Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-11-03

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 have helped people to thrive ,grow , develope and think more efficiently scince the very begening of the human kind . So saying that wont be contradictary science begings with beginning of universe. in conclusion everything that has happened ,happening and will happen in future from development to distruction its all science.

But did science improved humans way of living ?

TO be precise the answer is 'YES' , because science has played a vital role in the development of human biengs in all the ways possible. It has a wide spectrum of inventions, theories and predictions that has raised human beings from ordinary to outrageous biengs . If we talk about human health Medical scince palyed and important role in finding new medicins ,vaccines and cures for many infections ,diseses and life threatening viruses,for example corona virus , although it killed many people but our scientist made the vacccine and saved many lives. It also has a huge affect on agricultur, now we yeild more crops and harvest more grains as compare to previous centuries. there are a lote of more fields in which science helped humans grow.

So i guess most of the time science aimed to help and improve human lives , but yeah there are concequences too. like the important field of science is 'Technology' which helped humans to achive unbileavable milstones from smart phones to satelites ,even it took huamns to moon and planning to colonize them on Mars.

But some humans also used scince for power and dirty tasks , like bombs , messiles, harmfull drugs and medicines which are pretty concerning inventions of scince ,because they only lead to distruction, for example hiroshema and nagasaki (japan) ,also we have had 2 word wars just for the sake of power and position.

In conclusion i would say science helped humans in all the ways possible but if we use it to get power and for distruction purpose this is where we lack and we need to use sciene for the good of people.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You give a clear overall position: science has generally improved people’s lives, but its use for destructive purposes is harmful. The discussion of medicine, vaccines and agriculture is relevant, and the examples of the coronavirus and nuclear attacks help illustrate both benefits and risks. This addresses the question, but the response focuses more on whether science has improved life than on whether that should be its most important aim. The opening claim that science encompasses everything is also broad and does not directly support your argument. Some points, such as technology and the two world wars, are introduced but not fully explained. To strengthen the response, state your view on science’s priority explicitly and develop fewer examples with clearer links to that position.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has an overall structure, moving from an introduction to benefits, risks and a conclusion, and paragraphing helps distinguish these stages. The contrast between science’s contributions and its destructive uses is a useful organising idea. However, progression within paragraphs is sometimes loose: the opening moves from human development to the universe without showing how this leads to your answer, while the benefits paragraph shifts quickly from health to agriculture and then to other fields. Connectors such as “But,” “So” and “In conclusion” make the direction visible, but some transitions feel conversational or mechanical. Use topic sentences to signal each paragraph’s main point, and explain how each example supports your position. Clearer links between sentences would make the argument easier to follow.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You attempt a range of topic-related vocabulary, including “vaccines,” “life-threatening,” “agriculture,” “technology” and “colonize,” which allows you to discuss several aspects of science. However, the range is limited by repeated general terms such as “helped,” “humans” and “science,” and several inaccurate word choices or spellings make parts of the response harder to read. Examples include “outrageous beings,” “dirty tasks,” “medicins” and “distruction.” Some collocations are also unnatural, such as “raised human beings from ordinary to outrageous beings” and “planning to colonize them on Mars.” Aim for precise, natural combinations—for example, “improve living standards,” “destructive applications” and “establish a settlement on Mars”—and proofread spelling carefully.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You use both short statements and longer sentences with clauses, such as the sentence beginning “If we talk about human health,” so there is an attempt to vary structure. However, control is inconsistent, and errors in verb forms, agreement, articles and sentence boundaries sometimes make meaning less clear. For example, “Science have helped” should use a singular verb, and “did science improved” needs the base verb after “did.” The opening also contains a run-on sequence (“everything that has happened, happening and will happen in future…”), while “there are a lote of more fields” has an unclear grammatical construction. Practise checking subject–verb agreement and verb forms, and divide long sentences into complete, clearly punctuated units. This will help your ideas come across more reliably.

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.