Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-08-10

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)

It is often suggested that medical research projects should be sponsored by industry. I completely disagree with this opinion because it lacks ethical approvals and has strict policies and I believe that government should fund the research projects in order to promote a better research environment.

To begin with, industries do not have right themselves to pass the proposal of ethical requirement imposed by the government. They always have to approach the concerned ministry for paperwork and the researchers are entitled to get these acceptance from the government on their own.

For example, a private firm has granted a monetary support to a researcher, but funding can not allow them to perform experiments as it needs an ethical permission from the regulating body established by the government.

Furthermore, freedom of researchers compromises because of the terms and conditions imposed by an industry. They ask for multiple presentation, regular updates, and timely results, which tightens researcher's schedule and subsequently hinder in the experimental work. For instance, an experiment is supposed to complete in a week and continue monitoring is required for the period, and company manager scheduled a meeting in between, which directly affect the experimental work going on in the lab.

However, if the government overtakes the funding process. It would be relaxing for a researcher to perform their duties without the hindrance caused by paper-works.

In conclusion, I firmly believe that government should reserve all the rights of research project sponsorship as it will reduce the extra workload and provide more freedom to the researcher to work independently.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5

The response addresses the prompt by taking a clear position in favor of government funding. However, the development of ideas is somewhat limited. While you mention ethical approvals and researcher freedom, the arguments are repetitive and lack depth. For instance, the example regarding a private firm's meeting schedule is a bit narrow and does not fully explore the broader implications of private versus public funding. To reach a higher band, you should expand on the 'why' behind your arguments, perhaps discussing the conflict of interest inherent in private research or the long-term benefits of public-interest science, rather than focusing primarily on administrative hurdles.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5

The essay is organized into clear paragraphs, each with a central theme. You use basic cohesive devices such as 'To begin with', 'Furthermore', and 'In conclusion' to signal the progression of your argument. However, the flow between sentences is sometimes mechanical, and some transitions feel abrupt. For example, the sentence 'However, if the government overtakes the funding process' is a sentence fragment that disrupts the logical flow. Improving the use of referencing and ensuring that each paragraph develops a single, cohesive idea would enhance the overall readability and logical progression of your writing.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

Your vocabulary is generally adequate for the task, allowing you to communicate your ideas clearly. You use some topic-specific terms like 'ethical approvals', 'sponsorship', and 'monetary support'. However, there is a reliance on simpler phrasing, and some word choices are slightly unnatural, such as 'pass the proposal of ethical requirement' or 'get these acceptance'. To improve, try to incorporate more precise academic collocations and avoid repetitive phrasing. Expanding your range of vocabulary to include more nuanced expressions related to research and funding would help you achieve a higher score.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

You demonstrate a mix of simple and complex sentence structures. While the meaning is generally clear, there are frequent grammatical errors that occasionally impede the flow. Examples include 'freedom of researchers compromises' (should be 'is compromised'), 'funding can not allow them to perform' (should be 'does not allow'), and 'company manager scheduled a meeting' (should be 'the company manager schedules'). Additionally, there are issues with article usage and verb tense consistency. Focusing on subject-verb agreement and the correct use of passive voice in academic writing will significantly improve your accuracy and grammatical control.

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.