Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 18 · 2026-11-04

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 an important knowledge for every human-being because it is in our daily lives, it is unavoidable, and we need science to solve everyday problems. This has a big correlation with the statement that the important goal of science is to improve people's live, which is true, but to a certain extent.

People can live a better life quality with science. For instance, health and new innovations. Without science, we wont be able understand our body and what it needs, we also don't know what innovation can solve humanity's needs and how to create that innovation. So, the improvement of people's live being science's most important goal is not fully wrong.

But understanding our surroundings and not just humans is also really important. In this big universe, making people's live as the only important goal of science is not reasonable, because humans are not the only living thing that exists in this universe, or at least, the earth. With science, we can explore the whole universe, find new innovation and discovery that can protect all living things, and bring humanity to the next level.

In summary, making improvement of people's life as the only important goal for science is good, but we also have to take care and take notice of the other living things and the environment. We need to protect all living things, explore the universe, and bring humanity to a better future, because we are not the only living thing that exists in this whole universe.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

Your position is that improving people’s lives is an important aim of science, but not its only aim. This responds to the question, and the discussion of health, innovation, other living things and the environment is relevant. However, the extent of your agreement could be stated more precisely: “true, but to a certain extent” is not fully explained, and the conclusion shifts to “the only important goal,” which is stronger than the task’s wording about the “most important” aim. The examples remain general, such as understanding the body and protecting living things, rather than showing specific outcomes. Develop one or two examples and explain why they support your position, while clarifying how human welfare compares with other scientific aims.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a clear overall arrangement: an introduction, two body paragraphs presenting different considerations, and a conclusion. The contrast introduced by “But” helps signal the shift from human benefits to the wider natural world, and “In summary” makes the ending easy to identify. However, progression within paragraphs is sometimes loose: the second body paragraph moves from the universe to innovation and then to protecting all living things without clearly explaining the links. Repeated references to “people’s lives” and “living things” also make the development feel circular, particularly in the conclusion, which largely restates earlier points. Use clearer topic sentences and connect each example explicitly to the central argument; vary referencing so ideas build rather than repeat.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use a relevant range of topic vocabulary, including “innovations,” “humanity,” “universe,” and “environment,” and the main ideas are generally understandable. However, the range is limited and several word choices or collocations are noticeably inaccurate, sometimes making the meaning awkward: “an important knowledge,” “a big correlation,” “people’s live,” and “better life quality.” “Find new innovation and discovery” also uses forms that do not fit naturally in this context. These issues keep expression from being consistently clear and precise. Build a bank of common academic collocations and check whether nouns are countable and whether a phrase sounds natural. For example, use “important field of knowledge,” “strong connection,” and “quality of life.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex sentences, including a reason clause beginning “because” and a contrastive structure in “not just humans.” The overall meaning can usually be followed, but errors occur frequently and some sentences are difficult to process. For example, “Without science, we wont be able understand” is missing an apostrophe and “to”; “we also don't know what innovation can solve humanity's needs” has an unclear structure; and “making people's live as the only important goal … is not reasonable” contains a faulty construction. There are also problems with agreement and sentence boundaries, as in the opening sentence’s repeated clauses. Practise accurate clause construction and verb patterns, then proofread for agreement, articles, and punctuation.

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.