Make one choice and defend it as the better option
Task 2 presents a practical survey decision with two options. Official 2026 preparation material gives about 26 minutes and a target of 150–200 words. Choose one option and explain why it is better. Unlike Task 1, this response does not need email format.
Both options should be plausible. You are not searching for an official correct choice. Your job is to take a clear position, organize relevant reasons, develop them with consequences or examples, and compare the rejected option meaningfully.
Reasoned communication under a practical constraint
The same four Writing dimensions apply. Content/Coherence rewards enough relevant, organized, supported ideas. Vocabulary rewards suitable range and precision. Readability covers paragraphing, connections, grammar, sentence structure, spelling, and punctuation. Task Fulfillment includes the survey purpose, completeness, length, and appropriate style.
A response can be clear without pretending the rejected option has no value. Acknowledging its benefit and then explaining why your chosen option better fits the situation often creates a stronger comparison. This is not a formal debate requiring specialist evidence; it is a practical recommendation grounded in the prompt.
Use choice, criteria, development, and comparison
- Choose the easier argument.Do not spend several minutes discovering your true opinion. Pick the option for which you can produce two distinct, concrete reasons.
- State a controlling position.Name the choice and the main criteria: usefulness, access, cost, convenience, safety, participation, or long-term value.
- Build two reason chains.For each reason, write CLAIM → WHY → EFFECT or EXAMPLE. Development should add meaning, not restate the same adjective.
- Compare on a shared criterion.Acknowledge one benefit of the rejected option, then show why your choice performs better for this group, time, budget, or need.
- Revise the argument.Check that every paragraph supports the chosen option, transitions show the relationship between ideas, references are clear, and the response remains within 150–200 words.
A practical timing split is about three minutes to choose and plan, nineteen minutes to draft, and four minutes to revise. If both options seem equally good, choose the one that gives you clearer consequences and examples. Argument quality matters more than personal loyalty to the choice.
Compare both options on the building's actual needs
Original practice prompt: An apartment building has money for one courtyard improvement. Option A is secure covered bicycle storage. Option B is a covered seating area for residents. Which option should the building choose?
Plan: choose bicycle storage; criteria → broad daily use, existing problem, space efficiency; comparison → seating is social but the lounge already serves that purpose.
Model response:
The building should use the courtyard budget for secure covered bicycle storage. This option would solve an existing problem and provide practical value throughout the year.
First, many residents currently leave bicycles on balconies or beside the lobby stairs. A locked shelter would protect the bicycles from rain and theft while keeping shared walkways clear. It could also encourage more residents to cycle for short trips because storing a bicycle would become easier.
Second, bicycle racks use space efficiently. A shelter along one courtyard wall could hold dozens of bicycles without preventing residents from using the remaining open area. The improvement would therefore benefit both cyclists and people who simply want a less cluttered building.
A covered seating area would be pleasant during social events. However, the building already has an indoor residents' lounge, whereas it has no secure bicycle facility. Using limited funds to meet the unmet need would be the more useful choice.
For these reasons, covered bicycle storage offers the strongest combination of security, convenience, and everyday value.
Why it works: The position is immediate. Each reason moves from a claim to a practical effect, and the comparison respects the seating area's benefit before identifying the more important unmet need.
Why survey responses lose force
- Delaying the choice. The first paragraph summarizes both options but never states a position.
- Repeating one reason. “Convenient,” “easy,” and “saves time” may be the same undeveloped idea.
- Inventing unsupported facts. Precise budgets, survey percentages, or safety statistics appear even though the prompt provides none.
- Attacking the alternative. The rejected option is described as useless when it has an obvious benefit.
- Comparing different criteria. Option A is praised for cost while Option B is rejected for appearance, so the reader cannot evaluate the trade-off.
- Using email format. A greeting and sign-off consume words without helping the survey argument.
Turn a label into development
Weak reason: Extending library hours is more convenient.
Which sentence best develops it?
- Convenience is important and useful for everyone.
- Longer hours are clearly better because the other option is bad.
- Evening access would let shift workers and commuting students visit after their daytime obligations.
- Libraries have existed for many years in communities.
Reveal the answer
C. It identifies who benefits, when they benefit, and why the current schedule creates a constraint. The sentence develops the claim instead of renaming it.
Check the argument from position to comparison
- Did I choose one option clearly in the opening?
- Are my main reasons distinct rather than repeated?
- Does each reason include a cause, effect, example, or practical detail?
- Did I avoid inventing precise facts the prompt does not provide?
- Did I compare both options on at least one shared criterion?
- Does each paragraph support the controlling position?
- Are connectors and reference words accurate and varied?
- Is the response within 150–200 words and free of email framing?