IELTS Writing Task 2 Band Descriptors Explained Simply
IELTS Writing Task 2 is marked against four equally weighted criteria. Understanding what each criterion actually means — and what it looks like at Band 5, 6, 7, and 8 — allows you to diagnose your own weaknesses and target your preparation precisely. This guide explains all four criteria in plain English, with concrete examples at each band level.
The Four Marking Criteria
Each criterion contributes 25% to your Task 2 score. This means a weakness in any single area will limit your overall writing band, even if the other three are strong. Many candidates are surprised to learn that their grammar may be excellent but their Coherence and Cohesion is dragging their score down — or vice versa.
Task Achievement
25%
Coherence & Cohesion
25%
Lexical Resource
25%
Grammatical Range & Accuracy
25%
Task Achievement (TA)
Task Achievement assesses whether you have responded to all parts of the prompt, whether your position is clear and consistent, and whether your ideas are developed and supported. This criterion is entirely about the content of your essay — not how you write it.
Band 5
The task is partially addressed. The position may be unclear or inconsistent. Ideas are present but insufficiently developed or repeated without progression.
Example: An essay that identifies an opinion in the introduction but then writes a neutral discussion throughout, or that makes three brief points without developing any of them.
Band 6
The task is addressed but incompletely. The main idea is clear, but supporting arguments may be underdeveloped or occasionally irrelevant.
Example: An opinion essay that states a clear position and provides two reasons, but each reason is explained in only one sentence without examples or logical extension.
Band 7
The task is fully addressed. A clear position is sustained throughout. Ideas are developed and logically extended, with relevant supporting points.
Example: An opinion essay with a clear, consistent view, two well-developed paragraphs each with an explained point and a relevant example, and a concise conclusion that mirrors the introduction.
Band 8
The task is answered with sophistication. Ideas are well-developed, nuanced, and fully relevant. The writer covers the full scope of the task, including any implicit aspects.
Example: An essay that not only takes a position but anticipates counter-arguments, engages with the complexity of the issue, and develops each idea to a level of depth that goes beyond a simple explanation.
Coherence and Cohesion (CC)
Coherence refers to the logical flow of your argument — whether ideas progress clearly from one to the next. Cohesion refers to the language tools you use to connect those ideas: linking words, pronouns, substitution, and ellipsis. This criterion assesses both the macro-organisation of the essay and the micro-level flow of sentences.
Band 5
Organisation is present but not always coherent. Cohesive devices are used, but they may be mechanical, inaccurate, or overused. Paragraphing may be inconsistent.
Example: An essay where every sentence begins with 'Firstly,' 'Secondly,' 'Thirdly,' and 'Finally,' or where paragraphs are split arbitrarily rather than by topic.
Band 6
Information is generally arranged coherently. Cohesive devices are used effectively, though there may be some under- or over-use. Paragraphing is used but not always logically.
Example: An essay with clear paragraph breaks and topic sentences, but where one paragraph drifts to cover two unrelated ideas, or where 'however' is used between two sentences that do not actually contrast.
Band 7
The essay is logically organised and easy to follow. A range of cohesive devices is used flexibly and accurately. Paragraphing is clear, logical, and consistent.
Example: Each paragraph opens with a topic sentence that signals the function of that paragraph. Linking is varied: 'Furthermore,' 'This means that,' 'As a result,' 'Despite this' — and none feel forced.
Band 8
Sequencing is skilfully managed throughout. Cohesive devices are used naturally and with precision. The reader never has to re-read a sentence to understand how it connects to the one before.
Example: A paragraph where the first sentence sets the topic, subsequent sentences develop and extend it using referencing and substitution (not just linking words), and the final sentence leads naturally into the next paragraph.
Lexical Resource (LR)
Lexical Resource assesses the range, accuracy, and appropriacy of the vocabulary you use. It is not about using the longest or rarest words — it is about using words precisely, collocating them correctly, and paraphrasing effectively.
Band 5
Vocabulary is limited in range and often repetitive. Basic words from the prompt are recycled without paraphrase. There may be noticeable spelling errors and incorrect word forms.
Example: Using 'good' and 'bad' throughout, or repeating the word 'technology' ten times where synonyms or collocations such as 'digital tools,' 'modern innovations,' or 'technological advancements' would be more varied.
Band 6
An adequate range of vocabulary is used, with some less common items attempted. There are occasional errors in word choice, collocation, or spelling that do not impede communication.
Example: Writing 'the problem is very big' instead of 'the problem is substantial' or 'the issue is significant' — the meaning is clear, but the vocabulary does not demonstrate sufficient range.
Band 7
A sufficient range of vocabulary is used with flexibility and precision. Less common vocabulary is used with awareness of style and collocation. There may be occasional inaccuracies.
Example: Using 'exacerbate the issue,' 'socioeconomic disparity,' 'a marked deterioration,' and 'underpin democratic values' — all used accurately and in natural collocations.
Band 8
A wide range of vocabulary is used fluently and flexibly. Rare or idiomatic items are used naturally. Errors are rare and do not reduce communication.
Example: Paraphrasing the prompt multiple times using different word families, accurately collocating with academic vocabulary, and deploying nuanced hedging language such as 'it could be argued that' or 'this arguably suggests.'
Grammatical Range and Accuracy (GRA)
Grammatical Range and Accuracy assesses the variety of grammatical structures you use and how accurately you use them. Range refers to your ability to produce complex sentences — not just simple ones. Accuracy refers to whether those structures are formed correctly.
Band 5
Mostly simple sentences are used. Complex structures are attempted but with frequent errors. Basic errors such as subject-verb agreement, article misuse, and tense inconsistency are common.
Example: Every sentence follows a Subject-Verb-Object pattern. Relative clauses are attempted but malformed: 'The people which live in cities…' instead of 'The people who live in cities…'
Band 6
A mix of simple and complex structures is used. Complex sentences are present but may contain errors that occasionally reduce clarity.
Example: Using some subordinate clauses and relative clauses, but inconsistently — perhaps correct in one paragraph and error-prone in the next. Articles and prepositions may still cause difficulty.
Band 7
A variety of complex structures is used with frequent success. Errors occur but are few and do not impede communication. The majority of sentences are grammatically accurate.
Example: Consistent use of conditional clauses ('If governments were to…'), passive voice ('It has been argued that…'), participle clauses ('Having identified the key issue…'), and nominal clauses ('What is needed is a systemic approach').
Band 8
A wide range of structures is used with flexibility and accuracy. The vast majority of sentences are error-free. Any errors are rare and do not detract from fluency.
Example: Varied sentence structures within each paragraph — some long and complex, others short and emphatic. Punctuation is used accurately including colons, semi-colons, and dashes where appropriate.
How to Self-Assess Your Own Writing
After writing a practice essay, read it once for each criterion in isolation. First, read it only thinking about Task Achievement — have you answered every part of the prompt? Is your position clear and consistent? Then read it again for Coherence — does the argument flow logically? Then for Lexical Resource — underline every word that feels repeated or basic and think of a more precise or varied alternative. Finally, read it for grammar — identify every sentence that contains a complex structure and check whether it is formed correctly.
This four-pass method takes longer but trains the same analytical eye that the examiner applies when marking your script. Over time, you will internalise the criteria and monitor your writing in real time rather than only in retrospect.
Pre-Submission Checklist
Use this checklist before finalising any practice essay or timed response.
I have answered every part of the prompt, not just the part I find easier.
My position is stated clearly in the introduction and maintained throughout.
Each body paragraph has a main idea that is explained, not just stated.
My conclusion restates my position and summarises the essay — it does not introduce new ideas.
Each paragraph has a clear topic sentence that signals what the paragraph is about.
I have used a variety of cohesive devices — not just 'firstly, secondly, finally.'
My paragraphs are clearly separated and each one covers only one main idea.
I have paraphrased key words from the prompt and not copied them directly.
I have used at least some less common or topic-specific vocabulary accurately.
I have checked that my vocabulary collocates correctly — e.g. 'raise awareness,' not 'increase awareness of.'
I have used a variety of sentence structures — not only simple Subject-Verb-Object sentences.
I have checked subject-verb agreement in all complex sentences.
I have used articles (a/an/the) correctly, particularly in academic generalisations.