Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-04

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 debated whether research projects are owned by the private companies providing funds. In my opinion, while there are valid arguments on both sides, I firmly believe that scientific investigation carried by a government is far more beneficial for the public and specifically for the medical specialists working in the government sectors. This essay will discuss both perspectives and explain why analysis under the authorities' control is the primary factor.

On the one hand, a major argument in favor of the corporate-sponsored research is that it provides immediate exclusive benefits to the organization and its stakeholders. To clarify, when individuals or societies focus on this aspect, they tend to consider the escalating financial gains of the particular funding firm and the workers working inside it. For instance, recent studies show that a Chinese medical industry earned an extermely high profit from its new research of how to manage anger issues. Consequently, this demonstrates why a significant portion of the public supports this perspective.

On the other hand, I would argue that government owned research analysis is far more sustainable long-term solution. This is primarily because it is freely available to the public and also contibutes to social advancement.

In conclusion, although investigation with private firms coy

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 4.5

The response addresses the prompt only partially and fails to meet the required minimum word count of 250 words, stopping abruptly at 208 words due to an unfinished sentence. While the writer attempts to state a position regarding who should fund medical research, the ideas remain limited and under-developed. For instance, the discussion on corporate-sponsored research introduces a generalised example about a Chinese medical industry earning high profits from managing anger issues, but this point lacks sufficient depth or clear connection to the main argument. Similarly, the second body paragraph introduces government-owned research as a sustainable long-term solution, yet it is cut short before it can be fully elaborated or supported with appropriate examples. To reach a higher level, the writer must ensure the essay is fully completed, meets the length requirement, and extends all arguments with detailed supporting evidence.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The essay displays some organisation with a recognizable introduction and body paragraphs, but there is no clear overall progression due to the incomplete conclusion. The writer attempts to use standard cohesive devices, such as 'On the one hand' and 'On the other hand', to signal contrasting views. However, referencing and paragraphing are disrupted because the final sentence is cut off mid-thought ('although investigation with private firms coy...'). While logical connections are partially visible within the initial paragraphs, the lack of a proper concluding paragraph prevents the text from achieving a coherent overall arrangement. To improve, the writer needs to ensure that every paragraph is fully developed and that the text flows logically from an introduction through well-supported body paragraphs to a coherent conclusion.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

The lexical range is limited but minimally adequate for the task, allowing the writer to convey basic ideas about medical research and funding. There are noticeable errors in word choice and spelling, such as 'extermely' instead of 'extremely' and 'contibutes' instead of 'contributes'. The writer also relies on repetitive or slightly unnatural phrasing, such as 'medical specialists working in the government sectors' and 'research analysis'. While these lexical inadequacies do not entirely impede communication, they restrict the precision of the response. To achieve a higher band, the writer should incorporate a wider variety of less common vocabulary with greater awareness of collocations, and eliminate basic spelling and word-choice mistakes.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

The writer demonstrates a limited range of grammatical structures, relying mostly on simple sentences alongside a few attempts at complex forms. There are frequent errors in grammar and punctuation that can cause some difficulty for the reader, such as prepositional misuse in phrases like 'carried by a government' instead of 'carried out by the government' or 'funded by the government'. Additionally, minor agreement issues and awkward phrasings appear, such as 'research projects are owned by the private companies' instead of 'funded by'. Attempts at complex sentences often result in structural awkwardness or remain incomplete, as seen at the end of the response. To improve, the writer must work on increasing sentence variety while maintaining tighter control over grammatical accuracy, prepositions, and verb forms.

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.