Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 19 · 2026-10-07

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

The working week should be shorter and workers should have a longer weekend.

Do you agree or disagree?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Student answer (Band 5.5)

There is an argument raised that the workers working a week should be reduced, so they can have a longer weekend. I totally disagree with the statement as this will affect financial problem and less productive.

To initiate with, working less hours a week was the topic of discussion because employees were complaining about, they don't get enough time to spend with their families. However, this was implemented in one of the companies for testing the result, they noticed that after coming back from longer weekend workers are getting lazy and less productive toward their working time. As a result, companies now made a policy for them that it would be compulsory for all to work five days a week.

Moreover, if working hours reduced to give longer weekends, they will not get full money. Employers will not pay them full salary as working hours were reduced. Due to this, workers will face financial issues with paying bills and having groceries for their children. Also, working burden will increase on them, they had not work fulltime. Due to high workload, if employee wouldn't be able to finish work on time may result into losing a job. As factories need to provide their good or products to the supplier, they will not achieve their goals of delivering on time, they will directly blame workers for not working on time.

In conclusion, although, reducing working hours can give the quality time to spend with their families on longer weekend, there are numerous issues needs to be faced such as losing job, not enough income, not active at work and overload of work due to less working hours.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.5

Your position is clear from the introduction: you disagree because shorter weeks could create financial problems and reduce productivity. You address both the effects on workers and on employers, and the conclusion returns to your main concerns. This covers the task well, with relevant reasons and an example about a company trial. However, some points are asserted rather than fully explained: for instance, the claim that workers become “lazy” after a longer weekend needs clearer evidence or a more balanced explanation. The financial argument also assumes that reduced hours mean reduced pay, without considering whether a shorter week could retain salaries. Developing these points and supporting them more precisely would make the argument more complete.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a clear overall structure: an introduction, two body paragraphs presenting separate reasons, and a conclusion. Linking phrases such as “Moreover,” “As a result,” and “In conclusion” help signal the direction of the argument. However, cohesion is sometimes mechanical, with several sentences beginning “Due to” or “they,” and some references are unclear—for example, “they noticed” does not identify who conducted the test. The first body paragraph also moves quickly from employees’ family concerns to a company policy, so the connection between the trial and the policy could be made more explicit. Use a wider range of linking methods and clearer references to improve the flow between ideas.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

You use enough topic-related vocabulary to communicate the main argument, including “financial issues,” “workload,” “salary,” and “delivering on time.” However, the range is limited and several word choices or collocations are noticeably inaccurate, sometimes making the meaning less clear. Examples include “affect financial problem,” “less productive toward their working time,” and “provide their good or products.” Repeated use of “work,” “workers,” and “working” also limits variety. Aim to learn common collocations for employment and productivity, such as “create financial difficulties,” “reduce productivity,” and “meet delivery targets.” More precise vocabulary would make your reasoning clearer and more natural.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and complex sentences, including clauses introduced by “because,” “as,” and “if,” and the overall meaning is generally understandable. However, complex structures are often faulty, and errors in verb forms, agreement, articles, and sentence construction recur. For example, “employees were complaining about, they don't get enough time” incorrectly joins clauses; “they had not work fulltime” has an incorrect verb form; and “numerous issues needs to be faced” has subject–verb disagreement. The conditional sentence beginning “if employee wouldn't be able” is also difficult to control. Practise building accurate sentences with one main clause and a clearly formed subordinate clause, then check agreement and tense consistency.

See this exact question answered at other band scores. The same prompt compared across bands.

Browse more IELTS Writing model answers or get your own writing scored by the same AI examiner.