Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-11-08

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

Nowadays, many medical research projects are funded by private companies. In your opinion, do you think that research should be carried by private companies, individuals or government?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Student answer (Band 5.5)

Medical research projects funded by private companies leave deeper and fruitful impact in field of sciences. In my opinion, yes, medical research project should be carried by private companies but not one specific individual. The main reason behind is how the research is performed? what's aim of the research? duration of project? outcomes of the project and impact on surrounding? If government is providing proper funding, it should be for the betterment of medical sector, that directly contributes to the healthy nation. A proper research proposal must be formed that shouldn't harm any living organism like animals, insects etc. Before funding any medical research project, proper facilitation must be provided by government for successful completion of project. A proper monthly examination report must be develop and submitted to regulating authority for smooth working of project. The thing that, i disagree if to do experiments on animal.

The research project objective is another important aspect either private companies may lead it or not. Most projects states they are constructed to address like, cancers, anemia, leukemia etc. But, in real they took extra fund and didn't stick to their objectives. I still remember, the DVM department of my semi-government university used to amputate cat ears and dog tails for there experimental reasons, leaving them in pain. Sometimes, they starve them for there experiments. Such kind of research project shouldn't be proceed or approved in any cost. The thing, either to give medical funds to any organization do matters but not much, as long as there targeted work don't hurt any living species.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

You give a discernible view: you favour private companies over individual researchers, while arguing that government should regulate and facilitate projects. The examples about research aims and animal treatment are relevant and show concern for ethical oversight. However, the response only partly answers the choice in the question: it does not clearly compare private companies with government as the main funder, and the opening claim that private research has a “deeper and fruitful impact” is not supported. Several points, such as monthly reports and proposal approval, are listed rather than explained, while the animal-testing example takes up much of the discussion without fully showing how it supports your preferred funding model. Develop the comparison and explain the reasons behind your position more fully.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.0

The response has two paragraphs and a broadly identifiable movement from your position and oversight requirements to project objectives and an example of animal mistreatment. This gives the reader some organisation. However, progression within the paragraphs is uneven: the opening moves rapidly through research aims, government funding, proposals and monthly reports, without showing how each point connects to the central question. Linking expressions such as “The main reason behind is” and “The thing” are unclear or repetitive, and the final sentence does not provide a firm conclusion. Use a clearer paragraph plan—position and reasons, then a developed example, followed by a concise conclusion—and make references such as “they” and “there” unambiguous.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use some topic-related vocabulary, including “research proposal,” “regulating authority,” “objectives,” and “experimental reasons,” which helps communicate the subject. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “for the betterment of medical sector.” However, the range is limited by repeated general terms such as “proper,” “project,” and “thing,” and several collocations or word choices are inaccurate: “deeper and fruitful impact,” “monthly examination report,” and “in any cost” are not natural in these contexts. These choices sometimes make the intended meaning less precise. Build a more accurate set of phrases for funding, oversight and research ethics, and check spelling and word forms, including “their” rather than “there” and “species” where appropriate.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple statements and longer sentences with subordinate clauses, for example, “If government is providing proper funding, it should be for the betterment…” This shows some effort to vary sentence forms. However, complex attempts are often faulty or incomplete, and errors recur in articles, agreement, verb forms and sentence boundaries. Examples include “research project should be carried,” “a proper monthly examination report must be develop,” and “The thing that, i disagree if to do experiments on animal.” The series of questions in the opening is also not integrated into a complete sentence. These problems can make relationships between ideas difficult to follow. Practise forming complete clauses, checking subject–verb agreement and verb forms, and using punctuation to separate or connect ideas accurately.

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.