1. The four scoring criteria
Cambridge publishes four criteria, each scored 0–9:
- Task Response (TR) — Did you address every part of the prompt with a sustained position?
- Coherence & Cohesion (CC) — Are paragraphs organised, with appropriate linking?
- Lexical Resource (LR) — Is vocabulary varied, precise, idiomatic?
- Grammatical Range & Accuracy (GRA) — Do you control complex sentences with few errors?
Band 7 is the band that opens English-taught master's programmes. The pivotal insight: you must hit 7 in every criterion. Any one criterion at 6 pulls the overall band down to 6.5.
2. The 4-paragraph structure
Paragraph 1 — Introduction (40–50 words)
- Sentence 1: paraphrase the prompt's background
- Sentence 2: your thesis (clear position, full sentence)
- Sentence 3: roadmap (what the next two body paragraphs will cover)
Paragraph 2 — Main idea 1 + evidence (90–110 words)
- Topic sentence
- Reason (why is this true?)
- Concrete example (real or hypothetical)
- Mini-conclusion (link back to thesis)
Paragraph 3 — Main idea 2 + evidence (90–110 words)
- Same structure
- Optional: acknowledge a counter-view, then refute it
Paragraph 4 — Conclusion (30–40 words)
- Restate position in fresh wording
- One forward-looking sentence (implication or recommendation)
Total: 250–310 words. Fits the 40-minute time budget.
3. Annotated sample essay (original, not from any exam)
Prompt: Some people believe that universities should focus more on practical skills, while others think they should prioritise academic theory. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
In recent years, the debate over whether universities should emphasise practical skills or academic theory has intensified. While both approaches have merits, I firmly believe that a balanced curriculum, with a stronger lean towards theory, best prepares students for long-term success.
Technique 1 — Open with "the debate over…" to paraphrase the prompt. Thesis is explicit: "lean towards theory." Roadmap signalled in the same sentence.
Proponents of practical training argue that hands-on experience equips graduates with the immediate competencies employers demand. For instance, engineering students who spend their final year on industry-sponsored projects are often hired before graduation. This approach undeniably narrows the gap between classroom and workplace, especially in fast-evolving fields like software development. However, such skills can become obsolete within a few years if not underpinned by deeper understanding.
Technique 2 — Concession-then-rebuttal: acknowledge the opposing view fairly (first sentence), give a concrete example (engineering), then pivot with "However" toward your own position.
Conversely, a curriculum rooted in academic theory cultivates the analytical mindset that allows graduates to adapt across decades. A physics graduate who masters first principles, for example, can pivot from research to finance to data science with relative ease, because the underlying reasoning transfers. This adaptability is increasingly valuable in an economy where the average professional will change careers four or five times.
Technique 3 — Linking word "Conversely" + abstract claim + concrete example (physics graduate) + data-sounding generalisation ("four or five times").
In conclusion, while practical training accelerates short-term employability, academic theory remains the surer foundation for sustained career growth. Universities should therefore preserve a robust theoretical core, supplemented by practical modules rather than replaced by them.
Technique 4 — Restate position in different words, then forward-looking recommendation.
4. What makes this Band 7+
- TR — explicit, sustained position throughout; both views genuinely discussed
- CC — each paragraph has a topic sentence; linking via "Proponents… Conversely… In conclusion"
- LR — chunked phrases like "narrows the gap between," "underpinned by," "first principles"
- GRA — complex sentences ("while practical training accelerates…, academic theory remains…"), reduced relative clauses ("rooted in academic theory")
5. Self-check rubric
After writing, ask yourself:
- [ ] Is the thesis explicit by sentence 2 of the introduction?
- [ ] Does each body paragraph open with a topic sentence?
- [ ] Are examples concrete (numbers, names, scenes) rather than vague?
- [ ] Are there at least 3 high-frequency academic chunks?
- [ ] Are there at least 2 complex sentence structures?
- [ ] Does the conclusion avoid simply repeating the introduction?
5 or more ticks → Band 7 potential. Less → identify which criterion is dragging and rewrite that paragraph.
6. One closing rule
A Band 7 Task 2 is clear structure + concrete examples + precise language — not exotic vocabulary. Lock in the structure first; vocabulary is a multiplier on top.