The opinion essay that became a story about a cousin
Pau, a 17-year-old candidate, chooses the PAU opinion-essay option: 'Some people think mobile phones should be banned in secondary schools. Write an opinion essay of 120-150 words giving your opinion and mentioning at least two arguments.' His handwritten draft is 191 words. The first paragraph says that technology is important, that his school uses phones in class, and then tells a 45-word anecdote about his cousin's new phone. The second paragraph contains one argument, distraction, followed by 'But I think it depends.' He writes 'u', 'gonna', 'a lot of things' and ends with 'That's all.' He does not mention a second argument, and his conclusion repeats the introduction. His teacher has one 20-minute tutorial before the exam and wants him to fix the format and register without memorising a model essay.
1. Diagnose the draft against the PAU requirements of length, task coverage and register. Decide what to cut first and why.
Read the worked answer
Length: 191 words against a 120-150 limit. He is at least 41 words over, and examiners may penalise content that is not controlled. The 45-word cousin anecdote is the first cut: it is narrative, it does not support an argument, and removing it almost solves the length problem.
Task coverage: the prompt asks for an opinion and at least two arguments. He gives one argument, distraction, and then withdraws it with 'But I think it depends.' That is not a second argument; it is indecision. He needs a second reason, for example inequality between students who can afford new phones and those who cannot, or the loss of face-to-face interaction.
Register: 'u', 'gonna', 'a lot of things' and 'That's all' are informal or vague. An opinion essay can use 'a lot of' in moderation, but 'u' and 'gonna' mark it as chat. 'That's all' is a spoken closing formula, not a conclusion.
First cut: the cousin anecdote, because it is the largest block of text that does no argumentative work.
2. Produce a revised version of 135-150 words that keeps Pau's own opinion and adds a second argument. State the word count.
Read the worked answer
Revised essay (138 words):
Nowadays, mobile phones are part of everyday life, but I believe secondary schools should limit their use during lessons. Firstly, phones are a major source of distraction. A single notification can break a student's concentration, and teachers often have to repeat instructions. Secondly, phones can increase inequality, because not every family can afford the latest model, and students may feel pressured to compare devices. However, I do not think a complete ban is the best solution. Phones can be useful for quick research, dictionaries and emergency calls. A clearer rule would be to allow them only when a teacher asks for them. In conclusion, schools should not ban phones completely but should control when and how they are used. This teaches responsible use rather than simply removing the problem, so students benefit from the technology without losing focus.
Reasoning: the structure is opinion, two arguments, concession, solution, conclusion. The cousin anecdote is gone. The second argument is inequality, which is general and arguable, not a story. The conclusion does not simply repeat the introduction: it names the criterion, responsible use, that justifies the proposal.
3. Rewrite Pau's sentence 'Last year my cousin got a new phone and he was very happy' so that it supports an argument instead of telling a story. Explain the change.
Read the worked answer
Rewrite: 'When students are allowed to use their phones freely, they often compare models, which can make those with older devices feel excluded.'
Explanation: the original is an anecdote with a named relative, a time marker and an emotional result. It illustrates nothing general, so it cannot function as evidence. The rewrite removes the cousin and the narrative frame, turns the observation into a repeated pattern ('students ... often compare'), and connects it to a consequence that supports the inequality argument. It also uses a relative clause ('which can make ...') to show the result, which is more mature than joining two short sentences with 'and'.