Task 2 · Opinion (agree or disagree) · Consumer

Advertising aimed at young children

An agree-or-disagree essay on prohibiting adverts for under-twelves, where the band 9 answer locates the wrong in the absence of an informed party rather than in the desire adverts create.

The question

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task. Write about the following topic. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. Write at least 250 words.

Some people think that all advertising aimed at children under the age of twelve should be banned. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

A 250-word discursive essay — the half of the paper that carries two thirds of the marks. This prompt is original, written in the standard format for teaching purposes — it is not taken from any past paper.

What separates the three answers

The 6.5 and 7.5 argue that children cannot understand adverts; the 9 argues that persuasion is only legitimate between parties who both know it is happening, which is what makes the drafting problem solvable.

Band 6.5

259 words (the task asks for at least 250)

The answer works. It addresses the task, the reader follows it, and the meaning survives — but ideas stay general, linking is mechanical, wording repeats, and small errors are visible throughout.

In the modern world, the children are watching a lot of the advertisements on the television, on the internet and even inside the games. Some people believe that all the advertising for the children under twelve years old must be forbidden. I completely agree with this opinion, because the children are not able to understand the advertising.1

Firstly, a small child can not understand that the advertisement wants to sell something. He thinks it is only a funny video or a part of the program. Because of this, the companies are taking the advantage of the children3, and this is not fair. An adult can decide if he wants to buy or not, but a child can not decide this.

Secondly, the advertising causes many problems in the family. The children see the toys or the sweets on the screen and after that they ask their parents to buy them. If the parents say no, the child becomes angry and cry4. In the poor families this is a bigger problem, because the parents can not buy the expensive things and they feel bad.

Moreover, most of the advertisements for the children are about the unhealthy food2, like the sweets, the chocolates and the fast food. This is one of the reason of the childhood obesity which is increasing in many countries.

In conclusion, I strongly agree that the advertising to the children under twelve should be banned completely, because the children can not understand it, it makes the problems in the family and it is bad for their health.

What an examiner notices

1. Task response
“I completely agree with this opinion, because the children are not able to understand the advertising.”
No opposing view appears anywhere in the essay. Even in an agree-or-disagree task, an examiner expects the strongest objection to be recognised — here, that parents control the spending.
2. Coherence and cohesion
“Moreover, most of the advertisements for the children are about the unhealthy food”
A four-line paragraph on a genuinely separate point, joined with an additive connector that hides the fact that it belongs with paragraph two.
3. Lexical resource
“the companies are taking the advantage of the children”
Take advantage of takes no article. The essay repeats can not understand three times for the same reason: there is no second phrasing available.
4. Grammatical range and accuracy
“the child becomes angry and cry”
The second verb loses its agreement with the singular subject, and one of the reason in the next paragraph omits the plural after a partitive. Both are small and systematic.

Why this sits at band 6.5

Task response: The position is clear from the first paragraph and never moves, and the three reasons are all relevant to the question. What is missing is any counter-argument at all — the essay never acknowledges that parents make the purchases, or that a ban is difficult to define, so the case is one-sided rather than argued. The obesity paragraph is four lines long and functions as an afterthought rather than a developed reason.
Coherence and cohesion: The structure is easy to follow and the conclusion accurately summarises the three points. Every paragraph opens with a connector from the standard list, and the fourth paragraph is really a continuation of the second rather than a new idea, which the connector Moreover conceals rather than clarifies. Reference is repetitive: the children begins a large proportion of the sentences.
Lexical resource: Serviceable and clear but very restricted. Cannot understand appears three times because the essay has no way to say fails to recognise or cannot identify. Taking the advantage, makes the problems and feel bad are all near-misses. The definite article appears before nearly every generic plural, which is consistent enough to look like a rule the writer has learned wrongly.
Grammatical range and accuracy: Some subordination and a correctly formed conditional show that range exists. Accuracy does not keep pace: becomes angry and cry loses agreement mid-verb phrase, one of the reason omits the plural, and can not is written as two words throughout. Every error is minor and every sentence is comprehensible on first reading.

One honest caveat

Band labels here describe what each piece of writing demonstrates against the four published assessment areas, paraphrased in plain language. They are teaching illustrations produced for this site, not official material, and no sample has been marked by a test provider. Real scripts are marked whole; two answers with the same label can still look quite different from each other, and nothing on this page can promise anyone a particular result.

Advertising aimed at young children

The question

What separates the three answers

Band 6.5

What an examiner notices

One honest caveat

Banning cars from city centres

Community sentences instead of prison

Compulsory voting

The question

What separates the three answers

The three answers

Band 6.5

The answer

What an examiner notices

One honest caveat

Compare another question

Banning cars from city centres

Community sentences instead of prison

Compulsory voting