Something That Helps You Concentrate on Work or Study

Part 3 follow-up questions

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

1. 1. Could machines do most jobs better than humans because of people's inability to concentrate?

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

   Band 6.5

   The two short sentences 'But a good design decision...' and 'So machines are better...' state the contrast and conclusion plainly, one after another.

   I think machines can do some jobs better than humans, but not most jobs, because most jobs don't only need concentration. For example, the software that checks our app screens for errors never gets tired, and it does this better than any human because the task just needs constant attention. But a good design decision I once made came to me while I was distracted, looking out of a window. So machines are better at simple, repeated tasks, but humans are better at jobs that need judgement and creativity.

   Why this band

   • FC“So machines are better at simple, repeated tasks, but humans are better at jobs that need judgement and creativity.” — 'So' introduces the final conclusion directly after the examples, a clear but basic device. The 7.5 answer instead splits this same contrast into two separate, parallel sentences without needing a connector at all.
   • LR“never gets tired” — A simple, literal phrase. The 7.5 answer's 'never blinks' is a more vivid, idiomatic image for the same constant vigilance.
   • GRA“But a good design decision I once made came to me while I was distracted, looking out of a window.” — A single sentence with one participle clause ('looking out of a window') — controlled and clear, but simpler than the 7.5 version, which adds 'on a break' as a further detail within the same structure.

   Band 7.0

   'human minds wander, and that wandering is often where ideas actually happen' reflects on the point rather than just stating it.

   Honestly, I'd say some jobs, yes, for exactly that reason, but most jobs, no, because concentration isn't really what most jobs depend on. The software that checks our app screens for errors never gets distracted, and it's better at that than any human, since the task is pure, unbroken attention. But a good design decision I made once came to me while I was distracted, staring out of a window on a break — human minds wander, and that wandering is often where ideas actually happen. To be fair, machines win at fixed, rule-based tasks, while humans win at anything needing judgement and context.

   Why this band

   • FC“To be fair, machines win at fixed, rule-based tasks, while humans win at anything needing judgement and context.” — 'To be fair' signals a balanced final summary, a more developed cohesive move than the plain 'So' used at 6.5, though it's a single sentence rather than the fully parallel two-sentence structure used at 7.5.
   • LR“since the task is pure, unbroken attention” — 'Pure, unbroken attention' is a more precise, almost technical pairing than the plain 'tired' vocabulary at 6.5, though it's a shade less punchy than the 7.5 phrase 'pure sustained attention' used with a harder-hitting follow-up.
   • GRA“human minds wander, and that wandering is often where ideas actually happen” — This sentence reuses 'wander/wandering' deliberately across the clause, a controlled repetition-for-effect device more ambitious than the plain vocabulary of 6.5, though less compact than the semicolon-free parallel structure used at 7.5.

   Band 7.5

   The colon-free parallel closing 'Machines win at... Humans win at...' repeats the same sentence frame twice for rhetorical balance.

   Some jobs, for exactly that reason; most jobs, no, because concentration simply isn't what they run on. The software checking our app screens for errors never blinks, and it's better at that than any human ever could be, since the task is pure sustained attention. Yet the decision about what those screens should actually say came to me at a window, distracted, on a break — human minds wander, and the wandering is precisely where connections happen. Machines win at tasks needing unbroken attention to fixed rules: monitoring, checking, counting. Humans win at judgement, context, and noticing the irrelevant detail that turns out to matter. Our inability to concentrate is a weakness for the first kind of work, and oddly, a strength for the second.

   Why this band

   • FC“Machines win at tasks needing unbroken attention to fixed rules: monitoring, checking, counting. Humans win at judgement, context, and noticing the irrelevant detail that turns out to matter.” — Two parallel sentences, each opening with 'Machines/Humans win at', create a rhetorical balance that does more cohesive work than the single 'So' conclusion at 6.5 or the 'To be fair' summary at 7.0.
   • LR“the wandering is precisely where connections happen” — 'Precisely where connections happen' is a compact, abstract phrase that captures the value of distraction more sharply than the plainer 'often where ideas actually happen' at 7.0.
   • GRA“Our inability to concentrate is a weakness for the first kind of work, and oddly, a strength for the second.” — The inserted aside 'oddly' interrupts the parallel structure for emphasis, a more flexible, higher-risk placement than the plain coordination used in the 6.5 and 7.0 closings.

2. 2. What types of jobs is being able to concentrate particularly important for?

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

   Band 6.5

   The list of jobs (surgeon, pilot, bus driver) is joined simply with commas and 'and', without further comment on what links them.

   I think concentration is very important for jobs where a small mistake can be dangerous or costly. For example, a surgeon, a pilot, and a bus driver on a mountain road all need to focus completely, because one second of inattention could be very dangerous. It's also important for jobs like accounting or programming, where small errors are expensive to fix. And it matters in creative jobs like writing or design, which need long periods of focus. Jobs that involve a lot of interruptions, like customer service, need a different skill instead.

   Why this band

   • FC“It's also important for jobs like accounting or programming, where small errors are expensive to fix.” — 'Also' introduces a new category directly, a basic listing device. The 7.5 answer instead links its categories with 'Beyond safety, there's precision work —', letting one category flow into the next without a plain connector.
   • LR“one second of inattention could be very dangerous” — 'Very dangerous' is a generic intensifier-adjective pairing. The 7.5 answer's 'the difference between the road and a cliff' is a far more vivid, specific image of the same danger.
   • GRA“For example, a surgeon, a pilot, and a bus driver on a mountain road all need to focus completely, because one second of inattention could be very dangerous.” — A single sentence with a coordinated subject list and one 'because' clause — safe and clear. The 7.5 answer instead gives each job its own short fragment separated by semicolons, a considerably more flexible structure.

   Band 7.0

   'these all need unbroken focus' generalises the list with a short punchy clause rather than a full new sentence.

   Honestly, I'd say it matters most in jobs where a lapse costs more than just time. A surgeon, a pilot, or a bus driver on a mountain road, where a second's inattention could mean a cliff — these all need unbroken focus. Beyond safety, there's precision work too, like accounting, programming or editing, where small mistakes end up being expensive. And creative work, like writing or design, needs long stretches of attention just to get anywhere at all. To be fair, jobs built from constant interruptions, like customer service, actually need a different skill — the ability to switch quickly — which is almost the opposite.

   Why this band

   • FC“Beyond safety, there's precision work too, like accounting, programming or editing, where small mistakes end up being expensive.” — 'Beyond safety' signals a shift to a new category more fluidly than the plain 'It's also important for' used at 6.5, though it's still a fresh sentence rather than integrated into a single flowing list like the 7.5 version.
   • LR“a second's inattention could mean a cliff” — 'Could mean a cliff' is a vivid, economical image, a step up from the plain 'very dangerous' at 6.5, though it's slightly less integrated than the 7.5 phrase 'the difference between the road and a cliff'.
   • GRA“A surgeon, a pilot, or a bus driver on a mountain road, where a second's inattention could mean a cliff — these all need unbroken focus.” — An embedded 'where' clause interrupts the list before a dash sums it up, a more layered structure than the simple 'because' clause at 6.5, though still less densely packed than the semicolon list at 7.5.

   Band 7.5

   The semicolon-separated fragments 'A surgeon, obviously; a pilot; a bus driver...' list examples without repeating a verb, a compact structure unique to this band.

   Anywhere a lapse costs more than time, I'd say. A surgeon, obviously; a pilot; a bus driver on a mountain road, where a second's inattention is the difference between the road and a cliff; an interpreter on a live call, holding two languages in her head at once. Beyond safety, there's precision work — accountants, programmers, editors — anyone whose errors are small and expensive. And there's creative work too, which needs long, unbroken stretches of attention to get anywhere: writing, design, research. What these all share is that the work can't be done in fragments. Jobs built from interruptions, like customer service or management, need a different skill entirely — the ability to switch — which is almost the opposite.

   Why this band

   • FC“Beyond safety, there's precision work — accountants, programmers, editors — anyone whose errors are small and expensive.” — Two dashes set off an appositive list mid-sentence, letting the category and its examples flow as one unit rather than the separate listing sentences used at 6.5 and 7.0.
   • LR“a second's inattention is the difference between the road and a cliff” — This is a considerably more vivid, spatial image than the plain 'very dangerous' at 6.5, and more integrated than the 7.0 phrase 'could mean a cliff'.
   • GRA“A surgeon, obviously; a pilot; a bus driver on a mountain road, where a second's inattention is the difference between the road and a cliff; an interpreter on a live call, holding two languages in her head at once.” — Four semicolon-separated fragments build a list without repeating the main verb each time, a considerably higher-risk and more compact structure than the coordinated subject list at 6.5 or the single 'where' clause at 7.0.

3. 3. What impact does having to concentrate for long periods have on people nowadays?

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

   Band 6.5

   The two examples (headache, colleague's twelve-hour days) sit in separate sentences joined only by 'A colleague of mine'.

   I think concentrating for a long time is tiring, and it happens less often than before. For example, after doing four rounds of focused work with a timer, I usually get a mild headache and need to look at something far away. A colleague of mine does twelve-hour focus days before big launches, and afterwards she can't even hold a normal conversation. Concentration uses energy just like physical work does. Modern life makes long focus both more valuable and harder to keep up, because everything around us is designed to interrupt us.

   Why this band

   • FC“Concentration uses energy just like physical work does.” — A short, standalone comparison sentence. The 7.5 answer instead folds a similar comparison into a longer sentence using 'rather like', integrating it with the following clause about modern life.
   • LR“I usually get a mild headache and need to look at something far away” — Plain, literal description. The 7.5 answer's 'a strong need to look at something far away' keeps similar wording but embeds it in a semicolon-joined sentence with a second, parallel example.
   • GRA“A colleague of mine does twelve-hour focus days before big launches, and afterwards she can't even hold a normal conversation.” — Two clauses joined by 'and... afterwards' — a standard compound sentence. The 7.5 answer instead uses a semicolon to fuse a very similar pair of examples into one tighter unit.

   Band 7.0

   'I'd say the healthy pattern is intense bursts with real breaks in between' closes with a personal recommendation rather than a flat fact.

   Honestly, it's more tiring than people tend to admit, and it's become rarer than it used to be. After four rounds with my timer, I usually get a mild headache and a strong urge to look at something far away, while a colleague who does twelve-hour focus days before big launches finishes them barely able to hold a conversation. To be fair, concentration burns energy in a way that's a lot like physical work, and modern life has made long stretches of it both more valuable and harder to sustain, since everything around us seems designed to interrupt. I'd say the healthy pattern is intense bursts with real breaks in between.

   Why this band

   • FC“To be fair, concentration burns energy in a way that's a lot like physical work” — 'To be fair' introduces the comparison as a considered concession, a more developed move than the flat standalone sentence used at 6.5.
   • LR“a strong urge to look at something far away” — 'Urge' is a slightly more precise, evaluative noun than the plain 'need' at 6.5, capturing the involuntary pull more accurately.
   • GRA“After four rounds with my timer, I usually get a mild headache and a strong urge to look at something far away, while a colleague who does twelve-hour focus days before big launches finishes them barely able to hold a conversation.” — This sentence links the writer's own example to the colleague's with a 'while' clause inside one long sentence, more ambitious than the two separate sentences at 6.5, though slightly less compact than the semicolon version at 7.5.

   Band 7.5

   The semicolon linking 'my mild headache' to the colleague's 'twelve-hour focus days' places the two examples in direct, unhedged parallel.

   It's tiring in a way people tend to underestimate, and honestly, it's rarer than it used to be. After four rounds of my timer I have a mild headache and a strong need to look at something far away; a colleague who does twelve-hour focus days before launches finishes them unable to hold a proper conversation. Concentration burns energy rather like physical work does, and modern life has made long stretches of it both more valuable and harder to sustain, since everything around us seems engineered to interrupt. People who manage it well report real satisfaction and better output; people forced into it for too long report burnout and a life with no space left in it. The healthy pattern, I suspect, is intense periods with genuine breaks — which is exactly what my timer enforces and most workplaces simply don't.

   Why this band

   • FC“People who manage it well report real satisfaction and better output; people forced into it for too long report burnout and a life with no space left in it.” — A semicolon balances two contrasting outcomes in one sentence, a tighter and more symmetrical structure than the separate sentences the lower bands use to make similar points.
   • LR“Concentration burns energy rather like physical work does” — 'Rather like' is a more natural, slightly understated hedge than the plainer comparison at 6.5, giving the same claim a more considered, idiomatic tone.
   • GRA“After four rounds of my timer I have a mild headache and a strong need to look at something far away; a colleague who does twelve-hour focus days before launches finishes them unable to hold a proper conversation.” — A semicolon fuses the writer's own example directly to the colleague's without any connecting word, a more compact and confident structure than the 'while' clause used at 7.0 or the separate sentences at 6.5.

4. 4. How valuable is the ability to concentrate in modern society?

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

   Band 6.5

   'It also matters for learning and for relationships' adds a final point as a short, separate sentence.

   I think concentration is becoming more valuable every year, because it is getting harder to find. For me, two focused hours usually produce more work than the other six hours combined, and I think this is common for many people. In an economy where most work involves thinking, someone who can focus for a long time has a real advantage. Everything around us competes for our attention, like phones and notifications, so being able to ignore them has become valuable. It also matters for learning and for relationships, since attention shows people we care.

   Why this band

   • FC“It also matters for learning and for relationships, since attention shows people we care.” — 'Also' tacks on a final point directly, a basic listing device. The 7.5 answer instead links two such points with 'and it matters for... since', building them into one continuous sentence.
   • LR“someone who can focus for a long time has a real advantage” — Plain and literal. The 7.5 answer's 'an advantage that used to be ordinary and is now unusual' adds a historical contrast that makes the same point far more precise.
   • GRA“Everything around us competes for our attention, like phones and notifications, so being able to ignore them has become valuable.” — A single 'so' clause states cause and effect directly. The 7.5 answer instead uses a dash-set list before drawing the same conclusion, a more layered structure.

   Band 7.0

   'I suspect that ratio is fairly common' hedges the personal statistic before generalising from it.

   Honestly, I'd say it's becoming more valuable every year, precisely because it's getting rarer. My two focused hours with a timer usually produce more than the other six hours of my day combined, and I suspect that ratio is fairly common — in an economy where most work is thinking, someone who can hold a thought for an hour has an advantage that used to be ordinary and is now unusual. Everything competes for attention these days — phones, notifications, open-plan offices — so the ability to withdraw from all that has become a kind of wealth. To be fair, it matters for relationships too, since attention is often what people actually feel as care.

   Why this band

   • FC“To be fair, it matters for relationships too, since attention is often what people actually feel as care.” — 'To be fair' introduces a further point as a genuine addition to the argument, a more developed move than the plain 'also' used at 6.5.
   • LR“an advantage that used to be ordinary and is now unusual” — This historical contrast is a precise, reflective phrase that goes beyond the plain 'real advantage' at 6.5, though it's slightly less compact than the parallel 7.5 version of the same idea.
   • GRA“Everything competes for attention these days — phones, notifications, open-plan offices — so the ability to withdraw from all that has become a kind of wealth.” — A dash-set list sits between subject and verb before the 'so' clause, a more ambitious structure than the plain 'so' sentence at 6.5, though it stays slightly shorter than the equivalent 7.5 sentence.

   Band 7.5

   'has quietly become a kind of wealth' closes the sentence with a compact metaphor rather than a literal statement.

   More valuable every year, I'd say, precisely because it's getting rarer. My two timer hours produce more than the other six in my day, and I suspect that ratio is fairly common: in an economy where most work is thinking, the person who can hold a thought for an hour has an advantage that used to be ordinary and is now unusual. Everything competes for attention — phones, notifications, open-plan offices — so the ability to withdraw from that competition has quietly become a kind of wealth. It matters for learning, since nothing complex gets learned in fragments, and it matters for relationships, since attention is often what people feel as care. Societies are starting to notice, with 'deep work' books and phone-free schools cropping up everywhere. The skill was never more needed, and never less practised.

   Why this band

   • FC“It matters for learning, since nothing complex gets learned in fragments, and it matters for relationships, since attention is often what people feel as care.” — Two parallel 'it matters for... since...' clauses are joined by 'and' into one continuous sentence, a tighter structure than the separate 'also' sentence used at 6.5 or the single point added at 7.0.
   • LR“has quietly become a kind of wealth” — 'A kind of wealth' is a genuinely idiomatic metaphor for scarce attention, more figurative than the literal 'has become valuable' at 6.5 and folded here into a tighter, more economical sentence than the 7.0 version of the same phrase.
   • GRA“Everything competes for attention — phones, notifications, open-plan offices — so the ability to withdraw from that competition has quietly become a kind of wealth.” — The dash-set list is immediately followed by a 'so' clause built on the earlier word 'competes' repeated as 'competition', a deliberate lexical echo that neither lower band attempts.

5. 5. Why may people find it difficult to concentrate at work?

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

   Band 6.5

   The list of interruptions ('a conversation behind me, a chat message... a colleague with a quick question') is joined only by commas.

   I think the workplace itself often makes it hard to concentrate. At ten in the morning in my open-plan office, there is usually a conversation behind me, a chat message on my screen, and a colleague with a quick question, all before I've even started real work. Offices often reward people who reply quickly instead of people who focus deeply. Meetings also break the day into small pieces that are too short for real work. Tiredness and stress outside work make it harder too. I think most people aren't bad at concentrating — they just work somewhere that never lets them try.

   Why this band

   • FC“I think most people aren't bad at concentrating — they just work somewhere that never lets them try.” — The closing sentence restates the main idea plainly with a dash. The 7.5 answer extends the identical idea further by adding a relative clause about design failure, giving the conclusion an extra layer.
   • LR“a colleague with a quick question” — A plain, literal phrase. The 7.5 answer adds quotation marks around 'quick question', giving it a slightly ironic, reported tone that this version lacks.
   • GRA“At ten in the morning in my open-plan office, there is usually a conversation behind me, a chat message on my screen, and a colleague with a quick question, all before I've even started real work.” — A three-item list closes with 'all before I've even started', a fairly standard structure. The 7.5 answer adds a fourth item (the phone) and closes instead with a compact evaluative phrase, showing more range.

   Band 7.0

   'the person who replies instantly looks engaged, while the person with the door shut looks difficult' balances two contrasting images in one sentence.

   Honestly, I think it's because the workplace itself is built against it. At ten in the morning in our open-plan studio there's usually a conversation behind me, a chat pinging on my screen, and a colleague with a 'quick question' — all before I've properly started. To be fair, modern offices tend to reward availability over depth: the person who replies instantly looks engaged, while the person with the door shut looks difficult. Meetings fragment the day into pieces too short for any real work, and tiredness or stress outside work take their share too. Honestly, I don't think most people are bad at concentrating — they're just working somewhere that never lets them try.

   Why this band

   • FC“To be fair, modern offices tend to reward availability over depth” — 'To be fair' introduces a generalisation as a considered claim rather than a flat statement, a step up from the plain listing style at 6.5.
   • LR“a colleague with a 'quick question'” — The quotation marks around 'quick question' give the phrase a knowing, slightly ironic tone that the plain equivalent at 6.5 lacks, though it's used more extensively in the 7.5 version's four-item list.
   • GRA“the person who replies instantly looks engaged, while the person with the door shut looks difficult” — A 'while' clause balances two contrasting images in one sentence, more ambitious than the simple listing sentences at 6.5, though the 7.5 version manages a similar contrast without any connector at all.

   Band 7.5

   The four-item list ending in 'my own phone face-up on the desk' closes with 'none of them unusual', a compact evaluative tag.

   Because the workplace, honestly, is built against it. At ten in the morning in our open-plan studio there's a conversation behind me, a chat pinging on my screen, a colleague with a 'quick question', and my own phone face-up on the desk — four interruptions before I've even started, none of them unusual. Modern offices reward availability over depth: the person who answers instantly looks engaged, the person with the door shut looks difficult. Meetings fragment the day into pieces too short for real work, and tiredness, stress and worries from outside take their own share too. Most people, I suspect, aren't actually bad at concentrating — they're simply working somewhere that never once lets them try, which is a design failure, not a personal one.

   Why this band

   • FC“Most people, I suspect, aren't actually bad at concentrating — they're simply working somewhere that never once lets them try, which is a design failure, not a personal one.” — The closing dash is extended with a further relative clause ('which is a design failure...'), giving the conclusion an extra layer of judgement beyond the plainer closing sentences at 6.5 and 7.0.
   • LR“a colleague with a 'quick question'” — This exact phrase, in scare quotes, also appears in the 7.0 answer, but here it's folded into a longer four-item asyndetic list rather than standing as its own clause, showing more compact integration.
   • GRA“a conversation behind me, a chat pinging on my screen, a colleague with a 'quick question', and my own phone face-up on the desk — four interruptions before I've even started, none of them unusual” — A four-item list is followed by a dash and a compact summary noun phrase rather than a full new sentence, a more economical structure than the three-item list and full closing sentence used at 6.5.

6. 6. Why do children have to concentrate when doing sports?

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

   Band 6.5

   The story and the lesson are told in two separate simple sentences, joined only by 'and the coach just said'.

   I think children need to concentrate in sport because things happen quickly and they need to react. At my nephew's football match last month, he was watching a butterfly when the ball rolled past him into the goal, and the coach just said 'eyes on the ball'. Children need to concentrate for safety, because a moment of inattention in swimming or cycling can be dangerous. They also need it for skill, because catching, kicking and balancing all need focus. Team sports also need attention to other players. Sport is a good teacher because the feedback is instant.

   Why this band

   • FC“Sport is a good teacher because the feedback is instant.” — A short final sentence states the lesson directly. The 7.5 answer instead builds a similar idea into a longer sentence ending with 'no lecture required', a more compact and idiomatic closing.
   • LR“he was watching a butterfly when the ball rolled past him into the goal” — Plain, literal description. The 7.5 answer adds 'straight past him', a small intensifying detail that sharpens the same image.
   • GRA“Children need to concentrate for safety, because a moment of inattention in swimming or cycling can be dangerous.” — A single 'because' clause — clear and safe. The 7.5 answer instead uses 'since', embedded inside a much longer sentence with a second parallel 'since' clause for skill.

   Band 7.0

   'which is basically what sport teaches about attention' reflects on the coach's comment rather than just reporting it.

   Honestly, I think it's because the ball simply doesn't wait for anyone. At my nephew's football match last month, he was watching a butterfly when the ball rolled straight past him into the goal, and the coach's only comment was 'eyes on the ball', which is basically what sport teaches about attention. Children need to concentrate in sport for safety — a moment's inattention in swimming or cycling can be genuinely dangerous — and for skill, since catching, kicking and balancing all depend on the mind being on the body. To be fair, team sports add another layer too, like reading other players and remembering a plan.

   Why this band

   • FC“To be fair, team sports add another layer too, like reading other players and remembering a plan.” — 'To be fair' introduces a further point as a genuine addition, a more developed cohesive move than the flat listing at 6.5.
   • LR“the ball rolled straight past him into the goal” — 'Straight past him' adds a small intensifier that sharpens the image slightly beyond the plain 6.5 version, though the 7.5 answer pushes further still by calling the coach's four words a lesson 'in four words'.
   • GRA“and the coach's only comment was 'eyes on the ball', which is basically what sport teaches about attention” — A non-defining relative clause ('which is basically what...') extends the sentence with a generalisation, a more integrated structure than the separate closing sentence used at 6.5.

   Band 7.5

   'which is more or less what sport teaches about attention in four words' turns the coach's own phrase into the answer's closing joke.

   Because the ball, quite simply, doesn't wait. At my nephew's football match last month he was watching a butterfly when the ball rolled straight past him into the goal, and the coach's only comment was 'eyes on the ball' — which is more or less what sport teaches about attention in four words. Children have to concentrate in sport for safety, since a moment's inattention in swimming or cycling can be genuinely dangerous, and for skill, since catching, kicking and balancing all demand the mind stay on the body. Team sports layer on reading other players and remembering a plan. What makes sport such a good teacher of concentration is that the feedback is instant: lose focus and you lose the ball, no lecture required.

   Why this band

   • FC“which is more or less what sport teaches about attention in four words” — This closing clause counts the coach's own words ('eyes on the ball') as exactly four, a self-aware, witty piece of cohesion that neither lower band attempts.
   • LR“the ball rolled straight past him into the goal” — This shares the same intensifier as the 7.0 version but sits inside a longer, more rhythmic opening sentence, showing the phrase reused with more surrounding control.
   • GRA“What makes sport such a good teacher of concentration is that the feedback is instant: lose focus and you lose the ball, no lecture required.” — A cleft sentence ('What makes... is that...') leads into a colon and a compact conditional clause without 'if', a considerably more sophisticated structure than the plain 'because' sentence at 6.5 or the simple relative clause at 7.0.

7. 7. What can employers do to help their staff concentrate?

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

   Band 6.5

   The list of employer actions is simply joined with 'also... also...', repeating the same connector three times.

   I think employers can help by protecting people's time, and it doesn't cost anything. My studio introduced 'quiet mornings', with no meetings or chat messages before eleven, and the amount of real work done almost doubled. Employers can also have fewer meetings, give people a quiet place to work, and stop treating instant replies as a sign of commitment. They can also set clear priorities, because a lot of poor concentration comes from not knowing what matters most. Managers should also lead by example, instead of sending messages late at night.

   Why this band

   • FC“Employers can also have fewer meetings, give people a quiet place to work, and stop treating instant replies as a sign of commitment.” — Repeating 'also' as the main connector across several sentences is a basic, slightly repetitive cohesive pattern. The 7.5 answer varies its connectors more, using plain coordination within one sentence instead of repeated 'also's.
   • LR“the amount of real work done almost doubled” — A plain quantifier phrase. The 7.5 answer's 'roughly doubled, with no other change whatsoever' adds an intensifying final clause that sharpens the same claim.
   • GRA“My studio introduced 'quiet mornings', with no meetings or chat messages before eleven, and the amount of real work done almost doubled.” — A single sentence with one added prepositional phrase — clear and controlled. The 7.5 answer instead sets the same detail off with dashes as a self-contained aside, a more flexible structure.

   Band 7.0

   'with no other change at all' emphasises the result more than the plain statement at 6.5 does.

   Honestly, I'd say protecting people's time is the main thing, and it costs nothing to do. Our studio introduced 'quiet mornings' — no meetings and no chat messages before eleven — and the amount of real work done roughly doubled, with no other change at all. To be fair, employers can also reduce meetings, give people somewhere with a door, and stop treating instant replies as a measure of commitment. They can set clearer priorities too, since half of poor concentration is really just not knowing what matters. And honestly, a manager who messages at midnight is training everyone else to check their phone at midnight too.

   Why this band

   • FC“To be fair, employers can also reduce meetings, give people somewhere with a door, and stop treating instant replies as a measure of commitment.” — 'To be fair' opens this list rather than the repeated 'also' pattern at 6.5, giving the transition a more natural, spoken quality, though the list itself still runs in a fairly standard coordinated form.
   • LR“the amount of real work done roughly doubled, with no other change at all” — 'Roughly doubled' plus the emphatic 'with no other change at all' is a more precise, confident claim than the plain 'almost doubled' at 6.5.
   • GRA“half of poor concentration is really just not knowing what matters” — This is a fairly natural clause structure with an embedded 'what' clause as complement, a moderate step up from the plain sentences at 6.5, though still simpler than the multiple coordinated clauses used at 7.5.

   Band 7.5

   The closing line 'decide attention is a resource, and stop wasting it' turns a practical suggestion into a short, quotable maxim.

   Protect time, mostly, and it costs nothing. Our studio introduced 'quiet mornings' — no meetings and no chat messages before eleven — and the amount of real work done roughly doubled, with no other change whatsoever. Employers can reduce meetings, give people somewhere with a door, and stop treating instant replies as a measure of commitment. They can set clear priorities, since half of poor concentration is really just not knowing what matters. They can allow the occasional remote day for focused work, and cut the tools that interrupt, or at least the expectation that people watch them constantly. A manager who messages at midnight, after all, is training everyone to check their phone at midnight. The best thing an employer can do is decide attention is a resource, and stop wasting it.

   Why this band

   • FC“The best thing an employer can do is decide attention is a resource, and stop wasting it.” — This closing sentence uses a cleft-like structure ('The best thing... is decide...') to land the whole answer's argument in one compact maxim, a more polished piece of cohesion than the plainer closing sentences at 6.5 and 7.0.
   • LR“roughly doubled, with no other change whatsoever” — 'Whatsoever' is a stronger, more emphatic intensifier than the plain 'at all' used at 7.0, adding extra rhetorical force to the same claim.
   • GRA“They can allow the occasional remote day for focused work, and cut the tools that interrupt, or at least the expectation that people watch them constantly.” — This sentence coordinates three separate suggestions with varying structures (a noun phrase, a verb phrase, and an 'or at least' qualification), a more flexible pattern than the repeated 'also' listing used at 6.5.

8. 8. Why is it important for children to learn to concentrate?

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

   Band 6.5

   'This gap has nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with attention' is the most complex sentence in this answer, using a simple parallel structure.

   I think it is important because everything else children learn depends on it. My niece read a whole book in one sitting at nine years old, while a classmate just as clever couldn't finish one page without looking up. This gap has nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with attention. Concentration helps children finish hard things, like a maths problem or learning an instrument. It is also the base of self-control, which affects a person's whole life. Children today grow up in a very distracting world, so this skill is harder to learn but more important than ever.

   Why this band

   • FC“Concentration helps children finish hard things, like a maths problem or learning an instrument.” — 'Like' introduces a plain example list. The 7.5 answer instead uses a dash before a three-item list, giving the same kind of example more rhetorical weight.
   • LR“everything else children learn depends on it” — Plain and functional. The higher bands keep very similar wording here, but the 7.5 version extends it with a parallel closing sentence about tools, adding precision through structure rather than new vocabulary.
   • GRA“This gap has nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with attention.” — A neat 'nothing to do with... everything to do with' parallel structure — genuinely effective, and reused almost unchanged at higher bands, showing this particular pattern is accessible even at 6.5.

   Band 7.0

   'the gap between them at school had nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with attention' embeds the same parallel structure inside a longer sentence.

   Honestly, I think it's because everything else children learn depends on it. My niece read a whole book in one sitting at nine, while a classmate of hers, just as bright, couldn't finish a page without looking up — and the gap between them at school had nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with attention. To be fair, concentration is really how children get from the start of a hard thing to the end, whether that's a maths problem or a piece of music. It's also the foundation of self-control, which predicts a lot about adult life. And honestly, it's harder to learn later, especially since children now grow up in the most distracting environment in history.

   Why this band

   • FC“To be fair, concentration is really how children get from the start of a hard thing to the end, whether that's a maths problem or a piece of music.” — 'To be fair' introduces a generalisation drawn from the example, a more developed move than the plain listing at 6.5, though the sentence stays a single unit rather than the tri-partite list used at 7.5.
   • LR“it's harder to learn later, especially since children now grow up in the most distracting environment in history” — 'The most distracting environment in history' is a precise, slightly dramatic superlative that neither the 6.5 answer nor a plainer register would reach.
   • GRA“My niece read a whole book in one sitting at nine, while a classmate of hers, just as bright, couldn't finish a page without looking up” — A 'while' clause embeds the contrast within one sentence rather than two, a more integrated structure than the separated sentences at 6.5, though the 7.5 version fuses the same contrast even more tightly with a semicolon.

   Band 7.5

   The closing antithesis 'has a tool for every subject; one who doesn't struggles in all of them' uses a semicolon to complete the parallel without a connector.

   Because everything else they learn depends on it. My niece read a whole book in one sitting at nine; a classmate of hers, just as bright, can't finish a page without looking up, and the gap between them at school has nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with attention. Concentration is how children get from the start of a hard thing to the end — a maths problem, a piece of music, a friendship in difficulty. It's the foundation of self-control, which predicts almost everything about adult life. It's harder to learn later, too, and children now grow up in the most distracting environment in history. A child who learns to hold attention has a tool for every subject; one who doesn't struggles in all of them.

   Why this band

   • FC“A child who learns to hold attention has a tool for every subject; one who doesn't struggles in all of them.” — A semicolon links two parallel independent clauses without any connecting word, the most economical version of the contrast used across all three bands — 6.5 states it as one plain sentence, 7.0 develops it with 'while', and this compresses it further still.
   • LR“a maths problem, a piece of music, a friendship in difficulty” — A three-item asyndetic list (no 'and' before the last item, no verb repeated) is a more compact, rhythmic structure than the 'like' list at 6.5 or the 'whether that's' phrasing at 7.0.
   • GRA“My niece read a whole book in one sitting at nine; a classmate of hers, just as bright, can't finish a page without looking up, and the gap between them at school has nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with attention.” — A semicolon fuses the two examples into one sentence before the parallel 'nothing to do with... everything to do with' clause closes it, a denser structure than the separate sentences at 6.5 or the 'while' clause at 7.0.

9. 9. Is technology bad for children's concentration?

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

   Band 6.5

   'it captured it, and trained him to expect a reward every few seconds' is the most developed clause in an otherwise plain answer.

   I think some technology is bad for children's concentration, and my own family shows this. My nephew can focus for two hours on a building game, but only two minutes on anything without a screen. I don't think technology destroyed his attention — it captured it, and trained him to expect a reward every few seconds. Short videos and endless games teach children that attention should be constantly refreshed, which is the opposite of real concentration. But technology used well, like long games with goals or reading on a screen, can actually build concentration. I think the problem is the design, not the device itself.

   Why this band

   • FC“I don't think technology destroyed his attention — it captured it, and trained him to expect a reward every few seconds.” — The dash introduces a correction to the first idea, a clear but simple cohesive device. The 7.5 answer builds nearly the same correction into a longer, more integrated sentence using the same dash but adding a further clause about design.
   • LR“trained him to expect a reward every few seconds” — Plain and functional description. The 7.5 answer keeps this phrase almost identical but pairs it with 'captured it' inside a tighter structure, showing the same vocabulary used with more surrounding precision.
   • GRA“But technology used well, like long games with goals or reading on a screen, can actually build concentration.” — A single sentence with one inserted 'like' example list — safe and clear. The 7.5 answer extends a similar list to three items and adds a further contrastive clause about consuming versus making.

   Band 7.0

   'more or less the opposite of concentration' softens the claim with a hedge rather than stating it flatly.

   Honestly, I'd say some technology is bad for it, and the evidence is right there in my own family. My nephew can focus for two hours on a building game and lasts about two minutes at anything without a screen — the technology hasn't really destroyed his attention, it's captured it, and trained it to expect a reward every few seconds. To be fair, short videos, notifications and games designed to be endless teach children that attention should be constantly refreshed, which is more or less the opposite of concentration. But technology used well can build it too — long games with goals, reading on a screen, tools that let a child actually make something.

   Why this band

   • FC“To be fair, short videos, notifications and games designed to be endless teach children that attention should be constantly refreshed” — 'To be fair' introduces this generalisation as a considered claim, a more developed move than the plain listing pattern at 6.5.
   • LR“it's captured it, and trained it to expect a reward every few seconds” — This near-repetition of 'captured' and 'trained' across the sentence is a deliberate rhetorical device, slightly more polished than the plain equivalent at 6.5, though the 7.5 answer uses the identical phrase with even tighter surrounding structure.
   • GRA“the technology hasn't really destroyed his attention, it's captured it, and trained it to expect a reward every few seconds” — Three short coordinated clauses build momentum through repetition of 'it', a moderately ambitious structure, though less symmetrical than the 7.5 version's near-identical sentence used without the softening 'really'.

   Band 7.5

   The closing pair 'The problem is design, not devices' uses a stark two-word contrast instead of a full explanatory sentence.

   Some technology, badly, and the evidence is in my own family. My nephew can focus for two hours on a building game and lasts two minutes at anything without a screen — the technology hasn't destroyed his attention, it's captured it, and trained it to expect a reward every few seconds. Short videos, notifications and games designed to be endless teach children that attention should be constantly refreshed, and that's more or less the opposite of concentration. But technology used well can build it: long games with real goals, reading on a screen, tools that let a child actually make something rather than just consume it. The problem is design, not devices. Most of what children use today is built to hold them, not to help them, and telling the difference is increasingly a parent's job.

   Why this band

   • FC“The problem is design, not devices.” — This four-word closing sentence compresses the whole argument into a single opposition, a far more economical piece of cohesion than the fuller explanatory sentences used to make the same point at 6.5 and 7.0.
   • LR“reading on a screen, tools that let a child actually make something rather than just consume it” — The added contrast 'make something rather than just consume it' is a more precise, evaluative distinction than the plainer list of examples at 6.5, which stops at 'reading on a screen' without this extra layer.
   • GRA“Most of what children use today is built to hold them, not to help them, and telling the difference is increasingly a parent's job.” — A parallel 'not to help them' clause is followed by a gerund-subject clause ('telling the difference is...'), a more varied and layered sentence than the simpler coordinated sentences used at 6.5 and 7.0.