How to write an essay | C2 Proficient (CPE)
What is the C2 Proficiency (CPE) Discursive Essay?
Part 1 of the C2 Proficiency Writing paper always requires you to write an essay. You are given two short texts of about 100 words each. You must summarize and evaluate the key points from both texts.
Key Requirements
- Word count: 240 - 280 words.
- Tone: Highly formal, academic, and objective.
Recommended Structure
1. Introduction: Introduce the overarching theme connecting both texts. Maintain an academic tone right from the start.
2. Summary & Evaluation of Text 1: Identify the main points made by the first author.
3. Summary & Evaluation of Text 2: Transition to the second text. Summarize its core message.
4. Conclusion: Bring the ideas from both texts together. State your final overarching view on the matter.
Sample C2 Proficiency (CPE) Essay
Prompt: Read two texts about the impact of remote working. Write an essay evaluating the key points of both texts and adding your own ideas.
(Text 1 argues that remote work increases productivity and work-life balance. Text 2 suggests remote work destroys company culture and leads to isolation.)
The proliferation of telecommuting has sparked considerable debate regarding its long-term viability. The two texts provided offer contrasting perspectives on this shift, highlighting both the unprecedented autonomy it grants and the potential erosion of communal workplace dynamics.
The first text champions the flexibility of remote work, asserting that liberated employees naturally exhibit enhanced productivity and a superior work-life balance. It is irrefutable that discarding the daily commute frees up valuable hours, allowing individuals to tailor their schedules to their personal rhythms. However, the author implicitly assumes that all workers possess the requisite self-discipline and domestic infrastructure to thrive in such an environment. In reality, a chaotic home setting can easily derail focus, undermining the promised gains in efficiency.
Conversely, the second passage adopts a more cautionary tone, warning that a decentralised workforce inevitably sacrifices corporate cohesion. The writer posits that the absence of spontaneous, face-to-face interactions stifles innovation and precipitates feelings of professional isolation. There is considerable merit to this view; human beings are inherently social creatures, and the subtle nuances of collaboration are often lost in a purely digital realm. Notwithstanding this, the text overlooks the potential of modern virtual tools to foster robust communities if managed correctly.
Taking both perspectives into account, it appears that the optimal solution lies not in an absolutist approach, but rather in a hybrid model. While the undisputed benefits of autonomy and reduced commuting should be embraced, organisations must also systematically cultivate an inclusive culture to mitigate the risk of isolation. Ultimately, remote working is a powerful tool, provided its implementation is consistently mindful of human psychological needs.
