The task, quickly
You're shown a professor's discussion question and two classmates' short replies, then given about 10 minutes to write your own contribution — typically at least 100 words. The single biggest scoring trap is summarizing what the other students already said instead of adding something new.
Scoring criteria
Graded on development (a real, well-supported idea — not just an opinion), organization (coherent structure with clear transitions), and language use (grammar, vocabulary, sentence variety).
Example 1
Professor: "Some people believe universities should make all courses available online, while others think in-person classes are essential for learning. What is your opinion?"
Maria: "I think online courses are better because they're flexible — students can learn anytime, from anywhere."
Tom: "I disagree. In-person classes let you build real relationships with classmates and professors, and it's easier to stay focused without home distractions."
Band 5–6 model response: "I agree with Tom that in-person classes offer real advantages, but I think the best solution is a hybrid model rather than choosing one format over the other. Lecture-based courses that mainly involve listening and note-taking could be offered online, since students can pause and rewatch difficult sections — something Maria's point about flexibility supports well. Discussion-based or lab courses, though, benefit enormously from being in person, because they depend on spontaneous interaction that's hard to replicate on a screen. Splitting course types this way would keep the accessibility Maria values while preserving the collaborative environment Tom prefers."
Why this scores well: it directly engages both classmates by name instead of ignoring them, proposes a genuinely new position (a hybrid split by course type) rather than just picking a side, and uses clear transitions ("though," "this way") to organize the argument.
Example 2
Professor: "Should students be required to complete an internship before graduating?"
Wei: "Yes — required internships give students practical experience that classroom learning can't provide."
Sara: "I disagree. Mandatory internships are unfair to students who can't afford to work unpaid for months."
Band 5–6 model response: "I see Sara's point about unpaid internships creating financial barriers, but I don't think the solution is to remove the requirement — it's to fix how it's structured. Universities could partner with local businesses to guarantee paid placements, or allow part-time internships spread across a semester so students can keep other jobs. This way, students still gain the hands-on experience Wei describes, which employers increasingly expect, without excluding those who need income. Removing the requirement entirely would solve Sara's problem but create a new one: students graduating with strong grades but no practical skills, which is exactly the gap internships are meant to close."
Why this scores well: it acknowledges the real weakness in Sara's argument instead of dismissing it, proposes concrete fixes (paid placements, part-time spread), and closes by explaining the tradeoff of the opposing view rather than just restating its own opinion.
What both examples have in common
- They name the classmates and respond to specific claims — not generic paraphrasing.
- They land on a position that's more nuanced than "I agree" or "I disagree."
- They support the position with one concrete mechanism (a course split, a paid-placement structure) instead of staying abstract.
- Both land right around 100–120 words — enough to develop the idea, short enough to finish inside the 10-minute limit.
Practice under the real 10-minute clock
Reading model answers shows you the shape of a strong response. Building the speed to write one from scratch in 10 minutes takes reps — our free lane runs the same timer and prompt format as the real 2026 exam, with instant AI feedback against this same rubric.