# IELTS Academic Writing Task 2 — Band Descriptors This document describes how essays are assessed on the four official IELTS Writing Task 2 criteria: **Task Response**, **Coherence and Cohesion**, **Lexical Resource**, and **Grammatical Range and Accuracy**. It is intended as a reference for the AI Examiner and for human reviewers. It applies identically to all Task 2 mocks, regardless of essay type (Opinion, Discussion, Advantages/Disadvantages, Problem/Solution, Two-Part). Mock-specific guidance (what this particular prompt asks, what stances are valid, common topic-specific errors) is provided separately in each mock's `question-analysis.md`. --- ## How the Descriptors Are Applied A script must fully fit the **positive features** of the descriptor at a particular band level. **Bolded text** indicates negative features that will limit a rating. Each of the four criteria is scored independently on a 0–9 scale. The overall Task 2 band is the average of the four scores (rounded to the nearest half-band). This document covers the Academic version of Task 2. --- ## How to Apply These Descriptors When scoring an essay: 1. Identify which band best fits the candidate's writing on each criterion **independently**. Do not let a strong score on one criterion influence others. 2. A criterion score reflects the band that the candidate **"fully fits"** — not an aspirational target. If the writing only partially meets Band 7 features, the score is Band 6. 3. When in doubt between two bands, **prefer the lower band**. 4. Mock-specific expectations (what stances are valid, what scope is on-topic for THIS prompt) appear in `question-analysis.md` under "Acceptable Stances", "Topic Scope", and "Common TR Failures". --- ## Section 1: Official IELTS Band Descriptors (Updated May 2023) *Source: IELTS Writing Task 2 Band Descriptors, Updated May 2023. Jointly owned by the British Council, IDP: IELTS Australia, and Cambridge English Language Assessment.* ### Band 9 | Criterion | Descriptor | |---|---| | **Task Response** | The prompt is appropriately addressed and explored in depth.
A clear and fully developed position is presented which directly answers the question/s.
Ideas are relevant, fully extended and well supported.
Any lapses in content or support are extremely rare. | | **Coherence and Cohesion** | The message can be followed effortlessly.
Cohesion is used in such a way that it very rarely attracts attention.
Any lapses in coherence or cohesion are minimal.
Paragraphing is skilfully managed. | | **Lexical Resource** | Full flexibility and precise use are widely evident.
A wide range of vocabulary is used accurately and appropriately with very natural and sophisticated control of lexical features.
Minor errors in spelling and word formation are extremely rare and have minimal impact on communication. | | **Grammatical Range and Accuracy** | A wide range of structures is used with full flexibility and control.
Punctuation and grammar are used appropriately throughout.
Minor errors are extremely rare and have minimal impact on communication. | ### Band 8 | Criterion | Descriptor | |---|---| | **Task Response** | The prompt is appropriately and sufficiently addressed.
A clear and well-developed position is presented in response to the question/s.
Ideas are relevant, well extended and supported.
There may be occasional omissions or lapses in content. | | **Coherence and Cohesion** | The message can be followed with ease.
Information and ideas are logically sequenced, and cohesion is well managed.
Occasional lapses in coherence and cohesion may occur.
Paragraphing is used sufficiently and appropriately. | | **Lexical Resource** | A wide resource is fluently and flexibly used to convey precise meanings.
There is skilful use of uncommon and/or idiomatic items when appropriate, despite occasional inaccuracies in word choice and collocation.
Occasional errors in spelling and/or word formation may occur, but have minimal impact on communication. | | **Grammatical Range and Accuracy** | A wide range of structures is flexibly and accurately used.
The majority of sentences are error-free, and punctuation is well managed.
Occasional, non-systematic errors and inappropriacies occur, but have minimal impact on communication. | ### Band 7 | Criterion | Descriptor | |---|---| | **Task Response** | The main parts of the prompt are appropriately addressed.
A clear and developed position is presented.
Main ideas are extended and supported but there may be a tendency to over-generalise or there may be a lack of focus and precision in supporting ideas/material. | | **Coherence and Cohesion** | Information and ideas are logically organised, and there is a clear progression throughout the response. (A few lapses may occur, but these are minor.)
A range of cohesive devices including reference and substitution is used flexibly but with some inaccuracies or some over/under use.
Paragraphing is generally used effectively to support overall coherence, and the sequencing of ideas within a paragraph is generally logical. | | **Lexical Resource** | The resource is sufficient to allow some flexibility and precision.
There is some ability to use less common and/or idiomatic items.
An awareness of style and collocation is evident, though inappropriacies occur.
There are only a few errors in spelling and/or word formation and they do not detract from overall clarity. | | **Grammatical Range and Accuracy** | A variety of complex structures is used with some flexibility and accuracy.
Grammar and punctuation are generally well controlled, and error-free sentences are frequent.
A few errors in grammar may persist, but these do not impede communication. | ### Band 6 | Criterion | Descriptor | |---|---| | **Task Response** | The main parts of the prompt are addressed (though some may be more fully covered than others). An appropriate format is used.
A position is presented that is directly relevant to the prompt, although the conclusions drawn may be unclear, unjustified or repetitive.
Main ideas are relevant, but some may be insufficiently developed or may lack clarity, while some supporting arguments and evidence may be less relevant or inadequate. | | **Coherence and Cohesion** | Information and ideas are generally arranged coherently and there is a clear overall progression.
Cohesive devices are used to some good effect but cohesion within and/or between sentences may be faulty or mechanical due to misuse, overuse or omission.
The use of reference and substitution may lack flexibility or clarity and result in some repetition or error.
Paragraphing may not always be logical and/or the central topic may not always be clear. | | **Lexical Resource** | The resource is generally adequate and appropriate for the task.
The meaning is generally clear in spite of a rather restricted range or a lack of precision in word choice.
If the writer is a risk-taker, there will be a wider range of vocabulary used but higher degrees of inaccuracy or inappropriacy.
There are some errors in spelling and/or word formation, but these do not impede communication. | | **Grammatical Range and Accuracy** | A mix of simple and complex sentence forms is used but flexibility is limited.
Examples of more complex structures are not marked by the same level of accuracy as in simple structures.
Errors in grammar and punctuation occur, but rarely impede communication. | ### Band 5 | Criterion | Descriptor | |---|---| | **Task Response** | The main parts of the prompt are **incompletely addressed**. The format may be inappropriate in places.
The writer expresses a position, but the development is not always clear.
Some main ideas are put forward, but they are limited and are not sufficiently developed and/or there may be irrelevant detail.
There may be some repetition. | | **Coherence and Cohesion** | Organisation is evident but is not wholly logical and there may be a lack of overall progression. Nevertheless, there is a sense of underlying coherence to the response.
The relationship of ideas can be followed but the sentences are not fluently linked to each other.
There may be limited/overuse of cohesive devices with some inaccuracy.
The writing may be repetitive due to inadequate and/or inaccurate use of reference and substitution.
**Paragraphing may be inadequate or missing.** | | **Lexical Resource** | The resource is limited but minimally adequate for the task.
Simple vocabulary may be used accurately but the range does not permit much variation in expression.
There may be frequent lapses in the appropriacy of word choice and a lack of flexibility is apparent in frequent simplifications and/or repetitions.
Errors in spelling and/or word formation may be noticeable and may cause some difficulty for the reader. | | **Grammatical Range and Accuracy** | The range of structures is limited and rather repetitive.
Although complex sentences are attempted, they tend to be faulty, and the greatest accuracy is achieved on simple sentences.
Grammatical errors may be frequent and cause some difficulty for the reader.
Punctuation may be faulty. | ### Band 4 | Criterion | Descriptor | |---|---| | **Task Response** | The prompt is tackled in a minimal way, or the answer is tangential, possibly due to some misunderstanding of the prompt. **The format may be inappropriate.**
A position is discernible, but the reader has to read carefully to find it.
Main ideas are difficult to identify and such ideas that are identifiable may lack relevance, clarity and/or support.
Large parts of the response may be repetitive. | | **Coherence and Cohesion** | Information and ideas are evident but not arranged coherently and there is no clear progression within the response.
Relationships between ideas can be unclear and/or inadequately marked. There is some use of basic cohesive devices, which may be inaccurate or repetitive.
There is inaccurate use or a lack of substitution or referencing.
There may be no paragraphing and/or no clear main topic within paragraphs. | | **Lexical Resource** | The resource is limited and inadequate for or **unrelated to the task**. Vocabulary is basic and may be used repetitively.
There may be inappropriate use of lexical chunks (e.g. memorised phrases, formulaic language and/or language from the input material).
Inappropriate word choice and/or errors in word formation and/or in spelling may impede meaning. | | **Grammatical Range and Accuracy** | A very limited range of structures is used.
**Subordinate clauses are rare and simple sentences predominate.**
Some structures are produced accurately but grammatical errors are frequent and may impede meaning.
Punctuation is often faulty or inadequate. | ### Band 3 | Criterion | Descriptor | |---|---| | **Task Response** | No part of the prompt is adequately addressed, or the prompt has been misunderstood.
No relevant position can be identified, and/or there is little direct response to the question/s.
There are few ideas, and these may be irrelevant or insufficiently developed. | | **Coherence and Cohesion** | There is no apparent logical organisation. Ideas are discernible but difficult to relate to each other.
There is minimal use of sequencers or cohesive devices. Those used do not necessarily indicate a logical relationship between ideas.
There is difficulty in identifying referencing.
Any attempts at paragraphing are unhelpful. | | **Lexical Resource** | The resource is inadequate (which may be due to the response being significantly underlength). Possible over-dependence on input material or memorised language.
Control of word choice and/or spelling is very limited, and errors predominate. These errors may severely impede meaning. | | **Grammatical Range and Accuracy** | Sentence forms are attempted, but errors in grammar and punctuation predominate (except in memorised phrases or those taken from the input material). This prevents most meaning from coming through.
**Length may be insufficient to provide evidence of control of sentence forms.** | ### Band 2 | Criterion | Descriptor | |---|---| | **Task Response** | The content is barely related to the prompt.
No position can be identified.
There may be glimpses of one or two ideas without development. | | **Coherence and Cohesion** | There is little relevant message, or **the entire response may be off-topic**.
There is little evidence of control of organisational features. | | **Lexical Resource** | The resource is extremely limited with few recognisable strings, apart from memorised phrases.
There is no apparent control of word formation and/or spelling. | | **Grammatical Range and Accuracy** | There is little or no evidence of sentence forms (except in memorised phrases). | ### Band 1 | Criterion | Descriptor | |---|---| | **Task Response** | **Responses of 20 words or fewer are rated at Band 1.**
**The content is wholly unrelated to the prompt.**
Any copied rubric must be discounted. | | **Coherence and Cohesion** | **Responses of 20 words or fewer are rated at Band 1.**
The writing fails to communicate any message and appears to be by a virtual non-writer. | | **Lexical Resource** | **Responses of 20 words or fewer are rated at Band 1.**
No resource is apparent, except for a few isolated words. | | **Grammatical Range and Accuracy** | **Responses of 20 words or fewer are rated at Band 1.**
No rateable language is evident. | ### Band 0 Should only be used where a candidate did not attend or attempt the question in any way, used a language other than English throughout, or **where there is proof that a candidate's answer has been totally memorised**. --- ## Section 2: Interpretive Notes for the AI Examiner These notes clarify how to apply the official descriptors when scoring Task 2 essays. They are not additional requirements — only guidance on how official wording is typically interpreted in practice. ### On Task Response - **"Clear position" at Band 7+** means the candidate's stance is identifiable in the introduction, maintained across body paragraphs, and consistent in the conclusion. - **"Fully developed position" at Band 9 vs "Well-developed" at Band 8**: the difference is depth of support per idea. Band 9 essays leave no main idea under-explained; Band 8 essays may have one idea slightly less developed. - **"Tendency to over-generalise" at Band 7**: statements like "all young people prefer X" or "everyone knows that Y" without qualification. - **"Conclusions may be unclear" at Band 6**: the position may waver toward the middle in the conclusion or repeat the introduction verbatim. ### On Coherence and Cohesion - **"Cohesion attracts no attention" at Band 9**: the reader does not notice linking devices because they are so natural. - **"Mechanical cohesion" at Band 6**: formulaic linkers used without true connection between ideas. - **"Central topic within each paragraph" at Band 6+**: each paragraph should have one identifiable main idea. ### On Lexical Resource - **"Less common lexical items" at Band 7+**: words and phrases above general everyday vocabulary but appropriate for academic writing. Not the same as obscure or showy vocabulary. - **"Awareness of style and collocation" at Band 7**: choosing words that fit the register (formal/academic) and combine naturally with other words. - **"Errors do not impede communication" at Band 6**: the reader can still understand even if errors are noticeable. ### On Grammatical Range and Accuracy - **"Variety of complex structures" at Band 7**: relative clauses, conditional sentences, passive voice, subordinate clauses — used appropriately, not for show. - **"Frequent error-free sentences" at Band 7**: a clear majority of sentences contain no errors. - **"Full flexibility and accuracy" at Band 9**: complex structures used naturally to express meaning, not inserted to demonstrate range. ### Misconceptions to Avoid Do NOT apply the following requirements — they are not in the official descriptor: - ❌ Do NOT require named real-world examples for Band 7+. Strong hypothetical or general examples can meet the "extended and supported" requirement. - ❌ Do NOT require a specific word count beyond the official minimum of 250 words. There is no recommended upper limit, and length alone does not raise the band. - ❌ Do NOT require addressing counter-arguments for Opinion essays. Counter-arguments can demonstrate sophisticated thinking but are not mandatory. - ❌ Do NOT require inversion, cleft sentences, or any other specific grammatical structures for Band 9. Range with full flexibility matters more than the presence of any specific structure. - ❌ Do NOT penalize standard conclusion phrases like "In conclusion". What matters is whether the conclusion adds value, not the phrase used. - ❌ Do NOT enforce a fixed essay structure (e.g., exactly 4 paragraphs). Paragraphing should be logical, not formulaic. ### Note on Mock-Specific Application Topic-specific markers (what stances are valid for this prompt, what is on-topic vs off-topic, common topic-specific errors) are provided in each mock's `question-analysis.md` under sections like "Acceptable Stances", "Topic Scope", and "Common TR Failures". The AI Examiner should use those sections together with the descriptors in this document to score each essay. This separation is intentional: the band descriptors above describe what good writing looks like in general; the question-analysis tells the AI what specifically should be addressed for the prompt in question.