Here's the thing: examiners don't care how many examples you throw at them. They care whether your examples actually prove your point. This is where most students crash and burn. You'll spend 25 minutes writing an essay, drop in three "examples," and walk out convinced you nailed it. Then the band score comes back as a 6.5 instead of a 7, and the feedback says "Task Response: examples lack support."
That's not because your examples were boring. It's because they were weak. Unsupported. Floating in space with no connection to your argument. And the worst part? You probably didn't even notice.
Here's what most students don't realize: weak examples kill your score faster than grammar mistakes do. The IELTS band descriptors make this obvious. At Band 7, you need "relevant, extended examples." At Band 6, examples are just "generally relevant." That gap—between "generally relevant" and actually supported—is worth a full band point.
In this post, I'll walk you through exactly what makes an example weak, show you side-by-side comparisons of bad vs. good, and give you a checklist you can use on every IELTS essay before you submit. Our free IELTS writing checker evaluates examples automatically, but understanding the rules yourself matters more.
An example is weak when it sits there doing nothing. It looks like evidence, but it proves zero. You've probably written dozens of these without realizing it.
Here's what kills examples:
Examiners grade this under Task Response. They're asking themselves: does this example actually support what you just claimed? If the answer is "sort of," you get Band 6. If the answer is "yes, and here's exactly why," you get Band 7.
Let's look at actual examples from IELTS Task 2 prompts. Weak version first, then what it should look like.
The Question: Some people think remote work increases productivity. Others disagree. Discuss both views.
Weak: Remote work can increase productivity. For example, many companies now offer flexible working arrangements. This shows that remote work is becoming more popular.
What's the problem? You've just restated the topic. The example doesn't prove productivity increased—it only proves that flexible work exists. You've also skipped the crucial step: explaining why "becoming more popular" means "more productive." The example floats. It doesn't support anything.
Strong: Remote work increases productivity because employees eliminate commute time and workplace interruptions. A Stanford University study found that remote workers completed 13% more tasks than office workers, primarily due to uninterrupted focus. This demonstrates that reduced distractions directly improve measurable output.
See the difference? Specific study, concrete number, direct explanation of why. You know what was measured, how much it changed, and the mechanism behind it. No guessing required.
The Question: Some believe university education should be free for all. Others think students should pay. Discuss both views.
Weak: Free university education has benefits. In Germany, university is free. Germany has many universities. This shows that free education can work.
This is barely an example. You've stated facts, but you haven't shown any actual benefit. What benefits? How does "many universities" prove free education is good? It doesn't. You're asking the examiner to fill in the gaps, and they won't.
Strong: Free university education increases access for disadvantaged students. In Germany, where tuition is heavily subsidized, enrollment from low-income families rose 22% between 2010 and 2020. This proves that removing financial barriers directly enables poorer students to attend university, strengthening the overall talent pool.
Now you've got specificity. Concrete country, concrete number, concrete result. And you've explained the causal chain: lower cost leads to higher enrollment for low-income students.
The Question: Social media has negative effects on young people. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Weak: Social media does have negative effects. Young people use social media every day. They spend hours scrolling. This is a problem because it's too much time.
You've described behavior. You haven't explained actual harm. More scrolling equals bad? Bad for what—grades? Mental health? Sleep? You're making a claim with zero evidence of actual damage. It's just an observation.
Strong: Social media damages sleep quality and academic performance. The American Psychological Association found that teenagers spending over three hours daily on social media are 35% more likely to experience sleep deprivation. Poor sleep directly lowers test scores and classroom attention, creating a measurable chain of harm.
You've named the source, specified the threshold (3 hours), given the finding (35% increase), and explained why it matters to the argument. This is what Band 7 looks like.
Quick rule: Every example needs specificity (concrete details, not vague statements), relevance (clearly connected to your claim), and impact (explanation of why it matters). Missing one of these three? Your example is weak.
Before you submit your essay, ask yourself these five questions about each example. Can't answer all five clearly? Rewrite it.
You don't need real studies or company names. Realistic hypothetical examples work perfectly fine in Task 2, as long as they're specific and clearly explained.
These show up constantly in Band 5-6 essays. Recognize any?
Trap 1: Naming isn't explaining. "Technology helps education" is not an example. "Online platforms like Coursera let rural students access university courses without traveling, increasing educational opportunity" is. One names a thing. The other shows impact.
Trap 2: Describing a problem isn't proving your point. "Pollution hurts the environment" doesn't support an argument unless your argument is literally "pollution exists." Show consequences. Show damage. Show why it matters.
Trap 3: Personal experience without broader relevance. "I like online shopping" is an anecdote. But "As an international student, I've found online shopping saves money and travel time, which is why e-commerce benefits people with limited local access" connects your experience to a bigger principle. Examiners want to see thinking beyond yourself.
Trap 4: Assuming the examiner knows what you mean. Don't write "Like what happened in 2008." Name it: "the 2008 financial crisis triggered by subprime mortgage collapse." Specificity prevents confusion.
Trap 5: Examples that contradict your claim. You claim "expensive always means better quality" and then give an example of a cheap product that's high quality. You've just disproven yourself. Read your examples aloud. Do they actually support what you said?
You've got 40 minutes. You can't do research. How do you write strong examples on the spot?
Use this structure for every example: Claim, Context, Consequence, Connection.
Claim: State what you're about to show. "For example, remote work illustrates this."
Context: Add specific details. "During the COVID-19 pandemic, over 40% of the global workforce shifted to remote work." (Realistic estimates work; you don't need exact stats.)
Consequence: Explain what happened. "Companies reported maintained or increased productivity despite the shift."
Connection: Link it back to your argument. "This proves location matters less than having the right tools and autonomy, supporting my claim that flexibility improves performance."
This formula forces you to be specific, explain impact, and connect the dots explicitly. Your examples automatically get stronger.
Fact: Made-up examples are fine in Task 2. Examiners don't fact-check. A specific hypothetical example scores the same as a real one. The key is specificity and logical soundness.
Go through this for every example before you submit. Takes 90 seconds. Worth a band point.
Answer "no" to any of these? Rewrite before submission. That's the difference between a 6 and a 7.
The band descriptors are specific for a reason. Band 7 requires "relevant, extended examples." Band 6 has "generally relevant" examples. Why the difference?
Because examiners aren't just checking if you can discuss a topic. They're checking if you can prove a point. A Band 6 student can talk about remote work. A Band 7 student can prove an argument about remote work using evidence. Completely different skills.
Weak examples signal that you can brainstorm ideas but can't defend them. Examiners dock points for this. It's not a careless mistake—it's a thinking skill.
Strong examples show you understand argument structure: claim, support, explanation, outcome. That's critical thinking. IELTS rewards it.
If you want to check whether your examples actually work, our free IELTS writing checker evaluates Task Response specifically—it'll flag examples that don't support your claims and suggest how to strengthen them. You'll get instant feedback on your IELTS essay evidence evaluation before you submit for real.
Weak examples are often connected to other Task Response issues. If you're struggling with examples, you might also want to check whether your thesis statement is actually clear—a vague thesis makes it harder to write supporting examples. Similarly, if you're repeating the same ideas in multiple paragraphs, your examples might not be distinct enough. Our guide on avoiding argument repetition shows you how to structure each example so it covers different ground.
Some students also struggle with vague claims overall, which makes examples even weaker. If your main arguments lack precision, your examples can't save them. Work on the argument first, then support it with examples. Want to identify all these issues at once? Use our IELTS essay checker to evaluate your writing across all criteria.
Get instant feedback on whether your claims are actually supported. Our IELTS writing checker evaluates Task Response, identifies weak examples, and shows you exactly how to strengthen them.
Check My Essay Free