Written Communication: Building a Reasoned Argument Under Time Pressure
What the section actually tests
Written Communication asks you to produce two short essays that argue a position on a social or ethical issue. Markers reward clear thinking, not vocabulary. The concepts you must control are: thesis, justification, counter-argument, rebuttal, cohesion, and register.
Structure that scores
Open with a thesis that takes a side and hints at your reasoning. Each body paragraph should advance one reason, supported by a concrete example drawn from history, science, law, or ordinary life. Anticipate the strongest objection and answer it. Close by extending the thesis rather than merely restating it.
Traps
- The fence-sitter. "Both sides have merit" without committing reads as indecision. Choose a position, then qualify it.
- The example-free claim. Assertions like "society benefits from education" carry no weight unless anchored to something specific.
- Register drift. Slogans and slang lower the mark; so does inflated jargon that obscures meaning.
- Ignoring the prompt's qualifier. Words such as should, inevitable, or only change what you must defend.
Worked rule of thumb
Prompt: "Technology has made us less patient." A weak essay lists examples of impatience. A strong essay argues: impatience has shifted target rather than increased - we tolerate slow downloads poorly but will binge an eight-hour series, showing patience is reallocated, not lost. Then it concedes that attentional habits do change, and rebuts that this is adaptation, not decline.
Use the PEEL check on every paragraph: Point, Evidence, Explanation linking back to the thesis, Link onward. If a paragraph lacks evidence or a link, rewrite it before moving on.
Practice discipline
Plan for four minutes, write for twenty-five, reserve three to proofread for agreement, tense consistency, and sentence variety.