10 Task 2 Mistakes and Practical Ways to Fix Them

This checklist helps you find recurring Task 2 writing problems and choose concrete fixes. The final assessment depends on the whole response across four criteria; one mistake alone does not establish a Band 6 ceiling. I divide them into three groups: those related to the question and introduction (1-3), those related to ideas and development (4-6), and those related to language, time and psychology (7-10).

Use the list in two modes:

1. Before writing — memorise items 1-5 at the planning and introduction stage; these can be useful starting points for checking the plan and relevance.
2. After writing — check your own essay against the ten items; every “yes” answer is a concrete point to fix.

For each mistake a faulty example, a corrected version and a short explanation are given. One practical method is to review your latest essay item by item with this list. If you notice two or three recurring problems, choose them as priorities for your next practice. Read the list once from start to finish, then in each practice session return only to “your own” items — in this way the checklist doesn't waste time, it saves time.

1. A memorised introduction. “In the modern era of globalization, education plays a pivotal role...” — a generic opening like this does not develop the response unless connected to the specific question. One expression alone does not prove memorisation; relevance matters. Text copied from another source is a separate serious problem. Fix: make the introduction directly relevant to the question. Two sentences for paraphrase + thesis can be a useful practice option, not an official sentence count.

2. Losing part of the question. Defending only one side in a “Discuss both views and give your opinion” question, or listing only the advantages in a “Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?” question, is doing half the task. Fix: in the plan, set aside one answer block for each instruction word in the question (discuss, give, outweigh).

3. A position given late. When the question requires a position, giving it only in the conclusion can make it harder to maintain a clear position throughout; this is not an automatic Band 6 rule. Fix: state the thesis clearly in the introduction; the second sentence is one possible place, not a requirement: “I largely agree that public funding should prioritise rail over new roads.” The conclusion closes by repeating this position — it does not discover it there for the first time. A ready corrected introduction example: “Whether roads or railways deserve more public funding is a contested question, and I believe rail should come first.” These three fixes work together: the paraphrase ties you to the question, the thesis gives the direction — the introduction is not just a “nice sentence” but the course set for the whole essay.