For Academic Writing Task 2, write at least 250 words in about 40 minutes. See the official IELTS Academic Writing format. This guide’s planning method is a teaching choice, not a required test structure.
1. Separate the two views and the third instruction
Original practice task
How should employees learn new skills?
Some people think employers should teach new skills mainly through structured courses. Others believe employees learn more effectively by doing everyday work with experienced colleagues.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include relevant examples. Write at least 250 words.
There are three jobs here: explain the case for structured courses, explain the case for learning during work, and give your own judgment. The word mainly leaves room for a mixed approach. The question does not say that courses contain no practice or that experienced colleagues never explain a rule. Avoid inventing an extreme version of either view simply because it is easier to criticise.
A fair discussion makes the other position understandable even when you prefer a different approach. Ask what problem its supporters are trying to solve. A course may offer consistent information; work with a colleague may provide immediate feedback in a realistic situation. Once those benefits are clear, you can compare them using the same practical goal: helping an employee perform a new task competently.
This counts up. For a 40-minute practice, try 5 minutes planning, 30 writing and 5 reviewing. Adjust that practice split to suit your needs.
2. Plan with a shared comparison point
Use one situation throughout your notes: an employee learning to manage customer orders. Keeping a shared example prevents the discussion from drifting into unrelated claims about universities, childhood education or personal hobbies.
- Introduction: identify the two approaches; favour supported workplace practice for routine skills after a structured introduction.
- Course paragraph: consistent sequence and protected learning time; show why a new order system needs an explanation of its main steps.
- Workplace paragraph: immediate application and useful feedback; illustrate how a colleague can explain an unusual customer request.
- Evaluation: recognise that a good practitioner is not automatically a good trainer. Recommend trained mentors and time for questions.
- Conclusion: make the relationship clear: courses establish a foundation, while supervised practice develops everyday competence.
You do not need exactly the same number of words for each view. You do need enough explanation for both to be meaningful. If one side receives a developed paragraph while the other is dismissed in a sentence, check whether you have really discussed it. Equally, giving both views equal space does not excuse leaving your own opinion until an unexplained final sentence.
Try a fair-summary test before writing. Complete “Supporters of courses value ___ because ___” and “Supporters of workplace learning value ___ because ___.” If you cannot finish one of these fairly, you may need a stronger reason for that side. Your opinion can appear in the introduction and be reinforced by comparisons throughout the essay; it does not need a detached paragraph that repeats everything already said.
Write your own essay before opening the model
Your draft stays on this page. It is not submitted or saved by this site. Copy it elsewhere before leaving or reloading. The word count is approximate and does not assess quality.
3. Study the complete original model
This response illustrates one defensible approach. It is original teaching material, not an examiner-assessed script, and has no assigned band score. Compare its decisions with your own rather than memorising the wording.
Read the complete model essay
Employers can help staff learn through organised courses or through guided experience in their daily work. Both approaches have a useful role. In my view, a structured introduction is valuable, but most routine workplace skills are best developed through supervised practice with colleagues who have been prepared to teach them.
People who favour courses have a strong argument about consistency. A planned programme can ensure that every employee receives the same explanation of essential procedures, rather than relying on whatever advice happens to be available during a busy shift. For example, before staff use a new order system, a short course can introduce the main stages and demonstrate how mistakes should be corrected. Employees also have time to ask basic questions without delaying customers. This common foundation is particularly helpful when an organisation wants several teams to follow the same process.
However, working alongside an experienced colleague can make learning more directly relevant. Real tasks contain variations that a course may not anticipate, and a learner can receive feedback while the details are still fresh. An employee dealing with an unusual customer request, for instance, can discuss possible responses with a colleague and then apply the explanation immediately. Repeated experience of this kind can connect general instructions to practical decisions. This is why I would make supported workplace practice the main method for developing everyday competence.
The quality of that support matters. Being good at a job does not automatically make someone an effective teacher, and an overloaded colleague may simply complete the task instead of explaining it. Employers should therefore give mentors time to demonstrate, observe and discuss work. A short course followed by planned practice is more convincing than leaving new staff to learn by trial and error.
In conclusion, structured courses offer a reliable foundation and a shared understanding of procedures. Nevertheless, supervised work is usually the stronger way to develop routine skills, provided that colleagues have the time and ability to guide learners. The two methods should form a sequence rather than compete for exclusive use.
What makes this a discussion rather than a list?
- Both views are identifiable. One paragraph explains consistency through courses; another explains immediate application through workplace practice.
- Each view has a reason and a consequence. Shared teaching reduces uneven advice; timely feedback helps people connect instructions to decisions.
- The examples belong to the same setting. The order system and customer request make comparison easier than two unrelated anecdotes would.
- The writer’s preference is conditional. Workplace practice is preferred for routine skills when mentors have time and teaching ability.
- The ending resolves the relationship. Calling the methods a sequence follows from the argument; it is more precise than merely saying both are important.
Read the course paragraph again without the introduction. You can still understand why someone would support that approach. That is a useful sign that the view has been explained fairly rather than included as a token opposite opinion.
4. Revise unfair summaries and missing opinions
Exercise A: remove the false extreme
Revise this sentence: “People who like courses think employees should sit in classrooms forever and never do real work.” Keep the view recognisable to somebody who genuinely supports structured training.
See a fairer version
“Supporters of structured courses argue that employees benefit from a planned explanation of essential skills before they apply them at work.”
The revision presents a plausible reason without inventing an absolute ban on practice. You can disagree with how much training should be course-based after accurately explaining what the view offers.
Exercise B: make the judgment do some work
A conclusion reads: “Both methods have advantages and disadvantages. In my opinion, they are both good.” Rewrite it to express the model’s preference and condition without adding a new example.
Compare one possible conclusion
“Courses can establish a consistent foundation, but I would prioritise supervised workplace practice for routine skills. This approach depends on giving experienced colleagues enough time and guidance to teach effectively.”
The revision says which method should have priority, what the other contributes, and when the preference is reasonable. These are judgments already established in the essay.
As an extension, write a different conclusion that favours courses for highly standardised procedures. Then change the introduction and evaluation paragraph to match it. Revising only the last sentence would leave the essay with two competing positions.
5. Check the response you actually wrote
Choose one unchecked item and make a specific revision. Read the changed paragraph again in context; improving a single sentence should not introduce a new position or break the link to the question.
Format checked on 15 October 2026 against the official IELTS Academic Writing format. The fictional practice prompt, model and exercises are original. Drafts and checklist selections are not saved by this site.