Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 19 · 2026-10-03

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)

It is often argured that, services like household chores or baby sitting are very common by paying to someone as a medium of work for them. This raises two important questions is this practice ethical way of generating employment and should people take responsibility and to these work by thier own. This essay will adress both questions before drawing a reasoned conclusion.

To begin with I believe this is a positive development to provide employment for people in need. In this modern world people are busy are do not get sufficient time to do household work, this enables them to create small job opportunities for people in need. By completing small task people tend to earn money and fulfilling thier daily needs. To illustrate, many college goers from forign countries do part time baby sitting to earn money in their leisure time, this allows them to handle their daily expenses and ease their life. This results in completion of house hold chores and raising money for people in need.

Turning to the second question, raising a child or keeping the house clean is an important responsibility, and all individual should spare the time required for same. In this fast world a considerable amount of people overweigh their work with these responsibility and create new small jobs for people whom they can trust for raising their toddlers. This allows them to focus more on thier work and do well for thier family. Such as working professionals tend to leave their babies with old grannies who take care of the toddlers with proper care with earning. Therefore it is evident that people can focus on work and align responsibilites to trustable people.

To conclude, house hold chores are important but not at the compromise of work. I firmly believe this is a good way of providing work to individuals who need it. Leands to supoort to people and completion of work with grace.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5

The response addresses both parts of the prompt, discussing whether paying for services is a good way to provide employment and whether people should perform these tasks themselves. However, the development of ideas is somewhat limited and uneven across the essay. For example, while the writer mentions college students and working professionals hiring help, the arguments remain somewhat generalized and under-developed, lacking deeper elaboration on the societal or personal implications of outsourcing chores. The position is generally clear throughout the text, but the limited depth of supporting examples prevents the response from achieving a higher level of thoroughness and extension. To reach the next level, the writer needs to provide fully extended and well-supported arguments that thoroughly explore all parts of the task with deeper insight and more comprehensive examples.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The essay demonstrates a coherent overall arrangement with a clear attempt to structure the response into an introduction, body paragraphs addressing each prompt question, and a conclusion. Paragraphing is used sufficiently to separate distinct points, such as moving from employment benefits in the second paragraph to personal responsibility in the third. However, cohesion is sometimes mechanical or faulty, as seen in transitions like 'Turning to the second question' and referencing issues where pronouns occasionally lack clear antecedents. The use of cohesive devices is adequate for a solid level, but progression is not always entirely smooth throughout. To move further up, the writer should ensure that cohesive devices are used more flexibly and unobtrusively, and that logical relationships between sentences and paragraphs are maintained with greater precision.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.0

The vocabulary used is limited but minimally adequate to communicate the basic ideas of the task. The writer attempts some less common vocabulary items and phrases, such as 'reasoned conclusion' and 'working professionals', but this is accompanied by noticeable errors in word choice, collocation, and spelling, including 'argured', 'thier', 'adress', 'forign', 'house hold', and 'grannies'. These lexical inaccuracies and spelling errors sometimes cause slight difficulty for the reader. The range of vocabulary lacks the flexibility and precision needed for higher bands. To improve lexical resource, the writer needs to expand their range of vocabulary, pay closer attention to word formation and spelling, and use less common lexical items more accurately and with appropriate stylistic control.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

The response displays a limited range of grammatical structures, relying on a mix of simple sentences and attempts at complex forms. However, attempts at complex sentences are often faulty, such as 'This raises two important questions is this practice ethical way of generating employment and should people take responsibility and to these work by thier own.' There are frequent errors in grammar and punctuation throughout the text, including missing articles, faulty preposition use inside grammatical patterns, and subject-verb agreement issues like 'house hold chores are important but not at the compromise of work.' These frequent errors can occasionally cause difficulty for the reader. To achieve a higher band, the writer must demonstrate better control of complex sentence structures and significantly reduce the frequency of grammatical errors.

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.