IELTS Writing Task 2 prompt
Some people believe that the best way to reduce crime is to give longer prison sentences. Others think there are more effective alternatives. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Source practice test: IELTS Writing Test 8
Band 9 model answer
Expert-level response
Crime prevention is a perennial policy challenge, and opinions differ sharply on how best to tackle it. While some maintain that extending prison terms is the most reliable deterrent, others argue that addressing the root causes of offending yields more lasting results. This essay examines both perspectives before arguing that a combination of firm punishment and preventative investment offers the most sustainable solution.
Proponents of harsher sentencing contend that the prospect of a lengthy incarceration acts as a powerful deterrent, dissuading potential offenders from breaking the law in the first place. Removing repeat offenders from society for extended periods also physically prevents them from committing further crimes during that time, which can produce a measurable short-term drop in offences such as burglary or assault. This view is particularly persuasive for violent or premeditated crimes, where public safety concerns understandably outweigh rehabilitative considerations.
Nevertheless, an increasing body of criminological research suggests that punishment alone rarely addresses why people turn to crime, meaning that many offenders reoffend soon after release. Alternatives such as investment in education, vocational training and mental health support tackle underlying drivers like poverty, addiction and lack of opportunity. Countries that have prioritised rehabilitation programmes and community-based sentencing, for instance Norway, report considerably lower reoffending rates than nations relying predominantly on incarceration, suggesting that prevention can be more cost-effective than prolonged imprisonment, which is itself extremely expensive to maintain.
In my view, neither approach alone is sufficient. Serious and violent crimes warrant custodial sentences that protect the public, but for the majority of offences, particularly those linked to socioeconomic disadvantage, rehabilitation and early intervention are likely to reduce crime more sustainably than simply lengthening prison terms. Governments should therefore pursue a balanced strategy, reserving harsh sentencing for the most dangerous offenders while channelling greater resources into education, employment schemes and mental health services that prevent crime before it occurs.
Why this meets Band 9
- Task Response: the essay directly discusses both views with distinct, well-developed arguments and presents a clear, balanced opinion that is maintained throughout, fully satisfying the discuss-both-views structure.
- Coherence and Cohesion: paragraphs are logically sequenced with a clear progression from viewpoint one to viewpoint two to synthesis; cohesive devices like 'Nevertheless' and 'In my view' link ideas naturally without formulaic repetition.
- Lexical Resource: precise, topic-specific vocabulary is used accurately and flexibly, including 'deterrent', 'reoffending', 'custodial sentences' and 'socioeconomic disadvantage', with no signs of repetition or mistranslation.
- Grammatical Range and Accuracy: a wide range of complex structures, including relative clauses, conditional-style reasoning and passive constructions, are used with full control and no errors that impede meaning.
Band 6 sample answer
Competent but limited response
Nowadays, crime is a big problem in many countries and people have different opinions about how to stop it. Some people think that longer prison sentences are the best way to reduce crime, but other people think there are better ways to do it. In this essay, I will discuss both sides and give my opinion.
Firstly, many people believe that if criminals get longer prison sentences, it will stop them from committing crime again. This is because they will be scared of going to prison for a long time, so they will not want to break the law. Also, if criminals are in prison, they cannot commit more crimes outside, so the crime rate will go down. For example, in some countries, when the government made prison sentences longer, the crime rate became lower for a short time.
On the other hand, some people think that there are more effective ways to reduce crime than just making prison sentences longer. For instance, giving people better education and jobs can help stop them from becoming criminals in the first place. Some people become criminals because they are poor or do not have a good education, so if the government helps these people, crime could be reduced. In addition, programs that help criminals to change their behaviour, such as counselling, can also be useful and can stop people from committing crime again after they leave prison.
In conclusion, some people think longer prison sentences are the best solution, while others believe that education and rehabilitation programs are more effective. In my opinion, I think a mix of both methods would be the best way to reduce crime in society, because punishment alone cannot solve the deeper problems that cause people to commit crimes.
Why this sits around Band 6
- Task Response: both views are addressed and an opinion is given, but the ideas are underdeveloped, relying on general statements like 'crime rate became lower' without specific examples or explanation of mechanisms.
- Coherence and Cohesion: the essay relies on mechanical, list-style linkers such as 'Firstly', 'On the other hand' and 'In conclusion', and paragraph two repeats the same idea twice rather than building a progression of points.
- Lexical Resource: vocabulary is basic and repetitive, with words like 'crime', 'people' and 'good' overused, and phrases such as 'big problem' and 'do it' show limited precision compared to topic-specific terms.
- Grammatical Range and Accuracy: sentences are mostly simple or compound with repeated 'if' and 'because' clauses, and although grammar is generally accurate, there is little variety in structure and occasional awkward phrasing such as 'help these people, crime could be reduced'.
Should I give specific examples of countries or statistics when discussing crime and punishment in this essay?
Specific examples, such as naming a country known for rehabilitation-focused policy, can strengthen a Band 7 or higher response by showing developed, real-world reasoning, as seen in the Band 9 answer. However, you do not need precise statistics; a plausible, clearly explained example is sufficient, since IELTS examiners assess the logic and language of your argument rather than factual accuracy.