Band 6.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-22

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 6.0)

It is strongly argued that some employers ask candidates for their personal data while applying for a job, as it is useful for them. However, other people believe that there is no requirement to show the married status, hobbies and interest. This essay will demonstrate both the perspectives in the following paragraphs, along with my personal opinion.

To begin with, the reasons why people agree that their information may be useful for the employer. The first and foremost is that it allow an employer to search deeply on the background of an applied candidate. As multiple of humans apply for jobs in a similar sector, it becomes hard for an employer to select them. Consequently, personal data can be a great option to check which individual would be a better option for the agency. Secondly, it is a policy in some of the International companies to keep record of the personal information due to safety. For instance, large companies in Canada, Australia and England always ask people for their hobbies and interests, it is easy for an employer to differentiate people on the basis of their interests. Therefore, asking for personal data is a better choice.

Moving further to discuss the opposite view of human beings due to numerous justifications. A major key point to consider is the safety of an individual. Some of the online platforms such as Indeed, a particular website of an agency share data on social media without taking permission from the worker. It may lead various issues in the society. To demonstrate, one of my classmates gave full access of her mobile gallery during applying for a job on online platform. As a result, that platform had posted her private pictures on social media and she got depressed. However, her sister assisted to remove all those posts. Therefore, these are some of the reasons why people do not share information to the employers.

To conclude, both of the views have merits and demerits. However, I firmly believe that employer should ask for necessary information to a candidate for the further application process. As nowadays, human beings can not trust on anybody due to their safety.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 6.0

You address both views and state your own position: you explain why employers might use personal details and later argue that they should request only necessary information. The examples about company records and your classmate’s experience make the discussion relevant. However, some points are not fully explained or clearly connected to the question. For example, saying that hobbies help employers “differentiate people” does not show how this information is useful for selecting a suitable employee, and the privacy example focuses on an online platform sharing photos rather than employers asking about marital status or interests. Develop each view with a direct explanation and make your opinion more precise about which information is appropriate to request.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 6.5

The response has a clear overall arrangement: an introduction, separate paragraphs for the two views, and a conclusion. Signposting such as “To begin with,” “Secondly,” and “To conclude” helps readers follow the discussion, and the main ideas generally progress in a logical order. This meets the lower-band expectations and shows some features of stronger organisation. However, several transitions feel formulaic or do not accurately describe the relationship between ideas. “Moving further to discuss the opposite view” is awkward, while “Therefore” sometimes repeats a conclusion rather than advancing the argument. Some references, such as “that platform,” are also not fully clear. Use more natural links and make each paragraph’s central point explicit before adding its example.

Lexical Resource: Band 5.5

You use enough vocabulary to discuss employment and privacy, including “personal data,” “background,” “safety,” and “private pictures.” There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “a major key point” and “firmly believe.” However, word choice and collocation are often inaccurate or unnatural, which limits precision: “married status” would be better expressed as “marital status,” and “a similar sector” does not clearly convey that applicants are competing for the same role. Phrases such as “multiple of humans” and “a better option for the agency” are also unsuitable in this context. Aim for natural, precise combinations rather than adding formal-sounding words; this will make your argument easier to understand.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 5.5

You attempt both simple and more complex sentence forms, including clauses introduced by “as,” “while,” and “that,” and the overall meaning is usually understandable. Some sentences are controlled, such as “As a result, that platform had posted her private pictures on social media and she got depressed.” However, there are recurring errors in agreement, articles, and sentence construction. For example, “it allow an employer” should be “it allows an employer,” and “the reasons why people agree that their information may be useful” is an incomplete sentence as written. Other examples include “employer should ask” and “during applying for a job.” Review subject–verb agreement and article use, and check that each sentence has a complete main clause. More accurate complex sentences would strengthen the response.

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.