What we eat, and how long we live
A Task 1 pie-chart comparison and a Task 2 problem-and-solution essay, written, self-assessed, and shown beside the Band 7.5+ models, with the moves that earn the marks.
How to use this. Write both tasks in the boxes below, Task 1 in twenty minutes, Task 2 in forty, as in the real test. When you have finished, open Self-assessment to mark your own work against the four criteria, then compare it with the Band 7.5+ models and the notes on exactly what lifts a response up a band. You can download a copy of everything to keep. For a person to mark your writing against the criteria, the first lesson includes one marked Task 2.
Describe the pie charts.
Recommended 20 minutes · at least 150 words
The two pie charts below show the proportions of different types of food consumed by an average household in the United Kingdom in 1980 and in 2020.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
Write the essay.
Recommended 40 minutes · at least 250 words · carries twice the marks
In many parts of the world, people are living significantly longer than in previous generations, and the proportion of citizens aged over 65 is rising rapidly. Whilst this reflects real advances in medicine and living standards, it also presents substantial challenges for governments, employers and families.
What problems does this demographic shift cause, and what measures could be taken to address them?
Mark your own work.
Be honest with yourself against the four criteria, the same four an examiner uses. Then read the model answers and the notes on exactly what moves a response up a band.
Task Response
Coherence & Cohesion
Lexical Resource
Grammatical Range & Accuracy
The Band 7.5+ models, and what earns the marks
What the task wants. Two pies, six slices each, forty years apart. The mark is not in reading off all twelve figures but in naming the single change that runs through them: the British household shifted from fresh food towards processed convenience food. A Band 5 lists every slice; a Band 7.5 states that shift first and then uses the figures as evidence for it.
The target · Band 7.5+ · modelThe two pie charts compare the make-up of the food eaten by a typical British household in 1980 and in 2020, divided into six categories. Overall, the most striking change over the four decades was a marked move away from fresh produce and towards processed, convenience food: ready meals rose from the smallest category to one of the largest, while fresh fruit and vegetables, though still substantial, lost ground. In 1980, fresh fruit and vegetables made up the largest share at 28%, followed by meat and fish at 25%, with ready meals accounting for a mere 6%. By 2020 the picture had been reshaped. Ready and processed meals had nearly quadrupled to 23%, overtaking meat and fish, which had fallen by seven points to 18%. Fresh fruit and vegetables slipped to 22%, and the share taken by sweets, snacks and drinks doubled, from 6% to 12%. Bread, cereals and dairy both eased modestly, by six and four points respectively.
Why it scores. A genuine overview stated up front (fresh → processed), comparison built in throughout (overtaking, fell by, slipped, doubled) rather than two separate descriptions, accurate figures used as evidence, and controlled proportion language that never just repeats was.
Where weaker responses lose marks. Describing 1980 in full and then 2020 in full, with no comparison, so the reader has to do the work; no overview, or one that simply says "there were many changes"; reciting all six slices at equal length; and figure slips, increased with 17% for increased by 17%, the most biggest, a missing percentage sign, that quietly cap accuracy.
What the task wants. A two-part question: problems and measures. Both halves must be answered, and to a similar depth, an essay that lists three problems but offers a single vague solution is penalised under Task Response however well written. The cleanest structure devotes one body paragraph to each, and ties each measure to a problem already raised.
The target · Band 7.5+ · model paragraphsIntroduction, framing both halves. Populations across much of the world are ageing rapidly, as longer lifespans combine with falling birth rates to leave a growing share of people above retirement age. While this is in many ways a triumph, it carries real economic and social costs, and in this essay I will outline the chief problems it creates before considering how governments might respond.
Problems. The most pressing difficulty is fiscal. As the ratio of retired people to working-age taxpayers rises, the state must fund more pensions and far more healthcare from a proportionally smaller workforce, straining public budgets. There is a human cost too: with fewer younger relatives nearby, the burden of caring for the very old increasingly falls on a shrinking number of family members, many already in work, or on an underfunded care system.
Measures. Several responses can ease this. Raising the retirement age, and making it easier for older people to keep working part-time, both widens the tax base and keeps experienced workers contributing for longer. Carefully managed immigration of working-age people can offset a falling domestic workforce. And sustained investment in geriatric healthcare and professional care services, funded in part by incentivising private pension saving during working life, would relieve the pressure on families directly.
Conclusion. In conclusion, an ageing population places a genuine strain on public finances and on families alike. None of these pressures is insurmountable, but addressing them will require governments to act on several fronts at once, on the labour market, on migration, and on care, rather than relying on any single remedy.
Why it scores. Both parts answered with equal weight; each measure maps onto a problem already named (fiscal strain → later working + migration; family burden → care investment); the reasoning is developed rather than listed; and the conclusion gathers the threads without adding anything new.
Where weaker responses lose marks. Spending three-quarters of the essay on problems and rushing the measures; proposing solutions that answer no stated problem; one giant unbroken paragraph per half; and the recurring Task 2 ceiling, comma splices joining full sentences with only a comma, which holds an otherwise strong essay at 6.5 on accuracy.
These are model answers I wrote for this paper, shown with the criterion marks they would earn and the reasons. The first lesson includes one of your own Task 2s, marked the same way against the four criteria and returned annotated, line by line.
Take your work with you.
Download your two answers alongside the target models, so you can revise them later or bring them to a lesson.
Next, online: Paper 04, a process diagram and an advantages-and-disadvantages essay · or back to Paper 02 · Paper 01.
Send a task. Get it back marked.
A paper tells you the question. It can’t tell you why your answer sits at 6.5.
Write your response to the Task 2 above and send it to me. I’ll mark it in detail against the four assessment criteria and return it to you annotated, line by line, so you can see exactly where the band is sitting and what is holding it down. Written work is handled this way around the lessons, sent over and returned marked between sessions, which keeps the fifty minutes themselves free for speaking. The first lesson is a full assessment. Regular lessons are £20 for fifty minutes, one to one, in proper British English.