Marked version

This table shows the information about [k3: unnatural wording + k4: unnecessary article] information about a restaurant's average sales in [k4: wrong preposition] at three different branches ic [k5: wrong spelling] in Vancouver in 2016.

The table gives information about average sales at three branches of a restaurant in Vancouver in 2016.

Overalll [k5: wrong spelling] Overall, the Georgia Street branch performed the best result in [k3: unnatural collocation + k4: wrong preposition] recorded the highest figure for the number of transactions (854), followed by the Dunsmir [k5: wrong spelling] Dunsmuir Street branch with 750, while the Drake street [k5: capitalization error] Street branch was the worst [k1: register — too evaluative for data description] the lowest-performing branch with 390.

Overall, the Georgia Street branch recorded the highest number of transactions, at 854, followed by Dunsmuir Street with 750, whereas Drake Street had the lowest figure, at 390.

Similarly, the highest transaction value was greatest [k3: tautology + k3: unnatural wording] also highest at the Georgia Street [k4: wrong article + k3: incomplete reference] the Georgia Street branch ($10.69), compared with $9.02 at Drake Street and just [k1: slightly informal/emphatic for Task 1] only $5.61 at Dunsmir [k5: wrong spelling] Dunsmuir Street.

Similarly, the average transaction value was also highest at the Georgia Street branch, at $10.69, compared with $9.02 at Drake Street and only $5.61 at Dunsmuir Street.

In addition, the take-away transactions [k4: unnecessary article] take-away transactions were slightly more common than eat-in [k3: incomplete phrase] eat-in transactions in all branches, except the Drake Street with 190 and 200 for eat-in [k4: wrong article + k5: syntax — incomplete comparison + k2: unclear reference] except at the Drake Street branch, where there were 190 take-away transactions and 200 eat-in transactions.

In addition, take-away orders were slightly more common than eat-in transactions at Georgia Street and Dunsmuir Street, while the opposite pattern was seen at Drake Street.

The Georgia Street [k4: wrong article + k3: incomplete reference] The Georgia Street branch recorded 405 eat-in transactions and 449 take-away [k3: incomplete phrase] take-away orders, while the Dunsmir [k5: wrong spelling] Dunsmuir Street were [k4: wrong subject-verb agreement + k2: unclear subject] figures were 358 and 392 respectively.

The Georgia Street branch recorded 405 eat-in transactions and 449 take-away orders, while the corresponding figures for Dunsmuir Street were 358 and 392 respectively.

Finally, the most popular menu Items [k5: capitalization error] items differed across the branches: Chicken Burger at Georgia Street, Chicken Wigs [k5: wrong spelling] Wings at Dunsmir [k5: wrong spelling] Dunsmuir Street and Chicken Pasta at Drake Street.

In conclusion, yhe table shows definite patterns of the avarage sales in the branches in Vancouver. In particular, the number of different transactions. [k2: redundant ending + k5: wrong spelling + k5: syntax — sentence fragment + k0: task achievement — the conclusion repeats the overview vaguely and adds no useful comparison] Delete this paragraph. IELTS Task 1 normally needs an introduction, an overview and data details, not a separate conclusion.

Corrected version close to your wording

A stronger IELTS-style version of your answer

Marked version

The use of smartphones in schools is widely debated, especially regarding whether they should be prohibited during school hours. Supporters cite greater concentration and fewer interruptions, while opponents point to safety and learning apps. [k2: unclear framing — supporters/opponents of what? + k0: task response — this begins to frame the essay as “discuss both views”] Supporters of a ban argue that it would improve concentration and reduce interruptions, while critics claim that phones are useful for safety and learning. This essay examines both views and concludes that a ban is justified [k0: task response — the task asks to what extent you agree or disagree, not to examine both views] I largely agree that unsupervised smartphone use should be banned during the school day ; although the counterarguments matter, sustained attention and calmer classrooms are, in my view, decisive.

The use of smartphones in schools is widely debated, especially regarding whether pupils should be allowed to use them during school hours. I largely agree that unsupervised smartphone use should be banned during the school day, although supervised access may be permitted for emergencies or planned learning activities. This is because the benefits of sustained attention and calmer classrooms outweigh the advantages of unrestricted phone access.

On the one hand, [k2: unsuitable linker for this essay type — this sounds like a discussion essay] A reasonable objection to a ban is that it is often argued that smartphones should remain allowed, primarily because they enable quick contact in emergencies. In practice, this means that parents can reach children instantly if plans change or something goes wrong. For instance, a student may need to coordinate transport after an unexpected cancellation. Furthermore, proponents of this position maintain that phones support learning, as educational apps, dictionaries, and research tools can be used in class. Put differently, these devices are seen as both a safety tool and a study aid. That said, these concerns are not groundless, especially when schools lack reliable communication systems. [k2: incorrect linking + k0: task response — after presenting the opposing side, you need a rebuttal or limitation, not another sentence strengthening it] However, these points do not prove that students need unrestricted access to their phones, since emergencies can usually be handled through the school office and learning apps can be used under teacher supervision.

A reasonable objection to a ban is that smartphones allow quick contact in emergencies. Parents may need to reach their children if plans change or something goes wrong, and students may also use phones for educational apps, dictionaries and research. However, these advantages do not require unrestricted access throughout the school day: emergency communication can be managed through the school office, and educational use can be allowed only under teacher supervision.

On the other hand, [k2: unsuitable linker — it reinforces the “both views” structure] More importantly, I contend that a school-day ban [k0: task response —specify the exact extent of the ban] a ban on unsupervised phone use during the school day is necessary, largely because constant connectivity fragments attention and rewards impulsive checking. This is rooted in the fact that [k3: wordy phrase] This is because even brief “micro-breaks” of screen use disrupt concentration and reduce retention. To illustrate, lessons lose momentum when students repeatedly glance at messages rather than track explanations. In addition, a ban is crucial, since it protects peer interaction and reduces opportunities for in-school cyberbullying. What is often overlooked is that the goal is not punishment but a predictable learning environment. Admittedly, emergencies and educational uses are valid concerns; however, these downsides [k2: unclear reference — emergencies and educational uses are not “downsides”; the downsides are the possible disadvantages of a ban] the possible disadvantages of a ban are largely avoidable provided that phones are stored securely and supervised access is permitted when required. To give a clear example, a teacher can authorise brief use for a planned task while keeping devices inaccessible at other times.

More importantly, a ban on unsupervised phone use during the school day is necessary because constant connectivity fragments attention and encourages impulsive checking. Even brief “micro-breaks” of screen use can disrupt concentration and reduce retention. For example, lessons lose momentum when students repeatedly glance at messages rather than follow explanations. A controlled ban can also protect face-to-face interaction and reduce opportunities for in-school cyberbullying. The aim, therefore, is not punishment, but a predictable learning environment in which phones are stored securely and used only when a teacher permits them for a specific purpose.

In conclusion, while safety and educational uses deserve attention, I remain convinced that banning smartphones during the school day is the better approach. [k0: task response + k2: structure — this sounds closer to an “outweigh” conclusion; state the extent of agreement more directly] I largely agree that smartphones should be banned during the school day, provided that the ban applies to unsupervised personal use rather than to all supervised educational or emergency access. This is because focus and wellbeing are ultimately decisive, particularly when a controlled-access policy is in place.

In conclusion, I largely agree that smartphones should be banned during the school day, but the ban should target unsupervised personal use rather than carefully controlled educational or emergency access. This approach would protect students’ focus and wellbeing while still allowing schools to use phones when there is a clear practical need.

Corrected version close to your wording

8 July 2026

Checked IELTS Written / Speaking Answers

Answer 1 — Checked Version

I believe that robotisation affects workers in both positive and negative ways. On the one hand, robots help workers to handle some problems [k3: unnatural collocation + vague wording — robots usually perform tasks rather than “handle problems”] complete certain tasks that people lack the time or physical strength for.

On the other hand, companies raise the bar for employees, as they have a lot of efficient assistants from robots [k3: unnatural phrasing] access to efficient automated systems.

However, it also creates opportunities in fields like robotics engineering and artificial intelligence [k2: linking — “however” is possible, but not ideal here because the answer is balancing two sides rather than directly rebutting the previous point] At the same time, robotisation can create new opportunities in fields such as robotics engineering and artificial intelligence, so workers who reskill may benefit from this transformation.

Overall, while robotisation poses challenges, it also drives innovation and forces adaptation [k3: slightly unnatural / overly harsh collocation] encourages people to adapt.

Robotisation can make some jobs more demanding, but it can also open up new career paths for workers who are ready to develop new skills.

---

Answer 1 — Corrected Version

I believe that robotisation affects workers in both positive and negative ways. On the one hand, robots can help employees complete tasks that require too much time or physical effort. On the other hand, companies may raise the bar for staff because automated systems make many processes faster and more efficient.

At the same time, robotisation can create new opportunities in fields such as robotics engineering and artificial intelligence, so workers who reskill may benefit from this transformation. Overall, although robotisation poses challenges, it also drives innovation and encourages people to adapt.

---

Answer 1 — Main Rephrases

• handle some problems → complete certain tasks
• people lack the time or physical strength for → require too much time or physical effort
• a lot of efficient assistants from robots → access to efficient automated systems
• However, it also creates opportunities → At the same time, robotisation can create new opportunities
• forces adaptation → encourages people to adapt

---

Answer 2 — Checked Version

To safeguard their roles in the labor market [English variant: American spelling — not a mistake by itself, but you  mostly use British spelling, such as “robotisation” and “organisations”, so British English is recommended for consistency: labour], humans [k3: inaccurate word choice — “humans” sounds too biological in this context] workers must focus on continuous learning and adaptation to new technologies.

For instance, acquiring skills in areas like artificial intelligence can make workers more efficient, as now everything is developing in this way [k3: vague and informal phrasing] since technology is becoming increasingly important in many industries.

In addition, roles [k3: inaccurate word choice — “psychology” is a field rather than a role] professions that require emotional intelligence, such as psychology, are less likely to be automated, so workers can focus on such jobs [k3: slightly unnatural phrasing] move into such fields.

Governments and organisations should also play a role by providing access to ups-killing [k5: wrong spelling] upskilling programs [English variant: American spelling — not wrong in isolation, but British English is more consistent here because you  use “organisations” and “robotisation”; recommended form: programmes] and encouraging innovation in job creation.

Ultimately, by creating jobs for people and expanding knowledge in certain aspects [k2: unclear logic + k3: vague wording — the sentence should explain what workers themselves can do to remain employable] developing relevant skills and entering fields where human abilities are still essential, humans [k3: repetition of the inaccurate word “humans”] employees can maintain their relevance in the evolving labor market [English variant: American spelling — use labour for consistency with the prevailing British spelling in this answer].

Ultimately, employees can remain relevant by developing skills that technology cannot easily replace and by adapting to new professional demands.

---

Answer 2 — Corrected Version

To safeguard their position in the labour market, workers must focus on continuous learning and adaptation to new technologies. For instance, acquiring skills in areas such as artificial intelligence can make them more competitive, since technology is becoming increasingly important in many industries.

In addition, professions that require emotional intelligence, such as counselling, teaching or psychology-related work, are less likely to be automated, so employees can move into such fields. Governments and organisations should also play a role by providing access to upskilling programmes and encouraging innovation in job creation.

Ultimately, employees can remain relevant by developing skills that technology cannot easily replace and by adapting to new professional demands.

---

Answer 2 — Main Rephrases

• labor market American English → labour market British English
• humans → workers / employees
• as now everything is developing in this way → since technology is becoming increasingly important in many industries
• roles that require emotional intelligence, such as psychology → professions that require emotional intelligence, such as counselling, teaching or psychology-related work
• ups-killing → upskilling
• programs American English → programmes British English
• creating jobs for people and expanding knowledge in certain aspects → developing skills that technology cannot easily replace

---

Answer 3 — Checked Version

There is a wide variety of job opportunities in Russia. Small businesses contribute significantly to the economy, while international companies provide exposure [k3: incomplete collocation — companies provide exposure to someone] give employees exposure to global markets.

Furthermore, we have diversity in sectors [k1: register — informal wording for an IELTS-style answer + k3: unnatural phrasing] the labour market includes diverse sectors, such as farming and agriculture [k3: tautology — these words are too close in meaning] agriculture, manufacturing, IT and energy.

Additionally, Russia ranks among the world's most innovative nations in space technology [k0: task achievement — possibly overgeneralised claim; it needs evidence or softer wording] has a well-established space industry, making it an attractive and competitive labour market [English variant: British spelling — consistent with the recommended version in these answers] [k2: weak logic — one strong sector does not automatically make the whole labour market attractive] which creates opportunities for specialists in this area.

Similarly, science is a great way to achieve success in Russia [k3: too broad and informal] a career in science can also be promising in Russia, as the country has a strong research tradition.

A career in science can also be promising, especially for people interested in research, engineering or advanced technology.

---

Answer 3 — Corrected Version

There is a wide variety of job opportunities in Russia. Small businesses contribute significantly to the economy, while international companies give employees exposure to global markets. Furthermore, the labour market includes diverse sectors, such as agriculture, manufacturing, IT and energy.

Additionally, Russia has a well-established space industry, which creates opportunities for specialists in this area. A career in science can also be promising, especially for people interested in research, engineering or advanced technology.

---

Answer 3 — Main Rephrases

• provide exposure to global markets → give employees exposure to global markets
• we have diversity in sectors → the labour market includes diverse sectors
• farming and agriculture → agriculture, manufacturing, IT and energy
• ranks among the world's most innovative nations in space technology → has a well-established space industry
• science is a great way to achieve success → a career in science can be promising

---

General Feedback

The answers are clear and relevant, but they sometimes rely on vague or overgeneralised wording. The main issues are collocation, precision, and development of ideas. You should try to explain the cause-effect relationship more clearly instead of listing broad points.

You mix English variants: robotisation, organisations and labour are British English, while labor and programs are American English. Since British spelling is more common in these answers, the recommended version is British English: robotisation, organisations, labour, programmes.

---

Potentially Missed or Debatable Issues

In Answer 1, “However” is not grammatically wrong because it contrasts the previous negative point. However, “At the same time” creates smoother logic because the answer is balancing positive and negative effects rather than directly rebutting one idea.

In Answer 2, “psychology” is understandable, but it is more precise to mention actual professions, such as counselling, teaching or psychology-related work.

In Answer 3, the sentence about Russia and space technology is not necessarily wrong, but the phrase “ranks among the world's most innovative nations” is too strong without evidence. A softer version is safer for IELTS-style speaking or writing.

The American forms labor and programs are not mistakes in themselves. They are marked only as English-version consistency issues because the surrounding text mostly follows British spelling.

8 July 2026

Checked IELTS Speaking Answer

Checked Version

The author tells us how to do business [k3: inaccurate / too general wording — you probably mean starting or running a business] start and run a business and the main advantages and disadvantages of it.

So, the main idea is that people need to do what do they want to do [k3: unnatural phrasing in a spoken summary — not marked as syntax] what they really want to do.

So [k3: repetition — you use “so” too often as a filler/linker], if they are passionate about that, if they are into that [k3: repetition / vague reference] their work, it is the good way to make it [k3: unclear collocation] a good way to succeed.

But if they do it just to make some money, it is not the best city [transcription issue: this is probably speech recognition; check the audio. If you meant “the best idea”, use that phrase] the best idea because, at the end of the day, they will be tired of that [k3: vague reference] this kind of work.

so another thing is that people need to work where they want to work [k2: weak transition — the idea changes from business motivation to place of work too abruptly] Another important point is that people should choose a place where they genuinely want to work.

So, if you want to travel the world, travel the world, but if you are staying in your hometown just because of job [k3: incomplete noun phrase in oral expression — not marked as syntax] your job, you need to change the place [k3: unnatural collocation] move somewhere else because we live only once and we need to do everything that we want to do.

So there is a point to money [k4: wrong preposition / incorrect prepositional construction -- use "point in smth"+ k2: unclear conclusion] There is a point in caring about money / money matters, but it is better when it comes from work that gives you satisfaction.

And that's all [k1: weak ending for IELTS Speaking — try to finish with a complete concluding sentence] That is why I think passion and personal freedom are central to the author’s message.

The author’s main message is that people should not choose a career only for money. They should find work that gives them energy, freedom and a sense of purpose.

---

Corrected Version

The author explains how to start and run a business and discusses its main advantages and disadvantages. The main idea is that people should do what they genuinely want to do. If they are passionate about their work and are really interested in it, they have a much better chance of succeeding.

However, if they do something only to make money, it may not be the best decision because, at the end of the day, they may become tired of this kind of work. Another important point is that people should choose a place where they genuinely want to work. For example, if someone wants to travel the world, they should not stay in their hometown only because of a job.

In other words, money matters, but it is much better when it comes from work that gives you satisfaction. That is why I think passion and personal freedom are central to the author’s message.

---

Alternative Higher-Level Speaking Version

The author mainly talks about business and career choices. In my view, the key message is that people should build their careers around something they genuinely enjoy rather than focus only on money. If a person is passionate about their work, they are more likely to stay motivated, overcome difficulties and eventually succeed.

The author also suggests that people should think carefully about where and how they want to live. For example, if someone dreams of travelling, it may not be wise to stay in one place only because of a stable job. Of course, money is important, but it should not be the only reason for choosing a career. Overall, I think the author is saying that success should be connected with personal satisfaction and freedom.

---

Main Rephrases

• do business → start and run a business
• what do they want to do → what they really want to do
• if they are into that → if they are genuinely interested in their work
• it is the good way to make it → it is a good way to succeed
• they will be tired of that → they may become tired of this kind of work
• change the place → move somewhere else
• there is a point to money if it comes from pleasure → money matters, but it is better when it comes from work that gives you satisfaction
• And that's all → That is why I think passion and personal freedom are central to the author’s message

---

Feedback for You

You understood the general message of the text quite well: business and career choices should be connected with passion, not only money. Your strongest idea is that people should choose work and lifestyle according to their real interests.

However, your answer needs clearer organisation. You move from business to money, then to travelling, then to hometowns, and the links between these ideas are sometimes too abrupt. Try to use a clearer chain: main idea → explanation → example → conclusion.

You also rely too much on repeated words such as so, that, people and want. In IELTS Speaking, this can make the answer sound less controlled. Try to replace them with more precise phrases: this kind of work, their career, personal goals, career satisfaction.