In the future it may be necessary for us to live on other planets. For this reason, some people believe that we should spend money now to research other planets, such as Mars. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
This response is estimated at Band 7.5. Can you write a better one?
Write yours and get clear feedback on all four criteria.
- Closest to official scores
- What to fix on each criterion
- Feedback in about 20 seconds · free
Sample Response
It is true thattrue, that if present trends continue, it will become increasingly difficult to sustain human life on Earth. While I agree that it is vital to tackle this problem. I believe that expenditure on research for new planets to colonise should be given a low priority, and resources must be used to find other, more practical solutions.
There are two major reasons why life on Earth is becoming increasingly unsustainablemore and more unsustainable. One obvious problem is the uncontrolled consumption of natural resources, which are being depleted as a result. For instance, the extraction of fossil fuels, such as coal, gas and oil, to satisfygas and oil to satisfy growing energy demands has serious environmental impacts, and these resources will eventually run out. Another concern is the rising level of pollution of the world's land, oceans and airpollution worldwide, of the land, the oceans and the air that we breathe. In India, for example, thousands of tons of industrial rubbish have been released illegally into rivers, killing aquatic life and contaminating drinking water.
However, the search for a new planet on which humans could survive is a waste of valuable resources. Firstly, substantial fundinga vast amount of funding would be required to fundfinance such space exploration, with no guarantee of success. This money is needed now to improve health services globally and to provide better education for all. Secondly, financial resources should be used to develop advanced technologies that would be more environmentally- friendly and provide renew able energy. For example, in transportIn the field of transport, to take a simple example, vehicles can now be adaptedconverted to run on hydrogen or even waste cooking oil – as McDonald’s have done with their trucks.
In conclusion, the search for new planets on which to settle is a waste of time and resources, and efforts should be concentrated on living more sustainably here on Earth.
Why this response received Band 7.5
The response states a clear position, develops a coherent case for prioritising practical solutions on Earth, and supports it with specific examples and a strong range of vocabulary. The main limitation is that the first body paragraph explains environmental threats more than it evaluates spending on planetary research, while several sentence-boundary and agreement errors reduce grammatical polish. The highest-priority improvement is to connect every main paragraph more directly to the funding decision in the question.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
The position is clear and supported, although part of the development focuses more on Earth's problems than the proposed research expenditure.
Make each body paragraph explicitly evaluate why funding planetary research is or is not the best response.
Coherence and Cohesion
The argument follows a clear progression, with effective paragraphing and well-managed links between ideas.
Integrate enumerating devices more subtly to make the progression feel less signposted.
Lexical Resource
Vocabulary is varied and appropriately academic, with effective language for environmental and funding issues.
Eliminate distracting word-form and spacing slips and choose more exact phrasing for global pollution.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
Complex structures are frequent and usually clear, but sentence fragments, punctuation, and agreement errors recur.
Prioritise checking dependent clauses and subject-verb agreement so complex sentences are consistently complete and accurate.