Band 5.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.0 · 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 5.0)

The most crucial goal of science should be to enhance human live's. And I totally agree with this.

As we all know that the development of science is all new for the betterment of human life for example when there is a discovery in any science fee it is automatically use for human life style for an instant the discovery of cars airplane health care all of these are men for the human life to make it more easier and the main goal for the scientist should be always periotiese the human needs irrespective of the goal for the scientist research.

Also I do believe that the development of science is meant for the development of human being life as if the scientist who developed more things in the future it will directly help to is the people life in this world and these type of development should be increase as the air goes in upcoming year and we are know that if they don't enough technology for the human being than it will be not easy to survive with this difficult life in today's time.

To conclude this the scientist should experimental more and well some scientific or technology that food help to the human kind and help them to leave more.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

You state a clear position in the opening—“I totally agree”—and keep the response focused on science benefiting people. The examples of cars, aeroplanes and healthcare are relevant, and you also suggest that technology helps people cope with modern life. However, the task is addressed only partially: these points are asserted rather than explained, and there is little specific support showing how scientific advances improve lives. The conclusion is difficult to understand and does not clearly summarise your reasons. The response also contains 213 words, below the required 250, so there is not enough development. To strengthen the answer, explain two benefits in detail, give a concrete example for each, and make the conclusion restate your position clearly.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The response has a recognisable structure: an introduction, two body paragraphs and a conclusion. This gives the reader some sense of organisation, and phrases such as “Also” and “To conclude” signal transitions. However, progression within paragraphs is often unclear because several ideas are joined into long, loosely connected sentences. For example, the first body paragraph moves from scientific discovery to cars, healthcare and scientists’ priorities without clearly explaining the links. The second paragraph repeats the general claim that science helps people rather than advancing the argument. Use one main idea per paragraph, develop it in a logical sequence, and use clear referencing and linking phrases to show how each example supports your position.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use some relevant topic vocabulary, including “development of science,” “discovery,” “technology,” “health care” and “human needs.” These choices show an attempt to discuss the topic directly. However, the range is limited and several inaccurate word choices or spellings make parts difficult to understand, such as “science fee,” “periotiese,” “men for the human life” and “food help.” Some phrases are also unnatural, including “human life style” and “leave more.” Aim for accurate, natural collocations rather than trying to use complex wording. For instance, describe scientific discoveries as “used to improve people’s quality of life,” and use precise terms such as “prioritise human needs” and “scientific research.” Proofreading spelling and word forms would also improve clarity.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple statements and longer sentences with clauses, as in “if the scientist who developed more things in the future…” This shows some effort to vary sentence structure, but the longer constructions are often faulty and can make the meaning hard to follow. Examples include “As we all know that,” “it is automatically use,” and “if they don't enough technology,” where clause structure, verb forms or missing grammatical elements interfere with clarity. There are also problems with agreement and sentence boundaries, including the opening fragment “The most crucial goal of science should be to enhance human live's.” Build accuracy first with clear subject–verb sentences, then add subordinate clauses carefully. Check verb forms, articles, agreement and punctuation, and avoid joining several complete ideas into one sentence.

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.