Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 21 · 2026-10-14
IELTS Writing Task 2 question
Doctors tell us that we can get all the vitamins we need from having a healthy diet. Despite this advice, some people continue to spend large sums of money on vitamin pills.
Why do you think some people spend a lot of money on vitamin pills?
How could people be persuaded to improve their diet instead of buying vitamin pills?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Student answer (Band 6.5)
Healthcare professionals recommended that people can get all types of vitamins from a healthy diet. Despite this, some individuals prefer to purchase vitamin supplements by spending huge amount of money. This essay will discuss the reasons of this trend and also explain the ways to encourage people to take vitamins from original source rather than buying pills in the following paragraphs.
First and the foremost reason behind this is that, in this modern era people do not enough time to prepare food to meet their body minerals requirements thus they prefer to buy supplements. Moreover, people are nowadays trust on social media for everything and after seeing multiple advertisements on social media people get influenced and purchase them. Additionally, mostly population like office workers usually spend money on these pills because of inadequate time after their working hours. For example, many pharma companies spend large money on their vitamin products advertisement and it influenced individuals badly on a larger scale.
There are several significant ways to encourage humans towards healthy diet instead of spending large sums of money on vitamin supplements. Initially, there should be a proper seminars or presentations in the office or on public platforms to give awareness about benefits of taking vitamins from natural resources. Furthermore, people who get vitamins through their food rather than through medicines have good health and it also helps in save their money. For instance, government should make strict rules about the fake advertisements from the pharma organizations. This leads to positive shift in peoples behavior.
In conclusion, people are taking more and more supplements rather then healthy food because of having not enough time and fake popularity of vitamin capsule. But this can be improve positively by taking several measures at individual level and government level by restricting posts on social media platforms and by making educational sessions at offices to educate about benefits of healthy diet.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 6.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 7.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 6.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.5 |
| Overall | 6.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5
You address both parts of the question and maintain a clear overall position: lack of time and social-media advertising help explain purchases, while education and action against misleading advertising are proposed as solutions. The examples of office workers and pharmaceutical advertising make the reasons relevant. However, some ideas are more fully addressed than others. The time-pressure point is repeated in the first body paragraph, and the proposed seminars are not explained in detail—for example, who would organise them or how they would change buying habits. The claim that people who get vitamins from food “have good health” is also broad and would benefit from qualification or support. More specific development of these points would make the response more complete.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0
The essay has a clear overall structure, with an introduction, separate paragraphs for causes and solutions, and a conclusion that returns to the main ideas. The progression is easy to follow, and signposting such as “Moreover,” “Additionally,” and “Furthermore” helps show how points relate. This is a strong organisational foundation. At times, however, the linking feels mechanical, and some connections are repetitive: lack of time is mentioned twice in the causes paragraph, while the conclusion repeats the proposed measures without adding a final insight. The reference in “This leads to positive shift” is also not fully clear. Grouping related points more tightly and using a wider range of natural transitions would make cohesion more flexible.
Lexical Resource: Band 6.0
You use an adequate range of vocabulary for the topic, including “vitamin supplements,” “inadequate time,” “natural resources,” and “advertisements.” These choices make the main ideas understandable, and you attempt some less common expressions. However, several word choices and collocations are inaccurate or unnatural, such as “original source” for food, “fake popularity” for misleading promotion, and “spend large money.” There are also word-form and spelling issues, including “peoples behavior” and “rather then.” These do not prevent the reader from understanding your argument, but they limit precision and naturalness. Focus on common collocations and check word forms and spelling when revising.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5
You attempt both simple and more complex sentence forms, including clauses introduced by “because,” “after,” and “rather than,” and the overall meaning is generally clear. However, errors in sentence structure, agreement, articles, and verb forms occur across the response. For example, “people do not enough time” needs a verb such as “have,” and “people are nowadays trust” combines incompatible verb forms. In “there should be a proper seminars,” the article and plural noun do not agree; “it also helps in save their money” has an incorrect verb pattern. The conclusion also contains “this can be improve,” where the passive form is inaccurate. Careful editing of these patterns, while continuing to use complex sentences, would improve accuracy.
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.