Tip #25 Writing task 2 (Multi-task essays): Ensuring that a balance is met between the two tasks and language focus

Try this process to make sure a multi-task essay such as
Explain the reasons and suggest alternative ways to solve this.
Why is this happening? Do you think we should prohibit this practice?
Try this process:

Pre-Writing Process
1. Introduction:

• Hook: Start with a statistic/quote/universal truth ("Health experts worldwide grapple with...")
  
• Opinion: Clear stance on the debate ("While exercise matters, holistic health requires...")
• Preview: Signal you’ll address both parts ("This essay explores dietary debates and suggests mental health approaches")

2. Body 1 (Opinion on Debate):

• Reason: Brief claim ("Exercise alone cannot offset poor nutrition")
  
• Argumentation: Chain logic ("If people only exercise (A), they may overeat (B), negating calorie deficits (C)")
• Counter: "Gym advocates argue exercise boosts metabolism, but this ignores genetic factors"

3. Body 2 (Alternative Suggestions):

• Suggestion: "Sleep hygiene is equally vital"
  
• Reason: "Poor sleep disrupts hunger hormones"
• Consequence: "If societies prioritized sleep (X), obesity rates might drop (Y), reducing healthcare costs (Z)"
  

4. Conclusion:

• Clincher: "Health is a mosaic, not a single solution"
  
• Summary: 1-line recap + opinion reaffirmed
• Forward Look: "Future research should explore stress management’s role"
  

Task 2 Topic
"Some believe raising fuel taxes reduces emissions best, while others disagree. What’s your view? Suggest alternative environmental policies."

Model Essay (272 words)
[Introduction]
Climate change solutions often spark heated debates, especially around fuel taxation. While carbon pricing has merits, I argue it disproportionately burdens low-income groups. This essay critiques fuel taxes and proposes renewable energy incentives as a fairer alternative.
[Body 1: Opinion on Fuel Taxes]
Higher fuel costs do curb driving (A), potentially lowering emissions (B). However, this ignores socioeconomic disparities (Counter). If gasoline prices rise 20% (X), rural commuters lacking public transit face financial strain (Y), exacerbating inequality (Z). Studies show Norway’s electric vehicle subsidies reduced emissions without penalizing the poor—a more equitable model (Rebuttal).
[Body 2: Alternative Suggestions]
A better approach is subsidizing solar panels. When governments offset installation costs (A), households gain energy independence (B). This not only cuts emissions but stabilizes electricity bills long-term (C). California’s 2022 initiative exemplifies this: 500,000 homes adopted solar, reducing grid reliance by 18% (Example). Such policies create green jobs while protecting vulnerable consumers (Consequence).
[Conclusion]
The road to sustainability needn’t be paved with regressive taxes. By incentivizing renewables and learning from Norway/California, we can fight climate change equitably. I urge policymakers to explore these models globally.

Post-Writing Assessment
Why This Scores Band 9:

1. Task Response:
   • Fully addresses both questions (opinion + alternatives)
     
   • Body 2’s consequence chain: Subsidies → Adoption → Emission cuts + Job creation
     
2. Structure:
   • Body 1: Classic argument → counter → rebuttal
     
   • Body 2: Suggestion → reason → multi-level consequence
     
3. Language:
   • Conditional Chains: "If X → Y → Z" (Body 1) vs. "When A → B → C" (Body 2)
   • Reporting Verbs: "Studies show", "exemplifies"
   • Hedging: "potentially", "might drop" (avoids overclaiming)

Common Mistakes Avoided:
✖ Treating Body 2 as an afterthought (equal depth to Body 1)
✖ Vague alternatives ("use renewables" → specific solar panel policy)
✖ Weak consequence ("saves energy" → detailed 18% grid reduction)
Pro Tip:
For "suggest alternatives" questions, use this formula:
"Implement [Policy] → [Direct Outcome] → [Ripple Effect]"
 

Need tutoring? Call us at 1 + 613-447-1622