IELTS Writing Task 2 Mastery

Table of Contents

- Chapter 1: How IELTS Writing Task 2 is Scored (FREE)

- Chapter 2: 3 Model Essays with Detailed Feedback (FREE: Essay 1)

- Chapter 3: 20 High-Scoring Essays (PAID)

- Chapter 4: 100 Power Phrases for Task 2 (PAID)

- Chapter 5: 30 Common Task 2 Topics with Argument Banks (PAID)

- Chapter 6: 30 Common Errors and How to Fix Them (PAID)

- Chapter 7: 20 FAQs (PAID)

- Appendix A: Band 9 Vocabulary List (50 Words)

- Appendix B: 30 Useful Transition Words

- Appendix C: Time Management for 40 Minutes

- Appendix D: How to Use Your 10 AI Grading Credits

---

Chapter 1: How IELTS Writing Task 2 is Scored

Most candidates lose marks not because they can't write English, but because they don't understand what the examiner is actually looking for. Let me fix that in the next 2,000 words.

Your essay is scored on four criteria, each worth 25% of your Writing score:

Criterion	What it measures	Chinese
Task Response (TR)	Did you answer the question fully?	任务回应
Coherence & Cohesion (CC)	Is it logically organized and connected?	连贯与衔接
Lexical Resource (LR)	Is your vocabulary precise and varied?	词汇资源
Grammatical Range & Accuracy (GRA)	Are your sentences varied and correct?	语法多样性与准确性

Your final Writing score is the average of the four, rounded to the nearest half-band. This means you can be a Band 8 writer in vocabulary but if your Task Response is Band 5, you'll land around Band 6.5. You cannot ignore any criterion.

Let's break each one down with real examples.

---

1. Task Response (TR) — 任务回应

TR asks three questions:

1. Did you answer ALL parts of the question?

2. Did you give a clear position throughout?

3. Did you extend and support your ideas with evidence/examples?

Real example: Band 5 vs Band 7

Question: *Some people think that all university students should study whatever they like. Others believe that they should only be allowed to study subjects that will be useful in the future, such as those related to science and technology. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.*

Band 5 response (opening paragraph):

> Nowadays, education is very important for everyone. Some people think students should study what they like, but other people think they should study useful subjects. In my opinion, both views have some good points. This essay will discuss both sides.

Why this is Band 5:

- The position is unclear ("both views have some good points" — that's not a position).

- No extension — it just restates the prompt.

- "This essay will discuss both sides" is a memorized, empty phrase (中文：套话，考官一眼就能看出来).

Band 7 response (opening paragraph):

> The question of whether university students should be free to choose their own field of study, or be steered towards vocational subjects such as engineering and computer science, is widely debated. While I accept that allowing students to pursue their passions can boost motivation and creativity, I firmly believe that a balanced approach — one that considers both personal interest and future employability — serves both individuals and society best.

Why this is Band 7:

- Clear position stated in the first paragraph ("I firmly believe that a balanced approach...").

- The position is nuanced — not a naive "I agree 100%."

- It previews the argument structure without using a memorized phrase.

Band 8+ would go further: the candidate would signal the *specific* tension they'll resolve (e.g., "the real issue is not freedom vs. utility, but who bears the cost of a mismatched graduate workforce") — showing original thinking.

The #1 TR killer: answering the wrong question. If the prompt says "Discuss both views and give your own opinion," and you only give your opinion, your TR caps at Band 5. Read the instruction line twice.

---

2. Coherence & Cohesion (CC) — 连贯与衔接

CC is about two things:

- Coherence = your ideas make logical sense in order (整体逻辑).

- Cohesion = the *language* you use to connect them (连接词/指代).

A common myth: *"Use lots of linking words to get a high CC score."* Wrong. Overusing "Moreover," "Furthermore," "In addition" actually lowers your score — examiners call it "mechanical overuse."

What Band 7 cohesion actually looks like

Band 5 paragraph (mechanical linking):

> Firstly, studying what you like is good. Moreover, it makes students happy. Furthermore, happy students study better. In addition, they can be creative. Secondly, useful subjects are good too. However, some students don't like them. Therefore, they may fail.

Problems: Every sentence begins with a linking word. It reads like a checklist. No idea is developed — each sentence is a new, shallow point.

Band 7 paragraph (natural cohesion):

> One of the strongest arguments for free choice is motivational. Students who study a subject they genuinely enjoy are far more likely to engage deeply with the material — they read beyond the syllabus, attend optional lectures, and persist when the work becomes difficult. This intrinsic drive, in turn, tends to produce more original research and more satisfied graduates. The counter-argument, of course, is that passion alone does not pay the bills.

Why this is Band 7:

- Only one explicit linker ("in turn") — the rest is connected through logic and referencing ("this intrinsic drive," "the counter-argument").

- The paragraph develops one idea fully before moving on.

- The final sentence bridges to the next paragraph naturally.

Key CC techniques to master:

- Referencing: "this trend," "such students," "the former/latter."

- Substitution: "the same is true of..." instead of repeating the noun.

- Topic sentences: the first sentence of each body paragraph should state the paragraph's single main idea.

---

3. Lexical Resource (LR) — 词汇资源

LR is NOT about using the longest words. It's about:

1. Range — can you express the same idea in different ways?

2. Precision — is the word *exactly* right?

3. Collocation — do words naturally go together?

Vocabulary upgrade examples

Band 6	Band 7	Band 8
a big problem	a serious issue	a pressing concern
many people think	many people believe	it is widely held that
good for the economy	beneficial to the economy	a boon to the economy
children should	children ought to	it is imperative that children
very important	crucial	of paramount importance
get better	improve	make significant strides

But watch the collocation trap. A "big word" used wrongly is worse than a simple word used correctly.

- ❌ "This will make a huge influence on society." (wrong collocation — it's "have an influence")

- ✅ "This will have a profound influence on society."

- ❌ "Governments should do strict laws." (wrong verb)

- ✅ "Governments should enforce strict laws."

Band 8 vocabulary in context:

> The proliferation of remote work has upended traditional commuting patterns, eroding the viability of inner-city retail and reshaping urban planning priorities.

Notice: proliferation, upended, eroding, reshaping — all precise and naturally collocated. This is what Band 8 looks like. It is not "big words for the sake of it."

Chinese candidate trap (中文陷阱): Direct translation from Chinese produces unnatural English.

- 中文 "提高意识" → ❌ "raise awareness" is fine, but ❌ "improve consciousness" is wrong.

- 中文 "方便" → ❌ "convenient" used for "convenient to do something" — English prefers "it is convenient for someone to do something."

---

4. Grammatical Range & Accuracy (GRA) — 语法多样性与准确性

GRA has two halves, and both matter equally:

- Range: Do you use a variety of sentence structures — simple, compound, complex?

- Accuracy: Are your sentences free of errors?

A crucial fact: To reach Band 7, you need frequent error-free sentences (中文：大部分句子没有错误). One or two errors are fine; a pattern of errors caps you at Band 6.

The four sentence types you must control

1. Simple: *Governments must act.*

2. Compound: *Governments must act, and citizens must cooperate.*

3. Complex (subordinate clause): *Although the cost is high, governments must act.*

4. Complex (relative clause): *The policies that governments introduce must be enforced.*

Real error examples (Band 6 → Band 7)

Error 1 — Subject-verb agreement:

- ❌ "The number of cars have increased."

- ✅ "The number of cars has increased." (subject is "the number")

Error 2 — Dangling modifier:

- ❌ "Having considered the evidence, the conclusion is clear."

- ✅ "Having considered the evidence, I find the conclusion clear."

Error 3 — Run-on sentence:

- ❌ "Many students choose science, this is because it offers better jobs."

- ✅ "Many students choose science because it offers better jobs." OR "Many students choose science; this is because it offers better jobs."

Error 4 — Wrong conditional:

- ❌ "If governments will invest more, the problem will solve."

- ✅ "If governments invest more, the problem will be solved."

Error 5 — Misplaced "although/but":

- ❌ "Although it is expensive, but it is worth it."

- ✅ "Although it is expensive, it is worth it." (never use "although" and "but" together)

Band 8 sentence variety in one paragraph:

> While some argue that free tuition is financially unsustainable, the long-term economic returns — a more skilled workforce, higher tax revenues, and lower welfare costs — arguably outweigh the initial outlay. If governments are unwilling to fund this directly, they could, for instance, offer income-contingent loans, which students repay only once their earnings exceed a certain threshold.

Count the structures: subordinate clause, relative clause, conditional, appositive, parenthetical. That's range.

---

Band 5–9 Descriptors with Concrete Examples

Band	TR	CC	LR	GRA
**5**	Addresses the task only partially; position unclear; ideas underdeveloped	Basic linking but repetitive; paragraphing inadequate	Limited range; frequent errors in word choice	Limited structures; frequent errors that cause difficulty
**6**	Addresses all parts but some more fully than others; position present but not always clear	Coherent but mechanical linking; paragraphing may be illogical	Adequate range; some errors in word choice/spelling	Mix of simple and complex; some errors
**7**	Addresses all parts; clear position throughout; ideas extended	Logical progression; range of cohesive devices; clear paragraphing	Sufficient range; less common words; occasional errors	Variety of complex structures; frequent error-free sentences
**8**	Sufficiently addresses all parts; well-developed position	Sequences ideas skilfully; cohesion rarely faulty	Wide range; skilful use of uncommon items; rare errors	Wide range; majority of sentences error-free
**9**	Fully addresses all parts; fully developed position	Effortless cohesion; paragraphing skilful	Full flexibility and precision	Full range; virtually error-free

The jump from Band 6 to Band 7 is the hardest. It requires:

- A clear position (not "both sides have merits").

- Extended ideas (each body paragraph = 1 idea, 3–4 sentences deep).

- Frequent error-free sentences (not just "some").

---

The Top 5 Mistakes Chinese Candidates Make

Mistake 1: Memorized "template" introductions (模板化开头)

Chinese candidates are often taught to memorize openers. Examiners are trained to spot them instantly.

- ❌ "With the rapid development of society, more and more people are paying attention to..."

- ❌ "It is universally acknowledged that..."

- ❌ "Nowadays, with the advancement of science and technology..."

Why it hurts: These phrases add zero content. They waste 30–40 words of your 250-word minimum. Examiners may even penalize memorized language under LR.

Fix: Start with the *substance* of the question. Rephrase the prompt in your own words, then state your position.

Mistake 2: No clear position (立场模糊)

- ❌ "In my opinion, both views are reasonable and have their own advantages and disadvantages."

This is a non-position. You must decide.

- ✅ "While both views have merit, I believe X is more convincing because..."

Mistake 3: Overusing linking words (连接词滥用)

- ❌ "Firstly... Moreover... Furthermore... In addition... Besides... What's more... Last but not least..."

This looks like a list, not an essay. Band 7+ essays use logic, not linkers, to connect ideas.

Mistake 4: Vague, unsupported claims (空泛论述)

- ❌ "Education is very important for the development of a country."

Everyone knows this. It adds nothing. You need specificity:

- ✅ "Countries that invest heavily in tertiary education, such as South Korea and Finland, tend to have higher GDP per capita and lower unemployment than those that do not."

You don't need real statistics — but you need specific, plausible examples.

Mistake 5: Under-length essays (字数不够)

You must write at least 250 words. Under 250 = automatic penalty on TR. Aim for 260–290 words — enough to develop ideas, but not so long you run out of time or make errors.

Time budget (40 minutes total):

- 5 min: plan

- 30 min: write

- 5 min: check

---

Chapter 2: 3 Model Essays with Detailed Feedback

Now let's apply everything. Below are three real essays written to Band 7 standard, with sentence-by-sentence annotations and a full scoring breakdown.

---

Essay 1 (FREE): Education — "Some people believe university education should be free."

Prompt: *Some people believe that university education should be free for all students, regardless of their financial background. To what extent do you agree or disagree?*

Full essay (~280 words, Band 7):

> [1] The idea that university education should be free for everyone is appealing, but it raises difficult questions about funding and fairness. [2] While I agree that cost should never prevent a capable student from attending university, I do not believe that free education for all — including those who can easily afford it — is the best solution.

>

> [3] The strongest argument for free tuition is that it removes financial barriers. [4] Talented students from low-income families are often deterred by the prospect of decades of debt, and this means that a country loses potential doctors, engineers, and teachers simply because of their parents' income. [5] In countries such as Germany, where tuition is largely free, university enrollment among working-class students is noticeably higher than in countries with high fees. [6] Education, in this sense, is not just a private benefit but a public good: a better-educated population contributes more in taxes and requires less welfare support.

>

> [7] However, making university free for *everyone* is a blunt instrument. [8] Wealthy families would receive the same subsidy as poor ones, which means public money is spent on those who do not need it. [9] A more targeted approach — means-tested grants, income-contingent loans, or scholarships — would direct limited resources to the students who genuinely need help. [10] Moreover, free tuition does not address the deeper problem of unequal access to good schooling before university, which is often the real barrier for disadvantaged students.

>

> [11] In conclusion, while I strongly support removing financial obstacles to higher education, I believe the fairest and most efficient system is one that targets support at those who need it most, rather than making university free for all.

---

Sentence-by-sentence annotations

[1] *The idea that university education should be free for everyone is appealing, but it raises difficult questions about funding and fairness.*

- Function: Rephrases the prompt + signals a nuanced stance.

- Grammar: Relative clause ("that university education should be free") + compound sentence.

- Why it works: Avoids "Nowadays..." opener. Engages with the actual issue.

[2] *While I agree that cost should never prevent a capable student from attending university, I do not believe that free education for all — including those who can easily afford it — is the best solution.*

- Function: Clear position statement with qualification.

- Grammar: Subordinate clause ("While I agree...") + parenthetical insertion.

- Why it works: This is a Band 7 position — specific, qualified, and clear.

[3] *The strongest argument for free tuition is that it removes financial barriers.*

- Function: Topic sentence for body paragraph 1.

- Grammar: Simple sentence with a noun clause.

- Why it works: States the paragraph's single idea in one sentence.

[4] *Talented students from low-income families are often deterred by the prospect of decades of debt, and this means that a country loses potential doctors, engineers, and teachers simply because of their parents' income.*

- Function: Extends the idea with a specific consequence.

- Vocabulary: "deterred," "prospect of decades of debt" — precise, natural.

- Grammar: Compound sentence with a "this means that" clause.

[5] *In countries such as Germany, where tuition is largely free, university enrollment among working-class students is noticeably higher than in countries with high fees.*

- Function: Concrete example (specific, plausible).

- Grammar: Relative clause ("where tuition is largely free") + comparative.

- Why it works: This is what "extend your ideas" means — not a statistic, but a specific, verifiable-style example.

[6] *Education, in this sense, is not just a private benefit but a public good: a better-educated population contributes more in taxes and requires less welfare support.*

- Function: Elevates the argument to a principle.

- Vocabulary: "public good," "contributes more in taxes."

- Grammar: "not just... but..." structure + colon to introduce explanation.

[7] *However, making university free for everyone is a blunt instrument.*

- Function: Transition to counter-argument.

- Vocabulary: "blunt instrument" — idiomatic and precise.

- Why it works: One word ("However") does the work of a whole sentence.

[8] *Wealthy families would receive the same subsidy as poor ones, which means public money is spent on those who do not need it.*

- Function: Develops the counter-argument.

- Grammar: Non-defining relative clause ("which means...").

[9] *A more targeted approach — means-tested grants, income-contingent loans, or scholarships — would direct limited resources to the students who genuinely need help.*

- Function: Proposes a solution.

- Vocabulary: "means-tested," "income-contingent" — Band 8-level precision.

- Grammar: Dash insertion + relative clause.

[10] *Moreover, free tuition does not address the deeper problem of unequal access to good schooling before university, which is often the real barrier for disadvantaged students.*

- Function: Adds a second layer to the counter-argument.

- Why it works: Shows depth of thought — the candidate sees beyond the surface issue.

[11] *In conclusion, while I strongly support removing financial obstacles to higher education, I believe the fairest and most efficient system is one that targets support at those who need it most, rather than making university free for all.*

- Function: Restates position with precision.

- Grammar: Subordinate clause + relative clause.

- Why it works: Does not introduce new ideas; restates the thesis clearly.

---

Scoring on the four criteria

Task Response: Band 7

- Addresses all parts: agrees cost shouldn't block students, disagrees with "free for all."

- Clear position throughout (paragraph 1, reinforced in paragraphs 2–3, restated in conclusion).

- Ideas extended with specific examples (Germany, means-tested grants).

- Why not Band 8? The position is clear but not *fully developed* in every dimension. A Band 8 would explore, e.g., the long-term fiscal trade-offs or the international competition for talent.

Coherence & Cohesion: Band 7

- Logical progression: intro → pro → con → conclusion.

- Paragraphs have clear topic sentences.

- Cohesive devices used naturally: "in this sense," "however," "moreover," "which means."

- Why not Band 8? Cohesion is strong but not "skilful" — a Band 8 would use more sophisticated referencing and substitution.

Lexical Resource: Band 7

- Range: "deterred," "blunt instrument," "means-tested," "income-contingent," "public good."

- Precision: collocations are correct ("removes financial barriers," "direct limited resources").

- Why not Band 8? A few items are still somewhat common ("strongest argument," "deeper problem"). Band 8 uses more uncommon, precise items throughout.

Grammatical Range & Accuracy: Band 7

- Range: simple, compound, complex (subordinate + relative clauses), parenthetical dashes.

- Accuracy: no errors in this essay.

- Why not Band 8? Range is good but not "wide" — no inversion, no cleft sentences, no sophisticated passive constructions.

Estimated overall: Band 7.0

---

How to push this essay to Band 8

1. Add a cleft or inversion: *"It is not free tuition itself that matters, but who ultimately pays for it."*

2. Use more precise, less common vocabulary: Replace "deeper problem" with "structural inequity"; replace "strongly support" with "wholeheartedly endorse."

3. Deepen the counter-argument: Discuss the *opportunity cost* — money spent on subsidizing wealthy students could fund primary education in underserved regions.

4. Add a concession + rebuttal: "Critics may argue that means-testing is administratively costly; however, the cost of such bureaucracy is trivial compared with the billions spent on universal subsidies."

5. Vary sentence openings: Avoid starting three sentences in a row with "The" or "A."

---