Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-05

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)

In this modern era when the private compamies are growing as well as the Government sectors our topic is that funding of private companies should be accepted or not and research should be done by private companies , individuals or just by government.

In my prospective, each sector has its own rights so we cannot abondon any sector from its works if we talk about medical research many nof private companies are doin well from government ones.

In medical field we need results which serves humanity in health and other sectors irrelevant of this that who is funding. For instance, if we pass a rule of not taking fundings from private companies and government one are busy in other projects we can miss a lot of research which could be beneficial .

In medical field, there are many renowed private companies such as the FATRO, which is an Italian company and has its very outstanding research in zonotic diseases and they aldo funds a lots of medical institutes for research projects .

In my opinion, if any medical research is going on whoever the sponser is, there is no issue but real focus should be there that no one uses decided research results that are beneficial to the sales of that company

In conclusion, medical research programmes should be going on, even if the sponser is private company, any individual or government but focus should be on the fair results not personal beneficial results . Focus should be on the results that gives pros to mankind irrelevant of funding firm.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

The response addresses the prompt regarding who should fund and conduct medical research, offering a clear stance that private companies, individuals, and governments can all contribute as long as the focus remains on fair and beneficial results for mankind. However, the development of ideas remains somewhat limited and repetitive, which is typical of this band level. While the writer mentions examples such as the Italian company FATRO, the explanation of how and why private funding is preferable or manageable lacks depth. The arguments tend to circle back to the same point about humanity and sales rather than extending into well-supported paragraphs with broader economic or ethical implications. To reach a higher level, the ideas would need to be fully elaborated with more detailed explanations and stronger, more varied supporting evidence.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 5.5

The text demonstrates a basic level of organisation with an introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion, establishing an overall coherent arrangement. However, there is a lack of clear overall progression, and the transitions between thoughts feel somewhat disjointed. Cohesive devices are used rather repetitively and mechanically, such as excessive reliance on phrases like 'In medical field' and 'In my opinion' to anchor paragraphs. Additionally, referencing is occasionally unclear, as seen in dense or run-on sentences where pronoun links are weak. Paragraphing is present, but internal cohesion needs to be managed more skillfully through a wider variety of transitional markers and smoother logical links to guide the reader effortlessly through the argument.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

The vocabulary used is limited but minimally adequate to convey the basic message, featuring words such as 'humanity', 'sponser', and 'beneficial'. There are noticeable spelling and word-choice errors throughout the text, including 'compamies', 'abondon', 'renowed', 'zonotic', 'aldo', and 'sponser'. The student attempts some less common vocabulary, but these errors in spelling and collocation occasionally cause difficulty or distraction for the reader. To improve this area, the writer needs to expand their lexical range, pay closer attention to spelling accuracy, and ensure that word choices precisely fit the intended academic context without relying on incorrect forms.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response shows a very limited range of structures, relying heavily on lengthy, convoluted simple or poorly executed complex sentences. Frequent errors are present in punctuation, articles, verb forms, and prepositional patterns, such as 'compamies are growing as well as the Government sectors our topic is', 'government one are busy', and 'gives pros to mankind irrelevant of funding firm'. These frequent grammatical errors and awkward clause structures cause noticeable difficulty for the reader. To achieve a higher standard, the writer must incorporate a better mix of error-free simple and complex sentences, improve subject-verb agreement, and exercise tighter control over punctuation to ensure grammatical clarity throughout.

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.