Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-11-01

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)

Science is always considered an essential part of our lives. It has contributed in several ways to improve our lifestyle such as advanced medical technology. However, It also have few drawback especially when it used aganist the humankind such as in warzones. From my prespective, I firmly believe that science has more advantage than disadvantages.

Living in a world where people have unhealthy habits that includes not going to walk particularly after a meal, eventually leads to various medical conditions such as obesity and diabeties. In this regard, science has a postive effect because people who suffers from terminal diseases can get a treatment without having any surgical procedure. In many cases of cancer, nowadays people even get a proper diagnosis before reaching to the end of stage. During the WWI, the discovery of X-rays helped in the treatment of soliders. On the other hand, where science has positive contributions. It also have negative aspects as well. Chemists and nuclear physicist use science to make bombs which further make their way to destroying cities and natural habitat. One of the notable example is from WWII, when USA fired the first nuclear bomb on Japan that resulted in the destruction of human lives. Moreover, after effects on this incident was quite severe that even after 30 years, people still encounter the radiations over there.

In conclusion,the primary purpose of science was always to improve the people's lives. However, where it played a vital role in the medicine and treatment. It also put human life in danger due to the nuclear bombs.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You take a clear position that science brings more benefits than harms, and you address both its contribution to health and its use in warfare. The examples of cancer diagnosis, X-rays in the First World War, and the atomic bombing of Japan are relevant and help illustrate your argument. However, the response does not fully develop the question’s focus on whether improving people’s lives should be science’s most important aim. The opening claim about unhealthy habits and walking after meals is only loosely connected to the benefits of scientific research, and the conclusion mainly repeats the contrast rather than explaining how the examples support your view. Develop the central argument more directly and explain why improving lives should take priority over other scientific goals.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, a main paragraph considering benefits and harms, and a conclusion. The contrast between medical advances and weapons also gives the discussion a basic line of progression. However, the main paragraph moves abruptly from lifestyle habits to cancer treatment, then to wartime X-rays and nuclear weapons. The transition “On the other hand, where science has positive contributions” is incomplete and makes the shift difficult to follow; the conclusion’s “However, where it played…” has a similar problem. Some linking phrases, such as “In this regard” and “Moreover,” are used, but connections between ideas are not always clear. Group the health examples together, signal the move to harmful uses cleanly, and make each paragraph’s purpose explicit.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use a relevant range of topic vocabulary, including “medical technology,” “terminal diseases,” “diagnosis,” “nuclear bomb,” and “natural habitat.” These choices make the subject clear and show an attempt to discuss both scientific benefits and risks. However, several spelling and word-choice errors reduce precision, including “prespective,” “aganist,” “diabeties,” and “solid ers” (intended as “soldiers”). Some combinations are also unnatural, such as “get a treatment” and “encounter the radiations.” Aim for accurate, natural collocations and check spelling carefully. More precise terms such as “receive treatment,” “exposure to radiation,” and “scientific research” would help express your ideas clearly without relying on broad phrases like “positive effect” and “negative aspects.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex sentences, including a conditional-style explanation of health risks and clauses beginning with “when” and “that.” The overall meaning is generally understandable, but some grammatical errors affect accuracy. For example, “It also have few drawback” has subject–verb agreement and plural/article problems, while “people who suffers” should use a plural verb. The sentence beginning “Living in a world where people have unhealthy habits…” is awkwardly constructed, and “On the other hand, where science has positive contributions” is an incomplete clause. Punctuation and capitalisation also need attention, as in “In conclusion,the” and the mid-sentence capital “It.” Practise complete sentence structures, agreement, and careful proofreading 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.