1. Task explanation

You write to a professor, an office, a classmate or an organization. The three bullets define the content completely: cover all three and the task is fulfilled; miss one and no style can rescue the score.

2. What is being evaluated

• Task fulfillment — all three bullets, clearly addressed.
• Organization & coherence — greeting, purpose, one paragraph per point, polite close.
• Language — accurate grammar, precise vocabulary, consistent polite tone.
• Development — each point gets a detail or a reason, not a bare mention.

3. Step-by-step method (7 minutes)

• Minute 0-1: read the situation; underline the three bullets; choose your tone (formal for professors/offices).
• Minutes 1-5: write — subject line, greeting, one-line purpose, then a short paragraph per bullet, then a closing line.
• Minutes 5-6: add ONE detail per bullet if any paragraph is a single sentence.
• Minute 6-7: proofread with the checklist below — verbs, articles, names, and the three bullets (tick them off).

4. Planning strategy

Your plan is the bullets themselves: copy them as three mini-headings in your head and write one paragraph under each. Never invent a fourth topic — time spent off-bullet is time stolen from development.

5. Organization

Subject line → Dear + name/title → purpose sentence → bullet paragraphs → request/thanks → polite sign-off (Best regards / Sincerely) → your name.

6. Useful language

• Purpose: 'I am writing to ask about…', 'I am writing regarding…'
• Requests: 'Would it be possible to…?', 'I would appreciate it if…'
• Apologies/explanations: 'Unfortunately, …', 'Due to a family emergency, …'
• Closing: 'Thank you for your time and understanding.', 'I look forward to your reply.'

7. Common mistakes

• Missing a bullet — the most expensive error in this task.
• Chat tone with a professor ('Hey prof,', slang, emojis) or essay tone with a classmate.
• One giant paragraph; no subject line.
• Repeating the prompt's wording instead of writing naturally.

8-10. Weak vs strong — with detailed analysis

Situation: You attended a guest lecture by Dr. Brooks in your sociology class last week. Write her an email.

❌ Weak response

Hi Dr. Brooks,

Thanks for the lecture last week, it was really good. Your a great speaker and the topic was super interesting for everyone I think.

I wanted to ask something. You talked about cities and trust and stuff, and I was wondering about that. Also do you have any books I can read? I need sources for my paper so anything helps.

Also, I missed the class before the lecture because my alarm didn't go off, sorry about that, can you tell me what I missed?

Let me know soon please. Thanks!!!

Emily

• Too informal for a professor: 'Hi', 'stuff', 'Thanks!!!' and no subject line or proper sign-off
• The question is vague ('cities and trust and stuff') and never targets one specific idea from the lecture
• Adds an unrelated request about a missed class, so the email loses its focus and feels disorganized
• Contains errors that weaken credibility, such as 'Your a great speaker' instead of 'You're'

✅ Strong response

Subject: Thank You for Your Guest Lecture on Urban Communities

Dear Dr. Brooks,

Thank you very much for your guest lecture in our sociology class last week. Your discussion of how neighborhood design shapes social trust was one of the most interesting sessions of the semester, and it connected directly with our studies of urban life.

I have one question about an idea you mentioned. You said that shared public spaces can rebuild trust between strangers, even in large cities. Does this effect depend on people using the spaces regularly, or can even occasional contact make a difference? I would love to understand the mechanism better.

Finally, could you recommend any further reading on this topic? I am considering it as a possible subject for my final paper, and I would appreciate two or three key sources.

Thank you again for an inspiring lecture.

Sincerely,
Emily Carter

• Thanks the professor specifically, naming the lecture topic rather than using a generic compliment
• Asks a focused question that shows real engagement with one idea from the lecture
• Covers the reading request and connects it to a concrete purpose (the final paper)
• Polite, organized structure with a subject line, greeting, three clear parts, and a sign-off

11-13. Practice tasks (timed studio)

8 original tasks in the hub below — each opens the writing studio: prompt, timer, word counter, automated practice feedback and this checklist.

Self-evaluation checklist — the 10-point review

• Task fulfillment — I covered every bullet / answered the actual question.
• Organization — a clear structure a reader can follow without effort.
• Coherence — each sentence connects to the one before it.
• Development — reasons are explained and supported with examples, not just stated.
• Vocabulary — precise, academic words; no word repeated to death.
• Grammar — verb forms, agreement and articles checked.
• Sentence structure — a mix of short and complex sentences, no fragments or run-ons.
• Accuracy — names, facts and details match the prompt/sources exactly.
• Academic style — no slang, no contractions in formal tasks, no "you" lecturing the reader.
• Paraphrasing — source ideas are in MY words, not copied strings.

Automated checks on this page (length, variety, linking words) are practice feedback only — not an official TOEFL score.