IELTS WRITING COMMENTS!

9 BANDS!

In the days of millennium, the below valuable comments from the British Council's IELTS Evaluators can enrich your experience of writing towards Band 9 with extraordinary efforts and practice in your preparation time.

Ultimate Comments!

Writing Part 2

Band 9: This response fully satisfies the requirements of the task. All key features of each stage of the process are appropriately and accurately presented. An excellent overview is given at the beginning of the response and this skilfully incorporates part of the rubric, changing the grammatical function, to give a brief summary of the whole process. The message is very easy to read with seamless cohesion that attracts no attention. Paragraphing, linking, and referencing are all skilfully managed. The language used is very fluent and sophisticated. A wide range of vocabulary and structures are used with full flexibility and accuracy. Only rare minor ‘slips’ can be found and these do not detract from the high rating. This response is a good example of a Band 9 performance.

Band 3: With some effort, the reader can discern ideas related to two of the bullet points but the first bullet is not covered. There is a definite attempt to address the task but the purpose of the letter is not clear, the key features are not all covered, and there is the repetition of the minimal ideas produced. The test taker has not organized these ideas in any logical way and, although linkers are present, they are not always used correctly and fail to help the reader follow the message. The lexical resource is also inadequate for the task. There is a severe distortion of meaning in some parts of the answer due to errors in word choice, form, and spelling; some words cannot be deciphered. There is an effort to produce sentences but this is often unsuccessful. Overall, errors predominate and there are no correct sentences, other than those that rely on the input material. This is a good example of a Band 3 performance.

Band 3.5: The test taker attempts to address the task, but not all the key features are covered (there is no reference to the ‘walking and bus’ category). The response is also significantly under-length. The Task Achievement rating is affected by these deficiencies. Information is presented, but it is difficult to identify the organization and there is no clear progression within the response. There are some cohesive devices but these are not always used accurately. The range of vocabulary is basic and tends to be used repetitively. There is limited control over spelling, and errors are noticeable throughout. A limited range of sentence forms is used and although some structures are produced accurately, errors are frequent.

Band 4: The first part of the task is not really addressed. The opening paragraph could be said to serve as a long introduction, although it illustrates the situation, rather than explains it. In the second paragraph, some ideas are presented and supported with an example, but no conclusions are evident. The response is considerably under length, which lowers the rating. There is some appropriate use of paragraphing, although the paragraphs are self-contained rather than presenting a line of argument; thus the overall progression is unclear. The relationship between ideas can be followed and there are some cohesive devices. However, these are not always used correctly and some ideas are not fluently linked. There is also some repetition. Spelling errors are intrusive and cause strain. There is some relevant vocabulary, but overall the range is inadequate for the task. Frequent errors in syntax, verb phrases, and articles keep the rating down, despite basic structures being present. The failure to address the task and the weaknesses in vocabulary and grammar limit this response to an overall Band 4.

Band 4: While it is obviously related to the topic, the introduction is confusing and the test taker’s position is difficult to identify. Ideas are limited and although the test taker attempts to support them with examples from experience, they remain unclear. There is no overall progression in the response and the ideas are not coherently linked. Although cohesive devices are used, they assist only minimally in achieving coherence. The range of vocabulary is basic and control is inadequate for the task. Language from the input material is used inappropriately and frequent errors in word choice and collocation cause severe problems for the reader. Similarly, the range of structures is very limited, the density of grammatical and punctuation errors is high and these features cause some difficulty for the reader. Attempts to use complex structures, such as subordination, are rare and tend to be very inaccurate.

Band 4.5: The essay is short and doesn't fully answer the question. A detailed introduction and conclusion are not presented and there are several errors in phrasing. Overall, the question is not fully answered, the advantages are given but only one disadvantage. There is some good use of complex sentences, organization, and vocabulary, but this is not sustained.

Band 5: There is a good attempt to describe the overall trends but the content would have been greatly improved if the candidate had included some reference to the figures given on the graph. Without these, the reader is lacking some important information. The answer is quite difficult to follow and there are some punctuation errors that cause confusion. The structures are fairly simple and efforts to produce more complex sentences are not successful.

Band 5: Although the basic process is accurately described, this script fails to present an overview and some of the key features are not adequately covered. The first sentence may have been an attempt at an overview but it simply causes confusion and detracts from the answer. Despite this, the overall progression is clear and there is effective, though mechanical, use of linkers and sequencers. There are also examples of substitution and referencing, although sentences are not always well linked. The vocabulary is minimally adequate for the task. Spelling is generally accurate but there are inappropriate word choices, omissions, and errors in word form. Some attempts at subordination and complex nominalizations are made, but generally, the structures are limited and there are frequent errors. Overall this is a good example of a Band 5 performance.

Band 5: There is some repetition of the task rubric, and the content of the letter is rather thin, in terms of its coverage of the third bullet point especially. The organization of ideas is not wholly logical. Despite these problems, the introduction to the letter is appropriate and the purpose of the writer is clear. The points are not always linked together well and punctuation is sometimes faulty. The sentences are kept quite simple and mistakes occur as soon as more complex structures are attempted.

Band 5: There are quite a lot of relevant ideas in the answer but they are not always well supported and sometimes they are unclear. There are some areas in the answer where the organization becomes weak and the reader finds the message difficult to follow. Nevertheless, the writer’s view is apparent and there is a logical flow to the points given. There are a lot of mistakes in the answer and some parts, such as the conclusion, are very hard to follow because of these errors. Although there is some appropriate vocabulary, sentence control is very weak. These problems are made worse by the poor correcting which sometimes makes words unreadable.

Band 5: The topic is addressed and a relevant position is expressed, although there are patches (as in the third paragraph) where the development is unclear. Other ideas are more evidently relevant but are sometimes insufficiently developed. In spite of this, ideas are clearly organized and there is an overall progression within the response. There is some effective use of a range of cohesive devices, including references, but there is also some mechanical over-use of linkers in places. Paragraphs are sometimes rather too short and inappropriate. A range of vocabulary is attempted and this is adequate for a good response to the task. However, control is weak and there are frequent spelling errors that can cause some difficulties for the reader, thus keeping the rating down for the lexical criterion. The test taker uses a mix of simple and complex structures with frequent subordinate clauses. Control of complex structures is variable, and although errors are noticeable they only rarely impede understanding of the message. Although there are some features of a higher band in this response, flaws in the task response and the use of vocabulary limit this rating to Band 5.

Band 5: Although the basic process is accurately described, this script fails to present an overview and some of the key features are not adequately covered. The first sentence may have been an attempt at an overview but it simply causes confusion and detracts from the answer. Despite this, the overall progression is clear and there is effective, though mechanical, use of linkers and sequencers. There are also examples of substitution and referencing, although sentences are not always well linked. The vocabulary is minimally adequate for the task. Spelling is generally accurate but there are inappropriate word choices, omissions, and errors in word form. Some attempts at subordination and complex nominalizations are made, but generally, the structures are limited and there are frequent errors. Overall this is a good example of a Band 5 performance.

Band 5: The answer is short at just over 200 words and thus loses marks for content. There are some relevant arguments but these are not very well developed and become unclear in places. The organization of the answer is evident through the use of fairly simple connectives but there are problems for the reader in that there are many missing words and word order is often incorrect. The structures are quite ambitious but often faulty and vocabulary is kept quite simple.

Band 5: Although the script contains some good arguments, these are presented using poor structures and the answer is not very coherent. The candidate has a clear point of view but not all the supporting arguments are linked together well and sometimes ideas are left unfinished. There is quite a lot of relevant vocabulary but this is not used skilfully and sentences often have words missing or lapse into different styles. The answer is spoilt by grammatical errors and poor expression.

Band 5.5: A clear position is presented from the outset, supported by relevant ideas. These would require further development to achieve a higher score. The response is under-length, however. Information and ideas are generally arranged coherently and there is a clear overall progression. Cohesive devices are used effectively, but paragraphing is not always logical. A range of vocabulary is attempted, although there are some errors in spelling, word choice, and word formation. There also appears to be some interference from the test taker’s first language, e.g. ‘alimentation’, but these features do not make the answer difficult to understand. There is a mix of sentence forms, but the level of error is too high to achieve a higher band score.

Band 5.5: The key features are all covered, but reporting is somewhat mechanical and data is provided to support only some of the descriptions. The response also lacks an overview. Information and ideas are generally arranged coherently, though this is lost towards the end of the response. Cohesive devices are used effectively and there is a clear progression overall. The range of vocabulary is both adequate and appropriate and spelling is accurate, but there is insufficient flexibility and not enough use of less common vocabulary to justify a higher band. There is a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, used fairly accurately, but again, there is not a wide enough variety of structures to achieve a higher band.

Band 5.5: The test taker has made a good attempt at addressing the task but unfortunately, the first bullet point is completely omitted and this reduces the rating for Task Achievement. Other key features are highlighted and well covered. The response has quite a natural, clear progression, although some paragraphing would assist this. There is a good range of cohesive devices that have been used appropriately and some good examples of referencing. Despite the range and effective use of lexis, there are noticeable spelling errors, but they only rarely impede communication. Sentence types are mixed and there are many attempts at subordination, but control is uneven and there are punctuation errors. Although the response shows some features of higher-level performance, the omission of key parts of the task limits the overall band to 5.5.

Band 6: The candidate has made a good attempt to describe the graphs looking at global trends and more detailed figures. There is, however, some information missing and the information is inaccurate in minor areas. The answer flows quite smoothly although connectives are overused or inappropriate, and some of the points do not link up well. The grammatical accuracy is quite good and the language used to describe the trends is well-handled. However, there are problems with expression and the appropriate choice of words, and whilst there is good structural control, the complexity and variation in the sentences are limited.

Band 6: The answer has an appropriate introduction which the candidate has attempted to express in his/her own words. There is good coverage of the data and a brief reference to contrasting trends. The answer can be followed although it is rather repetitive and cohesive devices are overused. In order to gain a higher mark for content, the candidate would be expected to select the salient features of the graph and comment primarily on these. Sentences are long but lack complexity. There are some errors in tense, verb form, and spelling that interfere slightly with the flow of the answer.

Band 6: The test taker generally addresses the task, but only incompletely answers the first question. A position is presented, but ideas are sometimes insufficiently developed or extended so the argument is rather thin. Nevertheless, there is a clear overall progression in the response because ideas are logically organized. A range of markers is used effectively to link ideas, although there are errors in the use of some basic connectives. The test taker attempts to use a range of vocabulary and introduces some less common expressions, although with mixed success. Some expressions remain unclear, while others are used repetitively. Nevertheless, there is sufficient range and control to be adequate for the task. A mix of simple and complex structures is evident, but errors in grammar and punctuation occur and indicate limitations in control, although such lapses generally do not reduce communication. This response only just manages to reach an overall Band 6.

Band 6: The answer has an appropriate introduction which the candidate has attempted to express in his/her own words. There is good coverage of the data and a brief reference to contrasting trends. The answer can be followed although it is rather repetitive and cohesive devices are overused. In order to gain a higher mark for content, the candidate would be expected to select the salient features of the graph and comment primarily on these. Sentences are long but lack complexity. There are some errors in tense, verb form, and spelling that interfere slightly with the flow of the answer.

Band 6: Organization is strong, the question is answered and the word requirement is met. There is a good use of complex sentences and vocabulary. The introduction and conclusion could be a bit stronger and there are some phrasing and agreement issues. It should be clear what the question is in the introduction and this is only slightly able to be determined. Overall, the essay may score a Band 6.

Band 6: The answer has an appropriate introduction which the candidate has attempted to express in his/her own words. There is good coverage of the data and a brief reference to contrasting trends. The answer can be followed although it is rather repetitive and cohesive devices are overused. In order to gain a higher mark for content, the candidate would be expected to select the salient features of the graph and comment primarily on these. Sentences are long but lack complexity. There are some errors in tense, verb form, and spelling that interfere slightly with the flow of the answer.

Band 6: There are quite a lot of ideas and while some of these are supported better than others, there is an overall coherence to the answer. The introduction is perhaps slightly longer and more time could have been devoted to answering the question. The answer is fairly easy to follow and there is good punctuation. Organizational devices are evident although some areas of the answer become unclear and would benefit from more accurate use of connectives. There are some errors in the structures but there is also evidence of the production of complex sentence forms. Grammatical errors interfere slightly with comprehension.

Band 6.5: The introduction is mainly copied from the rubric. The arguments are generally well developed and there is a clear position, despite the lack of a conclusion. Better use of paragraphing would have allowed a clearer focus on some of the supporting points and prevented the lapse into generalization towards the end. Nevertheless, there is a generally clear progression with a good arrangement of opposing arguments. Referencing is usually accurate and effective, but better use of linkers would have improved the cohesion. Vocabulary is sufficient and used with some flexibility. The choice is not always precise but the test taker can evidently incorporate less common/idiomatic phrases into the argument and there is a good range that is generally accurate. The repetition of language from the rubric, while integrated, reveals a lack of ability to paraphrase. Regular errors detract from the use of a range of structures, although they do not impede communication. This is a generally good response to the task, but the weaknesses in organization and grammatical control limit the rating to Band 6.5.

Band 6.5: The test taker covers all the task requirements and states the purpose of the letter. The tone, though assertive, is consistently polite. The key features are highlighted and extended but this could be more appropriately dealt with in some areas. There is a clear overall progression, but the arrangement of ideas within paragraphs at times detracts from the clarity of the letter. At other times, the sentences are not as fluently linked as they might be. There is a good range of vocabulary that is more than adequate. Although there are errors in collocation and word choice, there are also many examples of accurate choice and appropriate modification. A mix of simple and complex structures is used, but mistakes in punctuation and in areas such as article use, subject-verb agreements, etc. limit the rating for this criterion. This response shows some features of higher-level performance, but weaknesses in organization and grammatical control limit the rating to Band 6.5.

Band 6.5: The purpose of the letter is clearly stated and all three bullet points are highlighted and developed. However, the final bullet and the closing section of the letter could be more fully or more appropriately extended. The presentation of information is clear throughout and cohesive devices, referencing and substitution are flexibly used, with occasional error. The absence of paragraphs prevents the award of a higher band for this criterion. Vocabulary is also used with some flexibility and there is a good range, with evidence that the test taker can use less common expressions and has an awareness of collocation. There is an occasional error in word form and choice. Although a variety of structures is apparent, with a mix of simple and complex sentences, the level and regularity of errors in articles, prepositions, and some verb phrases limit the rating for this criterion. The density of grammatical error prevents this response from fully satisfying the descriptors of the higher band, so Band 6.5 is awarded.

Band 7: Although ideas are often provided in the task rubric, candidates are at liberty to include some of their own ideas in their answers. In this case, the candidate has attempted to incorporate some original material. The answer reads quite fluently, is well organized and there is a good use of conjunctions to link points. There are some grammatical errors but these do not affect the reader greatly and there is evidence of some more complex sentence structures.

Band 7: The test taker addresses both aspects of the task and presents a clear position throughout the response. Main ideas are generally clear and relevant, although some supporting ideas lack focus (as in the opening of paragraph 2). Ideas are generally well organized and there is a clear overall progression, but there are lapses where points are not well integrated into the argument. A range of cohesive devices is used effectively, but some under-use of connectives and substitution and some lapses in the use of referencing are noticeable. A good range of vocabulary is used with flexibility and precision. The test taker has a good awareness of style and collocation, and although awkward expressions or inappropriacies in word choice occur these are only occasional and do not limit the rating for this criterion. Likewise, a good range of sentence structures is used with a high level of accuracy resulting in frequent error-free sentences. Minor systematic errors persist, however, and punctuation is unhelpful at times. The strong lexical resource compensates for flaws in the organizational features, so overall this response is a good example of Band 7.

Band 7: This test taker uses an inappropriate format at times (e.g. the letter-style opening and personal comments) and this limits the band for Task Achievement. The process itself is adequately described, although some irrelevant information is included and there is no clear overview. Information is logically organized and there is a clear progression throughout the response. A range of cohesive devices is used appropriately, although there are occasional errors in referencing and linking, and paragraphing would have helped convey a clearer description of the stages. A wide range of sophisticated lexis is used to convey meaning with precision, but there are also occasional flaws in word choice that lead to some slightly awkward expressions. A wide range of structures is also used fluently with only occasional slight errors and the majority of sentences are error-free. In spite of the high level of language proficiency, the flaws in format and organization limit the rating for this response to Band 7.

Band 7: The answer is wellwritten and contains some good arguments. It does tend to repeat these arguments but the writer’s point of view remains clear throughout. The message is easy to follow and ideas are arranged well with good use of cohesive devices. There are minor problems with coherence and at times the expression is clumsy and imprecise. There is a wide range of structures that are well handled with only small problems in the use of vocabulary, mainly in the areas of spelling and word choice.

Band 7: The answer deals well with both the individual media trends and the overall comparison of these trends. The opening could be more fully developed with the inclusion of information relating to the groups studied and the period of time during which the study took place. There is a good variety of cohesive devices and the message can be followed quite easily although the expression is sometimes a little clumsy. Structures are complex and vocabulary is varied but there are errors in word forms, tense, and voice though these do not impede communication.

Band 7: The test taker addresses both aspects of the task and presents a clear position throughout the response. Main ideas are generally clear and relevant, although some supporting ideas lack focus (as in the opening of paragraph 2). Ideas are generally well organized and there is a clear overall progression, but there are lapses where points are not well integrated into the argument. A range of cohesive devices is used effectively, but some under-use of connectives and substitution and some lapses in the use of referencing are noticeable. A good range of vocabulary is used with flexibility and precision. The test taker has a good awareness of style and collocation, and although awkward expressions or inappropriacies in word choice occur these are only occasional and do not limit the rating for this criterion. Likewise, a good range of sentence structures is used with a high level of accuracy resulting in frequent error-free sentences. Minor systematic errors persist, however, and punctuation is unhelpful at times. The strong lexical resource compensates for flaws in the organizational features, so overall this response is a good example of Band 7.

Band 7: This test taker uses an inappropriate format at times (e.g. the letter-style opening and personal comments) and this limits the band for Task Achievement. The process itself is adequately described, although some irrelevant information is included and there is no clear overview. Information is logically organized and there is a clear progression throughout the response. A range of cohesive devices is used appropriately, although there are occasional errors in referencing and linking, and paragraphing would have helped convey a clearer description of the stages. A wide range of sophisticated lexis is used to convey meaning with precision, but there are also occasional flaws in word choice that lead to some slightly awkward expressions. A wide range of structures is also used fluently with only occasional slight errors and the majority of sentences are error-free. In spite of the high level of language proficiency, the flaws in format and organization limit the rating for this response to Band 7.

Band 7: The answer deals well with both the individual media trends and the overall comparison of these trends. The opening could be more fully developed with the inclusion of information relating to the groups studied and the period of time during which the study took place. There is a good variety of cohesive devices and the message can be followed quite easily although the expression is sometimes a little clumsy. Structures are complex and vocabulary is varied but there are errors in word forms, tense, and voice though these do not impede communication.

Band 7.5: The test taker presents a clear position at the outset and explores some ideas to support this. An alternative position is also considered but rejected. This is a strong response, but there is rather too much emphasis on technology: other aspects of the proposition could also be considered, e.g. less physical work and more sedentary work, greater reliance on cars meaningless exercise, aging populations in some countries leading to more complex health issues. Ideas are organized logically and there is a clear progression throughout the response, with good use of cohesive devices and logical paragraphing. The response could perhaps be improved by breaking down paragraphs 2 and 3. There is a wide range of vocabulary with good use of less common items as well as evidence of higher-level features, such as ‘softening’, e.g. ‘They tend to’, ‘This appears to be’, and ‘might disagree’. Errors in spelling and word formation are rare. There is also a variety of complex structures with frequent error-free sentences, though some errors do occur and there is some overuse of rather short sentence forms.

Band 8: The topic is very well addressed and the position is clear throughout. Main ideas are presented and well supported, apart from some over-generalization in the penultimate paragraph. The ideas and information are very well organized and paragraphing is used appropriately throughout. The answer can be read with ease due to the sophisticated handling of cohesive devices – only the lack of an appropriate introduction and the minor error in the second use of ‘eg’ mars this aspect of the response. The writer uses a wide and very natural range of vocabulary with full flexibility. There are many examples of appropriate modification, collocation, and precise vocabulary choice. The syntax is equally varied and sophisticated. There are only occasional errors in an otherwise very accurate answer. Overall this performance is a good example of Band 8.

Band 8: This is a very well-organized script that contains a lot of well-supported arguments and analyses the topic from different angles. The ideas follow each other well and there is a very honest conclusion. The answer is easy to read. There are some areas where the expression is clumsy but this makes little difference to the overall flow of the answer. There are minor errors in spelling and structure.

Band 8: All parts of the task are sufficiently and appropriately addressed. A clear position is presented and supported and ideas are relevant and well developed. Some further extension in supporting points, such as some mention of negative effects, however brief, could be added to raise this to the highest band for Task Response. There is a clear progression throughout the response and a wide range of cohesive devices is used with flexibility, although there is a rare error too. However, the personal comment in the final paragraph is a sudden topic shift after the general exploration of the issues. This is a slight lapse in the development and clear progression of the response and prevents it from reaching the highest band for coherence and cohesion. A wide range of vocabulary is used with flexibility and precision. The occasional minor error, such as the omission of dependent prepositions, is evident but not systematic. Similarly, minor errors or omissions occur in structures, but these do not detract from the wide range flexibly and accurately used generally, and the majority of structures are error-free. This is a clear example of a Band 8 performance.

Band 9: This response fully satisfies the requirements of the task. All key features of each stage of the process are appropriately and accurately presented. An excellent overview is given at the beginning of the response and this skilfully incorporates part of the rubric, changing the grammatical function, to give a brief summary of the whole process. The message is very easy to read with seamless cohesion that attracts no attention. Paragraphing, linking, and referencing are all skilfully managed. The language used is very fluent and sophisticated. A wide range of vocabulary and structures are used with full flexibility and accuracy. Only rare minor ‘slips’ can be found and these do not detract from the high rating. This response is a good example of a Band 9 performance.

Evaluators' Comments!

Sample Academic Writing Part 1
Candidate’s Response:

The statistics show the number of tripe mad by children in one country over the past to years to travel to end from school using different modes of transport. children walking (13 million) are the by far highset, while, the children use bus (7 million) are a bit higher than the children use car in 1990. However, The children use car (11 million) in 2010 significant higher than The children use bus (5 million) in 2010. In contrest, The children walking (6 million) are Twice as high as the children use cycling (3 million) in 2010. overall, At the end priod there were 12,000,000 children walking in 1990, 11,000,000 children use care in 2010 and 5,000,000 children use bus.

Examiner's comment Band 3.5:

The test taker attempts to address the task, but not all the key features are covered (there is no reference to the ‘walking and bus’ category). The response is also significantly under-length. The Task Achievement rating is affected by these deficiencies. Information is presented, but it is difficult to identify organisation and there is no clear progression within the response. There are some cohesive devices but these are not always used accurately. The range of vocabulary is basic and tends to be used repetitively. There is limited control over spelling, and errors are noticeable throughout. A limited range of sentence forms is used and although some structures are produced accurately, errors are frequent.

Sample Academic Writing Part 1

Candidate’s Response:

The chart gives you information on how children travelled to and from school in the years 1990 and 2010. The modes of transport were by car, walking, cycling, walking and by bus and by bus only.

A striking feature in this chart is that the number of children who travelled by car has increased from 1990 to 2010. In 1990 the most number of trips per year by children were by walking. However in 2010 it reduced to up to 6 million trips per year. The total number of trips to school by cycling and walking and bus were approximately 6 million in 1990. However the number of trips to school by cycling reduced to 2 million and the number of trips to school by walking and bus reduced to about 3 million in 2010. There isn’t a significant change to the number of trips to school by bus. In 1990 it was about 7 million and in 2010 it came down to approximately 5 million.

In 1990 the amount of children who travelled to and from school by car was significantly lower than the children who travelled by walking. In contrast in 2010 the number of children who travelled to school by car increased and the number of children walking to school has decreased. In 2010 children travelled to school by bus more than they cycled to school.

Examiner comment Band 5.5:

The key features are all covered, but reporting is somewhat mechanical and data is provided to support only some of the descriptions. The response also lacks an overview. Information and ideas are generally arranged coherently, though this is lost towards the end of the response. Cohesive devices are used effectively and there is a clear progression overall. The range of vocabulary is both adequate and appropriate and spelling is accurate, but there is insufficient flexibility and not enough use of less common vocabulary to justify a higher band. There is a mix of simple and complex sentence structures, used fairly accurately, but again, there is not a wide enough variety of structures to achieve a higher band.

Sample Academic Writing Part 2

Candidate’s Response:

I completly disagree with the written statment. I believe that most of the people in the world have more information about their health and also about how they can improve their healthy conditions.

Nowadays, information about how harmful is to smoke for our bodies can be seen in many packets of cigars. This is a clear example how things can change from our recent past. There is a clear trend in the diminishing of smokers and if this continues it will have a positive impact in our health.
On the other hand, the alimentation habbits are changing all over the world and this can affect people’s health. However every one can choose what to eat every day. Mostly everybody, from developed societies, know the importance of having a healthy diet. Advances such as the information showed in the menus of fast food restaurants will help people to have a clever choice before they choose what to eat.

Another important issue that I would like to mention is how medicine is changing. There are new discovers and treatments almost every week and that is an inequivoque sintom of how things are changing in order to improve the world’s health.

Examiner comment Band 5.5:

A clear position is presented from the outset, supported by relevant ideas. These would require further development to achieve a higher score. The response is under-length, however. Information and ideas are generally arranged coherently and there is a clear overall progression. Cohesive devices are used effectively, but paragraphing is not always logical. A range of vocabulary is attempted, although there are some errors in spelling, word choice, and word formation. There also appears to be some interference from the test taker’s first language, e.g. ‘alimentation’, but these features do not make the answer difficult to understand. There is a mix of sentence forms, but the level of error is too high to achieve a higher band score.

Sample Academic Writing Part 2

Candidate’s Response:

Recently, there have been a lot of discussions about health and whether it is going to improve or not. In my opinion, I think that people will become unhealthier in the future than they are now.

There are many reasons that support the idea of people becoming unhealthy in the future. Firstly, one reason is that of food. People tend to eat more fast food nowadays. They tend to treat themselves with sweets and chocolate whenever they want. This appears to be because people are busier now than they used to be. So, people don’t have a chance to cook or even learn the art of cookery. Also, having a lot of unhealthy food can lead to obesity and it could be a serious issue in the future. Another reason is that technology is developing everyday. Young people enjoy buying new gadgets and the latest devices. This has a negative impact on their health, especially when they enjoy video games. Spending long hours looking at a screen can lead to bad eyesight and obesity as well. Yet another reason is that laziness is a big issue. Different forms of exercise might disappear in the future because people don’t like sports. Also, people prefer spending most of their time on the internet and the internet is growing every single day.

Other people might disagree and say that health will improve in the future. They believe that new sports and new ways to exercise will appear in the future. However, I don’t think it can happen since the majority of people spend less time outdoors. Moreover, other people believe that technology will try and help people improve their health. For example, there have been some games released on the Wii console that makes people exercise but technology is developing more in a negative way. For instance, many phone industries are developing new applications everyday and today’s generation likes to follow every trend. This prevents people to go outside to exercise. They like to spend more time on the internet downloading new programmes or reading gossips about celebraties. This affects people’s health badly.

In conclusion, I believe that people’s health is affected negatively by fast food, technology and sports and it will be a problem in the future.

Examiner comment Band 7.5:

The test taker presents a clear position at the outset and explores some ideas to support this. An alternative position is also considered but rejected. This is a strong response, but there is rather too much emphasis on technology: other aspects of the proposition could also be considered, e.g. less physical work and more sedentary work, greater reliance on cars meaningless exercise, aging populations in some countries leading to more complex health issues. Ideas are organized logically and there is a clear progression throughout the response, with good use of cohesive devices and logical paragraphing. The response could perhaps be improved by breaking down paragraphs 2 and 3. There is a wide range of vocabulary with good use of less common items as well as evidence of higher-level features, such as ‘softening’, e.g. ‘They tend to’, ‘This appears to be’, and ‘might disagree’. Errors in spelling and word formation are rare. There is also a variety of complex structures with frequent error-free sentences, though some errors do occur and there is some overuse of rather short sentence forms.

Context: In recent years, the structure of a family and the role of its members are gradually changing. What kinds of changes can occur? Do you think these changes are positive and negative?

Band 8.5 Model Essay 1:

It is true that these days the family structure has considerably shifted, and the changing roles of men and women in the family have become increasingly similar. There are several new forms of family composition, and in my opinion, these developments are not always desirable.

In the past, nuclear families where parents and their offspring living together under one roof used to be prevalent. However, there is now a huge trend towards single-parent families due to more marriages ending in divorce, while the increase in cohabiting couple families and stepfamilies is probably a result of cohabitation and remarriage becoming much more acceptable. In addition, the number of single-mother families has increased as many mothers want to have children without getting married. In terms of changing parental roles in a family, there has been a rise in the number of stay-at-home dads in recent years when it has become normal for women to gain qualifications and pursue their own career path. This is in sharp contrast to about half a decade ago when men were breadwinners, and women were in charge of household chores in their families.

In my view, the changes described above could have both positive and negative consequences. On the one hand, due to the lack of emotional attachment and legal binding, non-traditional households such as stepfamilies and cohabiting parents are more prone to breaking down.

Consequently, children of these families are more likely to be involved in antisocial behaviors while their parents may experience feelings of loneliness and worry. On the other hand, the changes in the roles of members in the family could be seen as progress because women are not put under pressure to sacrifice their own careers to assume childcare and domestic responsibilities.

In conclusion, I believe that the changes in the roles of family members and the family structure are both positive and negative.

IELTS Examiner’s Comment:

This is one of the best essays I have seen. It’s amazing! I don’t know what to suggest to improve this apart from minor improvements to the introduction and the conclusion, which is very short & unclear (positive & negative). All IELTS band scores would be 9 apart from Task Response, which would be 8.0. Overall – 8.5. Did you write this in 40 mins with no help/guidance?

Band 8.5 Model Answer 2:

The changes of family structure and family roles have become a major topic of concern in modem society. Some of the main changes will be identified, before an evaluation on whether this is a positive or negative trend is made.

A few drastic changes could be observed in families today. The most obvious one is the decreased size of an average family in society. In Vietnam, for example, a majority of extended families of three generations or more living under the same roof have been transformed into nuclear families with only parents and children. In addition, there is also a significant change in terms of the roles of the father and the mother in a family. The responsibility of males as the sole breadwinner of the family has now been shared with their partners, and now women have equal working opportunities compared with their male counterparts. Accordingly, household duties are also shared equally between the two sexes.

I contend that this new family structure is without doubt beneficial for all families. As regards the smaller family size, each family member could benefit from an increased sense of freedom. For instance, parents have more time for themselves now, compared with the situation in the past when they had to bear the responsibility of taking care of both grandparents and children. With respect to the change in family roles, women may reap the benefit of having their own career and thus financial freedom. Men also gain from this change since they have been freed from the financial pressure of being the only source of income in the family.

To conclude, the most apparent changes in today’s families include a decreased family size and a shared financial and household responsibility of men and women. All the existing data has provided a concrete foundation that these changes are beneficial for all members of the family.

Band 7.5 Model Essay 3:

It is true that there have been significant changes in not only the family structure but also family roles. In my opinion, these changes should be regarded as a positive tendency.

To begin with, the structure of a family is relatively different from that of some decades ago. In the past, it was likely that extended families became prevalent among societies when many generations including children, parents and grandparents lived in the same roof. In contrast, these days are witnessing the domination of nuclear families which have only parents and their offspring. Regarding parental roles, in earlier periods, men and women were supposed to be breadwinners and homemakers respectively as fathers tended to earn a living while mothers were supposed to stay at home to fulfill household duties as well as looking after children. However, both men and women currently go to work to support the whole family, whereas household tasks are often divided.

I am of the opinion that these changes would have beneficial effects on family life. First of all, if fewer generations reside together, people seem to have more freedom and privacy to do anything they have interest in without disturbing other members. For instance, in extended families juveniles adoring pop music might have to stop listening to it because their grandparents could find it annoying and noisy. Furthermore, pursuing their own careers can allow women to become financially independent from men and this also provides families with another income to have a higher standard of living. Another benefit when husbands assist their wives with household chores is that women would ease the burden of housework and have more time for themselves which can be spent on recreational activities.

In conclusion, I hold the view that several changes in family pattern and the role of member such as the fact that extended families are gradually replaced by nuclear ones and the fair division of household duties is a positive development.

STEPS OF BAND NINE

You probably need to get a Band 9 for IELTS Writing, so I think you should get an extreme awareness about it, but this lesson will help you see some key features and small changes that you can make to get you closer to your band score goal.

There are plenty of different ways of writing a high-scoring essay (this is just one example, but there is not just one ‘right answer’).

The main message is that you should write clearly. Don’t try to be more ‘complex’ to get a higher score.

Complex language IS important, but CLEAR language is MORE important. Complexity should not lead to confusion.

This essay uses ‘PEEL’ paragraphs to

P: make your point
E: give specific examples and evidence and/or
E: Explanations to support your argument
L: link it back to the question with an outcome or ‘so what?’ statement.

This ensures that the points are clear and supported and that the relevance to the question is clearly shown.

You will notice that in this Task 2 essay:

the language is easy to understand and not overly complex
the first line is a general statement (the writer does NOT paraphrase the question)
the writer does NOT put a linking word at the beginning of each sentence (there is no mechanical use of ‘moreover’ ‘besides’ ‘in addition’)
It’s advised to use the reference words in the middle of sentences but not in the beginning of the same.
Each paragraph has a clear topic sentence, summarising the purpose of the paragraph.
There are several OUTCOMES with high-level collocations
The outcomes are often written in the form of a CONDITIONAL (If, were it not for…), which we cover in my Conditionals Bootcamp.

What makes this writing a Band 9 essay?

The first line (General Statement) assesses the situation and gives the background to the issue.
The first line (General Statement) does NOT paraphrase the question.
There are clear TOPIC sentences to guide the reader.
The introduction presents both sides but gives a clear opinion here and throughout
The paragraphs follow the PEEL structure (Point, Example, Explanation/Evidence, Link or So what?)
The writer shows what other people think throughout.
The writer uses hedging (often, many, may, virtually, rarely) in order to avoid generalization.
The writer uses linking and referencing.
The writer constantly refers to the ‘So what?’ – the impact/results/consequences.
The writer uses complex language (e.g. conditionals).
The writer uses a variety of collocations (detrimental effect, damaging consequences, significant impact).

Is it even possible to write a Band 9 essay in IELTS?

Well, it is certainly possible. In fact, not only have I scored a band 9 in writing myself, I have also helped several of my students score band 9 in writing too. If you want to learn the art and science behind scoring an IELTS writing Band 9 (or if you just want to improve your score by a few bands), read on.

Every day we receive 100's of IELTS essays for correction from our students. Our experienced IELTS tutors go over every single word of the essay and mark them based on the criteria specified in the IELTS Band Score Descriptors.

Since a lot of IELTS students struggle in the writing section, we thought we would list out the IELTS Band 9 essay samples that we have seen from our IELTS Twenty20 Course students so far. An important thing to note is that the students who wrote these essays went through several feedback rounds with other essay topics where they perfected the art of writing a good IELTS Task 2 essay. So don't get intimidated if you think you cannot write such essays. Everyone struggles with it and it takes time to improve.

But, before we look at the IELTS Band 9 essay samples, let's first understand how to write the perfect IELTS essay.

How to write an IELTS Band 9 essay?

In IELTS Writing Task 2, you are given brief details of an opinion, an argument, or a problem, and have to produce an extended piece of discursive writing (an essay) in response.
You need to write at least 250 words and should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
Let's look at a step-by-step process on how to write a great writing task 2 essay every time ... no matter what the topic.

What are the different types of IELTS essays?

Agree or Disagree
Advantages & Disadvantages
Discuss two views and give your opinion.
Discuss two views without giving your opinion.
Causes - Problem and Solutions
Asking Opinion
Two questions - Two-part questions

Understand the IELTS writing task 2 marking criteria

When IELTS examiners mark your essays they refer to the IELTS writing band descriptors. Here's what the band descriptors mean in plain English.

Identify the main topic of the essay.
- If you incorrectly identify the main idea then you CANNOT score above Band 4.
- If you present the main idea that is not sufficiently developed and supported by examples then you CANNOT score above Band 6.
Identify all parts of the task.
- If you address only some parts of the task and not others then you CANNOT score above Band 5.
- Even if you identify all parts of the task correctly but fail to cover each of them fully you WILL NOT be able to score above Band 6.
Present a position/opinion.
- If you do not express a clear position then you CANNOT score above Band 5.
Conclusion
- If you do not write a conclusion at the end you CANNOT score above Band 5.
- If your conclusion is unclear or repetitive then you CANNOT score above Band 6.
In other words, if you want to score Band 7+, you need to consistently, accurately, and appropriately demonstrate the use of all 4 points highlighted above.
Did you think that was all ... nope there's more ...
Even if you do all of the above there is still a chance that you may not be able to score above Band 7. In order to really ensure Band 7+, you need to master the 4 C’s of Essay Writing.

The 4 C's of Essay Writing

Cohesion - refers to words and phrases that help link ideas together. For example:

Because of this...
It is clear that...
It can be seen... etc.

Conciseness - Long sentences do not mean more marks. Run-on sentences will often cause you to lose marks in this area. There are three sentence structures you should be using:

Simple sentences - Contains a subject and a verb and expresses a complete thought. For Example - The teacher returned the homework.
Complex sentences - Has an independent clause (simple sentence) joined by one or more dependent clauses (cannot stand alone as a sentence) For Example - The teacher returned the homework after she noticed the error.
Compound sentences - Two simple sentences joined by a coordinator (ex. for, and, or, yet, so). For Example - The teacher returned the homework so everyone got to go home early.

Coherence - How easy is your essay to understand? In order to improve your coherence, proper grammar is a must. You are not there while the essay is being marked, so your ideas need to be clear and easy to understand. Using the cohesive phrases mentioned earlier, can improve the coherence of your essay.

Composition - The structure of your essay (introduction paragraph, 2-3 body paragraphs, and a conclusion paragraph). A good introduction includes a little background on the topic, a thesis statement, and a preview of the 2-3 main points of your essay. Each body paragraph should include a topic sentence illustrating your point, an example of your point and how it ties into your topic sentence, as well as a concluding sentence that ties this point into your thesis.

Conclusions should reiterate your two or three main ideas from your body paragraphs and restate your thesis again using different words than before. To end your conclusion, you should give a prediction or recommendation on the essay topic.

Note: Remember a proper paragraph has at least 3-4 sentences. Each paragraph should revolve around the main idea, and when you start a new idea, you should start a new paragraph.

Tips for writing an IELTS band 9 essay

Here's a checklist for Writing Task 2. Follow this checklist and you are guaranteed to score Band 7+ in IELTS Writing.

First off, read & understand the topic of the essay for Writing Task 2.
Identify all the key parts of the question.
Brainstorm and organize your ideas to ensure that each of your ideas is fully explained and well supported with examples.
If the question asks for your opinion, make sure you state it clearly and you don’t contradict that view throughout the rest of the essay.
Learn the structure of an essay: introduction, body paragraphs, conclusion.
Do not copy the question word for word for your introduction or else those words will be deducted from your total word count. Instead, always paraphrase the question in your own words.
You MUST write a conclusion/overview at the end. Don’t add new information in your conclusion. Instead, rephrase your key points, and give a strong ending sentence that ties everything together.
Always write in a formal tone and use it consistently throughout the essay.
Do not use bullet points or short notes.
Use a wide range of grammatical structures and vocabulary.
Remember to follow the 4 C's of essay writing.
Practice and learn synonyms so your writing has a range of vocabulary and does not become repetitive.
Write at least 250 words. Anything less, you will lose marks. Ideally, the essay should be about 250-280 words.
Write neatly, as the person who is marking your essay should be able to easily read and understand what you have written.
Do Task 2 first, as it is worth twice as much as Task 1, so priority should be placed here.
Practice makes perfect. Write as many practice essays as you can, and have them marked by an English teacher for mistakes.
Practice timing yourself at home, and stick to the allotted time for each section. During the real test, bring a watch and manage your time carefully.
Check your writing. If you finish with extra time, look over your essay for any spelling, grammar, or other mistakes you might find.

Frequently asked questions about IELTS Writing Task 2

Q: Will I lose marks if I write too many words (400-500) in my essay?

A: There is no penalty for writing more than 250 words for writing task 2. However, there are also no extra marks for writing more. In fact, the more you write, the more you may end up making spelling or grammar mistakes. It is much better to write around 280 words within 35 minutes and spend the last 5 minutes reviewing your work for mistakes.

Q: Will I lose marks if my handwriting is very poor?

A: In IELTS, handwriting does not affect your scores directly. The scoring rubric does not have any points for handwriting. However, it affects your score indirectly. i.e if your handwriting is illegible, the examiner will think that you have misspelled a word and will mark you lower on lexical resources. The examiner will not give you the benefit of doubt if she is not sure about the words you have written.

Moreover, handwriting also affects the overall impression of the examiner. Remember that IELTS examiners are humans and like all humans, they form their first impressions looking at your handwriting. The clearer your work, the better the first impression you will make on the examiner.

In the end, good handwriting, and a neat and tidy essay will only help, not harm your score.

Insight English Academy, Madurai!

An Authorised TOEFL IBT & IDP IELTS Test Center!

Travel Overseas

IELTS WRITING COMMENTS!

Ultimate Comments!

Evaluators' Comments!