3.1. The Seven Habits That Earn Marks

Not the topic, the question. This one is not about cars in general. It is about private cars, in city centres, on weekdays. Those three limiters must survive into your answer. An essay about pollution, or about cars everywhere and always, is off the question however well it is written.

To what extent do you agree asks where you stand. Decide before you write. Agreeing with a condition is a position. Both sides have merits is not. The examiner should find your position in the introduction, see it in every body paragraph, and read it again in the conclusion.

A body paragraph makes one claim, then explains it with a because, then shows it with an example or a result. Three claims in three sentences is a list, not a paragraph. Two developed ideas beat four undeveloped ones.

I think banning cars is good. It is better for people. Also it is useful for cities. In my country some cities do this. Therefore it should happen.

I agree only when the city can offer a reliable bus or tram in the same hour. A weekday ban on private cars can cut peak delays, because commuters then have one clear rule. If the same streets have no frequent bus, the ban just pushes the jam to the ring road.

A weekday ban would cut delays at the main junctions is precise and says something. A weekday prohibition would ameliorate vehicular congestion says less and uses ameliorate where no one would. A rare word used wrongly costs more than an everyday word used exactly. Learn words that name things in your topic (junction, commuter, ring road, peak hour) before words that only sound academic.

A correct short sentence earns credit. A long sentence with two errors does not, and it can make the reader stop to work out what you meant. Add a relative clause or a conditional only when you can control it. Then check it. The grammar criterion counts errors as well as variety, and from Band 7 it looks for sentences that are frequently error-free.