🔶 Part 1 — Tutorial

Step 1 — Analyse the task & map the two questions (Direct Question / Two-part)

Read the prompt twice and classify the question type: this is a Direct Question (also called “Two-part Question”). The statement presents a situation—many people prefer renting to buying—and then asks (1) Why is this so? and (2) Should governments encourage home ownership? Underline the core focus: reasons behind the growing preference for renting (economic, social, demographic, lifestyle) and a policy judgement about whether the state should actively promote ownership (through subsidies, tax relief, planning rules, social housing pathways, etc.). Decide on a clear overall stance for Q2 (yes/no/it depends with named conditions) and list two robust reasons for Q1 that you can fully develop (e.g., affordability constraints and flexibility/mobility needs). Keep examples realistic and compact (short scenarios rather than statistics you cannot verify). Identify scope: the question is general—avoid limiting your answer to a single country unless you explicitly frame it as an example. Define key terms you will implicitly use: “renting” = paying for temporary occupancy; “ownership” = long-term asset with responsibilities (maintenance, taxes); “encourage” = specific policy tools (grants, interest relief, first-time buyer schemes). Note any assumptions to avoid (e.g., not all renters are low-income; not all owners gain long-term security). Finally, map the two questions to your paragraph plan so that each is answered explicitly and respectfully.

Example Box — Decoding the Prompt (Housing)

Prompt: “Many people prefer renting to buying a home. Why is this so? Should governments encourage home ownership?”
Q1 (Reasons): cost barriers (deposits, interest), flexibility for work/study, lifestyle (amenities/urban centres), lower risk/maintenance, uncertain markets.
Q2 (Policy judgement): encourage ownership or remain tenure-neutral? Consider equity, mobility, and fiscal costs. Offer a balanced, condition-based answer.

Step 2 — Plan a clear four-paragraph structure

Use a compact four-paragraph layout. The introduction paraphrases the situation in one sentence and then gives a two-part overview sentence that (a) signals your main reasons for the renting preference and (b) previews your judgement on government encouragement. In Body 1, answer Why people prefer renting with two tightly related reasons: start with a topic sentence that answers Q1 directly, then explain the mechanism (how affordability, deposits, and interest rates push households towards renting; how flexibility reduces risk), and add a micro-example (e.g., graduates relocating for contracts). In Body 2, answer Should governments encourage ownership? Choose a clear position (yes / yes but with guardrails / no, be tenure-neutral) and justify it with two principles (e.g., stability/asset-building vs. mobility/inclusion), including a short counter-consideration and a practical policy example (shared-equity, stamp-duty relief, or improving rental standards instead). The conclusion restates both answers in new words, synthesising the main logic without opening new debates. Aim for ~270–300 words. Time plan: 8–10 minutes to plan, 25–28 to write, 2–3 to check cohesion, article use, and parallelism.

Example Box — Skeleton Plan (Housing)

Intro: Paraphrase + overview (reasons for renting + your policy stance).
Body 1 (Q1): Reason 1: upfront and ongoing costs; Reason 2: flexibility/risk management → micro-example (early-career worker).
Body 2 (Q2): Stance (e.g., limited, well-targeted encouragement) + rationale; concede risks (market distortion/debt) → policy example.
Conclusion: Re-answer Q1 and Q2 succinctly, tie reasons to policy judgement.

Step 3 — Write high-impact paragraphs that answer each question explicitly

Keep the introduction concise: one sentence paraphrasing the trend; one sentence giving a two-part overview (your main reasons for renting’s appeal and your position on government action). For Body 1, start with a direct answer to Q1 (“People increasingly rent because…”), then unpack the mechanism behind each reason: deposits and borrowing costs create entry barriers; renting transfers major repair risks to landlords; short leases suit uncertain careers; central locations reduce commute costs. Add a micro-example to make the point tangible. For Body 2, open with a clear answer to Q2 (“Governments should/should not encourage ownership because…”). Develop two supporting ideas (e.g., promoting ownership can build household wealth and neighbourhood stability; however, indiscriminate subsidies inflate prices and penalise mobile workers). Include a measured concession and turn it back to your stance with conditions (target help at first-time buyers and expand affordable rental standards). Finish with a conclusion that restates both answers and emphasises proportional policy rather than slogans. Maintain formal tone, varied sentence structures, and precise referencing to keep cohesion strong.

Example Box — High-impact Sentences (Housing)

Thesis/Overview: “Renting has become more attractive mainly because ownership demands heavy upfront capital and limits mobility; governments should encourage ownership only in targeted ways that avoid inflating prices.”
Body 1 — Topic sentence: “Many households rent because deposits and rising borrowing costs make entry into the market unrealistic in the short term.”
Body 2 — Topic sentence: “Public policy should support ownership selectively—for first-time buyers and stable earners—while improving rental quality so people are not forced to buy prematurely.”
Conclusion line: “Overall, renting’s appeal stems from affordability and flexibility, and policy should balance pathways to ownership with fair, secure renting.”

Step 4 — Language, cohesion & accuracy for this task type

Use precise lexis such as upfront deposit, borrowing costs, maintenance liabilities, tenure security, mobility, market distortion, and means-tested support. Keep cohesion by answering each question explicitly in its own paragraph and by using reference chains (“this barrier”, “such incentives”). Avoid overusing mechanical linkers; prefer pronouns and synonyms to maintain flow. For grammar, vary complex sentences with controlled punctuation (non-restrictive clauses, concessive structures like “while/whereas/although”). Be careful with articles (a deposit / the deposit required), countability (housing costs, not “cost”), and parallelism when listing reasons or policies. Keep examples compact and plausible without invented statistics. In your final check, confirm that: (1) both questions are answered clearly, (2) each paragraph develops one controlling idea, (3) the conclusion synthesises rather than introduces new points, and (4) your stance on Q2 is consistent with the reasons you explained for Q1.

Example Box — Quality Checks (Quick List)

Coverage: Did you answer both questions explicitly?
Relevance: Do all examples relate to renting vs. buying or policy choices?
Development: Reason → mechanism → micro-example per body paragraph?
Balance: Is the policy stance qualified (targeted vs. blanket encouragement)?
Accuracy: Articles, prepositions, and modifiers checked?

Universal Fill-in-the-Gap Template — Direct Question (Two-part)

Adapt carefully to the housing prompt. Replace […] with your ideas. Keep sentences compact and formal.

Sentence-by-Sentence Scaffold (Renting vs. Buying)

Intro S1 (Paraphrase): In many places, increasing numbers of people prefer to rent a home rather than purchase one.

Intro S2 (Overview/Answers): This trend is largely driven by [Reason 1] and [Reason 2], and I believe governments [should/should not/should only under certain conditions] encourage home ownership.

Body 1 S3 (Answer Q1 — topic sentence): People often choose renting because [upfront cost barrier/flexibility/uncertainty] makes buying impractical.

Body 1 S4 (Mechanism for reason 1): Specifically, [deposits/interest/fees] create high entry costs that many households cannot meet quickly.

Body 1 S5 (Mechanism for reason 2): In addition, renting [reduces maintenance risk/offers mobility/keeps options open] when jobs or family needs change.

Body 1 S6 (Micro-example): For example, [short scenario showing a worker/student/family] who benefits from renting due to [reason].

Body 1 S7 (Link back): Therefore, the appeal of renting mainly lies in [affordability/flexibility] rather than a dislike of ownership itself.

Body 2 S8 (Answer Q2 — topic sentence): Regarding policy, governments [should/should not/should conditionally] encourage ownership because [principle 1] and [principle 2].

Body 2 S9 (Support 1): On the one hand, promoting ownership can [build stability/enable asset-building/protect older renters], especially for [group].

Body 2 S10 (Support 2 + concession): On the other hand, broad subsidies may [inflate prices/limit mobility/exclude renters], so any support must be [targeted/means-tested/paired with rental reforms].

Body 2 S11 (Policy example): For instance, [named measure: shared-equity/first-time buyer relief/affordable rental standards] can balance opportunity with market stability.

Body 2 S12 (Link back): Consequently, a measured approach best reconciles individual aspirations with wider housing pressures.

Conclusion S13 (Restate both answers): In summary, renting is popular mainly due to [Reason 1] and [Reason 2], and governments [stance repeated briefly].

Conclusion S14 (Synthesis): The most effective policy is to [target ownership support / improve rental security] so households can choose the tenure that genuinely fits their circumstances.

Paraphrase & Overview — Ready-to-adapt Samples (Housing)

Paraphrase Options

P1: In recent years, a growing share of households has chosen to rent rather than buy property.
P2: It is increasingly common for people to favour renting a home instead of purchasing one.

Overview/Answer Options

O1 (Yes, encourage ownership carefully): This is mainly due to high entry costs and the need for flexibility; governments should encourage ownership, but only through targeted, non-inflationary measures.
O2 (Balanced/tenure-neutral): Affordability and mobility explain the trend, and policy should support both secure renting and fair routes into ownership.
O3 (No, avoid blanket encouragement): Since renting suits many households and broad subsidies can distort prices, authorities should improve rental standards rather than push everyone to buy.

🔷 Part 2 — Task

[IELTS Academic] [Writing Task 2] — Public Transport vs. Road Building

Write about the following topic. Spend about 40 minutes on this task. Write at least 250 words.

Task Question

Many people believe that governments should invest more in public transport than in building more roads.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?

⏱ 40:00
Timer

40:00

Your Essay

Type your response below. Aim for 250–320 words.

Submit for Feedback
🔷 Part 3 — Sample Answers & Explanations

Sample Answers for the Task

Question: Many people believe that governments should invest more in public transport than in building more roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Band 6 — Sample Answer

It is often argued that public funds should be directed towards buses, trains and metros rather than towards building extra roads. I largely agree with this view because better public transport can reduce congestion and pollution more effectively than new highways, although some limited road investment is still necessary in certain areas.

The first reason to prioritise public transport is its ability to move large numbers of people efficiently. A full metro train or a bus rapid transit line can carry hundreds of passengers in the space taken by a few dozen cars. When people have fast and reliable services, they are more likely to leave their cars at home. This change not only eases traffic jams, which waste time and fuel, but also improves air quality in cities. For example, many commuters in big capitals choose the metro during peak hours because it is predictable and avoids surface-level delays.

A second reason is affordability for ordinary families. Owning and using a private car involves many costs, including fuel, parking, insurance and maintenance. If governments invest in safe, frequent and clean public systems, people can save money while still travelling to work or school on time. In addition, good networks connect different parts of a city more fairly so that those who live far from the centre still have decent opportunities.

However, road projects cannot be ignored completely. Rural communities still depend on well-maintained roads for ambulances, deliveries and school buses. Therefore, investment should focus mainly on public transport in towns and cities, while keeping essential roads in good condition elsewhere. In conclusion, although some road spending is required, prioritising public transport is a more sustainable and people-friendly policy for the future.

Why this could achieve Band 6

1) The introduction paraphrases the question and states a clear overall position (largely agree).

2) The writer answers the extent by signalling some room for road investment, showing partial balance.

3) The first body paragraph gives a general reason (capacity/efficiency) that directly supports the stance.

4) It explains how public transport reduces congestion (high passenger capacity in limited space).

5) It links to outcomes: fewer jams and cleaner air, which are relevant to government aims.

6) A short, realistic micro-example (peak-hour metro) makes the point concrete.

7) The second body paragraph adds a financial angle (household affordability), widening the rationale.

8) Cohesion is maintained with simple connectors (“first reason”, “second reason”, “however”).

9) The paragraphing follows a logical order: efficiency → affordability → exception.

10) The counterpoint acknowledges rural needs, preventing an extreme claim.

11) The conclusion restates the view and priority without adding new ideas.

12) Lexis is adequate for the task (e.g., “congestion”, “affordability”, “sustainable”).

13) Grammar and syntax are mostly accurate with occasional basic structures.

14) Sentences vary between simple and compound, with some complex forms.

15) Word count exceeds 260, meeting task length with enough development.

16) Some ideas could be developed further or supported with more precise mechanisms for a higher band.

17) The stance is consistent across paragraphs, which supports Task Response.

18) Minor repetition and limited variety of cohesive devices keep it around Band 6.

Band 7 — Sample Answer

Governments face the dilemma of whether to expand road networks or to channel funding into public transport. I strongly agree that the latter deserves priority in most urban contexts because better mass transit not only moves people more efficiently but also avoids the well-known problem of “induced demand”, whereby building extra roads simply attracts more cars and recreates congestion.

The central advantage of public transport is throughput. Rail corridors and dedicated bus lanes carry far more passengers per hour than general-purpose lanes, particularly at peak times. When frequency is high and interchanges are seamless, commuters value reliability over the uncertain travel times typical of crowded highways. The resulting shift from private cars to transit reduces emissions, noise and the demand for parking, allowing cities to reallocate street space to safer footpaths and cycling infrastructure.

A further argument concerns social equity. Car-centric policies often disadvantage low-income households, young people and the elderly, who may not drive. Investment in integrated ticketing, safe stations and real-time information ensures that essential trips—to work, health care and education—remain affordable and predictable. At the same time, governments can protect regional supply chains by maintaining freight corridors and rural roads, but these are targeted commitments rather than blanket highway expansion.

In conclusion, while certain strategic roads must be preserved for logistics and remote communities, routine traffic problems in cities are better addressed by fast, frequent and connected public transport. Therefore, I believe investment should primarily favour transit, complemented by selective road maintenance rather than continuous road-building programmes.

Why this could achieve Band 7

1) Clear, strong position is stated and maintained throughout.

2) The idea of “induced demand” shows topic-specific knowledge and analytical depth.

3) Body 1 explains the mechanism (throughput, frequency, reliability) rather than listing claims.

4) Cohesion is achieved through logical sequencing and precise referencing (“the resulting shift”).

5) Benefits are linked to concrete urban outcomes (emissions, noise, parking, safer streets).

6) Body 2 adds a distinct dimension—social equity—broadening task coverage.

7) Examples are implicit but credible (integrated ticketing, real-time information, freight corridors).

8) Concession is balanced: maintains freight/rural roads while resisting blanket expansion.

9) Lexical resource is varied and accurate (e.g., “throughput”, “interchanges”, “blanket”).

10) Grammar shows good control of complex structures and modifiers.

11) Topic sentences answer the question directly, improving Task Response.

12) Paragraphs are unified with a controlling idea and logical support.

13) The conclusion synthesises the argument without repetition or new claims.

14) Minimal redundancy and appropriate formality strengthen coherence.

15) Word count and development are sufficient for Band 7 standards.

16) To reach higher bands, more precise exemplification (e.g., brief city cases) could be added.

Band 8+ — Sample Answer

Whether governments should prioritise public transport over road construction depends on the context, yet in dense metropolitan areas the case for transit investment is overwhelming. I contend that most new funding should be directed to high-capacity, reliable networks, while road budgets concentrate on maintenance, freight efficiency and safety-critical pinch points rather than capacity expansion.

The economic rationale is twofold. First, urban rail and bus rapid transit generate higher passenger throughput per corridor kilometre, which lowers average travel times and supports agglomeration benefits such as deeper labour markets. Second, expanding road capacity tends to trigger induced demand and dispersed land use, locking cities into longer trips, greater emissions and persistent congestion. By contrast, frequent transit paired with demand-management tools—like parking reform and fair road pricing—shifts marginal trips away from solo driving without undermining business logistics.

A strategic programme would therefore sequence investments: upgrade existing lines for reliability, add missing links that enable seamless transfers, and protect surface priority through dedicated lanes and signal priority. At the same time, governments should fund road maintenance to a safe standard, remove freight bottlenecks at ports and distribution hubs, and introduce targeted safety projects at high-risk junctions. This approach safeguards commercial flows and rural accessibility while avoiding the fiscal and environmental costs of perpetual highway widening.

In summary, while roads remain essential infrastructure, especially for freight and remote communities, the most cost-effective and sustainable path for cities is to invest primarily in fast, frequent and integrated public transport and to manage road space intelligently. Such a portfolio delivers shorter, more reliable journeys for the majority without sacrificing the connectivity that modern economies require.

Why this could achieve Band 8+

1) The stance is nuanced (“depends on context” with a strong urban priority), showing sophisticated judgement.

2) The answer directly addresses “invest more” by specifying where funds should and should not go.

3) Economic reasoning is explicit (agglomeration benefits, labour market depth).

4) Mechanisms are explained (throughput per corridor kilometre; induced demand; dispersed land use).

5) Cohesion arises from cause-effect chains rather than formulaic linkers.

6) Policy instruments are precise (parking reform, road pricing, signal priority), adding technical credibility.

7) The essay separates urban passenger mobility from freight needs, a clear analytical distinction.

8) Counter-arguments are integrated: roads remain vital for freight/rural access; capacity expansion is questioned.

9) Lexical resource is advanced but controlled (e.g., “pinch points”, “portfolio”, “sequencing”).

10) Complex syntax is accurate, with balanced subordination and nominalisation where appropriate.

11) Topic sentences answer the question and frame each paragraph’s controlling idea.

12) Development uses specific steps (upgrade, add links, protect priority), not vague claims.

13) The conclusion synthesises priorities and reiterates conditional support for roads.

14) Tone is formal and consistent, suitable for an academic argument.

15) No invented statistics are used; claims rely on accepted transport principles.

16) Referencing of externalities (emissions, travel time, fiscal cost) shows breadth without digression.

17) The position remains fully consistent from introduction to conclusion.

18) Word count and depth align with high-band expectations.

19) To reach the very top, brief real-world illustrations could further strengthen persuasiveness.

🔷 Part 4 — Vocabulary

Key Vocabulary from the Task

The following items will help you discuss whether governments should invest more in public transport or build more roads. Each box includes pronunciation, patterns, a precise definition, an example with a quick gloss, common synonyms, and frequent learner mistakes to avoid.

congestion

BrE IPA: /kənˈdʒestʃən/   AmE IPA: /kənˈdʒɛstʃən/   Part of speech: uncountable noun

Patterns: traffic/road/urban congestion; reduce/ease/relieve congestion; congestion on/along the ring road

Definition: The state of roads or areas being too crowded with vehicles or people, causing slow movement and delays.

Example: “Dedicated bus lanes have eased congestion on the city’s main avenue.” — Gloss: Traffic became less crowded and faster.

Synonyms: traffic jam(s), crowding, bottleneck (countable)

Common mistakes:

  • *“Congestions are high.”* → Use uncountable: “Congestion is high.”
  • Wrong preposition: say “congestion on the highway,” not “in the highway.”
  • Overusing “traffic jam” for general situations; prefer “congestion” for overall conditions.
throughput

BrE & AmE IPA: /ˈθruːpʊt/   Part of speech: uncountable noun

Patterns: throughput of passengers/vehicles; increase/boost/maximise throughput

Definition: The amount of people or vehicles that a system, corridor, or service can handle in a given time.

Example: “Signal priority raised bus corridor throughput during peak hours.” — Gloss: More passengers moved through the route per hour.

Synonyms: capacity, flow rate, volume

Common mistakes:

  • Writing it as two words: *“through put”* → correct: throughput.
  • Confusing with “output”: throughput = flow handled; output = what is produced.
  • Using as countable: avoid *“a throughput.”* Prefer “system throughput.”
subsidy

BrE & AmE IPA: /ˈsʌbsədi/   Part of speech: countable noun

Patterns: government/public subsidy for fares/housing; subsidy to operators; means-tested subsidies

Definition: Money given by a government to reduce the cost of a service or support an industry or group.

Example: “A fare subsidy helps low-income riders access jobs.” — Gloss: Public funds make tickets cheaper for those on tight budgets.

Synonyms: grant, financial support, aid

Common mistakes:

  • Wrong preposition: say “a subsidy for students / to operators.”
  • Confusing with “subsidise” (verb): “to subsidise fares,” not *“to subsidy fares.”*
  • Using as uncountable in all cases; plural is possible: “transport subsidies.”
infrastructure

BrE IPA: /ˈɪnfrəstrʌktʃə/   AmE IPA: /ˈɪnfrəˌstrʌktʃɚ/   Part of speech: uncountable noun

Patterns: transport/road/rail infrastructure; invest in/upgrade/maintain infrastructure

Definition: The basic systems and physical structures (roads, railways, bridges, stations) needed for a society or economy to function.

Example: “Cities that steadily upgrade infrastructure attract more businesses.” — Gloss: Better systems make the city a stronger economic hub.

Synonyms: public works, network, facilities

Common mistakes:

  • Adding plural *“infrastructures”* for general use; normally uncountable.
  • Using without article where specific: “the rail infrastructure of the capital.”
  • Confusing with “superstructure” (a different term in engineering).
reliability

BrE & AmE IPA: /rɪˌlaɪəˈbɪləti/   Part of speech: uncountable noun

Patterns: improve/undermine reliability; reliability of service/timetables

Definition: The quality of performing consistently well, especially arriving/departing on time.

Example: “Frequent buses increased the system’s reliability for commuters.” — Gloss: Services became predictably on time.

Synonyms: dependability, consistency

Common mistakes:

  • Using the adjective instead: write “service reliability,” not *“service is a reliability.”*
  • Pluralising in general claims: avoid *“reliabilities.”*
  • Confusing with “availability” (being accessible) vs. “reliability” (being consistent).
maintenance

BrE & AmE IPA: /ˈmeɪntənəns/   Part of speech: uncountable noun

Patterns: road/track maintenance; schedule/fund/defer maintenance; maintenance of bridges/vehicles

Definition: The work of keeping roads, tracks, vehicles, and stations in good, safe condition.

Example: “Consistent maintenance prevents costly closures later.” — Gloss: Regular repairs avoid bigger future problems.

Synonyms: upkeep, servicing, repair work

Common mistakes:

  • Confusing with “maintain” (verb): “to maintain roads,” not *“to maintenance roads.”*
  • Using as countable: avoid *“a maintenance.”* Say “a maintenance schedule.”
  • Spelling: watch the middle syllable — main-ten-ance.
corridor (transport corridor)

BrE IPA: /ˈkɒrɪdɔː/   AmE IPA: /ˈkɔrɪˌdɔr/   Part of speech: countable noun

Patterns: east–west corridor; high-capacity bus/rail corridor; corridor for freight/commuters

Definition: A main route or linear area used intensively for moving people or goods.

Example: “The city upgraded its busiest corridor with dedicated bus lanes.” — Gloss: The main route now carries buses faster and more reliably.

Synonyms: route, artery, axis

Common mistakes:

  • Using “hallway” meaning; in transport, a corridor is a strategic route, not a building passage.
  • Missing article: “the north–south corridor,” not *“north–south corridor”* in specific reference.
  • Plural form is regular: “corridors,” not *“corridories.”*
equity (social/transport equity)

BrE IPA: /ˈekwɪti/   AmE IPA: /ˈɛkwəti/   Part of speech: uncountable noun

Patterns: equity in access to jobs/services; promote/advance equity; equitable (adj.) transport policy

Definition: Fairness in how benefits and burdens are shared across different groups or areas.

Example: “Fare caps improved equity by helping low-income riders.” — Gloss: Pricing became fairer for poorer passengers.

Synonyms: fairness, justice, inclusiveness

Common mistakes:

  • Confusing with “equality”: equity = fairness of outcomes; equality = same treatment.
  • Using as countable: avoid *“an equity”* (in this meaning).
  • Mixing with finance sense (“home equity”)—not the meaning in transport policy.
induced demand

BrE IPA: /ɪnˈdjuːst dɪˈmɑːnd/   AmE IPA: /ɪnˈdust dɪˈmænd/   Part of speech: noun phrase (uncountable)

Patterns: create/trigger induced demand; induced demand for driving; road widening leads to induced demand

Definition: The increase in travel that occurs when road capacity is expanded, drawing more drivers and restoring congestion.

Example: “The new lanes quickly filled up due to induced demand.” — Gloss: Extra capacity attracted more car trips, so jams returned.

Synonyms: generated demand, rebound effect (approx.)

Common mistakes:

  • Using as plural: avoid *“induced demands.”*
  • Assuming it only applies to roads; it can affect other modes when capacity/prices change.
  • Claiming it means “people are forced to travel” — it means extra trips are enticed by easier driving.
modal shift

BrE IPA: /ˈməʊdəl ʃɪft/   AmE IPA: /ˈmoʊdəl ʃɪft/   Part of speech: noun phrase (countable/uncountable)

Patterns: a modal shift to/from public transport/cycling; encourage/achieve/facilitate modal shift

Definition: A change in how people travel, such as moving from cars to buses, trains, or bikes.

Example: “Cheaper passes led to a strong modal shift from driving to metro use.” — Gloss: Many drivers switched to the metro.

Synonyms: change of mode, mode shift, mode share change

Common mistakes:

  • Spelling confusion with “model shift.” Correct term is modal (related to “mode”).
  • Wrong preposition: say “shift to/from a mode,” not “shift for a mode.”
  • Treating it as always singular; you can say “several modal shifts across districts.”
🔷 Part 5 — Phrases & Expressions

Key Phrases & Expressions for the Task

Use the following expressions to argue clearly about whether governments should prioritise public transport or build more roads. Each box includes IPA, part of speech, patterns, a concise definition, an example with a brief gloss, common synonyms, and typical learner mistakes.

prioritise X over Y

BrE IPA: /praɪˈɒrɪtaɪz/   AmE IPA: /praɪˈɔːrɪˌtaɪz/   Part of speech: verb phrase

Patterns: prioritise + noun/gerund + over + noun/gerund; give priority to + noun

Definition: To treat one option as more important than another when allocating attention, time, or money.

Example: “Governments should prioritise public transport over road expansion in dense cities.” — Gloss: Spend on transit first, not on more lanes.

Synonyms: give priority to, favour, put first

  • ❌ *prioritise X than Y* → ✅ prioritise X over Y
  • ❌ Using as noun without form: *“the prioritise of”* → ✅ priority
  • ❌ Double prepositions: *“prioritise to over”* → remove one.
channel funding into

BrE IPA: /ˈtʃænəl ˈfʌndɪŋ ˈɪntuː/   AmE IPA: /ˈtʃænəl ˈfʌndɪŋ ˈɪntu/   Part of speech: verb phrase

Patterns: channel/redirect/allocate + funding/resources + into + project/sector

Definition: To direct money purposefully to a particular area or programme.

Example: “The city should channel funding into bus lanes and reliable timetables.” — Gloss: Put money specifically towards buses and schedules.

Synonyms: allocate to, direct toward(s), funnel into

  • ❌ *channel funding to* (acceptable but weaker in focus) → ✅ into (destination emphasis)
  • ❌ Treating funding as plural: *“fundings”* → ✅ uncountable “funding”.
  • ❌ Missing object: say what the money goes into.
at the expense of

BrE IPA: /ət ði ɪkˈspens əv/   AmE IPA: /ət ði ɪkˈspɛns əv/   Part of speech: prepositional phrase

Patterns: at the expense of + noun/gerund

Definition: With negative consequences for something else; by sacrificing another goal.

Example: “More roads may speed cars at the expense of safe walking and cycling.” — Gloss: Drivers gain, but pedestrians/cyclists lose.

Synonyms: to the detriment of, sacrificing, undermining

  • ❌ *on the expense of* → ✅ at the expense of
  • ❌ Pluralising: *“at the expenses of”* → keep singular.
  • ❌ Using with positive outcomes only; it implies a cost/trade-off.
knock-on effects

BrE IPA: /ˌnɒkˈɒn ɪˈfekts/   AmE IPA: /ˌnɑːkˈɑːn ɪˈfekts/   Part of speech: plural noun phrase

Patterns: have/trigger/produce knock-on effects on X; knock-on effect of Y

Definition: Secondary or indirect results caused by an initial change.

Example: “Cheaper passes created knock-on effects like fewer emissions and less parking demand.” — Gloss: Extra results followed the price cut.

Synonyms: ripple effects, spillover effects, side effects

  • ❌ Dropping the hyphen: write knock-on.
  • ❌ Singular agreement errors: say “effects are…”, not “effects is…”.
  • ❌ Overusing for unrelated results; must be causally linked.
strike a balance between A and B

BrE & AmE IPA: /straɪk ə ˈbæl.əns bɪˈtwiːn/   Part of speech: verb phrase

Patterns: strike/achieve/seek a balance between + A and B

Definition: To find a middle course that satisfies two competing needs.

Example: “Policymakers must strike a balance between urban transit and rural road upkeep.” — Gloss: Support both fairly.

Synonyms: reconcile, find middle ground, calibrate

  • ❌ *make a balance* → ✅ strike/achieve a balance
  • ❌ Wrong preposition: use between A and B (not “among” for two items).
  • ❌ Vague objects: specify what you are balancing.
in the long run

BrE IPA: /ɪn ðə lɒŋ rʌn/   AmE IPA: /ɪn ðə lɔːŋ rʌn/   Part of speech: adverbial phrase

Patterns: in the short/medium/long run

Definition: Over an extended period; considering long-term results.

Example: “Transit priority saves money in the long run by avoiding constant road widening.” — Gloss: Long-term costs fall.

Synonyms: over the long term, ultimately, eventually

  • ❌ *on the long run* → ✅ in the long run
  • ❌ Missing article: not *“in long run.”*
  • ❌ Using for immediate results; it signals delayed outcomes.
a blanket approach

BrE IPA: /ə ˈblæŋkɪt əˈprəʊtʃ/   AmE IPA: /ə ˈblæŋkɪt əˈproʊtʃ/   Part of speech: noun phrase

Patterns: a blanket approach/policy/ban/subsidy

Definition: A one-size-fits-all policy that applies everywhere without considering differences.

Example: “A blanket approach to highway expansion can backfire in transit-friendly cities.” — Gloss: Uniform road-building may fail where transit works.

Synonyms: one-size-fits-all policy, across-the-board measure

  • ❌ Treating blanket as a verb (*“to blanketly expand”*) → avoid.
  • ❌ Mixing with “blank” (different word/meaning).
  • ❌ Using when policy is actually targeted.
make a compelling case for

BrE IPA: /meɪk ə kəmˈpelɪŋ keɪs fɔː/   AmE IPA: /meɪk ə kəmˈpɛlɪŋ keɪs fɔr/   Part of speech: verb phrase

Patterns: make/present/build a compelling/strong case for/against + noun/gerund

Definition: To provide strong reasons and evidence supporting a proposal.

Example: “Safety data make a compelling case for investing in protected bus lanes.” — Gloss: Evidence strongly supports bus-lane funding.

Synonyms: justify convincingly, offer strong justification, argue persuasively

  • ❌ *do a case / make a case about* → ✅ make a case for/against
  • ❌ Missing object after for; specify what you support.
  • ❌ Overstating when evidence is weak; keep claims proportionate.
means-tested support

BrE IPA: /ˈmiːnz ˌtestɪd səˈpɔːt/   AmE IPA: /ˈminz ˌtɛstɪd səˈpɔrt/   Part of speech: adjective + noun collocation

Patterns: means-tested + benefit/subsidy/support; provide/expand/target means-tested support

Definition: Financial help available only to people below a certain income level.

Example: “Cities can offer means-tested support for low-income riders’ monthly passes.” — Gloss: Cheaper tickets only for those who qualify.

Synonyms: income-targeted aid, means-based subsidy

  • ❌ Spelling: *mean-tested* → ✅ means-tested (with “s”).
  • ❌ Word order errors: say “means-tested support,” not “tested-means support.”
  • ❌ Assuming it’s universal; it is conditional on income/assets.
at peak times

BrE IPA: /ət piːk taɪmz/   AmE IPA: /ət pik taɪmz/   Part of speech: adverbial phrase

Patterns: at peak times/hours; during the peak; contrast with off-peak

Definition: During the busiest periods of travel demand.

Example: “Dedicated bus lanes keep services moving at peak times.” — Gloss: Even in rush hour, buses stay reliable.

Synonyms: during rush hour, at the busiest times, in peak periods

  • ❌ Preposition error: *in peak times* → ✅ at peak times / during peak hours
  • ❌ Confusing with “peak time” count: both singular and plural are used; match your meaning.
  • ❌ Mixing with pricing term “peak fare” without context.