Back to examples
Band 6.0CEFR B2Essay256 words

Wild animals have no use in the 21 century and trying to preserve animals now is just wastage of money. To what extent do you agree or disagree with question

The essay addresses the prompt by presenting a clear, though somewhat extreme, viewpoint that wild animals should not be preserved. It attempts both sides of the issue and maint...

IELTS WritingCEFR B2Checked

Prompt

Wild animals have no use in the 21 century and trying to preserve animals now is just wastage of money. To what extent do you agree or disagree with question

Essay review

Annotated essay

Interactive

Currently, there is debate among individuals regarding whether wild creatures ought to be conserved or not. In my view, although it might appear like a positive thing, shielding wild animals can be hazardous and cause waste of financial resources. Furthermore, there is a balance and selection in nature and I think humans shouldn't meddle with Mother Naturenature.

First of all, many people want to safeguard wild animals from natural selection, but it may cause numerous losses. The financial situation of the nation is the primary parameter. For example, these sorts of projects require far more funds and it is not simple to find a budget for particularly low-income countries. In these circumstances, it is more rational to save money for other topics such as healthcare and education.

Secondly, attempting to preserve wild animals can trigger dangerous situations for society. Many individuals have been killed or severely injured to protect animals in the wild. This signifies, government also has to find extra funds for hospitalisation costs for these people. As you can see, the expenditures are rising gradually. To protect ourselves and our government, I think we should stay away from the wild.

Consequently, however, people want to help wild animals which are impacted by natural selection, we should realise that it is all about nature, and if we interfere with nature, it won't be good for us either financially or health-wise. So I think trying to preserve wild animals is not necessary at all and we should leave nature alone to protect ourselves and our state.

Improvement plan

Close to Band 6.5

Current Band 6.0

Target Band 6.5

  • Greater control over complex grammatical structures without recurring article and punctuation lapses.
  • More sophisticated academic vocabulary choices and precise collocations.
  • Deeper development and extension of supporting arguments.

Strengths

Task Response

Establishes a clear, distinct position in the introduction that is maintained throughout the essay.

Coherence

Provides a clear topic sentence opening the first body paragraph and focusing the discussion on financial losses.

Weaknesses

Article and Punctuation Lapses

Medium

The text contains frequent missing articles before singular countable nouns and occasional punctuation errors such as comma splices.

Limited Argument Extension

Medium

Claims are supported by general assertions rather than well-elaborated examples with specific empirical evidence.

Priority improvements

  1. 1Improve Article and Punctuation AccuracyEliminate recurring missing articles ('the government', 'a waste') and fix punctuation faults around transitional phrases to enhance grammatical precision.Impact: Medium
  2. 2Enhance Idea Elaboration and RangeDevelop arguments beyond basic assertions by integrating more specific examples and nuanced reasoning.Impact: Medium

Error patterns

Band & CEFR

Band 6.0

B2

Confidence: High

Assessment summary

The essay addresses the prompt by presenting a clear, though somewhat extreme, viewpoint that wild animals should not be preserved. It attempts both sides of the issue and maintains a consistent stance. Organization is generally coherent with distinct paragraphs, though cohesive links are at times mechanical. Lexical range is adequate, featuring some academic expressions alongside basic repetition. Grammatical control is mixed, featuring several errors in article usage, punctuation, and preposition choice, though simple and some complex structures remain clear.

Scoring criteria

Strengths

  • The introduction clearly establishes the writer's perspective.
  • Both body paragraphs provide distinct supporting arguments related to financial costs and physical danger.

Weaknesses

  • Arguments rely on somewhat simplistic reasoning and sweeping assertions without deep extension.
  • The prompt asks 'To what extent do you agree or disagree', and the response leans heavily into a one-sided argument without a nuanced middle ground.

Justification

The response addresses all parts of the task and maintains a clear position, but the ideas are developed with limited depth and rely on somewhat general examples, satisfying Band 6 descriptors.

Writing stats

Words
256
Paragraphs
4
Estimated time
2 min read
Grammar issues
4
Lexical suggestions
4
Major issues
2
Minor issues
4
Top error pattern
Missing Definite/Indefinite Articles
Confidence
High