Fulfil the task
Cover every requested point and keep the response relevant to its reader and purpose. A model is one possible response, not the only correct answer.
The invitation states what, when and where, then asks for a reply.
B2
A factual report
About this lesson
A factual report · B2. Cover every requested point and keep the response relevant to its reader and purpose. A model is one possible response, not the only correct answer.
Draft your own response before viewing the model. Use the task-specific checklist to review it. Writing tasks are not automatically marked correct or wrong.
Writing is self-reviewed. This version does not assign a language score or certify your level.
4 items
Save it to find it in My collection.
WritingB2
A factual report
Draft your own response before viewing the model. Use the task-specific checklist to review it. Writing tasks are not automatically marked correct or wrong.
Read each task, draft your own text, then compare the model and checklist. Models are not unique answer keys.
A little clarity first
Organise the message
Put ideas in a useful order. Use sentences and, where the task needs them, paragraphs and links. Do not add connectors without a real relationship.
I give the time first. Then I explain how to get there.
Check clarity and language
Check verbs, agreement, spelling and punctuation. Use words you understand; revise anything the intended reader might misinterpret.
She works on Monday. We work on Tuesday.
Learning material
WritingB2
A factual report
Draft your own response before viewing the model. Use the task-specific checklist to review it. Writing tasks are not automatically marked correct or wrong.
Read each task, draft your own text, then compare the model and checklist. Models are not unique answer keys.
01 / 4P01Save it to find it in My collection.
Fictional briefing: observe a library study area on three afternoons. Notes: 18 desks; all occupied twice; six users asked for sockets; quiet-room signs hard to see; groups and silent readers shared the same space.
Write a report of 180–220 words for the library manager. Present the observations, separate evidence from interpretation, identify limitations, and recommend two practical improvements.
Your learning route
01
Step 1 · Build the skill
0/2Fulfil the task
Cover every requested point and keep the response relevant to its reader and purpose. A model is one possible response, not the only correct answer.
The invitation states what, when and where, then asks for a reply.02
Step 2 · Build the skill
0/1Organise the message
Put ideas in a useful order. Use sentences and, where the task needs them, paragraphs and links. Do not add connectors without a real relationship.
I give the time first. Then I explain how to get there.03
Step 3 · Build the skill
0/1Check clarity and language
Check verbs, agreement, spelling and punctuation. Use words you understand; revise anything the intended reader might misinterpret.
She works on Monday. We work on Tuesday.Writing
Writing is self-reviewed. This version does not assign a language score or certify your level.
No writing saved yet. Start a task and your draft will appear here.
Lesson map
B2A factual report
Lesson points
Fulfil the task
Cover every requested point and keep the response relevant to its reader and purpose. A model is one possible response, not the only correct answer.
The invitation states what, when and where, then asks for a reply.Organise the message
Put ideas in a useful order. Use sentences and, where the task needs them, paragraphs and links. Do not add connectors without a real relationship.
I give the time first. Then I explain how to get there.Check clarity and language
Check verbs, agreement, spelling and punctuation. Use words you understand; revise anything the intended reader might misinterpret.
She works on Monday. We work on Tuesday.Questions & answers
Opening an answer records help for that question.
Fictional briefing: observe a library study area on three afternoons. Notes: 18 desks; all occupied twice; six users asked for sockets; quiet-room signs hard to see; groups and silent readers shared the same space.
Write a report of 180–220 words for the library manager. Present the observations, separate evidence from interpretation, identify limitations, and recommend two practical improvements.
Answer & explanation
Study Area Review
Purpose
This report summarises observations made in the library study area on three afternoons and suggests practical changes for consideration.
Findings
The area contains eighteen desks. All were occupied during two of the visits, and six users asked staff where they could find a power socket. The signs identifying the quiet room were difficult to notice. Groups discussing projects and people reading silently were using the same open space.
Interpretation and limits
These observations suggest possible pressure on seating and power access, but three afternoon visits cannot show how busy the library is throughout the week. They also do not establish how many visitors would use additional desks or whether existing sockets are always unavailable. The different study activities may create conflicting expectations, although no formal user survey results were supplied.
Recommendations
First, the library should make the quiet-room signs clearer and explain which spaces permit discussion. Second, staff should review socket locations and publish a simple guide before considering new electrical work. A short follow-up record covering different days and times would help the manager decide whether larger changes are justified.
Purpose
This report summarises observations made in the library study area on three afternoons and suggests practical changes for consideration.
Findings
The area contains eighteen desks. All were occupied during two of the visits, and six users asked staff where they could find a power socket. The signs identifying the quiet room were difficult to notice. Groups discussing projects and people reading silently were using the same open space.
Interpretation and limits
These observations suggest possible pressure on seating and power access, but three afternoon visits cannot show how busy the library is throughout the week. They also do not establish how many visitors would use additional desks or whether existing sockets are always unavailable. The different study activities may create conflicting expectations, although no formal user survey results were supplied.
Recommendations
First, the library should make the quiet-room signs clearer and explain which spaces permit discussion. Second, staff should review socket locations and publish a simple guide before considering new electrical work. A short follow-up record covering different days and times would help the manager decide whether larger changes are justified.
One possible model, not an answer key. Self-check: Can the reader find all required points: observations, interpretation limits and two recommendations? Structure: Use headings to separate recorded facts, cautious interpretation, limitations and recommendations. Recommendations are proposals, not observed results. “Findings” → “Interpretation and limits”. Language: “These observations suggest possible pressure on seating and power access, but three afternoon visits cannot show how busy the library is throughout the week.” Cautious wording separates what the notes show from a possible explanation; do not invent a survey, a percentage or a proven cause. Other wording and organisation can meet the task. Keep any supplied facts. This is self-review, not an automatic language score.
Fictional briefing: a college cafe trials reusable cups for one week. Notes: 90 drinks in reusable cups; 14 customers asked about cleaning; return box full twice; staff spent extra time explaining the system; total drinks sold was not recorded.
Write a report of 180–220 words. Summarise the trial, explain what the figures can and cannot show, identify operational issues, and recommend a next step.
Answer & explanation
Reusable Cup Trial
Overview
The college cafe tested a reusable cup system for one week. This report reviews the available notes and identifies what should be checked before the scheme is extended.
Recorded results
Ninety drinks were served in reusable cups. Fourteen customers asked how the cups were cleaned, and the return box became full on two occasions. Staff also reported spending additional time explaining how customers should return their cups.
What the evidence means
The trial recorded reusable cup use, but the total number of drinks sold was not recorded. It is therefore impossible to calculate the proportion served in reusable cups or compare daily participation rates. Questions about cleaning suggest a need for clearer information, but they do not prove that customers were dissatisfied. The full return box may indicate a practical collection issue that needs checking, rather than a failure of the idea itself.
Recommended next step
A second short trial should record total drinks sold as well as reusable cup use. Clear cleaning information should be displayed, and staff should check the return box at agreed intervals. These modest changes would provide stronger evidence about participation while reducing avoidable demands on staff.
Overview
The college cafe tested a reusable cup system for one week. This report reviews the available notes and identifies what should be checked before the scheme is extended.
Recorded results
Ninety drinks were served in reusable cups. Fourteen customers asked how the cups were cleaned, and the return box became full on two occasions. Staff also reported spending additional time explaining how customers should return their cups.
What the evidence means
The trial recorded reusable cup use, but the total number of drinks sold was not recorded. It is therefore impossible to calculate the proportion served in reusable cups or compare daily participation rates. Questions about cleaning suggest a need for clearer information, but they do not prove that customers were dissatisfied. The full return box may indicate a practical collection issue that needs checking, rather than a failure of the idea itself.
Recommended next step
A second short trial should record total drinks sold as well as reusable cup use. Clear cleaning information should be displayed, and staff should check the return box at agreed intervals. These modest changes would provide stronger evidence about participation while reducing avoidable demands on staff.
One possible model, not an answer key. Self-check: Can the reader find all required points: trial findings, data limits, operational issues and next step? Structure: Use headings to separate recorded facts, cautious interpretation, limitations and recommendations. Recommendations are proposals, not observed results. “Recorded results” → “What the evidence means”. Language: “Questions about cleaning suggest a need for clearer information, but they do not prove that customers were dissatisfied.” Cautious wording separates what the notes show from a possible explanation; do not invent a survey, a percentage or a proven cause. Other wording and organisation can meet the task. Keep any supplied facts. This is self-review, not an automatic language score.
Fictional briefing: a museum tests a new audio guide with 12 volunteers. Notes: nine completed the route; three stopped because their phone battery was low; four found one instruction unclear; all testing occurred on a quiet weekday morning.
Write a report of 180–220 words for the museum team. State the results, distinguish device problems from guide problems, discuss the sample limits, and propose improvements.
Answer & explanation
Audio Guide Test
Purpose and results
This report considers the museum’s trial of a new audio guide with twelve volunteers. Nine completed the route. The remaining three stopped because their phone batteries were low. Four volunteers also identified one instruction that they found unclear.
Problems to distinguish
The incomplete routes should not automatically be treated as failures of the guide content. Low batteries are a device-related barrier, although the museum may still need to help visitors prepare for using their own phones. By contrast, an unclear instruction is a content issue that the guide team can examine directly. The notes do not show whether the same volunteers experienced both problems.
Limitations
All testing took place on a quiet weekday morning. A small volunteer group may not reflect the range of visitors or the conditions of a busy weekend. These results cannot establish how the guide will work for every visitor.
Recommendations
The team should rewrite and retest the unclear instruction. It should also provide an advance reminder about phone batteries and explain any charging options available. A further test at a busier time, involving a wider range of visitors, would help assess whether these changes are sufficient.
Purpose and results
This report considers the museum’s trial of a new audio guide with twelve volunteers. Nine completed the route. The remaining three stopped because their phone batteries were low. Four volunteers also identified one instruction that they found unclear.
Problems to distinguish
The incomplete routes should not automatically be treated as failures of the guide content. Low batteries are a device-related barrier, although the museum may still need to help visitors prepare for using their own phones. By contrast, an unclear instruction is a content issue that the guide team can examine directly. The notes do not show whether the same volunteers experienced both problems.
Limitations
All testing took place on a quiet weekday morning. A small volunteer group may not reflect the range of visitors or the conditions of a busy weekend. These results cannot establish how the guide will work for every visitor.
Recommendations
The team should rewrite and retest the unclear instruction. It should also provide an advance reminder about phone batteries and explain any charging options available. A further test at a busier time, involving a wider range of visitors, would help assess whether these changes are sufficient.
One possible model, not an answer key. Self-check: Can the reader find all required points: results, two problem types, sample limits and improvements? Structure: Use headings to separate recorded facts, cautious interpretation, limitations and recommendations. Recommendations are proposals, not observed results. “Problems to distinguish” → “Limitations”. Language: “The incomplete routes should not automatically be treated as failures of the guide content.” Cautious wording separates what the notes show from a possible explanation; do not invent a survey, a percentage or a proven cause. Other wording and organisation can meet the task. Keep any supplied facts. This is self-review, not an automatic language score.
Fictional briefing: a shared workplace tests online desk booking for two weeks. Notes: 30 staff used it; seven bookings were cancelled late; three people could not find their booked desk; there is no comparison with the previous system.
Write a report of 180–220 words. Present the facts, identify possible causes without claiming certainty, explain the missing comparison, and recommend practical adjustments.
Answer & explanation
Desk Booking Pilot
Scope
This report summarises a two-week trial of online desk booking in the shared workplace. Thirty staff members used the system during this period.
Recorded difficulties
Seven bookings were cancelled late, and three people reported that they could not find the desks they had reserved. Late cancellations may have limited the opportunity for other staff to use those desks. Difficulty locating a desk could reflect unclear labels, an unfamiliar layout or confusing instructions, but the available notes do not identify a definite cause.
Limits of the findings
There is no comparable record from the previous system. The trial therefore cannot show whether online booking reduced confusion or improved desk availability overall. It also covers only a short period, during which staff may still have been learning how the system worked.
Suggested adjustments
The workplace should make desk labels easier to match with the booking screen and send a reminder explaining how to cancel promptly. Staff should also have a clear way to report a problem. A further trial should record the reasons for cancellations and compare desk use with an equivalent earlier period, where reliable information is available.
Scope
This report summarises a two-week trial of online desk booking in the shared workplace. Thirty staff members used the system during this period.
Recorded difficulties
Seven bookings were cancelled late, and three people reported that they could not find the desks they had reserved. Late cancellations may have limited the opportunity for other staff to use those desks. Difficulty locating a desk could reflect unclear labels, an unfamiliar layout or confusing instructions, but the available notes do not identify a definite cause.
Limits of the findings
There is no comparable record from the previous system. The trial therefore cannot show whether online booking reduced confusion or improved desk availability overall. It also covers only a short period, during which staff may still have been learning how the system worked.
Suggested adjustments
The workplace should make desk labels easier to match with the booking screen and send a reminder explaining how to cancel promptly. Staff should also have a clear way to report a problem. A further trial should record the reasons for cancellations and compare desk use with an equivalent earlier period, where reliable information is available.
One possible model, not an answer key. Self-check: Can the reader find all required points: facts, cautious possible causes, missing comparison and adjustments? Structure: Use headings to separate recorded facts, cautious interpretation, limitations and recommendations. Recommendations are proposals, not observed results. “Recorded difficulties” → “Limits of the findings”. Language: “Difficulty locating a desk could reflect unclear labels, an unfamiliar layout or confusing instructions, but the available notes do not identify a definite cause.” Cautious wording separates what the notes show from a possible explanation; do not invent a survey, a percentage or a proven cause. Other wording and organisation can meet the task. Keep any supplied facts. This is self-review, not an automatic language score.