IELTS Task 2 Scientific Research Essay

This is an IELTS scientific research essay.

For this essay, you need to discuss whether the funding and controlling of scientific research should be the responsibility of the government or private organizations.

Governments should be responsible for funding and controlling scientific research rather than private organizations.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

This is a fairly complex topic so you may want to do an internet search and do some reading about it before you attempt to write a practice answer.

Compare/Contrast Style

The model answer below puts forward two ideas against private organizations holding such responsibility.

There are more arguments around the topic in opposition to this that could be discussed, but with 40 minutes to plan and write your answer, you will need to choose carefully which ideas you want to present.

Note the way that the body paragraphs have been organized in a compare/contrast style.

You are asked which of the two is best placed (‘rather than’) to manage research, so it makes sense to compare the relative benefits/disadvantages of each. 

Another way to approach this scientific research essay would be to present ideas for and ideas against in separate body paragraphs.

Model Essay

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task. Write about the following topic: Governments should be responsible for funding and controlling scientific research rather than private organizations. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own experience or knowledge. Write at least 250 words.

Scientific Research Essay – Model Answer

Undertaking scientific research is imperative if countries want to progress and compete in a globalized world. However, the funding and controlling of this research remain contentious issues. In my opinion, the government should have the predominant responsibility for these.

One of the first issues is the knowledge that we gain from research. If governments are responsible, then they are driven by the need to make advances in knowledge in order to improve people’s lives. This is because they are accountable to the public and the research is paid for by taxes. On the other hand, private organizations are driven by profit. This may mean that some research that could be valuable to society may not begin because there is no monetary gain.

Another issue related to this is the research process. When the funding for research comes from the same organization that is going to gain from a favorable outcome, there is a strong potential for biased results. Taking drug companies as an example, legislation usually requires rigorous trials for new drugs that can take many years to complete. The companies have large amounts of money invested in such research and the need for positive results is paramount. It is difficult for a scientist to remain impartial in these circumstances. However, if this is controlled and funded by governments, their accountability means that such conflicts of interest are less likely to occur.

On balance, I would argue that although it is not realistic to remove all opportunities for privately funded research, governments should have the main responsibility for the monitoring and controlling of this. Strong checks and balances need to be in place to ensure future research is ethical and productive.

(281 Words)

IELTS Score Evaluation for the Given Essay

1. Task Achievement: Band 7.5 – 8.0

✅ Strengths:

• The essay fully addresses the prompt and takes a clear position (government should take the primary responsibility).
• Each argument is well-developed and supported with logical reasoning (e.g., the bias in private research, public accountability).
• A balanced approach is taken by acknowledging that private research cannot be entirely eliminated.

🔻 Areas for Improvement:

• Some points could be expanded with more concrete examples or statistics. For example, mentioning real-world cases of government-funded breakthroughs (e.g., NASA, COVID-19 vaccine research) would make the argument stronger.
• The conclusion is strong but could summarize the key reasons more explicitly.

Suggested Improvement:

• Provide real-world examples to strengthen claims.
• Make the conclusion more conclusive by reinforcing the main reasons.

---

2. Coherence and Cohesion: Band 8.0

✅ Strengths:

• The essay is logically structured with a clear introduction, body, and conclusion.
• There is good use of linking phrases, such as “on the other hand,” “however,” and “on balance.”

🔻 Areas for Improvement:

• Some sentence transitions could be smoother. For instance, the second paragraph starts with “One of the first issues is the knowledge that we gain from research.” This could be refined to make the transition from the introduction more natural.

Suggested Improvement:

• Use more varied linking phrases (e.g., “A key concern regarding research is knowledge advancement…” instead of “One of the first issues is…”).

---

3. Lexical Resource: Band 7.5 – 8.0

✅ Strengths:

• Good range of vocabulary (e.g., “contentious issues,” “rigorous trials,” “conflicts of interest,” “accountability”).
• Paraphrasing is handled well, avoiding repetition.

🔻 Areas for Improvement:

• Some word choices could be more sophisticated or precise:
  • “Taking drug companies as an example, legislation usually requires rigorous trials for new drugs that can take many years to complete.”
    → “Pharmaceutical companies, for instance, must adhere to stringent regulatory protocols that require extensive, multi-year clinical trials.” (More formal and precise)
• More technical/scientific terminology could enhance credibility.

Suggested Improvement:

• Use more precise and academic word choices where possible.
• Incorporate some discipline-specific vocabulary (e.g., “peer review,” “longitudinal studies,” “scientific integrity”).

---

4. Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 7.5 – 8.0

✅ Strengths:

• Varied sentence structures (e.g., complex and compound sentences are used correctly).
• No major grammar errors that significantly impact meaning.

🔻 Areas for Improvement:

• Some sentences could be more concise:
  • “When the funding for research comes from the same organization that is going to gain from a favorable outcome, there is a strong potential for biased results.”
    → “Research funded by organizations with vested interests risks bias.” (More concise)

Suggested Improvement:

• Simplify longer sentences while maintaining clarity.
• Avoid passive constructions where active voice would be clearer.

---

Overall IELTS Band Score Estimate: 7.5 – 8.0

Criterion	Score
Task Achievement	7.5 – 8.0
Coherence and Cohesion	8.0
Lexical Resource	7.5 – 8.0
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	7.5 – 8.0