Some people think that school children need to learn practical skills such as car maintenance or bank account management along with the academic subjects at school.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is true that children do not learn many practical skills at school. However, I completely disagree with the idea that schools should teach skills like bank account management and car maintenance.

At present, most schools focus on important academic subjects such as mathematics, science and language. These subjects help young people to gain knowledge and to develop thinking skills that will be vital for their future careers. We live in a knowledge- based economy where independent thinking and problem solving are the most important skills. With timetables already full, schools do not have time to teach children anything else.

Furthermore, I do not believe that most practical skills are beneficial enough to be included in lessons. I would argue that bank account management, for example, is a life skill that anyone can learn by simply opening and using a bank account. Most adults have no problem managing their finances without being taught accounting lessons at school. In fact, I have never met anyone who found it difficult to use a bank account. Other practical skills like car maintenance or plumbing are not really necessary because most people prefer to pay a qualified mechanic or plumber. It would be a waste of children’s time if these subjects were introduced as part of the school curriculum.

In conclusion, schools have always taught the traditional academic subjects that help students to prepare for university or professional life. If they start to teach practical skills, the study of important academic subjects will suffer.

Some people argue that because the Internet makes it so easy for children to access facts, schools should not focus on teaching facts. Instead, they should focus on developing children’s skills and potential, and their relationships with other people.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

1. Position

Coherent position summary 1: completely agree

I agree that teachers no longer need to focus on facts. Instead, schools should focus on skills, relationships and developing potential.

Coherent position summary 2: completely disagree

I disagree with the statement because I believe that the Internet cannot do the job of a good teacher. Furthermore, children already learn skills both at school and outside school, so there is no need for a change in focus.

Coherent position summary 3: partly agree

I agree to a certain extent. The Internet makes the teaching of facts easier and faster. Space can therefore be made on school timetables for more work on skills, relationships and potential.

2. Essay structure

Four-paragraph plan for a ‘completely agree‘ answer:

1. Introduction: introduce the topic and say that you agree
2. Main paragraph: explain why facts no longer need to be taught
3. Main paragraph: describe the skills that can be taught instead
4. Conclusion: repeat / summarise the overall answer

Four-paragraph plan for a ‘completely disagree‘ answer:

1. Introduction: introduce the topic and say that you disagree
2. Main paragraph: explain why teachers should continue to teach facts
3. Main paragraph: explain why a new focus on skills is unnecessary
4. Conclusion: repeat / summarise the overall answer

3. Ideas

Spend a few minutes thinking about ideas and examples to support your main paragraph arguments. Write your ideas down in note form, not as full sentences.

Here’s an example:

Main paragraph: explain why schools do not need to teach facts

• Reason 1: multimedia lessons can be found on the Internet
• Example: YouTube has lessons on all subjects by good teachers
• Reason 2: children know how to do fact-finding online
• Therefore, researching facts can be done as homework, not in class

MODEL ANSWER

As information is now so accessible online, it can be argued that schools should move away from fact-based teaching and towards work on skills and relationship building. I completely agree with this idea.

There are two main reasons why I believe that school teachers should no longer focus on presenting factual information to their students. Firstly, there is simply no need for teachers to create lessons that are already available in multimedia format on the Internet. YouTube, for example, contains videos that cover the full range of school subjects and lesson topics. Secondly, young people are so adept at using websites and search engines that they can be trusted to do their own online fact-finding. In my opinion, this research could be done as homework, which would remove the need for the teaching of facts in the classroom.

A shift away from the traditional style of teaching would allow schools to build their students’ practical and social skills. Useful practical skills might include online research, presentations, website design, and even computer programming. Competence in these areas is in high demand in today’s job market. With regard to social or relationship skills, a modern approach to education would put more emphasis on group projects that require teamwork, negotiation and the delegation of tasks. This way of teaching could develop students’ emotional intelligence and leadership qualities, and help all children, regardless of academic ability, to reach their potential.

In conclusion, I believe that classroom teaching should prioritise skills and interpersonal relationships, while factual knowledge can be studied at home via the Internet.

THE PLAN FOR THE ABOVE ANSWER

Introduction: Paraphrase the question then answer – completely agree

Main paragraph 1

1. Topic: two reasons why schools do not need to teach facts
2. First reason: multimedia lessons can be found on the Internet
3. Example: YouTube has lessons on all subjects by good teachers
4. Second reason: children know how to do fact-finding online
5. Therefore, researching facts can be done as homework

Main paragraph 2

1. Topic: teach practical and social skills instead
2. Examples of practical skills: reseach, presentations, website design
3. Explain why: these skills are in high demand in companies
4. Examples of teaching social skills: group projects, teamwork, negotiation
5. Explain why: develop students’ emotional intelligence, leadership, potential

Conclusion: Repeat / summarise my overall answer

Vocabulary review

Here’s a list of the ‘less common’ collocations and phrases in the essay above:

• accessible online
• move away from x and towards y
• fact-based teaching
• should no longer focus on
• presenting factual information
• available in multimedia format
• cover the full range of
• adept at
• online fact-finding
• would remove the need for
• a shift away from
• competence in these areas
• in high demand
• in today’s job market
• a modern approach to education
• put more emphasis on
• teamwork, negotiation, delegation
• emotional intelligence
• leadership qualities
• regardless of academic ability
• reach their potential
• prioritise skills and interpersonal relationships
• factual knowledge
• via the Internet

Some people say that music is a good way of bringing people of different cultures and ages together.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

MODEL ANSWER

It is often said that music has the power to unite and connect people, regardless of their cultural backgrounds or ages. I completely agree with this view and will give my reasons below.

Music can certainly reach across cultural and national boundaries and bring people together. Perhaps the best example of this would be the Live Aid concerts that took place back in the 1980s, and which were broadcast to a global audience. Two live events were held simultaneously in the UK and the US, and the objective was to raise funds for famine relief in Ethiopia. The concerts were a huge success, both in terms of the number of people around the world who watched them and their impact on international public awareness of the famine. They demonstrated, I believe, that music truly is the planet’s global language.

Just as it transcends cultures, music also has the ability to connect people from different generations. Regardless of age, we can all enjoy a memorable melody, a strong rhythm or a beautiful singing voice, and the best songs seem to have the same magical effect on all of us. This would explain why televised music competitions, such as ‘The X Factor’ or ‘The Voice’, are such popular prime-time shows. These programmes attract incredibly broad audiences because singing and popular songs appeal to children, parents and grandparents alike. I would argue that no other form of entertainment can bring families together in this way.

In conclusion, I believe that music is unique in its capacity to create shared experiences between people, irrespective of culture and age.

THE PLAN FOR THE ABOVE ANSWER

Introduction: Paraphrase the question then answer – completely agree

Main paragraph 1

1. Topic: music brings different cultures together
2. Example: Live Aid concerts
3. Explain: more about these concerts
4. Result: the success and impact of Live Aid
5. Conclusion: music is the planet’s global language

Main paragraph 2

1. Topic: music brings different generations together
2. Explain: we all enjoy melody, rhythm, a beautiful voice
3. Example: the popularity of music competitions like The X Factor
4. Explain: these shows have broad audiences, appeal to all generations
5. Conclusion: no other entertainment can do what music does

Conclusion: Repeat / summarise my overall answer

Vocabulary review

Here’s a list of the ‘less common’ collocations and phrases in the essay above:

• the power to unite and connect people
• regardless of their cultural backgrounds
• reach across cultural and national boundaries
• took place back in the 1980s
• broadcast to a global audience
• two events were held simultaneously
• raise funds for
• famine relief
• impact on international public awareness
• the planet’s global language
• it transcends culture
• a memorable melody
• have the same magical effect on
• prime-time shows
• attract incredibly broad audiences
• appeal to children, parents and grandparents alike
• is unique in its capacity to
• create shared experiences
• irrespective of culture and age

In many countries today, people in cities either live alone or in small family units, rather than in large, extended family groups.

Is this a positive or negative trend?

MODEL ANSWER

It is true that cities are seeing a rise in smaller families and one-person households, while the extended family is becoming a rarity. In my opinion, this is a negative development.

As families become smaller, the traditional family support network is disappearing, and this can have a negative impact on children as they grow up. In a nuclear family or single-parent household, childcare becomes an expensive and stressful part of daily life. Without the help of grandparents or aunts and uncles, busy parents must rely on babysitters, nannies and after-school clubs to take care of younger children, while older children may be left alone after school and during holidays. The absence of adult family members can mean that friends, television and the Internet become the primary influences on children’s behaviour. It is no surprise that the decline of the extended family has been linked to a rise in psychological and behavioural problems amongst young people.

The trend towards people living alone is perhaps even more damaging because of the psychological effects of reduced human interaction. Individuals who live on their own have nobody to talk to in person, so they cannot share problems or discuss the highs and lows of daily life. They forgo the constant stimulation and hustle and bustle of a large family and are left to their own devices for extended periods of time. The lack of human contact in the home is necessarily replaced by passive distractions, such as television, video games, online chat rooms or Internet surfing. This type of existence is associated with boredom, loneliness, and feelings of isolation or even alienation, all of which are factors that are known to increase the risk of mental illness.

In conclusion, I believe that individuals thrive when they are part of larger family groups, and so it is worrying that many people are choosing to live alone or in such small family units.

THE PLAN FOR THE ABOVE ANSWER

Introduction: Paraphrase the question then give an opinion – it is a negative trend

Main paragraph 1

1. Topic: the negative impact of smaller families
2. First problem: childcare becomes expensive and stressful
3. Explain: busy parents rely on babysitters, nannies, after-school clubs
4. Related problem: friends, TV and Internet become the main influences
5. Result: a rise in psychological and behavioural problems

Main paragraph 2

1. Topic: the negative impact of living alone and reduced human interaction
2. Explain: nobody to talk to or share problems with
3. Explain: miss the constant stimulation of a large family
4. Result: human contact is replaced by TV, video games, Internet
5. Result: boredom, loneliness, increased risk of mental illness

Conclusion: Repeat / summarise my overall answer

Vocabulary review

Here’s a list of the ‘less common’ collocations and phrases in the essay above:

• one-person and single-parent households
• becoming a rarity
• the traditional family support network
• a nuclear family
• rely on babysitters, nannies and after-school clubs
• the absence of
• the primary influences on
• the decline of the extended family
• psychological and behavioural problems
• the trend towards
• even more damaging
• reduced human interaction
• the highs and lows
• they forgo
• the constant stimulation
• hustle and bustle
• left to their own devices
• for extended periods of time
• lack of human contact
• passive distractions
• online chat rooms
• this type of existence
• is associated with
• feelings of isolation or even alienation
• factors that are known to
• the risk of mental illness
• individuals thrive when they

When choosing a job, the salary is the most important consideration. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

MODEL ANSWER

Many people choose their jobs based on the size of the salary offered. Personally, I disagree with the idea that money is the key consideration when deciding on a career, because I believe that other factors are equally important.

On the one hand, I agree that money is necessary in order for people to meet their basic needs. For example, we all need money to pay for housing, food, bills, health care, and education. Most people consider it a priority to at least earn a salary that allows them to cover these needs and have a reasonable quality of life. If people chose their jobs based on enjoyment or other non-financial factors, they might find it difficult to support themselves. Artists and musicians, for instance, are known for choosing a career path that they love, but that does not always provide them with enough money to live comfortably and raise a family.

Nevertheless, I believe that other considerations are just as important as what we earn in our jobs. Firstly, personal relationships and the atmosphere in a workplace are extremely important when choosing a job. Having a good manager or friendly colleagues, for example, can make a huge difference to workers’ levels of happiness and general quality of life. Secondly, many people’s feelings of job satisfaction come from their professional achievements, the skills they learn, and the position they reach, rather than the money they earn. Finally, some people choose a career because they want to help others and contribute something positive to society.

In conclusion, while salaries certainly affect people’s choice of profession, I do not believe that money outweighs all other motivators.

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 are your opinions on this?

You should use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and relevant evidence.

Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

In the future, nobody will buy printed newspapers or books because they will be able to read everything they want online without paying.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

REFERENCE ANSWER

This answer follows a 4-paragraph structure and has very good vocabulary and expressions.

The popularity of physical newspapers and books is in steep decline, nearing irrelevance. In my opinion, although select segments of the population still value books, the move towards free online media is inevitable.

The argument against this is that certain individuals continue to pay for print versions. These tend to be older people and it only applies to the most well-known books and newspapers. For example, The New York Times still generates sizeable revenue from subscriptions and is one of the only magazines in the United States currently publishing a daily, physical edition. Moreover, hard copies of books are still popular. The vast majority of middle-aged and older people relish the texture and character of actual books and lack the technological know-how to download E-Books. Even many younger people prefer reading paperbacks and hardcovers to reduce eye strain.

Nonetheless, someday nearly everyone will read solely online. The clearest evidence for this can be seen in the number of publishers resigned to discontinue printing such as The Boston Globe, The Atlantic, and The Independent. Those still in print have seen circulation drop precipitously as individuals access the same news for free, more conveniently on their mobile devices. This same trend is occurring slowly with E-Books due to the rise of Amazon’s online platforms. Companies charging for online subscriptions have found their readership is trending towards obsolescence as competitors are willing to post free content and earn profits through targeted advertising. These are entrenched habits for young people, and it is only a matter of time until print media disappears entirely.

In conclusion, a rapid decline in publishing cannot be halted as reading habits have changed irrevocably. This means websites will have to become as reliable and responsible as newspapers.

CANDIDATE’S ANSWER

This is an answer written by a candidate who achieved a Band 6.0 score. Here is the examiner’s comment:

This is a thoughtful exploration of the topic. The writer considers the advantages of having online materials rather than printed ones, and also examines why printed books may not totally disappear, although other printed materials, such as magazines and newspapers, may become completely digitalised. The score might be improved by further exploration of whether online materials will be free, as cost is mentioned only briefly. Organisation is clear, paragraphing is logical and linking words and phrases guide the reader through the script [All of these factors On the other hand | Based on this). The range of vocabulary is quite varied, with many examples of collocation (electronic devices | Digital book and newspapers environmentally friendly | digital versions traditional printed books | emotional connection and value] with only two spelling errors (rech / reach | recources / resources]. There is a mix of simple and complex sentence structures and these are generally accurate. Some errors do occur [Todays / Today’s to read book(s) I makes some people to believe / makes some people believe digital versions of books … is/are more convenient | Printing so/such a huge amount of articles) but the meaning is still clear.

Todays technologies enable us to read book on electronic devices and what’s more, we can store hundreds of thousands of books on devices like Amazon’s kindle e-reader. This makes some people to believe that people will stop printing books and in the future, everything will be digitalized.

Electronic books and newspapers have many advantages. They are easy to use and rech. They can be stored in computers, mobiles, e-readers and in cloud in huge amounts and are available at any time. The cost of manufacturing and printing is completely removed, which reduced their price. Digital book and newspapers also have one very important advantage – they are environmentally friendly. No paper is used to print magazines and books, which means less trees are cut from our forests to produce papers. All of these factors convinced many people that digital versions of books and magazines is more convenient, ethical and cheaper choice

On the other hand, traditional printed books and magazines have existed for centuries and I believe they have created some kind of emotional connection and value for people when a man reads a book and he likes it, he most probably would like to have it in a form of a tangible thing. Books are a form of art, like statues and paintings. You can have a picture of some famous painting, but the painting itself has some intangible value. Magazines and newspapers do not have such a value in themselves.

Based on this, I believe that the amount of books are printed will decrease considerably and maybe even dramatically, however printed, tangible books will still be demanded by many people as they have some aura and value in addition to the things that are written inside.

I do think, though, that there is a big chance magazines and newspapers will move into the online world completely. This is because they are published in huge numbers daily and weekly and monthly and no one needs them after years. Printing so huge amount of articles will demand additional recources and make them less competitive even in terms of price.

Some people say that music is a good way of bringing people of different cultures and ages together.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

MODEL ANSWER

It is often said that music has the power to unite and connect people, regardless of their cultural backgrounds or ages. I completely agree with this view and will give my reasons below.

Music can certainly reach across cultural and national boundaries and bring people together. Perhaps the best example of this would be the Live Aid concerts that took place back in the 1980s, and which were broadcast to a global audience. Two live events were held simultaneously in the UK and the US, and the objective was to raise funds for famine relief in Ethiopia. The concerts were a huge success, both in terms of the number of people around the world who watched them and their impact on international public awareness of the famine. They demonstrated, I believe, that music truly is the planet’s global language.

Just as it transcends cultures, music also has the ability to connect people from different generations. Regardless of age, we can all enjoy a memorable melody, a strong rhythm or a beautiful singing voice, and the best songs seem to have the same magical effect on all of us. This would explain why televised music competitions, such as ‘The X Factor’ or ‘The Voice’, are such popular prime-time shows. These programmes attract incredibly broad audiences because singing and popular songs appeal to children, parents and grandparents alike. I would argue that no other form of entertainment can bring families together in this way.

In conclusion, I believe that music is unique in its capacity to create shared experiences between people, irrespective of culture and age.

Popular events like the football World Cup and other international sporting occasions are essential in easing international tensions and releasing patriotic emotions in a safe way.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

You should use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and relevant evidence.

CANDIDATE’S ANSWER

This is an answer written by a candidate who achieved a Band 4 score. Here is the examiner’s comment:

The majority of this answer has no relation to the task set: the first half is completely irrelevant and the second part is only marginally related to the topic. The candidate has therefore been penalized for this. There is little meaningful message, and grammatical control is weak.

I DISAGREE

Nowadays, football is the most popular game in the world. We can find there are many different teams who plays this football. There are dividing into 3 divisions: division one, division two and division three. Each division have different skills. The skills that they have are depend on the manager. He is the one who teach the player how to play. By playing football, there are many advantages and disadvantages. Firstly, the team can earn a lot of money. If we compare the income in division one and division two are really different. The division one will get more than division two. Because as we know, the team in division one, they show to the people that they are able to play better than the others. For example: David Beckham (the player of Manchester United). He can earn for about £45.000 £50.000/week. It’s unbelievable. Even the prime minister in the UK just got for about £110.000/year. Secondly, they can get a lot of spectators which makes the income increased. In one match, they can earn for about 20 or 30 million pounds. Actually, it’s really high. For one ticket (VIP) it can cost us a lot of money. I think for about £100 or over. That is for one person. How if we count for a million person? There are also many disadvantages: like from the task which says that the releasing patriotic emotions in a safe way. Actually, I don’t really agree about that: like 2 weeks or 3 weeks ago, there are 2 fans of Leeds United got shots. And it makes them died. Many people come and give them flowers and also the clothes which shown they’re sad about that. There are other sport games like tennis. Tennis is also popular. In playing tennis there are also have advantages and disadvantages. This games shows how they against each other. The advantages are can earn a lot of money, can attract the spectators (audience). There are also have disadvantages of this games, for example: two years ago, when Monica Sales and Steffi Graph are on the match. They play against each other then, one of the Steffi’s fan can’t stand anymore, he killed (shots) Monica Sales. That makes Monica Sales have to stop the game. The people are all thinking to take her to the hospital. Because of that, it makes Monica Sales stopped from playing tennis for about a year. But now, she has started again. In my opinion, these sport can ease the international tensions and also can make death from year to year become increase. So, it is very dangerous.

Today the high sales of popular consumer goods reflect the power of advertising and not the real needs of the society in which they are sold.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

MODEL ANSWER

This answer has simple language, but good structure.

It is true that we are increasingly surrounded by advertising by companies that want to sell us their products. To some extent I agree that advertising has an impact on sales, but I would also argue that we do need most of the goods that we buy.

Advertisements can certainly tempt people to buy products that they might not otherwise want. A good example could be the mobile phone. Every year people can be seen queuing to buy the latest models, even when they already have a perfectly good phone that does not need replacing. Perhaps it is the influence of marketing that leads us to make these kinds of decisions; we want to stay up to date with the latest fashions or own the newest high-status device. The high sales of the iPhone seem to support this idea.

On the other hand, I believe that most people do not buy products because of the advertising alone. There are other good reasons why we make these choices, and there must be some kind of need before a person makes a purchase. New versions of products almost always have improved features that buyers may want. A new car, for example, may have greatly improved safety features, or it may be more economical to run, or it may pollute less. A new phone may allow the user to communicate more quickly or effectively, thus enhancing their quality of life.

In conclusion, while advertising obviously influences our buying behaviour, I do not agree that people make decisions that go against their real needs.

CANDIDATE’S ANSWER

This is an answer written by a candidate who achieved a Band 7.5 score. Here is the examiner’s comment:

The way in which the candidate has responded to the task is a strong point of this script. It is a well-developed answer that addresses the issues relevantly and at length. The writer introduces the topic, examines both sides of the argument and expresses a clear position. Points are well-argued and supported with examples.

The answer is well-organised and the message is easy to follow with clear paragraphing and linking of ideas. There are too many errors in cohesion, however, and some linkers are not always fully appropriate, so this limits the rating for this criterion.

A wide range of vocabulary is used accurately and precisely, in spite of one or two awkward expressions and some rare errors. Similarly, a sophisticated range of structures is used but there are too many minor errors and omissions (such as in the use of prepositions and basic subject/verb agreement) to reach Band 8. Nevertheless, these mistakes do not reduce the clarity of the answer and overall a wide range of language is used with a high level of proficiency.

Nowadays, there are lots of advertisements on television or on the streets. Some people think that the advertising boosts the sales of goods and it encourages people to buy things unnecessarily. These arguments may be true. In my country, many advertising companies produce advertisements with famous and popular actors or singers. People, especially youngsters, buy goods that their favourite singer advertise, although they do not really need the products.

Also, on the television screen, a product may look gorgeous and good quality. As a result of it, people often buy goods without enough consideration. Consumers may not actually need it but they buy goods impulsively soon after they watch the advertising. Furthermore, as many customers buy a particular product due to its advertising campaign, the other people may be affected by the trend, even if the product is not of the real needs of the society.

On the other hand, there are various aspects against these arguments. Moreover, it is people’s choice to make a decision to buy goods. Advertising may be not a cause of customers’ buying habits. Individuals have their own spending habits. If they have got enough disposable income, then the right to make a decision’s given to them. No one actually can fudge whether the goods sold are the real needs of the society or not. In addition, as there should be a limited amount of disposable income consumers are able to spend, people try to allocate their budgets. They cannot be simply swayed by those advertisements.

In conclusion, as customers have their own strong opinions and standard of good quality goods, it’s better to leave them to make their own decision in buy goods. It’s fairly difficult to say everyone’s swayed by advertising and buy good impulsively. However, in sensitive area of businesses such as toy industries, it may be necessary to band advertising to those children as children have not got enough ability to control themselves or to know what they need.

Some people believe that we have too many choices these days. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

REFERENCE ANSWER

We are living in an era in which the world is continually changing and developing. Each new technique presents a plethora of possibilities, making it difficult for consumers to make a definitive decision. However, I believe that options have more advantages than disadvantages, particularly when it comes to consumerism and education, and so I favor them.

To begin with, students now have a broader selection of disciplines to select from, allowing them to pursue their passions and interests. Historically, education was restricted in terms of accessibility in some locations, most notably distant locations. Additionally, pupils were not given as many options as they are in today’s school system. This expansion is a result of advancements in technology, which enables students to access education in a variety of modes: online, distance learning, weekend courses, evening schools, and unique ability schools, to name a few. With the proliferation of the internet, students’ reliance on books has also been reduced to a minimum.

Consumers have much to gain from this era of change. You may simply get whatever you want, owing to online shopping, enabling one to buy any item from any corner of the world. Besides availability, they are also less expensive, which makes them more accessible to the middle class. Additionally, in the past, individuals could only watch a limited number of stations on television. Fortunately, there are now a variety of channels, websites, and films that engage people.

To conclude, those born nowadays are rather fortunate since they have numerous opportunities and resources at their disposal.

Living in a country where you have to speak a foreign language can cause serious social problems, as well as practical problems.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

REFERENCE ANSWER

One of the biggest social and practical challenges that people living abroad face is the language barrier. I believe that this can lead to very serious social problems in many countries but technology has made the practical issues less relevant over the last several decades.

The main reason that having to speak a foreign language can cause social problems is through the breakdown in understanding between people of different cultures. The most salient example of this is in the United States where there has been an influx of Hispanic immigrants, especially along the Southern border. These immigrants are typically able to integrate well if they learn English but those that have not learned have provoked social problems and even violent reactions. Many English speaking residents resent the immigrants’ failure to integrate and this has resulted in discriminatory practices and widespread racism towards Hispanics. This in turn has caused many Hispanics to develop an antipathy towards other residents and segregate themselves in homogeneous neighborhoods.

There are comparatively fewer practical problems caused by not knowing the language of the country where you live because of the development of technology in general and smartphones in particular. Computers have made it much easier to look up directions, find important information and get quick translations. Smartphones have made this even easier. If someone does not know the language of the country where they live, they can still find restaurants to their liking on Facebook and get simple directions through Google Maps. They can even order food online without having to use another language at all. If they need to communicate with someone who does not speak their language they can simply take out their phone and use Google translate to slowly, but effectively, convey a message. The problems that not knowing the language of the country where you live causes are therefore minimal and easily overcome.

In conclusion, I only partly agree with the statement in question. Not knowing a language when living abroad can cause social unrest but pragmatic concerns have been mitigated by recent technology. In the future, it will become even less important to know the language of the country where you live although there is great potential for increased social unrest and heightened tensions in many parts of the world.

Every year several languages die out. Some people think that this is not important because life will be easier if there are fewer languages in the world.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

REFERENCE ANSWER

It is argued that the annual extinction of many languages is not a problem because having just a few languages leads to a more convenient life. It is disagreed that the convenience of using just a few key languages makes the dying out of less spoken dialects acceptable. This essay will first discuss the importance of language to culture and secondly the fact that learning a few common languages is unrealistic, followed by a reasoned conclusion.

A language is not just a group of spoken words but the key to someone’s culture. Language has evolved over thousands of years to reflect what it means to be from a particular place. For example, the Irish language has one of the widest vocabularies in the world and reflects their tradition of storytelling. Despite this, English has become the first language of the Irish, as many feel it makes it easier to communicate with the world.

By speaking just a couple of languages, such as English and Chinese, you alienate billions of people throughout the world. English may be common, but it is not the ‘lingua franca’ many people think it is and it would take generations for everyone to learn it.  Countries like Korea and Vietnam have been trying to adopt English as a second language for a long time, but many of their people still can not fully grasp it.  However, English has been the language of business for a long time and it should be encouraged to help a country become more economically competitive.

To conclude, commonly spoken languages may make life more straightforward, but this should not be at the expense of less prevalent languages, in order to avoid the erosion of culture and the alienation of many countries.

Countries are becoming more and more similar because people are able to buy the same products anywhere in the world.

Is it a positive or negative development?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

REFERENCE ANSWER

It is said that countries are becoming to each other because of the global spread of the same products, which are now available for purchase almost anywhere. I strongly believe that this modern development is highly detrimental culture and traditions worldwide.

           A country’s history, language and ethos are all inextricably bound up in its manufactured artefacts. If the relentless advance of international brands into every corner of the world continues these bland packages might one day completely oust the traditional objects of a nation, which would be a loss of richness and diversity in the world, as well as the said disappearance of the manifestations of a place’s character. What would a Japanese tea company be without its specially crafted teapot or a Fijian Kava ritual without its bowl made from a certain type of tree bark?

Let us not forget either that traditional products whether these be medicines, cosmetics, toys, clothes, utensils or food provide employment for local people. The spread of manufactured products can often bring in its wake a loss of jobs, as people turn to buy the new brand perhaps thinking it more glamorous than the one they are used to. This eventually puts old-school crafts people out of work.

Finally, tourism numbers may also be affected as travelers become disillusioned with every place just the same as the ones they visited previously. To see the same products in shops the world over is boring, and does not impel visitors to open their wallets in the same way that trinkets or souvenirs unique to the particular area do.

Some may argue that all people are entitled to have access to the same products, but I say that local objects suit local conditions best, and that faceless uniformity worldwide is an unwelcome and dreary prospect.

Improvements in health, education and trade are essential for the development of poorer nations. However, the governments of richer nations should take more responsibility for helping the poorer nations in such areas.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

You should use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and relevant evidence.

CANDIDATE’S ANSWER

This is an answer written by a candidate who achieved a Band 6 score. Here is the examiner’s comment:

The writer expresses a point of view, but the ideas show little development and the argument does not go anywhere. The writing is well-organised, however, and can be followed with little difficulty. Sentence structures are sufficiently varied, but grammatical and lexical control is quite often faulty (e.g. subject/verb agreement, incorrect use of tenses, mass/count nouns).

In balancing the world economic growth, the underdevelopment of the Third World Nations have been drawn to the attention of the developed countries of the Western. Thus, governmental policies and interference in the agricultural business of the poorer nations were made to secure their dominant source of the economy. Many discussions among economists and politicians also put their focus on the other aspects. That is, to improve the health, education and trade for the developing countries. However, the improvements cannot be made by these countries, but more external assistance and aids should be done.

Because of the shortage of food supply, the people in poorer nations (i.e. Africa) are esily prone to disease, hunger and death. When natural or environmental disastres happen, they are threaten with their lives. Education cannot be well developed as a result of frequent droughts, famines and disease spreading. The other countries, while emphasising on the development of agriculture in the Third World, cannot really give the solution to the cyclical problem which has been existing for a long time. It is time to consider the consequences of all the waste of efforts in trying to help the economic growth of the Third World and to think from the other perspectives. The richer countries have the power to rebuilt the Third World by taking care the essentials – health, education and trade. More aids for providing the medicine, educational needs and materials can be done by the richer countries. The assistance of trade and developing business in the poorer countries also can be of a great help to the poorer nations. If the richer countries can be more serious about the essential issues of how a nation develops, and well consider the special situations and circumstances those poorer nations are facing, the improvements will be more efficiently made. The governments of developed countries are, in some ways, responsible – though not obliged – for the future of those developing countries.

Universities should accept equal numbers of male and female students in every subject. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

MODEL ANSWER

In my opinion, men and women should have the same educational opportunities. However, I do not agree with the idea of accepting equal proportions of each gender in every university subject.

Having the same number of men and women on all degree courses is simply unrealistic. Student numbers on any course depend on the applications that the institution receives. If a university decided to fill courses with equal numbers of males and females, it would need enough applicants of each gender. In reality, many courses are more popular with one gender than the other, and it would not be practical to aim for equal proportions. For example, nursing courses tend to attract more female applicants, and it would be difficult to fill these courses if fifty per cent of the places needed to go to males.

Apart from the practical concerns expressed above, I also believe that it would be unfair to base admission to university courses on gender. Universities should continue to select the best candidates for each course according to their qualifications. In this way, both men and women have the same opportunities, and applicants know that they will be successful if they work hard to achieve good grades at school. If a female student is the best candidate for a place on a course, it is surely wrong to reject her in favour of a male student with lower grades or fewer qualifications.

In conclusion, the selection of university students should be based on merit, and it would be both impractical and unfair to change to a selection procedure based on gender.

CANDIDATE’S ANSWER

This is an answer written by a candidate who achieved a band 6.5 score. Here’s the examiner’s comment:

The essay is a bit short and the conclusion could use a bit more content. There is some awkward phrasing but overall, the writing shows a sense of style. The use of vocabulary is advanced, the organization is strong and the introduction leads nicely into the essay. If the essay was a bit more developed, it would score a 7 but because it is short, it would achieve an IELTS 6.5.

Looking back on the last two generations, our parents receive the education system that is regulated to include both sexes.  The pre-organized mechanism allows both male and female students to understand each other better as well as to create a better environment for the students to come up with a variety of solutions when facing difficulties.  Therefore, I strongly agree that universities ought to accept fair numbers of male and female students in all subjects.

To begin with, university is a place where people learn.  In other words, no one should be excluded or limited to choose what they want to take part in. Also, with equal sexes in classes, students can exchange different ideas from opposite sex that according to a study, it stimulates students to think.

Next to go would be, no one can deny that universities are stepping stones of the fickle society.  If a student who go to a university that only accept males or females, they would not be full fledge to deal with various problems that will be encountered after they graduate.

To sum up, based on the abovementioned, history is the mirror of tomorrow; thus, keep taking in the same amount of male and females students would accelerate students’ learning efficiency.

Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled. They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement. To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

You should write at least 250 words.

MODEL ANSWER

It is true that we do not recycle enough of our household waste. Although I accept that new legislation to force people to recycle could help this situation, I do not agree that a recycling law is the only measure that governments should take.

In my view, a new recycling law would be just one possible way to tackle the waste problem. Governments could make it a legal obligation for householders to separate all waste into different bins. There could be punishments for people who fail to adhere to this law, ranging from a small fine to community service, or even perhaps prison sentences for repeat offenders. These measures would act as a deterrent and encourage people to obey the recycling law. As a result, the improved behaviour of homeowners could lead to a clean, waste-free environment for everyone.

However, I believe that governments should do more than simply introduce a recycling law. It might be more effective if politicians put education, rather than punishment, at the centre of a recycling campaign. For example, children could be taught about recycling in schools, and homeowners could be informed about the environmental impact of household waste. Another tactic that governments could use would be to create stricter regulations for the companies that produce the packaging for household products. Finally, money could also be spent to improve recycling facilities and systems, so that waste is processed more effectively, regardless of whether or not people separate it correctly in the home.

In conclusion, perhaps we do need to make recycling a legal requirement, but this would certainly not be the only way to encourage people to dispose of their waste more responsibly.

Some people believe that unpaid community service should be a compulsory part of high school programmes (for example working for a charity, improving the neighbourhood or teaching sports to younger children).

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant example from your own knowledge or experience.

You should write at least 250 words.

MODEL ANSWER

It is sometimes argued that high school students should be made to do some work in their local communities. While I disagree with the idea of making such programmes compulsory, I do believe that voluntary community service could benefit young people.

There are several reasons why I would argue against having compulsory community service for secondary school students. Firstly, the school curriculum is already full with important academic subjects, such as Maths, Science and languages. For example, I remember having an extremely busy timetable when I was at high school, and it would not have been possible to add to it. Secondly, students’ performance in other subjects would be affected if valuable study time were taken by charity work or neighbourhood improvement schemes. Finally, I believe that teenage students would be reluctant to take part in any programme of obligatory work, and this could lead to poor motivation and even bad behaviour.

On the other hand, the opportunity to do voluntary community service could be extremely positive for high school students. By making these programmes optional, schools would ensure that only motivated students took part. These young people would gain valuable experience in an adult working environment, which could help to build their self-confidence and enhance their skills. Having such experience and skills on their CVs could greatly improve school leavers’ career prospects. For example, a period of voluntary work experience might impress a university admissions officer or a future employer.

In conclusion, community service can benefit high school students in a number of ways; however, it should be offered on a voluntary basis for it to achieve the desired impact.

CANDIDATE’S ANSWER

This is an answer written by a candidate who achieved a Band 8.0 score. Here is the examiner’s comment:

The answer addresses all parts of the prompt sufficiently, focusing on the benefits for students rather than society. A number of relevant, extended and supported ideas are used to produce a well-developed response to the question. However, some ideas, for example, the reference to the crime level, are not fully extended. The ideas are logically ordered and cohesion is consistently well managed. Paragraphing is used appropriately, and progression between paragraphs is managed with some sophistication. A wide range of vocabulary is used to articulate meanings precisely, with skillful use of uncommon lexis, and very few inappropriacies. The range of grammatical structures use is also wide, with only occasional minor errors.

It has been suggested that high school students should be involved in unpaid community services as a compulsory part of high school programmes. Most of the colleges are already providing opportunities to gain work experience, however these are not compulsory. In my opinion, sending students to work in community services is a good idea as it can provide them many lots of valuable skills.

Life skills are very important and by doing voluntary work, students can learn how to communicate with others and work in a team but also how to manage their time and improve their organisational skills. Nowadays, unfortunately, teenagers do not have many after-school activities. After-school clubs are no longer that popular and students mostly go home and sit in front of the TV, browse internet or play video games.

By giving them compulsory work activities with charitable or community organisations, they will be encouraged to do something more creative. Skills gained through compulsory work will not only be an asset on their CV but also increase their employability. Students will also gain more respect towards work and money as they will realise that it is not that easy to earn and hopefully will learn to spend them in a more practical way.

Healthy life balance and exercise are strongly promoted by the NHS, and therefore any kind of spare time charity work will prevent from sitting and doing nothing. It could also possibly reduce the crime level in the high school age group. If students have activities to do, they will not be bored and come up silly ideas which can be dangerous for them or their surroundings.

In conclusion, I think this is a very good idea, and I hope this programme will be put into action for high schools/colleges shortly.

Some people think that universities should provide graduates with the knowledge and skills needed in the workplace. Others think that the true function of a university should be to give access to knowledge for its own sake, regardless of whether the course is useful to an employer.

What, in your opinion, should be the main function of a university?

Give reasons for your answer.

REFERENCE ANSWER

Whether a university’s role should be to prepare graduates for specific jobs or simply to educate without a particular vocation in mind is a debatable issue. In my opinion, universities should fulfill both purposes.

Some students have a very specific job in mind when they enroll at university. Medicine, dentistry and accountancy have clear career paths and they allow people to focus on and then undertake a certain profession upon graduation. This suits those who have decided on a career and it avoids them wasting time studying more general subjects. For instance, in the United States, you must complete four years of higher education before you can study law and many feel that these four years are a waste of time, that would have been better used focusing on their chosen discipline.

However, providing job specific skills and knowledge is not suitable for everyone as many young people have no idea what job they would like to do when they are 18. For these young people, it is better to do a non-vocational course, such as philosophy and simply add to their intellect without a career goal in mind. If they are forced to study a more practical subject, they are more likely to quit or become disillusioned because they do not see the point of their chosen subject. For example, The Times recently reported that only 50% of law graduates actually want to become lawyers at the end of their studies.

In conclusion, the function of college is to both prepare students for the workforce and provide knowledge and which one a person chooses should depend on their preference at the time.

CANDIDATE’S ANSWER

This is an answer written by a candidate who achieved a Band 5 score. Here is the examiner’s comment:

This answer is less than 250 words and it does not address all parts of the question, so it loses marks. Nevertheless, some relevant ideas and a position on the issue are presented Ideas are organised and the structure of the answer is clearly signalled. Paragraphing is not always logical, however. There is some good use of linkers, but there is also a lot of repetition due to inadequate use of referencing and substitution. The high level of repetition [‘knowledge and skills’ is repeated nine times) also indicates limitations in the range of vocabulary although, apart from language given in the rubric, there is just sufficient additional vocabulary for the task. The answer includes attempts at complex sentence forms, but these are generally awkwardly phrased and tend to require some re-reading to understand. Nevertheless, there are examples of accurate complex structures.

What knowledge and skills should universities provide has been argued for many years. Some people think that the true function of universities provide knowledge for their own purpose, but nowadays, more and more people point out that universities should provide graduates with the knowledge and skills according to the workplace.  The first reason for universities should provide these knowledge and skill is the student’s needs. Obviously, the most of the students go to university purpose of is to get some knowledge and skills which could make them have the ability to get a job. If a university does not provide these knowledge and skills, the students might not get a job and they would be very disappointed. As a result, the university would lose its students. Moreover, providing knowledge and skills needed in the workplace maks a university progress. The new skills and information always are initiated in the workplace, so focusing on the needs of the workplace the university could get sound strategies to do research and make it more mordengation. Lastly, providing these knowledge and skills could benefit our country which usually gives a financial support to universities. Having these knowledge and skills, students are more easy to get a job, and this can make our countries’ economy strong. In conclusion, it can be said that providing the knowledge and skills which the workplace needs is every university’s basic function.