Space exploration requires vast sums of money. Is the amount of money spent on space research justifiable? Could the money be better spent? What is your viewpoint on this issue?
Sample Response
There has always been considerable discussion and debate about whether governments in many countries should spend taxpayers’ money on space research. In my view, it is impossible to justify the amount of money spent on space research. Generally speaking, the main reason for this position is that there are several areas in which the money could be invested better. When we have so many problems and hungry people in the Earth, spending money on space is not a good choice at all.
The first point to make is that governments have a responsibility to spend public money on projects that bring a benefit to the citizens. This has not been the case with space research as most developments have been limited to helping astronauts in space or have been very specialised. For example, it is not of great value to the general public that we now have pens and biros that can write upside down. This does not merit the huge amount of money spent. Little success has been made so far on space exploration except landing on the Moon or knowing that Mars had once been a place for living being. What good that can bring to people who are starving in many countries?
The second point to make is that there are many much more urgent projects on Earth that require investment. If governments spent less money on space research, then they would be able to help solve some of these problems such as population control, elimination of diseases like cholera, global warming and food shortages. It seems to me that all of these issues are more important because they affect the lives of millions of ordinary people. An illustration of this is that the US government could provide food for all the starving people in the world if they did not spend so much on NASA.
My conclusion is that politicians should not fund space research. The grounds for saying this are that it is very costly and provides little real benefits. Furthermore, there are several more urgent issues that need to be funded.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Remove repeated meaning Original: considerable discussion and debate Suggested revision: considerable debate Why it matters: Discussion and debate overlap in meaning, so one noun is sufficient.
- 2. Place adverb naturally Original: the money could be invested better Suggested revision: the money could be better invested Why it matters: Better conventionally precedes the past participle in this passive construction.
- 3. Use hunger and Earth phrase Original: hungry people in the Earth Suggested revision: people suffering from hunger on Earth Why it matters: People live on Earth, and suffering from hunger is a more precise formal expression.
- 4. Use justifiable choice Original: not a good choice at all Suggested revision: not a justifiable choice Why it matters: Justifiable directly matches the issue of whether this spending can be defended.
- 5. Use direct benefit verb Original: bring a benefit to the citizens Suggested revision: benefit citizens Why it matters: The direct verb conveys the same meaning more concisely.
- 6. Remove duplicate pen term Original: pens and biros Suggested revision: pens Why it matters: Biros are pens, so listing both repeats the same item.
- 7. Clarify value clause Original: not of great value to the general public that Suggested revision: of little value to the general public that Why it matters: Of little value forms a grammatical complement before the following that-clause.
- 8. Use justify spending Original: merit Suggested revision: justify Why it matters: A result can justify expenditure, whereas merit does not take spending naturally in this structure.
- 9. Remove conflicting quantifier Original: many much more urgent projects Suggested revision: many more urgent projects Why it matters: Many already quantifies the plural noun, so much is ungrammatical here.
- 10. Introduce examples clearly Original: problems such as population control Suggested revision: problems, such as population control Why it matters: A comma should separate the general noun from the supplementary list of examples.
- 11. Use eradicate disease phrase Original: elimination of diseases like cholera Suggested revision: the eradication of diseases such as cholera Why it matters: Eradication is the precise noun for eliminating diseases, and such as formally introduces the example.
- 12. Use concise example link Original: An illustration of this is that Suggested revision: For example, Why it matters: The shorter connector introduces the illustration directly.
Suggested Rewrites
- considerable discussion and debate considerable debate
- the money could be invested better the money could be better invested
- hungry people in the Earth people suffering from hunger on Earth
- not a good choice at all not a justifiable choice
- bring a benefit to the citizens benefit citizens
- pens and biros pens
Why this response received Band 7.0
The essay gives a clear and consistent view that space-research funding should be redirected to urgent problems on Earth, supported through two logically ordered reasons. Its main limitation is that several examples and claims are overstated or insufficiently accurate, which weakens an otherwise relevant argument, while some language errors reduce polish. The priority is to use credible evidence and acknowledge tangible benefits of space research before explaining why other spending should still take precedence.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
The response directly answers all parts and develops a consistent case for alternative spending, but some examples are exaggerated and the benefits of space research are dismissed too broadly.
Acknowledge one genuine public benefit of space research, then use credible comparative evidence to show why urgent terrestrial needs deserve more funding.
Coherence and Cohesion
The four-paragraph structure and two clearly separated reasons create strong progression, with effective referencing and a focused conclusion.
Integrate the rhetorical question into the surrounding argument more smoothly and vary repeated announcing phrases such as 'The first point to make'.
Lexical Resource
Vocabulary is varied and generally precise for public spending and global problems, though several combinations are awkward or imprecise.
Use accurate phrases such as 'benefit citizens', 'achieve progress in space exploration', and 'support people facing hunger'.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A range of complex structures is used successfully, but recurring article, agreement, preposition, and question-formation errors remain noticeable.
Proofread long sentences for article and agreement accuracy, and form embedded or rhetorical questions with standard word order.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Writing Task 2
Space exploration requires vast sums of money. Is the amount of money spent on space research justifiable? Could the money be better spent? What is your viewpoint on this issue?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.