B BI MU CA THY DOMINIC COLE (www.dcielts.

com) Phn 1 Gm 5 bi
Chc hn cc bn u tng bit v thnh IELTS Dominic Cole, ch nhn ca website dcielts. Nu
nh Simon IELTS tp trung ch yu vo khn gi mc trung bnh (ngha l band 6-7), th thy
Dominic Cole c c gi l nhng bn mc nhnh hn, v c bit thy c recommend rng ri
bi nhng gio vin uy tn, thy c l examiners. C examiner cn tng ni vi mnh l every word
Dominic says about IELTS is golden.
Nu chu kh tm ti mt cht, bn s thy tt trn Internet c cc bi mu ca thy Dominic Cole m
mnh tng hp ti y. Nhng bi mu ny u tm band 9 v gip hng chc nghn bn hc IELTS
nc ngoi (hi ng bun mt cht l thy Dominic Cole khng thc s ni ting Vit Nam).
Trong qung thi gian nm 2016, mnh cng gii thiu cc bi vit di y ti hn 70 bn hc sinh
lp mnh v phn hi ca cc bn u rt tch cc, v nhng bi vit ny gip cc bn hc khng ch v
cch din t tri chy ca ngi bn x, m cn v cu trc bi ti u tr li cu hi bi.
Trc khi c bi mu, cc bn hy th c v brainstorm trc cu tr li cho 5 thi di y nh!
Chc cc bn hc tt.
Tu Pham, Head teacher at www.ippielts.com

1. In the past lectures were the traditional
method of teaching large numbers of students.
Nowadays new technology is increasingly being
used to teach students.
Do the advantages of this new approach
outweigh the disadvantages?
2. Science and technology have improved
the standards of living in all over the world. Some
people claim that the role of the arts has become
insignificant.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this
opinion?

3. Some people say that parents should
decide on what kind of medical care their
children should receive, while others believe that
this is the states responsibility
Discuss both views and give your opinion.
4. Differences between countries become
less evident each year. Nowadays, all over the
world people share the same fashions,
advertising, brands, eating habits and TV
channels.
Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages of
this?

5. Some people think that only staff who

worked in a company for a long time should be
promoted to a higher position.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?

1
 1
In the past lectures were the traditional method of teaching large numbers of students. Nowadays
new technology is increasingly being used to teach students.
Do the advantages of this new approach outweigh the disadvantages?
As we move into the twenty-first century, technology is affecting many different areas of life and education is no
exception. Indeed, in some institutions traditional forms of education have been revolutionised by new technology
to the extent that the lecture is no longer the main method of delivery. While there are a variety of benefits to this
new approach, there are also significant drawbacks.

Perhaps the greatest bonus of the introduction of technology is the flexibility it offers. This is evident in two
different ways. Firstly, it is now no longer essential for students to be present in the lecture theatre for their courses.
This means that part-time courses for adults who are in employment and distance learning courses for people in
other countries are now much more practical. Another area of flexibility is of course that the lecturer and tutor are
able to use Moodles, interactive whiteboards and other tools to deliver their courses in a more stimulating way to
large numbers of students.

Not everything, however, about the introduction of this new technology into education is positive. One major
problem is that not all students are comfortable with using technology, even if they are part of the digital native
generation. This is a serious issue as they may suffer from their lack of technological skills. Another related issue
is that education is a human activity and it works best with as much human interaction as possible. Impersonal
technology cannot replace the human contact found in traditional face-to-face tutorials and seminars.

As we have seen, there are major benefits to the introduction of technology into education, not least because it
enables modern forms of education such as distance learning courses. This is balanced, however, by the fact that
it can be too impersonal for some and disadvantages others for their lack of technological skills.

(305 words Dominic Cole)

2
 2
Science and technology have improved the standards of living in all over the world. Some people
claim that the role of the arts has become insignificant.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
There is no doubt that the quality of our lives in the 21st century has been greatly improved by various scientific
and technological advances. Despite this, the arts and humanities too still have much to teach us about ourselves
and life in general.

One area in which we can learn from the arts is that concepts such as beauty matter in and of themselves, whereas
in the world of science and technology the only true measure is whether something works or not. This is a limited
view of the world and the arts differ in that they offer us an alternative and more spiritual outlook. For example,
if we listen to Mozart we can learn about harmony and joy through the medium of music or if even we read an
author like PG Wodehouse we learn about the value of humour. These essential aspects of life are absent from the
clinical world of science and technology.

The other way in which artists can teach us more about life is that enjoying art encourages the habit of self-
reflection. If you walk into an art gallery, attend a concert or even just stay in to read a book, you will almost
certainly begin to think about your inner values. For me, this is a invaluable lesson in life because if we begin to
reflect about ourselves, we begin not just to become more human, but also consider the lives of others too.

So while science and technology may have made our physical lives more comfortable in the 21st century. It
remains true that the arts and humanities are still absolutely necessary for ordinary people as they promote a more
spiritual and reflective view of life that is essential to our humanity.

(289 words Dominic Cole)

3
 3
Some people say that parents should decide on what kind of medical care their children should
receive, while others believe that this is the states responsibility
Discuss both views and give your opinion
Although almost everyone agrees about the necessity to provide children with the best healthcare, there is some
dispute about whether parents or the government should decide what that care is. My own view is that while
governments may adopt a general policy for childrens medical care, parents should normally have the ultimate
say.

There are good grounds for arguing that the state should decide on the form of medical provision for children.
One of these is that typically the state is better able to make informed decisions because it has access to all the
latest medical research. Another is that occasionally there are epidemics in schools and it is the responsibility of
the government to ensure that illnesses should not be spread unnecessarily. In this case, it might justifiably order
compulsory vaccination.

Equally there is a very strong argument for allowing parents to decide on what care their children receive. This is
because one extremely important principle is that everyone should have the right to choose what care they receive.
For children who are too young to make their own choice, it is only natural that their parents should make that
decision for them. This is particularly important for families that come from a culture where certain medical
interventions such as blood transfusions are forbidden. In this case, it seems quite wrong for the government to
order something that may go against religious beliefs.

In conclusion, I do accept that there are good reasons for the state to outline what care children should receive,
but parents should be able to have the last word particularly when religious principles are at stake.

(271 words Dominic Cole)

4
 4
Differences between countries become less evident each year. Nowadays, all over the world people
share the same fashions, advertising, brands, eating habits and TV channels.
Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages of this?
It is undoubtedly the case that the world today has become a global village. One of the effects of this is that
increasingly people in all corners of the world are exposed to similar services and products and adopt similar
habits. My view is that this is largely a beneficial process and in this essay I will explain why.

The first point to make is that there are some downsides to this process of cultural globalisation, but these are
relatively minor. The most significant of these disadvantages is that it can weaken national culture and traditions.
For example, if people watch films and television programmes produced in the United States, sometimes they
adopt aspects of the lifestyle of the American characters they see on television. Typically, however, this only
affects minor details such as clothing and does not seriously threaten national identity.

When we turn to the other side of the argument, there are two major points to make in favour of this process. The
first of these is that the more we share habits, products and services, the better we understand each other and this
reduces prejudice against other nations. The other point relates to modernity. It is a sign of progress in a society
that people no longer are restricted to brands and advertisements from their own society but are able to access
more international goods. If, for example, there were unable to drink Coca Cola or wear Nike, then that would
mean their society was not part of the international community.

In conclusion, I understand the point of view of people who worry about cultural globalisation because it is a
threat to national traditions. However, this is outweighed by its positive impact on international understanding
and the fact that it represents progress within a society.

(298 words Dominic Cole)

5
 5
Some people think that only staff who worked in a company for a long time should be promoted to a
higher position.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
One of the reasons why companies choose to promote some staff is seniority. While length of service is
undoubtedly an important factor, my belief is it should certainly not be the only criterion for deciding who should
be promoted. Rather it would be better for companies to have a more varied policy in this area.

There are without question sound arguments for promoting employees who have been working for a company for
a number of years. The first of these is that these more experienced employees would be able to adapt themselves
to being in a higher position, as they would understand the culture and policies of the company better. Again, on
a practical level, if they were not promoted, they might well leave the company to find a higher position and earn
a larger salary. This could have serious consequences for the company, which might lose a significant amount of
business to its competitors.

Despite these reasons, there is a strong argument in favour of also promoting staff because of their performance.
This can be seen by how some multi-nationals use annual performance and development reviews when deciding
on promotion. Under this system a supervisor can set targets for an employee and if those targets are met, then
the employee can be promoted, even if they are relatively junior. The benefit of this approach is that it encourages
staff to work harder and rewards merit and not just long service.

In conclusion, there is no doubt a case for implementing a policy of promoting long-serving members of staff, but
I believe that it is also wise to take account of the performance of more junior members of staff.

(279 words Dominic Cole)