Some people think employers should give their staff at least four weeks' holiday per year to improve their job performance. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Sample Response
In today’s fast-paced working environment, the importance of employee well-being and productivity has become a central topic. Some people believe that a minimum of four weeks’ annual leave is essential to enhance job performance. While this may seem like a logical assumption, I disagree with this view because extended holidays do not always guarantee better work outcomes and can have adverse effects on business operations.
To begin with, productivity is not solely dependent on the length of a worker’s holiday but rather on how effectively time is managed and how well-supported employees feel at work. In fact, too long a break from work may lead to reduced focus and slower reintegration when employees return. For example, professionals who take extended leaves often require additional time to catch up on tasks and adjust to workplace updates, which can disrupt workflow and reduce overall efficiency.
Moreover, mandating a minimum of four weeks' holiday for all staff could negatively impact small and medium-sized businesses that rely on their teams to maintain daily operations. For instance, in industries like hospitality or retail, where profit margins are tight and staffing levels are modest, long absences can burden remaining employees and compromise service quality. Flexibility in holiday policy, tailored to the needs of both the employer and employee, is more practical and fair than imposing a universal standard.
In conclusion, while time off is essential for rest and recovery, a blanket requirement of four weeks’ holiday for all employees is not a one-size-fits-all solution. The approach that takes into account business needs and employee preferences is likely to yield better outcomes for both productivity and staff well-being.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use concise term Original: working Suggested revision: work Why it matters: Work environment is the more concise standard noun phrase.
- 2. Use precise noun Original: topic Suggested revision: concern Why it matters: Concern better reflects an issue affecting workplace policy and outcomes.
- 3. Use gerund complement Original: essential to enhance job performance Suggested revision: essential for enhancing job performance Why it matters: For followed by a gerund is the more natural complement after essential in this claim.
- 4. Use accurate noun Original: logical assumption Suggested revision: reasonable proposal Why it matters: The preceding idea is a policy proposal rather than an assumption.
- 5. Use concise modifier Original: too long a break Suggested revision: an excessively long break Why it matters: The adjective phrase expresses the same concern more smoothly.
- 6. Use uncountable leave Original: leaves Suggested revision: leave Why it matters: Leave is normally uncountable when referring generally to time away from work.
- 7. Use natural collocation Original: updates Suggested revision: changes Why it matters: Workplace changes is a more natural and inclusive phrase than updates.
- 8. Share the suffix Original: small and medium-sized businesses Suggested revision: small- and medium-sized businesses Why it matters: The suspended hyphen shows that both small and medium share the suffix sized.
- 9. Use general plurals Original: both the employer and employee Suggested revision: both employers and employees Why it matters: Plural nouns are more natural for this general policy comparison.
- 10. Use indefinite article Original: The Suggested revision: An Why it matters: No specific previously identified approach warrants the definite article here.
Suggested Rewrites
- working work
- topic concern
- essential to enhance job performance essential for enhancing job performance
- logical assumption reasonable proposal
- too long a break an excessively long break
- leaves leave
Why this response received Band 8.0
The response maintains a clear, nuanced disagreement and supports it with logically developed points about reintegration costs, staffing pressure, and the value of flexible policies. Its main limitation is that four weeks of annual leave is sometimes treated as one extended absence, which narrows the accuracy of the argument. Address how the entitlement might be distributed and compare flexible scheduling with a universal minimum to strengthen the reasoning.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
A clear position is maintained and supported with relevant, developed reasons, though the argument partly assumes the annual entitlement would be taken as one long absence.
Consider leave distributed across the year and explain why flexibility would still outperform a four-week minimum under that interpretation.
Coherence and Cohesion
The response is logically sequenced, clearly paragraphed, and cohesively moves from individual productivity to operational effects and a practical alternative.
Make the relationship between the two body arguments even tighter by explicitly linking employee reintegration to business continuity.
Lexical Resource
A wide and precise range of workplace and policy vocabulary is used naturally with strong control of register and collocation.
Vary the repeated words holiday and employees where suitable while preserving the current level of precision.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
Complex sentences are varied, accurate, and well controlled, with only rare minor awkwardness that does not affect clarity.
Refine the concluding noun phrase to an approach that takes account of business needs for a slightly more natural formulation.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Writing Task 2
Some people think employers should give their staff at least four weeks' holiday per year to improve their job performance. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.