Writing Task 2 — Build a Clear Position

Learn to state a position that answers the question and to carry that judgment through the planned argument.

In Task 2, your position should respond to the actual instruction. Giving an opinion does not mean using “I think” in every sentence, and a clear opinion need not be extreme. This lesson focuses on Task Response and the organisation aspect of Coherence and Cohesion. You will compare positions, edit a weak thesis, plan support and write a short introduction. It is component practice, not a full 250-word essay or a band estimate.

A position is your answer or judgment about the issue. A thesis is a concise statement that makes that judgment visible to the reader; it is usually part of the introduction. It can indicate the reason or direction of the essay without listing every paragraph.

“Both approaches have benefits” may acknowledge complexity, but it does not answer a question asking which approach should be prioritised. A qualification can sharpen a position: “I favour later opening where evening demand is high, provided quiet daytime spaces remain available” states a preference and a condition. It is clearer than refusing to decide.

Consistency means that the support and conclusion fit the judgment you actually stated. It does not mean denying every opposing point. You can acknowledge a cost and explain why you still favour a proposal. Do not change from “optional” in the thesis to “compulsory for everyone” in the conclusion without recognising that these are different proposals.

Original TutorLand prompt:

Some residents think a neighbourhood centre should use its limited funds for longer evening opening hours. Others prefer additional daytime classes. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Weak thesis: “Neighbourhood centres are very important nowadays. Some people like evenings and some people like classes. Both opinions are good and this essay will discuss them.”

The thesis repeats the existence of two views but does not say what the writer favours or how the budget should be used. “Very important nowadays” could introduce many unrelated essays. A reader cannot yet predict the writer’s judgment. The problem is missing task-specific meaning, not the absence of a sophisticated word.

Improved response:

“Although extra daytime classes could broaden the centre’s activities, I would prioritise longer evening opening because residents with daytime work commitments otherwise have limited access.”

Why better: it recognises the competing use of a limited budget and makes a preference clear. The reason connects directly to who can use the centre. It does not claim evening opening helps every resident equally. It also leaves room to discuss the case for classes fairly before explaining the final preference.

Possible support: daytime classes could provide structured learning for people available during the day; evening access could make existing facilities usable for people at work. A conclusion can restate why access should be prioritised under the stated budget constraint. It should not suddenly recommend closing daytime services.

A different position favouring classes could be equally defensible if relevant and supported.

Original TutorLand prompt:

A college is considering requiring every first-year student to attend a weekly study-planning workshop. Do you support, oppose or partly support this proposal? Explain your position.

Compare:

“I completely agree that every student must attend, though attendance should be optional.” This contains incompatible requirements.

“I support making planning workshops available, but I do not support compulsory weekly attendance for every first-year student.” This is a clear position on the actual compulsory proposal. It is not necessarily a rejection of workshops themselves.

To develop a partial disagreement, explain who may benefit and why a blanket weekly requirement may be unnecessary. “It depends” becomes useful only when you name what it depends on and state a resulting judgment. The task asks about a policy, not whether planning skills are valuable in the abstract.

Original TutorLand prompt:

Should a university lend basic laptops to students who cannot afford a suitable device, even if this reduces its budget for campus events?

Weak thesis: “Technology is developing fast. Events are also important. There are advantages and disadvantages to everything.”

Repair it by naming the trade-off and making a decision. One improved response is: “I would prioritise a basic laptop-loan scheme over some campus events because access to a usable device is necessary for many course tasks.” This gives an argument to develop, rather than a promise to discuss unspecified pros and cons.

Check the wording against the prompt. A laptop loan is not a gift of expensive devices to every student. If you invent that broader proposal, your thesis may become clear but irrelevant. A qualification about maintenance or eligibility is possible, but it should clarify rather than erase the judgment.

Original TutorLand prompt:

Some commuters want transport authorities to prioritise more frequent off-peak buses. Others want lower fares on existing services. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

First choose a provisional judgment. Write a two-sentence introduction of about 45–65 words, using your own wording. Then outline two paragraph purposes: one should explain the competing view fairly; the other should support or qualify your position. You may favour either policy or a reasoned conditional compromise.

Test the thesis by asking a partner to identify your preference without seeing your plan. If they cannot, revise it. Then test the plan: would these paragraphs lead naturally to the same judgment? Do not invent fare statistics or claim that every commuter has the same problem. A plausible example about irregular evening services can be hypothetical if clearly introduced as such.

Read your thesis and planned conclusion together:

• Do both answer the same policy question? • Can a reader identify my judgment? • Have I respected the limited budget, target users or other stated conditions? • If I qualify my view, is the condition clear? • Do I discuss required competing views rather than dismiss them? • Do the planned reasons support the thesis instead of reversing it?

Use the final reflection to repair one mismatch. A clear thesis is a foundation, not proof of a strong full essay. After review and publication, continue to Strong Topic Sentences to turn the position into purposeful paragraphs. If you cannot decide yet, list the consequences of each option and make a provisional judgment; refining a position is part of planning, not a failure.