IELTS Writing Task 2 asks you to discuss a point of view, an argument or a problem in at least 250 words in about 40 minutes. It contributes twice as much as Task 1 to your Writing band, and it must be continuous prose — bullet points are not permitted.
There are five question types and each has a different structure. Writing the wrong structure for the question is the most common way a well-written essay lands at band 6.
|
Want to FINALLY Pass the IELTS Academic Test And Reach Your Goals? Get Your FREE Lume Account Today to Unlock… ✅ 10,000+ PRACTICE QUESTIONS with detailed answers ✅ FREE MOCK TESTS with fast & accurate AI scoring ✅ Get BETTER SCORES with a PERSONALIZED study plan (Limited seats available!) |
| Type | Typical wording | What you must do |
|---|---|---|
| Opinion (agree or disagree) | To what extent do you agree or disagree? | State a clear position and defend it throughout |
| Discussion | Discuss both views and give your own opinion. | Present both sides, then your position |
| Advantages and disadvantages | What are the advantages and disadvantages? / Do the benefits outweigh the drawbacks? | Both sides, and a verdict if the question asks for one |
| Problem and solution | What problems does this cause and how could they be addressed? | Problems in one paragraph, solutions in another, linked |
| Two-part question | Two direct questions in the prompt | Answer both, roughly equally |
Read the final sentence of the prompt twice. That is where the instruction lives, and it is what task response is marked against.
| Paragraph | Content | Words |
|---|---|---|
| Introduction | Paraphrase the statement, then state your position unambiguously | 40-50 |
| Body 1 | Your strongest reason, developed with explanation and one example | 90-110 |
| Body 2 | Your second reason, or the opposing argument answered | 90-110 |
| Conclusion | Restate the position; add nothing new | 30-40 |
|
Introduction: It is sometimes argued that [paraphrased statement]. While [brief concession to the other side], I believe that [your position], primarily because [reason 1] and [reason 2]. Body 1: The principal reason for this view is that [reason 1]. [Two or three sentences of explanation showing the mechanism.] [Country / sector] offers a clear illustration: [specific example]. Body 2: A second consideration is [reason 2]. [Explanation.] Those who disagree tend to argue that [counter-argument], but this overlooks [your answer to it]. Conclusion: In conclusion, although [concession], the evidence points towards [your position], for the reasons of [reason 1] and [reason 2] set out above. |
“To what extent do you agree” allows a partial position, but partial is not the same as vague. “I largely agree, with one exception” is a position; “there are arguments on both sides” is not.
|
Introduction: [Topic] divides opinion. Some argue that [view A], while others maintain that [view B]. This essay considers both positions before concluding that [your view]. Body 1: The case for [view A] rests on [main argument]. [Explanation.] [Example.] Body 2: Those who take the opposite view point to [main argument]. [Explanation.] [Example.] Conclusion: On balance, I find [view A or B] the more convincing, because [the decisive reason]. |
The instruction “and give your own opinion” is not optional. An essay that presents both views neutrally and ends without a position is incomplete under task response, however well written.
|
Introduction: [Paraphrased situation] has become increasingly common. This essay examines its principal benefits and drawbacks, and argues that [the benefits outweigh the drawbacks / the reverse]. Body 1: The clearest advantage is [advantage]. [Explanation of who benefits and how.] [Example.] A further benefit is [second advantage], though it is less significant. Body 2: Against this, [disadvantage] represents a real cost. [Explanation.] [Example.] [Second disadvantage] compounds the problem where [condition]. Conclusion: While [disadvantage] should not be dismissed, [advantage] affects more people more directly, and on that basis the benefits are the greater. |
| Wording of the prompt | What the conclusion must do |
|---|---|
| “What are the advantages and disadvantages?” | Summarise both; a verdict is optional |
| “Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?” | Answer yes or no explicitly |
| “Discuss the advantages and disadvantages and give your opinion.” | Both sides plus a stated position |
|
Introduction: [Paraphrased situation] presents a growing difficulty in many countries. This essay identifies the main problems it causes and proposes measures to address them. Body 1: The most serious consequence is [problem 1]. [Explanation of the mechanism and who is affected.] In addition, [problem 2], which tends to fall hardest on [group]. Body 2: [Problem 1] could be reduced by [solution 1]. [How it would work, and why it addresses that specific problem.] Tackling [problem 2] would require [solution 2], although this depends on [condition]. Conclusion: [Problem area] is unlikely to disappear, but [solution 1] and [solution 2] would substantially reduce its effects. |
Each solution must attach to a named problem. Listing three problems and then three unrelated solutions is the standard way this essay type loses coherence marks.
|
Introduction: [Paraphrased context]. This essay considers [question 1 restated] and then [question 2 restated]. Body 1: Turning first to [question 1], the main factor is [answer]. [Explanation.] [Example.] Body 2: As for [question 2], [answer]. [Explanation.] [Example.] Conclusion: In short, [one-clause answer to question 1] and [one-clause answer to question 2]. |
Give both parts roughly equal space. Answering one thoroughly and the other in a sentence is a task response problem, not a length problem.
Prompt: Some people believe that governments should invest in public transport rather than building new roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
|
It is often argued that public money is better spent on buses and railways than on new road capacity. While there are places where road building remains necessary, I largely agree with this view, because additional road capacity tends to generate the traffic it was built to relieve, and because public transport serves people who cannot drive at all. The central argument concerns induced demand. When a congested route is widened, journeys that were previously deterred by delay become worthwhile again, and within a few years the new capacity fills. This is not a marginal effect: studies of urban motorway expansion have repeatedly found traffic growth close to the additional capacity provided, which means the congestion problem returns while the construction cost has already been paid. Public transport investment does not work in the same way, because a fuller train is a functioning train, whereas a fuller road is a slower one. The second argument is distributional. A substantial proportion of any population does not drive — the young, the elderly, those with disabilities that preclude driving, and those who simply cannot afford a car. Road spending delivers nothing to these groups directly, whereas a bus route reaching a peripheral estate changes what its residents can reach: jobs, hospitals, training. Investment in roads, in other words, benefits those who already have the most mobility. There is a legitimate counter-argument. In sparsely populated regions, public transport cannot achieve the frequency that makes it useful, and a road may genuinely be the only viable connection. I would accept that as a real exception rather than a general case, since the congestion that prompts most road schemes is an urban phenomenon, and it is precisely in cities that public transport works best. In conclusion, while rural connectivity can justify road building, the case for prioritising public transport in urban areas is strong: it avoids the self-defeating logic of induced demand and it reaches people whom road spending cannot help. |
313 words. A clear position in the introduction, one idea per paragraph, a counter-argument that is answered rather than merely mentioned, and a conclusion that adds nothing new.
| Function | Overused | Better |
|---|---|---|
| Adding | Moreover, Furthermore, In addition | The second argument concerns… / A further consideration is… |
| Contrasting | On the other hand | Against this… / There is a legitimate counter-argument… |
| Giving an example | For example | [Country] offers a clear illustration… / Take the case of… |
| Concluding | In conclusion (fine once) | In conclusion — but only once, in the final paragraph |
| Sequencing | Firstly, Secondly, Thirdly | Turning first to… / As for… |
Coherence and cohesion marks the logical flow, not the density of connectives. An essay opening every paragraph with “Moreover” is penalised for mechanical linking, not rewarded for signposting.
| Error | Criterion | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Not answering the exact question asked | Task response — the heaviest penalty | Re-read the final sentence of the prompt before planning |
| No clear position where one is required | Task response | State it in the introduction and repeat it in the conclusion |
| Two ideas in one paragraph | Coherence and cohesion | One central idea per body paragraph |
| Memorised phrases and sentences | Lexical resource | Prepare structures, not sentences |
| Under 250 words | Penalised directly | Target 280-320 |
| Bullet points or note form | Not acceptable in Task 2 | Continuous prose only |
| New arguments in the conclusion | Coherence and cohesion | The conclusion restates; it does not extend |
| Invented statistics | Credibility, and often accuracy of expression | Use named cases and mechanisms rather than fake figures |
The five minutes of planning is the highest-value time in the whole hour. An essay with two clear ideas and an example each will outscore a longer essay with five undeveloped points every time.
At least 250, with 280 to 320 as the practical target. Falling short of 250 attracts a penalty, and going far beyond 350 in 40 minutes usually costs accuracy rather than gaining anything.
About 40 minutes of the 60-minute Writing test, because Task 2 contributes twice as much to the Writing band as Task 1. Five of those minutes should go on planning.
Only when the prompt asks for one — and when it does, an essay without a clear position is incomplete under task response. “Discuss both views and give your own opinion” and “to what extent do you agree” both require a stated position.
No. Task 2 must be written in continuous prose. Notes and bullet points are not acceptable and will be penalised.
Invented examples are fine and normal — the examiner is not fact-checking you. Invented statistics are a bad trade: they add nothing to any of the four criteria and often produce awkward sentences. Named cases and explained mechanisms do the same job better.
On four equally weighted criteria: task response, coherence and cohesion, lexical resource, and grammatical range and accuracy. Task response is where structural errors such as answering a different question or omitting a required opinion do the most damage.
|
Want to FINALLY Pass the IELTS Academic Test And Reach Your Goals? Get Your FREE Lume Account Today to Unlock… ✅ 10,000+ PRACTICE QUESTIONS with detailed answers ✅ FREE MOCK TESTS with fast & accurate AI scoring ✅ Get BETTER SCORES with a PERSONALIZED study plan (Limited seats available!) |
Share
Lume Test
Editor
Lume Test is a leading platform offering practice questions and mock tests for major English exams like PTE, IELTS, TOEIC, Duolingo English Test, and more. We provide up-to-date, comprehensive materials designed to help learners improve their language skills and achieve high scores. With expert-crafted tests that closely mirror real exam formats, Lume Test ensures you're fully prepared for success. Your goals are our mission!
