Task 1
You should spend about 20 minutes on this task.
The chart below shows the number of international students enrolled in higher education in five countries in 2010 and 2020.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
| Australia | Canada | UK | USA | Germany | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 335 | 225 | 455 | 690 | 245 |
| 2020 | 565 | 530 | 430 | 950 | 410 |
Write at least 150 words.
Task 2
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
Some people believe that the centres of large cities should be closed to private cars altogether, so that the space can be given over to public transport, cycling and pedestrians.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Write at least 250 words.
What a Band 8–9 response must demonstrate
Measured against the four official assessment criteria — specific to this test's two tasks.
Task Achievement
- Gives a clear overview that states the two main stories: four of the five countries enrolled more international students in 2020 than in 2010, with the USA by far the largest host in both years, while the UK was the only country whose numbers fell.
- Identifies the standout features: Canada's numbers more than doubled (225,000 to 530,000), the fastest growth of the five, whereas the UK dropped from 455,000 to 430,000 and slipped from second place to fourth, behind both Australia and Canada.
- Supports comparisons with accurate figures and correct units — the chart is in thousands, so 690 means 690,000 students, not 690.
- Stays purely descriptive: no speculation about visa rules, tuition fees or the pandemic.
Coherence & Cohesion
- Organises by feature rather than by country — typically one paragraph on the countries that grew (USA, Australia, Canada, Germany) and one on the UK exception, or one on the largest hosts and one on the fastest movers — instead of five mini-paragraphs.
- Uses referencing ("the former", "these two countries", "over the decade") so that the country names are not repeated in every clause.
- Deploys comparative linkers ("whereas", "by contrast", "similarly") only where a genuine comparison is being made.
Lexical Resource
- Uses precise language for change between two points in time: rose from… to…, more than doubled, grew by roughly two thirds, overtook, fell slightly, rather than repeating "increased".
- Handles the vocabulary of ranking and proportion accurately: the largest host, the second-highest figure, almost twice as many as, roughly equal to.
- Keeps the register formal; no informal wording such as "shot up" or "a lot more".
Grammatical Range & Accuracy
- Controls comparative and superlative structures ("nearly twice as many as", "the highest of the five", "by far the largest") with correct quantifier agreement for countable students.
- Uses the past simple consistently for both dated years and handles "by 2020" / "in 2010" prepositions correctly.
- Writes figures accurately ("950,000" or "950 thousand", not "950 thousands"); most sentences are error-free.
Task Response
- Takes a clear position on the specific proposal — a complete ban on private cars in city centres — and states it in the introduction, not only in the conclusion.
- Engages with the word altogether: a Band 8+ answer considers whether a total ban is better than partial measures (congestion charges, low-emission zones, car-free days) and says why.
- Develops ideas with concrete support — delivery access, disabled drivers, shop footfall, bus and tram capacity — rather than generalities about "pollution is bad".
- Addresses the counter-case even while agreeing or disagreeing, so that the position is argued rather than merely asserted.
Coherence & Cohesion
- A clear four- or five-paragraph structure in which each body paragraph develops one reason for the stated position, with a topic sentence that signals it.
- Logical progression from the strongest reason to the concession and back to the thesis, rather than a list of unconnected benefits and drawbacks.
- Cohesion through referencing and sequencing ("such a measure", "this objection", "in these circumstances") rather than a mechanical "Firstly… Secondly… Finally".
Lexical Resource
- Uses topic-specific vocabulary accurately: pedestrianisation, congestion, modal shift, air quality, through-traffic, park-and-ride, last-mile delivery, accessibility.
- Paraphrases the prompt rather than copying it ("closed to private cars altogether" → "a blanket ban on privately owned vehicles").
- Uses collocations naturally ("ease congestion", "reclaim street space", "a phased approach") without forcing in rare words.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy
- A controlled range of structures: conditionals ("If private cars were excluded…"), concession ("While a total ban may inconvenience some residents…"), and passive forms where appropriate.
- Accurate use of modals to hedge policy claims ("would", "is likely to", "could") without over-hedging every sentence.
- Punctuation supports complex sentences — no comma splices or run-on lists — and errors are rare and do not impede meaning.
Common traps for this specific test
The mistakes most likely to cost marks on these two questions.
The vertical axis is in thousands. Writing that "the USA had 950 international students" is a factual error that immediately caps Task Achievement. Either write 950,000 or say "950 thousand".
A paragraph per country produces a flat list with no comparison. Group the data: the three large hosts versus the two that grew fastest, or rank order in 2010 versus 2020.
Writing "all five countries saw an increase" is wrong: the UK is the single exception, falling from 455,000 to 430,000 and dropping from second place to fourth behind Australia and Canada. The one country that moves against the trend is the most important feature to report, and it belongs in the overview.
The USA added the most students (260,000) but Canada grew fastest in percentage terms (over 135%). Reporting only one of these two measures misses a key comparison.
There are only two years of data. Words such as "steadily", "gradually" or "fluctuated" imply intermediate data points that do not exist. Compare the two snapshots; do not narrate a curve.
The prompt proposes banning private cars from city centres altogether. Essays about reducing car ownership in general, electric vehicles or rural driving are off-topic.
"To what extent" invites a graded answer, but "I partly agree" must still be a clear, defended stance — for example, agreeing with a ban on through-traffic but not on residents and deliveries. Listing pros and cons without a verdict reads as a different essay type.
High-scoring answers engage with the practical objections — disabled residents, shop deliveries, night workers without public transport — and explain how a ban would handle them. Pretending no one loses out is shallow development.