Some people say that giving a smaller amount of money weekly to children will help them become more capable as they grow older. Do you agree or disagree?
Sample Response
Nowadays, a growing number of people encourage parents to grant a small amount of pocket money weekly to their children. This is because they believe that giving weekly money to young children would enhance their financial management skills in future. However, some childcare organisations and guardians ask parents to avoid giving money to their juvenile. They claim that handing over money to their adolescents in early age might have deleterious impacts. However, I strongly assert that children have the right to receive a lump sum amount of money weekly so that they can readily fulfil their personal necessities and can learn better money management from an early stage of their life. Firstly, it is intuitively obvious that teenagers who receive weekly pocket money from their parents can become experts in finance management in the future life. Additionally, they involve practically in financial matters and since they have limited amount they persist and strive in order to accomplish all their necessities without crossing financial boundaries. Alternatively, granting money to offspring on a weekly basis have other uncountable benefits such as they become familiar with the methodology of bargaining. Moreover, children who want to buy a specific toy or gadget for themselves start accumulating money in their fantastic treasure boxes. As a result, they can primarily go through the sophisticated process of saving money. Ultimately, it is extremely fundamental for parents to allocate a small budget weekly for their children because children's necessities are as mandatory as elder's. On top of this, the biggest demerit of not delivering pocket money to children is that they become a victim of inferiority complexity. Last but not the least, they often create social distances from their friends and family members. On the contrary, it is undoubtedly acknowledged that children who start possessing money in their younger ages can instantly involve in illegal activities and bad habits. For instance, drinking alcoholic beverages, taking drugs and smoking require money and children who have money can incline to these bad habits. There are ample evidence to suggest that children who receive extra cash for their necessities are highly likely to commit crimes and get involved in bad habits. In conclusion, although offspring who do not grab a single penny from their parents are somewhat protected from getting into bad habits like smoking and alcoholic addictions, but in my opinion, parents should provide freedom to their kids in terms of purchasing their favourite and desired products and gadgets. As a result, they would probably become experts in purchasing, financial management, saving as well as bargaining.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use natural phrasing Original: grant a small amount of pocket money weekly to their children Suggested revision: give their children a small amount of pocket money each week Why it matters: The revision uses the natural verb and time expression for regular pocket money.
- 2. Clarify frequency Original: giving weekly money Suggested revision: giving money each week Why it matters: “Money each week” clearly expresses frequency without suggesting a type of money.
- 3. Use plural noun Original: juvenile Suggested revision: children Why it matters: The possessive refers to multiple parents and requires a natural plural noun.
- 4. Correct age phrase Original: their adolescents in early age Suggested revision: their children at an early age Why it matters: The fixed expression is “at an early age,” and “children” matches the prompt.
- 5. Remove meaning conflict Original: a lump sum amount of money weekly Suggested revision: a small amount of money each week Why it matters: “Lump sum” implies a single payment and conflicts with the stated weekly payments.
- 6. Use natural collocation Original: necessities Suggested revision: needs Why it matters: “Personal needs” is the natural phrase for everyday items children require.
- 7. Use concise phrase Original: from an early stage of their life Suggested revision: from an early age Why it matters: The shorter fixed expression conveys the same meaning more naturally.
- 8. Correct collocation Original: finance Suggested revision: financial Why it matters: The adjective “financial” correctly modifies “management.”
- 9. Use natural phrase Original: the future life Suggested revision: later life Why it matters: “Later life” is the idiomatic expression for their future adulthood.
- 10. Correct linking word Original: Alternatively Suggested revision: Furthermore Why it matters: The sentence adds another benefit rather than presenting an alternative.
- 11. Fix subject agreement Original: granting money to offspring on a weekly basis have Suggested revision: granting money to children on a weekly basis has Why it matters: The gerund phrase is singular and therefore requires “has.”
- 12. Correct quantifier Original: uncountable Suggested revision: numerous Why it matters: “Numerous” appropriately describes a large number of countable benefits.
Suggested Rewrites
- grant a small amount of pocket money weekly to their children give their children a small amount of pocket money each week
- giving weekly money giving money each week
- juvenile children
- their adolescents in early age their children at an early age
- a lump sum amount of money weekly a small amount of money each week
- necessities needs
Why this response received Band 6.5
The response gives a clear, consistent opinion and develops several relevant benefits of weekly pocket money, while also acknowledging a possible risk. The main limitation is that the entire essay forms one mechanically linked paragraph and contains frequent awkward word choices and grammatical slips; the highest priority is to group the argument into purposeful paragraphs and express each claim in simpler, more natural language.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
A clear agreement position is sustained and supported through budgeting, saving, bargaining, and independence, with a relevant counterargument considered.
Strengthen the argument by explaining the strongest benefits in greater depth and avoiding exaggerated claims about deprivation or crime.
Coherence and Cohesion
Ideas follow a generally logical sequence, but the absence of paragraphing and heavy use of mechanical linking expressions weaken organisation.
Divide the response into an introduction, focused supporting paragraphs, a brief counterargument, and a concise conclusion.
Lexical Resource
The essay demonstrates broad vocabulary, but frequent inappropriate collocations and imprecise word choices make the style unnatural.
Choose familiar, exact expressions for financial skills and child development instead of forcing elaborate synonyms into unsuitable contexts.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
There is a range of sentence structures, yet agreement, article, plural, and clause-combination errors occur regularly throughout.
Proofread each sentence for subject-verb agreement and avoid double-linking patterns such as combining although with but.
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 say that giving a smaller amount of money weekly to children will help them become more capable as they grow older. Do you agree or disagree?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.