Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer
Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-10-12
IELTS Writing Task 2 question
Write about the following topic:
In many countries, family members work together in their family business.
Do you think family businesses have more advantages than disadvantages?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Student answer (Band 5.5)
In today's world, realtives in a family business often work together.This essay will discuss why this trend has caused weaking of the family relationship and increased the sudden hate among the family members.
Firstly, one of the main disadvantages is that it causes problems in their family. When individuals spend hours of their precious time just for their family business, they often do not have enough time to spend with their own family. When their partner needs them for an emotional support, or spending some quality time together, it becomes difficult, due to their busy working hours. Even if they are at home, there would be a chance that they might be thinking or discussing about their family business with realtives. This could lead to the weaking of their own family relationship. For instance, people who spend singnificant amount of time for their family business often do not have a good family realtionship their own.
Secondly, another drawback is that it can create hate among realtives. Some family members share a close bond between each other. They protect and help the other person when difficuties emerge. Hence, if a relative helped the other family member in the family business, such as offerred money for any investment, or any other finacial helps , this would make others a feeling of gealous. As a result, family members may hate each others.Consequently, this could make the family reationship shatterd in the long run. For instance, family members who have hate among each other in any business will have problems for any decisions they make in the future.
In conclusion, if family members work together, it creates problems in their own familly as it leads weaking of their own family bond and can cause hate among their family relatives.
AI examiner evaluation
| Criterion | Band |
|---|---|
| Task Achievement / Task Response | 5.5 |
| Coherence and Cohesion | 6.0 |
| Lexical Resource | 5.0 |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | 5.5 |
| Overall | 5.5 |
Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 5.5
Your response takes a clear position against family businesses, and both body paragraphs give relevant disadvantages: reduced time for partners and jealousy over financial help or investment. The examples help show how these problems might affect relationships. However, the task asks whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, while the essay discusses only disadvantages and does not explain or compare any benefits. This means the response addresses the question only partially. Some claims also need fuller explanation: for example, the link between working long hours and a poor relationship is asserted rather than demonstrated, and the jealousy example could clarify how business arrangements create unequal treatment. To strengthen the response, acknowledge at least one advantage and explain why your chosen side is more significant overall.
Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0
The essay has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, two body paragraphs and a conclusion. The sequence from relationship strain to jealousy is logical, and signposts such as “Firstly,” “Secondly” and “In conclusion” make the stages easy to follow. However, cohesion is sometimes mechanical, and ideas within paragraphs are not always linked precisely. For instance, “Hence” introduces the example of financial help, but the connection between receiving help and other relatives feeling jealous needs clearer explanation. The repeated references to family relationships and hate also make progression feel circular, especially in the conclusion, which restates the body points rather than drawing them together. Use clearer cause-and-effect links and vary transitions while ensuring each sentence advances the paragraph’s main idea.
Lexical Resource: Band 5.0
You use some relevant topic vocabulary, including “emotional support,” “investment,” “family business” and “family bond,” so the reader can understand the main concerns. However, the range is limited and several noticeable spelling and word-choice errors reduce precision: “realtives,” “weaking,” “singnificant,” “difficuties,” “finacial” and “gealous.” Some phrases are also unnatural, such as “share a close bond between each other,” “make the family relationship shattered” and “a feeling of jealous.” These errors do not prevent the overall message from being understood, but they make it less fluent and sometimes require the reader to interpret the intended meaning. Build accuracy by checking spelling and learning natural collocations for relationships, conflict and business arrangements.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5
You attempt a mix of simple and complex sentences, including conditional and cause-and-effect structures such as “When individuals spend hours…” and “if a relative helped… this would make…”. This gives the response some structural variety, and the main ideas are generally understandable. However, there are several errors in sentence construction and grammatical patterns. For example, “When their partner needs them for an emotional support” uses an unnecessary article, while “spending some quality time together, it becomes difficult” has an unclear structure. “Family members may hate each others” also has incorrect plural agreement, and “there would be a chance that they might be thinking” is unnecessarily awkward. Aim for more controlled complex sentences, checking articles, plural forms and how clauses connect; clearer sentence patterns will make your reasoning easier to follow.
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.