Opinion essays (agree / disagree)
Master the most common Task 2 question type. Choose a full, partial or balanced position on ‘agree or disagree’ and ‘to what extent’ questions, state its extent precisely, hold it from introduction to conclusion and structure the essay to prove it.
By the end of this lesson you will be able to:
- Recognise opinion-essay wordings and what each one requires
- Choose between a full, partial and balanced position, and state the extent precisely
- Keep your position consistent across the introduction, body paragraphs and conclusion
- Choose a body-paragraph structure that fits your position, including concession and rebuttal
- Write a complete 250+ word opinion essay in 40 minutes
Opinion question wordings
| Question wording | What it asks for | Watch out for |
|---|---|---|
To what extent do you agree or disagree? | How far you agree: completely, largely, partly or not at all | State the extent in your thesis. ‘I agree’ is acceptable, but ‘I largely agree’ or ‘I agree, but only for…’ shows precision. |
Do you agree or disagree? | Your view on the statement; full and partial agreement are both acceptable | Plan it exactly like a ‘to what extent’ question. |
What is your opinion? / What do you think? | Your view on an issue or a proposal | Check the prompt for a second question. If there is one, it is a two-part essay. |
Is this a positive or negative development? | Your judgement of a trend | Answer it as an opinion (positive, negative or mainly one of them), with reasons. |
Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? | An opinion on the balance of pros and cons | This has its own lesson (advantages and disadvantages). You must say which side wins. |
There is no ‘correct’ opinion
Examiners do not give more marks for agreeing than for disagreeing, and they do not compare your opinion with their own. They assess whether your position is clear, relevant and well supported. So choose the position you can develop best in 40 minutes, which is not necessarily the one you feel most strongly about.
Three types of position
1. Full position (one-sided). You agree or disagree completely, and both body paragraphs support you. This is the easiest structure to keep clear, and it is ideal when you can think of two strong reasons on one side. You can still add depth by conceding and then rebutting the strongest counter-argument.
2. Partial position (leaning). You accept that the other side has a point, but one side clearly wins: I largely agree… / I agree, but only up to a point… One body paragraph covers the side you accept less, and the other covers the side you favour.
3. Balanced or conditional position. The statement is true in some cases and false in others, so you draw a dividing line: I agree in the case of X, but not Y. This works well when the prompt contains absolute words such as all, every, only, always or should be banned.
Whichever you choose, apply the one-sentence test. Could the examiner summarise your position in one sentence after reading your introduction? If not, it is not clear yet. “I partly agree and partly disagree” fails this test because it does not say which part.
Positions, thesis language and body plans
| Position | Thesis language | Body plan | Best when… |
|---|---|---|---|
Full agreement or disagreement | I completely agree that… / I strongly disagree with the view that… | Body 1: reason 1. Body 2: reason 2. | You have two strong, developable reasons on one side |
Full, with concession | Although…, I firmly believe that… | Body 1: the strongest opposing argument, then why it is weaker. Body 2: your main reason. | There is an obvious counter-argument and you want to show depth |
Partial (leaning) | I largely agree that…, although… / I agree only up to a point:… | Body 1: the side you accept less. Body 2: the side you favour, developed more fully. | You see merit on both sides, but one clearly wins |
Balanced or conditional | I agree in the case of X, but not Y. / … is justified for X, but not for Y. | Body 1: where the statement is true. Body 2: where it is not. | The prompt is absolute (all, every, only, always) |
Question: Some people believe that all advertising aimed at children should be banned. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
A. Full agreement
I completely agree that advertising aimed at children should be banned, because young children cannot recognise persuasive techniques and such adverts encourage unhealthy eating habits.
B. Full disagreement
I disagree with a total ban, since it would be almost impossible to enforce online and would deprive children’s television of essential funding.
C. Partial (leaning towards agreement)
Although advertising helps to fund children’s entertainment, I largely agree with a ban, as the harm it does to young viewers outweighs this financial benefit.
D. Balanced or conditional
I agree with a ban on adverts aimed at very young children, who cannot tell advertising from entertainment, but not for teenagers, who are better served by learning to judge advertising critically.
- A and BBoth are full positions with two reasons previewed. Each gives the essay a ready-made plan: one body paragraph per reason.
- C‘Although…’ signals a concession and ‘largely agree’ states the extent. Body 1 handles the funding argument, and Body 2 develops the harm.
- DThe dividing line (age) makes a balanced position perfectly clear. The examiner knows exactly where the writer stands for each group.
- What all four shareEach passes the one-sentence test. None of them says only ‘I partly agree’ or ‘there are pros and cons’.
Vague vs precise statements of extent
Band 6: the extent is unclear
Nowadays advertising is everywhere. Some people think advertising for children should be banned. I agree with this statement to some extent. In this essay I will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of advertising.
I partly agree and partly disagree with this opinion.
Band 8: the extent is precise
Children today are exposed to a constant stream of advertisements, not only on television but also on video platforms and in mobile games. Some argue that all advertising aimed at children should be prohibited by law. Although such a ban would have financial costs, I strongly agree with it, because…
I agree that adverts for unhealthy food should be banned from children’s programmes, but a ban on all advertising would be neither practical nor necessary.
‘To some extent’ and ‘partly agree’ are not wrong in themselves, but on their own they leave the examiner asking: to WHAT extent, and which part? The first band 6 introduction also promises to ‘discuss the advantages and disadvantages’, which belongs to a different essay type and suggests the writer will avoid taking a position. The band 8 versions state the stance (strongly agree; agree for unhealthy food but not for all advertising) and preview the reasons, so the whole essay has a clear target.
Drifting vs consistent: two essay skeletons
Drifting position (Task Response band 5–6)
Thesis: I completely agree that advertising to children should be banned.
Body 1 topic sentence: Advertising makes children want unhealthy food.
Body 2 topic sentence: On the other hand, advertising pays for children’s TV programmes, which is very important.
Conclusion: In conclusion, advertising has both advantages and disadvantages.
Consistent position (Task Response band 8)
Thesis: Although such a ban would have financial costs, I strongly agree with it.
Body 1 topic sentence: Admittedly, advertising revenue pays for much of the entertainment that children enjoy. (The paragraph then shows that other funding models exist.)
Body 2 topic sentence: More importantly, advertising aimed at children is fundamentally unfair.
Conclusion: In conclusion, while a ban would force broadcasters to find new sources of income, I am convinced that this price is worth paying.
Both skeletons mention the same counter-argument: advertising funds children’s TV. The difference is what happens to it. On the left it appears as an unanswered point for the other side, so the essay ends up agreeing and disagreeing at once. On the right it is introduced as a concession (‘Admittedly’), answered within the same paragraph and already built into the thesis (‘Although such a ban would have financial costs’), so the position never moves.
Check your understanding: positions and consistency
6 questions- 1
Question: Some people think that all students should study a science subject until they finish school. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Which thesis is clearest?
- 2
Examiners give higher marks to candidates who agree with the statement in the question.
- 3
A prompt says: “Only governments can solve environmental problems.” Which position type often works well for a statement like this?
- 4
Choose TWO ways to keep your position consistent.
Select 2.
- 5
Match the thesis language to the type of position.
I completely agree that…Although…, I firmly believe that…I largely agree that…, although…I agree in the case of X, but not Y. - 6
Admittedly, adverts fund many children’s channels. , this is not a convincing reason to allow them.
Answer every question to check.
Choose and hold your position: the five-minute plan
- 1
Underline the exact claim
Find the claim and its strength words: all, only, always, should be banned, the best way. Absolute words often invite a partial or conditional position.
- 2
Brainstorm both sides for 60 seconds
Jot down two or three ideas for each side without judging them yet.
- 3
Choose the position you can prove
Pick the side, or the dividing line, with the two strongest and most developable ideas. Remember that the examiner marks your support, not your opinion.
- 4
Write your one-sentence position
Write the thesis in your plan and keep it in front of you: Although X, I firmly believe Y, because A and B.
- 5
Check each topic sentence against it
Before each body paragraph, ask: does this topic sentence support my thesis, or concede and then rebut? If it simply argues the other side, rewrite it.
- 6
Write the conclusion from the thesis
Keep the stance and change the words. This step alone prevents most drifting positions.
Three essay blueprints
| Paragraph | Plan A: full position | Plan B: full, with concession | Plan C: partial or balanced |
|---|---|---|---|
Introduction (40–60 words) | Paraphrase + full position + two reasons | Paraphrase + ‘Although X, I firmly believe Y’ | Paraphrase + the extent or the dividing line |
Body 1 (100–140 words) | Reason 1, using PEEL | Concession: the strongest opposing argument, then why it is weaker | The side you accept less, or where the statement is true |
Body 2 (100–140 words) | Reason 2, using PEEL | Your main reason, fully developed | The side you favour, or where the statement is false |
Conclusion (30–60 words) | Restate the full position and reasons | Restate the position, acknowledging the concession | Restate the precise extent |
Question: Some people believe that all advertising aimed at children should be banned. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Children today are exposed to a constant stream of advertisements, not only on television but also on video platforms and in mobile games. Some argue that all advertising aimed at children should be prohibited by law. Although such a ban would have financial costs, I strongly agree with it, because young children cannot recognise when they are being persuaded and the products most heavily marketed to them are often harmful to their health.
Admittedly, advertising revenue pays for much of the entertainment that children enjoy. Many children’s channels and free apps depend heavily on adverts, and a ban could force some of them to close or to charge fees that poorer families cannot afford. However, this is not a convincing reason to allow the practice to continue. Public broadcasters such as the BBC already produce high-quality children’s programmes without commercial breaks, which shows that other funding models are possible when children’s media is treated as a public good rather than a marketplace.
More importantly, advertising aimed at children is fundamentally unfair. Research on child development suggests that most children under about eight do not understand that an advert is designed to persuade them, so they accept its claims as simple truth. Advertisers exploit this trust by linking sugary snacks and fast food to cartoon characters and free toys. A five-year-old who sees the same cheerful advert for a chocolate drink several times a day is likely to demand it on every shopping trip. Over time, such marketing shapes eating habits that contribute to rising rates of childhood obesity and tooth decay.
In conclusion, while banning advertising aimed at children would force broadcasters to find new sources of income, I am convinced that this price is worth paying. Children are too young to defend themselves against persuasive techniques, and protecting their health must take priority over commercial interests.
(About 305 words)
- IntroductionSentence 1 sets up the topic with specific background (video platforms, mobile games). Sentence 2 paraphrases the claim (‘banned’ becomes ‘prohibited by law’). Sentence 3 is the thesis, containing a concession (‘Although… financial costs’), a clear stance (‘strongly agree’) and two previewed reasons.
- Body 1: concession and rebuttal‘Admittedly’ introduces the strongest argument against the writer’s view and develops it fairly: channels and apps could close or charge fees. ‘However’ turns it round, and the BBC example proves that the alternative is realistic. The paragraph ends by supporting the thesis, so the position never wobbles.
- Body 2: the main argument‘More importantly’ signals the writer’s strongest point. The chain runs: children cannot recognise persuasion, so they trust adverts; advertisers exploit that trust; children demand the products; habits form that damage health. The hypothetical five-year-old makes the chain concrete.
- ConclusionIt mirrors the thesis, with the concession (‘would force broadcasters to find new sources of income’) and the stance (‘this price is worth paying’). Both reasons are compressed into the final sentence, and nothing new is added.
- Consistency checkThesis: agree. Body 1: concede, then defend the thesis. Body 2: support. Conclusion: agree. A reader could stop after any paragraph and still know the writer’s view, which is what a ‘clear position throughout’ looks like.
- Language for band 8+Hedging (‘suggests that most children’, ‘is likely to’), precise collocations (exploit this trust, a public good, take priority over commercial interests) and a range of complex structures (concessive, relative and result clauses). The linking is not mechanical: there is no ‘Firstly… Secondly…’.
- LengthAbout 305 words in four paragraphs, comfortably above 250 without padding. The two body paragraphs carry most of the words, as they should.
Writing Task 2 practice
250+ words · 40 minWrite a full opinion essay. You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
Some people believe that all university students should be required to complete a period of work experience as part of their degree.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Write at least 250 words.
Before you write (5 minutes): underline the absolute words in the prompt (all, required), choose Plan A, B or C, and write your one-sentence position.
Self-check before submitting
- ☐ The introduction paraphrases the question and states your position with its extent (fully, largely, partly or conditionally)
- ☐ If you partly agree, you say exactly which part you accept and which you reject
- ☐ Each body paragraph has one clear central idea that supports your position, or concedes and then rebuts
- ☐ Each body paragraph explains its idea in a chain and includes a specific or hypothetical example
- ☐ Your position is the same in the introduction, the body and the conclusion
- ☐ The conclusion restates the position in fresh words, with no new ideas
- ☐ Linking is varied: not every sentence starts with a connector, and there is no automatic ‘On the other hand’
- ☐ 250+ words (aim for 270–320), written in about 40 minutes
Final quiz: opinion essays
10 questions- 1
Which of these is an opinion (agree/disagree) question?
- 2
Find and correct the mistake:
In my opinion, I think that the government should invest more in rural healthcare.
- 3
Find and correct the mistake:
Admittedly, online classes are flexible. Although, they cannot replace laboratory work.
- 4
Put the parts of a Plan B (full position with concession) essay in order.
Drag the cards (or use the arrows) into the correct order.
- 1Body 2: the main supporting reason, fully developed
- 2Introduction: paraphrase, then ‘Although X, I firmly believe Y’
- 3Body 1: the strongest opposing argument, followed by a rebuttal
- 4Conclusion: the same position, acknowledging the concession
- 5
An essay’s thesis says ‘I strongly agree’. Body 1 supports it, Body 2 argues the opposite with no rebuttal, and the conclusion says ‘both sides are valid’. Which criterion is most directly affected?
- 6
Which TWO theses state a precise extent?
Select 2.
- 7
In an opinion essay it is acceptable to use ‘I’, for example ‘I believe that…’.
- 8
I support the proposal, certain reservations about its cost.
- 9
In a full-agreement essay, which Body 1 topic sentence introduces a concession correctly?
- 10
Question: Private cars should be banned from city centres. To what extent do you agree or disagree? You plan to argue for a ban ‘only during weekday working hours’. Which position type is this?
Answer every question to check.
Key takeaways
Vocabulary for arguing a position
Saved as flashcards with a free accountconcede
verb/kənˈsiːd/
to admit that something is true, often unwillingly, while keeping your overall view
স্বীকার করে নেওয়া
I concede that a ban would be difficult to enforce online, but this does not make it wrong.
compelling
adjective/kəmˈpelɪŋ/
very convincing and difficult to argue against
জোরালো; অত্যন্ত বিশ্বাসযোগ্য
There is a compelling case for protecting young children from targeted advertising.
reservation
noun/ˌrezəˈveɪʃn/
a doubt that stops you agreeing completely with something
আপত্তি; দ্বিধা
I support the proposal, with certain reservations about how it would be funded.
prohibit
verb/prəˈhɪbɪt/
to officially forbid something, especially by law
নিষিদ্ধ করা
Sweden prohibits television advertising aimed at children under twelve.
exploit
verb/ɪkˈsplɔɪt/
to use someone or something unfairly for your own advantage
অন্যায়ভাবে সুবিধা নেওয়া; শোষণ করা
Advertisers exploit children’s trust by linking snacks to cartoon characters.
detrimental
adjective/ˌdetrɪˈmentl/
causing harm or damage
ক্ষতিকর
Excessive screen time can be detrimental to young children’s sleep.
justify
verb/ˈdʒʌstɪfaɪ/
to show that a decision or action is reasonable or necessary
যৌক্তিকতা প্রমাণ করা
The health risks justify stricter controls on food advertising.
vulnerable
adjective/ˈvʌlnərəbl/
easily harmed, influenced or attacked
সহজে ক্ষতিগ্রস্ত হতে পারে এমন; ঝুঁকিপূর্ণ
Young children are especially vulnerable to persuasive marketing.
Keep your progress
You've completed 0 of 3 activities. A free Abroadway account saves your scores, turns new vocabulary into flashcards and builds a daily plan around your target band, with a full mock exam every week.