Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-10-20

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)

In this era the science make the life very easy as compared to past. The people are working on science to develop more technology which gives comfirtable and easy life to others. I agree with this statement and i will explain it in paragraphs bellow.

To beggin with, science totally change the life of people as it compared to past. It develop different technologies to make everyones life easy. For example, the people can go everywhere with the help of cars, buses and aeroplanes etc. The sceintist working in science to improve the of people and we see the science gives many facilities. They just worked in positive way but we made in negative way like uranium enrichment is done for producing energy which is very useful but we also used in atom bombs to destroy the word. In starting the scientist made all the technologies which have positive affects on people then governments use these for destroying another countries by making new dangerous equipments. I think so in this era the positives of science are much more then it negatives which gives idea about that it is just made for good purposes. All the technology which make our life very easy is just due to science and it is on us how we used it in which way.

To conclude, the science improves our life in many ways and we just used if for good purposes. All the things have their own merits and demerits and it is on us how we used it. We would make it more beneficial and countries make a law to stop the manufacturing of dangerous equipments which harms the living organisms.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is clear: you agree that science should improve people’s lives, and you support this with examples of transport and the use of nuclear technology for energy and weapons. You also acknowledge that scientific developments can be used destructively, then argue that their benefits outweigh their harms. This addresses the main question, but the discussion of whether improving lives should be science’s most important aim is not fully explored. For example, the transport example shows a benefit but does not explain its wider impact, while the point about governments using technology for weapons could be developed further. To strengthen the response, explain why improving lives should take priority over other possible aims of science and extend each example with clearer reasoning.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, a main paragraph and a conclusion, and the ideas generally relate to your position. Phrases such as “To begin with” and “To conclude” help signal stages of the argument. However, the main paragraph contains several ideas—transport, scientific benefits, uranium, weapons and government actions—without clear separation or a steady progression. Some links are also difficult to follow, particularly “They just worked in positive way but we made in negative way,” where the reference of “they” and “we” is unclear. Organise the body into distinct points, use clear topic sentences, and make pronoun references explicit. This would make the overall progression easier to follow and reduce the impression of ideas being joined mechanically.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some relevant topic vocabulary, including “technology,” “uranium enrichment,” “atom bombs,” and “manufacturing,” which helps communicate the subject. However, the range is limited and several words or phrases are repeated, especially “easy,” “life,” and “science.” There are also noticeable spelling and word-choice problems, such as “comfirtable,” “sceintist,” “affects” where “effects” is intended, and “destroying the word” instead of “destroying the world.” Some expressions are imprecise or unnatural, including “improve the of people” and “dangerous equipments.” Build a wider set of accurate phrases for discussing benefits, risks and priorities, and check spelling and collocations carefully. More precise vocabulary would make your argument clearer and more convincing.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and longer sentence forms, including a contrast between the beneficial and harmful uses of technology. However, control of sentence structure and basic grammar is inconsistent, and errors sometimes make relationships between ideas difficult to understand. Examples include “the science make the life,” “It develop different technologies,” and “the positives of science are much more then it negatives,” which show problems with agreement, articles and sentence construction. The final sentence, “countries make a law,” also has an unclear grammatical relationship between the subject and the intended recommendation. Practise accurate present-tense agreement, articles and plural forms, and build longer sentences from clearly connected clauses. Proofreading each sentence for its subject and verb would improve accuracy.

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.