In Write for an Academic Discussion you join an online class conversation. A professor asks a question, two classmates answer it, and you have ten minutes to post a reply of your own. The task rewards one clear position supported by something the other two students did not say — not length, and not a memorized essay shape.
The screen looks like a course discussion board. At the top is the professor’s post: usually a few sentences of background, then the question itself, most often in the last line. Below it are two classmates’ replies, each with a position, a reason and usually a short example. Underneath is an empty box for your contribution.
Questions come in a handful of shapes. Some offer a choice between two options; some ask yes or no; some ask how a group should decide something; some are open (“What is one change that…?”); and some combine two of these. The background often contains a warm-up question about your own experience — that is there to open the topic, not to be answered.
The clock is the defining feature. Ten minutes covers reading, planning, writing and checking, and when the time is up you will not get more of it, so plan to finish rather than hoping to add a last sentence. That makes this task as much about routine as about English: a plan you can make in two minutes is worth more than a brilliant idea you find at minute six.
The task measures whether you can take part in academic conversation in writing — read what others think, decide where you stand, and move the discussion forward. Concretely:
Your first sentence should answer the professor’s real question, in a form someone could underline: a side, a clear conditional (“yes, but only if…”), a decision rule, or one named answer to an open question. Openings like “Both options have advantages and disadvantages” feel safe but answer nothing.
Match the answer to the question type. A choice question needs one option, or a mix with a rule for when each applies. A how-to-decide question needs a test (“A course should go online only if its discussions work on a screen”). A two-part question needs both parts answered, usually the choice first. A trailing “Why or why not?” is not a second part — it just asks for your reasons.
Before deciding anything, note each classmate’s position and reason in three to five words. Then ask what neither of them covered. That gap is where your contribution lives. Useful angles to check: money (who pays, what is saved), time and the long term, who is helped or left out within the group the question is about, a practical problem in day-to-day operation, and a group outside the question that would also feel the change.
Agreeing with a classmate is perfectly fine; repeating one is not. A fresh example for the same reason, or the same reason in new words, is still their point. A useful signal phrase is “I side with Grace, but for a reason she didn’t mention” — you keep her side and add something the discussion did not contain. And remember that the opinion itself is never marked: either side can score well.
With a target of roughly 100–150 words, one developed point beats three listed ones. A reliable shape is position, link to a classmate, new reason, specific example, closing sentence. The example should be something a reader can picture — who, what, when, or a number — and it must prove your reason, not just the topic.
Personal stories are allowed, but test them: what does the story actually prove? If the answer is your classmate’s reason, it is repetition in a new setting. When both posts are strong and time is short, try turning a classmate’s goal: “Tomás wants books returned on time, and that’s exactly why I’d drop late fees…” — your side becomes the better route to their aim.
Academic writing acknowledges the other side. A single concession (“It’s true that a longer library day costs more, but…”) makes you sound fair — as long as you come back to your position in the same sentence or the next one. A concession that never returns leaves the reader unsure which side you are on.
Hedging works the same way. One probably or often makes a claim defensible; stacking might possibly perhaps hides your view. Watch the grammar of the turn as well: although already links two ideas, so it never takes a but, and however needs a semicolon or a full stop before it.
A fixed routine removes the panic. In our course we teach roughly two minutes to read and plan, about six to write, and the last minutes to check — treat those splits as a practice habit, not an official rule. The plan is five short note lines: the question and its type, each classmate’s reason, your side plus the new reason, your example, and the point of your final sentence.
Use checkpoints. By minute two you should be writing; by minute eight you should have an ending. If time runs short, cut a second reason before anything else, and always write a closing sentence — a finished post with one well-supported reason beats a longer one that stops mid-sentence. In the check pass, confirm the position is easy to find, every this or such points to one clear idea, and your personal error patterns are fixed.
Most weak discussion posts fail in a few predictable ways. Each mistake below is paired with a stronger version and the reason it works.
Mistake: Opening with “Hana and Kofi each raise good points, and the question of internships is complex.”
Better: “Each of them has a case, but I agree with Hana: an internship works like an extended job interview.”
Why: A balanced opening is fine only if it turns to a side within the sentence. Otherwise there is no position to support.
Mistake: Agreeing with a classmate and then restating their reason in different words.
Better: Agree, then add a reason they did not give: “I agree with Amara, and a later deadline would also give the writing center time to see everyone who books.”
Why: The task asks you to add to the conversation. A paraphrase adds nothing new.
Mistake: Answering the warm-up question in the background (“Yes, I have waited weeks for library books”).
Better: Answering the main question: whether the library should buy any book a student requests.
Why: The real task is usually the last question in the professor’s post; the experience question only opens the topic.
Mistake: “Dogs are good for offices because of stress, friendliness, exercise and morale.”
Better: One reason, developed: owners no longer have to leave early to walk their dogs — then a specific example.
Why: A list names four reasons and proves none. One reason with an example counts as support.
Mistake: “I am agree with Tomás” or “According to me, homework should be optional.”
Better: “I agree with Tomás” and “In my view, homework should be optional.”
Why: Agree is a verb and needs no am; according to introduces someone else’s view, never your own.
Mistake: Running out of time mid-list: “…and the food is good and another reason is”.
Better: A complete closing sentence that returns to the question.
Why: When the ten minutes run out, you cannot keep writing. A finished ending is worth more than an unfinished extra reason.
Two prompts from our free practice bank, each with a model contribution and a note on why it works. Notice that both models take a clear side early, link to a classmate, and then add a point neither classmate made.
Write a contribution to the discussion. Express and support your view in your own words, building on the discussion with a reason or example. Aim for at least 100 words. You have 10 minutes.
Model response (one good answer — yours can differ)
Kwame's prediction may well be correct, but I don't think it is an argument against free buses. If many new riders are people who used to walk or cycle, the bus is finally reaching people who were getting around with difficulty: an older man walking twenty minutes to the pharmacy, or a parent crossing town with two children because a family's fares add up quickly. Moving those people is exactly what public transportation is for, even if it does little for traffic. There is also a cost argument. Collecting fares is not free, since a city needs ticket machines, card systems, and staff to check tickets, and in a small system those costs can swallow a large share of what the fares bring in. So the question isn't only whether free buses remove cars. They make the city easier to move around for the people with the least money, often at a smaller net cost than it seems.
Why it works: The response accepts Kwame's prediction about who the new riders would be and then argues that serving those riders is a reason to make buses free. It adds a separate point that neither student made, the cost of collecting fares, and ends with a clear answer to the professor's question.
What the response must do
Write a contribution to the discussion. Express and support your view in your own words, building on the discussion with a reason or example. Aim for at least 100 words. You have 10 minutes.
Model response (one good answer — yours can differ)
Asking visitors to put their phones away would shut out some of the people who look most carefully. For many visitors, a phone is a tool for seeing better, not a distraction. My grandfather has weak eyesight, and when we visit museums, he photographs labels and small objects so that he can zoom in on details he could never read from behind the rope. Visitors reading labels in a foreign language do something similar with translation apps. Ayesha is describing a different problem. The crowds she saw in front of one famous painting were not really caused by cameras; those people would be standing there anyway, because that painting is what everyone came to see. Taking away their phones would not make the room less crowded, and it would make the museum harder to enjoy for exactly the visitors who need a little help to pay attention.
Why it works: The response opposes asking visitors to put phones away and adds a reason neither student gave: for some visitors, a phone helps them see and understand the objects. A family example makes this concrete, and the response then challenges Ayesha by arguing that the crowds she saw were caused by the painting's fame, not by cameras.
What the response must do
Our free Write for an Academic Discussion practice page has all 6 sets (6 questions) from the same bank as the examples above, with answer checking and an explanation for every option. For a short mixed session each day, try the Writing questions of the day.
The strategies on this page come from the Write for an Academic Discussion module of the Test Ninjas TOEFL course. Each lesson teaches the English behind the task, then drills it:
Ready for the whole course? Every lesson in all twelve task modules, plus full-length practice tests.
Start my free trial →