Opinion Essay with an Underdeveloped Thesis
A candidate submits a 138-word opinion essay for the PAU writing task. The prompt: 'Some cities have banned private cars from their centres. Do you agree?' The draft reads, in full: 'Nowadays, contamination is a big problem in all the cities. I think cars should be banned from the centre because they are bad for people and the planet. Also, the centre is small and there are a lot of cars. Some people say they need cars to work, but I think they can use public transport. Public transport is good. In conclusion, I agree with the ban because it is better for everyone. Kids can play in the street and old people can walk. I think it is super important.' The essay has two paragraphs, no title, and uses 'a lot of', 'kids', 'super' and 'good' repeatedly. The task requires 120–150 words, clear organisation, and appropriate register. The teacher must award a band and plan one revision cycle.
1. Assess the draft against the PAU writing criteria: task achievement, coherence and cohesion, lexical range, grammatical range and accuracy, and register. Give a band descriptor and two priorities.
Read the worked answer
Task achievement: The candidate answers the question and takes a clear position. The word count is within range. However, reasons are listed rather than developed: pollution, small centre, traffic, public transport, children and older people. There is no example or consequence. This is adequate but thin.
Coherence and cohesion: Only two paragraphs; the second mixes counterargument, conclusion and new reasons. Linkers are limited to 'Also' and 'In conclusion'. The conclusion introduces new ideas ('Kids can play...') instead of summarising. This weakens organisation.
Lexical range: Repetition of 'good', 'big' and 'a lot of'; no topic-specific vocabulary such as 'emissions', 'congestion', 'pedestrianised' or 'accessibility'. Register is informal: 'kids', 'super important'.
Grammatical range and accuracy: Mostly simple sentences, with few errors. There is little evidence of complex structures (conditionals, relative clauses, passive). Accuracy is not the main problem; range is.
Band judgement: A mid-range pass, roughly 5/10 in a 10-point scale, or 'adequate'. Two priorities: (1) paragraph plan and thesis control; (2) register and lexical upgrading, especially replacing vague evaluative words.
2. Rewrite the introduction and thesis so that it sets up a clear argument and uses an appropriate register. Keep it under 45 words.
Read the worked answer
Model rewrite (39 words): 'Several European cities have banned private cars from central districts to reduce pollution and improve safety. Although some commuters depend on cars, I believe the benefits for public health and urban life justify a ban, provided that public transport is reliable.'
Why this is stronger:
- It narrows 'all the cities' to a specific, plausible context ('several European cities'), which sounds informed rather than sweeping.
- It names two concrete goals: reduce pollution and improve safety. The original 'bad for people and the planet' is too vague.
- It acknowledges the counterargument in a subordinate clause ('Although some commuters depend on cars'), which is a B2 organisational move.
- The thesis is qualified: the ban is justified 'provided that public transport is reliable'. This gives the essay something to develop in later paragraphs.
- Register is formal: 'commuters', 'central districts', 'justify', 'provided that'. It avoids 'kids' and 'super'.
3. Identify three register problems and propose replacements that preserve the candidate's meaning.
Read the worked answer
- 'kids' → 'children' or 'young people'. 'Kids' is conversational. In an opinion essay for a PAU exam, 'children' is neutral and appropriate. If the candidate means teenagers, 'young people' is more precise.
- 'super important' → 'crucial' / 'essential' / 'a key priority'. 'Super' is an intensifier from informal speech. 'Crucial' preserves the strong evaluation without lowering the register. 'Very important' is acceptable but weaker; 'crucial' shows better range.
- 'a lot of cars' → 'heavy traffic' / 'traffic congestion' / 'a high volume of vehicles'. This is both a register and a lexical-range issue. 'A lot of' is not wrong, but it is vague and repetitive. 'Traffic congestion' names the problem precisely and fits the topic.
A fourth possible issue is 'contamination' in the first sentence. In English, 'contamination' usually suggests pollution of water, food or soil; for air pollution in cities, 'pollution' or 'air pollution' is more natural. This is a false friend from Spanish contaminación. Replacing it would improve both accuracy and register.