IELTS Task 2 Band 7 Sample: Is Species Loss the Biggest Environmental Problem? (Part 2 of 3): What Worked, What Was Missing, and the Path to 7.5

IELTS · Band Score Samples中文版　Updated 2026/11/09

In this post: A contradiction inside a paragraph, why LR was 7 and GRA 8, what this essay needed for 7.5, the same CC habit in another essay, and whether a conclusion can say something new.

Why this essay scored 7: the four criteria one by one (continued)

Contradictions inside a paragraph

Body 2 also contains a small contradiction. First it says global warming definitely poses a threat to people’s lives; two sentences later it says Even though those issues will not influence individuals directly. So does it threaten people’s lives, or does it not affect individuals directly? The reader has to reconcile the two sentences on their own.

In addition, rising sea levels, extreme climate, and the greenhouse effect will happen because of global warming presents the greenhouse effect as a consequence of global warming, when it is actually the cause. That is more an issue of vocabulary or content accuracy, but it also makes the paragraph’s cause-and-effect logic look less rigorous.

Lexical Resource 7 and GRA 8

LR 7: the topic vocabulary is on target. Pollination, species extinction, diversity, sustained development, rising sea levels and daily necessities are all used naturally. What kept it from 8 was precision: the cause and effect of the greenhouse effect; imperative (urgent or pressing would be more accurate here); hot issue (rather informal); and more terrible threats (more serious threats is the natural choice).

GRA 8: this was one of my best essays for grammar in that period. The structures are varied (non-defining relative clauses, since / even though clauses, not only … but also, so … that), and most sentences have no errors. The only clear mistake is global warming is so imperative that should not be ignored: the clause after so … that has no subject. It should be so urgent that it should not be ignored.

What worked, and what was missing for the next band

So how do you get CC to 7? The Band 7 descriptor says, in paraphrase: information and ideas are logically organised and there is clear progression throughout; a range of cohesive devices is used, though there may be some under- or over-use; and each paragraph has a clear central topic. Comparing that with this essay, I think three things are needed:

• Fewer template linkers and more “content linking”. Connect sentences with a key word from the previous sentence, a pronoun or a synonym, instead of starting every sentence with In other words or Furthermore.
• Aim the topic sentence at the question. Change Body 2 to However, I believe other environmental problems are even more serious, which answers “more important” directly.
• Build a link between the two views. The best way to create progression in this question is to point out that global warming and pollution are themselves among the main causes of species loss, so tackling them also tackles the species problem. Then the two paragraphs are no longer just side by side; they form a layered comparison.

Another 8/6/7/8 three days later: the same habit

As I mentioned in Part 1, the essay I wrote on 26 May, Essay 4 (should university students study subjects other than their main subject, from Cambridge 18, Test 2), also scored 8, 6, 7, 8. Put the two side by side and the CC problems are almost identical:

The two essays have completely different topics and arguments, yet the sequence of linkers is almost interchangeable. That is what “mechanical” means in the CC 6 descriptor: the position of each linker was decided in advance, not chosen according to the logical relationship in each sentence. Examiners read hundreds of essays, and they recognise a fixed routine like this at a glance.

My score records show a clear improvement in CC later on: before mid-June, my Task 2 essays mostly scored 6 or 7 for CC; from late June onwards, most of them scored 8. That is also when overall scores of 7.5 started to appear. Of the four criteria, CC changed the most, from 6 to 8. So if your own profile also has high TR and GRA but low CC, here is the good news: it is the criterion with the best chance of improving quickly.

The question I attached to the essay: can a conclusion say something new?

When I submitted this essay, I added a question at the end. In short: the last sentence of my conclusion explains why I support one side, but that reason seems to be a new idea I had not written about earlier. Is that acceptable?

Looking back, I think the problem with that sentence was not that it was “new”, but that it was “empty”. As I feel keeping the environment from being harmed is essential for achieving long-term success in environmental protection basically says “protecting the environment from harm is important for the long-term success of environmental protection”. It is circular and gives no real reason at all. This was a conclusion template I used a lot at the time (as I feel … is essential for achieving long-term success). On some topics it happened to fit; on others it turned into empty words like this.

My view now is this: a conclusion should not introduce a new argument that the body paragraphs have not supported, but it can condense what the body has already said into a single judgement. In this essay, Body 2 had already said that global warming and pollution directly threaten human life. So the conclusion only needed to say “because these problems directly threaten human health, and they are also causes of species loss”. That is a conclusion with real content that does not count as new information.