Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-10-22

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)

Many people give opinons that the most important goals of science should be required to improve people'slives. I compeletly agree with this Idea, because science can destory anyone nowdays by attracting in different sides, such as social media, games and betting. However,if science have a good intention for human being, Individuals can take advantage by using science rather than being destroyed.

There are various reasons why I believe that sciecee aim should be to enhance people's lives. Firstly, nowadays most of the people spend their time by using social media. This is because social media are made this way so that individuals become facinated to use. Besides, many young people at the present spendign their whole time by playing vedio games instead of studing regularly. This is heppening because science has made many gam apps to demolish young people;s lives. Furhtermore, in our community we can see that many adult are involved with gambling by using science made appps.

However, if science goal is beneficial for people's lives, it would help individuals to get success in their life faster rather than being destroyed. Like, if science delete all of the apps that waste young people time, such as social madeia, games and betting, younger students can focus on their studing attentively and take help from science. In UK, for example, younger individuals cannot access to social media , games and betting. As a result, their country citizens are more educated than other countries.

In conclusion, I believe that the most importan aim of science should be to improve people's lives.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

Your position is clear: you agree that science should improve people’s lives, and you attempt to explain this through the effects of social media, games and betting. However, the response only partially develops the task. Much of the discussion presents these technologies as harmful, rather than explaining more broadly how science should prioritise improving lives. The proposed solution—that science should “delete all of the apps”—is narrow and does not consider other scientific fields or possible benefits. The claim about people in the UK being unable to access these apps, and consequently being more educated, is not convincingly supported. Develop a few relevant reasons with accurate, specific examples and explain how each supports your position.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, two body paragraphs and a conclusion. The main position is repeated in the conclusion, and signposts such as “Firstly,” “Furthermore” and “In conclusion” help identify stages of the argument. However, progression between ideas is limited: the first body paragraph lists social media, games and gambling without clearly connecting them to the broader purpose of science. “However” introduces a contrast that is not fully established, and the second body paragraph moves quickly from banning apps to a claim about education in the UK. Use topic sentences to state each paragraph’s central point, then explain and support it in sequence. Clearer links between claims and examples would make the organisation more coherent and less dependent on formulaic transitions.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some vocabulary relevant to the topic, including “take advantage,” “beneficial” and “focus,” and the reader can generally identify your intended meaning. However, the range is limited and several inaccurate word choices or collocations make parts difficult to understand. For example, “science can destroy anyone … by attracting in different sides” does not express the intended idea clearly, while “science made apps” and “delete all of the apps” are imprecise. Spelling errors such as “opinons,” “facinated” and “studing” are also noticeable. Build a more accurate topic vocabulary and check spelling and word forms. Prefer precise expressions such as “digital platforms can be addictive” or “scientific innovation should serve public well-being.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and complex sentences, including a conditional structure in “if science goal is beneficial … it would help individuals.” However, control is inconsistent, and frequent errors in sentence structure, verb forms, agreement and punctuation sometimes make the meaning difficult to follow. For instance, “if science have a good intention” has incorrect subject–verb agreement, and “most of the people spend their time by using social media” uses an awkward grammatical pattern. The sentence beginning “Like, if science delete…” also lacks accurate verb forms and is not smoothly connected to the surrounding argument. Practise forming accurate conditional sentences and check agreement, articles and punctuation. Shorter, well-controlled sentences would help you communicate your ideas more clearly while you develop complex structures.

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.