IELTS scoring guide
Understand what examiners assess, compare original revision examples, and choose a focused exercise for your next answer.
Each writing task is assessed for its response to the task, organisation, vocabulary and grammar. The first criterion is called Task achievement for Task 1 and Task response for Task 2. These are alternatives for different tasks, not two extra marks on the same answer. The other three criteria apply to both.
Within one task, the four criterion scores have equal weight. For example, hypothetical scores of 6, 7, 6 and 7 have a mean of 6.5. This illustrates the arithmetic only; it does not assign a band to a sentence or show how an examiner would assess your writing. Task 2 contributes twice as much as Task 1 to the Writing result, so practise both rather than treating the essay as the whole test.
The official band descriptors describe performance across a whole response. A short extract cannot prove a band, and no fixed number of connectors, advanced words or complex sentences guarantees a score. See IELTS scoring in detail for the official criteria and linked assessment descriptors. The official Writing format explains the task weighting.
The official descriptors assess a complete Task 2 response. This comparison focuses on Task Response alone; vocabulary, grammar and organisation receive their own scores. The extracts below demonstrate revision choices, not assessed bands.
The main parts are answered, but some may receive more attention than others. The position is relevant, while its conclusions may be unclear or insufficiently justified. Some relevant ideas may need fuller explanation or better support.
The main parts are dealt with appropriately and the position is clear and developed. Main ideas are explained and supported, although some generalisation or imprecise support may remain.
Brief paraphrase of the Task 2 rows in the official IELTS Writing band descriptors (PDF). These are features to review across your answer, not a checklist that automatically awards a band.
Some people think public libraries should focus mainly on books, while others believe they should provide a wider range of community services. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
A plan with a developed paragraph about access to books and only “other services are useful too” mentions both sides but leaves the second view unexplained. Equal word counts are not required. Each view needs a reason that makes sense in this question, and your opinion must follow the reasoning.
“Libraries should offer more services because they help people. Computer classes are useful for the community, so libraries should provide them.”
“Help” and “useful” repeat the benefit without explaining it. The example names a service but leaves the reader to supply how it helps.
“Basic computer sessions can extend a library’s role in helping people find information. A resident who cannot use an online catalogue, for example, could learn to locate a book and reserve it independently. Small scheduled sessions could provide that support while keeping quiet reading space available.”
The revision identifies a need, explains what the service changes and connects it to the library’s existing purpose. The final sentence addresses a possible conflict with readers rather than promising unlimited services.
A position that fits this plan is: “Libraries should keep book access at their centre while offering selected services that help residents use information.” Develop the books-focused view elsewhere in the essay, including why collection space and quiet study matter. An ending that replaces books entirely would contradict this argument; an ending that simply says “both views are correct” would leave the priorities unclear.
Revise this note before opening the suggestion: “Books should remain the priority because reading is important.” Explain who benefits from a lending collection and how. Then check whether the reason fits the qualified opinion above.
“A lending collection gives residents access to books they may not be able to buy. A parent, for example, can borrow a changing selection for a child without paying for each title. Protecting the book budget therefore preserves a benefit that extra services should complement.”
This is an illustrative situation, not a research claim. It explains access and supports the stated priority. It still needs to sit within a complete answer that discusses the other view.
For Academic Task 1, an overview helps the reader see the main picture before examining selected figures. The Band 6/7 distinction concerns the whole report; improving one overview does not establish its score. General Training letters have different task requirements.
Selected key features are covered, with supporting figures. Some detail may be inaccurate, excessive or insufficiently developed.
The overview is clear, information is grouped appropriately, and major patterns or contrasts are identified. Relevant, accurate coverage may still contain a few omissions or need fuller illustration.
This is a brief paraphrase of the Academic Task 1 guidance in the official IELTS Writing descriptors (PDF). It does not replace the complete criteria.
Use the data below from our original practice chart. It compares daily litres per person for four purposes in 2005 and 2025. These are fictional teaching data. You can also view the complete chart and question.
These figures belong to the original English Test Coach practice visual. They are fictional teaching data, not measured statistics about real places.
| Purpose | 2005 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Kitchen | 35 | 30 |
| Bathroom | 70 | 60 |
| Laundry | 45 | 40 |
| Garden | 25 | 50 |
The measure is litres per person per day, not total town consumption. Garden use doubles while the other three categories fall; the visual does not supply reasons for those changes.
“Overall, water use changed for several purposes. Use increased in one area and decreased elsewhere.”
The reader cannot tell which category rose, how that differs from the rest or which remained largest. More elaborate synonyms would not supply the missing information.
“Overall, garden water use was the only category to increase, while daily use for the other three purposes fell. Bathrooms remained the largest category, although garden use moved from the smallest to the second largest.”
This gives the direction of change, the exception and the main ranking. It groups related movements instead of reproducing all eight values.
“Garden use doubled from 25 to 50 litres per person per day, whereas bathroom use fell from 70 to 60 litres. Kitchen and laundry use each decreased by 5 litres, ending at 30 and 40 litres respectively.”
The detail checks the overview: 50 is below the bathroom figure of 60 but above laundry at 40 and kitchens at 30. A claim that garden use became the largest would contradict the source. Keep the per-person unit; these values do not establish total consumption for the town or explain the reasons for the changes.
No. Here, the equal 5-litre falls in kitchens and laundry are useful supporting detail. The overview can group them with the bathroom decrease, then highlight the garden exception and ranking. Another accurate selection is possible; the aim is a clear main picture, not a memorised sentence or fixed number of features.
A letter needs to do the job set by the question. Polished wording cannot replace an omitted request, explanation or invitation. These original extracts demonstrate revision decisions; they are not complete letters or assessed bands.
Every bullet point is addressed, the purpose is generally apparent and small inconsistencies in tone may occur.
Points are clearly foregrounded, purpose is explicit and tone stays appropriate, with only minimal lapses. Further development may still be possible.
Brief paraphrase of the General Training Task 1 rows in the official IELTS Writing descriptors (PDF). The complete response is assessed across four criteria; fixing one passage does not establish its band.
You recently ordered an item online, but it arrived damaged. Write a letter to the company. Describe the item, explain the damage, and state what you would like the company to do.
Identify the desk lamp and a useful distinguishing detail. A long account of shopping preferences would add less than information that helps the company identify the order.
Name the damaged part and its practical effect. “It is bad” leaves the reader unsure what happened or why the item cannot be used as intended.
Specify a replacement or other reasonable resolution. Disappointment alone does not tell the company which response you want.
“I bought a white desk lamp from your website last week. The base is cracked, and the shade will not stay in position. I am extremely disappointed with this purchase.”
The item and damage are identifiable. The intended action is still missing. Replacing “extremely disappointed” with a longer formal expression would not supply it.
“I am writing to request a replacement for the white adjustable desk lamp I ordered last week. Its base arrived cracked, and the loose joint means that the shade will not stay in position. Please arrange delivery of an undamaged lamp and collection of this one. If the model is unavailable, I would appreciate information about a refund instead.”
The request is visible at the start and developed at the end. The damage explains why it is needed. These fictional details support the task; a complete letter still needs appropriate development, format and sufficient length.
“Sort this mess out immediately!” shifts from a business complaint towards an angry command. “Please arrange a replacement and let me know how the damaged item will be collected” states a clear action without that shift. Formal writing does not require hiding the request behind “I hope something might possibly be done”.
The company relationship makes a formal tone appropriate here. A letter to a friend would need a different voice. Check the recipient in each question instead of applying complaint wording to every letter.
A draft identifies the lamp and asks for a replacement, but describes the problem only as “the item is unsatisfactory”. Write two sentences explaining a specific defect and its effect. Use fictional details that fit this question.
“The joint between the arm and the shade is loose. As a result, the shade drops whenever I adjust it and will not remain in the required position.”
The first sentence identifies the defect; the second explains its consequence. A different plausible detail can work too. Do not add real order references, addresses or account information to public practice.
An answer can contain correct linking words while making its reader jump between unrelated points. Review the route through the complete essay as well as the connections inside each paragraph. The original example below illustrates that review; it has not been assigned an IELTS band.
Ideas are generally arranged coherently, with an overall direction. Connections can still feel mechanical or unclear, and paragraph divisions or central topics may not always work well.
Organisation supports the reader across the response. Paragraphs generally do useful jobs and their ideas follow a logical sequence. References and other connections show flexibility, although minor lapses can remain.
Brief paraphrase of the Task 2 coherence and cohesion rows in the official IELTS Writing descriptors (PDF). Compare the complete criteria with a complete answer; counting connectors or fixing one paragraph cannot establish a score.
Some people believe governments should make unhealthy food more expensive. Others believe education is a better solution. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
The second and third paragraphs examine different approaches through a common question: can people realistically act on them? The access condition introduced at the start returns in both discussions and the conclusion. It connects the argument without requiring a transition phrase at every paragraph boundary. Another order could work if those relationships remained clear.
In paragraph 2, “However” moves from the possible appeal of higher prices to the limits on their effect. In paragraph 3, “These are skills” refers to planning meals, reading labels and using leftovers; the next sentence explains their wider application. “Nevertheless” then introduces the access and time constraints. These words have identifiable jobs. Replacing all three with “Moreover” would label different relationships as simple additions.
Keep the introduction and conclusion above, but change body paragraph 2 to “higher prices can discourage purchases, cooking lessons teach meal planning, and some people dislike vegetables.” Leave body paragraph 3 as the education discussion. What becomes harder to follow? Would adding “Furthermore” solve it?
The mixed paragraph jumps from a price mechanism to education and then to a preference whose relevance has not been explained. It also duplicates the next paragraph’s meal-planning discussion. Give the price paragraph a clearer focus, place the education detail with its explanation, and either develop the preference as a relevant constraint or remove it. An extra connector cannot supply the missing relationship.
This diagnosis concerns organisation. Whether each view is sufficiently explained also concerns Task Response; the criteria can reveal related weaknesses without becoming the same criterion.
For your own draft, write one job label beside each paragraph. Read those labels in order, trace references such as “these skills”, and check whether the conclusion follows that route. Use the existing paragraph-order exercise when the difficulty lies inside one paragraph.
A vocabulary list cannot show how well your language works in an essay. Read word choices in their sentence and argument: do they name the right thing, preserve the claim and suit the situation? Our original tool-library answer provides a worked review without a band label.
Vocabulary is generally suitable and meaning remains clear, but range or precise choice may be limited. Trying more ambitious language can introduce unsuitable combinations or meanings. Spelling and word-form errors may occur without blocking communication.
The available vocabulary allows some flexibility and precision, including some less common language. Awareness of style and word combinations is evident. Remaining spelling or word-form errors are few and do not reduce overall clarity.
Brief paraphrase of the Task 2 lexical resource rows in the official IELTS Writing descriptors (PDF). There is no list of required “Band 7 words”. The complete response matters, including appropriate usage.
Some communities provide libraries where residents can borrow tools and household equipment instead of buying their own. Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages?
The register stays suitable for a reasoned essay: concrete examples make the argument accessible, while phrases such as “when misuse is documented” qualify responsibility. They do not promise that supervision will prevent every problem. Vocabulary flexibility means choosing among accurate expressions, not changing the substance to avoid repetition.
A revision says: “Residents can purchase occasional-use items from the library, whose booking system guarantees that tools are always available.” Identify two meaning changes. Write a version that keeps temporary access and the remaining availability limit.
“Residents can borrow occasional-use items from the library, and its booking system helps them check availability before arranging a loan.”
“Purchase” changes borrowing into buying. “Guarantees” and “always” erase the original drawback that another resident may have reserved a tool. The revision preserves the service and explains what booking can do without promising universal availability. It is a new illustrative sentence, not a quotation from the complete sample.
Transfer the review to another topic: mark its key category, two specific examples and a term whose repetition keeps the argument clear. Check any synonym against the sentence’s intended meaning. For countability, collocation or word form, continue with the existing vocabulary-repair exercise.
Range is useful when different structures express different relationships clearly. Accuracy keeps those relationships intact. Compare these original descriptions of the first four stages in our simplified recycled-paper diagram: collection, sorting and plastic removal, mixing with water, then screening the pulp.
“Used paper is collected. It is sorted to remove plastic. The sorted material is mixed with water to form pulp. The pulp is then screened.”
The order is understandable and each statement is complete. Short sentences are useful; their length alone is not an error. Across a whole report, consider whether some related steps could be connected more efficiently.
“After used paper has been collected, it is sorted to remove plastic. The sorted material is then mixed with water to form pulp, which is screened in the next stage.”
The time clause connects collection to sorting. The relative clause adds the next step for the pulp. Both connections preserve the diagram’s sequence and the material being described.
“After used paper has been collected and sorted to remove plastic, it is mixed with water to form pulp, which is screened and then pressed before the sheet is dried, cut to size and finally packed.”
This sentence carries all eight stages. It is not automatically ungrammatical, but it gives the reader several material changes and operations to track without a pause. Split it after screening, then begin the next sentence with the wet pulp. The revision would make the preparation and finishing groups easier to follow without adding another grammatical feature.
These extracts do not establish a band. No quota of relative clauses, passive forms or long sentences guarantees a score. A complete report also needs an overview, appropriate selection and accurate coverage. The process-diagram guide explains those wider choices.
Combine these facts into two sentences: “The wet pulp is pressed. The sheet is dried. It is cut to size. The cut sheets are packed.” Use one time clause and keep the final stage clear. Do not add machinery, temperatures or timings.
“After the wet pulp has been pressed, the sheet is dried and cut to size. The cut sheets are then packed.”
The time clause connects pressing to the following operations, while the short final sentence keeps packing visible as the endpoint. Other accurate combinations can work. The exercise asks for a time clause to practise it, not because every report must contain this pattern.
These original teaching extracts isolate one improvement at a time. They are not band-labelled answers: a complete response must also fulfil the question and maintain quality throughout.
Before: The lamp arrived damaged. I am very disappointed.
After: The lamp arrived with a cracked base and cannot stand securely. Could you arrange an undamaged replacement?
For a letter asking you to explain damage and request action, the revision develops the problem and states the remedy. Tone alone cannot make up for a missing task point.
See a complete letter plan →Before: Remote work has advantages and disadvantages. There are different opinions about it.
After: For experienced staff, the time saved by avoiding a daily commute can outweigh reduced office contact if teams maintain regular opportunities to work together.
For an outweigh question, the revision makes a comparative judgement and identifies a condition. The rest of the essay still needs to develop both sides and justify that balance.
Compare Task 2 instructions and plans →Before: Buses are useful. Moreover, some workers drive. Furthermore, early shifts are difficult.
After: Some workers still drive because their shifts begin before the first bus. An earlier service would give those commuters a practical alternative.
The revision makes the reason and proposed response explicit. Adding more linking words to the original would not fix the missing relationship between the ideas.
Develop one connected paragraph →Before: The new course makes students do good things at work.
After: The course gives students practice in explaining technical problems to customers.
The revised wording says which skill is developed and where it is used. It improves precision without relying on rare vocabulary or replacing every repeated word.
Practise precise vocabulary →Before: Although the course was demanding. It helped me organise my time.
After: Although the course was demanding, it helped me organise my time.
Joining the dependent clause to a main clause repairs the sentence boundary and makes the contrast clear. A controlled complex sentence is more useful than extra clauses that obscure your meaning.
Practise sentence control →Select the most important information and fulfil the purpose of the visual report or letter.
Use your own response or an original practice question. This is a self-review exercise, not an automatic score.
Answer every part of the question and develop a clear, relevant position.
Use your own response or an original practice question. This is a self-review exercise, not an automatic score.
Organise ideas so the reader can follow the argument without effort.
Use your own response or an original practice question. This is a self-review exercise, not an automatic score.
Choose precise, natural words and control collocations and register.
Use your own response or an original practice question. This is a self-review exercise, not an automatic score.
Use varied structures while keeping errors from distracting the reader.
Use your own response or an original practice question. This is a self-review exercise, not an automatic score.
Choose a timed practice task or analyse your current response.