Work & CareersAdvantages–Disadvantages
IELTS Essay: The Four-Day Working Week (Band 9 vs 6.5)
In short
Below is a full Band 9 model answer to this IELTS Writing Task 2 question, the same question written at Band 6.5, and a criterion-by-criterion breakdown of exactly what separates them — so you can see what to change in your own writing. Then check your essay with the free tool.
The question
In some countries, companies are moving to a four-day working week with no reduction in pay. Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages?
How to approach a Advantages–Disadvantages question
For an advantages/disadvantages question, first check exactly what is asked: 'discuss the advantages and disadvantages' wants a balanced account, whereas 'do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?' demands a clear verdict. If a verdict is required, state it in the introduction and return to it in the conclusion — listing pros and cons without deciding is a Task Response failure.
The plan
- 01Introduction: paraphrase the shift towards a four-day week and state a clear verdict - the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
- 02Body 1: the main advantages - better wellbeing and, counterintuitively, sustained or higher productivity.
- 03Body 2: acknowledge the real disadvantages - scheduling strain in service industries and compressed workloads - and weigh them as manageable.
- 04Conclusion: restate the verdict that the gains for workers and employers justify the transition.
Band 9 model answer
A growing number of firms now offer their staff a four-day week on full pay, a development that has provoked both enthusiasm and scepticism. While the model undoubtedly creates complications for certain industries, I would argue that its benefits to employees and employers alike comfortably outweigh its drawbacks.
The most obvious advantage is the transformation of workers' wellbeing. An additional free day allows people to rest properly, attend medical appointments, care for relatives and pursue interests that a five-day schedule squeezes out, which in turn reduces burnout and staff turnover. Crucially, the evidence from large-scale trials suggests that output rarely suffers: when time is scarcer, meetings shrink, distractions are pruned, and employees concentrate their energy on the tasks that genuinely matter. In other words, companies frequently exchange an unproductive fifth day for four sharper ones.
That said, the disadvantages are real rather than imaginary. Hospitals, schools and customer-facing businesses cannot simply close for an extra day, so they must hire additional staff or run complex rotas, both of which raise costs. There is also a danger that five days of work are merely compressed into four, leaving employees more exhausted than before. Yet these are problems of implementation rather than of principle: staggered schedules can keep services open, and workload reviews can prevent compression, as several national pilots have demonstrated.
In conclusion, although the four-day week demands careful planning in sectors that serve the public continuously, the gains in health, retention and focused productivity are decisive. On balance, this development benefits both sides of the employment relationship, and its advantages clearly outweigh its disadvantages.
The same question at Band 6.5
Nowadays, some companies let their workers work only four days in a week but they receive the same salary. This trend has advantages and also disadvantages. In my opinion, the advantages are bigger than the disadvantages.
There are some good points about the four-day week. Firstly, workers can have more free time to spend with their family and do their hobbies. This is good for their health because they will have less stress and they will not feel tired all the time. Secondly, when people have a good rest, they can work better. Some companies tried this system and they found that the workers finished the same amount of work in four days. So the company does not lose money and the workers are more happy.
However, there are also some problems. Some places like hospitals and shops cannot close for one more day because people need them every day. So these companies must pay for more staffs and it is expensive for them. Another problem is that workers maybe have to do five days work in only four days. This can make them more stressful than before, so the benefit of free day is lost.
In conclusion, I think the four-day working week has more advantages than disadvantages. It gives workers better life and the companies can still get good results. The government and companies should make a good plan for the industries that need to open every day, then this system can be success for everyone.
What separates them, criterion by criterion
| Criterion | Band 9 | Band 6.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Task Response | Delivers the required verdict in the introduction, develops advantages and disadvantages with specific mechanisms (shorter meetings, rota costs), and explicitly weighs them ('problems of implementation rather than of principle'). | States a clear verdict and covers both sides, but ideas stay general ('good for their health', 'it is expensive') and the weighing is asserted rather than argued. |
| Coherence & Cohesion | Paragraphs follow a clear advantage-concession-rebuttal arc, with cohesion built into the argument ('That said', 'Crucially', 'In other words'). | Logical paragraphing, but linking is mechanical and repetitive ('Firstly', 'Secondly', 'However', 'So') and sentences tend to list points. |
| Lexical Resource | Precise, natural collocation throughout: 'staff turnover', 'distractions are pruned', 'staggered schedules', 'both sides of the employment relationship'. | Adequate everyday vocabulary with repetition ('good', 'work', 'company') and errors such as 'more staffs' and 'more stressful than before' used for people. |
| Grammatical Range & Accuracy | Wide range of complex structures - concessive clauses, cleft-like emphasis, parallel lists - with full control. | Mostly simple and compound sentences; recurring slips ('the workers are more happy', 'this system can be success') that do not block meaning. |
Examiner's note
Both answers reach a verdict, which is essential for an 'outweigh' question, but the Band 9 essay earns its verdict: every advantage and disadvantage comes with a mechanism, and the counter-arguments are answered rather than abandoned. The Band 6.5 response is relevant and organised, yet generalised ideas, formulaic linking and frequent small errors cap it - exactly the profile of a competent candidate who has not yet learned to develop and weigh arguments in depth.
Vocabulary from the Band 9 answer
| Word / phrase | Meaning |
|---|---|
| staff turnover | the rate at which employees leave and are replaced |
| burnout | exhaustion caused by prolonged work stress |
| to prune distractions | to cut away things that waste time or attention |
| a staggered schedule | working hours arranged so people start and finish at different times |
| customer-facing | involving direct contact with the public |
| to compress a workload | to force the same amount of work into less time |
| a problem of implementation | a difficulty in putting a plan into practice, not in the plan itself |
| retention | a company's ability to keep its employees |
| on balance | after weighing all the arguments |
Frequently asked questions
Do I have to say whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
Yes. When the question asks 'do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?', a clear verdict is part of Task Response. State it in the introduction, keep it consistent, and return to it in the conclusion - simply listing pros and cons loses marks.
Should I write more about the side I choose?
A slight imbalance in favour of your verdict is natural and effective. Cover the other side genuinely - one well-developed paragraph is enough - then show why it carries less weight.
Can I use real-world examples like company trials?
Yes, and you do not need precise statistics. A plausible general reference such as 'large-scale trials suggest output rarely suffers' demonstrates development; invented precise figures are unnecessary and risky.