IELTS band-score feedback for teachers: explain the evidence, not just the number

Use the four Writing criteria as a feedback map

Task 2 is assessed through Task Response, Coherence and Cohesion, Lexical Resource, and Grammatical Range and Accuracy. A teacher comment should identify which area it addresses. Otherwise, a student may try to solve weak reasoning by adding sophisticated vocabulary.

Use the public descriptors as a reference, not a mechanical error-counting system. The frequency and effect of language problems matter, and judgements about development and organisation require reading the response as a whole. An isolated sentence cannot establish a full essay band.

Connect each important judgement to the response

Take a sentence or paragraph from the student's work and explain what it shows. For Task Response, point to an unanswered instruction or an underdeveloped reason. For cohesion, identify a reference whose meaning is unclear. For vocabulary, show a word choice that distorts meaning rather than praising rare words automatically.

Evidence-based comment

The question asks you to discuss both views, but paragraph two only repeats your own opinion. Explain why some people support the alternative view, then show how your judgement follows from that discussion.

Check the AI estimate before using it in teaching

In English Grader, AI feedback can supply a first-pass band estimate and comments. Teachers can review submissions and save their own band and feedback. If you disagree with the generated explanation, return to the question and original response instead of averaging two numbers without justification.

Practice estimates can vary and are not official IELTS results. Do not promise students that the same score will appear in their exam. Use several timed responses and your professional judgement when discussing readiness.

Turn the assessment into one clear revision priority

A report may mention all four criteria, but the next practice task should be manageable. Select the weakness that most affects communication or task coverage, then one recurring language issue. Ask for a concrete change that you can verify in the revision.

For example, a student who answers only one of two questions needs task coverage first. Polishing punctuation will not fix that omission. After the missing argument is developed, review sentence accuracy within the revised paragraph.

• Name the criterion.
• Show the evidence in the student's answer.
• Explain why it matters.
• Set a revision action and check it in a new attempt.

Discuss progress without false precision

Tell students what is improving: clearer positions, better-supported examples or fewer errors that obscure meaning. A small movement in an AI estimate may reflect the question, timing or judgement rather than a dependable change in ability. Keep conditions comparable and look for repeated evidence.

The site's Band 6.0 and 7.0 example answers can help illustrate differences in development and control. They are learning examples, not officially certified scripts or guaranteed score templates.

Related guide: Teach with Band 6.0 and 7.0 examples