IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample Essays: Band 7 vs Band 8 Side by Side
Compare real IELTS Writing Task 2 essays at Band 7 and Band 8 level. See exactly what examiners look for with annotated examples on common essay topics.
Why Compare Band 7 and Band 8 Essays?
Most IELTS candidates know roughly what a "good" essay looks like — but they cannot pinpoint what separates a Band 7 from a Band 8. The difference is not about big vocabulary or complex grammar alone. It is about how precisely you answer the question, how well your argument flows, and how naturally you control language.
Below you will find three common Task 2 topics. Each one is written at Band 7 and then rewritten at Band 8, with examiner-style annotations explaining every upgrade. Use these side-by-side comparisons to see exactly where your own writing falls — and what to fix.
Before you read on, make sure you understand how the official band descriptors work across all four criteria: Task Response, Coherence and Cohesion, Lexical Resource, and Grammatical Range and Accuracy.
Essay 1: Technology and Social Interaction
Topic: Some people believe that modern technology has made people more sociable, while others think it has made them less sociable. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Band 7 Version
Technology has changed the way people communicate with each other. Some argue that it has brought people closer together, while others feel it has created distance between individuals. This essay will discuss both perspectives before giving my opinion.
On the one hand, modern technology has clearly made communication easier. Social media platforms such as Instagram and WhatsApp allow people to stay in touch with friends and family regardless of geographical distance. For example, a person working abroad can video-call their parents daily, which was impossible twenty years ago. Online communities also enable people with niche interests to find like-minded individuals they would never meet in real life.
On the other hand, critics argue that technology has made interactions more superficial. People now spend hours scrolling through social media feeds rather than having face-to-face conversations. A common sight in restaurants is a group of friends all looking at their phones instead of talking to each other. Furthermore, the rise of online communication may reduce people's ability to read body language and develop real empathy, skills that are essential for deep social bonds.
In my opinion, while technology provides valuable tools for staying connected, it has overall made people less sociable in meaningful ways. The convenience of digital communication often replaces rather than supplements real human interaction.
In conclusion, technology offers both benefits and drawbacks for social interaction, but I believe the negative effects on deep, genuine connection slightly outweigh the positives.
Word count: 218
Examiner Notes — Band 7
- Task Response (7): Both views are discussed and an opinion is given, but the opinion could be developed further with a more nuanced final point.
- Coherence and Cohesion (7): Clear paragraph structure. Linking words ("On the one hand," "Furthermore") are present but somewhat formulaic.
- Lexical Resource (7): Good range ("niche interests," "superficial," "supplements"), though some expressions feel slightly rehearsed.
- Grammatical Range (7): Mix of simple and complex sentences. Generally accurate, with minor issues in naturalness.
Band 8 Version
The question of whether digital technology strengthens or weakens social bonds divides opinion sharply. While some see unprecedented opportunities for connection, others point to a growing culture of shallow interaction. This essay examines both positions and argues that the outcome depends largely on how individuals choose to use these tools.
There is a compelling case that technology has expanded the scope of human sociability. Platforms like WhatsApp and Zoom have effectively erased geographical barriers — a migrant worker in Dubai can now read bedtime stories to their child in Manila every night. Beyond maintaining existing relationships, technology creates entirely new ones: online forums for rare medical conditions, for instance, provide emotional support that was previously inaccessible. These are not superficial interactions; for many people, they are lifelines.
However, there is equally strong evidence that the same technology fosters disengagement. Research from the University of Michigan found that heavy social media use correlates with increased feelings of loneliness, suggesting that passive consumption of curated content is a poor substitute for genuine dialogue. The phenomenon of "phubbing" — ignoring someone in favour of a phone — has become so widespread that psychologists now study its effect on relationship satisfaction. When technology becomes the default mode of interaction rather than a supplement, the quality of human connection deteriorates.
Ultimately, I believe technology is neither inherently social nor antisocial — it amplifies existing tendencies. A person who actively uses video calls to deepen relationships will become more connected; a person who retreats into passive scrolling will become more isolated. The critical variable is intentionality, not the technology itself.
In conclusion, technology has expanded both the potential for meaningful connection and the risk of superficial engagement. Whether it makes us more or less sociable is, in the end, a personal choice.
Word count: 289
Examiner Notes — Band 8
- Task Response (8): Both views fully developed with specific, well-chosen examples. The opinion goes beyond simply agreeing with one side — it introduces a nuanced third position (intentionality matters).
- Coherence and Cohesion (8): Paragraphing is logical and ideas flow naturally. Cohesive devices are varied and unforced ("Beyond maintaining," "However," "Ultimately").
- Lexical Resource (8): Precise and natural vocabulary ("fosters disengagement," "curated content," "amplifies existing tendencies," "lifelines"). Topic-specific terms used accurately ("phubbing").
- Grammatical Range (8): Wide range of structures used flexibly — conditionals, relative clauses, participle phrases, inversion. Errors are rare and minor.
Key Differences: What Moved This from 7 to 8?
| Criterion | Band 7 | Band 8 |
|---|---|---|
| Task Response | Discusses both sides, gives opinion | Discusses both sides, gives a nuanced opinion with a third angle |
| Coherence | Formulaic linking ("On the one hand…") | Natural transitions woven into sentences |
| Vocabulary | Good range, some rehearsed phrases | Precise, topic-specific, and natural throughout |
| Grammar | Correct but predictable structures | Flexible, varied, and confident control |
| Examples | Generic (restaurants, video calls) | Specific and persuasive (University of Michigan, "phubbing") |
Essay 2: Government Spending on Arts vs Healthcare
Topic: Some people think that governments should spend money on improving healthcare, while others believe that money should be spent on the arts. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Band 7 Version
There is an ongoing debate about whether governments should prioritise healthcare or the arts when allocating public funds. Both areas are important, but opinions differ on which deserves more financial support. This essay will examine both sides and present my view.
Those who support increased healthcare spending have strong arguments. A healthy population is productive and contributes more to the economy. In developing countries especially, millions of people still lack access to basic medical services, clean hospitals, and affordable medication. Investing in healthcare infrastructure directly saves lives and reduces long-term economic costs associated with preventable diseases.
However, supporters of arts funding argue that culture is essential to a well-functioning society. The arts promote creativity, critical thinking, and emotional well-being. Museums, theatres, and public art make cities more attractive and improve quality of life. Without government support, many artistic institutions would close because they cannot survive on ticket sales alone.
In my opinion, healthcare should receive priority funding because it addresses fundamental human needs. Nevertheless, I believe governments can and should fund both — cutting arts funding entirely would be a false economy, since a culturally impoverished society suffers in less visible but equally damaging ways.
In conclusion, while healthcare must come first, balanced investment in the arts is also necessary for a healthy and vibrant society.
Word count: 205
Examiner Notes — Band 7
- Task Response (7): Addresses the question clearly with a stated position. However, the ideas, while relevant, remain at a fairly general level.
- Coherence and Cohesion (7): Well-organised but reliant on predictable paragraph openers.
- Lexical Resource (7): Adequate range with some effective collocations ("false economy," "culturally impoverished"), though overall fairly safe.
- Grammatical Range (7): Competent use of complex sentences. No significant errors, but limited variety.
Band 8 Version
Few budget debates are as persistent as the one between healthcare and the arts. Proponents of each argue that their priority is fundamental to society, and the tension is real — a government dollar spent on a hospital bed is a dollar not spent on a gallery. This essay considers both claims and argues that framing them as mutually exclusive is itself the problem.
The case for healthcare spending is grounded in urgency. The World Health Organization estimates that half the global population still lacks access to essential health services, and in low-income countries, a single illness can push entire families into poverty. Investing in healthcare infrastructure — hospitals, trained personnel, preventive programmes — yields measurable returns: lower mortality, higher workforce participation, and reduced long-term costs. These are not abstract benefits; they translate directly into human survival.
The case for arts funding, while less immediately urgent, is no less legitimate. Societies that invest in culture tend to be more innovative and cohesive. South Korea's strategic investment in cultural industries — what economists call the "Korean Wave" — generated an estimated $12.3 billion in export revenue in 2023 while simultaneously strengthening national identity. On a smaller scale, community arts programmes have been shown to reduce youth crime, improve mental health outcomes, and revitalise neglected neighbourhoods. Defunding the arts does not simply remove entertainment; it removes a social infrastructure that supports well-being.
Rather than choosing between these priorities, governments should recognise that healthcare and the arts often intersect. Art therapy is now a clinically recognised treatment for PTSD and dementia. Music programmes in hospitals measurably reduce patient anxiety and recovery times. The most effective public health campaigns — anti-smoking, HIV awareness — rely on creative storytelling. Treating these as competing budget lines ignores their complementary nature.
In conclusion, both healthcare and the arts deserve sustained public investment. The strongest societies are those that refuse the false choice between keeping people alive and giving them something meaningful to live for.
Word count: 310
Examiner Notes — Band 8
- Task Response (8): Both sides discussed with depth and precision. The response goes beyond simply picking a side — it reframes the question itself and introduces intersection points.
- Coherence and Cohesion (8): Seamless progression between paragraphs. The third body paragraph acts as a bridge that elevates the entire argument.
- Lexical Resource (8): Sophisticated and precise ("mutually exclusive," "yields measurable returns," "revitalise neglected neighbourhoods"). No overuse of academic clichés.
- Grammatical Range (8): Confident control of complex structures including appositives, em-dashes for parenthetical information, and conditional reasoning.
Essay 3: University Education — Opinion Essay
Topic: Some people believe that university education should be free for everyone. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Band 7 Version
University education is expensive in many countries, and some people argue that it should be made free for all students. I partially agree with this view because while free education has clear benefits, it also presents practical challenges.
There are several strong reasons for making university free. First, it would ensure equal access to higher education regardless of family income. Students from low-income backgrounds often cannot afford tuition fees and are therefore denied opportunities that wealthier students take for granted. Second, graduates contribute to the economy through higher productivity and tax payments, which means that public investment in education eventually pays for itself.
However, making university completely free is not without problems. The cost would be enormous and would have to come from increased taxes or cuts to other public services. Additionally, if university is free, there is a risk that some students may not take their studies seriously because they have nothing financially at stake. Countries like Germany offer free university education but maintain strict academic standards to prevent this — not all countries have the infrastructure to do the same.
On balance, I believe that university education should be heavily subsidised but not entirely free. A small contribution from students encourages commitment, while generous scholarships and income-based repayment schemes can protect those who genuinely cannot afford to pay.
In conclusion, while the ideal of free education is admirable, a subsidised model with strong financial support is more realistic and sustainable.
Word count: 224
Examiner Notes — Band 7
- Task Response (7): Clear position (partially agree) with supporting ideas. Adequate development but could push further.
- Coherence and Cohesion (7): Logical flow. Signposting is clear but conventional ("First," "Second," "However").
- Lexical Resource (7): Appropriate vocabulary. Some good collocations ("income-based repayment schemes") but limited range overall.
- Grammatical Range (7): Accurate grammar with some complex structures. Could show more variety.
Band 8 Version
The proposition that university education should be free for everyone is appealing in principle but complicated in practice. While I strongly support removing financial barriers to higher education, I believe a blanket policy of zero tuition oversimplifies what is fundamentally a question about resource allocation, incentive design, and social priorities.
The strongest argument for free university education is equity. In systems where students pay full tuition, access to higher education correlates tightly with family wealth rather than academic ability. A talented student born into poverty faces a choice their wealthier peers never confront: take on crippling debt or abandon their educational ambitions entirely. This is not merely unfair — it is economically wasteful. Research consistently shows that widening university access increases social mobility, raises lifetime earnings across demographics, and generates higher tax revenue that more than offsets the public investment.
However, the blanket elimination of tuition fees creates its own distortions. When university is free, the beneficiaries are disproportionately middle-class students who would have attended anyway — effectively a transfer of wealth from taxpayers to those who need it least. Finland and Germany offer tuition-free university, but they also operate highly selective systems with limited places; the "free for all" model works precisely because "all" is tightly controlled. Countries with larger populations and less selective systems would face unsustainable costs, potentially degrading the quality of education for everyone.
A more effective approach combines targeted subsidies with accountability. Means-tested grants, income-contingent loan repayment, and fully funded scholarships for high-achieving low-income students address the equity problem without the fiscal burden of universal free tuition. Australia's HECS-HELP system, for example, charges fees but ties repayment to post-graduation income — graduates earning below the threshold pay nothing, while higher earners contribute proportionally. This balances access with sustainability.
In conclusion, while the aspiration behind free university education is sound, the most equitable and sustainable path is not zero fees for all but rather a well-designed system that ensures no qualified student is excluded by inability to pay.
Word count: 320
Examiner Notes — Band 8
- Task Response (8): Nuanced, well-supported position. Does not simply agree or disagree — it interrogates the premise and proposes an alternative framework.
- Coherence and Cohesion (8): Each paragraph builds on the previous one. Transitions are embedded in the argument rather than bolted on.
- Lexical Resource (8): Precise and varied ("crippling debt," "blanket elimination," "income-contingent," "disproportionately"). Specialised vocabulary used naturally.
- Grammatical Range (8): Complex structures handled with ease — conditionals, concessive clauses, relative clauses, passive constructions. Virtually error-free.
Common Patterns: What Band 8 Essays Do Differently
After analysing dozens of IELTS essays at both levels, here are the recurring differences:
1. They Answer With Nuance, Not Just Balance
Band 7 essays typically say "both sides have merit, but I lean towards X." Band 8 essays reframe, qualify, or add a dimension the question didn't explicitly ask for. Examiners reward original thinking.
2. They Use Specific Evidence
Band 7: "For example, many people use social media." Band 8: "The University of Michigan's 2017 study found that passive Facebook use correlated with declining well-being."
You do not need to memorise statistics. Even specific, plausible examples — named countries, named policies, named organisations — signal that you are thinking precisely.
3. Their Cohesion Is Invisible
Band 7 essays use connectors like signposts: "Firstly… Secondly… In addition…" Band 8 essays build cohesion through pronoun reference, lexical chains, and logical sequencing so the reader barely notices the transitions.
4. Their Vocabulary Is Precise, Not Impressive
Band 8 does not mean using the longest word possible. It means using the right word. "Amplifies" instead of "increases a lot." "Deteriorates" instead of "gets worse." Precision beats complexity.
5. They Control Length Naturally
Notice that the Band 8 essays above are longer — not because length earns marks, but because developed ideas naturally require more words. Aim for 280–320 words. Use the word counter to check before submitting.
How to Use These Samples for Practice
- Read the Band 7 version first and identify its strengths. Most candidates write at or below this level.
- Read the Band 8 version and highlight every difference you notice.
- Pick one essay topic and write your own response in 40 minutes.
- Compare your essay against both versions. Where does yours sit?
- Rewrite one paragraph at a higher level, applying the patterns above.
Check your essay's word count with the Task 2 word counter, review the full band descriptors to self-assess, and see what Band 7.0 and Band 8.0 mean for your overall IELTS score.
Final Thought
The gap between Band 7 and Band 8 in Writing Task 2 is not about grammar drills or memorising "advanced" vocabulary lists. It is about thinking more precisely and then expressing that thinking clearly. Every essay in this article demonstrates the same core shift: from competent and safe to confident and precise.
If you are currently scoring around Band 6.0 and want to reach Band 7.0, read our step-by-step guide on how to improve from 6.0 to 7.0. For a deep dive into what examiners are looking for in each criterion, explore the Writing Task 2 band descriptors breakdown.