Most writers of fiction do not earn enough money to live from their writing. Do you think the government should give them financial assistance to help encourage good literature? - You should
Sample Response
There are some conditions under which a novelist could reasonably expect some government suport. In general terms, if the writer has already proved that he or she can write well, and if the stories produced are stimulating and interesting, then I consider that some financial help might be given. Language quality is difficult to define, but if the writing shows, for example, good grammar, a wide vocabulary, and elegance and imagination, then I can see a valid reason for assisting an author to spend some time free from money problems. Such a writing needs to be encouraged. the entertainment value of a book would be also a factor in deciding whether to provide assistance to an author. Further consideration would include social and educational values expressed in the author's work. However, if the ideas were socially irresponsible, or if the stories contain unnecessary violence or pornography for its own sake, then I would not want to see the author sponsored to write stories which do not benefit society. Other exceptions are the many writers of good books who do not require financial help. Books which proved to be extremely popular, such as the Harry Potter stories, clearly need no subsidy at all because the authors have become rich through their writing. Views on what good quality writing means will vary widely, and so if any author is to be given money for writing, then the decision would have to be made by a committee or panel of judge. An individual opinion would certainly cause disagreement among the reading public.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Correct spelling Original: suport Suggested revision: support Why it matters: The noun 'support' requires a double p.
- 2. Use precise term Original: Language Suggested revision: Writing Why it matters: This term refers more precisely to the overall qualities of an author's work.
- 3. Remove article Original: Such a writing Suggested revision: Such writing Why it matters: 'Writing' is uncountable when it refers generally to written work.
- 4. Capitalise sentence start Original: the Suggested revision: The Why it matters: The first word of a new sentence must begin with a capital letter.
- 5. Place adverb correctly Original: would be also Suggested revision: would also be Why it matters: The adverb normally comes between the modal verb and the main verb.
- 6. Use plural noun Original: consideration Suggested revision: considerations Why it matters: Several values are presented as separate considerations, so the plural noun is appropriate.
- 7. Match conditional tense Original: contain Suggested revision: contained Why it matters: The past form matches the hypothetical conditional introduced by 'if'.
- 8. Complete passive form Original: the author sponsored to write Suggested revision: the author to be sponsored to write Why it matters: The passive construction requires 'to be' before the past participle.
- 9. Use present perfect Original: Books which proved Suggested revision: Books which have proved Why it matters: The present perfect links past popularity with the books' current success.
- 10. Use plural noun Original: judge Suggested revision: judges Why it matters: A panel consists of more than one judge.
- 11. Clarify eligibility Original: could reasonably expect Suggested revision: could reasonably qualify for Why it matters: This wording frames assistance as conditional eligibility rather than an expectation of payment.
- 12. Use sharper description Original: stimulating and interesting Suggested revision: engaging and thought-provoking Why it matters: These adjectives distinguish reader appeal from intellectual value more precisely.
Suggested Rewrites
- suport support
- Language Writing
- Such a writing Such writing
- the The
- would be also would also be
- consideration considerations
Why this response received Band 7.0
The response presents a clear, nuanced position and develops sensible criteria for deciding which fiction writers merit support, using relevant exceptions to refine the argument. Its main weakness is the absence of paragraphing, while several awkward expressions and grammatical slips reduce polish. The highest-priority improvement is to organise the conditions, objections, and final recommendation into distinct paragraphs with clearer topic sentences.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
A clear conditional position is sustained and supported with relevant criteria and exceptions.
Strengthen the ending by explicitly restating whether government assistance should be offered and under what central conditions.
Coherence and Cohesion
The argument progresses logically, but presenting the whole response as one paragraph weakens its structural clarity.
Separate the eligibility criteria, objections, and decision-making proposal into focused paragraphs with clear topic sentences.
Lexical Resource
A broad and generally precise vocabulary supports nuanced discussion, despite several awkward collocations and one spelling error.
Use more natural phrasing in expressions such as “such writing” and “a panel of judges,” and proofread spelling carefully.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
Varied complex structures convey the argument clearly, although agreement, article, word-form, and sentence-opening errors recur.
Proofread complex sentences for agreement and noun forms, and check capitalization after full stops.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Writing Task 2
Most writers of fiction do not earn enough money to live from their writing. Do you think the government should give them financial assistance to help encourage good literature? - You should
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.