IELTS essay sample

Nội dung text: IELTS essay sample

1. IELTS ESSAY SAMPLE LAYOUT The 35553 is a total of 21 sentences. At about 12 words per sentence this is 252 words. a 3-sentence Intro a 5-sentence para a 5-sentence para a 5-sentence para a 3-sentence conclusion Conclusions A good conclusion will rephrase the question summarize the main ideas give your opinion, if you haven't given it already look to the future (say what will happen if the situation continues or changes) but will NEVER add new information Should we test products on animals? I agree that we need to make sure that animals who are used for testing new products have the minimum of suffering. However, I am convinced that animal testing is necessary, and that it will continue to benefit humans in new and wonderful ways. Should we beat children? In conclusion, physical punishment can be a useful method of discipline. However it should be the last choice for parents. If we want to build a world with less violence we must begin at home, and we must teach our children to be responsible. Is education important? In conclusion, although there are undoubtedly some problems with increased levels of education, I feel strongly that the country can only progress if all its people are educated to the maximum of their ability. Who are the better parents - men or women? I think this is not an either/or question. Both men and women have strengths and skills that are important for children's psychological growth. We need to ensure that both parents play an important role in the family in order to give children a good start in life. Who learns quicker - adults or children? Finally, I feel that we cannot generalize about children or adults being better learners. It depends on the situation and the motivation of the person, and the level of enthusiasm he or she has for learning. Should dangerous sports be banned? 1
2. In summary, our society would be healthier if more people took part in sports of all kinds. We should continue to try to prevent accidents and injuries. However, we should also ensure that sports are challenging, exciting, and, above all, fun. Through recent medical advances we now have the capacity to determine the characteristics of unborn babies, produce clones, transplant animal organs to humans, as well as prolong life. Such technology is unethical, interferes with the course of nature and should be prohibited. To what extent do you agree with this opinion? 1.In conclusion, recent medical advances offer us advantages such as prolonging our lives, improving the quality of our lives, and providing some infertile couples with the opportunity to experience parenthood. On the other hand, they pose dilemmas, including compromising our standard of living because of a dependent elderly population, potentially causing harmful mental and physical side effects, and undermining our ethical values. Therefore we have to think about them carefully or it will not be good. This example follows the suggested model of a concluding paragraph. The two summary statements succinctly paraphrase the main arguments. The paragraph makes a recommendation too, however, the benefits of this are not stated, so it is vague and unconvincing. 2. What is more, poor people often cannot afford to pay for these new medical advances.Consequently, they are only a benefit to a small, affluent part of the population, so we should prohibit them. This example does not follow the suggested model of a concluding paragraph. There is no statement referring to the main arguments or summary of them. In fact, it provides another argument, which the concluding paragraph should not contain. It does make a recommendation, however, this appears to be motivated by envy or jealousy, so it is not a very credible suggestion. 3.To conclude, new medical advances have many positive outcomes. However, we should analyse our objectives carefully in order to decide what is appropriate and what should be permitted. If we do not, the result might not be longer more fulfilling lives, but instead,extended less satisfying existence. This example follows the suggested model of a concluding paragraph. The summary statement is good; it refers back to the main arguments. The paragraph makes a recommendation too, which seems logical and acceptable. 2
3. EDUCATION 1. As computers are being used more and more in education, there will be soon no role for teachers in the classroom. There have been immense advances in technology in most aspects of people's lives, especially in the field of education. Nowadays, an increasing number of students rely on computers to research for information and to produce a perfect paper for school purposes. Others have decided to leave the original way of learning to get knowledge through online schools. These changes in the learning process have brought a special concern regarding the possible decrease of importance of teachers in the classroom. Some people believe the role of teachers started to fade because computers have been helping some students to progress in their studies quicker than when compared with an original classroom. For example, in the same classroom, students have different intellectual capacities, thus some would be tied to a slow advance in their studies because of others’ incapacity of understanding. In this way, pupils could progress in their acquisition of knowledge at their own pace using computers instead of learning from teachers. However, the presence of a teacher is essential for students because the human contact influences them in positive ways. Firstly, students realize that they are not dealing with a machine but with a human being who deserves attention and respect. They also learn the importance of studying in group and respect other students, which helps them to improve their social skills. Moreover, teachers are required in the learning process because they acknowledge some student's deficiencies and help them to solve their problems by repeating the same explanation, giving extra exercises or even suggesting a private tutor. Hence, students can have a bigger chance not to fail in a subject. In conclusion, the role for teachers in the learning process is still very important and it will continue to be in the future because no machine can replace the human interaction and its consequences. Sample 2 : Nobody can argue that the acquisition of knowledge is more fun and easier with computers. The mere activity of touching and exploring this device constitutes an enjoyable task for a kid. This, accompanied with the relaxing attitude and software interactivity, usually conduce to a better grasping of new knowledge. At a higher educational level; the availability of digital books, simulator and other academic materials, provide the student with an ever accessible source of information, that otherwise would not be at hand. But, besides the increasing complexity and behavior of intelligent software, which is usually embedded in the academic digital material, the need of human interaction in the learning process will always be present, at least in the foreseeable future. There is the necessity for a 3
4. human being to be able to determine what the specifics needs of each individual are. The expertise of a teacher in how to explain and adapt complex concepts to different individuals can hardly be mimicked by a computer, no matter how sophisticated its software is. As computers are becoming a common tool for teaching, teachers should be more aware of their role as guides in the acquisition of knowledge rather than transmitters of facts. They have to be open minded to the changes that are taking places, keep updated and serve as a problem solvers in the learning process, thus allowing students to discover the fact for themselves. To summarize, in my personal view, teachers play and will() play an important role in the classroom, especially at the primary level. No matter how complex computers become, there will be no replacement for the human interaction, but in the way haw this interaction takes place. Excellent essay! Are you a native English speaker? Well done. The only problem: too long, 365 words instead of 250-265 maximum. 2. In some countries young people are encouraged to work or travel for a year between finishing high school and starting university studies. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages for young people who decide to do this. It is quite common these days for young people in many countries to have a break from studying after graduating from high school. This trend is not restricted to rich students who have the money to travel, but is also evident among poorer students who choose to work and become economically independent for a period of time. The reasons for this trend may involve the recognition that a young adult who passes directly from school to university is rather restricted in terms of general knowledge and experience of the world. By contrast, those who have spent some time earning a living or traveling to other places have a broader view of life and better personal resources to draw on. They tend to be more independent, which is a very important factor in academic study and research, as well as giving them an advantage in terms of coping with the challenges of student life. However, there are certainly dangers in taking time off at that important age. Young adults may end up never returning to their studies or finding it difficult to readapt to an academic environment. They may think that it is better to continue in a particular job, or to do something completely different from a university course. But overall, I think this is less likely today, when academic qualifications are essential for getting a reasonable career. My view is that young people should be encouraged to broaden their horizons. That is the best way for them to get a clear perspective of what they are hoping to do with their lives and why. Students with such a perspective are usually the most effective and motivated ones and taking a year off may be the best way to gain this. (291 words) 4
5. 3. Some people believe that a college or university education should be available to all students. Others believe that higher education should be available only to good students. Discuss these views. Which view do you agree with? Explain why. People learn through their entire lives. They constantly improve their knowledge and develop. I think that a college or university education should be available to all students because every person has the right to choose the way to self-perfection. Bellow I will give some of my reasons to support my position. First of all, every person should have the chance to get a higher degree, gain new knowledge and experience. However, some people believe that higher education should be available only to good students. I think it is silly. It is like to make unavailable traveling for one who does not have IQ high enough. Second of all, some young people do not do well at school but they have great personality and ability to learn. They are self-confident, persistent and patient. With these qualities they can get higher grades then their classmates who are talented but lazy. Imagine for example situation when a teenager gets high grades because his or her parents constantly make him or her study and help to do most of the homework. In this case a child does very well at school but I think a college can show the opposite results. Finally, it is a discrimination against students to make available higher education only for good ones. So, if a student does poor and gets low grades he/she should be sent down. But if a person was never given a chance to try himself/herself at college, what to do in this case? To sum up, I think that all young people should have the chance to get a higher education. To take or not this chance must be up to them. (277 words) 4. Some people believe that the best way of learning about life is by listening to the advice of family and friends. Other people believe that the best way of learning about life is through personal experience. Compare the advantages of these two different ways of learning about life. Which do you think is preferable? Use specific examples to support your preference. From my everyday experience and observation I can stand that the best way of learning about life is through personal experience. However, some people think that it is wiser to learn about life through listening to the advice of family and friends. It does not mean I totally disagree with this way of learning. Moreover, I think that it is wise for a person to take an intermediate position because each of these ways has its own advantages. Bellow I 5
6. will give my reasons to support my point of view. From the one side, learning through one's personal experience brings many benefits. First of all, scientists say that personal experience has greater impact on a person. I have to agree with this. Take for example children. They will not believe their parents that something can hurt them until they try it and make sure in it. Furthermore, most likely they will remember this experience longer. Second of all, people learn how to analyze their mistakes, make conclusions and next time try to avoid them. So, I think it is a great experience that makes people stronger, more self-confident and persistent. They gain more knowledge and experience that will be very helpful and valuable in the future. From the other side, listening to the advice of family and friends brings many benefits too. Parents with great patience pass down their knowledge and experience to their children. They teach them all they know and they want their children do not make the same mistakes. In addition to those practical benefits, learning from someone's advice is painless. For example, parents nowadays very often talk to their children about drugs. I think it is a great example when one should not try drugs in order to gain new experience. I think it is a case when children must trust their parents. To sum up, I think it is wise to combine both of these ways to learn and try to analyze personal mistakes as well as not personal. I think together they can greatly simplify one's life and make the way to success shorter. (350 words) 5. With the pressures on today’s young people to succeed academically, some people believe that non-academic subjects at school (eg: physical education and cookery) should be removed from the syllabus so that children can concentrate wholly on academic subjects. To what extent do you agree or disagree? What young people should study at school has long been the subject of intense debate and this is a question that certainly does not have one correct answer. We need to provide young people the best possible chance of doing well at school. In traditional curriculum there is a wide variety of subjects with a mix of academic and non- academic subjects. In this way a young person is formed with a rounded education. Non- academic subjects would include sports, cooking, woodwork and metalwork. I believe this is the best form of education. A young person should learn things other than academic subjects. Sport is particularly important. Young people have to learn to love sport so that they can be fit and healthy later in life. If not we will be raising an obese and unfit generation. I totally understand the point of view that education is so important that students must be 6
7. pushed as hard as possible to achieve their best. It sounds a good idea to only expose the students to academic subjects as then they can spend all of their school hours on studying areas that will get them into university and good jobs later in life. I just feel a more rounded education would produce a better individual. We must remember too that a lot of people, maybe even most people, aren‛t academically minded and would benefit more from a more vocationally based education. Forcing academic studies onto them would lead to failure and the student leaving school too early. Therefore I agree that although a wholly academic curriculum would suit and benefit some young people, I believe that for most students non-academic subjects are important inclusions still in today‛s syllabuses. 6. In many countries, sports and exercise classes are replaced with the academic subjects. Discuss the effects of this trend. Over the past few decades, academic subjects have become increasingly important in this fast-changing information-based society. Nowadays, there has been a growing debate as to whether it would be more effective to replace physical education classes with academic subjects. Despite the importance of sports, I highly believe that it is inevitable and more efficient to focus more on academic subjects for several reasons. Those who argue that sports and exercise classes are needed in school base their case on the following arguments. First of all, sports are a good way to build character and develop personality. That is, there are necessary for learning about competition, cooperation, and good sportsmanship. In addition, as a majority of children these days are addicted to the Internet, they find it hard to leave their computer. Consequently, a growing number of children are becoming overweight or obese due to a lack of exercise. So, if schools foster an environment that deprives students of getting a proper physical education, it will have a long-term negative effect on children both mentally and physically. Nevertheless, people should not ignore the fact that devoting more time and energy to academic subjects will benefit students more in the long run. The time devoted to physical education now would be better spent teaching students English. This is because speaking fluent English will give young people an advantage over other college applicants and job seekers in the near future. Besides, science will undoubtedly benefit youth more than physical education as well. The principles learned in science will provide the necessary foundation for solving and difficult problems that are sure to arise in students' futures. In summary, there are high hopes that educators and parents exercise wisdom in teaching young generations. (300 words) 7
8. 7. Some people think high school graduates should travel or work for a period of time instead of going directly to study at university. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of both approaches. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. High school students face many decisions as they prepare to graduate, including what they are going to do after graduation. Some high school students go directly to college or university after graduation. Others prefer to travel or work for some time before going to university. For those who choose to go college or university after graduation, there are advantages and disadvantages. One of the big advantages of going directly from high school to college is that you are still in the habit of studying. By going to college after graduation, you do not lose the study skills that you developed during high school. The big disadvantages, however, is that you may not be ready for college. You may not know exactly what you want to study, or you may be more interested in freedom and parties than in your courses. At that age, it is often difficult for students to take on the responsibilities of college. There are also advantages and disadvantages to working or traveling befor starting college. Working or traveling allows you a better idea of what you want to do with your life. You gain practical experience that helps you define what you want to study. You also are well prepared for the responsibilities of college or university studies. On the other hand, by the time you start college, you will probably have obligations, like a job or spouse, which keep you from focusing on studies. In addition, travelling or working before college may cause you to spend enough time out of school that you forget how to study. The desicion of what to do after hich school graduation can be a difficult one. Deciding whether to go straight into college or university or take time to work or travel is something that faces every high school student. After thinking about the advantages and disadvantages of both options, the decision should be based on what is best for you. 8. The student who study from the school to university get benefit less and contribute less too, than those of student who go to travel or job and get skills and experience before going high. Do you agree or disagree? Nowadays, in our competitive world, to succeed, knowledge from school and university is not enough. Therefore, the student who study from the school to university get benefit less and contribute less too, than those of student who go to travel or job and get experience and skills before going high. There are two following reasons to prove for my opinion. I call the group of people who study from school to university is group A and the other group is group B. 8
9. Firstly, at school and university, what group A gain is almost theory, theory and theory. Of course, theory is very neccessary, however, you can’t do everything with theory. You must have praticeable experience. This is what group A lack very much. Although in the third of forth year at university, group A can be apprentices in some companies, to help them approach their future jobs, they aren’t trained well because of short time. And the real job is still very strange with them. After graduating, without experience, group A can’t accomplish their work perfectly. On the other hand, it take them time and money to keep up with other experienced ones and may be scorned. Therefore, group A can contribute less than group B who have the most two important things: skills and experience. Secondly, as group A is contribute less, they surely get less benefit. Moreover, many companies which employ people in group A have to train them from the back-ground. These companies take this cost from group A’s salary to get rid of the fact that their employees may leave after being trained to other companies. So, less benefit is unavoidable and certain, Whereas group B are more loyal and effective workers. They also have useful experience and skills. Besides, their education is the same as or even higher than group A. As the result, group B get more benefit absolutely. In conclusion, I think student should go to travel or job before going high. Therefore, they can’t only have basic knowledge but also skills and experience which are useful for them to get a good job and a brilliant future. This essay is too long (350 words instead of 250). To fight this problem, try to write more in general and provide fewer details. The language and ideas are good and so is the essay?s structure. Looks like Band 7 to me. 9. Disruptive school students have a negative influence on others. Students who are noisy and disobedient should be grouped together and taught separately. Do you agree or disagree? There is no doubt that some students in schools behave badly and their behaviour causes difficulty for others either because it has a negative effect on the group or because ordinary students find it difficult to study with them. One solution is to take these students away and teach them on their own. However, if we simply have them removed after one or two warnings, we are limiting their educational opportunities because it seems to me that a school which caters for difficult students is a sort of "prison" whatever name you give it and the people who go there may never recover from the experience. This can then cause problems for the wider society. Perhaps we need to look at why the disruptive students behave badly before we separate them. Disruptive students may be very intelligent and find the classes boring because the work is too easy. Perhaps these students need extra lessons rather than separate lessons. Or perhaps the teachers are uninspiring and this results in behavioural problems so we need 9
10. better teachers. On the other hand, most students put up with this situation rather than cause trouble, and some people argue that we have to learn to suffer bad teachers and boring situations and that students who can't learn this lesson need to be taught separately. So before we condemn the students to a special school, we should look at factors such as the teaching, because once the children have been separated, it is very unlikely that they will be brought back. 10. Some people think that universities should not provide so much theoretical knowledge but give more practical training throughout their courses. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? In the past, a majority of academics have held the opinion that universities should only offer a theoretically-based approach to teaching throughout their courses, as opposed to the more recent trend towards empirical acquisition of knowledge involving more “hands on” experience. Is this the most effective way for students to learn vital academic information while undertaking their degrees? Undoubtedly, advantages and disadvantages of both academic learning styles have to be evaluated. Firstly, on the one hand, despite being the more traditional educational approach, learning from theory in relevant academic discourses to identify established knowledge allows us to gain a professional insight. For example, students can easily identify facts and opinions from past discourses. In addition, students acquire knowledge more easily when given relative theoretical examples to build upon. For instance, in subjects such as history or sociology, studying textbook examples allows students to unravel complex academic theories which they could expand on. Alternatively, there are some disadvantages for students. On the other hand, there is no doubt that students could find themselves reading tedious and monotonous academic papers. For instance, university degrees involving the evaluation of numerous ‘long-winded’ academic discourses provide little inspiration for students, discouraging enthusiasm. Obviously, interest can be stimulated through empirical research in class. By this I mean that ‘the human brain learns best by doing’. Although time-consuming, there is no substitute for learning from making mistakes. In conclusion, while both approaches have benefits and drawbacks in our ever-changing academic world, I honestly believe that a more practical approach promotes a stronger acquisition of academic knowledge. In spite of the comprehensive nature which theoretical teaching can possibly provide, practical learning equals more positive learning for future generations. (280 words) 10
11. 11. People attend college or university for many defferent reasons (for example, new experiences, career preparation, increased knowledge). Why do you think people attend college or university? People attend college for a lot of different reasons. I believe that the three most common reasons are to prepare for a career, to have new experiences, and to increase their knowledge of themselves and of the world around them. Career preparation is probably the primary reason that people attend college. These days, the job market is very competitive. Careers such as information technology will need many new workers in the near future. At college, students can learn new skills for these careers and increase their opportunities for the future. Students also go to college to have new experiences. For many, it is their first time away from home. At college, they can meet new people from many different places. They can see what life is like in a different city. They can learn to live on their own and take care of themselves without having their family always nearby. At college, students have the opportunity to increase their knowledge. As they decide what they want to study, pursue their studies, and interact with their classmates, they learn a lot about themselves. They also, of course, have the opportunity to learn about many subjects in their classes. In addition to the skills and knowledge related to their career, college students also have the chance to take classes in other areas. For many, this will be their last chance to study different subjects. Colleges offer much more than career preparation. They offer the opportunity to have new experiences and to learn many kinds of things. I think all of these are reasons why people attend college. Sample 2: People attend colleges or universities for a lot of different reasons. I believe that the three most common reasons are to prepare for a career, to have new experiences, and to increase their knowledge of themselves and the world around them. Career preparation is becoming more and more important to young people. For many, this is the primary reason to go to college. They know that the job market is competitive. At college, they can learn new skill for careers with a lot of opportunities. This means careers, such as information technology, that are expected to need a large workforce in the coming years. Also, students go to colleges and universities to have new experiences. This often means having the opportunity to meet people different from those in their hometowns. For most students, going to college is the first time they’ve been away from home by themselves. In 11
12. additions, this is the first time they’ve had to make decisions on their own. Making these decisions increases their knowledge of themselves. Besides looking for self-knowledge, people also attend a university or college to expand their knowledge in subjects they find interesting. For many, this will be their last chance for a long time to learn about something that doesn’t relate to their career. I would recommend that people not be so focused on a career. They should go to college to have new experiences and learn about themselves and the world they live in. (243 words) 12. Nowadays, education overseas has become more accessible and growing numbers of people send their offspring to study in other countries. However, this trend has its detractors. I strongly believe that the pros far outweigh the cons, and will examine both below. One of the greatest advantages is that the children learn to be independent. Having to cook, clean, and pay bills instills this in them. Often they have to work part-time to make ends meet, and this impresses upon them the importance of work and money management. Another important factor is that these children will be exposed to different cultures and ways of thinking. They will become more open-minded and tolerant and are likely to become more adaptable individuals. One of the main motives for sending young people abroad to study is that it enhances their employment prospects. In my experience of living in foreign countries and speaking to various youths, it seems that a foreign education is regarded as something desirable and helpful in getting a decent job. A degree from Britain, for example, is seen as being of a higher standard than one from a developing country. Furthermore, living in a foreign country may lead to fluency in a second language, which is another selling point for prospective employers. In addition, many companies are keen to recruit people with a global outlook. There are a few drawbacks however. For instance, without parental supervision, the new found freedom children experience may lead to harmful practices such as drug-taking and drinking. Reluctance or inability to reintegrate into their mother country is another. To sum up, it can be seen that the advantages of studying abroad for children are more numerous than the disadvantages. Of course a lot depends on the age of the child, but I believe that for most teenagers it would be a positive experience. 13. It has been said, "Not everything that is learned is contained in books." Compare and contrast knowledge gained from experience with knowledge gained from books. In your opinion, which source is more important? Why? 12
13. "Experience is the best teacher" is an old cliché, but I agree with it. We can learn a lot of important things from books, but the most important lessons in life come from our own experiences. Throughout the different stages of life, from primary school to university to adulthood, experience teaches us many skills we need for life. As children in primary school, we learn facts and information from books, but that is not all we learn in school. On the playground we learn how to make friends. In our class work, we learn how it feels to succeed and what we do when we fail. We start to learn about the things we like to do and the things we don't. We don't learn these things from books, but from our experiences with our friends and classmates. In our university classes, we learn a lot of information and skills we will need for our future careers, but we also learn a lot that is not in our textbooks. In our daily lives both in class and out of class, we learn to make decisions for ourselves. We learn to take on responsibilities. We learn to get along with our classmates, our roommates, and our workmates. Our successes and failures help us develop skills we will need in our adult lives. They are skills that no book can teach us. Throughout our adulthood, experience remains a constant teacher. We may continue to read or take classes for professional development. However, our experiences at work, at home, and with our friends teach us more. The triumphs and disasters of our lives teach us how to improve our careers and also how to improve our relationships and how to be the person each one of us wants to be. Books teach us a lot, but there is a limit to what they teach. They can give us information or show us another person's experiences. These are valuable things, but the lessons we learn from our own experiences, from childhood through adulthood, are the most important ones we learn. * People are learning and practicing through their entire life. I believe that life experience and practice are the basic reasons of the humankind's evolution. However, in my opinion, knowledge gained from books plays a very important role in the modern life. The most obviously important advantage of books is that they hold all knowledge gained by previous generations. People write books about their discoveries and inventions, which are gained through practice and experience. This knowledge is accumulated in books that are passed from generation to generation. So, basically, people get all knowledge about the previous achievements from books, analyze it and than, according to their experience and new data, write new books. In this case, books are the holders of humankind's experience. For example, at old times people thought that the Earth was flat. It was concluded from observations and studdying. However, the next generations, using the experience of their 13
14. ancestors, proved that the Earth was round. Personally, I think that books are very important because they are able to give people the basic and fundamental knowledge. Books store history, the important events and discoveries. Without them it is difficult and sometimes impossible to move forward, make new discoveries and inventions. To summarize, I think a person should take basic knowledge from books because it will help him to make his own inventions, conclusions and discoveries. Only using both books and one’s experience one can move forward. (237 words) 14. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People should read only those books that are about real events, real people, and established facts. Use specific reasons and details to support your opinion. Some people think that fiction books have no use at all. They claim that people should read about real events that took place, real people, and established facts. I have to totally disagree with this statement. From my everyday experience and observation I can stand that fiction, miracles and fairy tails are required in our life. For several reasons, which I will mention below, I believe that fiction books play an essential role in our life. First of all, it is kind of difficult to imagine a six year old child reading about politics or history with the real facts that are not always pleasant. I think that children need miracles and Santa Claus because the real world is too complicated for them. They are too innocent and inexperienced to know the real facts and understand what a real life is about. In addition, I am sure that making a child read only non-fiction books can result in shock. Second of all, following this statement about refusing from reading books about fiction events we also should refuse from festivals, parades, and celebration such holidays as Halloween because most of the characters there are fictional. Moreover, comic books will disappear as well as animated films and fiction movies. The disadvantage of non-fiction lies in the facts that nothing happens to excite the mind and spirit. From the other side, fiction provides a great slope for a mind to think creatively. In conclusion, I think that people need miracles. We can not be satisfied with only naked truth. Human kind must believe in something and this belief helps people break limits and make new inventions. (273 words) 15. Going overseas for university study is an exciting prospect for many people. But while it may offer some advantages, it is probably better to stay home because of the 14
15. difficulties a student inevitably encounters living and studying in a different culture. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? There is no doubt that going to study in a foreign country, with its different language and culture, can be a frustrating and sometimes painful experience. But while overseas study has its drawbacks, the difficulties are far outweighed by the advantages. Indeed, people who go abroad for study open themselves up to experiences that those who stay at home will never have. The most obvious advantage to overseas university study is real-life use of a different language. While a person can study a foreign language in his or her own country, it cannot compare with constant use of the language in academic and everyday life. There is no better opportunity to improve second-language skills than living in the country in which it is spoken. Moreover, having used the language during one's studies offers a distinct advantage when one is applying for jobs back home that require the language. On a university campus, the foreign student is not alone in having come from far away. He or she will likely encounter many others from overseas and it is possible to make friends from all around the world. This is not only exciting on a social level, but could lead to important overseas contacts in later professional life. Finally, living and studying abroad offers one a new and different perspective of the world and, perhaps most important, of one's own country. Once beyond the initial shock of being in a new culture, the student slowly begins to get a meaningful understanding of the host society. On returning home, one inevitably sees one's own country in a new, often more appreciative, light. In conclusion, while any anxiety about going overseas for university study is certainly understandable, it is important to remember that the benefits offered by the experience make it well worthwhile. 16. Many students do not finish school. Why is this, and how can the problem be solved? School Drop-Outs: Problems and Solutions Today, although most students in the UAE complete school, a large number still drop out because of family, social and work pressures. This problem requires serious action from both individuals and the government. Most students who do not complete school do so because of family problems. Girls, especially, want to get married and start a family. Some parents are not interested in 15
16. education and do not support their children in studying. Social problems are also a contributing factor. Education is compulsory but, despite this, some people do not take it seriously. Furthermore, jobs are available even if students do not have a good education. The third reason is work pressure. Some families are poor and need their children to work in order to increase the income. All these problems will create young people who do not have any skills and who will not be able to improve their lives for the family and the country. There are several things that can be done about these problems. Parents should be encouraged to send their children to school. Schools with baby-minding facilities should be opened specially for married students. The government needs to stress the importance of education and even offer financial support to students to continue. This will encourage students to stay at school rather than start working. In conclusion, there are several things that the government can do to allow more people to finish school. However, a number of society attitudes also have to change if the country’s young people are to achieve their full potential. 256 words 17. Does a university education lead to success in life? It is very difficult to answer the claim that a person needs a university education to be successful in life because success in life means different things to different people. This essay starts by defining three different ideas of success. Following this, it looks at which types of success are dependent on a university education. Success in life can be achieved in different ways. Many magazines and television programmes tell us that success means having a lot of money, having a fulfilling career, and being powerful. In contrast, most religious and spiritual organizations claim that success means finding spiritual happiness and being at peace with God and with yourself. Another idea of success focuses on relationships - being surrounded by people who love you and care about you, spending time with family and friends. A university education can help you achieve some types of success, but it makes little or no difference to whether or not you are successful in other areas of life. Undoubtedly, a university education is essential if you want to have a career in a profession such as law, engineering, teaching, or medicine. However, you do not need a university degree to become a wealthy and powerful movie star, sports star or businessperson. In fact, a university education does not generally enable you to achieve spiritual happiness, or to have successful relationships with family and friends. sIn conclusion, there are many different types of success. A university education may help you to achieve professional success in some careers. However, it will not help you to achieve success in other areas of your life such as your spiritual life or your relationships. 275 words Author unknown, edited slightly 18. Education: Losing its Value 16
17. Today, it seems to be universally accepted that increased education is a good thing. Thousands of colleges and millions of students spend vast amounts of time and money chasing pieces of paper. But what is the value of these qualifications? This essay will discuss whether education has been devalued. Supporters of education (usually teachers or educators, or those who have an interest in stopping people thinking for themselves) say that increased levels of education will open doors for students. Certificates, diplomas, and degrees are held up as a status symbol, a passport to a private club of money and power. However, the truly powerful are not those who have taken degrees, but people who have stood back and looked at what is really important in life. They have seen opportunity and followed dreams. These people are found in every part of society. Like many brilliant people, Einstein was a weak student at math. Like many successful businessmen, Bill Gates never completed college. Like many inventive and creative people, Edison never went to school. The greatest religious teachers do not have letters after their name, but have looked into their hearts for meaning. Similarly, the world’s political leaders do not have master’s degrees or doctorates. These are the people who shaped our century, and they are too busy with real life to spend time in the paper chase. Students in college are being sold an illusion. They are made to believe that self- understanding and society approval will come with the acquisition of a piece of paper. Instead of thinking for themselves, and finding their own personality and strengths, they are fitted like square pegs into round holes. The role of education is to prepare masses of people to operate at low levels of ability in a very limited and restricted range of activities. Some of these activities are more challenging than perhaps the assembly lines of the past, but still the ultimate purpose is equally uninteresting. More worryingly, despite the increased level of education, people are still not genuinely expected to think for themselves. In fact, the longer years of schooling make the job of brainwashing even easier. There is still a role for study, research, and education. However, we need to examine our emphasis on education for the sake of a piece of paper, and to learn the real meaning and revolutionary challenge of knowledge. 19. Education: Still Invaluable! In the past, degrees were very unusual in my family. I remember the day my uncle graduated. We had a huge party, and for many years my mother called him "the genius" and listened to his opinion. Today, in comparison five of my brothers and sisters have degrees, and two are studying for their masters'. However, some people think that this increased access to education is devaluing degrees. In this essay, I will look at some of the arguments for and against the increased emphasis on degrees in our society. People have several arguments against the need for degrees. They say that having so many graduates devalues a degree. People lose respect for the degree holder. It is also claimed that education has become a rat race. Graduates have to compete for jobs even after years of studying. Another point is that studying for such a long time leads to learners becoming 17
18. inflexible. They know a lot about one narrow subject, but are unable to apply their skills. Employers prefer more flexible and adaptable workers. However, I feel strongly that this move to having more qualifications is a positive development. In the past education was only for the rich and powerful. Now it is available to everyone, and this will have many advantages for the country and the individual. First of all, it is impossible to be overeducated. The more people are educated, the better the world will be, because people will be able to discuss and exchange ideas. A further point is that people with degrees have many more opportunities. They can take a wider variety of jobs and do what they enjoy doing, instead of being forced to take a job they dislike. Finally, a highly educated workforce is good for the economy of the country. It attracts foreign investment. In conclusion, although there are undoubtedly some problems with increased levels of education, I feel strongly that the country can only progress if all its people are educated to the maximum of their ability. 339 words 20. It is often said that the subjects taught in schools are too academic in orientation and that it would be more useful for children to learn about practical matters such as home management, work and interpersonal skills. To what extent do you agree or disagree? A criticism often heard these days is that the subjects taught in schools tend to be too academic, and contribute little to preparing a young person for the real-life tasks he or she will have to perform after graduation. They say that academic subjects are rooted in the past, and are not useful for solving modern problems. I disagree with this point of view for three reasons. My first reason is that it is the duty of parents, not teachers, to prepare their children to deal with the practical affairs of life. The home, not the classroom, is the ideal place to learn about home management and interpersonal skills. As for work abilities and attitudes, they are best learned “on the job” and under the supervision of an experienced older worker. My second reason is that academic subjects have withstood the test of time. They represent the accumulated wisdom of our ancestors down through the ages, and, far from being impractical, they equip us with the knowledge and confidence to make sound judgements about any problems which may crop up. In addition, academic subjects are good for training us in mental discipline, while practical subjects are weak in this regard. My third reason is based on the saying “Man does not live by bread alone.” Schooldays devoted solely to instruction in down-to-earth practical matters would be dull indeed! Lessons in the best literature of the world, and the epoch-making scientific and geographical discoveries of the past enrich our lives and make us feel that we are part of the great family 18
19. of mankind. All in all, the teaching of academic subjects in schools is entirely appropriate. It is my firmly held view that practical subjects have no place in the classroom. On the contrary, the curriculum should be more academic! 21. It has been said, “Not every thing that is learned is contained in books.” Compare and contrast knowledge gained from experience with knowledge gained from books. In your opinion, which source is more important? Why? “Experience is the best teacher” is an old cliché, but I agree with it. The most important, and sometimes the hardest, lessons we learn in life come from our participation in situations. You can’ learn everything from a book. Of course, learning from books in a formal educational setting is also valuable. It’s in schools that we learn the information we need to function in our society. We learn how to speak and write and understand mathematical equations. This is all information that we need to live in our communities and earn a living. Nevertheless, I think that the most important lessons can’t be taught; they have to be experienced. No one can teach us how to get along with others or how to have self-respect. As we grow from children into teenagers, no one can teach us how to deal with peer pressure. As we leave adolescence behind and enter adult life, no one can teach us how to fall in love and get married. This shouldn’t stop us from looking for guidelines along the way. Teachers and parents are valuable sources of advice when we’re young. As we enter into new stages in our lives, the advice we receive from them is very helpful because they have already bad similar experiences. But experiencing our own triumphs and disasters is really the only way to learn how to deal with life. (252 words) 19
20. CHILDREN 47. In some countries children have very strict rules of behaviour, in other countries they are allowed to do almost anything they want. To what extent should children have to follow rules? Freedom plays a mandatory role in everybody?s life. We can see in today?s modernized era nobody likes to get some restrictions upon them, whether it would be a child or an adult. Some people think that there should have some strict rules of behaviour for children, but I disagree with this statement. Wherever it is a reality that sometimes more restrictions can cause more frustration in children, which leads to many other mental diseases as well. Morever they can be, behave like a stubborn. Sometimes they feel themselves under pressure, which can be a main reason for their poor performance in their field. In some cases children would be crazier to do these things from where we?ll try to keep them away. In other words _ we have to look for other aspects as well, like if we usually ignore our children?s bad habits, then they can?t be good human beings in their future life. Moreover_ if we never draw attention upon the children?s main activities then they may be acquiring bad company. They can know regarding the value of respect for their elders. They can know the importance of relationships. They can know regarding their cultural values as well. In a nutshell, I would like to say that children should be teach regarding the value of their customs, rituals and respect towards their elders for their future life, but most of the extra restriction should be being avoided. It would be better to make the good human beings in their coming future. A good essay, set out well. Some sentences are too short and could be combined together to create more complex structure. There are also some repetitions of the same words, that should be avoided. Overall, nicely done. 48. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Parents are the best teachers. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. Parents shape their children from the beginning of their children's lives. They teach their children values. They share their interests with them. They develop close emotional ties with them. Parents can be very important teachers in their children's lives; however, they are not always the best teachers. Parents may be too close to their children emotionally. For example, they may limit a child's freedom in the name of safety. A teacher may organize an educational trip to a big city, but a parent may think this trip is too dangerous. A school may want to take the children camping, but a parent may be afraid of the child getting hurt. 20
21. Another problem is that parents sometimes expect their children's interests to be similar to their own. If the parents love science, they may try to force their child to love science too. But what if the child prefers art? If the parents enjoy sports, they may expect their child to participate on different teams. But what if the child prefers to read? Parents want to pass on their values to their children. However, things change. The children of today are growing up in a world different from their parents' world. Sometimes parents, especially older ones, can't keep up with rapid social or technological changes. A student who has friends of different races at school may find that his parents have narrower views. A student who loves computers may find that her parents don't understand or value the digital revolution. Parents are important teachers in our lives, but they aren't always the best teachers. Fortunately, we have many teachers in our lives. Our parents teach us, our teachers teach us, and we learn from our peers. Books and newspapers also teach us. All of them are valuable. Sample 2 : Throughout my life, I have been lucky enough to have a very good relationship with my parents. They have supported me, given me necessary criticism, and taught me a great deal about how to live my life. Parents can be very important teachers in our lives; however, they are not always the best teachers. Parents may be too close to their children emotionally. Sometimes they can only see their children though the eyes of a protector. For example, they may limit a child’s freedom in the name of safety. A teacher might see a trip to a big city as a valuable new experience. However, it might seem too dangerous to a parent. Another problem is that parents may expect their children’s interests to be similar to their own. They can’t seem to separate from their children in their mind. If they love science, they may try to force their child to love science too. But what if their child’s true love is art, or writing, or car repair? Parents are usually eager to pass on their value to their children. But should children always believe what their parents do? Maybe different generations need different ways of thinking. When children are young, they believe that their parents are always rights. But when they get older, they realize there are other views. Sometimes parents, especially older ones, can’t keep up with rapid social or technology changes. A student who has friends of all different races and backgrounds at school may find that her parents don’t really understand or value the digital revolution. Sometimes kids have to find their own ways to what they believe in. The most important thing to realize is that we all have many teachers in our lives. Our 21
22. parents teach us, our teachers teach us, and our peers teach us. Books and newspapers and television also teach us. All of them are valuable. friends or take part in challenging outdoor activities. To sum up, although none of these changes could, on its own, have caused widespread harm to children’s health, there can be little doubt that all of them together have had a devastating effect. This, in my opinion, can only be reversed by encouraging children to return to move traditional ways of eating and living. (267 words) 51. In many countries children are engaged in some kind of paid work. Some people regard this as completely wrong, while others consider it as valuable work experience, important for learning and taking responsibility. What is your opinion on this? Nowadays, many children involved in different types of jobs to have some kind of financial assurance for themselves. However, whether this is good for their development and personality is a much debatable issue. I personally believe that paid works is harmful for children for several reasons. It is said that children learn valuable experience in the work place. This may be true. However, I would argue that children are mainly employed for jobs that require manual work and are low paid. The recent statistic reveals the common tasks that children are assigned are washing dishes, cleaning floors or serving food in restaurants. Meanwhile, this kind of jobs actually do not provide children with necessary and useful skills so that they can apply in their future carrer. This brings me to the second point. Defenders of child work argues that it is an effective method of learning. The point is children should be able to apply knowledge taught to them in a real life working environment. Although this is undoubtedly true, it also means that children may neglect the classroom study and even fail the class. The worst thing is yet to come. They may become so occupied with the benefits ahead of them like small salary and leave school. Finally, supporters said that it helps them to build responsibility in the family. They will understand how it is difficult to earn money and therefore have a compassionate view with their parents. This is true to a certain extent, but may have a totally adverse effect on children. As children can make money at an early age, they would feel that it is appropriate to spend on luxury things by their own money, which could be recovered later. In conclusion, I think that parents should take measures to restrict their child to work, otherwise it would have a negative consequences on their futures. This is a great essay, Band 7+ candidate. My only suggestion is to divide your arguments so that you have 2 paragraphs covering arguments ?against? and one covering arguments ?for? or vise versa. Don?t mix ?for? and ?against? in one paragraph. 22
23. 52. Children should never be educated at home by their parents. Do you agree or disagree? Discuss the advantages and disadvantages for young people who decide to do this. Nobody can say with confidence that children should be taught at home or at any children's institutions. There are many different children and every one demand of education suitable only for him. But for most of children the best way of learning the life is being in the children's institutions. Nobody would argue that contacts between children of the same age are very important for bringing your child up. Such a contact is very important for playing, entertaining and learning living with other people. The harmonious living with other people, to my mind, is the first task for any man. Lack of this harmony sets problems and troubles. The children need space to run and make noise, to jump and cry. Do you or your neighbours allow these actions for your child? If you live in town, it is difficult to find a safe place to play. Kindergartens give such a possibility. They give space, a lot of toys and constructions for physical exercises. So, if you have bad living conditions, the kindergarten is the best way for you. But if you have a large family with many children and enough space, you may keep your child at home. You should be sure that the child feels, dressed and comfortable. His brothers and sisters give him necessary contacts. It's noticed long ago that children in big families are much more easy-tempered and calm. They are located in more harmonic world than others. Sometimes differences in age put troubles in contacts between children in large families. Then it is better for child to be sent to the kindergarten (school). But if quarrels don't last for a long time, everything is all right. In general, quarrels develop ability to cooperate with people. They develop a personal initiative and force setting the balance. In such a way the child gets lessons of life. Addly, the quarrels often take place in kindergartens and schools and we shouldn't fear it. Side by side with quarrels parents often are afraid of colds which happen in kindergartens more frequently. Parents prefer keeping the child at home. But for a healthy child odd cold (if illness occurs, it goes its normal course) can't make big harm to the child. And if the child is adaptable to the conditions of public places earlier it would be better for him in future. In general, I am a follower of the theory of keeping children in adapted places such as good kindergartens. But keeping children in such a place can't replace family and home. Only together they make harmonic and beautiful union. (431 words) 23
24. 53. Some people think that a sense of competition in children should be encouraged. Others believe that children who are taugh to co-operate rather than compete become more useful adults. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. Nowadays, purpose of education being changed in Korea. There are some People who think that competition in children should be made, also others believe that children who are taught to co-operate as well as become more usefwl adults. There are advantages and disadvantages for both Maybe this is not a clear question. As we can see there are several values here and of course cultural behaviours. The roots of the question are religious, cultural, ethical and even geographical. The world is divided and the law systems show those divisions. The solutions, however can lead us to other questions concerning revenge and justice. It will be better to kill a person because of his crimes? Can we admit that life sentence could be a much better sentence? In fact, rehabilitation is the right way especially with an accurate psychological evaluation first. Some people are lost forever, and in my opinion some murderers and other perverted people will suffer more in jail. In this sense, capital punishment is a soft release. This is a very good essay, you should do well in the Task 2 Writing Test. 24
25. FAMILY 82. In some countries, marriages are arranged by the parents but in other cases, people choose their own marriage partner. Discuss both systems. The idea that a marriage should be arranged by the parents of the couple, or by other members-of the family, is quite acceptable to some societies, yet completely out of the question for others. It all depends on your cultural expectations. In so-called western societies, it is very unusual for marriages to be arranged. Most young people would not welcome the idea that their parents have the right to choose their partner for life. They feel that arranged marriages deny them their fundamental right to choose, even if they make a bad decision. However, if we are honest about it, we might acknowledge that some parents organise their children's lives in such a way that they are likely to meet and marry partners the parents approve o£ It could be said that this is, to some extent, similar to an arranged marriage. It is always better when families support the relationship and welcome the grandchildren. People for whom arranged marriages are the cultural norm often argue that the likelihood of the marriage lasting is greater when it is set up in this manner. Parents can be assured that their children are joining a family of similar standing and cultural background, and this, in the long run, makes for a more stable society if your parents' marriage was arranged, and has worked well, then why should you question the custom? The important thing to ensure is that people are never forced into a marriage which will make them unhappy or lead to an unequal relationship where one partner is exploited by the other. This applies in all societies and situations. (269 words) 83. Many people believe that women make better parents than men and that this is why they have the greater role in raising children in most societies. Others claim that men are just as good as women at parenting. Write an essay expresing your point of view. The view that women are better parents than men has shown itself to be true throughout history. This is not to say that men are not of importance in child- rearing indeed, they are most necessary if children are to appreciate fully the roles of both sexes. But women have proven themselves superior parents as a result of their conditioning, their less aggressive natures and their generally better communication skills. From the time they are little girls, females learn about nurturing. First with dolls and later perhaps with younger brothers and sisters, girls are given the role of carer. Girls see their mothers in the same roles and so it is natural that they identify this as a female activity. 25
26. Boys, in contrast, learn competitive roles far removed from what it means to nurture. While boys may dream of adventures, girls' conditioning means they tend to see the future in terms of raising families. Girls also appear to be less aggressive than boys. In adulthood, it is men, not women, who prove to be the aggressors in crime and in war. Obviously, in raising children, a more patient, gentle manner is preferable to a more aggressive one. Although there certainly exist gentle men and aggressive women, by and large, females are less likely to resort to violence in attempting to solve problems. Finally, women tend to be better communicators than men. This is shown is intelligence tests, where females, on average, do better in verbal communication than males. Of course, communication is of utmost importance in rearing children, as children tend to learn from and adopt the communication styles of their parents. Thus, while it is all very well to suggest a greater role for men in raising children, let us not forget that women are generally better suited to the parenting role. 84. It is generally acknowledged that families are now not as close as they used to be. Give possible reasons and your recommendations. There is much discussion nowadays as to whether or not the relation-ship between family members is as close as before. Diverse contributing factors can be identified. In the following, I would like to present my point of view. Great changes have taken place in family life along with the development of society. One of them is that the once-extended family tends to become smaller and smaller. Many children have to leave their parents at an early age to study or work elsewhere. As time passes, children become emotionally estranged from their parents. Compared with the past, social competition is becoming increasingly fierce. People are urged to concentrate their efforts upon work, so that they can achieve success, or at least a good standard of living. As a result, they can’t afford to spend their leisure hours with their families. The importance of bonds of kinship is gradually fading from their minds. In addition, the availability of various kinds of recreational facilities also diverts people from enjoying chats with the members of their families. Their free time is mostly occupied by watching TV, surfing the Internet or playing video games. They come to lose interest in communicating with the other members of their families. In view of such alienation within families, urgent steps must be taken, in my opinion. For members of families who live away from one another, regular contact on the phone can bring them the care that they need. Family reunions on holidays or other important occasions 26
27. can make a difference as well. For those living together, it is a good idea to take some time off work or recreation periods to spend more time with each other. In the final analysis, a close family relationship can surely be maintained as long as we realize the significant role it plays in our lives and attach importance to it. 85. "Fatherhood ought to be emphasised as much as motherhood. The idea that women are solely responsible for deciding whether or not to have babies leads on to the idea that they are also responsible for bringing the children up." To what extent do you agree or disagree? believe that child-rearing should be the responsibility of both parents and that, whilst the roles within that partnership may be different, they are nevertheless equal in importance. In some societies, it has been made easier over the years for single parents to raise children on their own. However, this does not mean that the traditional family, with both parents providing emotional support and role-models for their children, is not the most satisfactory way of bringing up children. Of crucial importance, in my opinion, is how we define 'responsible for bringing the children up'. At its simplest, it could mean giving the financial support necessary to provide a home, food and clothes and making sure the child is safe and receives an adequate education. This would be the basic definition. There is, however, another possible way of defining that part of the quotation. That would say it is not just the fathers responsibility to provide the basics for his children, while his wife involves herself in the everyday activity of bringing them up. Rather, he should share those daily duties, spend as much time as his job allows with his children, play with them, read to them, help directly with their education, participate very fully in their lives and encourage them to share his. It is this second, fuller, concept of 'fatherhood' that I am in favour of, although I also realise how difficult it is to achieve sometimes. The economic and employment situation in many countries means that jobs are getting more, not less, stressful, requiring long hours and perhaps long journeys to work as well. Therefore it may remain for many a desirable ideal rather than an achievable reality. 27
28. ew university will bring only benefits to our community. In this essay I will analyze advantages and disadvantages of this issue and present my view in favor of establishing a new university in my community. From the one side, establishing a new university in my community brings many benefits. First of all, a new construction means more job opportunities. I think it would be good for my community because many people have to spend much time driving to their work day in and day out because they could not find a job in our neighborhood. Second of all, a new university is a good chance to meet new people and I like this opportunity. Many students will live in our community. Finally, if a new university is built in my community there is a big chance that I will be willing to enroll in it. I think it is great because it is not far from my place and I do not have to move to another part of the city. Another important aspect of this is that people from my community will have a chance to use new libraries and facilities of a new university. For example some people can take courses and classes there. From the other side, building a new university can bring some disadvantages. A new construction means noise, traffic jams and different kinds of pollution. In addition to these disadvantages, many young people in our community can cause more noise especially in the evenings. To sum up, I think that I would support the decision of the government of establishing a new university in my community despite a few disadvantages that could follow this construction. I believe that a new university will increase a chance of many young people to get a higher education, gain more knowledge and experience, which will help them to succeed in today’s world. (341 words) 106. Should a city try to preserve its old, historic buildings or destroy them and replace them with modern buildings? Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion. Some people think that old, historic buildings are no need for the city and they should be destroyed and replaced with modern ones. However, other people believe that historic buildings must be preserved in order to know and remember our past. For several reasons that I will mention bellow I agree with those people who want to preserve old, historical buildings. First of all, by preserving historical buildings we pass our history to our future generations. I think that out children should know their history, learn from it and respect it. People need to know their traditions and customs, which are priceless and irreplaceable. Our history is our knowledge and power. From my opinion we need to preserve and restore historical 28
29. buildings. By destroying them we show our disrespect to our forefathers and their traditions. Second of all, by preserving historical buildings a city can attract many travelers. Welcoming tourists a city can get many benefits including money, which can be spent on preserving historical buildings as well as on improving roads and facilities. Also, many tourists mean a lot of new business opportunities. Another important aspect of this is that businessmen will be willing to build new recreational centers, hotels, movie theaters, shopping centers to make a city more attractive for travelers. In addition to those practical benefits, many people will have the opportunity to get a job. All this is good for the economy of the city. To sum up, I believe that preserving old, historical buildings can bring only benefits to a city and all humankind. (259 words) 107. In the past, buildings often reflected the culture of a society but today all modern buildings look alike and cities throughout the world are becoming more and more similar. What do you think is the reason for this, and is it a good think or a bad think? City has its architectural character, but the similarities between cities are more obvious these days than in the past. In my opinion, one reason for this is the high price of land. In most large cities, land is scarce and consequently it is very valuable. This has led to the construction of tall buildings which occupy only a small area of land while providing lots of floor space where people can live or work. Buildings of this type are made of concrete and steel and can be built comparatively quickly using prefabricated materials. They do not use local materials, such as stone, timber or brick, which used to give cities their individual character. In consequence many cities. now look very much the same and you might not know whether you were in Brisbane, Bangkok or Berlin when you are on the street. While I realise that we cannot stand in the way of progress, I believe that cities should try to keep some individuality. For example, in Paris it is prohibited to build very tall buildings in the centre of the city, as this would spoil the overall appearance of the skyline. Other cities have chosen to design unique buildings to ensure they look different. The twin towers in Kuala Lumpur or the Opera House in Sydney are examples of this approach, and I agree with this kind of initiative. All in all, although it is regrettable that modern cities look similar, I tend to feel that this is unavoidable. However, it can be argued that, even if the buildings are similar, cities will 29
30. maintain their own character as a result of cultural diversity, the terrain and the climate, which ultimately determine how people live. 108. In many major cities of the world, you will find large public buildings, both new and old. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of such buildings. How important is it for a country to construct impressive public buildings when houses are want is really required? (Introduction: mention that public buildings exist in all cities and towns, large and small, e.g. post office, court pause, places of worship, theatre) A public building is a building that belongs in some way o the state. The number of public buildings in any town or village will depend on the size of that community and its needs. For example, you will usually find a town hall of some sort, a school and a place of worship at he least. In anger communities there will be a police station, law courts, a library and maybe a theatre funded by he state. (Pros: city pride, beautiful to look at, useful/necessary buildings, create a city centre.) The desire to build impressive buildings is not new. The ancient cities of the Middle East and South America were designed with large public buildings to impress visitors and enemies and give a sense of pride. In modern times, outstanding public buildings still. create a great sense of local and national pride. They are what gives a city its character and they form asocial centre, a place where people like to meet. (Cons: waste of public money, intimidating, nationalistic. Give opinion on whether they stop us from building houses or whether they can be compatible.) However, some people argue that governments have constructed unnecessary, and sometimes ugly, buildings simply to make themselves feel important. I tend to feel that such buildings may be a waste of public money but I am not sure we can claim that they prevent houses from being built, because these governments have often ensured that adequate housing was also available. Houses and public buildings can exist side by side. (Conclusion - sum up the two parts to the answer. Leave the reader thinking.) The answer lies in finding ape right balance. We want o feel pride in our town, but we also want our citizens to have comfortable homes. It is hard to please everyone. 109. In the past, buildings often reflected the culture of a society but today all modern buildings look alike and cities throughout the world are becoming more and more similar. city has its architectural character, but the similarities between cities are more obvious these days than in the past. In my opinion, one reason for this is the high price of land. In most large cities, land is scarce and consequently it is very valuable. This has led to the 30
31. construction of tall buildings which occupy only a small area of land while providing lots of floor space where people can live or work. Buildings of this type are made of concrete and steel and can be built comparatively quickly using prefabricated materials. They do not use local materials, such as stone, timber or brick, which used to give cities their individual character. In consequence many cities. now look very much the same and you might not know whether you were in Brisbane, Bangkok or Berlin when you are on the street. While I realise that we cannot stand in the way of progress, I believe that cities should try to keep some individuality. For example, in Paris it is prohibited to build very tall buildings in the centre of the city, as this would spoil the overall appearance of the skyline. Other cities have chosen to design unique buildings to ensure they look different. The twin towers in Kuala Lumpur or the Opera House in Sydney are examples of this approach, and I agree with this kind of initiative. All in all, although it is regrettable that modern cities look similar, I tend to feel that this is unavoidable. However, it can be argued that, even if the buildings are similar, cities will maintain their own character as a result of cultural diversity, the terrain and the climate, which ultimately determine how people live. 31