Companies should encourage employees who work in a high position to leave at the age of 55 in order to give opportunities to the new generation. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Sample Response
I totally disagree with the idea of high-level employees leaving at the age of 55 to make room for the upcoming generation. While it is true that the energy level and fresh ideas of youth can rejuvenate a company, the steady hand of experience can still best guide a company in most cases. In English, there is a saying, “You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.” In the fast-paced world of business, bolstered by even faster hi-tech innovations, a younger more pliant mind would seem to be able to adapt with greater flexibility, while such an environment might boggle an older more set-in-its-ways mind. Take, for example, Microsoft’s Bill Gates, whose energy and brilliant insights as a youth helped him to pioneer new territory in the computer software world and establish a digital empire. Now as a more mature CEO, this king of the “computer” mountain is constantly on the verge of being knocked down by upcoming digerati entrepreneurs. However, it is now the experience he has accumulated as an older man which keeps him on top. So, combining the vigour and innovation of younger workers with the experience of older workers would seem to be the winning hand in the world of business. The assertion is to give opportunities to the younger generation. If everyone retires at 55, there will be a smaller pool of experience at the company. So, who will show them the ropes of the trade? It would be as if we lopped off the last few chapters of a textbook. On this point, the argument would seem to be built on false presumptions. And think of all the other problems retirement at 55 would create. With life expectancy in many advanced nations at 70-plus years, how would the state along with private enterprises be able to support their retirement pensions? The economic repercussions of such an idea could be great. Besides, the Western form of capitalism is built on competition and merit and not seniority according to age, and democracy is built on equality for all regardless of one’s age, so the argument clearly goes against these two pillars of Western society. Granted, my counter-arguments are perhaps as simplistic as the original assertion itself, but without qualifying the assertion with greater supporting evidence or background information, both sides can be argued. Nevertheless, even after thoroughly considering the argument, I believe I would still adhere to my viewpoint that the assertion lacks merit for the aforementioned reasons. Besides, when I am 55 I do not fancy the idea of being put out to pasture. I think I will still be full of vitality and have a desire to work, so I hope my workplace will view me as a treasure house of valuable experience to pass along to the next generation and keep me on until I am at least 65 if not older.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use standard form Original: hi Suggested revision: high Why it matters: ‘High-tech’ is the more standard form in formal writing.
- 2. Clarify the description Original: a younger more pliant mind Suggested revision: a younger, more adaptable mind Why it matters: ‘Adaptable’ states the intended quality more precisely, and the comma separates the coordinate modifiers.
- 3. Remove redundancy Original: adapt with greater flexibility Suggested revision: adapt more readily Why it matters: ‘Adapt’ already implies flexibility, so the revision is more concise.
- 4. Use clearer wording Original: boggle an older more set-in-its-ways mind Suggested revision: overwhelm an older, more set-in-their-ways mind Why it matters: ‘Overwhelm’ conveys the intended effect more directly, while ‘their’ avoids treating a person as ‘it’.
- 5. Use precise term Original: computer software world Suggested revision: software industry Why it matters: ‘Software industry’ is the established and more concise term.
- 6. Avoid obscure jargon Original: digerati Suggested revision: digital Why it matters: ‘Digital entrepreneurs’ is more widely understood and maintains a formal register.
- 7. Clarify the subject Original: The assertion is to give opportunities Suggested revision: The proposal aims to give opportunities Why it matters: An assertion does not perform an action, whereas a proposal can have an aim.
- 8. Use concise collocation Original: support their retirement pensions Suggested revision: fund their pensions Why it matters: ‘Fund pensions’ expresses the financial responsibility more directly.
- 9. Fix passive construction Original: both sides can be argued Suggested revision: arguments can be made for both sides Why it matters: People make arguments for positions; the positions themselves are not ‘argued’.
- 10. Use formal metaphor Original: a treasure house of valuable experience Suggested revision: a valuable source of experience Why it matters: The revision keeps the intended positive meaning in a more controlled academic register.
- 11. Sentence rewrite Original: Besides, the Western form of capitalism is built on competition and merit and not seniority according to age, and democracy is built on equality for all regardless of one’s age, so the argument clearly goes against these two pillars of Western society. Suggested revision: Moreover, Western capitalism is based on competition and merit rather than age-based seniority, while democracy rests on equality regardless of age; the proposal therefore conflicts with both principles. Why it matters: The rewrite preserves the claim while clarifying the relationship among three densely coordinated clauses.
Suggested Rewrites
- hi high
- a younger more pliant mind a younger, more adaptable mind
- adapt with greater flexibility adapt more readily
- boggle an older more set-in-its-ways mind overwhelm an older, more set-in-their-ways mind
- computer software world software industry
- digerati digital
Why this response received Band 7.5
The response maintains a firm position and develops a substantial case based on experience, mentoring, pension costs, merit, and age equality, using flexible and engaging language. Its major weakness is presenting nearly five hundred words as one unbroken paragraph, which obscures the hierarchy of otherwise coherent ideas, while a few later points become tangential. The highest-priority improvement is to divide the argument into focused paragraphs and trim peripheral material.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
The position is clear and extensively supported with relevant arguments, although the capitalism, democracy, and personal-age points are less focused than the central case.
Prioritize the strongest business-related reasons and develop them concisely instead of extending the response through peripheral or personal arguments.
Coherence and Cohesion
Ideas generally follow a logical sequence and cohesive devices are effective, but the complete absence of paragraph breaks seriously weakens organization and readability.
Create separate paragraphs for the concession, value of experience, broader consequences, and conclusion, each led by a clear topic sentence.
Lexical Resource
The response demonstrates wide, flexible vocabulary and confident idiomatic expression, with only occasional overstatement or informality.
Replace overly figurative or informal phrases with more measured academic wording where they distract from the argument.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A wide range of complex structures is used accurately and fluently, with only minor punctuation and phrasing lapses.
Add punctuation within dense comparative phrases and shorten a few long sentences to make their grammatical relationships immediately clear.
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
Companies should encourage employees who work in a high position to leave at the age of 55 in order to give opportunities to the new generation. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.