Writing Task 2: Discussion (Both Views) Essay: Question 6
Syllabus W.task2
Many festivals, stadiums and venues have stopped accepting cash and now take only card or app payments. Some see this as faster and safer, while others believe it excludes certain people and encourages overspending.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. Write at least 250 words.
Show worked solution Hide worked solution
Worked solution
Examiner notes: why this is a band 9 response
Task Response
The introduction paraphrases both views and states a clear, qualified position (“venues should be required to offer some form of cash-accepting alternative”) that is sustained through to the conclusion’s practical proposal (a single dedicated kiosk). Both body paragraphs are developed with a specific, concrete example, the Millbrook Festival’s wristband system and the friend who overspent at a cashless festival, giving the two views genuinely comparable depth before the candidate’s own opinion is stated.
Coherence & Cohesion
Topic sentences clearly flag whose view is under discussion (“Supporters of cashless systems argue that…”, “Critics counter that…”), and the semicolon in the third paragraph links a general claim to its supporting illustration. Reference chains such as “such policies” and “those for whom cash remains… the safer, choice” tie ideas back to earlier points without relying on a mechanical string of linking words.
Lexical Resource
Vocabulary is precise and topic-appropriate throughout: “contactless tap”, “a visible, countable exchange of banknotes”, “shutting out”. Near-synonyms avoid repetition (e.g. “cashless systems”, “cashless policy”, “cashless payment”), and collocations are used accurately (“reduces the risk of theft”, “control their spending”).
Grammatical Range & Accuracy
The response shows confident control of complex structures: a coordinated relative-clause pair (“organisers, who no longer need to… and attendees, who cannot have…”), a semicolon joining two closely related clauses, and a purpose clause (“so that the genuine speed and security benefits… can be enjoyed”). There are no errors of tense, agreement or word form anywhere in the response.
Common pitfalls specific to this task
See commonMistakes above: the most damaging is developing the speed-and-safety view in full while reducing the exclusion/overspending view to a token remark that “some people don’t like it”. A band 9 discussion essay must give both views genuinely comparable depth before the candidate’s own opinion is given.