The working week should be shorter and workers should have a longer weekend. Do you agree or disagree?

The working week should be shorter and workers should have a longer weekend.
Do you agree or disagree?

One school of thought holds that a reduced working week could be better than a normal one owing to the fact that employees could have more time on the weekend. While acknowledging the reasons for this thinking, I would argue that this might be not perfectly beneficial to both the workers and the businesses.

On the one hand, it is justifiable for some to advocate the shorter working week. The primary reason is that having more weekend days can result in a remarkable improvement in work-life balance. Workers can have a longer amount of time to spend with their families, pursue their personal leisure and hobbies as well as participating in self-growth activities. For instance, parents could have more time with their children, help them with their homework or simply play with them. As a result of having more relaxing time, employees’ mental health can enhance significantly, which leads to the achievement of higher productivity, job satisfaction. This can be seen in Germany – a developed country, where exemplified how working hours have decreased alongside increased average incomes. As GDP per capita grew more than tenfold, working hours nearly halved, the experiment has demonstrated the link between more leisure time and the rising profit.

Despite the aforementioned benefits, I am convinced that reducing the working week might not be the most suitable and effective way in some specific cases. First and foremost, employees on a four-day working week may still be expected to work the same total hours condensed into fewer days so they have to work longer hours per day to fit the same workload. The compressed workdays can lead to fatigue, reduced productivity, increased stress-related problems and pressure. Another case is the 24/7 industries, which requires continuous operation.For example, the healthcare, emergency services are impractical to the shortened working week.In such case, implementing a four-day workweek could delay work and create longer spare time.

To summarize, while there are justification for supporting a reduced working week, I would contend that it is not a feasible option in some cases and has potential drawbacks for the mental health of the workers.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

1. "One school of thought holds that" -> "Some scholars argue that"
   Explanation: "Some scholars argue that" is a more precise and academically appropriate phrase, as it specifies the source of the opinion and aligns better with formal academic discourse.

2. "a reduced working week could be better than a normal one" -> "a reduced working week may be preferable to a standard one"
   Explanation: "may be preferable to a standard one" is more formal and avoids the simplistic comparison "better than a normal one," which is vague and informal.

3. "owing to the fact that" -> "due to the fact that"
   Explanation: "Due to the fact that" is a more formal expression commonly used in academic writing, enhancing the formality of the sentence.

4. "this might be not perfectly beneficial" -> "this may not be entirely beneficial"
   Explanation: "may not be entirely beneficial" is more concise and maintains the formal tone, avoiding the awkward construction "might be not perfectly beneficial."

5. "it is justifiable for some to advocate the shorter working week" -> "it is reasonable for some to advocate a shorter working week"
   Explanation: "reasonable" is more precise and academically appropriate than "justifiable," and removing "the" before "shorter working week" corrects the grammatical error and improves readability.

6. "having more weekend days" -> "having additional weekend days"
   Explanation: "additional" is more precise and formal than "more," which is vague and informal in this context.

7. "pursuing their personal leisure and hobbies as well as participating in self-growth activities" -> "pursuing personal leisure activities and engaging in self-improvement activities"
   Explanation: "engaging in self-improvement activities" is a more specific and formal term than "participating in self-growth activities," which is less commonly used and sounds less formal.

8. "As a result of having more relaxing time" -> "As a result of having more leisure time"
   Explanation: "leisure time" is a more specific and formal term than "relaxing time," which is too vague and informal for academic writing.

9. "the experiment has demonstrated" -> "the experiment has shown"
   Explanation: "has shown" is a more commonly used and academically appropriate phrase in formal writing than "has demonstrated," which can imply a more complex or scientific demonstration.

10. "the most suitable and effective way" -> "the most effective approach"
    Explanation: "the most effective approach" is a more concise and formal expression, avoiding the redundancy of "suitable and effective."

11. "employees on a four-day working week may still be expected to work the same total hours" -> "employees on a four-day working week may still be required to work the same total hours"
    Explanation: "required" is more precise and formal than "expected," which is less specific and can imply a less formal obligation.

12. "impractical to the shortened working week" -> "infeasible with a shortened working week"
    Explanation: "infeasible with a shortened working week" is more precise and formal, correcting the awkward and incorrect phrase "impractical to the shortened working week."

13. "implementing a four-day workweek could delay work and create longer spare time" -> "implementing a four-day workweek could delay work and result in extended downtime"
    Explanation: "result in extended downtime" is a more precise and formal way to describe the potential consequences of implementing a four-day workweek, replacing the less formal "create longer spare time."

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Task Response: 7

• Answer All Parts of the Question:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay addresses the prompt by presenting both sides of the argument regarding a shorter working week and longer weekends. The introduction acknowledges the opposing viewpoint while clearly stating the author’s disagreement. The body paragraphs provide reasons for both supporting and opposing the idea, which demonstrates an understanding of the task. However, the essay could have more explicitly stated the author’s position in the introduction and conclusion to reinforce the response to the prompt.
  • How to improve: To enhance the response, the author should ensure that their position is clearly articulated in the introduction and reiterated in the conclusion. Additionally, explicitly linking each argument back to the prompt can help to ensure that all parts of the question are thoroughly addressed.

• Present a Clear Position Throughout:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear position that reducing the working week is not universally beneficial. However, the clarity of this position could be improved. The author states their disagreement but does not consistently emphasize this stance throughout the essay. For example, while discussing the benefits of a shorter working week, the author could have made it clearer that these benefits do not outweigh the potential drawbacks.
  • How to improve: To maintain a clear and consistent position, the author should use transitional phrases that reinforce their stance, such as "Despite these benefits, I maintain that…" This would help to remind the reader of the author’s viewpoint as they explore the counterarguments.

• Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas, such as the improvement in work-life balance and the potential drawbacks of a compressed workweek. However, some points could be further developed. For instance, the example of Germany is relevant but lacks depth; the author could elaborate on how this example directly supports their argument against a shorter working week.
  • How to improve: To improve the development of ideas, the author should aim to provide more detailed examples and explanations. For instance, when discussing the potential drawbacks of a shorter working week, the author could include statistics or studies that illustrate the negative impacts on productivity and mental health.

• Stay on Topic:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the implications of a shorter working week. However, there are moments where the discussion could be more tightly focused. For example, the mention of "self-growth activities" could be seen as somewhat vague and not directly related to the main argument.
  • How to improve: To maintain focus, the author should ensure that every point made directly supports their central argument. Avoiding vague terms and instead providing concrete examples that relate directly to the benefits or drawbacks of a shorter working week would enhance the relevance of the discussion.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents a balanced view, but with clearer articulation of the author’s position, more developed examples, and tighter focus on the topic, it could achieve a higher band score.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

• Organize Information Logically:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear argument structure, with distinct sections addressing both sides of the issue. The introduction effectively sets the stage for the discussion, and the body paragraphs are logically organized, with the first paragraph outlining the benefits of a shorter working week and the second paragraph discussing the potential drawbacks. However, the transition between ideas could be smoother. For example, the shift from discussing benefits to drawbacks feels somewhat abrupt, which can disrupt the reader’s flow of understanding.
  • How to improve: To enhance logical flow, consider using transitional phrases that guide the reader through the argument. Phrases like "On the contrary" or "Conversely" can help signal a shift in perspective. Additionally, ensuring that each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence that encapsulates the main idea will further improve coherence.

• Use Paragraphs:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay utilizes paragraphs effectively, with each paragraph focusing on a specific aspect of the argument. The first paragraph discusses the advantages of a shorter working week, while the second addresses the disadvantages. However, the paragraphs could benefit from clearer internal structure. For instance, the first paragraph includes multiple ideas that could be better organized into separate sentences or even sub-points to enhance clarity.
  • How to improve: To improve paragraph structure, ensure that each paragraph contains a clear main idea followed by supporting details. Consider breaking down complex sentences into simpler ones to enhance readability. Additionally, using examples more strategically within paragraphs can help reinforce the main points without overwhelming the reader.

• Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a reasonable use of cohesive devices, such as "for instance," "as a result," and "despite the aforementioned benefits." These devices help link ideas and provide clarity. However, the range of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and there are instances where the connections between sentences could be made clearer. For example, the transition from discussing the benefits of a shorter week to the drawbacks could be more explicitly connected.
  • How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider variety of linking words and phrases, such as "furthermore," "in addition," "however," and "therefore." This will not only enhance the flow of the essay but also demonstrate a more sophisticated command of language. Additionally, consider using pronouns or synonyms to refer back to previously mentioned ideas, which can help maintain coherence without repetitive phrasing.

By addressing these areas, the essay can achieve a higher level of coherence and cohesion, potentially improving its overall band score.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6

• Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a reasonable range of vocabulary, with terms such as "work-life balance," "self-growth activities," and "compressed workdays." However, there are instances where vocabulary could be more varied. For example, the phrase "more relaxing time" could be enhanced with alternatives like "increased leisure time" or "greater relaxation opportunities." Additionally, phrases like "the most suitable and effective way" could be expressed with synonyms to avoid repetition.
  • How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, the writer should actively seek synonyms and related terms. For instance, instead of repeating "working week," consider using "work schedule" or "employment period." Engaging with a thesaurus or vocabulary-building exercises can help diversify word choice.

• Use Vocabulary Precisely:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay includes some precise vocabulary, such as "advocate," "beneficial," and "productivity." However, there are instances of imprecise usage, such as "the experiment has demonstrated the link between more leisure time and the rising profit," where "profit" could be more accurately described as "economic growth" or "financial success." Additionally, the phrase "this might be not perfectly beneficial" is awkward and could be more clearly stated as "this may not be entirely beneficial."
  • How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on clarity in expression. Reviewing the context of each term used and ensuring that it accurately reflects the intended meaning is crucial. Practicing paraphrasing sentences can also help in finding more precise language.

• Use Correct Spelling:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay contains a few spelling errors, such as "self-growth activities" (which is acceptable but could be more commonly phrased as "personal development activities") and "24/7 industries, which requires continuous operation" (should be "require" to match the plural subject). The overall spelling is generally accurate, but these minor errors can detract from the overall quality.
  • How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should proofread the essay carefully, preferably after a break to gain a fresh perspective. Utilizing spell-check tools and practicing writing regularly can also help reinforce correct spelling habits. Additionally, keeping a list of commonly misspelled words and reviewing them can be beneficial.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and employs a reasonable range of vocabulary, there are areas for improvement in vocabulary diversity, precision, and spelling accuracy. By focusing on these aspects, the writer can enhance their lexical resource and potentially achieve a higher band score in future essays.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7

• Use a Wide Range of Structures:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good variety of sentence structures, including complex and compound sentences. For instance, phrases like "One school of thought holds that a reduced working week could be better than a normal one" and "Despite the aforementioned benefits, I am convinced that reducing the working week might not be the most suitable and effective way in some specific cases" showcase the ability to construct nuanced arguments. However, there are instances of repetitive structures, such as starting multiple sentences with "The primary reason is that…" or "For example," which can detract from the overall variety.
  • How to improve: To enhance the diversity of sentence structures, the writer could incorporate more varied introductory phrases and clauses. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "The primary reason is that," they could use alternatives like "One compelling argument for this is…" or "A significant factor to consider is…". Additionally, integrating more passive voice constructions or conditional sentences could further enrich the grammatical range.

• Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally maintains a good level of grammatical accuracy, with only a few minor errors. For example, the phrase "might be not perfectly beneficial" should be rephrased to "might not be perfectly beneficial" for correct word order. Additionally, the sentence "the healthcare, emergency services are impractical to the shortened working week" lacks an article before "emergency services," which should be "the healthcare and emergency services." Punctuation is mostly correct, but there are some run-on sentences that could benefit from clearer separation to enhance readability.
  • How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on careful proofreading to catch minor errors in word order and article usage. Practicing sentence segmentation could help in avoiding run-on sentences; for example, breaking down longer sentences into shorter, clearer ones can improve clarity. Furthermore, reviewing rules regarding conjunctions and punctuation, especially in complex sentences, would be beneficial.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid command of grammatical range and accuracy, but with targeted practice and attention to detail, the writer can elevate their score further.

Bài sửa mẫu

One school of thought holds that a reduced working week could be better than a normal one due to the fact that employees could have more time on the weekend. While acknowledging the reasons for this thinking, I would argue that this may not be entirely beneficial to both the workers and the businesses.

On the one hand, it is reasonable for some to advocate a shorter working week. The primary reason is that having additional weekend days can result in a remarkable improvement in work-life balance. Workers can have a longer amount of time to spend with their families, pursue their personal leisure activities, and engage in self-improvement activities. For instance, parents could have more time with their children, help them with their homework, or simply play with them. As a result of having more leisure time, employees’ mental health can enhance significantly, which leads to higher productivity and job satisfaction. This can be seen in Germany—a developed country—where it has been exemplified how working hours have decreased alongside increased average incomes. As GDP per capita grew more than tenfold, working hours nearly halved; the experiment has shown the link between more leisure time and rising profits.

Despite the aforementioned benefits, I am convinced that reducing the working week might not be the most suitable and effective approach in some specific cases. First and foremost, employees on a four-day working week may still be expected to work the same total hours condensed into fewer days, so they have to work longer hours per day to fit the same workload. The compressed workdays can lead to fatigue, reduced productivity, increased stress-related problems, and pressure. Another case is the 24/7 industries, which require continuous operation. For example, healthcare and emergency services are impractical with a shortened working week. In such cases, implementing a four-day workweek could delay work and result in extended downtime.

To summarize, while there are justifications for supporting a reduced working week, I would contend that it is not a feasible option in some cases and has potential drawbacks for the mental health of the workers.