Smaller, Not Gone
The problem shrinks but stays visible — beside the version where it vanishes, marked as an over-claim.
Click to zoom
The honest claim is the one on the left. It is also the one you can defend.
Distinguish reducing a problem from solving it — the single most useful hedging move available in a Task 2 solution paragraph.
Preview · progress not saved — Chapter 1 is free
Seven of these eight verbs claim only that the problem got smaller. That limitation is what makes them defensible.
Building more housing would solve homelessness.
No examiner believes that, and neither do you. The claim is too big, and the rest of your paragraph now has to defend something no evidence supports.
Here is the same idea, defensible:
Building more housing would alleviate homelessness.
One word, and the sentence becomes something you can actually argue for.
Sprint 3.1 taught you to hedge a claim with tend to and arguably. This sprint does the same job through the verb — and in a solution paragraph, it is more natural and less visible than adding a hedge word.
Seven of these eight verbs claim only partial improvement. That is not a weakness of the vocabulary. It is the reason to use it.
The problem shrinks but stays visible — beside the version where it vanishes, marked as an over-claim.
The honest claim is the one on the left. It is also the one you can defend.
A collocation drill. Each verb has settled on particular nouns.
Terms
Definitions
Three decisions turning on whether the cause has actually been dealt with.
One
What the measure does: it reduces suffering, but the cause of the suffering is untouched.
Candidates: alleviates / remedies
The expert chooses:
Because:
Two
What the measure does: the writer wants to talk about reducing poverty itself, not the effects of poverty.
Candidates: mitigate / alleviate
The expert chooses:
Because:
Three
What the measure does: a new fuel tax raises exactly enough revenue to balance the cost of a subsidy.
Candidates: offset / ease
The expert chooses:
Because:
Six gaps across a solution paragraph. One tests whether you will over-claim.
What can be done about urban overcrowding?
No single measure will end the problem, but several would make it substantially less severe.
Building social housing at scale would the pressure on families currently in temporary accommodation, even though the underlying shortage would remain.
Investment in regional cities could the growth of the capital, which has absorbed most internal migration for three decades.
Better public transport would congestion in the worst-affected districts, though it would not reduce the number of people living there.
Governments should also the planning restrictions that prevent construction in the first place — this is the one measure that addresses a genuine cause rather than a symptom.
Revenue from a vacant property tax could the cost of the building programme, balancing the two against each other.
None of these would the housing crisis outright, and a solution paragraph claiming otherwise would not survive scrutiny.
Taken together, though, they would the worst effects on the households currently least able to bear them.
Propose a measure and say what it will not fix — then see whether your verb admits the limit.
Problem: rising levels of anxiety and stress among school students.
Most candidates never write sentence 2. It is the one that makes sentence 1 credible — and it is the check on whether your verb was honest.
One proposal, one honest limitation.
Name the verb and what it claims.