How to answer this essay?
- Paraphrase the overall essay main topic.
- Write a clear opinion.
- 1st Body Paragraph
- Write a topic sentence with a clear main idea.
- Explain your main idea.
- Develop it with specific or hypothetical examples.
- 2nd Body Paragraph
- Write a new topic sentence with a new main idea.
- Explain your new main idea.
- Include specific details and examples.
- Add as much information as you can and make sure it links logically.
- Summarise your main ideas.
- Include a final thought.
Model Answer | Marked as Band 8
Cohesive connecting words that improve coherence in writing . Useful less common words that boost fluency in writing .
- Scientific developments are occurring at a great rate but some of them do not seem to be of help to people. In fact, sometimes scientific innovations are regretted by those who invented them. This essay will argue that science should never harm people but scientists should aim to further their understanding as much as to improve people's lives.
- On one hand, there is a strong argument that the public good should be the top priority for scientists. They are the ones who have the potential to make discoveries and invent things that can change the world. Electricity, modern medicine, telecommunications and the internet are just some of the scientific innovations that have changed lives for the better.
- On the other hand, sometimes scientists do research just in the hope of adding to their knowledge. While they should make absolutely sure that their experiments do no harm, they may not Know until they have finished how their findings will be used and whether they will improve people's lives. The scientist Nobel invented dynamite to help with mining, not Knowing that it would one day be used in weapons, and the scientist who discovered the life-saving drug penicillin did so quite by chance.
- Overall, it seems that science should improve the lives of people and that ought to be one of its aims. However, Knowledge and discovery are aims in themselves and are just as important for scientists. Sometimes scientists do not Know how their scientific breakthroughs will be used until their work is done.
- Here are some comments about the above essay:
- This response presents a well-developed response to the question and concludes that the aim of scientific discoveries should be to improve people's lives, but that the process often results in unexpected outcomes.
- The essay agrees with but adds to the statement. This is acceptable in a 'to what extent' question, as the essay is explaining that the extent cannot always be predicted.
- The essay presents the argument that the true aim of science is gaining new knowledge and discoveries. It agrees that this should be to improve people's lives but that the results can't be predicted.
- The second paragraph gives examples of discoveries that have changed people's lives for the better [Electricity, modern medicine, telecommunications and the internet].
- The third paragraph presents the other side, that scientists do not often know what they will find. Examples of two innovations are given [dynamite / penicillin] to support this point.
- Ideas are logically organised and paragraphs have clear central topics. Cohesive devices are used appropriately with some appropriate referencing [them / there / it], although linkers often appear at the start of the sentence, which can seem a little mechanical [On one hand / On the other hand / While / Overall / However / Sometimes].
- To conclude, this is a strong, higher-level response to the task.