How to use band-score samples honestly
A band-score sample is most useful when it helps you see why a response works at a particular level. It is not a script to memorise, a vocabulary list, or a promise that copying its shape will produce the same result. IELTS examiners judge the response you write for the exact task in front of you. Your score reflects the quality of that whole response.
IELTS Writing uses four equally weighted criteria for each task: Task Achievement for Task 1 or Task Response for Task 2, Coherence and Cohesion, Lexical Resource, and Grammatical Range and Accuracy. Task 2 contributes more to the overall Writing score than Task 1. A response can therefore be stronger in one area and weaker in another. A neat conclusion cannot rescue undeveloped ideas, while one spelling error does not automatically define the entire band.
Official candidate materials are valuable because some include examiner comments showing the evidence behind a score. Read the writing first, make your own notes, and only then read the comment. The short comparison samples on this page are original teaching examples. They isolate particular differences so you can practise them; they are not official scripts or guaranteed scores.
What changes as a response moves upward
Main parts are addressed, key features or ideas are selected, and claims are explained with relevant detail.
Paragraphs have a clear purpose, information progresses logically, and links express real relationships.
Words fit the meaning and register. Repetition is managed without awkward synonyms or memorised phrases.
Sentence forms vary because the ideas require it, and errors interfere less with clarity.
These changes work together. If a writer explains an idea more fully, the paragraph often becomes more coherent because each sentence has a clear job. Precise vocabulary reduces the need for vague repetition. Better sentence control helps the writer express cause, contrast and limitation accurately. This is why you should not study each criterion as an isolated box.
A practical comparison method
- Read the task.
Underline every instruction and any important limit such as a time period, group, place or degree of opinion.
- Read the sample once for meaning.
Do not count linking words. Ask what the writer’s main message is and whether it answers the task.
- Map the content.
Give each paragraph a five-word label. If you cannot, its purpose may be unclear or it may contain unrelated ideas.
- Find the support.
Mark where a main idea is explained, illustrated, compared or qualified. An assertion alone is not development.
- Inspect language in context.
Look for words and sentence patterns that make the meaning exact. Also mark errors that repeat or make reading difficult.
- Choose one transferable improvement.
Rewrite a paragraph from your own work. Do not copy the sample’s topic language.
Task 2 comparison: the same position at three levels
Some people think universities should mainly teach skills needed for employment. Others believe university education should have a wider purpose. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
All three teaching samples below take the same position: employment matters, but a university should also develop wider intellectual abilities. The differences lie in how fully and precisely that position is delivered.
Universities are important for jobs because students need skills. Many companies want people who can do the work quickly. For example, computer students should learn computer programs. However, university is also for knowledge and this can help society. Students can learn many subjects and become better people. In my opinion, job skills are important, but other knowledge is important too.
Supporters of employment-focused degrees argue that graduates need practical abilities that allow them to enter work without lengthy additional training. Engineering students, for instance, benefit from using current design software and completing team projects similar to those used by employers. Nevertheless, universities also have a broader role. By evaluating evidence and encountering unfamiliar viewpoints, students learn to question weak claims and make responsible decisions. I therefore believe career preparation should be an important part of a degree, but not its only purpose.
Employment is a legitimate priority because students invest considerable time and money in a degree. Courses should therefore expose them to current professional tools, collaborative projects and realistic constraints. Yet designing every subject around an employer’s immediate needs would be short-sighted: particular software can become obsolete, whereas the ability to test evidence, learn independently and communicate a defensible judgement remains useful across careers. In my view, universities serve students best when practical experience is built upon this broader intellectual foundation.
A higher-level response is not simply longer. It makes relationships explicit and spends words on reasoning rather than repeated claims. It also controls the strength of its statements. “Would be short-sighted” is a defensible judgement; “will destroy education” would be exaggerated and harder to support.
Task 1 comparison: reporting data without listing it
A town survey records the percentage of commuters using cars, buses and bicycles in 2005 and 2025. Cars fall from 68% to 49%, buses rise from 22% to 31%, and bicycles rise from 10% to 20%.
The chart shows transport in two years. Cars were 68% and then 49%. Buses were 22% and then 31%. Bicycles were 10% and then 20%.
This lists figures but does not summarise the main pattern. The reader must work out the change.Overall, cars remained the most common form of transport despite a substantial decline, while both alternatives gained users. Cycling was still the least popular option in 2025, although its share doubled.
This selects the dominant category, overall direction and a notable proportional change without crowding the overview with every number.For Academic Task 1, a clear overview is central to Task Achievement. A strong overview does not need to mention everything. It identifies the most important patterns, changes or stages. Details then support those patterns with carefully chosen figures. Accuracy matters: a rise from 10% to 20% is a doubling, but it is an increase of 10 percentage points, not 10 percent.
Detail paragraph at two levels
Cars decreased by 19%. Buses increased by 9%. Bikes increased by 10%. Cars were higher than buses and bikes.
The data is relevant, but “by 19%” is ambiguous and the comparisons are basic.Car use fell by 19 percentage points, from 68% to just under half of commuters. Over the same period, the bus share climbed moderately to 31%, while cycling experienced the faster proportional growth, doubling to one fifth.
Related changes are grouped, units are accurate, and comparison language reflects the size and type of change.Task 1 General Training: tone can change the level
In a letter task, content and tone must fit the relationship and purpose. Imagine you are writing to a hotel manager after noise prevented you from sleeping.
Your hotel was terrible and you must give all my money back now. I am very angry because nobody did anything.
The purpose is clear, but the tone is aggressive, the request is inflexible, and the complaint lacks useful detail.I am writing to complain about persistent noise outside room 214 on 16 May. Although I contacted reception twice, the disturbance continued until after 2 a.m. I would therefore appreciate a partial refund and confirmation of how similar complaints will be handled.
The writer states the purpose, supplies relevant circumstances and makes a proportionate request in a formal register.Higher-level writing is not always more formal. A letter to a close friend should sound warm and natural. The important skill is consistent appropriacy: choosing language that suits the reader, situation and purpose.
Common mistakes when chasing a higher band
- Replacing every simple word. “Use” can be more accurate than “utilise.” Precision matters more than rarity.
- Adding memorised introductions. A polished general statement may delay or obscure the actual answer.
- Forcing complex sentences. A long sentence with unclear control is not stronger than two accurate sentences.
- Counting connectors. “Moreover” cannot create progression if the next idea does not logically follow.
- Inventing statistics. Task 2 examples can come from knowledge or experience; unsupported exact figures often sound artificial.
- Ignoring one part of the prompt. Fluent discussion of half the task remains incomplete.
- Copying a Band 9 model. Memorised language may not fit a new topic and can hide the skill you actually need to practise.
- Editing only grammar. Accuracy helps, but weak selection, development or organisation also limits performance.
Use examiner comments without guessing your score
Examiner comments are evidence reports. Separate them by criterion and convert each observation into an action. If a comment says that ideas are relevant but insufficiently developed, the useful action is not “learn harder words.” It is to add the missing explanation: why the claim is true, how the effect happens, who is affected, or under what condition it applies.
Write your position in one sentence, then check that each body paragraph and conclusion supports it.
Label the job of every sentence and move or remove anything that interrupts the reasoning.
Replace vague nouns such as “things” with the exact person, action, policy or result you mean.
Find the two repeating error patterns in your work and practise those forms in short, accurate sentences.
Do not assign yourself a band from one paragraph. Official descriptors describe performance across a complete response, and trained examiners make the judgement. Use descriptors to guide revision and feedback, not to manufacture certainty.
Exercises: turn comparison into improvement
- Coverage check.
Choose a two-part Task 2 question. Write one direct answer to each part, then combine them into a thesis without losing either answer.
- Development ladder.
Write a claim. Add why it happens, a realistic illustration, and one condition or limitation. Remove any sentence that merely repeats the claim.
- Overview choice.
Take a chart and list five observations. Circle only the two or three that best summarise the whole visual, then write an overview without numbers.
- Precision edit.
Find five vague words in an old response—people, things, good, bad, big—and replace only those that have a clearer exact meaning.
- Sentence control.
Underline your longest three sentences. Check subjects, verbs and punctuation. Split any sentence whose relationship cannot be understood on the first reading.
- Blind comparison.
Read two anonymous samples before seeing comments. Record evidence under all four criteria, then compare your observations with the official explanation.
A final checklist for studying samples
- I read the exact task before the response.
- I identified every required part.
- I can state the writer’s position or overview.
- I traced how each paragraph contributes.
- I found where ideas or features are supported.
- I noticed precise language in context.
- I marked repeated errors, not isolated slips only.
- I compared all four criteria.
- I chose one change for my own writing.
- I did not copy topic phrases or memorised sentences.
References
Compare, diagnose, rewrite
Make the next version measurably clearer
Practise a complete response, then revise one criterion with evidence.