. Agreement and article use are also inconsistent, for example “Scientist are producing.” Practise building accurate clauses with because, although and which, and check sentence starts, verb forms and punctuation.

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.