Band 5.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 5.5 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-12

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

Employers sometimes ask people applying for jobs for personal information, such as their hobbies and interests, and whether they are married or single. Some people say that this information may be relevant and useful. Others disagree.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

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

 

Student answer (Band 5.5)

People have different views about weather sharing their personal information is useful when they are applying for jobs, other disagree with this statement. Although I believe that giving information about hobbies and interest are beneficial rather than mention about their marital status.

On the one side, There are several reason why people think that they should mention about their hobbies and interest for application form. The primarily reason is personality. If individuals tells about their likes and dislikes in resumes then it would helpful for employer to understand about your personality. For example, people who have interest in sports then they already know that how to do team work, time management and coordination. These type of skills is necessary for getting job. Consequently, It helps individuals to get relevant position in the company.

On the other side, it impacts on person performance if they adds information about their marital status. If you shows that you are married then employers know that you may be not able to do extra hours because of families responsibilities. Sometimes you have to go early as well. Sometimes they feel stress from families responsibilities. That time they cannot perform well in their work. That impacts on their job performance. Another reason is misuse of their personal details. people have right to not share their personal information. They feels afraid if they reveals their personal relationships because of misuse of the personal details.

From my perspective, sharing hobbies and interest details are useful instead of revealing everything about their personal life. For instance, one of my friends, Preet shared their personal information to the company and they misuse their information because they do not want to give the salary to my friend. As a result, I think personal information cannot be shared by the individuals to anyone.

In conclusion, although many people think it is relevant to share personal details, I believe that mention about the hobbies or interest is useful instead of sharing details about the relationships.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You address both views and give a clear overall preference: hobbies and interests can be relevant, whereas marital details should remain private. The discussion of hobbies is supported with a useful example linking sport to teamwork and coordination. You also explain possible employer assumptions about family responsibilities and raise the risk of misuse of personal details. However, the two sides are not developed equally: the argument that marital status could be relevant or useful is not really explored, and the example about your friend is difficult to follow and does not clearly show how the information was misused. Develop each view with a specific, clearly explained example and make your final position consistent throughout: distinguish job-related interests from sensitive personal details more precisely.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.0

The response has a recognisable structure, with an introduction, separate paragraphs for the two views, your opinion, and a conclusion. Signposting such as “On the one side,” “On the other side,” and “From my perspective” helps readers follow the discussion. Overall, the ideas are arranged coherently, but some links are mechanical or unclear. For example, “Sometimes” is repeated in the paragraph about marital status, while “That impacts on their job performance” repeats the preceding point rather than advancing it. The friend example also shifts from discussing privacy to an unclear claim about withholding salary. Use clearer references and connect each example directly to the point it supports; avoid repeating the same consequence in adjacent sentences.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use enough topic-related vocabulary to discuss the issue, including “personality,” “team work,” “coordination,” “marital status,” and “personal details.” Some choices show an attempt to express more specific ideas, such as “misuse” and “families responsibilities.” However, errors in word choice, word forms, and collocation are noticeable and sometimes make meaning less precise. Phrases such as “mention about their hobbies,” “these type of skills,” and “sharing hobbies and interest details” are not natural English. Repetition of “personal information/details” and “useful” also limits flexibility. Build a bank of accurate collocations for job applications and privacy, and check singular/plural forms and whether a verb takes a preposition.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.0

You attempt both simple and more complex sentences, including conditional structures such as “If individuals tells about their likes and dislikes… then it would helpful” and a reason clause beginning “because of families responsibilities.” This shows some range, but control is uneven: errors in agreement, verb forms, articles, and sentence construction recur. For example, “individuals tells,” “if you shows,” and “they adds” have subject–verb agreement problems, while “it would helpful” is missing a verb. The opening sentence also joins contrasting ideas awkwardly. Practise building accurate subject–verb patterns and complete conditional sentences, then proofread for missing auxiliaries and articles. More reliable control of these structures would make your meaning 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.