Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-28

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)

Nowadays, a considerable amount of medical research is funded by private companies, while some people believe that individuals should take resposibiity for it. In my opinion, government should take the leading role in funding medical research with support from private companies.

On the one hand, private companies make a significant contribution to medical research and have substantial financial resources for funding. They have advanced technologies and experienced researchers as well, and they invest in medical research to develop better treatment. For example, pharmaceutical companies invest heavily in medical research to develop vaccines and in innovative drugs that are crucial for treating serious diseases. Competition between companies may encourage scientists to work more efficiently.

On the other hand, the government should fund medical research because public health should not depend entirely on private companies, the private companies aim to generate profits and may prioritise expensive treatments over research into diseases that affect many poorer communities. As a result, these communities may be neglected. The government should allocate public funds to ensure that people from all sections of society benefit from medical research and that its results are accessible to everyone. Individulas and the private sectors also have valuable roles to play. Individuls can support the medical research through donations, participations in clinical trials and contribution to cheritable organizations but they do not have enough resources required to run these large scale medical research.

In conclusion, individuals and private companies play a valuable role, I believe that government should provide the public funds, the contribution between public and private sectors is accessible to all communities.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

Your position is clear: government should lead funding, with private companies and individuals contributing. You address all three options and give relevant reasons, including the risk that profit-seeking firms may overlook poorer communities and the value of public funding for access. The pharmaceutical-company example also supports the case for private investment. This meets the task well, and some reasoning is developed with cause and effect. However, the role of individuals is mainly listed—donations and clinical-trial participation—without explaining how these contributions could influence research. The conclusion also becomes unclear when it says “the contribution between public and private sectors is accessible to all communities.” To strengthen the response further, develop the individual role and state more precisely how public-private cooperation would ensure fair access.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a coherent overall structure: an introduction states your view, two body paragraphs contrast private and government funding, and a conclusion returns to the main position. “On the one hand” and “On the other hand” help signal the main shift, and ideas generally progress from funding capacity to fairness and access. However, the second body paragraph carries several functions at once: it explains the government’s role, introduces individuals, and discusses their limitations. This makes the progression less controlled. Some links are also unclear, especially the final sentence, where the relationship between public-private cooperation and accessibility is difficult to follow. Use clearer paragraph focus and connect each supporting point explicitly to your central argument.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use a relevant range of topic vocabulary, including “financial resources,” “public health,” “clinical trials,” and “poorer communities.” These choices allow you to discuss funding and access with reasonable precision. However, noticeable spelling and word-choice errors reduce accuracy, including “resposibiity,” “Individulas,” “Individuls,” “cheritable,” and “participations.” Some phrases are also awkward or imprecise: “contribution between public and private sectors” does not express the intended idea, and “innovative drugs” is not naturally linked to “in” in the example sentence. Aim for accurate collocations and proofread spelling carefully. More precise phrases such as “collaboration between the public and private sectors” would make your argument sound more natural and controlled.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt a mix of simple and complex structures, including a contrast clause with “while,” a reason clause beginning “because,” and a result link with “As a result.” Most of the argument remains understandable, but some sentence structures and punctuation are not controlled. The sentence beginning “the government should fund medical research because” continues into a comma splice: “...private companies, the private companies aim...” Separate these ideas or connect them with a suitable conjunction. The conclusion also joins several independent ideas with commas, making the relationships unclear. There are some article and number-pattern issues, as in “the medical research” and “these large scale medical research.” Work on sentence boundaries and grammatical patterns while retaining your attempts at complex sentences.

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.