Writing Task 2: Opinion (Agree/Disagree) Essay: Question 8
Syllabus W.task2
National governments currently spend large sums administering means-tested welfare systems, in which benefit payments are calculated individually according to a claimant's income, family circumstances and employment history. Some people believe governments should instead introduce a universal basic income: a regular, unconditional cash payment made to every adult citizen regardless of their personal circumstances or need.
To what extent do you agree or disagree that governments should replace means-tested welfare benefits with a universal basic income?
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
Task Response
The position (agreement that a universal basic income should replace means-tested welfare) is stated clearly in the introduction and sustained without drift throughout: both body paragraphs argue directly for that position, and the concluding paragraph explicitly weighs the genuine counter-consideration of cost before restating the same position “on balance” rather than reversing it. Each body paragraph supplies a specific, developed example (the poverty trap mechanism plus Finland’s basic income trial; non-take-up among eligible claimants) rather than resting on unsupported assertion.
Coherence & Cohesion
The essay is organised around two distinct, clearly signalled reasons (the removal of the poverty trap, and the removal of stigma and non-take-up) introduced with explicit topic sentences (“The first reason is…”, “Equally significant is…”), and the conclusion is cohesively linked back to the introduction via “Nevertheless… so on balance”. Ideas within paragraphs are connected through logical, non-mechanical linking (“since”, “so”) and pronoun/lexical reference rather than a repetitive list of transition words.
Lexical Resource
Vocabulary is precise and varied for the topic (“means-tested”, “poverty trap”, “perverse incentives”, “non-take-up” implied through “never claim the support they are entitled to”), with synonyms used naturally to avoid repeating “payment” (transfer, stipend, sum). Collocations read naturally rather than as inserted “advanced” phrases (e.g. “bureaucratic overhead”, “outweighed by the savings”).
Grammatical Range & Accuracy
The essay demonstrates control of a wide range of structures: non-defining relative clauses (“a phenomenon economists call the poverty trap, which discourages…”), a complex conditional-style trial description (“in which unemployed citizens received… found that participants took up…”), and concessive structures (“Critics rightly note that… Nevertheless, I believe…”) used accurately and to genuine rhetorical effect, with no grammatical errors across a full range of sentence types.