A Person You Know Who Does a Job Useful to Society

Part 3 follow-up questions

These are the discussion questions examiners asked after this cue card. Sample answers are shown where available.

1. 1. How do you think the changing needs of society will affect the jobs people do in the future?

   May–Aug 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   Lists two separate future trends in short sentences joined loosely with 'too' and 'At the same time'.

   I think care work will be the big one. Families in Vietnam are getting smaller and older, and you can already see private care homes opening around Da Nang where there were none ten years ago — but they can't find trained staff. As people get older, more and more jobs will be about looking after people, both physically and emotionally. Climate change will create jobs too, like flood engineering and coastal protection. At the same time, normal office work is shrinking fast because software can do it. So future jobs look more human, not less.

   Why this band

   • FC“As people get older, more and more jobs will be about looking after people, both physically and emotionally.” — This sentence restates the idea plainly with 'more and more jobs will be about'. The 7.0/7.5 versions use the more precise phrase 'whole categories of work will grow around', which sounds like a more considered generalisation.
   • LR“normal office work is shrinking fast” — This is a plain, accurate description. The 7.0/7.5 versions add the precise modifier 'routine' before 'office work', which more accurately names the type of work being displaced.
   • GRA“Climate change will create jobs too, like flood engineering and coastal protection.” — Examples are introduced with the plain connector 'like'. The 7.0/7.5 versions replace this with a colon followed by a short list, which is a more economical way of presenting the same examples.

   Band 7.0

   Uses 'I'd say' to hedge the claim about ageing populations and a colon to introduce the climate-related job list.

   I think care will be the big one. Families in Vietnam are getting smaller and older, and you can already see private care homes opening around Da Nang where none existed ten years ago — and they can't find enough trained staff. As populations age, I'd say whole categories of work will grow around looking after people, both physically and emotionally. Climate will create jobs too: flood engineering, coastal protection, energy. Meanwhile, routine office work is shrinking fast because software increasingly does it. So the jobs of the future look more human, not less — the things a machine genuinely can't do.

   Why this band

   • FC“I'd say” — This hedge softens the generalisation about future work, a more natural spoken device than the flat 6.5 statement 'more and more jobs will be about looking after people'. The 7.5 version drops the hedge, stating the same claim with more direct confidence.
   • LR“routine office work” — This precise compound noun names the type of work at risk exactly. The 6.5 version uses the vaguer 'normal office work', while 7.5 reuses this exact phrase, confirming it fits the higher bands.
   • GRA“Climate will create jobs too: flood engineering, coastal protection, energy.” — This colon-introduced list of noun phrases is more economical than the 'like' clause used at 6.5. It's identical to the structure at 7.5, showing this device is already appropriate from 7.0 upward.

   Band 7.5

   Extends the closing sentence with a further relative clause explaining what 'more human' actually means.

   I think care will be the big one. Families in Vietnam are getting smaller and older, and you can already see private care homes opening around Da Nang where none existed ten years ago — and they can't find trained staff. As populations age, whole categories of work will grow up around looking after people, physically and emotionally. Climate will create jobs too: flood engineering, coastal protection, energy. At the same time, routine office work is shrinking fast because software does it instead. So the jobs of the future look more human, not less — the things a machine can't do, which are mostly about caring for and understanding other people.

   Why this band

   • FC“which are mostly about caring for and understanding other people” — This relative clause extends the closing sentence with a further explanation, going beyond 7.0's shorter ending 'the things a machine genuinely can't do' by specifying exactly what those things are.
   • LR“whole categories of work will grow up around looking after people” — The phrasal verb 'grow up around' is a vivid, organic image for how new job sectors emerge, matching 7.0's near-identical phrase but developed further by the closing relative clause that follows it here.
   • GRA“the things a machine can't do, which are mostly about caring for and understanding other people” — A relative clause is nested onto an existing dash-led clause, creating a two-layer structure more complex than 7.0's single dash-led clause and much more than 6.5's plain final sentence.

2. 2. Do people need to continue training throughout their working lives?

   May–Aug 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   Explains the negative alternative with a plain 'If you don't keep learning, you slowly get' structure.

   Yes, and in my job it's not really optional. Half the tools I use every day didn't exist when I finished university seven years ago, and the way I work now would look strange to the person who left back then. This is true in most jobs to some degree — a nurse learns new rules, a mechanic learns about electric motors, a farmer learns a new app for prices. If you don't keep learning, you slowly get pushed to the edge of your own job. What's changed is that training used to be organised by employers, but now it's mostly up to the person, which isn't really fair to people without time or money.

   Why this band

   • FC“If you don't keep learning, you slowly get pushed to the edge of your own job.” — This is a simple conditional sentence with 'if... you get'. The 7.0/7.5 versions replace this with the noun phrase 'The alternative... is being slowly pushed', which packages the same idea more economically as a single clause.
   • LR“would look strange to the person who left back then” — This is a workable but slightly informal comparison. The 7.0/7.5 versions upgrade this to the more precise, formal adjective 'unrecognisable', which is a stronger and more natural word choice for the idea of complete change.
   • GRA“This is true in most jobs to some degree — a nurse learns new rules, a mechanic learns about electric motors, a farmer learns a new app for prices.” — Three parallel examples are listed after a dash. This same structure appears at 7.0/7.5, but those versions vary the noun in the first example to the more precise 'protocols' instead of the general word 'rules'.

   Band 7.0

   Uses 'honestly' to frame the claim about being left behind and closes with a short reflective final sentence.

   Yes, and in my field it's simply not optional. Half the tools I use every day didn't exist when I graduated seven years ago, and the way I work now would be almost unrecognisable to the person who left university back then. That's true in most jobs to some degree — a nurse learns new protocols, a mechanic learns electric motors, a farmer learns a new app for prices. The alternative, honestly, is being slowly pushed to the edge of your own profession. What's changed is that training used to be something employers organised, and now it's largely on the individual, which seems unfair to people without the time or money. But the need itself isn't going away.

   Why this band

   • FC“honestly,” — This hedge is inserted mid-sentence before the consequence, adding a natural spoken register the flatter 6.5 version lacks. The 7.5 version removes this hedge, stating the same idea with slightly more direct confidence.
   • LR“unrecognisable” — This precise adjective is a clear upgrade from the vague 6.5 phrase 'would look strange'. It's reused identically at 7.5, confirming it already fits the higher bands.
   • GRA“The alternative, honestly, is being slowly pushed to the edge of your own profession.” — The hedge 'honestly' is inserted between the subject and verb, a more flexible placement than a sentence-initial hedge would allow, showing slightly more grammatical control over hedging position than the simpler 6.5 conditional sentence.

   Band 7.5

   Drops the hedge used at 7.0, stating the same reflective observation with slightly more direct confidence.

   Yes, and in my field it's simply not optional. Half the tools I use every day didn't exist when I graduated seven years ago, and the way I work now would be unrecognisable to the person who left university back then. That's true in most jobs to some degree — a nurse learns new protocols, a mechanic learns electric motors, a farmer learns a new app for prices. The alternative is being slowly pushed to the edge of your own profession. What's changed is that training used to be something employers organised and now it's largely on the individual, which is unfair to people without the time or money. But the need itself isn't going away.

   Why this band

   • FC“The alternative is being slowly pushed to the edge of your own profession.” — This sentence states the consequence directly and confidently, without the mid-sentence hedge 'honestly' used at 7.0 or the conditional 'If you don't keep learning' structure at 6.5, yet still lands on the same idea.
   • LR“a nurse learns new protocols” — The precise noun 'protocols' is more accurate and professional than the vague 6.5 phrase 'new rules', matching the identical upgrade already present at 7.0.
   • GRA“What's changed is that training used to be something employers organised and now it's largely on the individual, which is unfair to people without the time or money.” — This long sentence links a past/present contrast ('used to be... and now') directly to a relative clause of consequence ('which is unfair to...') in one continuous structure, slightly more fluent than 7.0's version of the same sentence, which pauses on the hedge 'honestly' earlier.

3. 3. Do you think university is a good place to learn about the world of work?

   May–Aug 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   Uses a plain 'But' before the closing evaluation and a comma-joined dash clause to list examples.

   Honestly, not very well. My first real client meeting was a disaster that nothing in four years at university had prepared me for — the client hated the design, my lecturer wasn't there to grade it, and I had to negotiate instead of just defend my work. University teaches the subject well but barely teaches the world of work — deadlines with money attached, difficult colleagues, who actually decides things. Internships help, and the better courses now include them. But I'd say university is good for learning how to think and not very good for learning how a workplace works.

   Why this band

   • FC“University teaches the subject well but barely teaches the world of work” — The contrast here is built with the simple repeated verb 'teaches', which is clear but slightly repetitive. The 7.0/7.5 versions restructure this with a colon and an implied ellipsis ('and the world of work barely at all'), avoiding the repeated verb.
   • LR“had to negotiate instead of just defend my work” — This phrase is functional but adds the extra words 'just' and 'my work' to make the contrast clear. The 7.0/7.5 versions compress this to the leaner 'negotiate rather than simply defend' / 'negotiate rather than defend', which reads more naturally at speed.
   • GRA“But I'd say university is good for learning how to think and not very good for learning how a workplace works.” — This sentence repeats the phrase 'good for learning' twice, which is clear but a little repetitive. The 7.0/7.5 versions vary the second half to 'a poor place to learn how a workplace behaves', avoiding the repetition while keeping the parallel structure.

   Band 7.0

   Uses ellipsis after a colon to avoid repeating the verb 'teaches' a second time.

   Honestly, not very. My first real client meeting was a disaster that nothing in four years at university had prepared me for — the client hated the design, my lecturer wasn't there to grade it, and I had to negotiate rather than simply defend the work. University teaches the subject well and the world of work barely at all: deadlines with money attached, difficult colleagues, the politics of who decides. Internships help, and the better courses now build them in. But I'd say university is a good place to learn how to think and a fairly poor place to learn how a workplace actually behaves.

   Why this band

   • FC“University teaches the subject well and the world of work barely at all:” — This sentence drops the repeated verb after 'and', relying on ellipsis, which is more economical than the 6.5 version's repeated verb 'teaches'. The 7.5 answer keeps this identical structure, showing it's already suited to the top band.
   • LR“negotiate rather than simply defend the work” — This is a leaner, more natural phrasing than the 6.5 version's 'negotiate instead of just defend my work'. The 7.5 answer trims it even further to 'negotiate rather than defend', dropping the object entirely for maximum economy.
   • GRA“a good place to learn how to think and a fairly poor place to learn how a workplace actually behaves” — This parallel structure repeats 'a... place to learn how' twice with contrasting adjectives, a more controlled repetition-for-effect than the plain 6.5 version's similarly patterned but less polished sentence.

   Band 7.5

   Trims the negotiate/defend contrast to its leanest form and adds a further closing sentence about the first year on the job.

   Honestly, not very. My first real client meeting was a disaster that nothing in four years at university had prepared me for — the client hated the design, my lecturer wasn't there to grade it, and I had to negotiate rather than defend. University teaches the subject well and the world of work barely at all: deadlines with money attached, difficult colleagues, the politics of who decides. Internships help, and the better courses now build them in. But I'd say university is a good place to learn how to think and a poor place to learn how a workplace behaves. Most people learn that in their first bewildering year on the job.

   Why this band

   • FC“I had to negotiate rather than defend” — This is the leanest version of the three bands' phrasing, dropping the object 'the work' entirely that both 6.5 and 7.0 include, trusting the reader to follow the implied contrast.
   • LR“their first bewildering year on the job” — The adjective 'bewildering' adds a vivid, precise sense of confusion that neither lower band attempts; this phrase appears only in the final sentence unique to this band.
   • GRA“Most people learn that in their first bewildering year on the job.” — This additional closing sentence extends the answer beyond where 6.5 and 7.0 stop, adding a further generalising observation that rounds off the comparison rather than ending abruptly on the workplace/place-to-think contrast.

4. 4. Which types of jobs do you think are not paid enough?

   May–Aug 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   Explains city workers' pay with the simple comparative structure 'which is paid like it's unskilled, when...'.

   The caring jobs, without question. A nurse friend of mine works twelve-hour shifts with very sick children and earns less than a junior designer at my studio, which doesn't make sense by any measure of usefulness. Teachers, especially in primary schools, are in a similar position. Then there's the work that keeps cities running — cleaning, security guards, delivery riders — which is paid like it's unskilled, when the city would actually stop within days without it. Farmers too. The pattern is clear: jobs where the value is obvious but the customer is the public instead of a company get paid badly.

   Why this band

   • FC“which is paid like it's unskilled, when the city would actually stop within days without it” — The comparison uses the informal 'like' and the plain verb 'stop'. The 7.0/7.5 versions replace 'like' with the more formal 'as if' and 'stop' with the stronger, more precise verb 'collapse', both clear upgrades.
   • LR“which doesn't make sense by any measure of usefulness” — This is a workable but slightly flat evaluation. The 7.0 version softens it slightly to 'makes little sense', while 7.5 intensifies it to the more emphatic 'makes no sense', showing a wider range of evaluative precision across bands.
   • GRA“Then there's the work that keeps cities running — cleaning, security guards, delivery riders — which is paid like it's unskilled, when the city would actually stop within days without it.” — This sentence lists examples after a dash and then adds a 'when' clause. The 7.0/7.5 versions replace the general noun 'cleaning' with the more precise, technical term 'sanitation', a small but real lexical upgrade within the same structure.

   Band 7.0

   Upgrades 'stop' to 'collapse' and adds the causal final clause 'because nobody profits from paying them well'.

   The caring jobs, without question. A nurse friend of mine works twelve-hour shifts with seriously ill children and earns less than a junior designer at my studio, which makes little sense by any measure of usefulness. Teachers, especially in primary schools, are in much the same position. Then there's the work that keeps cities running — sanitation, security guards, delivery riders — which gets paid as if it were unskilled, when the city would genuinely collapse within days without it. Farmers, too. The pattern is fairly clear: jobs where the value is obvious but the customer is the public rather than a company tend to get paid badly, because nobody profits from paying them well.

   Why this band

   • FC“The pattern is fairly clear:” — The hedge 'fairly' softens the generalisation slightly, a natural spoken qualifier absent from the flatter 6.5 statement 'The pattern is clear'. The 7.5 version drops 'fairly' for a more confident, unhedged claim.
   • LR“the city would genuinely collapse within days without it” — The intensifier 'genuinely' plus the stronger verb 'collapse' makes this claim more forceful than the plain 6.5 phrase 'the city would actually stop'. The 7.5 version keeps 'collapse' but drops 'genuinely', relying on word order for emphasis instead.
   • GRA“jobs where the value is obvious but the customer is the public rather than a company tend to get paid badly, because nobody profits from paying them well” — This sentence adds an explicit causal clause ('because nobody profits...') that the 6.5 version lacks entirely, giving a fuller explanation for the pattern rather than just stating it.

   Band 7.5

   Reorders the final city-collapse clause and drops the hedge 'fairly' for a more confident final generalisation.

   The caring ones, without question. A nurse friend of mine works twelve-hour shifts with seriously ill children and earns less than a junior designer at my studio, which makes no sense by any measure of usefulness. Teachers, especially in primary schools, are in the same position. Then there's the work that keeps cities running — sanitation, security guards, delivery riders — which is paid as if it were unskilled when the city would collapse without it within days. Farmers, too. The pattern is clear: jobs where the value is obvious but the customer is the public rather than a company get paid badly, because nobody profits from paying them well.

   Why this band

   • FC“The pattern is clear: jobs where the value is obvious but the customer is the public rather than a company get paid badly, because nobody profits from paying them well.” — This closing sentence states the generalisation and its cause in one unhedged, confident flow, without the softening 'fairly' used at 7.0 or the shorter, causeless version at 6.5.
   • LR“would collapse without it within days” — The word order here places 'without it' before the time phrase, a slightly more compact and natural-sounding arrangement than 7.0's 'would genuinely collapse within days without it', which needs the extra adverb 'genuinely' to carry similar force.
   • GRA“which is paid as if it were unskilled when the city would collapse without it within days” — The subjunctive 'as if it were' (rather than 'as if it is') is a more formally correct and controlled structure than the informal 'like it's unskilled' used at 6.5, and matches the register upgrade already present at 7.0.

5. 5. What kinds of jobs are very well paid in your country?

   May–Aug 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   Closes with a plain causal statement rather than naming the two abstract underlying factors directly.

   Anything close to foreign money or investment. A university friend of mine at an international bank in Ho Chi Minh City earns in one month roughly what my father earned in a whole year teaching, and she isn't unusual. Senior people in finance, real estate developers, executives at foreign-invested companies and some doctors in private hospitals are at the top. Technology is rising fast too — a good software engineer can now earn more than most professionals. Pilots and some civil-service jobs with, let's say, unofficial income are also well known. What links most of them is that they sit where a lot of money passes through.

   Why this band

   • FC“What links most of them is that they sit where a lot of money passes through.” — The closing generalisation is expressed as a single simple clause introduced by 'that'. The 7.0/7.5 versions replace this with two named abstract nouns before a colon, 'scarcity and leverage', which frames the same idea more analytically.
   • LR“Technology is rising fast too” — This is a plain, functional way of describing a trend. The 7.0/7.5 versions use the more dynamic, idiomatic verb 'climbing', which paints a slightly more vivid image of rapid upward movement.
   • GRA“a good software engineer can now earn more than most professionals” — This is a straightforward comparative sentence. The 7.0 version compresses the same idea into a single verb, 'out-earn', which is a more economical, single-word way of expressing the comparison.

   Band 7.0

   Names the two abstract causes explicitly, 'scarcity and leverage', before explaining them with a colon.

   Anything close to foreign money or capital, I'd say. A university friend of mine at an international bank in Ho Chi Minh City earns in a month roughly what my father earned in a year teaching, and she's not particularly unusual. Senior people in finance, real estate developers, executives at foreign-invested companies and some doctors in private hospitals sit at the top. Technology is climbing fast — a good software engineer can now out-earn most professionals. Pilots and certain civil-service positions with, let's say, informal income are also well known. What links most of them, honestly, is scarcity and leverage: they sit where large amounts of money pass through, and they take a slice.

   Why this band

   • FC“honestly,” — This hedge is inserted mid-sentence just before the key generalisation, softening the claim in a natural spoken way the flatter 6.5 conclusion lacks. The 7.5 version removes this hedge for a more direct, confident final claim.
   • LR“scarcity and leverage” — This pair of precise abstract nouns names the underlying economic logic directly, a clear upgrade from the plain descriptive clause used at 6.5. The 7.5 answer reuses this exact pair, confirming it's already right for the top band.
   • GRA“a good software engineer can now out-earn most professionals” — The single compound verb 'out-earn' replaces the fuller comparative structure used at 6.5 ('can now earn more than'), a more economical piece of grammar that packs comparison directly into the verb.

   Band 7.5

   Drops the hedge used at 7.0, presenting the same abstract analysis with direct confidence.

   Anything close to foreign money or capital. A university friend of mine at an international bank in Ho Chi Minh City earns in a month roughly what my father earned in a year teaching, and she's not unusual. Senior people in finance, real estate developers, executives at foreign-invested companies and some doctors in private hospitals are at the top. Technology is climbing fast — a good software engineer can now earn more than most professionals. Pilots and certain civil-service positions with, let's say, informal income are also well known. What links most of them is scarcity and leverage: they sit where large amounts of money pass through, and they take a slice.

   Why this band

   • FC“What links most of them is scarcity and leverage: they sit where large amounts of money pass through, and they take a slice.” — This sentence states the analytical claim and its explanation directly, without the mid-sentence hedge 'honestly' used at 7.0, giving the conclusion more unhedged authority while keeping the same content.
   • LR“they take a slice” — This is a vivid, idiomatic closing image for profiting from a flow of money, shared with 7.0 but landing with more weight here since it isn't preceded by a softening hedge.
   • GRA“a good software engineer can now earn more than most professionals” — This reverts to the fuller comparative structure rather than 7.0's compressed verb 'out-earn', which is arguably a deliberate, slightly more formal choice suited to the analytical tone of the rest of this band's answer.

6. 6. How have working conditions changed over the years?

   May–Aug 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   Ends the answer on the father/phone contrast without drawing an explicit final generalisation about the trade-off.

   Hugely different, in my family within just one generation. My father worked six days a week for most of his life, often without a written contract, and paid holiday only came along when he was already in his forties. I work five days, two of them from home, with health insurance and a contract a lawyer could actually read. Safety has improved a lot in factories and construction, though not everywhere. What's got worse, I think, is the boundary between work and life — my father's work ended when he left the building, but mine follows me home on my phone.

   Why this band

   • FC“What's got worse, I think, is the boundary between work and life” — The hedge 'I think' plus the spelled-out phrase 'between work and life' is clear but slightly wordy. The 7.0/7.5 versions replace 'I think' with 'I'd argue' and drop the explanatory phrase, letting the colon and example carry the meaning instead.
   • LR“Hugely different” — This is a plain, general opening adverb-adjective pair. The 7.0/7.5 versions replace it with the single, stronger adverb 'Enormously', which is more economical and slightly more formal in register.
   • GRA“my father's work ended when he left the building, but mine follows me home on my phone” — This final contrast is joined with the simple coordinator 'but'. The 7.0/7.5 versions replace 'but' with 'and', relying on the parallel structure itself to signal contrast, plus they add a further summarising sentence afterwards that this version lacks.

   Band 7.0

   Adds an explicit summarising sentence at the end: 'So conditions are physically far better and mentally somewhat worse'.

   Enormously, in my family within one generation. My father worked six days a week for most of his life, often without a written contract, and the idea of paid holiday arrived when he was already in his forties. I work five days, two of them from home, with health insurance and a contract a lawyer could genuinely read. Safety has improved hugely in factories and construction, though not everywhere. What's got worse, I'd argue, is the boundary: my father's work ended the moment he left the building, and mine follows me home on a phone. So conditions are physically far better and mentally somewhat worse.

   Why this band

   • FC“I'd argue,” — This hedge is more confident and analytical than the plainer 6.5 hedge 'I think', signalling a considered judgement rather than a simple opinion. The 7.5 version keeps this exact hedge, showing it already suits the higher bands.
   • LR“a contract a lawyer could genuinely read” — The intensifier 'genuinely' sharpens the contrast with the father's undocumented work more than the plain 6.5 phrase 'a contract a lawyer could actually read', with 'genuinely' carrying slightly more formal weight than 'actually'.
   • GRA“So conditions are physically far better and mentally somewhat worse.” — This additional closing sentence draws an explicit generalisation from the examples given, a structural move the 6.5 answer doesn't make, instead ending on the example itself without stating the broader conclusion.

   Band 7.5

   Extends the closing generalisation with a further clause naming what the 'new fights' are actually about.

   Enormously, in my family within one generation. My father worked six days a week for most of his life, often without a written contract, and the idea of paid holiday arrived when he was already in his forties. I work five days, two of them from home, with health insurance and a contract that a lawyer could read. Safety has improved hugely in factories and construction, though not everywhere. What's got worse, I'd argue, is the boundary: my father's work ended when he left the building, and mine follows me home on a phone. So conditions are physically far better and mentally somewhat worse, and the new fights are about time rather than safety.

   Why this band

   • FC“and the new fights are about time rather than safety” — This final clause extends the closing generalisation beyond where 7.0 stops, adding a further precise claim about the nature of modern workplace conflict that neither lower band includes.
   • LR“a contract that a lawyer could read” — The relative pronoun 'that' is used here in a slightly more formal, complete relative clause than 7.0's reduced version 'a contract a lawyer could genuinely read', showing a marginal grammatical formality upgrade even without a new intensifier.
   • GRA“So conditions are physically far better and mentally somewhat worse, and the new fights are about time rather than safety.” — This sentence adds a second coordinated clause after the one used at 7.0, extending the same summarising sentence with a further specific claim rather than stopping at the general observation.

7. 7. What could secondary or high schools do to better prepare students for work?

   May–Aug 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   Lists the missing workplace skills with a plain 'like' clause rather than a colon-introduced list.

   Put students into real workplaces, even for a short time. The single most useful thing my school did was send us to a workplace for a week — I spent mine in a print shop — and that one week taught me more about deadlines, customers and being useful than a whole year of careers lessons. Schools could also teach the things every job needs and no subject covers, like writing an email, presenting an idea, and working with someone lazy. Bringing in ordinary workers to talk honestly would help too, since students usually only hear from the successful ones. And letting students fail safely at something real prepares them better than any exam.

   Why this band

   • FC“Schools could also teach the things every job needs and no subject covers, like writing an email, presenting an idea, and working with someone lazy.” — The examples are introduced with the informal connector 'like'. The 7.0/7.5 versions replace this with a colon, a more formal and economical way of presenting a list that follows a general claim.
   • LR“Bringing in ordinary workers to talk honestly would help too” — This is a workable but slightly blunt phrase. The 7.0/7.5 versions expand it to 'people with ordinary jobs' / 'people who do ordinary jobs', which reads as a more natural, less compressed description.
   • GRA“that one week taught me more about deadlines, customers and being useful than a whole year of careers lessons” — This comparative sentence is complete but relatively plain. The 7.0 version extends it with the added phrase 'than a whole year of careers lessons ever did', using 'ever did' for emphasis, a slightly more idiomatic comparative structure.

   Band 7.0

   Uses a colon to introduce the list of missing skills and adds emphatic 'ever did' to the closing comparison.

   Put students into real workplaces, even briefly. The single most useful thing my school did was send us to a workplace for a week — I spent mine in a print shop — and that one week taught me more about deadlines, customers and being useful than a whole year of careers lessons ever did. Beyond that, schools could teach the things every job needs and no subject covers: writing an email, presenting an idea, working in a group that includes someone lazy. Bringing in people with ordinary jobs to talk honestly would help too, since students usually only hear from the successful. And letting students fail at something with real consequences, safely, prepares them far better than any exam.

   Why this band

   • FC“Beyond that,” — This connector signals a shift to a new category of suggestion more formally than the plain 6.5 connector 'also', giving the answer a clearer sense of structure between its two main points.
   • LR“people with ordinary jobs to talk honestly” — This phrase is a more natural expansion of the compressed 6.5 phrase 'ordinary workers', giving the noun phrase a fuller, more idiomatic shape. The 7.5 answer varies this again slightly to 'people who do ordinary jobs', showing continued refinement at the top band.
   • GRA“than a whole year of careers lessons ever did” — The addition of 'ever did' after the comparative intensifies the claim through a kind of echo structure, a more sophisticated device than the plain comparison at 6.5, which stops at 'than a whole year of careers lessons'.

   Band 7.5

   Extends the colon-introduced list with a fourth item, 'handling money', going further than 7.0's three-item list.

   Put students in real workplaces, even briefly. The single most useful thing my school did was send us to a workplace for a week — I spent mine in a print shop — and that one week taught me more about deadlines, customers and being useful than a year of careers lessons. Beyond that, schools could teach the things every job needs and no subject covers: writing an email, presenting an idea, working in a group that includes someone lazy, handling money. Bringing in people who do ordinary jobs to talk honestly would help, since students only ever hear from the successful. And letting students fail at something with real consequences, safely, prepares them better than any exam.

   Why this band

   • FC“writing an email, presenting an idea, working in a group that includes someone lazy, handling money” — This four-item list extends one step beyond 7.0's three-item version of the same list, adding 'handling money' as a further concrete, practical skill.
   • LR“people who do ordinary jobs to talk honestly” — This is a slightly more natural, idiomatic phrasing than 7.0's 'people with ordinary jobs', using the verb 'do' to describe the relationship between a person and their job more directly.
   • GRA“that one week taught me more about deadlines, customers and being useful than a year of careers lessons” — This drops the intensifying 'ever did' used at 7.0, relying instead on the plain comparative alone, which suggests a slightly more restrained, controlled register appropriate to the calmer tone of this band's closing paragraph.

8. 8. Why do some jobs have a higher status now than they did in the past?

   May–Aug 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   Uses the noun phrase 'being seen' rather than the more precise noun 'visibility' in the opening summary.

   Money and being seen, mostly. When I was small, cooking for a living was a job people just fell into; now every second young person in Da Nang wants to be a chef, because chefs are on television and their restaurants are on social media. Software developers went through the same change once people saw how much they earned. Some jobs became higher status because they became rare and skilled — a good plumber is now hard to find and gets paid well. Society's values also changed: jobs connected to health, sustainability or creativity now get a respect they didn't use to have.

   Why this band

   • FC“Money and being seen, mostly.” — The opening summary uses the verb phrase 'being seen', which is functional but less precise than a single abstract noun. The 7.0/7.5 versions replace this with 'visibility', a tighter and more formal noun that matches the register of the rest of the answer.
   • LR“gets paid well” — This is a plain, general verb phrase. The 7.0/7.5 versions replace it with the more precise, slightly formal phrase 'paid accordingly', which more directly links the pay to the scarcity just described.
   • GRA“Society's values also changed: jobs connected to health, sustainability or creativity now get a respect they didn't use to have.” — This sentence uses the plain verb phrase 'didn't use to have'. The 7.0/7.5 versions replace this with the fuller, more explicit clause 'didn't have when the priority was simply a stable government salary', adding a precise historical contrast within the same sentence.

   Band 7.0

   Adds a precise historical contrast at the end of the values sentence, naming what the old priority actually was.

   Money and visibility, mostly. When I was small, cooking for a living was a job people simply fell into; now every second young person in Da Nang wants to be a chef, because chefs are on television and their restaurants are all over social media. Software developers went through the same shift once it became clear how much they earned. Some jobs gained status because they became rare and skilled — a good plumber is now genuinely hard to find and paid accordingly. And society's values shifted: jobs connected to health, sustainability or creativity now carry a respect they didn't have when the priority was simply a stable government salary.

   Why this band

   • FC“And society's values shifted:” — The connector 'And' plus the more formal verb 'shifted' (replacing 6.5's 'also changed') signals the final point slightly more smoothly, setting up the colon-led explanation that follows.
   • LR“visibility” — This single abstract noun is a more precise, economical upgrade from the 6.5 verb phrase 'being seen'. It's reused identically at 7.5, confirming it already fits the higher bands.
   • GRA“they didn't have when the priority was simply a stable government salary” — This clause adds a specific historical contrast that the 6.5 version lacks entirely, explaining exactly what values used to prioritise instead of just asserting that they've changed.

   Band 7.5

   Adds a final aphoristic sentence, 'Status follows the money and the cameras, in that order', summarising the whole answer.

   Money and visibility, mostly. When I was small, cooking for a living was a job people fell into; now every second young person in Da Nang wants to be a chef, because chefs are on television and their restaurants are on social media. Software developers went through the same shift once it became clear how much they earned. Some jobs gained status because they became rare and skilled — a good plumber is now hard to find and paid accordingly. And society's values shifted: jobs connected to health, sustainability or creativity carry a respect they didn't have when the priority was simply a stable government salary. Status follows the money and the cameras, in that order.

   Why this band

   • FC“Status follows the money and the cameras, in that order.” — This closing aphorism condenses the entire answer into one memorable, structured sentence, a device neither the 6.5 nor the 7.0 answer includes, giving the response a stronger sense of a deliberate rhetorical close.
   • LR“the cameras” — This metonymic use of 'cameras' to represent media visibility is more vivid and economical than the abstract noun 'visibility' used earlier in the same answer, showing a wider stylistic range within one response.
   • GRA“Status follows the money and the cameras, in that order.” — The phrase 'in that order' functions as a compact appositive modifying the whole preceding clause, a more sophisticated closing device than the plain final sentences used at 6.5 and 7.0, which end on the values point without this extra layer of commentary.

9. 9. Do you agree or disagree that young people should not earn as much as older people?

   May–Aug 2026
   Compare Band 6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5 for this question

   Band 6.5

   Introduces the counter-argument with a plain colon after a short lead-in sentence, 'There is one reasonable version of the argument:'.

   I disagree, as a general rule. At my studio, a former receptionist who taught herself to code now earns more than a colleague fifteen years older, because she's better at the job, and nobody serious thinks that's wrong. Pay should follow value and responsibility, not age. There is one reasonable version of the argument: older workers usually have more experience, more dependents and more to lose, and experience is often worth paying for. But that's a reason to pay experience, not birthdays. Systems that pay purely by seniority tend to push out ambitious young people and keep unmotivated older ones.

   Why this band

   • FC“There is one reasonable version of the argument:” — This lead-in uses the number word 'one' before 'reasonable version', which is functional but slightly clunky. The 7.0/7.5 versions drop 'one' and instead add the concessive tag 'though' at 7.0, a more natural way to flag a genuine counterpoint.
   • LR“a colleague fifteen years older” — This is a plain, workable comparative phrase. The 7.5 version upgrades it to the more idiomatic 'fifteen years her senior', a more natural collocation for describing an age gap between two specific people.
   • GRA“Systems that pay purely by seniority tend to push out ambitious young people and keep unmotivated older ones.” — This closing sentence ends without a further consequence clause. The 7.0/7.5 versions extend the same sentence with 'and I've seen that hollow out a company/companies', adding a personal, evidence-based consequence.

   Band 7.0

   Adds the concessive tag 'though' and extends the closing sentence with a personal consequence clause.

   I disagree, as a general rule. At my studio a former receptionist who taught herself to code now earns more than a colleague fifteen years older, simply because she's better at the job, and nobody serious thinks that's wrong. Pay should follow value and responsibility, not age. There is a reasonable version of the argument, though: older workers usually have more experience, more dependents and more to lose, and experience genuinely is often worth paying for. But that's a reason to pay for experience, not for birthdays. Systems that pay purely by seniority tend to push out ambitious young people and keep unmotivated older ones, and I've seen that hollow out a company.

   Why this band

   • FC“though:” — This concessive tag, placed right before the colon, signals a genuine shift toward the counter-argument more naturally than the 6.5 version's plain 'one reasonable version of the argument'. The 7.5 version achieves a similar effect without the tag, relying on tone alone.
   • LR“experience genuinely is often worth paying for” — The intensifier 'genuinely' strengthens this concession more than the plain 6.5 phrase 'experience is often worth paying for', making the acknowledgement of the counter-argument feel more considered.
   • GRA“and I've seen that hollow out a company” — This added clause extends the final sentence with a first-hand consequence, a structural move the 6.5 version doesn't make, stopping instead at the general claim about seniority systems.

   Band 7.5

   Drops the tag 'though' used at 7.0 for a more direct concession, and pluralises the closing consequence to 'companies'.

   I disagree, as a general rule. At my studio a former receptionist who taught herself to code now earns more than a colleague fifteen years her senior, because she's better at the job, and nobody serious thinks that's wrong. Pay should follow value and responsibility, not age. There is a reasonable version of the argument: older workers usually have more experience, more dependents and more to lose, and experience often is worth paying for. But that's a reason to pay experience, not birthdays. Systems that pay purely by seniority tend to push out ambitious young people and keep unmotivated older ones, and I've seen that hollow out companies.

   Why this band

   • FC“There is a reasonable version of the argument:” — This states the concession directly and economically, without the numeral 'one' used at 6.5 or the concessive tag 'though' used at 7.0, relying on the colon alone to signal the shift.
   • LR“fifteen years her senior” — This idiomatic collocation for describing an age gap between two people is more natural and precise than the plain 6.5 phrase 'fifteen years older', and is not used at 7.0 either.
   • GRA“and I've seen that hollow out companies” — The plural 'companies' generalises the closing consequence beyond a single instance, a subtly more sweeping claim than 7.0's singular 'hollow out a company', suggesting a broader pattern rather than one specific case.