Writing Task 2 — Writing Effective Conclusions

By the end, you can close a Task 2 argument by restating a consistent judgment and synthesising its central reasons. A conclusion helps the reader see the answer as a whole. It should not introduce an unargued major idea, copy the introduction sentence for sentence or expand into another body paragraph. This relates to Task Response and Coherence and Cohesion, with language accuracy also relevant. A short conclusion exercise is not an official band assessment.

Before writing the conclusion, look back at the task, your introduction and your body reasons. A conclusion should answer the same question and make its final judgment clear. If the essay argued for a limited trial, do not suddenly demand a permanent nationwide policy. Synthesis can join the main reasons: “The trial offers access, but its staffing cost needs monitoring.” This is more useful than listing every example again. For a two-view essay, the conclusion can acknowledge both views briefly while keeping the writer’s opinion visible.

Original TutorLand task idea: a district is considering a shared bicycle station near a ferry pier; discuss one benefit and one concern and give an opinion. Suppose the essay argued that the station could help short local journeys but needs safe parking. Weak conclusion — “In conclusion, the government should also ban social media because it harms young people.” The ban is unrelated and was never developed. A new major claim cannot be rescued by “in conclusion”.

Memorised claim — “Only time will tell whether humanity can solve this problem.” It does not answer whether the bicycle station is worthwhile. Word-for-word repetition — copying the introduction gives no synthesis and may sound mechanical. Overlong ending — adding a new body paragraph about tourism, repair costs and national transport policy overwhelms the close. Vague ending — “There are positive and negative things” hides the writer’s judgment. A concise close is normally enough for the purpose.

Improved example — “Overall, I support a small bicycle-station trial near the ferry pier because it could make short connections easier. The district should proceed only if it provides secure parking and checks how the scheme is used.” This keeps the conditional support from the essay, combines access with the main concern and avoids a new policy topic. It does not copy the introduction verbatim. Another well-supported position could be valid.

Introduction position: “I favour a six-month shared-bicycle trial if secure parking is included.” Body reasons: shorter local trips; risk of bikes blocking the pavement without designated space. Matching close: support a limited trial with parking controls and evaluation. Mismatch: “The scheme must be rejected in every city forever.” That contradicts the introduction and changes scale. Before editing language, test the logic: same proposal, same scope, same judgment? If your reasoning changed as you drafted, revise the introduction and body too; do not disguise the inconsistency.

Guided edit: revise “In conclusion, there are many opinions. Only time will tell. The council should also build a new airport.” Keep only ideas discussed in the bicycle-station plan. Independent application: original TutorLand prompt — “A city library is considering lending portable study lamps to residents. Discuss one benefit and one practical concern, and give your opinion.” Assume your essay supports a small lending trial because it could help learners with poor lighting, while the library needs a simple return-and-repair process. Write a 30–50-word conclusion that closes that exact argument. This is not a full essay.

Check: □ Does my final judgment match the position developed in the essay? □ Have I combined the central reasons rather than repeated every example? □ Is any major new claim appearing for the first time? □ Can I remove memorised filler or copied wording? □ Is the ending concise? This completes the draft core-writing sequence through conclusions. Later modules for editing, a guided full essay and timed Task 2 practice are planned but not created in this phase. This resource remains private until reviewed and published.