IELTS Task 2 Sample Answer With the Band Explained

A sample answer with a band printed at the top teaches you almost nothing. You cannot see which sentences earned the band, which sentences cost marks, or what would have to change to move the number.

So this page does it the other way round. One complete Task 2 answer, then each of the four criteria with the sentences behind it, and finally the arithmetic that turns four criterion scores into one band. The answer is published in our sample library, where you can read the full breakdown alongside the text.

Every number here is an estimate produced by Bandly's scoring engine. No qualified examiner has marked this answer. Treat the reasoning as the useful part and the numbers as a guide.

The question

Some governments have introduced a tax on foods that are high in sugar and fat in order to improve public health. To what extent do you think this is an effective measure?

This is an opinion question, so it needs one position held from the introduction to the conclusion. "To what extent" allows a partial answer, which is what this candidate gives.

The answer, 315 words

In recent years, several governments have introduced a tax on foods that contain high levels of sugar and fat. This measure aims to reduce the consumption of these products and improve public health. In my opinion, while taxing these products is a step in the right direction, it is only partially effective and must be combined with other strategies to achieve significant results.

On the one hand, a tax can discourage people from buying unhealthy food. When the price of sugary drinks and fatty snacks increases, consumers, especially teenagers and low-income families, are likely to think twice before purchasing them. For example, many researches show that after implementing a soda tax, the sales of these drinks dropped significantly. Furthermore, this policy forces food manufacturers to reformulate their recipes to avoid the tax, which leads to healthier options on supermarket shelves. Therefore, taxing these products encourage people to make better dietary choices.

On the other hand, a tax alone cannot solve the complex problem of obesity and related illnesses. First of all, this policy has a great influence in poor people's budgets, as they spend a larger percentage of their income on food. Since healthy options like fresh fruits and vegetables are often expensive, some families might still buy cheap unhealthy food despite the tax, or they might cut down on other necessities. Additionally, sugar addiction is very strong, and a small price increase may not stop people from buying their favorite snacks. Thus, the tax can be seen as unfair if governments do not subsidize healthy alternatives so that people can buy healthy food more easy.

In conclusion, introducing a tax on unhealthy foods high in sugar and fat is a useful tool to guide public behavior, but it has limitations. To truly improve public health, governments should use the money collected from this tax to educate the public and make healthy food more affordable.

The four estimates

Task Response, estimated 8

The question asks to what extent the measure is effective, and the third sentence of the introduction answers exactly that.

In my opinion, while taxing these products is a step in the right direction, it is only partially effective and must be combined with other strategies to achieve significant results.

Three things are working there. The position is stated, it is a genuine answer to "to what extent" rather than a flat agreement, and it predicts the structure of the essay. Both body paragraphs then do what the introduction promised, and the conclusion repeats the position without introducing a new idea.

What stops it going higher is depth rather than shape. The effects discussed are immediate ones, prices and purchasing, and the answer never reaches long term public health outcomes, which is where the question about effectiveness eventually points.

Coherence and Cohesion, estimated 7

The paragraphing is correct: introduction, one side, the other side, conclusion. Each body paragraph opens with a sentence that announces its content, and the reader is never lost.

The cost is in how the sentences are joined. "For example", "Furthermore", "Therefore", "First of all", "Additionally", "Thus" all sit at the front of a sentence, one after another. Each one is used correctly, and that is the trap: correct linking words used at this density read as a list of connected statements instead of a developed argument. Band 8 cohesion is usually less visible, not more. There is more on this at Coherence and Cohesion.

Lexical Resource, estimated 6

This is the criterion holding the answer down, and none of the problems is about knowing difficult words.

1. "many researches show". Research is uncountable in English. Write "much research shows" or, better, "many studies show".
2. "has a great influence in poor people's budgets". The collocation is influence on, not influence in.
3. "people can buy healthy food more easy". The adverb is more easily.
4. Repetition of "healthy" and "unhealthy" across all four paragraphs, where alternatives such as nutritious, processed or high calorie were available.

The vocabulary that is present is appropriate: reformulate, dietary choices, subsidize, necessities. The band is set by control, not by ambition. Four visible slips in 315 words is what separates a 6 from a 7 here.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy, estimated 7

The range is genuinely varied. There are conditional and time clauses ("When the price of sugary drinks and fatty snacks increases"), a concessive clause ("while taxing these products is a step in the right direction"), and relative clauses ("which leads to healthier options").

The accuracy is not quite matching the range. The clearest error is subject verb agreement:

Therefore, taxing these products encourage people to make better dietary choices.

The subject is the gerund phrase "taxing these products", which is singular, so the verb is encourages. A single error of this kind does not sink the criterion, but it is exactly the kind that a reader notices. See complex sentences for how to add range without losing control.

How the four become one band

The four criteria carry equal weight. Add them and divide by four.

8 plus 7 plus 6 plus 7 equals 28. Divided by four, that is 7.0, so the answer is filed at band 7. No rounding was needed here, but when the mean lands on a quarter, IELTS rounds up: 7.25 becomes 7.5 and 7.75 becomes 8. The full method is at how the writing band is calculated.

The single change worth half a band

Because the four criteria are averaged, the cheapest improvement is always the lowest number, not the most interesting one.

Lift Lexical Resource from 6 to 7 and nothing else changes. The mean becomes 8 plus 7 plus 7 plus 7, which is 29, divided by four, which is 7.25, and that rounds up to 7.5.

Half a band, from four corrections: researches to studies, influence in to influence on, more easy to more easily, and two of the repetitions of healthy replaced. That is proofreading, not study. It takes the five minutes at the end of the exam that most candidates spend writing one more sentence they did not need.

Writing a better argument, by contrast, would move Task Response from 8 to 9 and produce a mean of 7.5, the same result for far more work.

What to do today

Take your last practice essay and mark only the word level errors: countability, prepositions after nouns and verbs, adverb forms, and any word you used more than three times. Count them. If there are more than three in 300 words, Lexical Resource is your lowest criterion too, and it is the one with the shortest route to half a band.

Then put the essay into Bandly, which returns an estimated band for each of the four criteria and quotes the sentences behind each one. The bands are model estimates rather than marked results, so read the quoted sentences first and check whether they match the errors you found yourself.