IELTS Task 2 introductions: five openings scored line by line

There is no band descriptor for an introduction. What the opening actually controls is one clause inside Task Response — whether a clear position is on the page and whether every part of the prompt has been recognised — and that is the only thing worth judging it on.

So this article takes one two-part prompt and five introductions written for it, and marks each against the published Task Response wording, nothing else. Every prompt and every introduction below was written for this article; no real exam question or third-party sample is reproduced.

One qualification before the examples. A band is a judgement on a whole response, not on 45 words of it. What follows judges each opening on two questions the descriptors do ask — are the main parts of the prompt addressed, and is a position visible — and stops there.

Five openings, one prompt. The only questions being asked of each: are both parts recognised, and is there a position.

What the introduction is actually marked on

Task 2 is assessed on four criteria: Task Response, Coherence and Cohesion, Lexical Resource, and Grammatical Range and Accuracy. None of them mentions an introduction, a hook, or a thesis statement. The introduction gets marked because it is usually the first place two Task Response requirements become visible.

The first is coverage. Band 6 Task Response reads: "The main parts of the prompt are addressed (though some may be more fully covered than others)." At band 5 it becomes: "The main parts of the prompt are incompletely addressed." The phrase to notice is main parts — plural, and counted from the prompt itself. IDP's own guidance puts it plainly: "Read the question prompt carefully to see how many parts are in the question."

The second is position. Band 7 Task Response reads: "The main parts of the prompt are appropriately addressed. A clear and developed position is presented." Two adjectives, two different jobs. Developed is settled across the body paragraphs — no introduction can deliver it. Clear can be settled in the opening, and this is where most candidates lose it, because a sentence announcing what the essay will discuss is not a position.

That is the whole test for an opening. Are the parts recognised, and is there an answer someone could disagree with.

One prompt, five introductions

The prompt (written for this article). In many countries, people are working longer hours than they did in the past. Why is this happening, and is it a positive or a negative development?

Two parts: a cause, and an evaluation. Both have to survive into the response.

Introduction 1 — the restatement.

In many countries, people are working longer hours than in the past. This essay will discuss why this is happening and whether it is a positive or a negative development.

Both parts are named, and that is all. The prompt has been reproduced almost word for word and then promised back. There is no answer to part two here, and announcing that one is coming is not the same as presenting one. Against "a clear and developed position is presented", this opening contributes nothing.

Introduction 2 — the background hook.

Since the beginning of civilisation, work has occupied the greater part of human life. In today's modern world, this issue has become a hot topic which is discussed by many people around the globe.

Neither part of the prompt has been touched. No cause is named, no evaluation is offered, and the topic itself has widened from longer hours to work. The band 5 wording — "the main parts of the prompt are incompletely addressed" — is the relevant line, and the widening is how openings like this lead into an essay about a related subject rather than the one on the paper.

Introduction 3 — the clean paraphrase, no position.

The number of hours people spend at work has risen across many economies in recent decades. There are several reasons behind this trend, and its consequences are certainly worth examining.

The paraphrase is genuinely better: hours people spend at work, risen, across many economies are the writer's own. Part one is flagged and part two is flagged. But both are only flagged — no reason is named, no evaluation is given. This is the shape band 6 describes, where the main parts are addressed but some are more fully covered than others, and it is the most common opening at band 6.5.

Introduction 4 — position-shaped, but not a position.

Longer working hours are largely the result of economic pressure and new technology, and while there are arguments on both sides, this development clearly has both benefits and drawbacks.

Part one is now genuinely addressed: two causes are named. Part two is where it fails. Both benefits and drawbacks restates the structure of the question instead of answering it, and no examiner can disagree with it, which is the giveaway. The word clearly does not make a claim clear.

Introduction 5 — both parts, one position.

People in many countries now work longer hours mainly because job security has weakened and digital tools have made work reachable outside the workplace. On balance I consider this a negative development, because the extra hours buy employers little additional output and are paid for in employees' health.

Part one: two named causes. Part two: an answer, stated so that a reader could reject it, with the reason that the body paragraphs will have to defend. That last clause is what makes the position developable — it commits the essay to an argument about output and health, rather than to a list.

Opening	Part 1 (cause)	Part 2 (evaluation)	Position visible	Descriptor line it meets
1 Restatement	Named, not answered	Named, not answered	No	Parts named only
2 Background hook	No	No	No	"incompletely addressed"
3 Clean paraphrase	Flagged	Flagged	No	"addressed (though some may be more fully covered than others)"
4 Position-shaped	Yes	No	No	Part one addressed, part two not
5 Both parts	Yes	Yes	Yes	"a clear and developed position is presented" — the clear half

Only opening 5 does what the band 7 line asks of it, and even there the second half of that line — developed — is still owed by the rest of the essay.

The paraphrase trap

Paraphrasing the prompt is a habit taught almost everywhere, and openings 1 and 3 show why it is not the same thing as answering. IDP's guidance on question prompts is blunt about where the habit ends up: "If you try and answer a question with a formulaic response (a learned response that closely matches the question), your essay will not address the task appropriately and you will lose marks."

What gets penalised is not the reused words. It is the rehearsed opening meeting a prompt with a different number of parts.

Note what is being penalised there. Not the reused words — the learned response. A memorised opening is built for the question the candidate rehearsed, and prompts differ in exactly the place that matters: the number of parts, and what each part asks. A rehearsed two-sentence opener dropped onto a prompt that asks for a cause and an evaluation will address one part fully and the other by mention, which is band 6 wording, not band 7.

Two things are commonly claimed here that have no published basis, and neither is asserted in this article. The first is that words copied from the prompt are excluded from your word count. There is no published rule saying so, and none saying otherwise. The second is a stated mark deduction for formulaic language — IELTS has not published a deduction table for anything, so any figure you see is invented.

The practical version: write the opening after you know your answer, not before. If you cannot state part two of the prompt in a sentence someone could argue with, you do not yet have an essay to introduce.

A frame that is not a template

A template gives you sentences. A frame gives you questions, and the answers change the sentences every time.

1. What is the topic, in your words? Not a synonym swap — a restatement you could say aloud to someone who had not seen the prompt.
2. How many parts does the prompt have, and what does each one ask? Count them before you write. A prompt asking why and is it positive or negative has two; a discuss-both-views-and-give-your-opinion prompt has three.
3. What is your answer to each part, in one clause each? If a clause cannot be disagreed with, it is not an answer.
4. What reason will the body have to defend? One "because" in the opening is what turns a stated position into a developable one.

Run those four on the prompt above and you get opening 5, which is two sentences. Run them on a three-part prompt and you will get more, because there is more to answer. That is the point of a frame over a template: the length follows the prompt, not a rule.

Notice what is not in the list. No background sentence, no hook, no fixed sentence count — none of that appears in any descriptor. And no minimum length for the introduction: the only published length requirement for Task 2 is that you write at least 250 words in total.

FAQ

How long should an IELTS introduction be?

There is no published length for the introduction. The only figure IELTS publishes for Task 2 is the 250-word minimum for the whole response. Openings 1 to 5 above run from 33 to 56 words, and the differences between them are not length.

Can I copy words from the question?

You can, and there is no published rule that copied words are excluded from your count or penalised. The risk is the one IDP names — that a learned opening answers a question you were not asked.

Do I need a background sentence to open with?

No descriptor asks for one. Opening 2 is entirely background and addresses neither part of the prompt.

Should my position go in the introduction or the conclusion?

The descriptors require a position that is clear and developed across the response; they do not say where it starts. Stating it early makes it far easier to keep the body consistent with it, which is what developed is measuring.

Will a strong introduction raise my band?

Only within Task Response, and only for the coverage-and-position part of it. Task Response is one of four criteria, and the other three are earned across the whole essay.

Related reading

• IELTS Task 2 conclusions that reach band 7 — the other end of the essay, scored the same way
• IELTS Task 2 discussion essay band 7.5 sample — a position staying visible from opening to conclusion across a full answer
• Task Achievement vs Task Response — which criterion is marking which task
• How to get band 7 in IELTS Writing — the four criteria as conditions to meet

Official task instructions are on ielts.org.