Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 17 · 2026-11-12
IELTS Writing Task 2 question
Nowadays, a growing number of people with health problems are trying alternative medicines and treatments instead of visiting their usual doctor.
Do you think this is a positive or a negative development?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Student answer (Band 6.5)
In this contemproray era, more people are trying various medicines and treatments to treat health problems instead of consulting their usual doctor. In my opinion, this is a negative development because people are influenced by social media and they overthink about their health problems.
An increasing number of individuals are preferring other medicines and treatments than their usually prescribed ones because they are influenced by social media. There are many reels and videos circulating over various media channels claiming that a particular medicine or a product has cured their diseases. Some people blindly believe these claims and spend a lot on consultation fees and buy expensive medicines or products. Although these medicines worked for a few individuals, they may cause harmful effect on others. This is because their usual doctor considers various aspects of the patient such as diabetes, blood pressure or other medicines that may interact before prescribing medicines. For example, using ayurvedic medicines for knee pain may cause an increase or decrease in the glucose levels. Therefore, trying medicines other than the one prescribed by usual doctor may result in taking additional medicines to get the diabetes under control.
Many people often overthink that the treatment provided by their usual doctor is not helping and they should try other treatments . This overthinking encourage them to try other treatments without thinking that the current treatment takes time to respond. For example, a person uses a herbal ointment to treat back pain that promises to get relief in short time. This ointment is purchased from a person who is not medically trained and may not have knowledge about skin reactions. Using this medication may cause various skin issues such as skin burns and rashes. Doctors are experienced and are aware of various medicinal reactions on human beings.
In conclusion, I believe it is a negative development that increasing number of people are trying various other medicines and treatments instead of following their usual doctor's advice because of the social media influence and overthinking that some thing else will help with the problem.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 7.0 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 6.5 |
| Lexical Resource | 6.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 6.0 |
| Overall | 6.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0
Your position is clear from the introduction to the conclusion: you regard the shift to alternative treatments as negative. You address the question with two relevant reasons—social-media claims can encourage unsafe choices, and impatience with a doctor’s treatment can lead people to try unverified remedies. The examples involving diabetes and a herbal ointment help explain the risks, and the discussion is generally extended and supported. Some claims, however, are broad, such as saying people “blindly believe” online claims, and the second reason could be developed further by explaining why patients might reasonably seek another opinion or how they could do so safely. More balanced, precise explanation would strengthen the argument.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5
The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction states your view, two body paragraphs develop separate reasons, and the conclusion restates your position. The progression within each paragraph is usually easy to follow, particularly the sequence from online claims to possible medication risks. You also use linking expressions such as “Although,” “For example,” and “Therefore.” However, some connections feel repetitive or mechanical, with “usual doctor” and “other treatments” recurring frequently. The relationship between the example about diabetes and the broader point about alternative medicines could be signposted more explicitly. To move further, vary your referencing and transitions, and make each paragraph’s central claim and supporting example connect more smoothly.
Lexical Resource: Band 6.0
You use an adequate range of vocabulary for the topic, including terms such as “consultation fees,” “interact,” “glucose levels,” and “medically trained.” These choices help communicate the health-related risks clearly, and some less common expressions are attempted. There are, however, several inaccurate or awkward choices that limit precision: “their usually prescribed ones” is unclear, “harmful effect” needs a more natural form, and “overthink” is repeated where a more exact description would help. Spelling errors such as “contemproray” also detract from control. Aim for more natural collocations and precise wording, especially when describing patients’ decisions and possible side effects.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0
You use a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, including subordinate clauses with “because,” “although,” and “before,” and most of the meaning remains clear. Some sentences are controlled well, such as the explanation that a doctor considers other conditions and medicines before prescribing. There are also some grammatical errors: “This overthinking encourage” should have subject–verb agreement, and “they should try other treatments” shifts awkwardly from the singular “treatment” in the preceding clause. Articles and plurals are also inconsistent in phrases such as “by usual doctor” and “a increase.” Review agreement, article use, and sentence boundaries, while continuing to use complex structures with careful proofreading.
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.