Cambridge IELTS 21 Academic Writing

This response addresses all of the changes illustrated in the college café plans. The writer describes how the café looked before the modifications, then moves on to the present day map. There is no overview, or summary of the information, but all main changes have been captured.

Information is generally arranged coherently. The first paragraph is an introduction, and the second contains the rest of the comparison. There is evidence of linking expressions [First of all | Then | After that | Although], however, there is a lack of reference, resulting in repetition [as it is].

Vocabulary is generally good [modifications | replaced with | transformed into] but errors remain [redisign / redesign | midle / middle | seatting / seating | modificated / modified].

Grammatical range is mixed. There are examples of complex sentence forms, but there is frequent repetition of verb forms e.g. passive structures [have been changed | have been replaced | hasn't been modificated | has been added] which means the range is limited and precludes a higher score.

To improve the score, an overview that summarises the main changes should be added. It would also be beneficial to show greater accuracy in vocabulary and a wider range of grammatical structures.

This is a strong response, with a series of ideas for each part, presented effectively. It starts with a note that different countries have different patterns and the writer's position is clear in the first paragraph [facilities are still of paramount importance]. The first half captures the benefits of watching performances and movies online; it saves time and money, people can watch at any time of day, with flexibility. Paragraph 4 presents the economic and cultural benefits, the big screen makes people feel more included in the experience, real live actors, who can so dome things that computers cannot, public money can be raised from get togethers for specific needs. The candidate concludes that some people think that cinemas and theatres are [non-useful places] but they believe there could bring a lot of advantages.

Ideas are logically organised, and cohesive devices are varied. Reference is used [when | those] but with some inaccuracy [that facilities]. Some effective linking devices are used [On the one hand | Firstly | Secondly | On the other hand | On top of this]. However, paragraph 2 is one sentence, and should be combined with paragraph 3 for a more logical progression.

Vocabulary is a strength, with frequent high-level items and some skilful collocation [of paramount importance | differing views | watch any content] although, some errors remain [devise / device] and there are some examples of less precise language [make people feel themselves inside the movie | watchers / audiences | non-useful places].

Grammatical structures are also varied and show some flexibility and some multi-clause sentences, including modal verbs and [if] clauses. However, most sentences are not error-free, as there are slips with articles, prepositions [in computers / on computers], other simple structures [is | are] and some missing punctuation.

To achieve a higher score, the candidate could make the paragraphing more consistent, and aim for a greater degree of accuracy in vocabulary and grammatical structures.

This response addressed the requirements of the task but, overall, there is a lack of detail.

The first paragraph is an introduction to the diagram. Task 1 Academic tasks require an overview, a summary of the key stages of the process, but this is missing. Paragraph 2 contains some irrelevant information [This is important because the process have a lot of steps and the distance gives time to all of them]. The main response comes in paragraphs 3 and 4 and it does include the main features, but there are details missing, such as ‘clouds form’ ‘Windward side’ and ‘Leeward side’. The irrelevant content and missing details detract from the score for this task.

Information is generally arranged coherently and there are linking expressions [First of all | Moreover | Then] and some referencing within the process [this desert | all of them | this part]. There is some repetition [The first | First of all] but overall, cohesive devices are used to some good effect.

Vocabulary is generally good and appropriate for the task [appears | explanation], the meaning is clear but there are errors [arrove / arrive | grow up / move up | saids / sees] and a lack of precision [in specific / specifically | gives time | below part]. Similarly, the grammatical range is narrow, often inaccurate and repetitive but the writer does attempt multi-clause sentences [while | when] and a modal verb [can] so there is some ability. Overall though, grammatical errors are frequent and they do cause some difficulty in understanding.

To achieve a higher score, an overview, which summarises the main stages of the process should be presented.

This is a strong, detailed and well-developed response. Ideas are appropriate and the position is presented at the beginning of the 4th paragraph [advantages prevail]. The first three paragraphs act as the introduction. Paragraph 4 addresses the advantages of time spent studying abroad (which include comparing approaches and levels of education, practising skills in a new environment, seeing new horizons for future careers and cultural enrichment). Paragraph 5 addresses the advantages of doing a work placement (which include trying work positions and fitting into real professions). The final paragraph presents the drawbacks, although the main disadvantage mentioned is the inability of all universities to afford these initiatives, which is not a drawback of the initiatives themselves, but in the ability to run them.

Some of paragraph 5 is less relevant to the question [why spend time on something you are not that good at?]. To improve this response, there could be more relevant detail on the advantages of work placements and, possibly, mention of ‘disadvantages’ of studying abroad and work placements themselves.

The ideas presented are organised logically and the six paragraphs support overall coherence. Although paragraph 3 is only one sentence, so not a standard paragraph but this can be seen as a stylistic variant, to make the point more clearly. Cohesion is used well throughout, and the message can be followed with ease.

Vocabulary is used well, with flexibility and precision [polishing their skills | new horizons | moving forward in that direction | future of humanity], with mostly accurate spelling and only a few errors in word choice [implemented these ideas into life | polar sides | taken as granted / taken for granted]. Similarly, the range of grammatical structures is wide. There are frequent multi-clause sentences and error-free sentences are frequent.

This is a good, articulate response. There are a few small lapses in vocabulary and grammatical structures, and more could be added on the advantages of work placements, to score even more highly.

This is generally a good response, there is an introduction at the start, and an attempt at an overview […the users majority take part of full-time undergraduate and full-time post-graduate, such as they probably are the biggest data of library satisfaction]. To improve the overview, there should be a summary across both charts. Key data from the pie chart is presented quite well but the ‘Library user satisfaction’ data is not sufficiently covered. There are also examples of irrelevant information [would need more special materials | use it more than once during a day | use the library on their free-time] which can detract from task achievement.

Ideas are mostly arranged logically. There are some nice linking expressions [since | also | so | Finally | On the other hand] with some slips [Even thought / Even though], and some good examples of reference [their | they].

Vocabulary is mainly appropriate and spelling is generally well managed [representation | pay attention]; some errors remain but don't affect understanding. Grammatical structures are mixed, but there are multi-clause sentences and examples of a range of structures, including modal verbs used correctly [would need], and with some errors [must to focus].

This response could be improved by including an overview that covers both charts (so, including the ‘Library user satisfaction’ table,) and eliminating the irrelevant content. A wider range of vocabulary and grammatical structure would also help improve the score.

This is an excellent response that presents a range of relevant ideas. The writer sets out their position in the opening paragraph, and addresses both parts of the question. Paragraph 2 presents the importance of formal learning: it teaches discipline and respect, it allows people to take exams to show how much they have learned and are capable of. Paragraph 3 goes on to present the importance of play: being too formal blocks fun, schools should promote ‘fun’ methods of teaching, they make suggestions of types of games and activities that could be used to teach in an enjoyable way, prevent boredom, and instil a love for lifelong learning. The conclusion brings the response to an end, but is quite general. It is appropriate, but could be more focused.

Ideas are presented logically. A range of good linking expressions are used [To begin with | Moreover | On the other hand | Furthermore]. However, almost every sentence begins with a linking device which makes it quite mechanical. Generally, reference and cohesion within sentences is well managed [which | it]. A reduction in the number of linking devices that come at the start of sentences would make it less formulaic.

Vocabulary is well managed, with a good range of higher-level items, including collocation [pay…attention | capable of doing | a crucial part of]. There are occasional errors [till / to | focused at / focused on] that detract from the highest scores. Grammatical structures are well presented, with a range of complex structures, including multi-clause sentences. A few errors do remain.

Overall, this is a very strong and articulate response. To achieve a higher score, the candidate could provide a conclusion that refers directly to the question, and avoid starting each sentence with a linking expression.