Writing is 60 minutes and two tasks. Each is marked against four criteria, each worth a band
from 0 to 9, and the four are averaged into the task's band. Task 2 counts twice as much as
Task 1 in the Writing score.
Criterion
Task 1
Task 2
1
Task achievement 任务完成 — did you select and report the key features, with an overview?
Task response 任务回应 — did you answer every part, with a clear position?
2
Coherence and cohesion 连贯与衔接 — does the writing progress logically, one idea per paragraph, with the right linking words?
same
3
Lexical resource 词汇丰富度 — range, precision and collocation 词语搭配
same
4
Grammatical range and accuracy 语法准确度 — variety of structures, and how often errors appear
same
Two thirds of the Writing band comes from Task 2, so give it 40 of the 60 minutes. Running out
of time on Task 1 costs half as much as running out on Task 2 — still a real loss, so finish both.
Under the minimum length — 150 words for Task 1, 250 for Task 2 — almost always costs on
criterion 1, because a short answer rarely covers the task fully. Count if you are unsure; the
count costs 20 seconds.
You must write in full connected prose. Notes and bullet points score as an unfinished
answer.
grammatical range and accuracy/ɡrəˈmætɪkl reɪndʒ ænd ˈækjʊrəsi/
语法准确度
yǔ fǎ zhǔn què dù
4.2
Task 1：选取、描述与概述句
English
Task 1 asks you to describe a graph, table, chart, diagram or map in your own words.
There is no opinion in Task 1. No I think, no this is because, no recommendation. A
sentence of opinion or an invented cause is irrelevant detail, and it pulls Task achievement
down.
The overview 概述 is one or two sentences saying what the data does overall — the
biggest movement, the largest category, the crossing point, the thing that did not change.
In the public band descriptors, detail reported with no clear overview belongs to band 5 for
Task achievement, and band 6 already expects one — so the overview is the cheapest band you will
ever earn.
A reliable structure: rewrite the question in your own words (1 sentence) → overview
(1–2 sentences) → two body paragraphs of grouped detail.
Group, do not narrate. Two paragraphs — one for what rose, one for what fell; or one for
the two large categories, one for the three small ones. A year-by-year account of every line is
a typical band-5 answer.
Quote figures selectively. Enough to support each statement, not every number on the chart.
A process diagram needs no data at all: say how many stages there are and whether it is a loop
or a straight line, then run through it in the passive.
Worked example. Look for the three things an overview must catch: a fall that speeds up, a fast rise
and one crossing.
Bicycle rentals fall, e-scooter rentals rise, and the lines cross between 2022 and 2024
The line graph compares how many bicycles and e-scooters were rented each day in one city
between 2016 and 2024. (paraphrase)
Overall, bicycle rentals declined throughout the eight years, more quickly after 2018, while e-scooter rentals grew rapidly, and
e-scooters overtook bicycles between 2022 and 2024. (overview)
Bicycle rentals fell throughout the period. They dipped only slightly at first, from 12,000 a
day in 2016 to 11,500 in 2018, but the decline then quickened, to 10,400 in 2020 and 9,100 in
2022, before ending at 7,800 in 2024. This was a drop of 4,200, or roughly a third. (detail
paragraph 1: the falling line)
E-scooter rentals, by contrast, rose from a very low base of just 500 a day. The figure climbed
to 2,600 in 2018 and more than doubled to 5,900 by 2020. Bicycles were still slightly ahead in
2022, at 9,100 against 8,300, but e-scooters overtook them soon afterwards and reached 10,200 by
2024, about twenty times their starting level and 2,400 more than bicycles. (detail paragraph 2:
the rising line and the crossing)
That is just over 150 words: four short paragraphs, every sentence checkable against the graph.
Notice what the model leaves out: any reason why riders switched, even the obvious one, that a
scooter does not make you sweat before class. The chart does not say why, so neither do you.
The same data, weaker. Compare this opening from a typical weaker answer:
The graph is about bicycles and e-scooters. In 2016 bicycles was 12 and e-scooters was 0.5. In
2018 bicycles was 11.5 and e-scooters was 2.6. In 2020 …
It narrates year by year, never says what happened overall, drops the units (12 what?) and
repeats one structure with an agreement error (bicycles was). Every number is accurate and the
answer still scores low: accuracy is necessary, selection is what is rewarded.
A trend 趋势 is the direction over the whole period; a fluctuation 波动 is movement without one.
Nouns from the same verbs: a rise in, a sharp fall in, a steady increase in.
⚠ The prepositions are where marks are lost.Rise by 20 is the size of the change;
rise to 20 is the end point; rise from 10 to 30 gives both. Many candidates
write increased of, or increased to 20% when they mean by.
⚠ Percentage and percentage point are different. From 20% to 24% is a rise of 4
percentage points, or of 20%. Writing "a rise of 4%" there is a factual error.
Approximation: just over, just under, roughly, around, nearly, approximately.
Comparison: twice as many as, three times the figure for, by far the largest, the same
as, slightly higher than.
A proportion 比例 is a share of a whole; an amount 数量 is not, and a pie chart shows
only proportions. "Households spent more on housing" is wrong unless you also know the total;
"a larger share went on housing" is right.
Read the question twice and decide which of the five forms it is, because each one has its own
way of going wrong.
Form
What it asks
The trap
Agree or disagree
choose a position
sitting on the fence — no clear position for the examiner to follow
Discuss both views and give your opinion
both views and your own
giving the two views and no opinion
Advantages and disadvantages
both; outweigh means decide
listing four of each and never deciding
Causes and solutions
both halves, matched
a solution that answers no cause you gave
Two-part question
two answers
answering the second and forgetting the first
Answer every part. The public descriptors put a response that addresses the task only
partially at band 5 for Task response, however well written the rest is.
Hold one position. Band 7 in Task response needs a position that is clear throughout. If
your introduction disagrees and your conclusion says "both sides have merit", the examiner can no
longer see where you stand, and that criterion falls.
Support, do not assert. Every main idea needs a reason, an example, or a consequence traced
one step further. Pollution is bad for health is an assertion; particles from traffic
aggravate asthma, which is why clinics near main roads report more attendances is support.
A useful shape: introduction (rewrite + position) → body 1 (first reason, developed) → body 2
(second reason, developed) → conclusion (restate position, no new material).
Answer the strongest objection. A concession 让步 names what the other side gets
right; a counter-argument 反驳 then answers it. Together they show you have a position
rather than a preference.
Worked example: one body paragraph, two versions
Some people think that all secondary students should do unpaid work in their community. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Version A
Nowadays, community work is a hot topic. There are many advantages and disadvantages. Students can learn many things. However, they are very busy. In conclusion, community work has both good and bad sides.
Version B
The strongest argument for compulsory community work is that it teaches responsibility in a way that classrooms cannot. A student who spends two hours a week helping at a care home learns to be punctual because elderly residents are waiting for them, not because a teacher is checking. Admittedly, students already have heavy timetables, and an extra obligation could add stress. However, a single afternoon a month would be enough to build the habit without harming exam preparation, which is why I support the idea in a limited form.
What the four criteria see:
Criterion
Version A
Version B
Task response
no position
clear, limited support
Coherence
sentences listed
claim, example, concession, reply
Vocabulary
hot topic, many things
punctual, obligation
Grammar
simple sentences only
because, which is why clauses
Version B does not use rarer words for their own sake: each one says something more exact than the word it replaces.
Chinese candidates are often taught openers and "high-level" phrases to memorise. Examiners are
trained to discount memorised language 背诵句式, so a template-heavy essay reads as a lower
Lexical resource band, not a higher one.
Delete
Write instead
With the development of society / the economy
(nothing — start with the topic)
It is undeniable that / There is no doubt that
Clearly, or nothing
Every coin has two sides
(state the two sides)
As far as I am concerned
I think / In my view
more and more people
a growing number of people / a figure
in today's fast-paced world
(nothing)
Last but not least
Finally,
The problem is not that these are wrong English. It is that they carry no information, and
the examiner has seen them a thousand times.
The same applies to a rare word used out of collocation. Augment the problem is not better
than make the problem worse; it is worse, because augment does not collocate with
problem (aggravate does). A common word used precisely beats a rare word used wrongly.
Mechanical linkers hurt too. Firstly, Moreover, Furthermore, Last but not least at the start
of every sentence lowers Coherence and cohesion. Real cohesion comes from pronouns, repeated
noun phrases and the order of ideas.
These are systematic, so hunt for the pattern, not the one instance.
Articles 冠词 — Mandarin has none. The government should build more school → schools;
in the society → in society.
Plurals — an unmarked plural is one of the most frequent errors. Many student → many
students; informations, advices, equipments are uncountable and have no plural at all.
Tense not carried through — a paragraph that starts in the past drifts into the present.
Subject–verb agreement — the number of students have risen → has risen.
Although … but … and Because … so … — English uses one connector, not two. Although it
is expensive, but it is useful → drop but.
Comma splices — two full sentences joined by a comma. Use a full stop or a conjunction.
Missing preposition after a verb — discuss about, emphasise on, affect to are all
wrong; those verbs take a direct object.
How often errors appear is part of criterion 4, so fixing two of these patterns consistently is
one of the fastest ways to raise it — faster than learning new vocabulary.
Spend 5 minutes planning Task 2. An essay with a plan is a different band from the same
ideas written as they arrive.
Do Task 2 first if you tend to run out of time. It is worth double.
Count your words once, at the end. On paper, learn how many words your own handwriting puts on
a line and count lines instead; on computer the screen shows the count.
Leave 3 minutes to reread for articles, plurals and tense. Those three are the slips a quick
reread catches best.
“许多学生需要设备。”应写作“Many students need equipment”：people为复数，equipment为不可数名词。
“虽然它很有用，但获取受限。”去掉 but，或者写成两个独立的句子。
“这本书很贵，学生们共用。”修正逗号粘连错误：“The book is expensive, so students share it.”
“图表增长至70名会员。”需指明测量的对象：“Club membership increased to 70.”
选择一个词汇是因为它能准确表达你的含义。
Collocation（词语搭配）是指常见的词组组合，例如 make a decision（做决定）或 heavy rain（大雨）。
不要仅仅因为短语不常见就将其排除，也不要假设生僻词理应获得额外分数。
“Ameliorate a problem”可以是正确的英语表达。但在本语境下，Improve the situation（改善现状）可能仍更清晰易懂。
应在整个句子的语境中审视用词的恰当性，而不是对单个单词自动扣分。
