Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-09-20

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)

Despite progressing rapidly in the field of medical research, people are divided on its financial management. Many people who are in favor of medical research should be funded by private organizations; however, others argue that governments should take responsibility of funding research projects. I strongly believe that experimental work should be funded by private companies rather than the state or authorized bodies. This essay will highlight reasons of my narrative and also makes it easy to understand it with relevant examples.

The primary reason to favor this idea is the waiting period. If, everyone applies for the research grant from a government, it will lead to longer to wait for approval. In fact, records of developing countries have shown that about half of their medical projects are in pending list due to the delay of financial aid. Although, it could provide the financial stability in case of pandemics, it also causes unnecessary delay in the approval of research aid.

Another concern which influences my mind to support this stance is the independence of decision power that private companies generally provide to their researchers. Medical scientists can utilize the research equipment as per need without the permission of the relevant authority. This autonomy will lead to producing beneficial results of the project as quickly as possible. Research projects that are characterized predominantly by independence of researchers; consequently, are more frequent than others.

Overall, to some extent state funding is beneficial including the financial stability during natural disasters. However, from my perspective private funding is more convenient and faster approach for medical research as it provides autonomy and reduces the waiting stress.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response — Band 5.5

The response addresses all parts of the task by presenting a clear position on who should fund medical research and supporting it with relevant ideas. The writer takes a firm stance in favor of private companies and supports this position with arguments regarding waiting periods and research autonomy. For example, the student points out that government funding can lead to longer waiting times and pending lists in developing countries, while private companies offer greater autonomy and decision-making power to researchers. However, the ideas could have been extended further with more detailed real-world examples to reach higher bands. Overall, the task is addressed adequately and a clear position is maintained throughout the essay, aligning well with the Band 6 descriptors.

Coherence and Cohesion — Band 5.5

The essay displays a coherent overall arrangement with a clear introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Paragraphing is used appropriately to separate distinct ideas, such as waiting periods and research autonomy. However, cohesion at the sentence level is sometimes mechanical or slightly faulty. For instance, transitional phrases like 'Another concern which influences my mind to support this stance is' are wordy, and sentences such as 'If, everyone applies for the research grant from a government, it will lead to longer to wait for approval' contain awkward phrasing and punctuation errors that affect smooth progression. Referencing and conjunctions are sometimes overused or imprecise, placing this response firmly in the Band 6 category.

Lexical Resource — Band 5.5

The student demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, successfully attempting less common items such as 'financial management', 'autonomy', and 'financial stability'. However, there are noticeable inaccuracies in word choice, collocation, and phrasing throughout the text. Examples include 'responsibility of funding' instead of 'responsibility for funding', 'lead to longer to wait' instead of 'lead to longer waiting times', and 'pending list' instead of a 'waiting list'. Furthermore, expressions like 'reasons of my narrative' are unnatural in an academic context. While these errors do not impede overall communication, the frequent word-choice inaccuracies prevent the response from achieving a higher score.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy — Band 5.5

The writer employs a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, attempting conditional and subordinate clauses such as 'If, everyone applies for the research grant from a government, it will lead to longer to wait for approval.' However, control over grammar and punctuation is inconsistent. There are several grammatical errors, including unnecessary commas (e.g., 'If, everyone...'), awkward preposition usage ('responsibility of funding'), and incomplete verb structures ('it will lead to longer to wait'). Additionally, the sentence 'Research projects that are characterized predominantly by independence of researchers; consequently, are more frequent than others' uses punctuation incorrectly with a semicolon and comma combination. These errors mean that error-free sentences are not in the majority, fitting the Band 6 profile.

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.