Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 19 · 2026-09-28

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

It is sometimes possible to pay somebody to do things you don't want to do, or don't have time to do, for example, household chores or looking after children.

Is this a good way of providing work for others?

Should people do these things themselves?

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

Student answer (Band 5.5)

Due to the hectic life schedule, people could not find enough time for whether its house duties or nuturing their kids which forces them to hire caretakers or househelps.Acoording to me this could be a good approach to provide work to someone,but there are certain things which needs parents personal attention as well.

Firstly,it can be the reason of some familie's bread butter.for example, in big cities ,where both parent are working they prefer to keep house maids that gives other people working oppotunities especially those who are unprivilliged or uneducated.Moreover, taking caring are the highly paid jobs.people find it more secure to hier nany at home then to sending childern to day cares which is the good opportunity of earning for working people as well.

However , People might not be fully dependent on some one for their responsibity of either its home owner or parents. They should de budgeting and keep an eye on hygine of maintainace of working people.As per many newses its ofently notice the robbery in house or sometimes people prefer to serve expired food than to perepare new for their owners just to earn more just to leave early so that the can start their another duties early at another place.

Secondly, Childern need personal attraction of their parents for many of things which they cannot share with the outsider or caretaker whether they are so close to each other.

In conclusion, to employ someone might be the good way for helping but guardians should not assigned all duties to helping people as some duties need personal attention and care.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

The response addresses both parts of the task prompt, examining whether hiring help provides useful employment and discussing whether people should perform these tasks themselves. The writer presents a clear position throughout the essay, acknowledging both the economic benefits of employing house helpers and nannies, and the personal responsibilities that parents and homeowners must retain, such as hygiene oversight and emotional engagement with children. However, the ideas are somewhat limited and under-developed, relying on brief examples like 'bread butter' or basic mentions of security and child attraction. While the main points are relevant, they lack deep extension and specific, fully realised examples. Because all parts of the prompt are addressed with a clear stance, the essay meets the criteria for Band 6.0.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The essay presents a coherent overall arrangement with a recognizable introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. Paragraphing is utilised, though paragraph boundaries and internal transitions feel somewhat disjointed and mechanical. Cohesive devices are attempted, such as 'Firstly', 'However', 'Secondly', and 'In conclusion', but referencing and conjunctions are frequently faulty or confusing, as seen in phrases like 'whether its house duties or nuturing their kids which forces them' and 'to employ someone might be the good way for helping'. The progression of ideas is sometimes hindered by clunky transitions and punctuation issues. Overall, the organizational structure is adequate to guide the reader through the argument, fitting the Band 5.5 to 6.0 range, leaning toward a solid Band 6.0 for clear overall progression.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

The vocabulary used is adequate for the task, allowing the student to communicate basic arguments about employment, household chores, and childcare. However, the lexical range is limited and contains numerous word choice errors, spelling mistakes, and awkward collocations. Examples include 'hectic life schedule', 'nuturing', 'househelps', 'Acoording', 'oppotunities', 'unprivilliged', 'taking caring', 'nany', 'day cares', 'hygine', 'maintainace', 'ofently notice', and 'Childern need personal attraction'. The misuse of vocabulary and frequent spelling errors occasionally cause strain for the reader, though communication is generally maintained. These features align closely with the Band 5.0 descriptors, where vocabulary is minimally adequate but restricted by noticeable errors.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The writer attempts a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, demonstrating some capability to link clauses together. However, grammatical accuracy is weak throughout the text, featuring frequent errors in subject-verb agreement, articles, prepositions, and sentence structure. Examples of frequent errors include 'people could not find enough time for whether its house duties or nuturing', 'there are certain things which needs', 'gives other people working oppotunities', 'people find it more secure to hier nany at home then to sending childern', 'People might not be fully dependent on some one', 'They should de budgeting', and 'guardians should not assigned all duties'. These errors occur across many sentences and occasionally impede smooth reading, placing the essay firmly within the Band 5.0 category.

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.