IELTS Writing Task 2 question types

What you need to answer

Decide how far you support free city transport as a way to reduce congestion and pollution. Keep both the proposed action and its purpose in view. An essay about public transport being useful does not yet answer whether it should be free.

One possible direction

I support making buses and trains affordable, but I only partly agree that removing fares is the best solution: unreliable services may still leave people dependent on cars.

This is one defensible direction. A different approach can work if it answers the instruction and is developed with relevant reasons.

Compare the reasoning

‘There are many kinds of transport’ opens a topic. ‘Free fares help only when the service is a practical alternative to driving’ begins an answer. Develop the second claim with a plausible commuter example.

Build a plan

1. Explain when free fares could persuade drivers to switch: the saving matters if a useful route already exists.
2. Explain the limit: a free bus that arrives too rarely may not replace a car journey. Compare fare removal with spending on reliability.
3. Conclude with the same qualified judgement about free transport, rather than switching to a general appeal to protect the environment.

Mistake to avoid

Partial agreement is a clear position when you explain its boundary. It is not the same as postponing your opinion or writing unrelated advantages and disadvantages. You do not need an equal number of paragraphs on each side.

What you need to answer

There are three jobs here: explain the case for academic subjects, explain the case for practical skills, and give your judgement about what universities should prioritise. Explaining a viewpoint fairly does not require agreeing with it.

One possible direction

Universities should preserve a strong academic foundation while using practical projects to help students apply what they learn.

This is one defensible direction. A different approach can work if it answers the instruction and is developed with relevant reasons.

Compare the reasoning

‘Some people like theory and others like practice’ repeats the disagreement. A developed comparison explains what each approach enables a student to do, then uses that reasoning to justify a course design.

Build a plan

1. Explain why academic knowledge matters beyond a first job: understanding principles can help graduates adapt when techniques change.
2. Explain why practical experience matters: a placement can reveal how those principles work under real constraints.
3. Make the relationship explicit: practical work should apply academic learning, so the two can support each other rather than compete for all course time.

Mistake to avoid

Do not spend the whole essay defending your preferred view and dismiss the other in one sentence. Also check the wording: if a different question only asks you to discuss views, follow that instruction rather than assuming every discussion task is identical.

What you need to answer

This question asks whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. Explain both, then compare their importance. Having two advantages and one disadvantage is not a reason by itself to decide the balance.

One possible direction

For work that can be done remotely, the continuing benefit of avoiding a daily commute can outweigh the difficulty of training new staff, provided teams keep regular opportunities to work together.

This is one defensible direction. A different approach can work if it answers the instruction and is developed with relevant reasons.

Compare the reasoning

If the instruction changed to ‘What are the advantages and disadvantages?’, the same examples could still work, but your main job would be to explain the benefits and drawbacks. The original ‘outweigh’ wording adds a comparative judgement. ‘This has good and bad sides’ does not supply it.

Build a plan

1. Develop a benefit: less commuting can give workers more control over time and widen the jobs available to people far from an office.
2. Develop a drawback: a new employee may find it harder to learn through informal questions and observation.
3. Weigh impact, frequency and possible remedies. Explain why a lasting saving may matter more when planned mentoring can reduce the training difficulty.

Mistake to avoid

A conditional answer still needs an overall decision. Do not use ‘it depends’ to avoid weighing the two sides, or quietly discuss only one group when the question concerns a wider development.

What you need to answer

Explain why children may spend more time on devices than outdoors, then explain what could encourage outdoor activity. This wording asks for causes and action; it does not ask for a general argument that all technology is harmful.

One possible direction

Convenient indoor entertainment and limited access to safe play spaces can discourage outdoor activity; families and local services can address those barriers together.

This is one defensible direction. A different approach can work if it answers the instruction and is developed with relevant reasons.

Compare the reasoning

‘Children use phones because they are popular’ largely repeats the situation. ‘A child without a safe place to play nearby can use a device without arranging travel or supervision’ explains a mechanism. The solution should respond to that mechanism.

Build a plan

1. Explain a cause as a chain: if nearby outdoor spaces feel unsafe, staying indoors becomes the easier option, where devices are readily available.
2. Match an action to that barrier: accessible supervised activities can make outdoor play a realistic choice. Say who would organise them and how children could attend.
3. Develop another connected response, such as a regular family outdoor routine, rather than listing bans that do not address access.

Mistake to avoid

Causes, problems and effects are different. A cause explains why something happens; an effect explains what follows. If your actual question asks for problems and solutions, describe the problems instead of automatically answering a causes question.

Asked about problems rather than causes? Compare the worked noise problems-and-solutions plan below.

What you need to answer

Explain what increasing traffic and construction noise can cause people to experience, then identify measures local authorities could take. The first part asks for problems resulting from noise. A paragraph explaining why cities have more traffic would answer a different question.

One possible direction

Repeated noise can disrupt rest and concentration; councils can respond by controlling when the loudest work happens and reducing avoidable traffic disturbance near homes.

This is one defensible direction. A different approach can work if it answers the instruction and is developed with relevant reasons.

Compare the reasoning

‘More residents are buying cars’ proposes a reason for increasing traffic. ‘Repeated noise interrupts a resident’s sleep and makes concentrating at work harder’ develops a resulting problem. Only the second directly answers the first part of this question; a cause may still help you explain why a particular measure is suitable.

Build a plan

1. Develop a problem through a specific situation: repeated late-night drilling can wake a resident, leaving them tired and less able to concentrate the following day. Explain the effect rather than merely calling noise bad.
2. Connect a measure to that situation: local authorities could enforce working-hour restrictions for routine construction, with a complaint route and an exception for essential repairs. Explain how changing the timing protects rest.
3. Develop another linked pair, such as heavy vehicles passing homes at night and carefully chosen route restrictions. Consider whether a proposal would simply move the disturbance to another residential street.

Mistake to avoid

‘The government should solve the problem’ does not identify a measure or its mechanism. Name the responsible actor and explain how the action addresses an effect you described. Do not promise a completely silent city or add invented medical statistics to make a hypothetical example sound authoritative.

Asked why a change is happening? Compare the causes-and-solutions example above.

What you need to answer

Answer two different questions: why workers may move, and whether their arrival is positive or negative for the towns receiving them. A benefit to a worker does not automatically establish a benefit to the town. Keep the reason for moving separate from the effect of the move.

One possible direction

Remote work lets some employees seek more living space or live nearer relatives without changing jobs. I consider their arrival broadly positive for receiving towns when housing and services can accommodate the extra demand, but rapid growth without that capacity can disadvantage existing residents.

This is one defensible direction. A different approach can work if it answers the instruction and is developed with relevant reasons.

Compare the reasoning

‘A worker moves to live near relatives’ explains the choice. ‘The worker gains family support’ describes a personal benefit. ‘The household’s spending helps keep a local shop open’ develops a possible benefit to the receiving town. Only the first and third directly perform the two jobs this question sets.

Build a plan

1. Explain a reason: if an employee no longer travels to the office every day, living farther away can become practical. They may choose a town for family support or a suitable home; do not assume every small town is cheaper.
2. Evaluate a local benefit: new households may spend in shops and use a struggling bus service, helping those services remain available to existing residents. Make the connection to the receiving town explicit.
3. Weigh that benefit against a local pressure: where rental homes are already scarce, stronger demand may make finding a home harder for existing residents. Conclude that the balance depends on how quickly arrivals grow relative to housing and service capacity, while retaining your overall judgement.

Mistake to avoid

Do not replace the evaluation with a list of reasons people prefer small towns. Also avoid turning the answer into a solutions essay: a short condition about housing can support your judgement, but a long programme of policies would crowd out the requested reasons and effects. Positive or negative asks for an overall evaluation, not a claim that every town experiences the same outcome.

What you need to answer

Identify the two audiences carefully: the first question asks about benefits to students, and the second asks what universities can do to encourage participation. A paragraph only about benefits to local residents would miss the first focus.

One possible direction

Volunteering can help students practise communication outside their course, while universities can increase participation by offering accessible placements that fit study schedules.

This is one defensible direction. A different approach can work if it answers the instruction and is developed with relevant reasons.

Compare the reasoning

One useful planning test is to complete two separate sentences: ‘Students benefit because…’ and ‘Universities can encourage them by…’. If both notes answer only the first question, change the plan before writing.

Build a plan

1. Explain a student benefit with a concrete example: helping at a community event requires listening to unfamiliar people and giving clear instructions.
2. Explain an action a university can take: advertise short placements with clear responsibilities and times, reducing uncertainty for a first-time volunteer.
3. Check that the second paragraph explains how the action encourages participation, not just why volunteering is valuable again.

Mistake to avoid

Two-part is a useful study label, not a universal essay structure. ‘Why does this happen, and is it positive or negative?’ needs an explanation plus an evaluation. ‘What difficulties arise, and how can providers help?’ needs difficulties plus responses. Read the actual verbs.