TOEFL Email Task — Band 6 Sample Response (Research Topic)

Prompt

You receive the following email from your sociology professor.

Subject: SOC 312 term paper — choose or propose a research topic

Dear class,

The term paper for SOC 312 is due in week twelve, and I would like each of you to commit to a research focus by next Tuesday so that I can begin matching you with reading lists. To help you start, I have drafted two suggested topics:

  Topic 1: How remote-work policies have reshaped urban commuting patterns since 2020.
  Topic 2: The role of community-run libraries in neighbourhoods that have lost public branches.

You are welcome to take either of these as written. However, I would equally welcome a topic of your own, provided that it sits within contemporary urban sociology and that you can articulate why it matters. Please reply by Tuesday with the topic you intend to pursue and a sentence or two explaining your choice.

Best,
Professor Adeyemi

Instructions: Write a reply of 100-150 words. Acknowledge the offer, commit to a topic (one of the two suggested or one of your own), justify your choice with a clear rationale, and propose a concrete next step.

Sample response

Word count: 142

Dear Professor Adeyemi,

Thank you for the flexibility on the term paper. Both of your suggested topics are appealing, but I would like to propose a third focus that draws on the same urban frame: how municipal night-bus networks shape access to shift work for low-wage employees in our city. The question matters because public-transport schedules are usually optimised around white-collar commuting, and the inverse problem (what happens to a cleaner who finishes at 1 a.m.) is rarely studied with the same care. I think a comparative case study of two routes, one well served at night and one not, would yield something publishable in scope.

If the topic is acceptable, could I drop by your Thursday office hour to confirm the two routes and agree on three core readings? I will bring a one-page outline.

Best,
Priya

Rubric breakdown

Criterion	Score	Comment
Organization	5/5	A tight three-move structure: acknowledgement, proposal with justification, concrete next step. A band 5 version would also hit these moves but would tend to mark each one with an explicit signpost ("First, I would like to..."). The band 6 response weaves the moves together so the seams are invisible, which is what the top of the scale rewards.
Development	5/5	The justification works on two levels at once: it states why the topic matters in the discipline (transport schedules optimised around white-collar commuting) and proposes a workable method (a two-route comparative case study). A band 5 response would typically deliver one of these layers; a band 6 response delivers both and shows they are connected.
Language Use	5/5	Hypotactic syntax is used for meaning, not display: the long sentence about white-collar commuting embeds a parenthetical example (the cleaner finishing at 1 a.m.) inside a contrast structure. Lexis like "yield", "publishable in scope", and "inverse problem" land naturally rather than ornamentally. A band 5 response would typically rely on shorter coordinated sentences and one or two showpiece collocations.
Tone & Register	5/5	Pitch-perfect for a student writing to a professor: the formal "Dear Professor Adeyemi" opening matches the professor's own register, the proposal is hedged with "I would like to" and "if the topic is acceptable", and the close is unhurried. A band 5 response often slips one notch too informal or one notch too stiff; this one holds the middle line throughout.

What pushes this to band 6 and not band 5

Lexical precision rather than vocabulary display. "Publishable in scope" and "inverse problem" are doing real work in the sentence; they are not synonyms reached for to impress. Band 5 writers often substitute a fancy word where a plain one would carry the meaning more cleanly, and examiners notice.
Hypotactic syntax with subordinate clauses that earn their length. The white-collar commuting sentence carries a contrast (usually optimised for X, rarely studied for Y) and a parenthetical example inside a single grammatical frame. Band 5 responses tend to break this into two coordinated sentences joined by "and".
A genuinely original third option. The professor invited a student-proposed topic, and the response takes that invitation seriously rather than defaulting to one of the two suggestions. The proposed topic is also disciplined: it sits inside the urban-sociology frame the professor specified, so it answers the offer rather than ignoring it.
Method as well as motivation. A band 5 writer typically explains why a topic matters; a band 6 writer also sketches how it would be studied (two routes, comparative case). That second layer is what separates a student who has had an idea from a student who has thought one through.
A concrete, low-friction next step. Asking to drop by a specific office hour with a one-page outline turns a reply into the start of a working relationship, which is exactly the move the professor's prompt was designed to elicit.

Compare with the band 5 versions

It is worth reading the band 5 samples side by side with this one. The gap looks small in scoring terms but is visible on the page once you know what to look for: longer subordinate clauses, fewer signposts, more disciplined word choice.

Common ways students lose half a band

Reaching for vocabulary that does not pay its rent. A response that uses "plethora", "myriad", or "delve" once is fine; using all three in a 140-word reply signals memorised lexis and pulls the language-use score down to band 5.
Proposing an original topic that drifts outside the professor's frame. If the brief specifies urban sociology and the student replies with a topic on, say, online dating, the development score collapses regardless of how well the topic is written. The new idea has to honour the constraint.
Justifying a choice with feelings instead of a discipline-anchored reason. "I find this fascinating" is a band 4 line. "This question matters because public-transport schedules are usually optimised around white-collar commuting" is a band 6 line. The difference is whether the justification could appear in an academic article.
Forgetting the next step. Many otherwise-strong replies stop at the proposal and never invite the next contact. A concrete ask (an office hour, a reading suggestion, a one-page outline) is what converts a reply from a notice into a working exchange, and the rubric rewards exactly that move.

Practise this task on a real test

Take a free TOEFL Writing practice test and submit your own response for rubric-anchored expert evaluation, or sit a full mock exam end to end.

Try a Writing practice test