Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-14

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 6.0)

Owing to the necessity of addressing public health challenges, I believe that it is more important to continue cutting edge research in the medical field than choosing who does it. Nevertheless, I believe that it is crucial to have independent research done by experts in this field.

The reason why I advocate for independent research done by individuals is because there is less likelihood of falsification of evidence in research outputs produced by individuals as opposed to the research done by private and government entities. Since the purpose independent research is to discover and expand knowledge in a specific field, the researchers are obligated to report on the findings of their clinical trial. Besides, the individual researchers can apply for academic funding opportunities to conduct their research. These grants are usually given by universities dedicated to promote research. Hence, the researcher do not have the psychological pressure of producing a result which serves the agenda of a particular group or corporation.

The usual sponsors of medical research in the private sectors are big pharmaceutical companies and many product based multi-national corporations. Since the companies have a profiteering agenda, this can lead to attempts at tempering of evidence. For instance, there are count less news reports regarding endorsement of smoking by doctors and plethora of research done by scientists on the positive effect of smoking for stress management. These kinds of reports lead people to believe that smoking is harmless but, in fact, we know that smoking has dire health consequences.

Similarly, governments can disseminate inaccurate research results to protect their popularity. For example, many government have under reported the side effect of COVID-19 vaccines in order to encourage people to take the vaccine. This kind of practice can be fatal due to the outbreak of public health emergencies.

Although, there are some bad precedents set by governments and private companies, their usefulness cannot be negated either. Funding is one of the biggest challenges in carrying forward medical research. Private companies can come to the aid by providing the much needed funding. Similarly, governments can help researchers through not only funds but also by creating laws and policies to prevent unethical practices in medical research.

To conclude, I think medical research done by all the mentioned stakeholder ultimately contributes to taking a step forward in dealing with health issues. However, it is important to make sure that the research conducted is not done solely for profiteering, popularity and is free from biases.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

Your position is clear: you favour independent research, while recognising that companies and governments can provide valuable funding and safeguards. You address all three possible sources and support your concerns with examples, including smoking research and reporting on vaccine side effects. However, the response does not fully resolve the choice posed by the question: the opening prioritises continuing research over deciding who conducts it, and the conclusion says all stakeholders contribute, leaving your preferred model somewhat qualified. Some claims, particularly that individual researchers are less likely to falsify evidence and that governments under-reported vaccine effects, are asserted broadly rather than carefully explained or evidenced. Develop the comparison by explaining how independent researchers could be funded and held accountable, and qualify examples where appropriate.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a coherent overall arrangement: it introduces a preference, gives separate paragraphs on individuals, private companies and governments, then acknowledges their benefits before concluding. Linking expressions such as “Nevertheless,” “Similarly” and “To conclude” help readers follow the argument, and the paragraphing is purposeful. This already shows some flexibility beyond a basic sequence. At times, however, the progression feels mechanical because each stakeholder is handled in turn without enough explicit comparison, and references such as “This kind of practice” require readers to infer precisely which claim is being summarised. The opening also shifts from prioritising research itself to advocating individual research. Use clearer transitions to connect these positions and make the relationship between each example and your central argument explicit.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.0

You use an adequate range for the topic and attempt more formal, less common expressions, including “public health challenges,” “falsification of evidence,” “profiteering agenda” and “unethical practices.” These choices make the subject and your concerns clear, although some are inaccurate or awkwardly collocated: “tempering of evidence” does not express the intended idea, and “product based multi-national corporations” is imprecise. There are also spelling and word-form slips, such as “count less” and “cutting edge,” which should be written as single compounds in these uses. Aim for precise, natural combinations rather than elevated wording for its own sake; for example, describe companies as having a “commercial motive” and evidence as being “manipulated.”

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You use a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, including subordinate clauses beginning “Since” and “Although,” and most sentences communicate the intended meaning. Some grammatical errors remain, but they rarely prevent understanding. Examples include the missing article in “the purpose independent research,” the singular/plural mismatch in “the researcher do not,” and “many government have,” where the subject should be plural. The construction “Although, there are…” also has unnecessary punctuation after the conjunction, while “not only funds but also by creating” is not grammatically parallel. Review articles, subject–verb agreement and parallel structures, then proofread punctuation around introductory clauses. More consistent accuracy across these varied sentence patterns would strengthen 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.