IELTS guide
Build an answer to the question you receive: identify its demands, develop relevant ideas and check the complete response. This guide combines official requirements with a full original, unscored essay and practical revision tasks.
English AIdol · Published · Updated
Prepared with AI assistance and published by English AIdol. No human expert review is claimed.
What this guide covers
Both test versions ask for an essay of at least 250 words. IELTS recommends about 40 minutes for Task 2 within the 60-minute Writing test; this is an allocation, not a separate timer. Complete both tasks: Task 2 carries twice the weight. Submit connected prose, not notes or bullet points. IELTS Academic Writing format; IELTS General Training Writing format.
Academic Task 2 uses an academic or semi-formal/neutral style. General Training Task 2 is a semi-formal/neutral discursive essay; the personal-letter option belongs to General Training Task 1. The same Task 2 assessment criteria apply to both versions. IELTS Writing band descriptors (PDF).
Writing more than 250 words is not itself penalised, but extra length can leave less time for checking or introduce irrelevant material. There is no official optimal word range. Practise completing a relevant response and reviewing it within your allocation, rather than stretching it to an invented target.
The labels below are common preparation patterns, not five exhaustive test categories or fixed templates. IELTS guidance on understanding Task 2 prompts emphasises interpreting the instruction rather than matching a learned answer to a category. Check the topic’s scope, every instruction and every named group.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Decide the extent of your agreement and justify it. Qualified agreement is possible, but explain the boundary rather than presenting an unexplained change of view.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Explain both views and your judgement. You can state your position early and develop it throughout; do not save an unsupported opinion for the final sentence.
What are the advantages and disadvantages? / Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
Read the actual wording. An outweigh question needs a comparison and a judgement as well as discussion of both sides. Simply counting points does not explain which effects matter more.
What causes this? / What problems arise? / What solutions can you suggest?
Causes explain why something happens; problems describe its harmful effects. They are not interchangeable. Answer the requested combination and connect proposed solutions to the issue identified.
Why is this happening? Is it a positive or negative development?
Make a checklist of every question and named group. A response about causes alone would leave the evaluation unanswered. The two answers need relevant development, not necessarily equal word counts.
For example, “effects on individuals and society” asks about two levels. A paragraph only about personal convenience does not also explain a social effect. Underline those separate demands before drafting.
An introduction, developed body paragraphs and a conclusion are useful planning elements. Choose the number and length of paragraphs for the argument. IELTS’s descriptors assess organisation and development, not a universal four-paragraph formula. No required sentence count, paragraph word quota or compulsory forward-looking conclusion is specified.
This is English AIdol planning advice, not a scoring algorithm. The five-paragraph example below uses a separate judgement paragraph. A writer could integrate that reasoning into the other body paragraphs instead if the result remained clear and complete.
The four criteria are equally weighted within Task 2; the task score is their average. IELTS scoring in detail. The checks below are teaching questions, not replacements for the IELTS Writing band descriptors (PDF).
| Criterion | A practical review question |
|---|---|
| Task Response | Does the response answer the actual questions, maintain a relevant position and explain its supporting ideas? Identify a reason or example that needs a clearer connection to the claim. |
| Coherence and Cohesion | Can a reader follow the argument within and between paragraphs? Check the purpose of each paragraph, what pronouns refer to and whether a linking phrase expresses the real relationship. |
| Lexical Resource | Do words convey the intended meaning in this context? Check precision, combinations such as allocate a budget, spelling and word formation instead of replacing every repeated noun. |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | Do sentence forms express relationships clearly and accurately? Check clause boundaries, agreement and punctuation; vary structures where the meaning calls for it rather than adding complexity everywhere. |
The published descriptors include a Band 1 rule for responses of 20 words or fewer, with separate Band 0 conditions for specified cases such as no attempt. Meeting the minimum length does not establish a band. Use the full descriptors instead of assigning one fixed score from paragraph count, a linking phrase or a short checklist.
AI comments and bands are unofficial estimates and may be wrong. Compare suggestions with the prompt, your actual sentences and the criteria. Activity and feedback limits depend on the current plan.
The prompt, response and comments are original English AIdol teaching material prepared with AI assistance. They are not official or recalled IELTS questions. No examiner band or human expert review is claimed. The people and situations are illustrative, not research findings.
Some people think public libraries should spend more of their budget on digital resources, while others believe printed books should remain their priority. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include relevant examples. Write at least 250 words.
Public libraries face a choice about how much of their budget to devote to digital materials and how much to printed books. Although online resources can make a library more convenient, I believe that maintaining a useful print collection should remain a priority, with digital expansion guided by local needs.
There is a strong argument for investing more in digital access. A person who works evening shifts, for example, might be unable to visit during opening hours but could read an electronic book at home. Digital borrowing could also help someone who has little space to store books. For these readers, additional online resources would extend access beyond the library building, provided that they have suitable devices and an internet connection.
However, making printed books a secondary concern could exclude other residents. Readers without reliable internet access still need materials they can borrow and use independently. Parents may also value being able to browse picture books with their children before choosing one. If a library allowed its printed collection to become outdated or worn, offering more digital titles would not necessarily meet these visitors’ needs.
For this reason, I would protect funding for replacing useful printed books while setting aside money for digital services that residents actually use. A library could examine borrowing patterns and ask visitors which resources they cannot currently obtain. Where demand for electronic materials is strong, it could expand that collection without abandoning essential printed titles. This approach makes the budget decision depend on access needs rather than a preference for one technology.
In conclusion, digital resources can widen access, but they should complement a maintained print collection. Public libraries should decide where to invest by considering who benefits and who might otherwise be left out.
These comments explain the argument’s design. They do not establish how an examiner would rate the complete essay.
“Digital resources can widen access” follows the second paragraph; “complement a maintained print collection” follows the third and fourth. A new final claim about raising taxes would need development earlier in the essay. More elaborate vocabulary would not supply that missing argument.
Keep exact topic words when they are useful. “Digital resources” and “printed books” are not interchangeable with “technology” and “education”: the broader terms can lose the budget question’s scope. Learn combinations such as allocate funding, maintain a collection and meet readers’ needs in complete sentences. No fixed number of uncommon words or complex sentences earns a band.
Change the library prompt to: “What are the advantages and disadvantages of increasing spending on digital resources?” Write the two demands your plan must address. Would an essay about the causes of library closures answer this task?
Explain benefits and drawbacks of increased digital spending. Causes of library closures answer a different question. This wording does not ask for an outweigh judgement, so do not replace the required analysis with one unsupported verdict.
Keep the original discuss-both-views prompt, but favour greater digital investment. Write a new thesis and identify which body paragraph must change most.
One possible thesis: “Libraries should retain a basic print collection, but I would give additional funding to digital resources when this reaches residents who cannot visit.” Revise the policy paragraph to explain why the extra digital access deserves priority; keep fair discussion of both views and make the conclusion match.
Revise: “Digital books are better because research proves that everybody likes them.” Add a specific possible user and a limitation instead of a made-up research claim.
For example: “A shift worker might benefit from electronic borrowing outside library hours, provided that they have a suitable device.” The narrower claim identifies a mechanism and a condition. It does not claim measured popularity or prove that digital books are better for everyone.
After writing a fresh response, record one specific issue, quote the affected sentence, make a revision and explain why it better answers the task. Then try a different prompt without copying the example. The Writing revision workshop offers another paragraph-level exercise.
Official sources checked on . This guide was prepared with AI assistance and is published by English AIdol. No human expert review or IELTS endorsement is claimed. Sources establish the exam requirements; the original essay, planning suggestions and exercises are our teaching material.
It is an essay responding to an opinion, argument or problem in Academic and General Training IELTS. Write at least 250 words. IELTS recommends about 40 minutes within the 60-minute Writing test; Task 2 is not separately timed and carries twice the weight of Task 1.
Use a structure that answers the exact question and develops a clear argument. An introduction, purposeful body paragraphs and a conclusion are useful planning elements, but there is no official fixed paragraph count or word allocation. Four paragraphs are one option, not a universal template.
Task Response, Coherence and Cohesion, Lexical Resource, and Grammatical Range and Accuracy are equally weighted. The task score averages the four criteria; Task 2 then contributes twice as much as Task 1 to the Writing result. Use the full published descriptors rather than awarding a band from one feature.
The instruction requires at least 250 words, and a shorter answer may not provide enough development or language evidence. The published descriptors include a Band 1 rule for responses of 20 words or fewer, alongside separate Band 0 conditions. Do not assume one fixed band for every other under-length response; assess the whole response against the criteria.
No. IELTS allows relevant examples from your knowledge or experience and advises against made-up statistics and research. Explain how an example supports your point. A possible situation can illustrate reasoning when clearly framed as possible; it is not evidence of a measured real-world outcome.
Yes, a phrase such as “I believe” can state your position clearly. An impersonal construction can also work. Neither choice earns a band by itself; use an appropriate style and support the position rather than treating a phrase as a substitute for reasoning.
Practise ways to develop and connect ideas, but answer the wording in front of you. A memorised response may miss the task, and unfamiliar words can introduce errors. Learn useful word combinations in sentences and check their meaning rather than meeting an invented vocabulary quota.
No band is assigned. The prompt, essay and teaching comments are original English AIdol material prepared with AI assistance. They are not official or recalled IELTS questions and have not been assessed by an IELTS examiner. The explanations show choices, not validated scores.
No. AI comments and bands are unofficial practice estimates and may be wrong. Check comments against the essay and published criteria, revise a specific weakness, and use appropriate human feedback when you need a qualified assessment.