Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-10-27

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 6.5)

Improving people's standard of living should be the main aim of science. I strongly agree that science should focus on making people's life easy and comfortable.

Some people might argue that the most vital aim of science should be discovering how nature works. People think that science should be used as a mean to increase one's knowledge about the world and not just a tool to improve living standards of people. Scientists should put more energy in exploring Earth, like how volcanoes are formed, why tactonic plates move, and what smog is?. For example, rather than spending all its resources on making people's life more comfortable, science should focus on exploring the milky way galaxy to increase our existing knowlege about our planet.

However, all this information about nature, our planet, and our galaxy would be useless, if it is not used for the betterment of humankind. There would be no point of increasing one's knowledge about something, if we are not going to use that knowledge to improve our living standard. If scientists spend his or her time and resources understanding a disease and does not use that knowledge to find a cure, it would be a waste of time and resources. For example, if windmills were not developed after the discovery that wind could be used as a form of energy, there would be no point in having the knowledge that wind can be used as a form of energy.

In conclusion, people might argue that science has bigger objective than to just improve people's life, but if the knowledge is not used for the betterment of humankind, it might not make any difference. Science discover about different aspects of this world so that it can improve people's life.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

Your position is clear from the opening: you strongly agree that science should improve people’s lives, and you acknowledge the counterargument that science also expands knowledge of nature. The disease-and-cure example and the discussion of wind energy are relevant ways to support your view. This addresses the task, but the ideas are not developed equally: the counterargument’s examples about volcanoes, tectonic plates and the galaxy are listed rather than explained, and the windmill example could show more clearly how scientific discovery leads to practical benefits. To strengthen the response, explain the value of knowledge for its own sake before showing why improving lives should remain the priority, and develop each example with a specific consequence.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The essay has a clear overall structure: an introduction, a paragraph presenting an opposing view, a response to that view, and a conclusion. Transitions such as “However” and “In conclusion” help readers follow the argument, and the contrast between knowledge and practical application gives the response a logical direction. Some connections are less smooth or precise, however. The first body paragraph moves from Earth science to the Milky Way without explaining the relationship, while “all this information” refers broadly to several examples. The conclusion also repeats the central claim rather than drawing together the reasoning. Use clearer links between examples and the main point, and vary referencing so that each connection is explicit rather than relying on broad phrases.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range of topic-related vocabulary, including “living standards,” “exploring,” “resources,” “disease,” and “energy.” Phrases such as “betterment of humankind” show an attempt to use more formal language, and the meaning is generally clear. However, some word choices and collocations are inaccurate or repetitive: “science discover” is not the correct form, “a mean” is an incorrect expression, and “making people’s life easy and comfortable” is less natural than a more precise formulation. There are also spelling errors, including “tactonic” and “knowlege.” Aim for accurate collocations and check spelling carefully; using a few precise terms such as “scientific research,” “practical applications,” and “quality of life” would make the argument more fluent.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use both simple and complex sentence forms, including conditional structures such as “if windmills were not developed…” and a relative clause in “the discovery that wind could be used…”. These structures help express contrast and cause and effect, and the main argument remains understandable. Some grammatical errors persist, particularly with agreement, articles, and sentence construction. For example, “Scientists should put more energy” needs an article or a different construction, “if scientists spend his or her time” has a subject–pronoun agreement problem, and “Science discover” has an incorrect verb form. The question mark in “what smog is?” is also inappropriate within the indirect question. Review agreement and verb forms, and proofread punctuation while retaining your attempts at complex sentences.

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.