C1 Advanced · Writing · Part 2
C1 Report Practice (Free)
Organise findings into a purposeful report. Practise evaluating evidence, grouping related points and making practical recommendations.
This exercise, its explanations and the downloadable PDF are in English.
Download exercise and explanations (PDF)
Free download · No account needed · 3 pages
Assessing a workplace training pilot
You work for a company which has piloted online and in-person workshops attended by staff together. Your training manager has asked you to write a report evaluating the pilot and recommending changes before the next programme. Staff feedback says that recordings were convenient for people with conflicting duties, remote participants found it difficult to enter spontaneous discussions among colleagues in the room, and some participants wanted clearer instructions before group activities. Use this feedback to assess the benefits and weaknesses, recommend practical improvements and explain how the revised programme could be evaluated. Write 220–260 words.
Write 220–260 words.
This is guided self-review, with no automatic writing score.
Your draft stays only on this page while it is open. It is not submitted, saved or sent for feedback. Compare at any length, or read the model without writing first.
Read the model and review your draft
One possible response
236 words · Original teaching example. Other responses can also work.
Report on the workshop pilot
Purpose and evidence This report evaluates the recent workshop pilot using the staff feedback provided. It considers access to training and participation in activities, then recommends adjustments for the next programme. The feedback identifies useful themes, although it does not establish how common each experience was across the workforce.
Benefits Recordings made it easier for staff with conflicting duties to follow the workshops. This flexibility should be retained, since a fixed timetable would otherwise exclude some colleagues. However, being able to watch a session later is not equivalent to taking part in its discussions, so recordings should complement rather than replace opportunities for interaction.
Areas for improvement Remote participants struggled to enter conversations that developed spontaneously in the room. This suggests a problem with facilitation rather than a lack of interest. In addition, requests for clearer activity instructions indicate that some staff began group work without a shared understanding of the task. Both issues could limit the value of an otherwise accessible programme.
Recommendations Future sessions should appoint a facilitator to invite remote contributions and allocate short turns to each group. Written instructions should be circulated before activities and checked briefly with participants. After two revised sessions, the manager should collect feedback from remote and in-person attendees separately and review whether each group could contribute. This would help establish whether the adjustments address the reported problems before the programme is expanded.
What to notice
Task and evidence boundaries
The manager needs an evaluation and actionable recommendations. The model uses all three supplied feedback themes and explicitly says the feedback does not establish prevalence. It therefore avoids inventing percentages, a sample size or a claim that all staff had the same experience.
Plan and report structure
Purpose and evidence establishes scope; Benefits identifies what to retain; Areas for improvement diagnoses problems; Recommendations connects each problem to an action and evaluation. Headings help a busy manager find the relevant information.
Content: distinguish access from participation
“Being able to watch a session later is not equivalent to taking part” explains why convenient recordings do not resolve the discussion problem. This distinction prevents the positive finding from cancelling out the negative one.
Communicative achievement and language
“This suggests a problem with facilitation” presents a reasonable interpretation without pretending it is proved. The impersonal, professional tone suits an internal report. “Should be circulated” focuses attention on the procedure; the report is clear without unnecessary official-sounding language.
Recommendations and evaluation
Inviting remote contributions responds to exclusion from discussions; written instructions address uncertainty before activities. Collecting the two groups’ feedback separately checks whether an apparent overall improvement hides continuing inequality. The review after two sessions is a proposed method, not invented evidence.
Alternatives and pitfalls
Other feasible participation methods could work, such as structured online breakout groups. Recommendations must respond to the supplied findings and preserve the useful flexibility. Avoid turning the report into a personal complaint or asserting that more technology alone will solve a facilitation problem.
Review your own choices
- Have I addressed all three feedback themes?
- Have I distinguished evidence from interpretation?
- Does each recommendation solve an identified problem?
- Have I explained how changes will be evaluated?
- Are headings and register suitable for the manager?
- Is my response 220–260 words?
Choose one improvement to make in your draft. Matching the model's wording is not the aim; compare how clearly each response does the task.
Continue with more C1 report practice
Create a free account for more practice. This sample, model and review remain free to use here.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Log in to this writing task.