Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 13 · 2026-11-01
IELTS Writing Task 2 question
Some people say History is one of the most important school subjects. Other people think that in today’s world subjects like Science and technology are more important than History.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant example form your own knowledge or experience.
Student answer (Band 5.5)
It is often argued that many individuals speak that history is one of the crucial academy subjects while others believe that in modern era subjects such as science and technology are more vital rather than history.Although, both prespective have their own merits, i firmly believe that iat is beneficial to focus more in science and technology because it is an advance time where children must have to concentarate in digital activities.
On the one hand, there are several public who consider that history is one of the necessary university subjects because it illustrartes the background of legendary people who sacrifice their life to save the country or place.This can lead to remeber those days and want to make their children like those citizens.For example, there was a man who hunted numerous people and also killed his life to save the country, his name was pritihivi narayan shah.Therefore, this is the reason behind why some people prefer to give priporirity to historical activities and subjects.
On the other hand, some individuals argue that children should more focus on subjects such as science and technology because they think that life is short and their son and daughter will not obtain a sucessfullife after reading history.This is because parents want their children to live in a digital time.Instead of studying history subjects and the children should learn how to make new equipment or how to earn money in the future.For instance, if childrens works on how to earn money from online through technology and will practice and study about organizing bussiness than oneday, they can be a successful person in their life.Consequently, it is crucial to prioritize science and technology subjects.
In conclusion, i think that learning about religious and rituals have some benefits however i firmly believe that it have less advantages than science and techology.Furthermore, i think individuals should spend more time in science and technology rather than history.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 6.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.0 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5
You address both sides of the discussion and state a clear preference for science and technology, especially in the introduction and conclusion. The historical example of Prithvi Narayan Shah also gives the first view some support. However, the response only partly develops the task: the history paragraph focuses mainly on remembering heroic figures, while the science paragraph relies on broad claims about earning money and succeeding. The conclusion introduces “religious and rituals,” which was not established in the discussion and does not accurately summarise the history argument. To strengthen the response, explain more fully how history benefits students and how science or technology prepares them for modern life, using relevant, specific examples and keeping the position consistent.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0
The response has a recognisable overall structure: an introduction, one paragraph for each viewpoint, and a conclusion. “On the one hand,” “On the other hand,” and “In conclusion” help readers follow the main stages. However, progression within paragraphs is sometimes weakened by unclear links or abrupt claims. For example, the move from studying history to wanting children to become like past citizens needs clearer explanation, and the science paragraph shifts from digital life to earning money without showing how these points connect. Some linking phrases, such as “Therefore” and “Consequently,” are used mechanically rather than to show a precise relationship. Use clearer topic sentences and connect each example directly to the point it supports; ensure the conclusion refers back to the arguments actually discussed.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.0
You attempt vocabulary relevant to the topic, including “crucial,” “digital,” “prioritize,” and “successful,” and you use some topic-specific terms such as “equipment” and “technology.” However, the range is limited by repeated general words such as “subjects,” “children,” and “people,” while several inaccurate choices make meaning less clear. For instance, “academy subjects” and “historical activities” do not express the intended ideas naturally, and “hunted numerous people” appears to be an unsuitable description of the historical figure. Spelling errors such as “prespective,” “concentarate,” and “bussiness” are also noticeable. Build a more precise range of academic vocabulary and check spelling and collocations carefully.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0
You attempt both simple and complex sentences, including clauses beginning with “because” and “although,” and the overall meaning is usually recoverable. However, complex structures are often faulty, and errors in sentence boundaries, agreement, articles, and verb forms can make reading difficult. Examples include “Although, both prespective have,” “children should more focus,” and “it have less advantages.” The sentence beginning “if childrens works” also combines an incorrect plural subject and verb form with an unclear conditional structure. Punctuation is inconsistent, particularly where sentences run together after full stops. Practise forming accurate conditional and subordinate clauses, checking subject–verb agreement, and separating complete sentences with appropriate 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.