Art Essay Questions for IELTS

Some people think that the government is wasting money on the arts and that this

money could be better spent elsewhere.

To what extent do you agree with this view?

These days, the government spends a large part of its budget not only on public
services, but also the arts. Although I agree that it is important to spend money on
public services, I do not think spending on the arts is a waste of money.

There are several reasons for spending a significant amount of the government budget
on public services. First and foremost, public services are the things such as hospitals,
roads and schools, and these things determine the quality of life that most of us will
have. For example, if the government does not spend enough money on hospitals, the
health of our society may decline. Similarly, if not enough money is spent on schools,
our children may not be properly educated. Also, it will be the poor in our society that
will be affected more if we do not spend enough on these things because they are the
ones more dependent on such services.

However, this does not mean that the arts should be completely neglected. To begin, it
is difficult for many arts institutions to generate much profit, so without some help from
the government, many theatres and other such places may have to close. Moreover, the
arts also have an important impact on our quality of life. Many people get great pleasure
in going to see music and theatre performances so it is important that the government
assists such institutions so that they can continue to provide entertainment to the public.

To sum up, there are clear benefits of ensuring a large amount of investment goes into
public services as this influences the quality of life for nearly all of us. That said, I do not
believe spending money on the arts is a waste of money as this too provides important
benefits.

Sample 2
Arts sometimes reflect the heritage of a country and depict the creativity of an
individual. While many believe that financing in arts is a wastage of money, I am
of the opposite view as I believe that financing in arts is a good idea for the
government.

Supporters of the idea put forth that diverting funds towards arts hamper the
national well-being. For example, available monetary resources could be put to
use in building more hospitals, roads, infrastructure and schools. This means
increasing care of the sick and improved transportation to previously inaccessible
areas. For children, it caters for increased literacy rates. This group of people
believe that art is a luxury and many governments cannot afford this
extravagance. According to them, other important sectors require more money
and hence a government should stop spending money on arts and invest in more
critical areas.

However, while investments in such areas are vital, spending on arts is equally
important. Allocating money to the development and sustenance of arts helps
boost the economy. Art galleries can attract tourists from all over the world,
generating revenue in return. It is also the case that viewing and practising arts
are good sources of venting out stress and recreate. Such activities also portray
a positive picture of a nation and help to take pride in if pieces of arts become
famous. If governments fail to support arts fiscally, many art galleries and
theatres would not be able to survive.

Hence, it is clear to me that spending on arts is beneficial both for an individual

and society. Therefore funding arts is not squandering money.

Sample 3

Some contend that there are many pressing concerns that a country must
resolve first before putting emphasize to art. However, I personally think that art
is an essential part of a culture and it is quite fair to allocate funds to preserve
and develop art.

Admittedly, there are some justifications by people who oppose spending on

promoting arts. First of all, most art projects are expensive with no obvious
outcomes that have direct relations to a nation’s income. For example, the
monument of Kebangkitan Pahlawan in Malang city that adsorbed almost 1
billion rupiahs does not attract people that much. Besides, art is not a critical
aspect of the sustainability of human’s life. Human’s life will not disappear just
because they have a less taste of esthetic.

However, I still support that the government should allocate budget for arts. Art is
part of a culture which becomes the identity of a nation and if the culture is strong
enough, eventually it could be a major source of income. For instance, Bali is an
island in Indonesia, where millions of visitors come each year to experience the
combination of conventional values and modern lifestyles. The government in
Indonesia invests more than a third of their budget to maintain their traditional
arts. Furthermore, art makes a life worth living- as food, art is a supplement for
the human soul. It has a magnificent power to aid buildings, roads, parks, and
everything, with its uniqueness. Just imagine how empty a room would be if there
is no painting or decoration on the wall! Art is enhancing people’s life by
leveraging their experiences and empowering people to possess beautiful
imagination.

To conclude, supporting art is important for a government as it would enhance

the quality of life either by improving tourism industry or by providing a better
artistic facility.

Art is considered an essential part of all cultures throughout the world.

However, these days fewer and fewer people appreciate art and turn their focus

to science, technology and business.

Why do you think that is?

What could be done to encourage more people to take interest in the arts?

Sample 1
It is commonly believed that art plays a fundamental role in society as artists are able to
express their thoughts and their culture in their work. In my opinion, children should
definitely learn art because they can develop creativity and learn to express themselves
in their art work but it should not be taught to the detriment of other subjects.
Firstly, art is an essential subject which children, especially young children, should learn
in order to help promote their creativity and imagination. Without the development of
imagination and creative thinking, children will struggle to grow into dynamic, individual
thinkers when they reach adulthood. Furthermore, some children are particularly gifted
in their creative abilities and studying art can help them nurture their talents.

Another important advantage for children when practicing art is that it provides a
medium through which they can express their emotions and feelings. In other words,
young children do not have the linguistic capabilities to put their ideas into language and
thus communicate directly. Therefore, by using art, they are able to convey meaning
through pictures and symbols. For this reason, many child psychologists often study the
art work of children to gain an insight into what they think and feel.

Finally, however, regardless of how useful the study of art is for children, this should not
result in more focus being placed on art rather than other subjects. Children need to
have a balance of all subjects so as to facilitate a healthy development both mentally
and physically. Thus, ensuring that there is a healthy balance of art, sciences,
languages and physical education in the school syllabus is essential.

In conclusion, while art certainly helps a child develop creativity as well as express their
thoughts, it should be taught equally alongside all other subjects. A school curriculum
should offer a balance of subjects.

Sample 2

Art has been the indispensable part of the human civilization from the Stone Age.
Although in this era of modernization, more importance is given to the science
and technology and few to the art and the artists. Some causes for this ignorance
can be identified, but there are some solutions which could help to turn this view.

There are two primary reasons why attention of the people is turned into
technical areas. Firstly, human beings are heavily dependent on the technology
and medical science to survive on this earth, especially to fight the diseases and
to create the earth more comfortable to live in. As they found how useful
medicines are to live a long life and how essential technology is to live a +a
business helps to grow the economy of a country, it provides a bounty of
employment options. Due to these opportunities, people resort to business rather
than artistic skills.

Some steps can be taken to promote arts. Firstly, awareness programs to teach
the importance of art in human life are very vital. This can be done by introducing
arts related subject in the schools where future society is being built. Also,
teachers could develop artistic skills among children. Secondly, the government
should open art academy for those poor students who cannot afford higher
education. Further, it is not enough to educate individuals, the regime should also
create opportunities for these graduates in arts.

In conclusion, there are some reasons for this trend. However, something should

be done by authorities to attract people towards art.

Sample 3

Art has been very crucial part of the human civilization throughout the history.

Nevertheless, less importance is given to the art in contrast to the past. This

essay describes reasons for this negligence and some measures which can be

taken to promote the interest of people in art.

There are two main causes which can be considered to play a major role behind

this drift. Firstly, this era of computer make people to take interest in

automation, because of which people avoid creative activities. For example,

every one chooses to stay online to contact friends and family rather than social
functions. Secondly, a business open up a bounty of opportunities for an

employment which attracts the youth. Art, on the other hand, does not provide

the means for a regular earning. For instance, a businessman or salaried

employee get monthly income opposed to an artist who would have to wait till

the art has been sold.

Some steps can be taken to promote the art sector. Firstly, parents should

encourage the artistic skills of their children. For example, they could help child

to develop at least one art from early childhood. They should make sure that

their offspring owns one innovative talent like music, dance or acting. Secondly,

earning opportunities needs to be increased so that people could concentrate

to make art their occupation rather than a hobby. For instance, government

could create job positions for artists, also they can provide subsidy on artifacts.

Last but not the least, awareness programs can be arranged to explain the

vitality of the art on the culture. For this, art related subjects can be introduced

in schools. Also government should open art academy for poor one who cannot

afford higher education.

To conclude, materialistic view of the human community and advancement of

the modern technology has attracted the people towards science and

technology and lessen the interests in the art. However, awareness programs
and intervention regime would encourage the citizens to concentrate on the

arts.

Some people think that art is an essential subject for children at school while

others think it is a waste of time.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

Sample 1
Art as a subject in school has been arguable topic. While one portion of the world
population believes art as a subject is just wastage of time, others consider it as
vital portion of human generation. In this essay, first I will show how modern
technologies are replacing art, then will show how art helps children and finally
present a reasonable conclusion.

Modern technology has become indivisible part of the human life thus life devoid
of the same is unimaginable. For instance, computer literacy has become
essential for everyone, and one who does not know how to handle computer is
considered as illiterate. Due to this modernization, some argue that children
should be taught technology related subject as they can help them for their
career growth and earnings and are thereby of the opinion that traditional
subjects like art are only wastage of time which are worth to be replaced by
technology related subjects.

On the flip side, art has been one of the primitive ways of communication and
importance of it is undeniable in solving the mysteries of human history; even
now it is seen as a medium of expressing feelings, specifically for children. For
instance, a child who always prefers its comfort zone can express it’s feelings by
means of painting. Apart from this, in this era of competition, while stress seems
to be indivisible part of human race, arts can act as a way to release stress. To
illustrate, music therapy nowadays is acknowledged to cure depression at
remarkable level. In addition to this, arts like dancing keeps child not only fit but
also healthy.

To conclude, although arts subjects are essential for overall growth of a person,
modern technology related subjects like science and mathematics are necessary
for career growth. In my opinion/To opine, although children should be taught all
the subjects in primary education, they should be enabled to select subject of

their choice in secondary education.

Sample 2
Some people in our society think art is a waste of time and it would not buy them bread
and butter for living. Other thinks that its plays vital role in our society, It make human to
think beyond imagination. In my opinioun, art is a compelling medium to express
imagination and creativity.

As from the other side of the coin, People who think that its waste of money and time
have their own arguments. They think that it would not buy them luxuries of life. There
are many examples, where art and artist are taking funds from goverment organization
to pass their life and their life mostly spend in darkness.

However, As i see the art, Its most facinating thing happen to humans from the
beggining of time, because it make us immaginable, We start to think differently, thats
the main reason how human survive from the time to time. I think art has to be a
mandatary subject in schools and collages, So our childern build up their creativity and
immagination. They will be doctors,scientist or may be engineer but if the did not have
creativity and immagination they will not become successful in life.

The bottom line is, Art is a important subject for childern and its play vital role in the
creativity and immagination of childern. Its Art which connects our past with future and
major of everything it makes us human. There were old saying without the art there is

no human and without a human their will be no life.

Sample 3

In this day and age, few people are in the opinion that school should also

focus on other activities like art, sports apart from academic subjects.

However, a recent study shows that about 60% of the parents want their

children to excel only in academic rather than extracurricular tasks.

Hence, most people think that art is a waste of time. We can discuss both

sides of the argument in the below essay.

Firstly, spending an hour on the subject of art will not be beneficial

especially when they are preparing themselves for public exams. It may

also distract them from focusing on their academic subjects. Moreover,

art subject may not be useful to them in their future. For example, only 2

students out of 100 prefer arts subject and for rest of 98% students find

it as a mere time consumer that retards the academic growth. Since Art is
a vast subject, people may not be interested in a particular art and they

want to learn some other form of art.

On the other hand, sometimes student find the academics boring if they

ought to study only academics for a full-time. Not only that, when they

go to an exhibition or a theatre, they are not able to correlate since they

are the novice to the subject of art. Hence, it is essential to include art

subject such as painting, dancing, singing, drama classes etc. along with

academic lessons and it will precursor them to appreciate the art. If they

are only concentrating on the academic syllabus, chances are there that

they become bookworms and never admire any form of arts.

To elucidate, schools must be encouraged to have a balanced set of

subjects for children including academics, sports, and arts. In my

opinion, students should at least know the basics of arts and should not

be a novice to the subject of art. It is my hope that we have more artists

in the future ahead.

Sample 4

There is a controversial debate among the people about the importance

of Art subjects in school and college level. But other people are thinking
it is a worthless activity. Even though ,I agree about to learn Art subject in

school and secondary level is essential for development of creativity in

children.

Some people think that Art is an essential subject in school level.

Nowadays many school giving equal important for Art as same as other

subject like physics, chemistry, and mathematics etc. Because Arts had

given a peaceful relaxation and more creativity in children, so that they

can improve their educational level also. Secondly, some artist can

become a roll model of society. They can create amiable arts ,so it may

attracts more tourists to their country. The Government can improve

revenue income through this way. Thirdly, one artist can become an

educator by explored their ideas to society.

On the other way, people developed all technologies such as computer,

television, mobile phones, and internet. This can make people's life easy.

So all world attracted by new technologies. Secondly, most of the

youngsters turn to some other field such as science, technology, business

etc. Thirdly, all parents are becoming more selfish about their child. So

many parents emphasize their children only in educational subject rather

than other subject for secure their child's life.

IN my opinion, the children should make sense in both educational and

Arts level. Moreover parents should provide an opportunity to decide

their further career prospective.

For example, some children font of multifarious art activities, but the

parents forced to focused in studies. Through that they will have spoiled

their bright future.

To conclude, Arts and education should be continue as parallel to

education in school level. This will not made as a time waste process

Artists need a certain amount of freedom to develop their creativity. Some

people think that artists should have total freedom to express any thoughts and

ideas.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Sample 1
The issue of freedom of creative artist has extremely grown in importance in
most countries over the few decades. It is considered that government should not
interfere with their works and the artists should be free to do whatever they want.
While I accept many artists are sharing their valuable ideas for the tremendous
development of this world, I believe some certain area they should be controlled
by the rules and regulation.

Admittedly, the human civilisation has approached this sophisticated stage

because many creative artists have bestowed us an enormous number of
significant ideas and opinions in the form of pictures, music or films. As an
example, many creative artists like Leonardo Da Vinci, Pablo Picasso
and Michelangelo Buonarroti had first drawn the design of aeroplane; but, at that
time nobody could think that human can fly and everybody thought it was just
imagined of his mind. Although it required a long time, but it became true that
human now can fly. This example makes it clear that the work of artists can lead
to immense improvement of humankind. Therefore, many people think that they
should be free with their works for the advancement of the human being.

On the other hand, there are some vital reasons why the work of artists should
be controlled in some certain area. Firstly, most people in this world believe in
the God; so the artist should not create such type of acts, which hurt the religion.
If this type of activity they make, it may bring colossal embarrassment to the
human society. Secondly, the artist should not go against any culture and
costume of a country. In this certain field, government can limit the practice of an
artist.

In conclusion, the creative artists are indispensable in our society although some
artists have tended to draw against our cast, creed, and religion. In my opinion,
this tendency may call harmful to our mankind so that the government should
control the activity, which can go directly against to our culture and religion.

Sample 2

Art has been an indispensable part of the human civilization, although it

has been a debatable topic throughout the history whether artists should

be given full freedom to express their views or there should be some

restriction. Despite the fact, that without any restriction artist can create
a masterpiece that can attract the whole world, it can negatively impact

the society if they are not socially responsible.

Some people believe that artists are exemplary individuals who should be

allowed to express their views without any confinement. There are many

reasons for this argument. Firstly, if artists are provided liberation to

express their views of their life, they would criticize the problems around

them. If the government will use any kind of censorship on them, they

would suppress the critics against them. Secondly, an artist is also an

individual whose work could be improved if they are not under any

pressure or tension of restrictions. Thus, with complete liberty, they can

produce a masterpiece for use or can provide means to expose the issues

around us.

However, I believe that total freedom could adversely affect the society.

The basis for this notion has two main arguments. Firstly, some of the

arts could hurt the communal or religious sentiments of the people. For

example, there have been many instances where some painters have

presented gods and goodness in a way which hurt the sentiments of the

Hindu community. Secondly, some artist can exhibit the idea which could

create frictions among the people. For instance, some Indian filmmakers
have included some social incidents which, if was not cut by the censor

board could create communal riots. Thus, limitations are required to

avoid any harmful effect on the society.

To sum it up, although, I agree that freedom is required to create pieces

of art which could be appreciated by all the countries, authority is also

required to create artists responsible for the multicultural group

Most artists earn low salaries and should therefore receive funding from the

government in order for them to continue with their work.

To what extent do you agree?

Sample 1

Despite the fact that artists have played a significant role in the human

civilization throughout the history, they are being neglected from ancient

past. Funding artists to complete their masterpiece has always been a

debatable topic. Some argue that there are more areas where the fund

can be spent than the art, but I assume that it is quite necessary for a life

of the art.

There are many arguments on opposing of the peculiar help to the

artists. Firstly, due to a prevalent belief in our society that art is a trivial
skill which can be owned by anyone, they don’t find justifiability on

funding artists. They think there are many important areas which should

be given more priority. For example, in my country, corruption is the

acute problem which needs to be addressed with a higher precedence.

Secondly, there are some artists who are known to the world and earning

more than any highly professional personal or businessman. They don’t

need any kind of monetary assistance from any agency; in fact, they

should provide support to some low paid artist. For instance, most of the

actors of India possess luxury which is not less than any monarch.

However, there are grounds for assisting artists. The first point to make

is that artists are paid very less compare to other white-collars because

of the fact that they can be replaced easily. Because of this low salary,

they survive to cope up with the basic needs of the life. For example, you

could find many street-painters than plumbers and all of them struggle

to earn their bread. Another point to make is that if the artist gets the

subsidies from the government to create its art pieces, he can put all his

talent out for this creation. Such creative masterpiece can attract others

around the world which would be beneficial for the tourism industry and
at the end economy of the country. For example, in Agra, many tourists

visit “Taj Mahal” which contributes to the development of the city.

To conclude, I believe, although there are many reasons why artists

should not be funded by the government, it is necessary that they get

financial reinforcement for the overall development of the nation.

Sample 2

Art has been considered as an integral part of human history since ages.

Some people think there are other areas to be spent on than art. Funding

artists has always been a topic of debate and I completely agree that the

assistance provided by the Government to sustain their craftsmanship is

a commendable decision.

The main reason being rapid industrialisation. Fewer people choose to

continue with arts as a profession in the world of technological

advancements and alluring salaries. With the rate of artisans on decline, it

would be difficult for humans to preserve their cultural experiences in the

form of art. For instance, an artist who has been living a troubled life

would not encourage his next generation to continue or take the

profession further due to the poor prospects.

Another reason is the irregular source of income. An artisan has to wait

till his art work is sold to make a living whereas a businessman has a

steady flow of cash for his livelihood. Some of them belong to poor

socio-economic background and require funds to enhance their talent

and skills. For example, you could find many street-painters struggling to

earn their bread. In this case, the help provided by the officials would be

a boon. Finally, by promoting the artists in the country also generates

revenue, flourishing the tourism industry.

In conclusion, I think the monetary aid given to the artists would help

them improve their competence and progress in their field and boost the

development of the country.

Some people think that governments should give financial

support to creative artists such as painters and musicians.
Others believe that creative artists should be funded by
alternative sources.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Model answer 1:
Although Proficient creators like musicians and painters are the assets of our
society, whether they should be given sufficient fiscal support by their own
authorities has triggered spirited debates. Some assert that government is
obliged to generate money for their skilfulness, whereas others contend that
alternative ways are to be taken into account. In my perspective, the latter should
be considered highly, for they provide clear-cut advantages.
The idea is that government must lend a helping hand to its artists does have a
handful benefits. One reason why people propose this is that artists could easily
collect reasonable income to bring forth remarkable creations. The perceived
general idea is that this readily available fund would encourage the talents to
bring out the best in them, which, in turn, enhances remarkable achievements
not only to the artists but also to the government. Nevertheless, it is highly likely
that, if they get necessary resources as easily as ABC, they would develop
laziness and this drawback retard the overall cultural promotion and improvement
of their nation.

However, the counter arguments of supporting talents financially seem more

likely to be effective rationally than the former. This is partly because people who
work hard to earn money for their creative works will definitely value their job and
thereby they strive tirelessly to achieve their dreams. They will, for example,
estimate the needed costs and use it adequately. It is also relevant that artists
can do further alterations in their creations as they are not bound by any rules
and regulations, and they can clearly do whatever they want for better
accomplishments. Moreover, each and every authority is mandated to rather
consider other big issues, which is chiefly important to protect its public.

To put it in a nutshell, while getting promoted economically by the government is

supportive, I believe, other options such as private funds are to be chosen, in
addition to the government budget, it would be argued, could be allocated for
other necessary purposes.

[ Written by - Syama Stephen S ]

Model answer 2:
It is unquestionable that one very complex issue in today's world is the funding
support to creative artists. While there is a controversy that should be supported
and funded by the government. I do believe that there is also a case for saying
that they should be funded by alternative sources.
It is fairly easy to understand the reason why government support is vital to
artists and their projects. Perhaps by considering that proportion of artists are
living in poverty. In fact, only a few artists, who have achieved success in their
fields, are able to support themselves, whereas others are still struggling for life
and some of them even living below the poverty line. Likewise, the construction
of a non-profitable art gallery, which helps the public to develop a sense of art,
requires vast sums of money. Therefore, without financial funding by
government, our cities would be much less interesting and attractive.

However, we can fairly understand that artists should no emphasis on the state
to fund their work. While most musicians and the majority of painters make a
living by performing or selling their artistic creations to fans or collectors.
Besides, as to painters or musicians, they can expect to gain their income as
tutors giving individuals lessons. In short, these artists are capable of gaining
financial support in a number of ways.

In conclusion, I believe that there are good reasons why artists should not only
rely on the government for supporting them, but the alternative sources of
financial support should be suggested.

[ Written by - Ray Looi]

Model answer 3:
More and more artists are naturally born since the dawn of time. As a result, it
has been the subject of discussion on whether the state or a non-government
institution should support them financially. These points of view will be discussed
in this order.
It is believed by some that the country's administration should finance the
creative artists. For instance, under President Ferdinand E. Marcos regime, all of
our skilfully created arts by the Filipino artists were provided by all the helps they
needed. Like Fernando Amorsolo, one of the most famous painters in the
Philippines was funded by the late President Marcos and even his first exhibition
held in the National Museum of the country. Thus, he was known by visitors who
came and saw his creations internationally, and this led him to exhibit his
paintings in different countries. He made our country known around the world
and he is indeed a Filipino pride.

On the other hand, many argue that NGOs (Non-government Organisations)

should be the one financing them. An idea that may support this is that the
government has a lot of funding already and they cannot afford to finance these
creators of arts, so it is better to ask for a help to a private institution. For
example, the Pro-mil Milk Company has funded the concert of Sarah Geronimo
in Araneta Coliseum. She is the most popular singer in the Philippines because
she sings magnificently and can touch our deepest emotions. In fact, this private
company can make a lot of profit in her concert.

In conclusion, for reasons related to the Philippine pride and private institution
making of profit when financing arts creators is supported and refuted by many.
However, after analysing these two points of view, it is clear that the Philippine
government should finance them. Thus, the argument that the state should
financially support creative artists can be supported and expected to be realised.
[ Written by - Rona Lyn Olivar ]
Model answer 4:
A group of people believe that governments should provide subsidies for
unpopular or amateur artists, while other people think that artistic people should
be subsidised from another resource. The following essay will discuss both
opinions, but in my personal opinion, I believe that governments should fund
them before they are sponsored by alternative sources.
Several people believe that creative artist such as street painters and musicians
should not be subsidised by the governments. They think that art activities are
not the basic need of human beings, and governments should focus on more
important matters. For example, rather than spending some budget for these
street artists, the fund could be allocated for improving the public education
sectors, public transportations or public facilities. They think that creative artist
should seek sponsorship from private institutions or private companies.

For several reasons, some people believe that creative artist should be funded
by governments. Firstly, many amateur painters have painted some of the public
areas, and they have changed the look and the atmosphere of these places from
a negative aura into a positive one. Secondly, some talented artists have made
artistic sculptures and placed them in public areas such as in the parks, and they
have made the parks become more beautiful and attractive. Thirdly, many
amateur musicians who are performing in public areas, such as in subways or in
bus terminals have entertained the public with their music. Therefore, it is
undeniable that the existence of these artists brings benefits for the society and
governments should subsidise them.

In conclusion, people have different opinions about funding creative artists. Some
people think that they should be funded by governments, while others believe
that they should be subsidised by other resources. In my point of view, I think
governments should allocate some budget for amateur artists as they bring
benefits for individuals and communities, but once they have become
professional, they should seek sponsorship from other resources, and the
government should stop providing the subsidy.
Sample 4

People have different views about the funding of creative artists. While some people
disagree with the idea of government support for artists, I believe that money for art
projects should come from both governments and other sources.
Some art projects definitely require help from the state. In the UK, there are many works
of art in public spaces, such as streets or squares in city centres. In Liverpool, for
example, there are several new statues and sculptures in the docks area of the city,
which has been redeveloped recently. These artworks represent culture, heritage and
history. They serve to educate people about the city, and act as landmarks or talking
points for visitors and tourists. Governments and local councils should pay creative
artists to produce this kind of art, because without their funding our cities would be
much less interesting and attractive.
On the other hand, I can understand the arguments against government funding for art.
The main reason for this view is that governments have more important concerns. For
example, state budgets need to be spent on education, healthcare, infrastructure and
security, among other areas. These public services are vital for a country to function
properly, whereas the work of creative artists, even in public places, is a luxury. Another
reason for this opinion is that artists do a job like any other professional, and they
should therefore earn their own money by selling their work.
In conclusion, there are good reasons why artists should rely on alternative sources of
financial support, but in my opinion government help is sometimes necessary.

business and money.

In some countries, a few people earn extremely high salaries. Some people think

that this is good for a country, while others believe that the government should

control salaries and limit the amount people can earn.

Discuss both views and give your opinion. (Reported 2017, Academic Test)
In the economic structures of many countries in the world, it is observed that a

huge deviation exists among the salary structure of the employees. Some

employees usually earn extremely high salaries, whereas, many other have

lower pay scales. Some people consider it a positive sign for a country but some

refute this and proclaims that government should have limitize the salaries

amount. I will discuss both opinions in my Essay.

On the one hand, it is believed that earning higher levels of salaries by

individuals is beneficial for country, government and the individuals earning it.

Moreover, if an employee reaches the top limits of pay/salary scale that means

he/she deserves it and company values his/her competences and experience.

For Instance, we consider cement sector and taking real life example of D.G.

Khan Cement Company, which is indeed the second largest cement producing

company in Pakistan. By analyzing pay structure, it is observed that an electrical

engineer is earning approximately half a Million Rupees a month but a Manager

Finance usually earns half of it while being on the same position in terms of

grade. It is because of the fact that an electrical engineer is technical person

and spends more of his time outdoor and believed to be a key person in the

plant. Subsequently, he deserves more salary/compensation.

on the other hand, many people believe that there has to be a limit over the

remunerations paid to employees and government should back/organize the

same. Furthermore, by sealing the pay scale or by limiting the amount, almost
all the employees of any organization would be benefited as the pay scale of

the people with lower salaries will be improved. For Instance, MCB Bank Limited

is largest financial institution in Pakistan. In addition, the same approach can be

observed in this organization as the model discussed earlier is well

implemented in this esteemed Bank. Resultantly, the employees working in this

Bank are very much satisfied, motivated and contented. On the top of it, the

Bank is growing at a rapid pace and earning huge profits as well as paying more

than 3 Billion Rupees as Tax to Government of Pakistan.

In a nutshell, it can be said that the both approaches are logical and beneficial

in many contexts. But in my opinion, the proper distribution of wealth is always

a better approach and provides benefits to more and more people. As a result,

the employers, employees, companies and governments all gets benefited.

Introduction: People have different views about salary levels in numerous countries.
While enormously high wages that a group of people get is beneficial for the country, I
agree with those who believe that the governments should control the level of salaries in
the societies.
Main paragraph 1: Firstly, high salaries can increase the brain drain from overseas.
Secondly, high-income people pay more taxes than others, which can help to boost
economy.
Main paragraph 2 (also my view): However, I would argue that salary levels should be
framed by the governments. Moreover, limiting high salaries would bring more equality
in the community. Furthermore, capping high salaries will prevent the rich from gaining
unfair control over certain aspects of society.
Conclusion: In conclusion, huge incomes that some people earn have useful sides for
the country but the governments should not let wages being higher than a definite level.
Posted by: Murad | Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 15:26
Introduction
the issue whether extremy high wages should be permitted is heated in many coutries.
although government's curtail of extremely high wages is beneficial to the stability of the
society, i maintain the fact that the manority of the society earns pretty high salary might
contributes to the overall development of the society.
Posted by: stella | Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 15:43

Nowadays,the money given to the workers in compensation of their labour constitutes

the high wage/salary for a certain group.However,it is argued by some that it works in
favour of country,while others are of the opinion that its boundaries should be in a direct
concern of government representatives,which will have imposed some restrictions over
the salary from the equilibrium point .this essay will delve into the both sides ,and my
personal opinion about this issue
Body1.
On the one hand,it is said to be good about the benefits given to the country.firstly,the
shared money in governmental organizations would be more beneficial in that case of
not providing the salary more than normally-deserved responsibility.Secondly,the
money from which the certain proportion is cut will have provide the benefits to the
organizational government
On the other hand,however it is argued by the majority of people that not having the
money payment balance,which is not shared equally during the working processes,will
not cause the appearance of more potential workforces.Another contributing factor
tailored to the issue of not giving the chance to get high salary is that unemployment
problem which is currently standing as a fundamental issue for society will not cause an
increase.From the the other side,if the people are not assessed according to their
background,which plays the vital role for salary, then their enthusiasm to the jobs will
not be in a great extent.
In conclusion,it is understandable that despite the money can generally provide the
advantages to the society in engaging government on the infrastructurial spheres,yet I
believe that to assign the salary according to the potency and give the high salary to the
more experienced workers is really a right option
Posted by: alex | Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 19:39

Workers’ wages vary with degree earned and competence level. While others think that
this is unfair and should be regulated by the government, this writer believes that as
with almost everything in this world, people are given what is due to them.
The labor force in various countries consist of minimum wage earners, those earning
average income and the high paid individuals. While those having huge salaries enjoy
the benefits of a greater purchasing power, minimum wage laborers have to live with the
meager sum that they receive. Blue collared jobs and rank and file employees who earn
just enough, work the same number of hours and even exert more effort as those who
are paid more. This is probably that main reason why others think that a ceiling should
be created by the government to keep salary levels fairly even.
On the other hand, an increase in salary may be what an employee needs to further
motivate him or her to do better at work. Inspired employees are more productive and
this may benefit the country more. Usually, workers who earn more are those who are
successful in their field. These are professionals or non-professionals who have
excelled either in their education or performance and are rewarded through salary
increase. High salary rates may encourage the brightest minds around the world to work
in the country and share their expertise. Employers should be given the prerogative to
provide a competitive salary scheme for valued individuals who deserve it.
Employees depend on income from work to feed their families and provide for their
needs. People should be allowed to receive high salaries if they have truly worked hard
for it.

Due to the development and rapid expansion of supermarkets in some countries,

many small, local business are unable to compete. Some people think that the

closure of local business will bring about the death of local communities.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Sample Answer 1: (Disagree)

The proliferation of supermarkets in rural and urban areas is on the rise. It is thought to be beneficial by
some and damaging to the local businesses by others. While people with both points of view continue to
exist, I strongly believe that opening up of shopping marts helps local communities to bloom and
blossom.

Proponents of the idea argue that international products render national investors out of business. As
increasing numbers of cheap goods are available to choose from, sufficient funds may not be available
to local people to produce items of comparable quality. For example, ever since the advent of China in
the cotton and food industry, native Pakistani cotton fabric industry has almost shut down. This has also
resulted in many individuals being unemployed, also leaving local contractors paralysed.

However, while such problems do occur, large shopping areas, in fact, help to sustain local produce.
Firstly, as competitors stock their articles from around the world, inhabitants of the area stand a better
chance to sell their crops and finished goods to a greater number of customers. Generation of increased
amount of revenue would be a direct consequence, therefore, enhancing the gross domestic product in
return. Moreover, the establishment of supermarkets can help to feel pride en masse. This can be
especially true in cases where local items occupy shelves of supermarkets, enabling purchases by
international customers. Provided marketing strategies are put to us, a brand might become popular all
over the world, thereby setting the stage for uplifting morale.
Hence, it is imperative that growth and sustenance of supermarkets will fuel the survival of local
communities.

sample 2 Nowadays, supermalls are growing worldwide due to its elegant environment. Some people
believe that owing to the extension of mall culture, the local business would die and as a result local
community, while I don’t find any valid justification in these arguments. A deep insight of this is
described in below paragraphs.

There are few reasons why people choose supermalls over local markets. People prefer a hygienic and
sophisticated environment over crowdie and traditional places to shop. Due to this change in
preference, consumers turn to supermarkets where they could get all quality products they want at one
place.

Some people argue that this causes closure of local shops and in turn local community. There are some
grounds to valid their thinking. The first point to make is that, most of the malls sell international goods,
so local goods would not be the first choice for the citizens which causes severe harm to the local
business. For example, the popularity of the labels like Nike and Adidas has put locally made clothes on
extinction. The second point to make is that, this extinction of local business could increase
unemployment. People would leave the region and deport to seek the employment which might cause
the death of local community. For example, in India, workers of handmade cloths have changed their
occupation due to an introduction of the big brands. Thus, opponents of mall culture believe an
establishment of the supermarket is the main reason behind disturbance in the society.

However, I believe that market does not directly relate to society or culture. There are many bases of my
view. Firstly, traditional goods could be sold in the malls which can increase the sell which means
proliferation of the traditional business. As a prime example, Indian “Banarasi Saree” has become so
famous that westerners also order it. Secondly, these markets require many employees to cater for the
needs of the visitors which could increase the opportunity. For example, each town in India has D-mart
having at least a hundred employees working in each. Finally, any community does not fully depend on
the shopping centers. For instance, there are many places like community centers and club which could
keep traditional society to live. Thus, it would be an overstatement to say that supermall kills local
business and local community.

To sum up it all, although the spread of large markets could impact small business, it does not mean the
complete death of the regional business or local culture.

sample 3 Some people contend that giant supermarkets, that operate in many regions, diminish the
ability of local business to survive, therefore local communities will difficult to thrive. To some extent, I
personally agree with their claim, but I also agree that the opening of the supermarkets would be
beneficial to the people surrounding.

Admittedly, there is a justification by people who become the opponents of the supermarket
development. Supermarkets can exert leverage over local businesses by attracting more buyer to visit
the supermarkets. Supermarket are supported by stronger financial than the local stores are, so that
they are able to supply many kinds of items from all over the world with cheaper prices as they buy
these items in large quantity.

However, still I support the opinion that the expansion of supermarkets would not certainly take over
local community business. The first reason is there is a symbiosis between large supermarkets and
people around them. The large supermarkets are likely to utilize the local capacity to provide local
vegetables or other things as the local business products are easy to be controlled due the short
distances. Thus, the more people demand supermarket products, the higher orders that the local
businesses receive. Furthermore, the supermarkets demand employees from local people, which spans
the job’s opportunity for the local society.

Another reason is that local stores offer their customers with a closer relationship and more personal
touch. For example, some large local stores in Malang manage to survive because they understand their
loyal buyer’s needs and are able to maintain personal communication with each customer, which is hard
to be done by national level supermarkets.

To sum up, the existence of the large scale of supermarkets in cities may bring advantages and
disadvantages for local people but the advantages outweigh the disadvantage. Moreover, local stores
have competitive aspects that difficult to be achieved by the large scale of supermarkets.

Companies should provide sports and social facilities for local communities.

To what extent do you agree? (Reported 2017)

In recent time, some people think that the administration should afford free sport and fitness centers
for everyone. I strongly believe these are a good idea.

The establishment of free sport and fitness centers is good to the community because they can render
people to do exercise together both with their families or friends. Moreover, these facilities can create
healthier and happier community. For instance, in my hometown, there are fitness centers and facilities
for free sport such as free-styling park for skateboard and bicycles, which is located near from my house.
Once a week, I go to the sport center to swimming with my wife. When I go there, I see juvenile do some
free sport like free-styling with their skateboard and bicycle. The young generations look so happy and
healthy because this activity could burn their calorie.

furthermore, doing exercise together with my family or friends can improve my knowledge and enrich
my experience. I can share my experience with my friends and vice versa. Furthermore, doing some
exercises in sport centers with my family can create a happy situation in my family. For instance, when I
go swimming with my wife, I usually create a game with my wife. I usually throw a coin into the
swimming pool and both of us should find it. This activity is very fun and makes us happier than before.

All in all, I agree with some people who believe that government should provide free sport and sport
centers, because these facilities are important to create happy and healthy community.
Large businesses have big budgets for marketing and promotion and as a result,

people gravitate towards buying their products.

What problems does this cause?

What could be done to encourage people to buy local products?

sample 1 Large businesses and international brands spend an enormous amount of money for
marketing and advertising. Consequently, people tend to watch those advertisements all the time while
small local businesses fail to reach the customers. This can lead to some serious problems, such as the
closure of local businesses and the monopoly in business. Other than that, people could be easily
trapped by large businesses. There are few steps that can be adopted to address this issue and motivate
people to buy local products.

Naturally, people prefer to buy products that were consciously or unconsciously publicised to their mind
and thus many local businesses, even with their quality products, cannot attract consumers. The
dominance of international brands and large businesses will destroy the market for locally made
products and thus would make thousands of people unemployed. Moreover, large markets do their very
best to attract the public attention to their products and advertising is one of the best tools they have.
Sensitive, creative and deceptive advertisements and marketing policies often make the people believe
that they need these products. This would create a monopoly in the market and people would often be
deceived. Thus consumers would be trapped by the large businesses and would have no alternatives for
them but to buy products of some particular brands.

In order to encourage people to buy local products, some solutions should be taken into account. The
government should strictly monitor and ban any deceptive and illusory advertisement from the mass
media. People should compare a product's quality before purchasing from shops and the shop owners
must shelf local products along with the branded products. Furthermore, a government authority should
rate and review any product and disclose it to the public. Finally, local product manufacturers should be
financially supported by the banks and the government as they are helpful for the economic progress of
a country.

Absolute dominance of large businesses can have unimaginable effects that can damage a city's or even
a country's financial situation. A solution to this problem is systematising local markets and creating a
closely integrated system that can have an effective outcome.

sample 2Big companies, nowadays, have been using their huge funds over advertisements to attract
consumers from worldwide, due to which, it has been difficult for the local shops and the businesses to
compete. This huge transformation in the market has not only impacted an individual, but also the
society as a whole. Some steps need to be taken promote regional businesses.

These changes in trend have affected the world at two levels. Firstly, people are becoming habituated
with the unnecessary shopping because of the marketing strategies of the multi-national companies.
These companies are using all the types of communication to influence the tendency of the consumer to
purchase the product which they might not need. This could lower the financial position of the citizen.
For example, owing to the advertisements of a big sale, a person can purchase a smartphone, even
though he owns the cell phones. Secondly, local communities have been affected adversely by the
expansion of the international brands. This expansion has almost put an end to the local or traditional
trade which causes rise in unemployment and lower standards of people involved. For instance, the
closure of hand-made Indian cloths called “Bandhani” has ruined many workshops making all of their
employees unemployed. Owing to this, these workers are facing difficulties to earn their bread. Thus,
big marketing has many gloomy consequences.

However, some measures are required to lower these cynical implications. Firstly, the government
should introduce some subsidies for local markets to help them in production and advertisement. For
example, financial aids to purchase industrial plots to regional manufacturers could help them to
manufacture and to promote their commodities. Secondly, awareness program should be introduced to
make people aware of the benefits of locally produced merchandise. For instance, the great Indian
leaders have started programs to urge people to use domestic products. Finally, local businessmen could
also use smart approaches to advertise their products. A prime example is an adoption of social
networks like Facebook or Instagram as a platform for promotion. Thus, the regime and local
entrepreneur both together can make sure adequate steps have taken to pull the customers towards
them.

To conclude, the big firms have used their huge part of the fund for marketing their products which have
resulted in the change of consumer tendency to purchase branded products. This alarming trend has
definitely affected people and local communities. However, some essential actions are required to
lessen these negative dominations.

sample 3 Most widespread companies have an intelligent financial plan to advertise wisely in order to
catch the eyes. Therefore, people tend to purchase sharply their products which leads to serious
economical problems to the citizens and the country.

First of all, since those kind of marketing have been starting, most people cannot economize any more.
Indeed, what they are facing with is a marked deficit in their budget before the end of each month. For
instance, smart-phones advertisement cause in raising the number of buying these devices by a person
despite the high cost. Thus, it is trendy to have a different mobile-phone every while even if the old one
still works. For that, some people are suffering from lack of money due to their extravagance.

Secondly, the monopoly of domestic market by global businesses may result in a deflation in local
economic activity. Consequently, the gross income of the country is dropping which means both wages
as well as its currency rate of exchange is declining. Hence, while the country is blooding much of
money, its budget and reputation among global economy contributors are impacting negatively.

As a solution, government has to motivate people to buy domestic productions. To begin with increasing
attractive ads and promotions of local manufactures is an effective way to grab attentions. In addition,
raising awareness about the benefit of buying locally may end up with the required results. Finally, to
attract consumers’ interest, providing the internal market with acceptable quality and price of products
should be a mandatory.

In conclusion, the high budget for marketing productions of external industries brings about a growth in
their clients as well as, on the other hand, a reduction in the local market activity. As a result, people
struggle from losing much of money whereas the country economy is threatened by a critical deficiency.
The only way to resolve this issue is to encourage people to prefer consuming local produce.

An increasing number of people are buying what they need online.

What are the advantages and disadvantages for both individuals and companies to

shopping online?

sample 1In today’s world, no one can argue that technology has changed human lives significantly. In
term of shopping style, the internet offers and improves a better and convenient way of purchasing as
online shopping. E-commerce or online shopping is the buying and selling goods on the internet or
business that is transacted by transferring data electronically. Some people think that this measure has
many advantages rather than disadvantages, while other think that it also has many disadvantages. Both
sides will be discussed further within this essay.

On the one hand, there are many advantages of online shopping. First and foremost, it can save a lot of
time that people spend on shopping. If a person does not have time to travel to the shopping malls or
does not have any idea where to get products, he/she also can search and order products online from
home easily. On top of that people can also order some products from other parts of the world easily.
For example, if western people want to get local products from Eastern countries such as tea or
traditional Asian cloths, they can be able to purchase authentic Asian tea or a variety Asian cloth styles
through the internet.

Moreover, unlike ordinary merchandises, online businesses are available all day all night. People can
order whenever they want through online and do not have to worry about store will close. Customers
also are able to compare different shops, prices and qualify of goods before making decisions. For
instance, many smart customers always go through the information about products in different store on
the internet first which can help them to get good quality products and more reasonable price rather
than buying from a traditional store. Al of these points support the idea that why e-commerce is very
convenient and has become very popular these days.

On the other hand, there also are some drawbacks from this trend. Firstly, personal checking items are
definitely missing during shopping online. Shoppers cannot be able to look closely at goods before
making a decision. The sense of touching and feeling a product disappear from the process of shopping.
If a shopper wants to touch and try a product before purchasing, it may be hard for them to make the
right decision from buying a product online. For instance, some products such as shoes, ordering online
may be very hard for customers to feel the comfort and style. Moreover, the online services are not as
good as actual stores because it will be very hard to get refund or exchange.

In conclusion, even though online shopping provides many benefits which can attribute to less time
consuming, unlimited day off and convenience, this method also has some drawbacks to customers such
as lacking personal checking products and poor services. However, an individual can try and decide what
shopping style that he/ she likes. Hopefully, with the high technology, it can develop the online shopping
to be more effective and advanced in the future.

sample 2 Currently, purchasing products via online becomes a popular trend in the modern life. There
is an increase in total of customers using this service. This essay will discuss both pros and cons of this
method for personal and companies.

begin with, this way of buying products has some positive impacts on both individuals and enterprises to
go shopping on the internet. First and foremost, this method is time saving for customers to buy
anything they want without going out for shopping at brick-mortal stores. For example, people can be at
their home and with only a simple action such as click the icon, products that they choose will be
distributed door - to - door. Secondly, shopping online saves money for both customers and companies.
In the term of individuals, the can compare the price of the same items in a range of shops and choose
the store which has the cheapest price. Meanwhile, shopkeepers also decrease the overheat costs like
rents, a huge amount of money for electronics or hiring employees. Moreover, companies also have a
chance to enhance their public image through advertisements on the internet. Due to the fact that more
and more people spend a lot of time on surfing the web, shopping onlive plays an integral part for
increasing revenur for business.

On the other hand, there are some disadvantages of shopping online. Firstly, customers can have
trouble on purchasing something which do not have as good quality as advertisements. It is clearly seen
that there are a bunch of business make the most of products' features on the advertisement programs
to attract people to buy their good while the real standard of theses products are not good. This makes
loose the truth of a large number of customers when buying via internet. In addition, the products may
be not fit for buyers. For instance, when people spend money on ordering clothes on the internet, the
do not have chance to try on them, therefor garment that they buy can not suitable for customers.

In conclusion, although there are some drawbacks of shopping online, I outweigh the advantages which
this advanced technology bring for both personal and companies. As a result, this method should be
carried out more popularly and more effectively.

sample 3There is certainly a rise in number of people buying various products online. This offers many
positives and negatives for the people involved in purchasing and companies involved in selling.

From the consumer point of view, they have varied choices to buy from different websites by comparing
products and price catalog online. This in turn offers them useful products at competitive price. Also
they need not to have personally visit the shops to get the necessities which in turns save them valuable
time. Moreover, the items are delivered at their door steps. On the other hand, companies benefits by
buying directly from the market in turn saving them money. They pay for no brokerage costs to the
intermediaries hence maximizing their profit. Also, selling online lets them targets wider base of
population who are separated by social and demo graphical divide.

As as far disadvantages are concerned to individuals sometimes the product differs in quality and
durability which could be checked easily when buying item physically. Also, there are chances of online
fraud while paying upfront. On the other side, seller face unnecessary hassles of people returning the
items labeling them as defective or unsatisfactory after using them which incurs packing and
transportation charges to the companies. Also, certain notorious elements review and rate their
products low which affects the image of the seller.

To conclude, I must say that all in all it is a win-win situation for both individuals and companies and we
will see an up-rise in trend in years to come.

sample 4With an increase in technological advances, and awareness regarding the internet among
the people, electronic shopping has become famous from last few decades. The consumers and the big
firms both are affected by this trend. This essay will discuss pros and cons at both the level.

This change in the tendency of people is beneficial not for them only, but also for corporations. For
customers, they got a convenient way of shopping which can be done anytime, from anywhere owing to
the availability of the internet and the electronic devices. For instance, when they order a product from
the website, it would be delivered right in front of their door. Not only this, if the product is not as
expected or damaged, pick from the home facility is also available. This ensures not only the quality but
also the satisfaction. For a company, they could sell their products direct to the customers without any
intermediary like wholesalers or promoters, which could decrease the maximum retail price and as a
result increases the sales. As an outstanding instance, some big brands of the smart phones have
realized the profit associated with it. They have gained at the extent that they have completely moved
to online sale. Thus, online shopping has been proved to be the boon for both the sellers or
manufacturers and purchasers.

However, some curses are also attached to this blessing. For individuals, they could be a victim of the
social fishing while shopping online. Their important data like credit card number, personal
identification number, username and password could be used for forging. For instance, once a
newspaper published one incidence where one person used the cyber café computer for shopping a gift
for her girlfriend and his online banking account was hacked. The hacker used this information to
withdraw all the money in his account. On the other hand for a company, it could be costly if the price of
the shipment is considered. Also, some risks regarding damage are associated with the transportation.
For example, if someone purchases a product electronically, the seller has to ship it safely to him
otherwise, the replacement would be required which causes further expense on the shipment. Thus, it is
quite possible that this boon can be converted into the curse if care is not taken.
To conclude, online trade has made the shopping convenient for the customer by bringing the
supermarkets on their fingers and increase in sale to the entrepreneur, although there are some threats
to the security of the information and commodity in transit.

sample 4it is indisputable that the internet has transformed every aspect of our life and this has been
both advantageous and disadvantageous in many ways. Similarly, in the last few years e-shopping has
become the trend. This essay will give an outline about the pros and cons for the seller and buyer of
shopping online.

First and foremost, when a person wants to buy a product, he can browse for what he wants from
anywhere. This means there will be no need of commutation and a lot of time will be saved by the
customer. Furthermore, in case we want to gift our beloved ones, purchasing through internet and
delivering it to their preferable address seems to be a convenient way, than couriering through mail.
Moreover from the companies’ point of view, there will be no necessity of establishing retail outlets or
employing sales staff, which will serve as major cost-cutting and also they can easily keep track of the
competitors’ price for the product and decide theirs’ accordingly.

However, the main drawback for the individual is that he can never be sure about the quality of the
product. For instance, when the customer surfs for a shirt; the color, texture and size may be different
from what he had expected. Even more, the buyers should also be cautious about the security issues
related to the web, as there are chances of hacking their website, which may become a doom to their
business. Additionally, it will be a tedious task to win the purchasers’ trust as there will be hardly any
physical meeting with the customer.

In a nutshell, as in case of any advancement of technology, even online shopping has its own edges and
downsides and it is finally up to the customer which method of shopping they prefer.

Marketing and promotion is the key to a successful business.

To what extent do you agree?

sample 1 There are several strategies for businesses to achieve success on a competitive market. It
has been claimed that advertising is the principal reason for a successful business. In my opinion, it is
not only through advertising that will bring a business to the top, but also through the quality of its
products or services that will help maintain its prosperity.

Certainly, marketing and promotion creates a huge impact on selling products or services. To begin,
effective advertising creates brand awareness to the public especially target consumers. Through mass
media and other ways of promotion, new and unknown companies establish themselves in the market
and attract consumers who might want to try their product or services. Furthermore, advertising
reminds customers of established companies of their existing products as well as new special offers. This
helps companies be the first option and may increase customer loyalty.
However, quality also plays a vital role in a successful business. After all, no matter how popular the
product or services are by using marketing and promotion, if they are of poor standards then consumers
cannot trust the company. In particular, most consumers are quality conscious, therefore, they will look
for an alternative brand that will satisfy their standards. Moreover, quality consistency relatively builds
brand credibility that helps in maintaining loyalty from the consumers so they will continue to purchase
from the company in the future.

In conclusion, although advertising is necessary in achieving business success as it is a strategy that

attracts customers, I believe that a good quality of products and services is equally important because it
builds consumer trust and the company’s reputation that maintains the loyalty of its customers, thus
keeping the business at the top.

sample 4 There are several strategies to take any business on the top. It has been argued that
advertisements and promotional offers are the prime schemes for the success of any business. While I
agree with the importance of the marketing, I also believe other factors are equally important at long
run.

Marketing has played the prime role in the success of any endeavour. There are grounds for this notion.
Firstly, if people are not aware about the features and the qualities of the product, it would not be sold.
Awareness among the people is necessary which could be made by the advertisements. For example,
one popular mobile now in India, once not recognized as a standard phone. Secondly, if consumers
know all the aspects of your service, then only, they could compare them with the existing market. For
instance, people nowadays juxtapose with all the policies from different providers to make the wise
choice. Thus, cognizance in society could create a market space for any new venture where it can
flourish.

However, I believe quality is the first preference for the customers and is the critical for any
organization. There are several bases to justify my view. Firstly, if features of the product advertised do
not match with the real one, it could negatively affect the popularity and buyer would not trust the
company. For instance, one famous washing powder claimed to remove all the types of the strains in
just few seconds which proved false and the brand lost many customers. Secondly, if quality meets the
standards of the society, sales would definitely increase. A prime example is of iPhone which has
covered the global market by matching with the expectations of the users. Thus, the quality is vital to
gain the trust and maintain the loyalty of the purchaser which could result in long term victory.

To conclude, I agree that advertisements and promotional offers are indispensable for newly launched
products to attract the attention of the community, although quality assurance is the principal element
for successful enterprise.

sample 3 That which factors impact on success of company has controversial. It is believed that
marketing and promotion campaigns are the essential elements for a successful business. I partially
agree with this view.
To begin with, there are several advantages of spending more budgets for marketing and promotion to
business. First and foremost, marketing is a good way to enhance company's public image. For example,
when company focus on investing marketing for one product, more people know the brand of that
good. As a result, the sales of company will raise significantly. Secondly, promotion programs attract
more customers to buy the product. Due to the fact that people have intention to purchase everything
at reduced price, company will sell a huge number of products and have a large revenue. For instance,
promotion such as buy one and get one free or give discount vouchers for customers will contribute on
success of business. Moreover, marketing and promotion help company gain competitive edge
compared with other enterprises in the same field. One example in case that company breaks into a
market as a novice, these play an vital part for a sucessful business.

On the other hand, other factors effect on success of company along with marketing and promotion.
Firstly, the quality of product is criteria which most customers care about. It is clearly seen that if
enterprise makes the most of product's features, more and more people believe and use this good of
company. In addition, it is necessary to make the diversity of product's model following trend of market.
Companies should conduct more market research to understand what products customer would like to
buy and why they choose them.

In conclusion, it is essential for company to expand marketing and promotion campaigns, however other
elements such as the standard of products or habits of customers also should be taken into
consideration to carry out at collective level in order to make the successful business.

sample 4 Nowadays developing and maintaining of a successful business is considered to b a very

difficult task because there is a large of competition in the field of business. In my point of view,
advertisement and promotion of products as well as good relation with costumers play an important
role in the development of business.

In modern world, where everything is progressing very rapidly and the competition in very field of life is
increasing day by day. In the field of business there is a large of competition and every person is facing a
variety of challenges. For this purpose, promotion and marketing of different products in the market is
very useful. For instance, a business needs to satisfy the people for the quality assurance of their
products, inform and assure them about prices as compared to market prices, and to seek their
attention have a great effect in business development.

Other ways of successful business include good relation and contacts with their costumers. It has a
positive impression in the business, because good behavior with people attract them toward and help in
dealing of products. People often visit some specific shops frequently because of good quality products,
reasonable prices and nice attitude of the salesman.

In my opinion, business development needs some basic skills which include promotion, marketing and
attitude with which a businessman can attract the attention of their costumers towards their products
and have a good impact in the business fields as well.
sample 5 In this comparative world, where the number of companies of all kind is growing up, the
more popular they are, the more people buy their products. So that, advertisement plays an crucial role
in the process of making the bussiness succesfully. From my point of view, the main point decide a
company will succeed or not depend on its products’ quality.

First of all, we cannot deny that it is necessary to have the great maketing and promotion in order to
introduce the products to the numberous people. The company has a myriad of ways to increase the
popularity of their products such as: by contribute the campaign or competition to confirmed their
position, by using famous and trusted people.

Secondly, on the other hand, the quality need to be put priorty over all because the first thing
everybody judge is how good the goods is. If they can build the belief in the customers,day by day, they
can have the certain number of close people who put their trust on them and also make the new ones
can buy their amount without consideration.

Finally, moreover, the company can compete with others in the products’uses. It is not only necessary to
keep perfecting the qualities, but also widen the fuction. It is obvious that the more convenience the
products can bring, the more people will choose to buy.

In conclusion, like a customer, evreybody always have two main priorties are the qualitiy and the uses of
products. Then , they will put the number of people who buy it into consideration.

The performance of staff can have a significant impact on the success of a

company.

What can companies do to increase staff productivity?

In modern world, every business wants devotion and this devotion comes from the employees who
work in that business or companies and in return every hard worker person want some credit for the
work he/she is doing. Its company responsibility to give credit to their staff members so that their
dedication of work increased with time.

First of all, if we look around of our self, so it will be clear to us that every money making things are run
by different types of people. For example, if there were hard working teachers in an education institute
and they are giving their full effort in maintaining high quality of education in that school or college, and
as a result it will gain its importance and in this way the credit goes to its staff members.

Moreover, a company is always get success with the help of hardworking employs. For instance, when
their is good relation between bank staff and costumers, it gives a good result in the development of
bank.

In return, it’s the responsibility of a company or institute to give credit to their employees for the efforts
they are providing to their owners. For example, increase their salaries, give them bonuses for their
extra hardships, provide them proper promotions and last but not the least appreciate them in every
steps they are taking in favor of their working place.

It has been considered that efficiency of the employees of the company can significantly affect the
business. It has been agreed by all that success of any business depends on the people who do the
business. Employers also consider the improvement in the ability of the workers as one of the prime
factors for the successful business. They are continually finding ways to increase the capacity of the
company by motivating and ensuring overall satisfaction of the workforce.

sample 2Motivation is the vital for to yield the complete output from an individual. All the big firms
can use this element in many ways to raise the productivity. Firstly, they could motivate their workers by
providing the financial benefits based on appraisal cycle. For example, the annual bonus could become
driving force for the employees to work hard to get higher increment. Secondly, appreciation is
indispensable for any hard work. This admiration in front of the whole company would inspire others to
be assiduous. For instance, organization can arrange yearly award ceremony to distribute awards to
those who have achieved milestones. Thus, incentives and recognition could play essential roles in
improvement of the staff.

Apart from this, overall job and work environment satisfaction is necessary for an individual to work
hard. Firstly, an enterprise should ensure the basic necessities of the workers so as they will not have to
think about these needs and could fully concentrate in the work. For example, health insurance for the
employees and their family members, low subsidized accommodation, transportation and food.
Secondly, working condition should be comfortable so as they can put forward all their efforts and as
result contribute to the corporate. For instance, workspace where the employees spend most of their
time should be ergonomic; also canteens and washroom should be hygienic. Finally, annual feedback
from the workforce and its implementations are imperative. A prime example could be annual
brainstorming sessions with the higher management which can put forward some new and innovative
solution to the problem. Also, such meetings can create a surrounding of a corporate family and
decrease distance between senior and junior. Thus, contentment of the human resources by taking care
of small points regarding their primary needs is significant for the employer.

To conclude, efficiency of the workforce is the primary factor to take the business on the top and
companies can increase it by admiration and job satisfaction.

sample 3 It is an evidence-based fact that the capacity of workforce is one of the substantial factors
of the rising economy of a company. There are variety of ways how to enhance the quality of work and
service, consecuently, this essay will discuss them.

To begin, if workers are fitter and less stressed, their working time will be more efficient leading to
higher level of output. By subsidizing memberships of gyms and sports clubs, employers can motivate
their employees to be healthier and thus more effective at work due to the fact that work/life balance of
a worker will be improved.
On the other hand, companies can use different financial rewards as a driving force factors in order to
achieve high productivity. Employers might set annual target-related payments such as pay increments,
perks, bonuses, or incentives for those who archive aimed milestones announcing their names during
performance reviews and appraisals, as revalry among employees leads to being more committed.

Providing regular trainings and having job prospects are other indispensable elements in efficacy of a
worker. In fact, all employees are seeking for opportunities to further their career and acquire more
knowledge without leaving work, so it is reasonable to have on the job trainings and internship
programmes for career progression, because the more the rate of job satisfaction, the better
productivity of a company. A recent research, for instance, conducted in Baku has shown that among all
local businesses the most sucsessful one is AF business center which provides monthly trainings with
foreign teachers and professors in business and economy field.

Overall, by using of health-related subsidies, ongoing trainings, and some rewards to salaries an
enterprise can encourage its employees to be more assadous to produce useful results at work.

sample 4 It has been considered that efficiency of the employees of the company can significantly
affect the business. Employers also consider the improvement in the ability of the workers as one of the
prime factors for the successful business. They are continually finding ways to increase the capacity of
the company by motivating and ensuring overall satisfaction of the workforce.

Motivation is the vital for to yield the complete output from an individual. All the big firms can use this
element in many ways to raise the productivity. Firstly, they could motivate their workers by providing
the financial benefits. For example, the annual bonus could become driving force for the employees to
work hard. Secondly, appreciation is indispensable for any hard work. This admiration in front of the
whole company would inspire others to be assiduous. For instance, organization can arrange yearly
award ceremony to distribute awards to those who have achieved milestones. Thus, incentives and
recognition could play essential roles in improvement of the staff.

Apart from this, overall job satisfaction is necessary for an individual to work hard. An enterprise should
ensure the basic necessities of the workers so as they will not have to think about these needs and could
fully concentrate in the work. For example, health insurance for the employees and their family
members, low subsidized accommodation, transportation and food. Furthermore, basic necessities like
accommodation, transportation and food should be subsidised. Finally, annual feedback from the
workforce and its implementations are imperative. Thus, contentment of the human resources by taking
care of small points regarding their primary needs is significant for the employer.

To conclude, efficiency of the workforce is the primary factor to take the business on the top and
companies can increase it by admiration and job satisfaction.

Some companies have uniforms for their staff which must be worn at all times.
What are the advantages for a company of having a uniform?

Are there any benefits of having a uniform for the staff?

sample 1 Workers in many companies are directed to wear specific uniform which should be used
during their working hours. There are a lot of benefits to companies and their employees with the use of
this uniform.

To begin with, large number of people are working in many industries and they belong to different
societies. So there should be some rules and regulations for the employees of these companies. Specific
uniform is one the main component of the company for their workers and it helps in the development of
a company, for example, there is feasibility in identifying of staff by the costumers which result in good
interaction between employees and customers.

In contrast, using same color of uniform give a variety of advantages to companies staff as well. For
instance, there will be equality among all the staff members, and there will be no class difference
between workers, whether he/ she belongs to a high or low class family.

Secondly, specific uniform can be used as a mark of identification of that specific company and for their
workers, as most uniforms have their companies name mentioned on it, which helps to identify a
company name even from their staff uniform.

Therefore, using of uniform by the employees of an industry is beneficially important for the a company
and its staff members, and it should be used in all working hours and every company needs to make it
necessary for their employees.

sample 2 Nowadays, many organizations compel their employees to wear uniform during their duty
hours. This trend has brought upon some positive changes for the employee by increasing the
confidence while for the employers by creating decent image in front of the client and public.

There are many benefits for the employees to wear the dress defined by their employers. Firstly,
Uniform, as its name suggests, establish uniformity among the staff and can become social leveler as
there will be no difference between poor and rich or senior and junior owing to the same appearance.
Wearing the same cloth would create disciplined environment. Secondly, formal wear can imbibe
confidence in workers as a result they would put forward all their efforts in work increasing their
productivity which would in turn can earn appreciation from clients and managers. Finally, it could
reduce the confusion about what to wear or which cloth would be appropriate for the work. Thus,
uniform could play a vital role among employees by creating harmony and confidence.

Apart from this, employers would also get benefited by this drift. The first point to make is that same
dress for all could help to keep his employees safe. For instance, tie would not be appropriate for the
workers working with the machine which could catch it and create a dangerous threat for them. The
second point to make is that well-dressed employees could create a positive impression on client which
could enforce the customer relationship and help to make the business. The third point to make is that
intruders or burglars will be identified easily if all insiders look same. The final point is that dress
designed for the human resources can advertise and promote the brand. Thus, uniform can keep
workforce safe and promote the business by creating a first impression on stakeholders.

To conclude, there are several advantages for not only employees but also for employers. Employees get
benefited by harmonious environment and build confidence while employers can increase the trade by
impressing their consumers and keeping the employees safe.

sample 3Uniforms are treated as an identity of the company and serve multiple purposes. Hence, few
organizations insist on wearing it. This essay will discuss the pros for the companies because of this
practice and how the staff is benefited by this.

First and foremost, wearing a coordinated outfit paints a professional picture about the business
concern to the customer. This further lays the foundation for better client-vendor relationship.
Moreover, uniforms also serve as a free source of advertisement. Take for instance, when the logo of
the company is printed on the uniform, it will be seen by many people, when the employee shuttles to
and fro to the office and it will get registered in their sub-conscious mind. Thus, they get familiarized
with the brand.

Furthermore, making the employees wear the same attire, favors enhancing the security of the firm.
This is because; any outsider can be distinguished immediately from the staff. Additionally, wearing an
outfit that we mentally relate to work will definitely help us get accustomed to the working environment
in lesser duration and this in turn will increase our efficiency. Supporting this view, there are a few
researches that have identified a boost in the productivity, when workers are clothed in uniforms.

In addition to that, from the employee point of view, in many professions uniforms safeguard the staff
member from occupational hazards. For example, it is mandatory for a construction worker to don
glasses and head-gear for his own safety and also uniforms eliminate the difference among the
employees and thus, two men from different social backgrounds can get along without any hesitation.
Hence, it is advantageous to the employee also.

Precisely, ensuring that the members of an organization clothe alike, aids the company in building and
marketing a brand and in easy surveillance. Besides, employee protection and equality is guaranteed by
uniforms.

Some people think that the best way to run a business is within the family.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of a family run business?

sample 1 Family business involve many combinations of relationships such as parent-child, husband-
wife, siblings, also extended family members could be involved in board. This trend has many benefits,
although it has some detriments attached with it.

On the one hand involving relatives in business at different levels has many advantages. The most
important one is that family members are generally more dedicated to the common goals and they do
not hesitate to sacrifice for achievement of the company targets. In addition, involvement of closed one
in the business creates grounded and firm foundation for the company, also their presence around
provides support, trust and comfort. For instance, people involved in the business know the
consequences of their action on the business if they or their relatives own it and so they would choose
themselves for cut off in case of recession. Furthermore, families are more lenient and forgiving when it
comes to working hours, schedules and even mistakes. When family is involved, there is a leeway to
work flexible or part time which in turn allow taking care of children, parents and other family members.
For example, researches have proved that people working in their own office or workshop are more
liberal about the work. Thus, kinsmen in company create a flexible environment with loyalty.

On the other hand, there are some challenges to run business in family. The biggest difficulty is issue
regarding succession which might causes conflicts in the relationship involved. This might occur if the
older generation does not permit the young generation the needed room to develop and grow. For
instance, if the elders of the family do not allow youngsters to take risks, they would never understand
how to deal an emergency. Furthermore, business owner might prefer a relative for the job even though
he or she does not have adequate skills for the position. This can deteriorate the business, and cause
harmful ripples among the employees working hard to secure higher position. For example, no one
denies that efficient employees would leave the company if they feel any kind of partiality. Thus,
inappropriate referral without ability and clashes could affect the trade adversely.

To conclude, family business would be beneficial in terms of honesty, devotion and liberty, although
issues with heredity and favouritism can bring gloomy effects on the environment of the firm.

sample 2 While the strategies for operating a business vary from person to person, running it internal
to the family is one of those and has been in existence since long time. This essay will discuss the pros
and cons of limiting the administration of a firm to the family.

The prime advantage of family business is that kinsmen will be inclined to invest more in the business
compared to other stakeholders. Furthermore, they will even be ready for pay-cut in critical times for
the welfare of the business, but this cannot be expected from outsiders. However, on the downside, in
extreme cases, this will result in nepotism. Consequently, people, who are not eligible for the position,
will be given prominence, jeopardizing the growth of the company.

In spite of that, irrespective of the designation, relatives will be willing to carry out diverse roles in the
company. For instance, they will be interested in sharing their ideas and experiences across
departments because; they have an emotional attachment to the organization. Nevertheless, this
practice may result in an unstructured hierarchy in the firm and as a backlash, there may not be a proper
decision making, resulting in chaos.

On the other hand, most family members have informal training from childhood and they know the in
and out of the business. Moreover, they will be groomed for taking over the business by getting
schooled in various divisions and ranks and so they become perfectly qualified to undertake the
company. On the downside, sometimes, people may emphasize family conflicts and hence, may find it
hard to draw a line between professional and personal life. Consequently, then concern’s development
may be compromised.

In a nutshell, as any plan of action, even family owned businesses have their own edges and pitfalls.
Hence, it is crucial to be vigilant about the negative aspects and to reap the benefits of the leverages.

Some people think that when recruiting, companies should aim to take on people

who are innovative and able to work independently while others considered they

should recruit people who are able to work in a team and follow instructions.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

sample 1 Selection criteria for the employees have been a difficult task for the employers throughout
the past. Selecting an appropriate candidate for a position is crucial for a recruiter. Some argue that
creativity and ability to work individually are important factors to consider prospective employee, while
other believe workers should be able to work in team and rigorous in operation. However, I believe that
different characteristics are required for different employers, and it depends on them which criterion
needs to be prioritized more.

There are some grounds for the belief that innovation and working independently are the key factors for
recruiting. Firstly, innovative way of working could bring optimization and creativity to the work which
could solve many problems that are unsolved as of now. For example, in software industry, invention of
new design pattern has resolved many issues of software throughout the world and also optimized
them. Secondly, working alone on any product could give a worker leeway to take risks and important
decisions which in turn can give some artistic output. For instance, while designing a house, if an
architecture need to work with team, all will put their ideas which could create conflicts and affect the
design. Thus, inventiveness and expertise to work alone are imperative for employers to consider future
employee.

Nevertheless, there are some bases for selection of applicant who is expert in team work and obedient
in terms of following orders strictly. Firstly, an individual in team would be more efficient than the one
working alone. Team work enhance the ability to communicate as when any difficulty arise, person does
not stuck and could ask others in team which could decrease the resolution time. For example, if a CAD
machine operator would face any problem while creating a predefined die, he could ask others for the
solution. Secondly, adhering to instruction given by the superior would not allow any space for the
mistake, this could bring upon standard output by many individuals. For instance, if a person can adhere
to guidelines for operating a machine, it will never give faulty outcome. Thus, efficiency to grasp the
directions and working with others are vital for the employers.

To conclude, I believe that firms where creative production is required, candidate with innovativeness
and ability to work independently is required, on the other hand, person who can work with team and
rigorous in operation are appropriate for positions in operation line.

sample 2It is thought by some that independence in working is the priority quality that every
employer are looking for. On the other hand, people who can easily work in a team are said to be the
necessary ones. From my point of view, both of sides have their own advantages to support their points,
I won't take side and be sure that the readiness of changes is the most crucial one.

On one hand, we need to admit that every job, every environment requires employees to be able to
work as a team in order to have the best productivity. No matter what occupation you work, teamwork
skill helps us a lot in getting on good terms with not only co-workers but also our boss. This helps us to
build a comfortable and effective place to work and be creastive. Lastly, it helps every employees has to
push themselves to catch up with others and learns from partners' mistakes and experiences in order to
set up a strong and competitive company.

On the other hand, a job has a variety kind of works, the employees not only have to work in a group
frequently but they need to solve their problems on their own as well. It is obvious that nobody can help
and decide for our life everything in the long run.In a short time, we will have to depend on our abilities
to come to the solution and decision for the job. Thus, people who can arrange their job independently
is considered to be more qualified.

In my opinion, nobody is perfect so that it is impossible for find the people who are excellent in both of
demands. The employers need to accept the correspondence of people but I strongly believe they need
put priority over the people who are not afraid of changes, difficulties and persistent.

In conclusion, teamwork skill and independence are two of the most crucial qualities of a good
employee but people who have strong passion for job, studying and never give up are the brightest
candidates for any vacancy.

sample 3 A company’s productivity mainly depends on the staff’s talents in different aspects. While
some people think that when hiring people the company’s priority should be finding people who are
creative and self-reliant, others argue that the skill to work in a team is more important. I believe both
independence and teamwork are necessary skills for an employee.

To begin with, people who are innovative bring new ideas to their work and aid to the development of
the institution they work in. Innovation is very crucial for the progress of the any organisation. A
business group, for example, may not experience growth when they follow the same path for many
years. An innovative and independent employee would be able to take decisions according to the
situation and lead the company to success. Moreover, a person who is having many ideas tends to share
his thoughts with the other colleagues and encourage them to be innovative.
On the other hand, according to some people, team work is more vital compared to the other skills. The
reason behind this is that in their opinion, the employees have to complete their projects or tasks as a
team. No one is actually taking individual decisions. In fact they are following instructions given by their
managers. Sometimes individual decisions even cause clash among employees. Furthermore, they argue
that in most cases, the freshly hired employees start as juniors. They do not immediately go to
managerial positions that require them to make independent decisions. Majority of the decisions are
taken by the senior staff. Therefore the quality of self reliance is irrelevant in most occasions.

To conclude, both the traits of independence and team work play different roles in the growth of the
company. So in my opinion both these qualities are equally important for the success of an organisation.

Some people think that the only way to have success in business is to have a

unique product.

What factors, do you think, influence the success of a company?

sample 1There are many aspects which need to be considered to take your company on the top of
the market. Some people believe that by launching an extraordinary product only could bring
achievements in business, while I believe there are some other ways possible which could influence the
trade.

There are some bases for the belief that a peculiar invention could make your business top in the world.
Firstly, it is human tendency that creative and unique ideas are always welcomed. Consumers might
purchase product out of curiosity to learn its features which are not available with any other
corporation; this trend could increase the sales. For instance, First Sign Company got hike in its capital
when it launched the fashion accessory which could track and report the violent attack on a victim.
Secondly, such products create a famous brand for the company which in turn can become status quo
for the people. The prime example could be Apple which is now become the top in the trade of the
smartphone because of its invention iPhone having an extraordinary processor.

However, I believe that services and people running the business are some of the other factors which
could earn accomplishments for the organization. The first aspect is that selling out the product does
not end the responsibility of the manufacturer, but service provided after the selling is equally
important to create a long lasting impression on the customers and in turn far-reaching influence on the
business. For instance, Tupperware provides food grade plastic container with a life-long guarantee to
replace the product if it wears out. The second point is that stakeholders involved with the corporation
could have vital impacts on the operation. For example, if employees are satisfied with the job, they
would be retained otherwise company has to face higher attrition rate which could affect the venture
adversely.

To conclude, I agree that novelty features in the product could bring success by impressing buyers and
making the producer famous brand in the world, while there are some other points which could impulse
like services and individuals involved.
sample 2It is believed by some that the most effective way to be successful in business is to own a
unique product.There are many factors that contribute to the success of a company such as advertising
and the quality of the products.

firstly, one of the main ways to create a successful business is through using marketing and
promotion.This is due to the fact that advertising can raise brand awareness and introduce consumers
about the type of the products that they have and what are the services that they offer.Furthermore,
advertising can be used to remind customers of the products that are available and what new products
will be released in the future.

secondly, the quality of the products can have a crucial role in the success of a company.This is because
many customers are very careful in using a product and if a product does not have the quality that they
aim for, then they will switch to another brand that cares about their customers satisfaction and ensures
that they receive the level of quality that they require, and this will create customer loyalty for the
particular brand.Furthermore, the company must maintain the quality of the products they offer in
order to keep the credibility that they have among consumers.

In conclusion, a business can flourish by advertising for their products and by delivering products that
live up to the customers expectations.

sample 3 There are a group of people believe that success of a certain company involved of having a
unique products. However. I do not think that success comes to this point.

To begin, there are mutiple points could be buinlt over successful company. Firstly, the structure of the
company is very important to be organized well. To clarify more, each staff should have a strong
communications between each other. Secondly, having an excellent team would help the company for
growth. Furthermore, experience individuals who have good experience in such areas would increase
the profit of the company and its success. As they have a strong relations with other customers outside
to market their products. Lastly, if one company look for success, they should treat their teams
professionally as a family, because they are integral part in the company, they are the backbone of the
company. So success does not involve on monopolising one product to one company. If so, failure will
happen apparently.

There are lots of compnies focus only on monoplising products to achieve success. Unfortunately, they
fail at the end. They rise the cost of products, as a result, people stopped buying it. On other words, it
has failed and led to loss. Even they shut down due to the loss which it has happened for them. It is
invevitable that companies with no plans, as they look for obtaining success only, they will lose their
customers in the market. They should be aware about all the other parts, which it might consolidate
success in the distributing their products. So professional management knowledge about strategies
could assist for success.

In brief, companies should not concentrate on having exclusive products, in turn to achieve its
advantages, whereas, there are other sides need to be taken into considertion.
sample 4 It is believed by some that the most effective way to be successful in business is to own a
unique product.There are many methods that a company can implement to expand their business and
grow their success such as using marketing and promotion and delivering satisfactory quality of
products.

firstly, one of the main ways to create a successful business is through using marketing and
promotion.This is due to the fact that advertising can raise brand awareness and attract consumers who
might be interested to buy products that can be useful and necessary to have .Furthermore, advertising
can be used to remind customers of the products that are available and what new products will be
released in the future.

Secondly, the quality of the products can have a crucial role in the success of a company.This is because
many customers are very careful in using a product and if a product does not have the quality that they
aim for, then they will switch to another brand that cares about their customers satisfaction and ensures
that they receive the level of quality that they require, and this will create customer loyalty for the
particular brand.Furthermore, the company must maintain the quality of the products they offer in
order to keep the credibility that they have among consumers and to ensure that customers will
maintain their loyalty and continue in purchasing the products.

In conclusion, a business can flourish by advertising for their products to the people and by delivering
products that live up to the customers expectations.

Small businesses should avoid recruiting young women who do not have their own

family in order to avoid paying maternity leave later on.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There are many criteria to be considered for recruitment process, some of which is the gender and age
of the candidate. Some argue that recruiters from the small firm should avoid a girl without child or
prospective mother to decrease cost on the maternity leaves, while I believe they should hire equal
number of applicants from each group of age and gender.

There are some bases of the view for not hiring a girl or a lady without child. Firstly, when they go on a
long leave, they need to be paid without any work which could not be feasible for corporation with
limited workforce. For example, it would definitely hamper the business if one goes on leave from 6
employees. Secondly, after having a child, her efficiency would be adversely affected owing to the dual
responsibilities of the child and the family. For instance, she may take further leaves for the regular
check up of her infant or could not extend the working hours. Thus, such leaves would certainly affect
the small company.

However, it seems to me that benefits of hiring young generation could alleviate these harms on the
trade. Firstly, salary of a fresher is far less than the highly experience professional, so hiring novice could
diminish the cost on human resources. For example, two apprentices could be hired instead of one
expert. Secondly, research has shown that recently passed out graduates could brainstorm better ideas
than the experienced one. For instance, recently passed out computer engineers have much more
knowledge of newer technologies; specifically young girls possess higher ambitions regarding her career
and job.

To conclude, I believe that that the hirer should not consider cost on maternity leave for long-run
business rather than short term benefits. Young girls who constitute more than fifty percent of the
skilled workers could contribute for success of the small enterprise by providing new ideas and insights
which are essential for newly established enterprise.

sample 2There is a tendency that small businesses shall be prudent in hiring juvenile female staff. It is
argued that once on board, they may start their families and apply for maternal care benefits, which will
cost the business both time and money. While such employers are arguably conducting a discriminatory
act, they are also missing out in huge opportunities. I strongly disagree with such discrimination and
present my arguments while discussing solutions in this essay.

Indeed exclusion of such segment in recruitment process is in the disadvantage of a business. Every year
a pool of fresh female graduates become available in the job market that can benefit a business. When
hired their remuneration demands are usually lesser in contrast with more experienced applicants. This
type of cost savings will enable the business to focus on development of their core products. In addition,
when they are given a chance, young women are highly motivated in order to learn valuable experience
from and contribute to a business. It is also easier to train young females and males alike due to their
eagerness and curiosity.

On the other hand, It is against the law to avoid hiring an individual for their potential maternity costs.
Such behaviour is deemed as discrimination and can bring unpleasant consequences.

In order to avoid such scenarios, businesses shall seek profound solutions. One of the alternatives can
be that the responsibility among parents through a shared parenting leave plan is distributed, where
both father and mother will take care of their newborn in rotation.

To conclude, the concept of unmarried women inflicting a business financially in the long run is based on
erroneous and short-sighted assumptions. Business leaders ought to ponder on the potential benefits a
business can receive by employing this part of the workforce.

Sales companies should recruit people who are hungry for money as they will make

the most dedicated workers.

Do you think money is the driving force behind hard work?

What factors should be taken into consideration when recruiting staff for sales

positions?
Recruiting a sales person is quite different from others. They require some abilities which might not be
crucial for candidates applying for other department. Some believe that greed for money is required in a
applicant for a sales job, while I suppose other factors should equal weight.

On the one hand, there are some grounds for the view that hunger for money is essential for the person
applying in sales department. Firstly, annual appraisal cycle of a sales person consider the sales for
annual increment. To gain big increment, a person would try to boost his or her sales. On the contrary if
person is contended with the existing salary, would not even try to convince the customer. Secondly,
urge for the money would insist a person to be an industrious one. For instance, financial gains received
as a concession would work as a motivator for a salesman to work hard and sale more.

On the other hand, it seems to me that to be an effective sales person, some interpersonal skills and
professional skills are required. Firstly, the individual should be persuasive and friendly. The ability to
change people’s mind is one of the most important personal trait in the sales. For example, it is not
possible that all the customers would be interested in the product or service a representative has to
offer. The person should be able to approach customer from an angel that make sense. The sales person
must have ability to make the customer think that he or she needs a specific product. Secondly, a
salesperson must also be highly motivated. The person should be able to take initiative without any
direction. For instance, a good salesperson would constantly think the ways to generate sales and get
ahead. Even when the working hours have been completed, he will brainstorm ideas to make strategies.
Thus, it is compelling for the person to be proactive and enthusiastic.

To conclude, although monetary benefit is one of the essentials for hard work and urge of money for a
person is one of the criteria to hire sales man, I suppose other characteristics are equally important.

sample 2I completely agree that marketing and sales oriented organisations should hire individuals
with strong desire to make huge amount of money and definitely they will turn into the most efficient
workers . Nevertheless , interpersonal skills and academic qualification should also be given an equal
importance while selecting sales representatives .

it is undeniable that people who have a longing for money work their socks off and therefore have the
potential to bring prosperity to the company they work in . Likewise , any sale officer who wants to
make money and know that he would get some incentives if he manages to sale maximum amount of
products, he would not only work with full dedication and devotion but also try his level best to
maximise the sales of the company . He would try his level best to persuade the customer to buy the
product of his company . I think that behind hard work there always is a lust of generating revenue .

Besides having an ambition for earning more money ,there are other attributes that should be taken
into account while the recruitment of salespersons .Firstly , interpersonal skills should also be given
priority like confidence and self assurance . A confident and self assured salesman would easily tempt
his customers to buy a certain product even if it is out of their budget . Secondly , academic qualification
should never be looked down upon . Individuals with degree in marketing and an exceptional hold on
linguistics could be really beneficial for a sales job as they will apply their knowledge to market the
product . Therefore ,a well qualified , confident and self assured individual should be selected for a sales
job .

To recapitulate , although money is the driving force that led people to work very hard for their
organisation , in order to increase the sales of any company above mentioned qualities should also be
considered whilst the selection of a sales personal .

The reason that most individuals are in debit is due to the overuse as well as

irresponsible use of credit cards. Banks should not issue credit cards unless

they are completely sure of an individual’s ability to pay back their debits.

To what extent do you agree with this?

In modern age, people prefer to use non-conventional payment methods such as internet banking, cards
and other more. Even government also promote people to avoid cash payment and use cards & others
method for financial transactions. It is believed that use of credit card cause individuals in debt situation.
I shall explain the reason for this and measures, a bank may take while issuing a credit card

Use of credit card gives so many facilities to individual. First and foremost is the liberty to spend the
money without even having it. It is generally seen that credit card holder tends to spend more money
than non- credit card holder because money is made available in plastic card and does not restrict to use
it. Furthermore, credit card company also provide long term credit facility which motivates consumer to
buy without consideration and sometimes in emotions they buy the things which are not actually
required at that point. For instance, my brother’s office is just 500 meter away and company ply the
buses regularly but he bought the card using credit card and put the rationale that it is on easy credit
and money to be paid later.

Such credit facilities make people reckless and they enter in debt cycle. In order to protect the bank
money and people to go through stress of repayment, it is highly advisable to bank to put measures in
place. The primary measure which can be taken is to check the people earning and expenditure trend as
it gives the fair idea about people’s attitude towards use of money. Another important point to check is
credit history of individual which may give right idea whether people make the return on time or not.

To conclude, use of credit cards certainly spiked the consumer buying and in some cases, people buy in
irresponsible manner and do not pay on time or become bankrupt in few cases. Bank should take above
given precautions while issuing credit cards.

sample 2
In this modern word, almost all the processes has gone virtual, payment and selling are not the
exception. Credit card which is well-known as one of the plastic money gives purchasing power to the
person even if he or she does not have enough cash. This has made people extravagant and put them in
debt which causes dangerous consequences for both people and the card issuer. To resolve this
problem, the bank should check the history of the applicant’s credit records before issuing this facility.

To begin with, as people could purchase without thinking the price and the income, they become
imprudent and would purchase the things which they might not need. This tendency of the consumer
increases liabilities and make them bankrupt. Also, the citizen are not conscious about credit limit and
due date of the payment. This means they will have to pay hefty premium of the interest which is more
than any loan like home loan or vehicle loan. As they end up without the money, they might not be able
to compensate. Thus, credit card certainly brings a failure if not used judiciously.

This failure affects the economy of the country as a financial institute and its stakeholders are harmed
economically. Owing to the customer under highly debit who does not have enough liquid to pay back,
the bank would have to use external forces like debt collection agency which may use wrong ways for
such repayments. This could make the negative publicity for the organization and its stock price may fall.
On the other hand, the ruined patriot also suffers financially and mentally. For instance, the one who
cannot repay may lose its property and capital which disturbs him economically and psychologically.
Under such pressures, person may attempt to suicide. Thus, these disastrous consequences insist a
background check by the financial agencies before providing a credit card.

To conclude, I strongly believe there should be a stringent rule by the company to provide the credit
limit below the salary. Such rules ensure win-win situation for both the corporation and customer of the
credit card.

Some people believe that the higher a product is priced, the more likely it is

that people will want to buy it.

To what extent does price influence potential buyers?

What other factors influence people to buy a product?

sample 1
Behaviour of the consumer about purchasing the product has been a research topic throughout the last
many decades. While some researchers have proved that the pricing eventually affects the decision
making of the consumer, there are other aspects which have also been popular affecting the choice of
the customer.

To begin with the price factors, there are some social factors owing to which people tend to choose
costly products. The first factor is the general perception of the human society that quality is always
costly to achieve and hence the standard product is also higher priced than the normal one. For
example, to prepare durable furniture, timber wood is used in India which is expensive due to its low
harvesting and higher demand. The second one is the social standard attached to the price tag, as it has
become the status quo for the community to have the dear capital. The last but not the least is the
brand name. Most of the branded products are high-priced and have also become the benchmark of the
wealth among the masses. For instance, if a person uses iPhone or iPad, people believe him or her as a
rich. Thus, people whether they could afford it or not would like to purchase sky-high commodities to
either show off the luxury or due to a wrong assumption.

However, there are others which affect the shopping choice. Firstly, product quality is the highly
desirable feature without which merchandise cannot stand in the competitive market. For instance, no
one would like to purchase substandard shoes no matter which brand they belong to. Secondly,
nowadays, an individual would first research on the internet for the reviews and ratings given by other
customers and no one would prefer the product below rating four out of five. Thirdly, advertisement
targeting a particular group of people affect their preferences. For example, toothpaste for the children
would aim to manipulate small kids by attractive colors and taste and may give free toys with it to
attract them. Finally, the creative products are always welcomed and would be sold out of curiosity.
Thus, apart from price, high-quality, high-rated, strategic advertised and innovative products are always
overwhelmed by the market.

To conclude, of course, price is one of the decisive elements for consumers and exorbitant ones have
become the first choice for them, although some facets are there which impact the customers to
purchase the things.

sample 2
Today we have countless manufacturers and numerous products to choose from. Which creates hard
competition between the producers. As a customer, there are several features we focus upon before
choosing a product. Price is one of the main factors.

In Ancient times, we had very limited selections to choose from becuase of globalization, we have all
famous brnads available everywhere. An overhelming majority of people have some miscondenption
about brand names. Because of

advertisements, brandings have an important role in the society. Secondaly, price comes in to the
picture. It is true that if there is some product priced high, the standard and the qality of raw materials
used will be higher. These

facts uphold the grade of the product and chances of durability extend. Every customer seeks profit for
the amount they spend. In addition, now brands and price tags are one fo the exhibit elements of social
status.

Some of the traditional brands spend huge amounts for adevertisements and in the modern world
people are easily notified about advertisements in manifold ways. Such as Newspapers, internet,
Telemarketing and via Television

commercial. AS a result, communities easily get attracted to the products and brands are inviting them
to spend money on their goods. Last but not the least, there are many celebrities who act as brand
ambassidors for products
and convince their fans to use them.

In Brief, we live in a world where advertisements have impacts on the consumers. however, there facts
are limited to some extends. In my opinion users will analyse thier needs before choosing a product.

Some people think that the only way to judge someone’s success in business is by

the amount of money they make.

Is money a true indicator of the success of a business?

In what other ways could success in a business be measured?

It is argued in the statement that achievement and success in business can only be
judged by the amount earned by the people. From my perspective, money is a true and
most valuable criterion to mark success of a business. There are different other ways to
measure business success which will be taken into account prior to reaching an
informed conclusion.
Money is considered as a correct and reliable index to predict the strength of a
successful business. For example, families of victorious business owners are rolling in
money just because they earn a lot to fulfil the needs and demands of their dependents.
It is clearly evident from the given example that the amount of money directly
correlates with the huge productivity and outcome of a trade. So, it is only possible for
someone to deal with all the life affairs very coherently with an ample amount of
earning.There are many other potential ways in which the peak of running business can
be measured easily.

Firstly, different deals and standard packages are only offered by the leading
multinational companies. Secondly, a power of occupation can also be judged by the
remarkable number of clients. Thirdly, an organization can also become successful with
happy clerks and working staff.
Finally, a success of a business can be related to the amount of taxes paid by its owners,
as increased income will lead to more tax payments.
To conclude, although money is the most important way to determine the effectiveness
of a business but other methods are also very important to tackle multiple problems in
running a business. By following the above mentionedprotocols, economy would have a
bright future internationally.

sample 2
Nowadays, business is famous very much and a lot of people are doing their own
different types of business. According to some people, that by amount of money a
businessmen is making we can find out either he/ she is having a successful business or
not. In this essay I will discuss either it is true or not and will talk about some other ways
of successful business.

To begin with, money is very important to start a well established business and for the
maintaining of that business. It’s obvious that if a person is making enough amount of
money, so we can assume that he/ she is a successful business and his business is
successful.

Secondly, money is needed for the maintenance of a business and will always required
for expansion of business for example, a businessman needs to invest money in other
companies, and will make associates and in this way his/her business will expand.

However, money is not the only indicator on which we will measure the business of a
person, there are a lot of other things which play a great in successful business, such as,
qualified and cooperative staff members, proper and good contacts with costumers,
advertisement of the products in market, quality of products etc and it will give a good
result in the development of business.

In brief, we can judge someone’s success in business by money a person is making but
still there are many other ways on which a successful business is identified. Because,
there will be many people in business who will have a lot of money but still their
business will not that much established.

sample 3

Success has many forms to take. Some might believe that, wealth is the form to success
whereas others might believe that happiness and psychological relaxation consider as a
form of successful lifestyles. Since there are many indicators to judge someone’s form of
successful life, it can difficult to say money is the only measure to judge the success.
Therefore, other criteria should be required.

There are many people in the world who have achieved a successful life. Some of them
could be succeeded financially whereas others succeeded psychologically. For example,
Bill Gates is known to be financial successful entrepreneur whereas Gandhi is known for
psychological successful person. Those two persons have lived completely different
lifestyles. Since most of wealthy people are suffered to be acquiring wealth, they get a
lot of stresses and fear of being revealed of their privacy. Therefore, it is difficult to say
that the finances are the only indicator to measure one’s successes.

Finance measurement can be seen as only one way to measure the successful lives,
therefore, it should be used other indicators to observe different aspects of successes.
Other indicators can be used to measure successes such psychological, health and
spiritual. For instance, incurable patients may think of successful life as a healthy life
whereas other religious people believe that spiritual life is the successful life. Since there
are several diverse aspects of life that people are aiming at, it is difficult to claim that
there is only one factor to judge successful lifestyles. As a result of this, there are
psychological, spiritual, health and personal factors to measure in diverse ways to define
the successful lifestyles.

In conclusion, the measurement of successful lives can vary due to the different
perspectives and diverse in definition of successes. Thus, the finance measure to
indicate someone’s success is only seeing one side of successes and psychological,
health and spiritual indicators should be used.

It is common practice for some students to take a gap year between high school

and university in order to do charitable work abroad in underdeveloped

countries.

What are the advantages and disadvantages for young people of doing volunteer

work?

Taking a gap year is popular among students especially in developed regions. During a gap year, some
students participate in volunteer work in order to gain practical experiences and understand of other
cultures while this could delay their studies and which can cause financial issues. In this essay will
discuss the advantages and disadvantages of taking a voluntary work during the gap year.

There are several benefits of taking a gap year and conduct a voluntary work. Firstly, this can provide
practical experiences. While students take a gap year, usually they spent those times doing a charitable
work so that they can gain diverse skills from socialisation, effective communication and team work.
Furthermore, they may able to adapt the differences in culture, tradition, custom and languages by
working in underdeveloped nations. Therefore, taking a gap year to do voluntary work brings several
advantages to students.

On the other hand, this is not having only advantages. There are some drawbacks of taking a gap year
which may involve psychologically and financially. Students may have difficulty to adapt the
environments as usually developing countries are lacking of various facilities which can even affect their
daily lives. For example, it is very common to see that oversea students experience depression,
loneliness and homesick in foreign countries. Moreover, since they are losing of few years of university
study, this can delay their profession career lifestyles. In other words, students who took a gap year may
start their career later than those who did not take a gap year. As a result of this, psychological and
financial issues can be the significant drawback for taking a gap year.

In conclusion, every aspect of decisions has benefits and drawbacks. Taking a gap year has benefit of
learning practical skills and understanding of foreign cultures whereas homesickness and delaying in
career cannot be avoidable.

sample 2
There is a popular trend, nowadays, among the pupils who are passed out from the secondary education
to volunteer in the humanitarian projects working in the developing country before they continue their
tertiary schooling. There are both pros and cons for this current for the community as well as an
individual. Following paragraphs will highlight these benefits and consequences.

On the one hand, there are some boons for this movement. Firstly, an under privileged area may get the
skill set which would be unavailable otherwise which is very crucial for the development. Secondly, by
living far from home they might confront with the situations which will get them the maturity and ability
to stay alone with strangers. Finally, such selfless work is believed to be the means to increase the self-
awareness and decrease the ego. Thus, apart from making the students sensitive to the local
community, it serves as the mean to foster the cognizance.

On the other hand, there are some circumstances which may bring the curses with these blessings. The
first point to make is that the expertise of the high-school passed person are not up to the mark which
may deliver sub-standard work. Sometimes, they are not serious about the gravity of this philanthropy
or may not pay attention and take it as just a way to weight their CV. Furthermore, if the agency by
which they join the program does not provide proper knowledge of the customs and conventions, then
a foreigner might accidently harm local sentiments. In addition to this, without any support volunteers
may get frustrated and emotionally disturbed which may lead to deterioration of mental and physical
health. Thus, if care is not taken, they may do something to the community instead of something for the
community.

To conclude, increasing tendency to take a gap year for the volunteer work in the developing country
brings new changes to improve the lifestyle of the masses and nurture the person towards the self-
realization. But if a youngster is not sincere about the seriousness of the work, he may adversely affect
not only the physical and mental health but also the culture of the nation.
Rich countries are getting richer while poor countries are getting poorer.

What is the cause of this?

What could be done to solve this problem?

The gap between the wealthy and the destitute is getting wider these days as the high-class people get
wealthier while the low-class is suffering even more. This essay discusses the problems that might arise
due to this ever widening gap between poor and rich and solutions that could be addressed to resolve
the poverty problems.

The wide-range differences of social classes could cause a big problem for a country. When the elite
classes get richer and the low-income get poorer, crime, inequality and violence rate increases
significantly. This issue could be a threat to the country's stability, as there might be protests and riots.
One of the examples is the French Revolution that was primarily caused by the social and economic
discriminations. During the Revolution, the gap difference between the rich and the poor was large and
it had caused the unstoppable riot. The gap is responsible to brings political instability and
dissatisfaction among mass people.

The government could take numerous initiatives do to resolve the issue and alleviate poverty. Firstly,
the government should make proper regulations in terms of business practice and create more job
opportunities. Any monopoly and nepotism in important sectors should not be allowed. Secondly, the
government must provide subsidies for the low-income people. The fund for these subsidies could be
allocated from income taxes collected from the rich people and larger organisations. With the subsidies,
it is hoped that the poor classes could improve their economic conditions.

In conclusion, it is undeniable that the majority of global resources are controlled by a fraction of the
population and this could become a serious threat to the country. Creating more jobs and eliminating
corruption could be effective measures to address the poverty problems.

Sample Answer 1:

There is no doubt that the gap present clearly today between the poor and the rich is getting wider by
time and is affecting our way of life.

That was only observed in the past in some communities where the wealth of a country was restricted
to a few powerful and connected people. They used to own more than eighty percent of the resources
and income, while the rest is barely enough for the common people. Nowadays, the difference is
significant but not limited to the societies finest. The society is divided into groups, the rich, the poor
and the few managing to enjoy some of the rich benefits but struggling to keep this level, they are
bouncing between the limits of each of the other groups.

As a result of today's situation, a broadband of the poor are striving to get a fair share of prosperity with
no actual hope, the fabric of the society is getting weaker and therefore each group is more colonised to
itself forming new habits and customs. Bridging this gap can only be done if equality was achieved in the
basic needs like education and healthcare. If an acceptable ease was managed for the common people
in their daily routines like public transportations and business facilities, that would also be helpful. There
must be transparent laws to manage the use of the wealth and the equality of sharing it and monitor
any possible corruption. The sense of equal opportunity has to be delivered and believed by all people.

Briefly, no community can prosper and evolve safely unless the gaps are bridged between people at all
aspects giving a fair chance to everyone to live in comfort if they worked reasonably hard to achieve it.

Sample Answer 2:

The amount of income of people is always an important topic in social sciences. Equilibrium of society
depends on how this income is shared among the people. Sadly, with the start of the 1950s, the gap
between poor and rich has become wider and nowadays this gap has reached its peak point.

The reason of this situation is the structure of our business system we have constructed over years. This
economic model is called ‘Capitalism’. Needless to say, the word Capitalism is the derivative of Capital
and obliviously, one who has capital has the chance to improve his business and obtain welfare. On the
other hand, poor guys are less likely to build a business because of the absence of capital. One of the
ugliest results of this system is that this system makes people simply greedy. The community has started
to think true happiness can be reached only with more money. Another problem we face in this system
is consumerism which means to have a good stable mood it is obligatory to consume more and more. In
future, if this economic model preserves itself, it can lead to anarchy which may results disasters and
deaths of many innocents.

To improve our lives, to beat this endless unhappiness, we should teach our children the importance of
social justice. This problem is not going to be solved in following several years. In the long run, we
should change the way how we understand about life. We must alter the roots and dynamics of our
community. Nevertheless, we should preserve our hope because human being had solved much more
difficult problems in the history. There is a great number of people who are aware of this problem.

A modern social and economic structure should be formed to address this issue. The government policy
to help the poor should be more emphasised and education in a country should be free so that poor
people can make their children educated. This educational opportunity can play a huge role to mitigate
this eminent gap.

In conclusion, the social and economic formation and revolutionary changed in current capitalism is
required to eliminate the gap between the poor and rich. More than three-fourth of wealth is owned by
only 15% of the total population in the world. This is an unfair distribution and if not addressed carefully
would only create chaos in the future.

Sample Answer 3:

It is true that nowadays the difference between the wealthy and the poor is increasing: the wealth is
growing, while the poor are going deeper into debts.
We must acknowledge that life for some categories of the population is extremely hard. It does not
mean that they are people who have never worked in life or those with anti-social behaviour like drug or
alcohol addicted. I read in "Gold Coast Bulletin" that 700 households in Queensland had been
disconnected from electricity in the past 3 months because they had not been able to pay the bills. It is
true that it is more complicated for these citizens to survive and adopt, as the cost of living is
unreasonably high.

On the other hand, 1% of Earth’s population owns as much money as the rest 99%, which is absolutely
unfair. I doubt that all of them have inherited their wealth or have been working hard for decades. The
names of two wealthiest families –the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers are known to everybody. The
ways of getting such enormous sums are not always legal, but the society prefers to ignore such facts.

Moreover, these people do not only live in multi-million mansions, drive luxurious cars, eat in
sophisticated restaurants, but they constantly show off their money, which many people find offensive
and irritating. Instead of spending a fortune on useless things, why are not they involved in charity
more? If they have billions of dollars and do not know what else to purchase to attract others' attention,
why do not their share a half of their wealth? They will not become poorer, while the lives of less lucky
ones can be transformed, and these people can at least get a chance. The whole society would benefit
because of that as the crime level would descend.

Overall, the gap between the rich and the poor is becoming more dramatic, if the Governments do not
take immediate actions, it is going to grow in future as well.

Sample Answer 4:

The economic differences in the society create inequality among the people. The differences between
the rich people and the poor people’s income are increasing in the recent years. The reason for them
can be classified into the improper government policies and the individual's talents.

Tax policies introduced by the governments are favourable for the high net worth people to evade the
tax. For instance, entrepreneurs have different tax slabs that make them avail tax exemptions like,
opening an office in a special economy zone can result in good savings and increase in profit. However,
we cannot discount the individual talents in making enormous profits.

Talent is something that can be acquired by experience or inherited from the family. There are several
startup companies created by talented individuals who make it to the rich people category in a matter of
few years. In addition, there are few interesting people from the wealthy segment who use their talents
to bridge the income gap between the rich and poor.

For example, the companies like Microsoft and Google are spending the hard earned money for the
betterment of the society by investing in child education and infrastructure. If all the organisations and
the individuals spend a fraction of their enormous income in the country's infrastructure, education and
economic growth, then there are bright chances to fill in the gap of the income difference.
I firmly believe that rich people spending the money on improving the lifestyle of poor people and
better government tax policies will increase the chances of closing the income difference between the
rich and poor.

Sample Answer 5:

It is true that nowadays rich people are getting even richer and poor people have become poorer
especially in developing countries. This situation has presented a wide variety of problems to the
community and it has negatively affected a country's developments. To tackle these problems I believe
that governments and authorities should take necessary steps and implement laws to improve the living
standards of financially poor people.

To begin with, studies have shown that poverty and crimes are correlated owing to the fact that people
are committing crimes for earning a living. Furthermore, children's of poorer parents are often not able
to access higher education even they may have talents in their studies. As a result, they are not hired for
a wealthy job. This means that probably they will live their lives under uncomfortable circumstances and
poverty. That will present uncertainty in one country. Moreover, the public health of one country would
be deteriorated if people in one country are living in extreme poverty.

To tackle these worrying concerns governments should need to do more works for minimising the gap
between poorer people and richer people. Firstly, governments should provide financial support for
people who are living under uncomfortable financial circumstances. Secondly, governments should
ensure the quality of education to all of their citizens. That will definitely help to reduce the poverty as
well as increasing the living standards of financially poor families. Finally, developed countries should
take more responsibility and efforts to eradicate poverty from the world. These efforts already have
been seen in some African countries and that have helped many people to increase their living
standards.

To conclude I believe that we as a human everyone has rights to get an access to the education and a
quality life. In addition, education is the most useful weapon to fight against poverty. In this sense,
governments should ensure a quality of education to all of their citizens. That will certainly help to
reduce the gap between richer and poorer people.

Sample Answer 6:

In this day and age, the gap between affluent and destitute is becoming increasingly wider. This surging
wave of differences among people leads to some problems, which are elucidated below. However, these
are not an insurmountable problem if the government takes some suitable measure.

The most significant problem is that the rent of crime will increase because in wretched families both
parents should work outdoor and cannot pay enough attention to their children. As a result, these kids
will grow up in an improper way and almost all of them are serious dangers for society in the future. In
addition, these poor families always think that wealthy families spoil their rights and so they want to
revenge with theft or harshness from them.
The next problem in this situation is that illiteracy will be common since needy cannot afford the cost of
education. Therefore, their future becomes blurred as they do not get a quality education. This
deprivation (lack of education) causes their tendency to lawlessness and violence become more.

While that the problems mention above, there are some solutions that can be taken to reduce the
problems. Firstly, governments should impose a heavy tax for affluent persons and spend these gain
money for improving the destitute lives. Also, governments can prepare the facilities of education, free
of charge for poor children.

In conclusion, today it is apparent that the gap between poor and wealthy is dramatic. However, this
situation should not ignore, because it creates some serious such as surging rate of crime and illiteracy.
The government can reduce this gap with some proper measures by taking prudent decisions.

Some people think that it is better for a country’s economy for people to spend

money while others believe that it would be better for people to save money.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

sample 1

Money has been considered as the prime resource in this materialistic world. Some
people believe that it should be saved for the future usage in tough times while others
assume it is better to increase the consumption for the stronger economic growth of the
country. I presume the balance of these both views is beneficial to save both the
country as a whole or an individual. Following paragraphs would represent the impact of
both the views.

There is a ground for the belief that the spending is vital for the growth of the nations.
The stability of the economy is measured by means of Gross Domestic Product which is
called GDP in short. Consumption is required to increase this factor as increased usage
by people increases the demand which in turn give a rise in production which means
higher GDP. For instance, if the demand for the product or the service increases, it's
manufacturing increases which give employment to many which again increases the
spending giving rise in demand. This is a full circle and a break in one stage could harm
this process and eventually the community. On the contrary, if this spending is fueled by
the credit more than the income, then consumers would be brought under the
mountain of the debt. A prime example is the American citizens who are under higher
debits owing to their extravagant nature of spending more than earning. Thus,
expenditure according to the income is crucial.
On the other hand, the value of the thrift is important for both the industry and the
individual to fight with the catastrophic situations. Firstly, the corporate saving would
save the company in time of the crises when it does not get the loan from the bank.
Secondly, if the mass population would deposit money in the bank, then it can be used
for a loan to the corporate for capital gains. Thirdly, domestic conservation can save the
family at the time of calamities like natural disasters and recession. On the contrast, if
more and more folks start savings at the cost of the consumption, the cycle of the
demand-supply will be breached which can harm the development of the society. For
instance, fewer requirements mean less production this causes higher cost which again
lessens the demand and finally the industry. Thus, it is imperative for citizens to save
enough to cope up with unwanted situations but not at the limit which affects the GDP.

To conclude, it is quite essential that judiciary equilibrium be maintained between the

spending and savings for the health financial state of the provenance.

sample 2

One of the prime factors of country’s economic growth is spending power of its citizens.
While some are favoring the trend of monetary consumption to fuel growth, some
believe that saving for future use and emergency situations is an ideal way to proceed.

To begin with, there is no denying that the growth of the country is based on the
purchasing power of the people. As population spends more, it amplifies fund flow in
different sectors, increasing the liquidity in the market. Overall, fuelling the gross
domestic product of a country. Secondly, consumption rate is increased since many are
investing in buying goods or utilizing services. Therefore, manufacturing industry gets a
boost to meet the demand and supply for goods. Finally, the employment rate is
improved to support manufacturing sector which inadvertently adds to country’s
monetary growth.

On the other hand, some people believe in traditional methods of saving for future and
catastrophies.Their belief is money saved now, is money well earned. The real
advantage is visible when a lump sum amount is a withdrawal for investmentafter long a
period of time. For example, fixed term deposits are the most common way of savings
and giving decentreturns to people. In addition, capital gains are high for corporate
since deposit base is substantially high when many are savings in bank. Finally, savings
lead to freedom from credit and allowing people to live a financially stress free life.
In my view, a more head on the shoulder approach will be equally beneficial to the
citizens and nation. Since economic growth will be stalled or move at snail’s speed when
savings are greater than spending, whereas a credit based economy is not a healthy
symbol for major population.

To conclude, money defines living standard of the people. However, it should be wisely
spent and invested for future.

sample 3

Money play an important role in human being life. So, every person should understand
value of money. Apart from it, where we need of money, we should use money.
Otherwise, money should storage for essential things. I would like to elaborate my
opinion and both sides views on these essay.

To commence with, first view in this essay is the saving money. Conservation money
make secure life for future. For example- newfangled era full of fierce competition,
where people chass to each other because they want to attain success in their life. So,
safeguard money help those people who want to obtain good skill, it is very herculean
task to recieve skills without money. In consequence, reduction money will use in every
field like in education, household expenditure and many more.

Furthermore, second opinion is that spending money is the best for enjoy life. Generally
people believe

In present time instead of future. So they spend money to collect happy in different
ways, such kind of people have not aim of further life. For instance- youth go to club and
disco for entertain of life. Moreover, they sterling money on unnecessaries ways, they
do not bother about following days as well as they do not alert about up coming bad
situation, which fell down worse impact on human being. Consequently, modern
teenager will be extravagant, their life are not safe and they have to face myriad
problems in life without money.

On my notion, I would like to say that saving money is better than extravagant. There
are ample reasons behind it, primarily, if we have used to saving money for further lives,
we would not need to take tension in our life because we have made preserve life on
the half of saving money. Maintain economy is not only use for us but also a needy
person, apart of it, we can help those peole who need more of this money and we can
take blessing of that person. Last but not least, saving money is usefull in worse
situation like drought earthquake and without telling situation and so on. As a result,
people can be economically safe due to storage money. In addition to it, we can buy
expensive things which has importance in our life.

To cap it all, I have discussed all aspect of saving and spending money. I still argue that
every person should save money for future, so that , we can fulfil desire in our life and
we should save for extravagant .

communication and personality.

Some people fail in school, but end up being successful in life.

Why do you think that is the case?

What is the most important thing to succeed in life? (Reported 2017, GT Test)

Formal education is not the gateway to a sure shot success. This is easily noticeable from the
achievements of personalities such as Steve Jobs, Bill Gates who are famous school dropouts of today,
proving that one needs many qualities to have a glorified career.

To begin with, the traditional system of education lacks creativity and imagination today. The formal but
mundane methods of teaching are not helping the cause either, forcing brilliant minds to lose their
interest in education. Schools and colleges are not having the challenging environment. For example, by
asking real life problems may enforce students to come up with out of the box solutions. Finally, entire
examination system works on scoring in exams rather assessing cognitive and intelligence quotient. As a
result, creative minds either drop out or asked to leave the school due to their poor academic records.

Although one may need minimum education to face the world, there is no replacement of perseverance,
determination and hard work in life. A laborious and professional approach towards life ensures that
that target always stays in sight. And, having the head on shoulders proves the point that successful
people have a good sense of situation to overcome obstacles. Finally, having entrepreneurial skills is
icing on the cake. As it supplements the career growth by not only working for your own company but
also attracting fund raisers to invest and grow their firm.
Therefore, it can be concluded from above that success depends on individual. With focused purpose
and non-stops efforts are decisive factors which make people successful in their life. Whether they drop
out or fail in school, people can become better than before.

sample 2
There are a number of students fail in schools, but it does not mean that they will not be successful in
life. I actually agree that failing in school, it is not end of life.

I tend to believe that individuals have defferent interests from person to another. However, if we failed
in acadamic fields, it does not mean that we will fail in our professional life. So based on real stories , we
saw a lot of people got success in the professional life rather than acamdemic directions. As a result, we
can not say that education is the one which it judges our destiny. For example, in recent real stories of
persons around the world, we recognize that most of actors have not completed their education, and
they become an asset in the art world, as they gain money triple times compared to individuals who
finished education backgrounds.

For the mentioned above, life will not stop on education only, so people continue up their life naturally.
But there must be kind of ambitious aspect available in them. Hence, they must not feel disappointed, if
they did not success in acamdemic sides. There are a number of student left school at early age, because
they do not have the desire of education. For example, I know one person his name was khaled who was
born in Jordan, he stopped going to school, because he liked working since he was a child. Notable, his
father was handling his own business in small shop selling grocery items, as he was taking his son to his
shop to help him in managing the store. So khaled liked working with customers and help them to select
the best products for the customers as he tried to make a smile in the face of each customer visiting the
shop. Suddenly, his father died due to critical health condition. Now, he handled the store instead of his
late father.

In addition, since he controlled the store by himself, he thought of other ways to expand his business, as
a result, he offered a good to his next neighbour's shop, it went successfully, he won the deal, and
bought, after he opened both shops all together, as a consequence, he got more customers, and his
sales were increased dramatically. Currently, he opened a new company in Jordan deal with import and
export items from other countries. In addition, he has one of the best malls.

In brief, I tend to believe that education is not the only way to success life, as people have defferent
interests in life, if they could not success in acamdemics, they would have succedded in professional life.
People succeed because of their hard work; luck has nothing to do with success.

Do you agree or disagree with this statement?

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

Sample Answer 1:

Many people are successful in life, which can be explained not only by their hard work. In this essay, I
am going to consider that luck is as important as the ability to dedicate our time and energy to work.

We must acknowledge that without a deep understanding of what we do and how we do we can hardly
achieve positive outcomes. There are millions of employees who do not go beyond their duties, not
moving deeper to comprehend that the process is about. Consequently, they see only a visible side of
the iceberg. They are quite satisfied being paid a decent salary and having some bonuses. Such people
do not look for challenges; they treasure stability and are not ready for changes. They can spend a whole
life doing one and the same work, even if it is extremely boring and irritating,

On the other hand, there are absolutely different people who do not only dedicate all their time to work
but comprehend all the stages, distinguish the bonds and even make efforts to improve these processes.
Needless to say, it takes a lot of time and inner strength. These people are said to be "burning at work",
as they cannot imagine their existence without it. The job for them is not only a source of wealth but
something they are fond and proud of.

Undoubtedly luck plays an invaluable part in climbing a professional ladder. For example, I worked as a
teacher of English in Ukraine. 5 years ago it was my first attempt to take part in the programme
"Excellence in Teaching" held by the American Department of Education. Despite all my efforts, I was
not able to go further than the semifinal. There were two opposite feelings struggling within- the desire
to give up and the enormous intention to win. The most unbearable thing was that I could not figure out
where I had made a mistake. The next year I filled in the same application forms and wrote exactly the
same essay. To my amazement, I became a winner and was granted a scholarship at George Mason
University, Virginia. I doubt it can be explained other factors than the luck.

Overall, hard work cannot be underestimated. But only with luck a person can achieve recognisable
success. We all should dedicate ourselves to our jobs and climb new summits.

Sample Answer 2:

At the present time, people believe that only hardworking people will succeed and there's no place for
luck. I totally disagree with the rubric above due to the fact that people cannot earn money without luck
and with no luck people won't be able to get a job and it will be proven in the following essay.
Firstly, since the dawn of time people believed to luck, for example, people always carry some kind of
talismans or chokers. In the Ireland, people believe that green clover will bring them money and luck.
And the situation has not been changed at the present as well. You can hold a questionnaire and ask
strangers "do they believe in luck or not?" I'm sure that 100% of people will say ‘yes’; because the luck is
an inalienable part of the life of human beings.

Secondly, without luck people won't be able to get even a job. For instance, when people looking for a
job, they are searching them on newspapers and magazines and they don't know what expects them
there, they only rely on luck and trying to find a suitable job for themselves. Furthermore, even at the
school sometimes kids are getting their marks by luck, which means that teachers sometimes can mix up
jobs and mark the student wrong. It's also a clear example of luck.

On the other hand, if people will rely on only luck they will not get anything, truly luck is with us but it
helps only when we work hard. For example, in difficult situations when people cannot make a choice
between something, they are choosing only by their instincts and if they work hard and learn a lot, they
know which decision to make, it all comes from experience.

After analysing both sides of this issue, I have concluded that despite the hard work, people always need
at least the grain of luck for the successful life.

Sample Answer 3:

Every person wants to be successful in life. They have been trying their best, studying or working hard to
reach what they wish for. Some people believe that success is about hard work. They argue that luck
does not have a part in this case. People succeed depend on how big their effort to get what they want,
not about fortune. But I disagree with the opinion because I think that success is about effort, pray, and
luck.

There are many things that people do for being successful in life, especially in their careers. They spend
the time to work as hard as they can and as much as they are able. Success becomes their goal so they
push their selves to get that. Successful people in this world are them who always are responsible,
honest, hardworking, and lucky.

Sometimes people feel very confident and they just focus on their effort. They are too busy trying their
best to achieve something so they forget that there is an important thing besides an effort: that is luck. I
do not want to say that hard work is not important, but I believe that luck influences the result of our
effort. For instance, occasionally people have tried their best for doing something but in the end, they
do not get what they want.

Many people forget that the biggest power in this universe is God, not themselves. Furthermore,
thinking that hard work is the only thing to be success sounds not wise. There were few people fail to
reach their dreams although they have worked hard for it. They have spent much of their time to try
their best. But who knows, they get something which is not expecting. Is because of luck? Maybe yes
because the effort is not enough to be successful. We need luck and definitely, we need God.
In conclusion, I believe that success is not only about how hard we try but also our luck. Every human
has their own luck and their own fate but they have to still try. People should respect the process, not
just the result. What happens in future will depend on our effort and the blessing of the Almighty.

Sample Answer 4:

"Success is always a journey but not a destination". I feel that success cannot be a place but it is a part
and journey of one's own life. The author of this topic says that people succeed in their lives only
because of the hard work but not the luck. According to me, both will play vital roles in every individual
person's life. In the below paragraphs I will justify how both are important to succeed.

Firstly, I would like to say that without hard work even God will not help you out in coming over the
things in life. So, one should work hard to earn anything. I say this because there are many people
around the world who tasted success because of their immense hard work. It is a sheer illusion that one
comes up in life without hard work. For instance, everyone knows about the president of America. He
was born in a poor family in Kansas, his father somehow managed to send him to the school for
education. Then he really worked hard and secured seats in Columbia University and then to his
dedication, he completed his law from Harvard Law University with scholarships and stipends.

Now I would like to put emphasis on the luck which is also a required one in success. One may be really
hard working but if the place where he or she is residing is underdeveloped then it will be very difficult
to achieve the feat. Not only that when we read the stories of great people, we can observe that, they
had a coordinating family through which they succeeded, they are not lucky here. One such example is
the legendary cricketer Sachin Tendulkar. He is a well-known cricketer in the world. He was such a lucky
person that he not only had a very good coach and his parents' support but also got a chance to play
international cricket at the age of 16, which I feel is terrific. He used to be busy with the cricket schedule
and his wife use to take care of their children, so he is lucky enough to have all this.

In the end, I would like to conclude by saying that it is a combination of both hard work and luck that
makes a man successful in life in all respects. Having one without another is like a car without any fuel.

Sample Answer 5:

Many people think that to be successful someone should rely on working hard and luck has no role in
success. I completely disagree with this notion that success only depends on hard work. In my view, the
importance of luck should not be ignored to be successful.

Firstly, Lucky people have more advantages than unlucky people. For example, in IELTS exam, to be lucky
it is very important to manage to get a high score because you confront a lot of topics in the exam and if
you are lucky, the topics may not be tough for you because of your knowledge about them. In the
speaking test, you must opt to cue card that is a vital part of your score. If you are not familiar with the
topic in the cue card which you choose, you could not achieve to get a high score in the exam even if
you study hard and learn a lot of vocabularies. On the other hand, if you know a variety of vocabulary
about the topic that you choose, you can get a high score and pass the exam even maybe this is the best
score you have ever got. Therefore, to be lucky sometimes is as important as to be hard-working.

Secondly, Luck is essential to be successful in the professional life. For instance, one of my friends, his
name is Mehmet, is a kind, smart, and hard-working person, but he is still in the same position since he
began to work. However, one of our mutual friend, his name is Ali, is also hard-working but at the same
time, he is an amazingly lucky person because he embarked on working the same position in the same
company. However, because of having one more certificate than Mehmet, he was promoted to the
director post. As a result, he earns a higher salary than Mehmet.

In conclusion, In my opinion, success not only rely on hard work but also rely on to be luck. Thus, lucky
people have always advantages to accomplish what they want compared to the unlucky people.

Sample Answer 6:

Success is the ultimate goal of everyone. All of us are doing our best to achieve success in different fields
of life as work and study.

People try to achieve success through many ways; some of them are hard workers, they depend on their
efforts to gain success. Others are relying on their relations with important or authorised persons to
reach their goals. In addition to the previous, there is a category of lucky people where luck plays
important role in their lives and helps them very much.

Luck, in my opinion, has a great effects on the people's life, as it can shift their ways into different
directions that may change their lives completely to the better, for example: Lionel Messi, the most
famous football player in the world, was a son of very poor family in Argentina and suffered from a
medical problem while he was children related to his growth and bone formation. The luck leads a scout
of one of the biggest football club in Spain to see his skills while he was playing in his area's street in
Argentina and presented him to the club, where he obtained the due care and now Lionel Messi is may
be the most famous person in the world. Beside of that, luck and coincidence can serve humanity in a
positive way, no one can deny the role of luck in the story of Newton and the apple which lead after that
to discover the gravity rules.

I tend to see that, hard working is the first step of success and it is a mandatory thing, but also luck is
very important. So, from my point of view, I think they are complementing each other.

Last but not least, It should not be left unmentioned that success is the normal result of working hard
and one should not only depend on his/her luck for a long time to achieve success because it may not
work for many times.

Sample Answer 7:

There has been a debate whether or not luck plays a part in success. Some people argued that hard
work is the only thing that helps people to succeed, whereas others think that luck also contributes to
success. Personally, I agree with the latter.
Hard work is definitely crucial when it comes to success. Without any hard work, it is highly unlikely that
someone would succeed. For instance, there might be a good opportunity for someone to establish a
cyber-security company given the current demand on that field, but if he is unwilling to work hard on
developing the firm, it might not flourish.

In my opinion, success occurs when one is willing to commit to one thing, prepare for the right
opportunity to come and snatch it when it arises. Steve Jobs would be a good example of this when he
developed iPhones despite the popularity of other non-touch screen phones at the time. Thus, when
touchscreen phones were finally in a boom, he was well-prepared and made good use of the
opportunity.

Nevertheless, I believe that luck is also needed to be accomplished. This is because one has to be in the
right place at the right time. An example of this would be a person who has the ability and perseverance
to develop a website similar to Google. While he might work really hard on it, if the person does not
have any connection to the technology world, it is unlikely that his website would gain much attention.

In conclusion, I think being hardworking is really important to be successful. Still, luck plays a role where
having the right opportunity to the right person is also required for success. I do believe, however, that
it is more important to keep working hard rather than simply waiting for luck to approach us.

Sample Answer 8:

It is believed that people will achieve their goals and have a successful career if they work hard, and luck
has no effect on it. To a certain point, I would agree that some people are succeeded due to their
diligent and hard working cultures, but I do believe that luck also plays an important part in people's life.

On the one hand, it is true people could get their highest achievement if they work hard and diligently.
People who have great determination, integrity and positive thinking attitudes would have a different
point of view from the ordinary workers. And with their outstanding performances, it is obvious that
they will generate a more productive works and extraordinary results. These successful people believe
that there are not other factors that affected their success except for the hard-working culture.

On the other hand, although some people might not believe in luck, others feel that luck has affected
their performances and achievements. There are people who have standard working performances and
could not give significant contributions to their companies, but they are promoted by their superior. In
another case, there are several salesmen who do not approach their potential customer aggressively,
but their sales performances are beyond the target. And for these groups of people, they are convinced
that luck has truly affected their careers.

In conclusion, some people believe that the only way to success is through hard work and luck has
nothing to do with it. To a certain extent, I would agree with the statement, but some people are also
succeeded to the factor of luck, therefore I think each people have their own way of life and we should
not compare each individual.

Nowadays celebrities are more famous for their glamour and wealth than for their
achievements, and this sets a bad example to young people.

To what extent do you agree or disagree? (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

Sample Answer 1:

It is true that most of the celebrities are known for their luxurious lifestyles than for their performance
or talents these days. Many people think that this kind of attitude is not a good example for the young
generation. To a certain extent, I would agree that this kind of behaviour would be a bad example for
the society, but there are other famous people are popular due to their outstanding accomplishment.

On the one hand, it is a fact that many famous people become popular due to their fancy lifestyle,
instead of their outstanding achievement these days. Their acting talent might be standard or below the
average, but they are making sensation to the public by showing their wealth and glamorous lifestyles.
One of the examples would be Kim Kardashian who is famous for her reality television program,
whereas it mostly shows her luxurious mansion, party and shopaholic lifestyles and less of her acting. It
is believed that the behaviour would be a negative influence for the young people as it teaches them
about hedonistic lifestyle.

On the other hand, there are celebrities who are popular for their incredible acts or outstanding
performance. These people have shown to the world that they have reached success due to strong
determination and hard work, and the public always recognise them for their masterpiece of arts and
great achievements. One of the examples would be the legendary English footballer David Beckham. He
was not only a good athlete but also became the model of some sports apparels. Although David
Beckham sometimes had shown his glamorous lifestyle, but he had also shown to the public that he was
a good football player. He had informed in his biography that to achieved success, he had to work hard
in his young age, as he had to practice in doing penalty kick for around 1000 kick per day consistently.
These kinds of celebrities are worth to be followed by the young generation.

In conclusion, many famous people are well known for their wealth and luxurious style, instead of their
achievement and it would be a negative example for the young age people. To a certain point, I would
disagree with the opinion, since there are other celebrities who are famous due to their great talent and
performance. In my opinion, I think the public should be more selective in choosing their role models,
not just in front of the camera, but we should also see from their personal life as well.

[ by - Darwin Lesmana ]
Sample Answer 2:

Fame and fortune are largely dependent on the hard-work, persistence, luck and creativity displayed by
individuals of a society. These qualities often make them very famous and popular that the whole nation
becomes anxious and curious just to get their glimpse or an autograph. Few people believe that people
are popular due to their glamour and rich lifestyle. They claim that youngsters should not follow their
footprint because they may lead them astray and I don’t agree fully with this proclamation. This essay
will analyse the merits and demerits of idealising celebrities before presenting a conclusion.

Famous people such as movie or sports stars can be a role model for the young people of a society.
Idealising and treating them as their idol can help them to achieve their required goal in life. Following
their footprints can result in exploring their own talent which can further showcase marvels and
brilliance. Their creativity, innovation and display of their skills and abilities inspire adolescents to bring
change in their life for good. For instance, legendary Amir Khan, the famous Bollywood celebrity, is
known for his inspirational and creative movies but not for his wealth or attractive personality.
Adolescents copying his qualities and attributes have promoted strong moral and ethical values in a
society.

On the contrary, few people believe that following superstars and famous people displaying negativity
can mislead young people of our society. Proponents of this viewpoint believe that inspiring from their
negative roles and displaying the same act at home or in streets can have a severe impact on the
society. Moreover, celebrities are often found in smoking advertisements, charged with drugs and other
criminal activities, youth following their path can result in the destruction of ethical values of a society.
For instance, Sanjay Dutt, Bollywood Actor is well known for his money and roles as a villain, his terrorist
acts in different movies have given rise to violence and crime in streets of Mumbai, all these were
committed by adolescents for thrill and adventure.

To recapitulate, the aforementioned provides plausible arguments in favour of both views. There is no
doubt that famous people have their influence, as youth is not mature and in the growing phase of their
life. However, one should not criticise the celebrities as it depends on the young people how they
perceive and take it forward.

[ by - Tauseef Raza ]
Sample Answer 3:

It is certainly true that today more TV and movie personalities are better known for their glamorous look
and wealth rather than their accomplishments. This will probably have a negative impact on gullible
young individuals but not for the critically thinking teenagers.

The primary reason to agree with this statement is that minors are gullible. They are easily taken into
those who they watch in television, movie or even in advertisements. For instance, Philippine
presidential sister and TV and movie superstar, Ms. Kris Aquino is the most admired especially for the
Filipino adolescents, and at the same time most dislike celebrity in the country. She came from a very
powerful political family, but she uses her wealth for the sake of glamour through liposuction and
spending too much for expensive branded products such as Louis Vuitton, Chanel and Hermes. This will
perhaps affect believing younger people in a negative way because she is actually showing that it is
alright to spend too much money for manipulating God-given body and for unnecessary costly things.

On the other hand, not all young ones are credulous; most of them are critical thinkers. So they are
wisely enough not to look just the allurement and richness of TV and commercial stars but to focus their
notable achievements. For example, the international boxer figure, Emmanuel "Manny" Pacquiao who
was then a typical Filipino poor man, and became an extremely wealthy boxing man because of his
undeniably perseverance and dedication. These are the qualities some youths in the Philippines are
trying to emulate

In conclusion, I think that in my country, there are more discerning younger people than unwise ones. So
they are not easily affected by just the celebrities' beautiful aura and wealth. They know which one to
be emulated and that is the figure's good qualities.

[ by - Rona Lyn Olivar ]

Sample Answer 4:

Mass media enabled inviting fame to those who have a commanding presence and dominant influence,
best of whom are celebrities. People follow their leads as their graceful lives set bars for glory, far less
than their own achievements. As this needs imperative attention, I think it shall take a while for this
concern to be addressed.
Marked by their elusive beauties, celebrities hail in all forms of media; thus, people only see their outer
sophistication. Nonetheless, their achievements are commonly left unnoticed. This is mainly due to
idolatry where beauty is considered an investment. Hence, in today's era, a person need someone to
look up to and is perfect enough to stand out among the rest. This notion is even exacerbated by the
media, to which they preserve one's outer elements as priorities. For instance, adverts hire celebrities
whose commanding influence hypnotises others to follow. This is quite hard to control since creativity is
companies' best shot.

Notwithstanding the attention that artists' glamour and richness are getting, this creates a notion to
people's mind to achieve something rather than to stay mediocre and plebeian. However, the point of
losing one’s sight towards achievements is getting into trouble. This create a bad impact to our society
since people no longer feel the hunger to do the best in their own fields instead, they want to become
gorgeous, rather than a winner, because it is perceived as a trend way more than the other.

By and large, I think it has both positive and negative remarks. Albeit the fact that one is given more
importance than the other, still, people consider a point of reference for standards. The drawbacks may
outweigh the good points, I believe that general trends be acknowledged on their own.

[ by - Jeezreel Orquina ]

Sample Answer 5:

It is an unfortunate reality of today's world that celebrities are cherished and celebrated, not for their
achievements, but merely for their fame and wealth. Youth, in particular, views such worldly
possessions of celebrities as the highest mark of human achievement. No wonder this trend has
devastating effects on the younger generation. To prove this, one has to analyse how youth perceives
celebrities' success in general and the fact that many amongst them don't pose the right kind of image
for youth to look up to.

Firstly, very few young people realise that all the fame and glory that the celebrities get to enjoy is never
achieved overnight, rather it is all blood, sweat and tears. It takes years and years of struggle to get to
that point, which many youngsters choose not to go through, rather, they look for shortcuts towards
success. Thus, as a result, they are overcome with procrastination and laziness, which is a direct
consequence of idealising the materialistic possessions of their ideals.
Secondly, one should consider the fact that a number of superstars in the entertainment business are
infamous who should not be looked up to in any way. For instance, musicians who use extremely
obscure lyrical themes in their music, or the actors working in biographical movies dedicated to serial
killers etc. These instances show that when youth venerates such forms of entertainment, they are
somehow led to believe that they can also become as famous and successful merely by imitating their
so-called ideals. Hence, the negative influence of such a trend is obvious.

Having analysed how glorifying the rich people, not for their hard-earned achievements, but merely for
their worldly possessions, can affect youth's perception of success, it is proven that this tendency does
set a bad example. It is highly recommended that youth should be encouraged to realise that a man's
worth should not be judged by his possessions, rather by the journey he goes through to achieve those
possessions.

With an increasing population communicating via the internet and text messaging,

face to face communication will become a thing of the past.

To what extent do you agree?

Use of the internet and smartphones has become a global phenomenon and each of us is dependent on
these technological marvels in one or the other way. While there is a notion which asserts that
widespread use of the internet, online communication and cellular messaging will replace the traditional
form of face to face interaction, - I completely disagree with it.

to begin with, the use of the internet and other latest communication technologies drive us to meet new
people and contact the dear ones who stay far away. This can especially be true when one gets a chance
to express his feelings via a text or phone call. To quote an example, Skype and Facebook have enabled
people living in far flung areas to communicate effectively through video chats, thereby enabling us to
contact more frequently with people we care about. This has not replaced the way we care and meet
others, rather it has made it more convenient and frequent.

While the advancement of technology might scale back in personal contact to some extent for a short
term, the web can, in fact, enable the present and future generations to become more polarised
towards seeing siblings, parents and mates in the long run. This can be easily visualised by taking into
account that if we are to sustain the net as a tool to deliver our emotions and beliefs to the world, we
will need to picture proof gatherings, celebrations and events thereby obviating the need for face to
face communication. Secondly, it is a well-acknowledged fact that 'the human is a social being' and it is
to the credit of this physical presence that we as a species are able to harness long-term relationships,
so its value cannot be undermined for times to come. Mere endorsing words of good character by texts
cannot inculcate the right kind of virtue, thereby further laying emphasis on human presence for future
is required.

To conclude, by seeing both sides of the spectrum, it is clearly evident that the internet and text
messaging will not make the face to face communication a footnote of the past.

sample 2
ommunication is a manner of discharging feelings and emotions experienced by a person via different
many social ways such as text message, the Internet and face to face. In my opinion, I partly agree with
the extension of face to face mode because communication technology has borrowed some
characteristics of live conversation.

Admittedly, the face to face communication is the most private and safest interaction with a person. The
gestures and physical configuration of the individual body can be seen more clearly than sending an
emotion picture or live movies made by the video camera. Therefore, some people prefer meeting each
other in an open-air environment or a room because they are not constrained by somebody who has
really accessed to read or listen to their conversation. So, the free communication does not inhibit the
natural affective instincts of a human such embracement and shaking the hand.

On the other hand, face to face communication is limited by place and moment. Computer technology
offers mankind the possibility to get in touch with a lot of people far away. Meanwhile computer helps
to keep alive the chat with someone whether a friendly text message or a confirmation of an
appointment can be received later. Obviously, if the population depends more on online and mobile
communication service, there will be critical backwardness in social abilities as well in body language.
What is more, the robots will imitate face to face style of conversation and will assist disable people but,
the heart of a person cannot be customised by advanced technology.

In conclusion, the prospect of the face to face communication remains at attitude level from future
generation, but, unfortunately, the quality of this kind of conversation will not be reached by modern
technology.

sample 3
t is been widely known that the Internet has already occupied human's way to communicate. In some
sort of arguments, it is been agreed that the prevalence of the Internet appliance could alienate and
immediate interaction.

Nowadays, the apps developers invent over than a hundred social-media apps and adjust them with
human need. At the earlier appearance, people had trouble with delayed receiving mail, but after e-mail
invented, the senders will not worry anymore due to it is received fastest than the old one. Soon after
this invention, the system was developed to an e-chatting messenger. With this, people could
conveniently chat with their friends and families without length and space boundaries. Lastly, because
of some admirers do not satisfy with e-chatting service which does not give face recognition. The
developers invented a new app, a video call. With this invention, the member of families will not miss
their close-knit's face even though they are separated within and island.

On those advanced system of the internet, it could ease human problems of communication which are
related to time and cost. Internet customers could minimize a time and it can bring a good effect on
their work duties, as such, sending letter of agreements, project layout approvement to some clients.
Furthermore, it would decrease the outcome, and consequently, the profits will get in handy. Prior to
technology era, businessman adds some petrol cost to his budget, but after e-chat is invented they
erase it due to meeting client already been held in the social-media group virtually.

Wit those privileges that are given by the Internet, modern people gradually will leave the traditional
way to communicate due to the fact that old fashion could not advance their lifestyle and business
marketing. Above all, we all already lived in the future. A time when space and length have not been
regarded as a problem issue in advanced communication.

More and more businesses as well as individuals are choosing to communicate

either professionally or socially using technology rather than being face to

face.

Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using technology for communicating.

Model Answer 1:

Technology is permeating every aspect of human lives. This is apparent in the way in which both
individuals and corporations are increasingly using technology to communicate rather than relying on
the conventional face to face interactions. The advantages and disadvantages of this development will
be analysed in this essay.

On the one hand, many argue that technology has abolished the barriers among people and
organisations. The most popular depiction cited for this is the shrinkage of time it took to communicate
information from one party to another. For instance, Apple offers round the clock online customer
services to its customers and potential customers, which enables their sales representatives to instantly
respond to the questions posed by consumers. As a result, Apple’s customer service is well renowned
for its promptness and quality of service. Hence, it is argued that online communication contributes
positively to build harmonious relations between businesses and end-users.

On the other hand, many contend that communication through technology has a quality of becoming an
addiction to the users to the point where it consumes most of their time. For example, a recent survey
by Reddit found that an average American spends around 5 hours a day on websites like Facebook and
Twitter. Consequently, a large part of an individual’s day, which would be perhaps better spent on
productive activities, is wasted. Thus, the negative aspects of disseminating information through such
modern means are clear.

After musing upon both the benefits and drawbacks of communication through the internet, it is felt
that the merits of this trend outweigh its demerits. It is hoped that technology will continue playing its
part in the betterment of the world.

sample 2

Nowadays, with the development of technology, communicating via the internet

plays an integral part in the modern life. There is a increase in using the advanced
technology to communicate instead of talking directly with other people. This
essay will discuss both pros and cons of this method.

To begin with, there are some positive influences of choosing technology for
communicating. First and foremost, it is time-saving for people to interact with
friends, colleagues and other relationships. It is clearly seen that this method
accelerates the flow of information between two distances. For example, people
who live far from their home can keep in touch with their families by making a call
or sending an email which accounts for a few minutes rather than posting a letter
which make up several days as previously. Moreover, interacting via the internet
helps people save a huge amount of money. For instance, thanks to advanced
technology such as smart phone, wifi or 3G, people can communicate with other
people all over the world at no cost. They even see each other by using some
social network sites like Facebook, Skype or Viber.
On the other hand, this way of communication has some drawbacks. Firstly, it
makes the downfall of direct communication in society. The fact shows that
communicating via the internet create a decrease in interacting between people,
therefore, it is difficult to build a strong relationship since internet is only a virtual
life. In addition, the information which is posted in the internet is out of control
and not be examined thoroughly, people can be cheated and this will create some
negative impacts on residents' lives.

In conclusion, although there are some disadvantages which communicating via

the internet brings for human, I strongly believe that this method of interaction
will be trend in the modern life provided that people use of its benefits.

sample 3
Over from last few years, with the advent of modern technologies, businesses and society are
continously progessing and benefiting in almost every way. In established businesses, professionals
conduct business meetings , dealings over the phone and video channels. In past times, almost every
communication was time consuming due to non-existance of modern technology. Many people think
that companies as well individuals should choose modern technologies for commnucation and avoid
face to face interactions.

There are clearly many advantages from communication technologes both to businesses and individuals.
To being with, in current times, companies are running high-tech projects with teams across onshore
and offshore. Businesses have to communicate day and night across all the shores and
telecommunication and network technologies are the only means of talkas meeting everytime is just not
possible due to cost and time matters. Also company interviews can take place over the phone and
video calls to assess the candidate’s capabilities before taking the next step of meeting in person.
Secondly, these days, people plan and send ceremony invitations over the social mobile applications to
their relatives and friends, thus saving the money, cost and commuting time.

However, although evolution of telecommunication technolgies has made our life easier, there are also
certain demerits. First of all, there is a risk of someone playing notorious over the communication
channels without letting the other person know about it. For example, these days several incidents have
been reported where people develop trust over each other only by communicating on the social website
and do not meeting in person. Such relations late fail to mature.
In conclusion, advantages of technology for communication so much that today people and companies
cannnot survive without teecommunications. However, people and businesses should be more alert and
should not have blind faith on the other without have face-to-face conversations.

Many young children have unsupervised access to the internet and are using the

internet to socialise with others. This has can lead to a number of dangerous

situations which can be threatening for children.

What problems do children face when going online without parental supervision?

How can these problems be solved?

Due to the developing of technology, it seems that children can easily access the internet to
communicate with people without any supervision and this can cause a serious consequence to young
children's life. This essay will first discuss one of the main problems which associated with being cheated
by bad people and then will suggest a viable solution.

The principle problem with giving freedom for kids to joining the social network is they can be benefited
by someone who has badly purpose. There is a reason to think that evildoers also use the internet as a
tool to searching and approaching their target such as young children. Moreover, kids are immature and
inexperienced classifying good or bad people. They easily believe in what people said without any doubt.
For example, some thieves try to make friend with young children through Facebook with a good profile
to get the trust, then they ask for the address to and living habits of the family to plan for the robbery.

A solution for this worrying problem is parents have to pay attention to their kids and control the way
they using the internet. Parents should ask their children to carefully make friend with strange people.
Moreover, they should use software to control their kids' accessing to internet. For instance, some new
softwares allow people checking the history of last using such as what website have been going or what
people chatting in some social network.

In conclusion, one of the main problems with free accessing internet of young children can be solved
through controlling software. It is predicted that more and more software will be created to help
parents know what their kids doing with the computer.

sample 2
Modern days, the Internet becomes one of the main entertainments in every society where people can
communicate, make a friend and find variety interesting videos. However, there are several weak points
which are connect with social networks when parents cannot control their children's chats with same
strangers.

First of all, children are not objective in a making decisions. Teenagers cannot clearly understand when
person on the other end of the net lays or says true and youth easily gives same personal information on
them self or their parents. For instance, cheaters can rid children's believe by saying something untrue
but interesting and teens started believe him or her after that no daub it is easy take personal date from
them.

Secondly, on the Internet is many kidnappers and pedophiles. Everyone can create own fake profile on
website as a young boy or girl and invite children to go out. In a result that meeting might be finish with
some criminal.

That is why, parents must check their children's internet conversations with others. For that purpose,
mother or father should explain to children the problems that wait them on the Internet. Also, children
should tell to their parents who they are virtual friends and about what they texting.

In conclusion, as it is shown, the Internet have troubles for children, if their parents did not check
children's online conversations. However, these problems are fixable if parents pay attention to their
children online live.

Some people think that being able to communicate with others online is breaking

down geographical barriers and enabling people, who would normally never have

the chance to meet, to communicate.

What are the advantages of international communication online?

Are there any disadvantages to this?

Media transportation is believed to have shorten the distance and gives people chances to make friends
with people who couldn't be met in the past. In my judgement, modern tool of communication has
brought people closer to each others than ever before.

For starters, as a matter of fact, in this period of integration, the role of online communication cannot be
ruled out. One point in favour of this is having made the work from this continent to others much more
convenient. This has opened so many opportunities for people from all over the world to introduce their
products, tradition and worship to oversea friends. Additionally, human are able to work and go on
business with many companies at different corners of earth.

Secondly, the other focus point of modernization is advanced the living standards. Media tools not only
increase the understanding among countries but also widen our knowledge from different sources. The
developing places can approach many advance equipment and experiment from the developed ones so
that people can catch up with the speed of life easier.

On the contrary, besides, if people cannot fend off from many criminal in virtual world, they are prone
to put themselves in jeopardy. Bear in mind that there are a myriad of people day by day trying to lead
the teenager, people into the illegal way to take advantages over. Especially who cannot overcome the
emotion, belief and think straight in the social life.

In conclusion, international communication online has contribute to the succeed of the world today
from making the cross-country work easier and give people chances to keep up with the world outside.
However, unconcern at the disadvantages of it can put human in danger.

sample 2
In today’s world, no one can argue that the technology has changed human lives significantly. Many
technological communicating methods have been invented in the last decade. With the internet, it
allows us to keep in touch with others who live in other cities effectively. Some people think that the
online communication measure has many benefits to human beings while others think that it also has
several drawbacks. Both advantages and disadvantages of the online communication will be discussed
carefully.

On the one hand, there are many merits for the development of communication technology. First and
foremost, it can tackle many barriers for communication. The technology can break down geographical
problems. People can contact others who live in the other part of the world without travelling. Secondly,
with communicating through the internet, people do not have to spend a lot of time for communication
that we used to do in the past anymore. Calling people online consumes only a few seconds to reach
others which can save a lot of time. Lastly, using the internet for communication is the most convenient
way for communication these days. This is because, it requires only the internet which is very easy to
find almost everywhere especially in a city.

On the other hand, communication online also has many drawbacks for a number of reasons. Firstly,
communication on the internet can decrease personal interactions. The sense of face to face
communication will disappear when we reach others by sending message online. If a person try to
express their ideas or try to use sarcasm, it may be hard for a recipient to understand clearly. Secondly,
misinterpretation can easily happen during communicating online. If some people use abbreviation or
slang words for communication, it can make readers to be confused and misunderstanding.
In conclusion, even though both sides have their positive sides, the advantages of communication online
are still much more than the disadvantages. Hopefully, with the development of technology rapidly,
humans will be able to invent new methods or systems which can alleviate some drawbacks of
communication online such as lacking personal interactions, eventually.

With the development of online communication, people will never be alone and

will always be able to make new friends.

To what extent do you agree?

The widespread popularity of computer-mediate communication has enabled people's connectivity to a

great extent. I agree that in this digital world it is very difficult to be alone and it undeniably enhances
new friendships. This essay will point out the pivotal role of mediated communication in facilitating new
friend circles and eliminating the feeling of loneliness among people.

There are myriad benefits of online communication. Firstly, this type of communication has
astonishingly mitigated the geographical barriers. Today it is possible to contact family or friends either
through e-mails or instant messaging in a seconds time, without bearing massive bills for using it. As
websites such as Facebook, Skype or Whatsapp provide quick and convenient access to either message
or call anywhere in the world, therefore one is in constant touch at any place and time. For instance, I
starkly remember how I obviated the feeling of being lonely or homesick through online communication.
Thus, it is clear that in today's digital world one cannot feel lonely anywhere.

Secondly, the advent of electronic communication has successfully assuaged cultural differences among
dissimilar nationalities. The millennials are mostly digital natives and lead a virtual life. The social
networking websites and the internet are being used by everyone and through them, it is convenient to
connect people residing miles away. To illustrate, I reside in India and have never been abroad but
because of this mediated communication, I have pals from various countries. This not only promotes
exchanging each other cultural beliefs and languages but also help me in understanding their lifestyles
and culture. Thus, the central role of online communication in making friends is quite evident.

To conclude, I reaffirm my position that electronic communication affirmatively enhance friendships and
eliminates negative emotions like loneliness. I hope that much more people realise the advantages of
online communication in future.

Communication through text messaging and other instant forms of online

communication are short and basic. Some people think this will be the death of
grammar and spelling.

Do you agree or disagree?

Due to modern communication devices, people can easily get in touch with each

other. one of these platforms which is the short message service. Although

people have welcomed this way of connecting for its promptitude, in many views

it is an improper way of socializing because it will destroy the rules of grammar.

First and foremost, people are sending text messages through small sentences

and even eliminating the words. To exemplify, they are typing ‘LOL’ instead of

laughing out loud or ‘SMS’ for short message service or ‘wud’ instead of would.

This sort of typing will only save a few seconds, whereas in the long-run ‘wud’ will

stick in people’s mind and ultimately will leads to destruction of words’ right

dictation. In addition, it is embarrassing that typing shorthand is becominge not

only a trend, but also is being added to well-known dictionaries. For instance, the

word ‘OMG’ meaning "Oh My God"oh my God is being added to the Oxford

dictionary. Many argue that this is the legacy that we want to left leave behind.

Admittedly, when an individual uses short sentences gradually the person will

forget the formal phrases. A clear example is, most employers are complaining

that the majority of their staff are not able to send an official email or using use

formal words in meetings.

By way of conclusion, the text messaging service provides a quick and efficient

method of communicating. However,, people have forgotten how to use proper

grammar and spelling. I opine that what our ancestors left behind, in other words, our language,
deserves more attention to pay.

It's generally believed that some people are born with certain talents, for instance for music and sport,
and others are not. However, it's sometimes claimed that any child can be taught to become good
sports person or musician.
Discuss the two ideas giving your opinion.

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

Model Answer 1:

Many artists or football players claim that their talent is of genetic origin. They did not have to learn
music or sport to become that talented. Having said that, a growing number of people believe they any
child can be the best chess player or the fastest swimmer in the world as long as he receives the right
teaching and proper direction. In this essay, I will look at both sides of the argument and give my
opinion.

First and foremost, many believe that any child can be a genius one. It is only about how much his
parents are paying attention to his needs and what do they do to develop these hobbies. For example, a
psychology professor agreed with his wife to raise their children as the books of development and
psychology say, and now their daughter is the second best chess player in the world.

In my view, it all starts from home when a mother tries to show her baby various options and different
areas of play. Therefore, he will identify the available components around him and try to discover his
own interests. As the children grow up, they need continuous support and encouragement to keep his
certain hobby, such as music, more developed. This will not happen without professional help to have
the famous talented artist at the end. On the contrary, there is a common belief that many celebrities
are famous because they were born with specific talents not because they were taught to practice these
talents.

To sum up, I strongly believe that either born talented or not, any person can be whatever he wants only
by the continuous hard work and practice, not by genetics.

[ by Hooba Essayed ]

Model Answer 2:

It's well known that some children are born with talents and skills which are very obvious like those who
are very talented in playing music from the very early age, or those who have physical and mental power
which in fact exceeds their age. In the same context, some people say that these talents are not only
found in some children, but in all. They claim that these skills don't appear clearly unless treated in
proper ways. While other people believe in natural talents and they opine that talents are something
people are born with and what people learn are experience and skills. In my opinion, every child is good
more specifically extremely good, in a specific thing, but what is that talent? How can we develop it? Or
can we at all develop it?

"He doesn't have an extra foot or hand to be better than you!" - this is a well-known saying which
encourages children to develop their skills to catch up with those who are supposed to be talented.
Parents and teachers use this common saying just to indicate that someone is not better just because he
was chosen at the time of his birth. With efforts, anything can be achieved.

Psychologically, all children have the ability to be good at music or sports, for instance, if they are given
appropriate teaching and wise guiding. This doesn't contradict with what is known as natural talents. I
believe that these natural talents play an important role in manifesting talents; this can be seen in the
fields of music and sports. We can see that most of the stars of sports and the brilliant musician had a
natural talent; however, it was treated correctly and finally gave that success.

In conclusion, I completely agree with the idea that any child can excel when he gets enough
encouragement, guideline, opportunity and proper environment.

[ by Abdullah Hassan ]

Model Answer 3:

These days a talent hunt shows are very popular in India. Some people have quite unique talents which
are difficult to imagine. For example, a person can create a shadow of different faces of the freedom
fighters of India by just using his two hands. It is a debatable topic whether such talents are learned or it
is God gifted.

Few people are born with a talent. For instance, a two years old child can play multiple drums parallel
like a professional musician. I am confident that a child cannot learn such skills at the age of two.
Sometimes you inherit such skills from your ancestors. For instance, it is not surprising if a great singer's
son can also sing very well.
On the other hand, we have a considerable amount of people who are different from their family. For
example, a golf world champion belongs to the wrestler’s family. A champion confirmed that his father
wanted him to be different than his family. With rigorous training he became would champion at the
age of nine. If talent is acquired only by birth than a coaching concept would not have been accepted so
widely.

It is said that China won 15 medals in one of the Olympic Games. After that, the government started a
training program nationwide where kids are being trained in different sports. In two decades China won
15 medals and became number one in that Olympic game.

I truly believe that talent can be learned by passion and dedication. We would not have got some of the
greatest talents in India like Lata Mangeshkar and Sachin Tendulkar if they stopped trying after their
initial failures. If talent is acquired by birth then Mr Amitabh Bachchan would have stopped the acting
after continuous nice flop films in the starting of his career, thinking he does not have any inherent
acting skill.

[ by - Naaz ]

Model Answer 4:

The statement states the old discussion of the role of nature and nurture. The first group believes that
the innate capacities, inherited genes, or born talent play a key role in the professions like sports and
performing arts such as music. It’s true that there are people who born with certain talents can perform
exceptionally well in their fields. It’s also a general belief that musicians and artists are born with the
ability of music and arts or sports.

The other groups of people have confidence in the learning. For them, any talent can be acquired be it a
music or sports and any person can achieve anything through hard work and determination. They
believe that the man is an architect of his own fate.

In my opinion, I support the second statement, though no one can rule out the role of natural talents. A
person can be born with good voice tone and quality but he cannot achieve harmony, scale and rhythm
without learning. And beyond one’s primitive ability, every innate talent is basic in nature and for its
development, it requires encouragement and teaching. The consistency and hard work can then make
you perfect. The poets and writers, though born with the talent, do not let out their work before making
it perfect through several alterations. For example, William Wordsworth, the famous poet, revised and
amended his poem daffodils. As it is said, “draft while drunk, but revise when sober.”

On the whole, innate abilities do provide an aptitude for art and sports but success and perfection
require trial and error method.

[ by - Amna Arshad ]

Model Answer 5:

People have differing opinions as to what makes a high achiever. Some believe that a person has got to
possess certain innate traits to become an excellent performer while the other school of thought is that
anyone can become an excellent performer if being taught in a right way. I tend to gravitate towards the
latter school of thought.

Firstly, we have to admit that in certain realms in life, to achieve greatness, you have got to have the
right genetics, to illustrate; a shorter person will always be at a disadvantage against a taller person in
basketball. Secondly, many children display phenomenal qualities at sports and music that it wouldn’t be
irrational to believe that they were born with these characteristics, enabling them to excel in their
chosen fields.

However, I strongly believe that talent is massively overhyped in our culture. If we examine the lives of
top performers in any field such as Tiger Woods in Golf or Mozart in music, we would realise that these
people didn’t have any inborn attributes that we normally associate with geniuses. What in fact happens
is that such people normally are exposed to the areas that they would grow up to excel in, later in their
lives, from a very tender age. There is indeed no such thing as a child prodigy which is evident from
biographies of almost all of highly recognised top performers. In addition, these people spend a
painstaking amount of time perfecting their acts whether be it symphonies or a particular kind of move
in sports.
To conclude, in spite of the fact that most people believe that talent is inborn, I beg to differ with this
notion and believe that as long as the trait in question is not purely physical, like height, any child or
person can become a top performer in their chosen domain with enough time spent in practice.

[ by - Sameed ]

Model Answer 6:

'Talent' as defined by many scientists, is a gift and inherent ability that enables someone to be special
than others in a particular area, while many people believe in that others argue that talent could be
achieved, learnt or could be gained with practice. I agree that talent is a gift but could be strayed
without continuous practice.

On one hand, the proof of that talent or being good in certain aspect is something came spontaneously
as many famous talented celebrities, whether they are a musician or professional sportsmen, never had
any teaching or any special teaching when they were young. Moreover, many of them were raised in a
poor environment with very limited resources, in contrast, there are many sports teams which had a
huge budget for the best training facilities and they are still losing whereby the team with low budget
and even poor training sessions are winning! If talent had nothing to do with our success, then rich
students with better facilities would always have performed better than the poor students who study all
by themselves. If practice could have done everything, we would definitely have many Einstein,
Leonardo da Vinci, Newton, Pele and Shakespeare in every country. The reality is, they are born with
talents and their dedication makes them unique.

On the other side talent alone is not enough without practice and hard work. The talented persons need
to replenish his/her talent every now and then and try to improve it with practice and learning. The
personality like Leonardo da Vinci and Einstein have not achieved their success without sacrifice and
hard work.

Many famous and talented singers and famous musicians make hours of daily certain voice exercise for
their vocal cords for maintaining the nice voice quality they have and get the maximum benefit of his
talent for his community. Furthermore, the government and community associations should contribute
in discovering new talents and promote it, facilitate the training for talented persons and sponsor them
from their youngest age and make them stars.
In conclusion, talents always play a key role in our success but self-development, commitments, hard
work and tender care are also required to maintain the inherent talent and through practice, we can
make impossible into possible.

[ by - Nehal Touski ]

Model Answer 7:

It is said that ‘nothing is impossible ' in this world. To make every impossible thing possible, lots of hard
work, sacrifice, determination, and good health are required. In an exception, some people confront to
failure despite performing their duties sincerely.

I believe that those unsuccessful people were deprived of inborn talent. Sometimes, it may happen that
luck does not favour them. For instance, a highly talented athlete who was preparing for competition
breaks his leg. Provided that he had not broken his leg, he would have at least won the bronze medal
but luck did not favour him. Furthermore, there was another athlete who never won any medal in his
career despite his sincere endeavour. It means that he was not gifted to become a professional athlete.
So, it would better if he brings down the curtain as an athlete.

On the contrary, there are some people in the world who fail to realise their interest. Certainly, one can
have a rewarding career if one's talent is deduced on time. Otherwise, life becomes far worse than
expectations. Let's imagine, what will happen if Pele had pursued his career other than football? Surely,
other people might have been filled up the shoe as 'a king of football'. But, this did not happen as
football passionate Pele transformed gifted talent into a reality. So, natural talent cannot be fostered
unless one interests in it.

It is the obligation of parents and teacher to motivate, care and assist in making their children's future
prosperous. Otherwise, children have to lead the life beyond their acumen and capacity. Neither does it
any good to children themselves nor to the parents and the country if the natural talents of a particular
field get spoiled.

In conclusion, one can learn whatever they are taught but to become the master of it, one should be
born with the talent for it.
[ Written by - Abhiyan basnet ]

Model Answer 8:

Each child in this world comes with a great potential and different children have different talents for
various activities. One child may have fantastic talents for sports and someone may have more potential
to become a mathematician, musician or an artist. It’s a quite interesting natural phenomenon that we
face within the children. To make the world more beautiful and enriched, we should nurture the
different thoughts and different innate abilities of children. In my opinion nature and nurture both have
the equal role to play for a child to become a successful professional.

To begin with, every child reflects his/her abilities at the infant stage and parents can decide their life
path. Those children come with natural talents and outshine others. For instance, a child shows more
promising performance among the siblings in mathematics even though all of them have got same care
and environment. This proves that people have inborn talents that we cannot deny. No doubt proper
care and effective teaching method can hone someone's performance but this is not always the case. If
training and teaching would have been everything we would certainly recreate great minds like Newton,
Einstein, Mozart and Shakespeare every year.

From a neutral point of view, it depends on the brain capacity and also with the parent’s care. If the
parents are wiser and more talented, we can see their children become more talented. Sometimes it
gives a broader outlook of a child's life. They easily absorb the things what they learn from the school as
well as from the society. Genetic engineering also confirms that talented parents usually give birth of
talented children. However, this does not guarantee that a child of talented a successful parents will
always be talented and successful. For this, an outstanding amount of effort and dedication would be
required both from the parents and the child.

On the contrary, most of the children do not have outstanding inborn talents. They might have some
potentials but that cannot be explored until they are engaged in a certain field. Without practice and
commitment, many talented individuals do not even explore their potential in their entire life. Thus
practice, excellent teaching method and dedication can bring out the best of a child and guide him for
the rest of the life. Consequently, children become more talented and experts only if they are engaged
in a certain field. For an instance, well-known football player Ronaldo had has his own talents, but he
has improved this skill only by proper guidelines and practice.
To conclude, talent makes many people stand out of the crowd and helps to perform extraordinary
things. However proper care, environment and dedication are also required to create professionals with
expertise and kill.

Research indicates that the characteristics we are born with have much more influence on our
personality and development than any experiences we may have in our life.

Which do you consider to be the major influence?

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

Model Answer 1:

In today's modern world, numerous researches have been conducted around the globe in order to
improve the personality and the development of an individual. There is one recent research which has
clearly shown that the personality and development of a person are highly likely to depend on the
characteristics that they are born with as compared to other experiences in their life. However, I believe
experiences of a person will have a greater impact on one's personality and development.

Undoubtedly, if we could utilise the experience we gain from working or travelling abroad, we would be
more mature and more open-minded. Whenever we arrive in a new place, we can learn the cultures and
traditions from the locals in order to acquire more information about the lifestyles of others and
eventually become more knowledgeable. Besides, we may learn how to respect and not to criticise the
customs of other races which may be slightly or totally different from ours. By doing so, we can actually
get benefited by being able to look at the problems from a various perspective.

We may also become more self-independent than others if we live in a harsh environment when we
were young. To illustrate, in China, many children have to sacrifice their studies and come out to work
since they were small. They are proved to have the ability to make more mature decisions on their own
in a research conducted in China between those who are affluent and those who live in poverty.
Moreover, people who face a lot of hardships in their lives will have a detailed plan of what to do next.
For instance, they will organise their expenditure well, which in other words, they will not spend money
on unnecessary things, especially those luxurious items. Therefore, it is apparent that experiences
gained from a various field in their lives have a huge influence on one's personality and development.

In conclusion, I am of the opinion that life experience has major consequences on our personalities and
developments than the characteristics that we are born with. We will be able to think from different
perspectives and make wise decisions if we use the experiences that we gained in our daily live.
Model Answer 2:

Many scientists believe that genetic characteristics have more influence on the human’s personality
than some experiences in life. Although genetics has some effect on our characters, I believe that the
influence of life experience is more significant, and the following essay will discuss this in details.

On the one hand, it is true that everyone is unique, as they are born with different characteristics. While
some people are born with an easy going character, others might be born with a melancholic one.
People could not choose their genetic characters, and these characters will develop more as they get
adults. Therefore many experts believe that genetic characters have a significant effect on a person’s
identity.

On the other hand, other people believe that experiences in life have more influence in our life than
genetic characters. Communities, family condition, education and work experiences have a deeper
effect on a person’s character. For example, a person might be born as a sanguine person, but raise in a
broken home family. As a consequence, he could become a pessimistic person when he grew up.
Another example is that a man might be a positive person, but as he spent so much time with negative
friends, he could become as just one them.

In conclusion, I agree that genetic characters have some influence on a person’s personality, but I think
that life experiences are giving more significant influence to our personality. Therefore it is important for
us to be selective in choosing the place to live, workplace and friends.

Some people think that women are generally more peaceful than men as their

characters are naturally more nurturing than aggressive.

To what extent do you agree with this?

Recently, a debate triggered where a section of society claims that women are more affable and composed
than men, whereas others are not in agreement with it. I agree with it because females play a significant ,
important and compassionate role in everyone’s life.

To begin with, women are more compassionate and sensitive towards others. They can easily relate to
other’s situation. Furthermore, men are weak in exemplifying emotions and care to people around them.
And male chauvinism worsens the situation because it may look them weak while expressing the
sentiments and feelings. However, women express compassion easily by socializing, bonding with others
and nurturance within the society. Today, they play different roles, for example being a mentor of her kids
to face the world or she works full time as a breadwinner of the family. Thus, compassionate instinct is the
innate trait in them.

For ages, women have been raising and protecting offspring who needed protection while men engaged in
herculean tasks of hunting and warfare. Therefore, kindness, gentleness, and warmth have always been
associated with females. In addition, men have the tendency of fight or flight in case of stressful situations.
However, women embrace hard times with ease and resolve the stress. Therefore, these tendencies
confirm that women are affable figures than men.

To conclude, women are cool as a cucumber and have composed attitude to develop and nurture the world
around them, when compared to men.

World history suggests that violence and conflict were more evident under male leadership than under
female leadership. So, for peace to prevail, female leadership can be considered as a better option than
male leadership.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

You should write at least 250 words.

Model Answer 1:

(Disagreement: Denied the fact that violence and conflict were less under female leadership)

The human history has been violence and conflict-stricken since the beginning of the human existence. If
we look back in history or to the world around us, we see wars, conflict, power struggles and revolutions,
peace making kings, prudent emperors and ruthless rulers. History also reveals that society has always
been predominantly male dominated, with leaders and rulers mainly being men. It is, hence, easy to blame
the ruler and put the responsibility of atrocities on the shoulders of men. But a deeper perspective always
reveals to historians that conflict is a generic tendency of humans. So peace being disturbed is not the
liability of men only, but humans in general, and a power shift, from men to women, is destined to be futile
in prevailing peace.
Most of the women who are known to be great till date, e.g. Queen Isabella of Spain, Queen Mary, a.k.a.
Bloody Mary, Victoria, and Elizabeth of Britain, all have ruled over a vast spectrum of power. And they
often have done so ruthlessly, achieving goals with an iron hand. They have waged wars that are barely
comparable to only a few of those devised by men. These women are not anomalies of history, but
examples from numerous others, who went beyond the boundaries of gender in the path of prevailing in
power while expanding peace whenever they deemed it to be expandable.

The two greatest wars of modern history, World Wars I & II, have taught us that wars are impersonal. Race,
religion, nationality, sex are only pretences to the universally human lust for power. It is true that during
both the global conflicts men were in the rulers’ thrones. But it will be foolish to say that Margaret
Thatcher, the famed Iron Lady who spared no road against a minnow enemy in the war of Falkland, would
be more peacefully diplomatic than how the greats Winston Churchill and Franklyn D. Roosevelt had been
tackling the Axis of Hitler.

The gender issue is only a determinant in the battle of the sexes, not the battles among nations and
peoples. It is therefore, impertinent, if not irrational, to conclude that world conflicts result from the rule of
a particular gender and the finer sex would do a better job at prevailing peace if selectively put at the helm
of human nations.

(Approximately 388 words)

N.B: You should be able to pick up different points from this essay and organise your answer in your own
style. This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is just
one example out of many possible answers.)

Alternative Answer 2:

(In favour of the argument that violence and conflict were less under female leadership)
Though some people argue that war and conflicts among nations and within a territory are impersonal
regardless of men and women leaders, the history suggests that world saw less violence, war and conflicts
under female leaders. Considering this in in mind I suggest the idea that female leadership can be
considered for a better world.

The major World Wars, conflicts among nations, civil wars mostly caused by the male ego, assassinations
and conflicts of interests among men. Very few female leaders contributed making decisions to have war
with other nations in their period of ruling a country. Sometimes people often mention the Trojan War and
convict a female as the main reason for this war. But the fact is, it is not even a historically approved war
and its root lies more in mythology than in evidence. And even if it was true, female leaders were not even
remotely involved deciding to start the war. Though the number of male rulers throughout the history is
much more compared to the number of female leaders and very few major wars could be related to the
decision or action taken by women.

Women are naturally mild-hearted and avoid conflicts and wars by all means. They are more caring and less
violent by their prototypes and that makes them better leaders in terms of serving people. The leader who
is caring and has the mentality to serve people would naturally be a good leader and women are better
candidates than men in this regards.

In summary, the idea of female leadership in terms of avoiding wars and serving nations better is indeed a
good idea.

Model Answer 3:

(Neutral Notion )

Certain people think that violence and conflict were more evident under male leadership than under
female leadership since the dawn of the time. Throughout the history, Male leadership encourages
violence and some other sets of people suggest considering female leadership to prevail peace.
The issue whether or not 'female leadership can be considered as a better option to prevail peace' is always
a debatable issue. There are strong arguments from both the sides and let us discuss in a detailed way.

Firstly, World history clearly suggests violence were more evident under male leadership .An instance
illustrating this in action is first and second world wars .Male leadership encouraged violence in those 2
worlds wars and it is proved that violence is more evident under male leadership .In addition to this,
women are against violence by nature and suffer a lot because of the violence thus the women leadership
always try to prevail peace. For example, some Asian countries tried to restore the peace during women
leadership. It is obvious from this that women leadership can be considered to bring back the peace

There is always an opposite side of the coin. Certain women leadership proved that they are ready to
encourage violence. To illustrate this, Pakistan started a war during women leadership and it clearly proves
that peace cannot be restored by changing leadership. In addition to this, Bangladesh also saw a great deal
of internal violence during women leadership only. It is clearly proved that violence can be evident under
women leadership also.

Thus it is recommended, to prevail peace in all circumstances irrespective of women or men leadership.
Peace can prevail in many ways and consider female leadership is only one of those options.

(by Nirmala Pagolu)

Model Answer 4:

(Neutral Notion )

If we delved through the major historical archives, it would be noticeable that many wars and conflict
occurred under a male leadership. This observation led to some analysts to favouring a female leadership
in order to maintain peace and harmony. This approach purporting leadership based on gender to attain
peace seemed flawed and simplistic. Instead if would appear that leadership should be chosen based on
democracy and the most qualified leader for the job.

On the one hand, supporters for female leadership cite the numerous wars and conflicts under male
leadership such as Adolf Hitler or Benitto Mussolini. However, it can also be argued that a significant
number of atrocities had likewise occurred under female leaders such as Queen Elizabeth during the Iron
Age. Additionally, those who support females' leadership may quote their innate nurturing and non-
aggressive characteristics as opposed to men's innate aggressiveness. Similarly, this would seem an
inaccurate statement as observed in the aforementioned argument.

On balance, it would be more sensible to elect a leader based on democracy and his/her qualifications.
Firstly, a nation's citizens should ideally be endowed a right to vote for a leader out of their own free will.
Additionally, the most qualified person for the leadership may be another useful criterion. This
characteristic may range from their previous experience as leaders, favourable leadership qualities and
innate morale. Secondly, we all have to acknowledge the metamorphosis of gender's role. It may be that
more violence was suffered under male leadership because fewer females were allowed in that role.

To summarise, it would appear that the approach to claim that peace would prevail under female leaders
as rather simplistic. Ultimately, what would seem more crucial is for the most qualified person irrespective
of gender should be chosen by citizens out of their own free will

(by Fiona Lai)

Model Answer 5:
Over the time, history has proved that male leadership shows some violence and conflict, while female
leadership spreads peace. I agree that male performs more toughness than female in many aspects,
especially in leadership, although, there are always some odds that break the rules.

It is well known that men are stronger and tougher than women. Maybe this returns back to his body's
physiological structure, referring to his corporal side, hormones or even his nature that he was created on
the superior shape by God, where each gender mostly shares many common desires. Although men's
violent control, Hitler for example, but recent research studies revealed that two-thirds of the male's brain
are mentally described and last third refers to the emotional part in his brain, while the female's brain
shows two-thirds of emotions and the other is mental. So, this result leads us to vote positively for men
leadership. In addition, we can see that man can stand for hard times and attend and violent moments
easier than women without losing control of himself. And this is an important requirement for a good
leader.

Unlike male, the female is more sensational and caters for perfect output. They are better in house leading,
as they are used to considering small details. The woman in the house embodies the meaning of residence
where each member gets rest and live peacefully, they can get all their pains cured in moments. And that is
an essential need that humans seek all the time through their life. But this does not mean that the woman
is unable to succeed in leadership. We can see clearly the obvious example of Queen Elizabeth, and how
could she change the country she judges into a better state, her people love her and can live happy and
safe under control. The truth about most of the women that they tend to calmness and peace could qualify
her to lead complex organisations and countries even more than men.

Finally, we conclude that whoever male or female is in a leader position, however, all always search for
freedom, happiness and peacefulness, and anyone can be a leader only if he or she owns leadership skills
and humanity.

(by Samar)

Model Answer 6:
History portrays that reign of war and chaos was on the rise under male rulers compared to their
counterparts. Now in reality, does this imply that female leaders are more favourable candidates for non-
violent governance? In my opinion, it would be irrational to globalise this and crowning of leaders should
not on gender biased.

The mighty rulers of the past were predominantly males. History of conflicts and chaos during their time
deceive that they possessed an innate quest to conquer the world. The great king Alexander and Hitler
exemplify this. But the matter of fact is a deeper interpretation of historical facts reveals that this was the
need and situation of that time. The global scenario at that age persuaded the rulers to war and conquer.
Another fact would be the conflicts were not less in feminine ruler era too; the great ruler of Jhansi from
Indian scripts would serve an example.

However, the nineteenth century has witnessed more organised and determined leaders like Mahatma
Gandhi and Nelson Mandela. They exemplify the unfairness in relating male rulers to violence on a global
perceptive.

In the present day, where public involvement is emphasised while choosing a leader, the criteria set
forward by an educated mass will never be gender biased, instead, they look forward to more sensible
leaders. In spite of being under the feminine leadership, India did not address to any changes in its war
protocols in last few years. Similar is the situation in another Asian country of Bangladesh.

Though our history , canvas male rulers as a source of carnage in the time of antiquity, it would be rather
dogmatic to conclude that violence and conflicts are gender bias. Some of the examples mentioned above
would serve the evident. I would opine that for peace to prevail, sensible leaders should be crowned
irrespective of their gender differences.

Crime & Punishment Essay Titles

Some people think certain prisoners should be made to do unpaid community work

instead of being put behind bars.

To what extent do you agree? (Reported 2017, GT Test)

Crimes in many countries have gone beyond the alarming rate and it is a common practice to
put convicted people behind bars. A segment of society opines that not all crimes are equal and
repercussion of harsh sentence for all offences is uncivilised. They outline the need for unpaid
community service as punishments for mild-offenders and youngsters. I believe that certain
offenders should be given non-custodial sentences.

The predominant reason for me to believe that unpaid community services like cleaning streets,
planting trees, and working for charity instead of prison is that many offenders are not born-
criminals and the circumstance often incite them to commit a felony. Besides, when such
unpremeditated convicts are expelled from the society, they incline to re-offend in isolation as
there is none to accept them. Apart from this, juvenile delinquents should be rehabilitated by
indulging them in community services.

On the contrary, brutal offenders who commit heinous crimes like premeditated murder,
vandalism, abduction, hijacking, rapes and so on should be punished to set examples in the
society. Thus, the background of a criminal and the motif of a crime should be considered. For
instance, if a teenager steals food from a store as his mother is starving is a completely
different scenario than someone robbing an old lady. The former deserves a second chance
while the latter should be imprisoned.

To recapitulate, someone with no previous record of crime and a sensible reason for a slight
misconduct should be treated differently than a serial killer. The objective of the law is to
maintain peace in the society, not to punish people. Thus unpaid community services is a great
option to let some convicted lament for their crime.

The crime rate nowadays is decreasing compared to the past due to advance

technology which can prevent and solve crime.

Do you agree or disagree? (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

The prevalence of crime actions nowadays is weakened by the advanced technology.

Alternatively, it could prevent and solve some fugitive movements.

It is true that our home and our living planet now are secured from any false witnesses. Thanks
to futuristic video type modification that is possibly installed at every household. This day, the
engineer has embedded a nano-technology into a minor lens of a camera, so the camera can
move smartly that can predict the movement of strange projects. As a result, the house owners
are alarmed by the camera if there is a thief in their houses. Moreover, a recorded movement
can become a strong defense at a court.

At the first beginning of rocket launching, our planet has finally a good ally that can watch us
from outside the planet, an artificial satellite. Some countries have sent their satellite, then use
it to monitor every anomaly that lays at every place-spotted crime. Mostly, the Police
Department uses it to manage the traffic. Moreover, many cops can easily trace the hijackers
who run and hide in a transportation system.

Besides the progressive technology can prevent the crimes it can also help police to investigate.
Some criminal cases have been solved by the lie detector machine. It can suggest a suspected
crime allegedly guilty or innocence. It detects a truth from the pulse of suspects. If the pulse
bits abnormally they lie and if it happens reversely they say the truth. So it is clearly that police
officers can solve the problem with this intelligent machine.

In so forth, I truthfully say that with technology we can suspend the criminal development due
to the fact that it can prevent and solve the problem. And after all, every home is secured by
the hidden camera, and police can detect who is the lier.

sample 2
Crime is actually considered as the modern day cancer, which affects almost all parts of the
world inspite of country barriers. Surprisingly it has shown some signs of decline as compared
to the past, no one ear expected this would happen. Many people believes that it is due the
advanced technological developments. I completely agree with this option because of the
following reasons.

Currently we are living in technological era. Law enforcements and authorities are making use
of this hi-tech improvements as a tool for controlling the crime rate. For instance, the
technology giant google developed a facial recognition software which can able to detect a
particular person even if he changes his identity or appearance. Cops are using this technology
to hunt criminal who are on the run and ensure the safety of the citizens. Moreover
technologies like DNA recognition, is helping the authorities to keep their city free of crimes by
identifying the wanted criminal from the public and putting them behind the bars even if they
could be able o change their entire look.

Furthermore, criminal now a days think twice before committing a crime because they are
always worried about being caught by red handed with proper evidence because of the
equipments like security cameras and heat sensors. In addition these kind of technologies also
helping the country's prison system to run effectively and reducing the jail breaks to a
minimum. Likewise general public is also integrating these kind security equipments at their
homes and offices to prevent the possible future crimes.

In conclusion, we can definitely say that technological advancements making a huge impact in
all around the world to control the crime rate and criminals.

sample 3
Applied science has generated significant positive impacts in a crime field. Owing to the
unconventional mechanisation, some nations have witnessed a marked slump in the proportion
of unlawful acts as opposed to antecedent times. This essay will first discuss on how the DNA
finger printing, one of the key blessings of modern automation, plays a pivotal role in impeding
and addressing misconducts and secondly, the significance of surveillance cameras in cracking
down the criminals and precluding the evils from committing heinous crimes.

To begin with, generally speaking, DNA based investigation remains the top most compared to
other probes in terms of tackling and deterring barbarous crimes from hardcore criminals. For
illustration, in 1999, New York authorities linked a suspect through DNA evidence to at least 22
sexual assaults and robberies which remained a mystery and terrorised the city for a prolonged
time despite laying out 15 million dollars for the examination. Likewise, the same authority
associated data that was found on a rape victim to a convicted rapist just 5 days before the
schedule of his release from the prison. If the said prisoner was set free before the outcome of
the investigation, understandably, the offender would have carried out grave crimes.
Therefore, it ascertains why DNA finger printing seems instrumental in both solving and halting
crimes.

In addition, for many, installing Closed Circuit Television has subjected to a significant drop in
wickedness. The majority of law breakers would usually think twice before breaking a house
because they feel intimidated of being caught red handed as camera can capture the identity
and illegal activities that normally form a solid basis for evidence in the court. Not only would
surveillance cameras firmly discourage potential crooks but also they could crack notorious
cases. Bombing at Boston Marathon would be an ideal example, where three people died and
264 were injured. Two suspects were identified and convicted, thanks to control cameras. In
absence of such valuable products of automation, the case would have got increasingly
complicated. Presumably, security cameras prove that they remain effective in combating awful
crimes.

In conclusion, it is clear that DNA finger printing and Closed Circuit Television seem entirely
worthy because of the positive effect and creation of continuing anxieties among villains.

Many criminals commit further crimes as soon as they released from prison.

What do you think are the causes of this?

What possible solutions can you suggest? (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

As we all know that the world is facing with the crime problems and criminals are continuous
commits crime after they had been released from the jail.

Commencing crime for the criminals is not that hard because they are used to it and in order to
reduce the crime rate the government of all the country should adopt strict rules and
regulations which might help to decrease the number of crime.People are involved in crime due
to various reasons and some of them are due to influence of criminal activities in their country,
due to lack of education and due to weak legal actions.

Whenever a person is brought up in a country where the crime is very high then the person
might be interested in getting into crime. It tends to be normal for the people who are living in
the country where every day they see the crime happening in front of their eyes and they have
already committed the crime so they tend to repeat it again because they do not have fear as
compared to other people.For example in the country like Afganistan the local people will be
more inclined towards committing crime rather than a person who is living in Australia.

Reducing the crime rate is not an easy job but country should always try to reduce the crime
rate by applying legal procedures.When there are strict rules, criminals might think twice
before committing any crime.For instance, If the criminal killed a person then the criminal
should be given harsh punishment such as lifelong imprisonment or death penalty.
Lack of educational background will tend to force the people to commit the crime.Whenever a
person is not educated and might not get the desired employmentpeople might choose crime
in order to earn a living.If a person cannot fill his/her desire then the person will be involved in
the crime such as stealing, murder and other criminal activities.

Education should be free from the government so that the people all over the world will be able
to understand the importance of life.Whenever a person is educated then they will easily find
the desired job or will be involved in something creative rather than being involved in
something which will create bad impact in the country. A successful person is always the one
who have desired job or skilled person in their interested field.

To sum up, though there are various causes of crime happening everywhere and the
governmental bodies play the top role to reduce the rate of crime byadopting the necessary
action which will definitely help to get over from crime.

Statistically a person who has been once convicted has a 57 percent chance to be arrested
again within five years after being released. Below some reasons and solutions of the issue will
be discussed in details.

sample 2
To begin with, those who used to be inmates have a hard time to find a job, moreover, not
having opportunity to earn money and sustain themselves has a deteriorating effect on former
prisoners. Consequently, many of them might be considering committing a crime to get some
cash. Furthermore, if we take a closer look at the described situation, the second cause of the
problem will become noticeable – negative social attitude. In average, law-abiding citizens are
suspicious and even afraid of the yesterday’s inmates. This attitude probably makes the ex-
inmates to feel abandoned and ousted by society. Thus, they are pushed by the situation to
commit a crime.

However, causes that were discussed above might be successfully addressed. Firstly, creating
new government backed social programs that are aimed to help the released individuals to find
a job could have a dramatic positive effect on the number crimes committed by the released
from jail. To illustrate, a former criminal who has been employed and is able to make enough
money to support himself need not look for illegal ways to earn some cash.

The last but not the lease point is that attitude to ex-inmates has to be changed in the society.
Contemporary society has a plethora of biases and prejudices about those who were convicted.
Those biases should be addressed. Probably, raising awareness about challenges that are faced
every day by those who want to change their lives after being punished and served their terms
may bring some positive results. In other words, there is a need to accept and include those
who are willing to change into society.

To sum up, statistics states that many of those who were released out of jail would commit new
crimes because they have no legal way to make money and are ousted by others. However, if
government makes steps to help those people to find jobs, it will have an enormous positive
impact on the statistics and fewer ex-inmates will violate the law again.

sample 3 In modern world, crime rate is increasing incessantly though, culprits do get
punishment and are sent to jail. But even after attaining freedom they continue to commit
crime. Although, there are a slew of factors responsible for such behaviour however, I will
discuss few of them in this essay along with the couple of ways to resolve this deplorable issue.

To embark upon, association of immoral people. In prison various types of people are present,
some of them are innocent and some are forged. However, when an individual is accompanied
by people who are indulged in illegal activities, he tends to get brain washed and eventually fall
into this trap. I can reminisce, one of my colleagues was imprisoned for two months since he
was the prime suspect of a robbery. By the time, he returned from jail, he had learned new
techniques of breaking a locker and started acquainting with other thief.

Additionally, nonacceptance of the society plays a major role in making someone a "Criminal".
It is no exaggeration to state that we are equally responsible for such a lamentable situation
because when a person goes to any place for job, he only gets rejection. It is perhaps due to the
stigma of crime, we do not forgive them and indeed feel threatened to give them a chance to
improve. For example, there was a sixteen year old boy who went to jail for stealing. Though,
he changed later but nonetheless, he could not get a decent job to survive and was compelled
to steal again.
To recapitulate, I would like to mention assertively that we all must come forward to bring this
revolutionary change in the society. This can only be achieved by trusting this elite by providing
them an opportunity to prove themselves so that they do not get depraved. Also, government
must take robust actions to support them in beginning their new life by setting such facilities
where they can show their skills and work diligently to earn money to sustain.

It is often thought that the increase in juvenile crime can be attributed to

violence in the media.

Do you agree that this is the main cause of juvenile crime?

What solutions can you offer to deal with this situation?

sample 1 It is considered that the rising of teenager crimes is related to the media. I like to
mention that I completely argue that the mass media focus on violent and sensational crimes.
So we need to discuss the main reasons and the effect of media on increasing the juvenile
adequacies then the ways to prevent and solve this unpleasant situation.

It is obvious that media increased the crime because of two main reasons. Firstly, teenager
tends to have role models. So if their favorite role model involves in gangs or was criminal, they
would have been negatively influenced by them and consequently, might commit a crime.
Secondly, media is one of the most important parts of our life which we spend most of the time
with. If the media's content was violence, it would affect our behavior and we would become
depressed or disappointed and as a result of that, we might encourage committing a crime to
make our feeling better and reduce the depression.

The solutions which resolve the massive increase of juvenile adequacies is to enforce
observation of the children and pay attention to age limitations. Children should use the media
under their parent's observation and they have to be allowed to watch some kind of films for
instance. Furthermore, parents should pay attention to age limitation of some kind of movies at
first the children might break down but that is for their own benefits. Generally, I enjoy bringing
children up with full of attention and care.
In conclusion, most of the time people believe that violence in the media is an acceptable
reason for rising of teenage crimes. In fact, several reasons are known up to now, and media is
one of the most discussable ones. We debate the effects and the ways to avoid the rise of the
crimes above.

sample 2 It is apparent that juvenile delinquency has evolved to be a pressing concern

especially in metropolitan areas, in recent decades. Although there exists a commonly held
notion that juvenile crime stems from violence in the media, some other causes should be
taken into consideration as well.

There is a multitude of reasons spurring the growth of juvenile crime. Firstly,due to the
development of the internet, Citizens especially teenagers have easier access to pronographic
and aggressive materials. This means that adolescent will imitate exactly what are depicted on
these images and videos, which in the long run acts as an contributor to mental health
impairment leading to crime commission. Secondly, Poverty is the main factor that accelerates
individuals’ crime commission at their early stage of life. In order to satisfy the living demand,
some children especially those in the poverty-stricken regionss has become a pickpocket or a
pilfer for their life maintanance, which probably can breed the future offenders for even more
serious crime.

Nevertheless, There are also a variety of solutions to alleviate this issue. First, there is an urgent
demand for higher degree of parents supervision to the young people’s usage of the Internet.
Due to a stricter restriction of internet usage, teenagers would be less sensitive to X-rated and
other violent materials and subsequently have a heathier lifestyle. Second, The Government
should create more jobs especially labor job to ensure a better standard of living for the young
destitute citizens. For example, many unemployed adolescents in Vietnam now can make an
honest living thanks to being offered labor jobs in governmental company and no longer have
to steal money for survival.

In conclusion, negative materials from media definitely not the sole factor leading to young
people committing crime. Identifying the reasons behind this issue is the key to finding practical
solutions.

sample 3It is irrefutable that there has been a growth in the juvenile crime rate in the recent
days. Though some people may argue that it has been contributed by the violence in media, I
believe that it is contributed by the change in the entire lifestyle of the society. This essay will
discuss two paramount arguments supporting this view and probable ways to handle the
situation.

First and foremost, in the last few decades the entire family structure has undergone a drastic
change. For instance, because of the financial necessities, both the parents are required to
work and hence, they spend a very less time with their adolescent children. This leaves them
without proper guidance and when they make wrong decisions, there is no one to mentor
them. Furthermore, we cannot deny that, there is more exposure to youngsters nowadays. This
is caused by the advancement in technology that can bring the whole world to our desk. But,
the downside of this is that, sometimes, juveniles are not aware of what is moral and what is
not.

These problems can be overcome only by the combined effort of the parents and the teachers.
For example, parents should spend more time with their children and guide them in how their
difficult situations should be handled. Additionally, proper counselling should be provided by
the mentors at school to youngsters, who go astray and also, though we cannot shun youth
from enjoying the benefits of technology, we should teach them assess the morality of what is
presented to them.

In a nutshell, our transformed way of life along with the unguided exposure to undesirable
contents is the major contributor to the increase in juvenile crime-rate and this can be solved
through prompt direction from the elders.

In some societies, the number of crimes committed by teenagers is growing. Some

people think that regardless of age, teenagers who commit major crimes should

receive adult punishment.

To what extent do you agree?

sample 1 Juvenile adequacies were increased in some societies, therefore some people
believe that criminals who are a teenager and committing a crime should get the adult penalty.
I completely agree with the equal sentence for both teenager and adult criminals. In this essay,
I will discuss the reason for the agreement.
First of all, the punishment would help to prevent a teenager from committing the crime.
Punishment would make a kind of fear of the result of an action; as a matter of fact if teenager
knew about the ultimate result of the crime they would forbid themselves to act like a criminal.
For example, In Iran, if people kill someone while driving without the driving license, the highest
penalty considered for them and as a result of that the young people under 18 which do not
have driving license are not allowed to drive and are strongly controlled by their parents
because the fear of punishment exists in families.

Secondly, in my opinion, the age does not make sense in the embarrassing figure of the crime.
It means crime is a crime and when someone committed that, no regret would be acceptable
especially about major crimes. For Instance, when a murder takes place the victim would never
have the chance of being alive anymore and in that case, law should not be soft on crime
despite how old the murderer was.

In conclusion, juvenile crime is unexpectedly rising and some citizens argue that teenager
should be punished as the same as adults. As I debate two reasons which are mentioned above
I totally believe that, this opinion might positively work.

sample 2 It is true that the juvenile delinquency has turned into a more serious problem in
recent years. Concerning the issue that how teenagers should be punished people have
different opinions. As far as I am concerned, I believe that they also should be punished in that
vein as adults for the major offences.

Firstly, if we turn a blind eye to the crimes committed by adolescents, it can motive them to
break the law. Along these lines, the fixed punishment for major crimes can be regarded as the
ultimate deterrent for everybody, particularly for teenagers. Taking into consideration the fact
that young persons are more impressionable, the fear can be a crucial factor which prevents
them from resorting to crime.

Secondly, making exceptions in the law would be the wrong step to be taken which can
undermine government’s authority among people. The more fixed rules, the more obedient
citizens government will have. At some point, nobody would like to rely on the law which is full
of privileges.

Lastly, if there were discernable differences for the major crimes, it would bring inequality not
only to society but also prisons. Adult inmates would demand the same discipline to all outlaws
regardless of their age. On the condition that their requests are disapproved, it may result in
discrimination to young prisoners in the jails.

For the reasons mentioned above, I firmly believe that there should be the fixed legislations
against serious falling foul of the law disregarding that adults or teenagers are responsible for.

sample 3In the recent days, we can notice that the involvement of youngsters in crime has
increased considerably. Due to this, a section of our society conceives that those teenagers
should be tried as adults. However, in my opinion the way we handle juvenile and adults in
crime should be different. This essay will discuss two paramount reasons supporting this view.

First and foremost, a crime is committed only when there a criminal act along with a criminal
intent occurs. But, youngsters neither have a vivid intent for their actions nor a clear
understanding of the consequences of their doings. Furthermore, many adolescents lack the
cognitive ability to plan and execute a harmful activity. Consequently, most of the incidents are
due to peer pressure and impulsive reaction rather than a planned lawbreaking. Hence, it is
inappropriate to try a teenager in court as an adult.

In conjunction with the above justification, youth have more room for rehabilitation compared
to grown-ups. Since it is likely that they don’t comprehend the aftermath of their conduct, they
stand a higher chance in realizing their wrongdoing and mend their ways. Additionally,
apprehending them along with adults, will not only turn them into hardened criminals, but also
does not achieve the goal of abating crime in the society. For these reasons, the trial and
punishment for juvenile and adult should be separate.

In a nutshell, since, the comprehension of a teenager is lower than an adult and, as they are
more probable to rectify their blunders; the sentence imposed on them should also vary
accordingly.

Some countries are struggling with an increase in the rate of crime. Many people

think that having more police on the streets is the only way to reduce crime.

To what extent do you agree?

Crime is one of the most crucial problems of modern manking on the equal basis with pollution,
obesity, diseases and so on. Various countries practice different ways to achieve decrease of
crime rates. Placing more police employers is one of such measures. In my view, this method of
control of criminals is not always effective and definitely is not the only one in the century of
up-to-date technology.

To begin with, plenty of policemen on the streets rarely stops criminals on the way to commit a
crime. Such people usually prepare well and get ready to any predictable situation, including
fights with police. There are some examples which are worth mentioning. Despite great
amounts of police workers in developed European countries (Belgium, France, the Netherlands
and so on) numerous terroristic crimes in recent years were not prevented.

In addition, the online crimes gain a great popularity nowadays. Professional hackers and
programmers have an ability to crack any computer (even computer systems of the
Governments). Unfortunately, there is still no ways of preventing such types of crimes were
invented but existing ones (including police) are useless in these cases.

In conclusion, it seems to me that putting a greater number of policemen on the streets is not
always a key to the problem of growing crime situations. Modern criminals have already been
using various techniques of overcoming methods of safety including police, and police officers
are senseless for online crimes.

sample 2 The rate of crime is increasing within a fraction of minute everywhere. Countries are
suffering due to the high rate of crimes which have to be stopped unless it becomes
unstoppable. As it has already done a lot of damage in minds of people. They feel the danger to
move safely in streets where they live. Crime doesn’t have any age limit or gender equality.

People think the government has to deploy more police officers to ensure the safety. Increase
in the number of the police officer to ensure security is one of the best options. They can patrol
cities over time and time to have an eye on any ill happening. Criminals will fear out with the
risk of getting caught and punished.

Crime can’t be reduced with the increase of police. The government has to look at another
perspective available. Strict laws should be enforced so that everyone fears before doing
anything wrong. CCTV cameras should be installed across the street in order to have 24*7 eye
on everyone. One of who is caught up should be punished hard so that they don’t commit same
again.
The government should create better job opportunity and education system. So that no one
move to the dark side for survival that is indulging in crimes. This can’t reduce the crime but it’s
a way to make it. With jobs and educations, the rate of stealing, robbing away and killing
people for money can be rationed.

To conclude, it’s right to say increasing the number of police is a way of reducing the number of
crimes. But some other ways also has to be considered.

Some people think that women should not be allowed to work in the police force.

Do you agree or disagree?

If women should be allowed to join military forces just like men is a debated topic of the last
decades. Since the second half of 19th century, our society has changed in several issues, like
the one related to women rights. The decision if to allow females to join the army like men is
anyway a more complex argument, because of the particular skills required to military forces
members. My opinion is that women should be allowed to join army, navy and air forces exactly
like men, mainly because nowadays roles of these forces have changed consistently if
compared to last centuries, but also in reason of the real contribution that women could bring
in those professional areas.

It is not a secret that the role of military changed after World War II, as technology developed
and new instruments were created to be used, at least at first, in war activities. The deep
change in the way to conceive war led to the possibility for women, historically considered the
“weak sex”, to participate as army, navy and air force soldiers. For instance, women are today
represented in military forces in several roles, even if mainly in administrative positions.

This reflection brings us to the second reason why women should be free to choose military
careers, that is the potential loss of good members in chief positions. At least in these decades
the firsts for women with an almost complete emancipation, we could expect that the greatest
contribution they could bring in war topics is not about physical strength, but mind ability. For
example, in Italy we see that many women working in police forces occupy chief positions. This
could happen in a few years also in military forces.

In conclusion, I strongly believe that in the 3rd millennium of human history there is no longer
space for any form of sexism. Moreover, the advantages of having women in the army, navy
and air forces are too much to not remove, both in the military and in public opinion, any sexist
prejudice.

sample 2Recently, the discrimination between male and female has been significantly
obliterated and some kind of jobs has no longer male dominated. Although, some people
believe that, specific jobs are suitable for woman bud some others consider that some kind of
jobs such as police officer is not appropriate for a woman. In this essay I discuss both of the
views, besides, in my perspective, the second group's opinion is more related to the modern
world.

On the one hand, each gender has individual characteristic and based on that could do some
type of job better. For instance, most of the women are good at taking care of people or
cooking and they are more successful in being a nurse or a chief. What's more, men are strong
and confident and act much more professional in being army or police officers. So, it might be
true that some kinds of jobs are suitable base on the gender.

On the other hand, the different trends should not be neglected because of the gender. It
means that talented person despite the gender might carry out a specific job successfully more
than others' expectation. For example, a woman as a police officer might be so talented and
capable of making a decision or designing plans as a professional male officer. To sum up, other
people might think some jobs are suitable for specific gender but motivation and talent has a
massive influence on doing the jobs despite what the gender is.

In conclusion, we debate two views of people and discuss why they have these beliefs, first of
them argue that male and female can do same jobs equally if they are capable, the second
group think that some jobs like a police officer are not suitable for a woman.

sample 3 The military services of any country have always seen a dearth of female candidates.
However, more women are now working in military jobs. There are many arguments for and
against women working in the military, however, I believe that women have the right to make
their own choices.

The people who believe that women should be allowed to join the military forces, say so
keeping fairness in mind. In other words, no job can be monopolized by males or females, and
that people should be allowed to decide for themselves. In the present times, we see women
taking on and performing outstandingly well on almost all the jobs that were once traditionally
dominated by men. The phenomenal contribution by women to various sectors in employment
is commendable. This is also the case for developing countries, where women, until a few years
ago, were not even given an equal status to men in the society.

However, it is also argued that women should not join the army, navy or the air force. It doesn't
seem an appropriate career choice for women, considering their physical strength will not
outweigh as that of men. Also military jobs require months of staying away from home in
possibly adverse conditions, which might be a difficult situation to handle for women with
children. In a family where both parents work, a woman would not be able to adjust her family
life with her job in the military. But these are situations I feel that don't affect women who are
not under such responsibilities, and these women may very well be able to work in the armed
forces.

To conclude, I believe women to be pretty capable of multitasking, and certainly not less skilful
than men. Therefore, I definitely agree on letting women join the army, the navy or the air
force.

Many crimes are often related to the consumption of alcohol. Some people think

that the best way to reduce the crime rate is to ban alcohol.

Do you think this is an effective measure against crime?

What other solutions can you suggest?

sample 1

It is indisputable that alcohol plays a key role as a major contributor to the rising crime
rate. In my opinion, official forbiddance of alcohol will definitely have a significant
outcome in curbing felony. This essay will discuss an argument supporting this view and
the other probable actions to subside crimes induced by alcohol.

First and foremost, alcohol prohibition has already been experimented in certain states
of India and has been found to be effective. For instance, in the Indian state, Bihar, the
crime rate has reduced by 27% after the ban of alcohol. This is because, countless
crimes happen owing to the aggravation and irrational behavior induced by alcohol.
When the availability of liquor is curtailed, people will be sober and hence will make
levelheaded decisions and will not pursue illegal activities impulsively. Therefore, liquor
restriction is an efficient proposal to control violation of law.

Over and above, rehabilitation centers for addicts can be established in different
regions, to ensure that the delinquents do not become repeat offenders. Moreover, the
social norm about drinking has to be changed through awareness programs. This is
because, a considerable number of people, start as social drinkers; deteriorate and give
in to alcoholism. Hence, the peer pressure should be nipped in the bud. This will further
serve as a step in solving alcohol abuse and in turn as a precaution to prevent crime.

In a nutshell, reformation centers and awareness programs will be instrumental in

bringing a change in the social outlook about alcohol and in turn in undermining the
crime rate. Meanwhile, alcohol prohibition will aid in reducing the occurrence of crime
instantaneously.

sample 2

It is indisputable that alcohol plays a key role as a major contributor to the rising crime
rate. In my opinion, official forbiddance of alcohol will definitely have a significant
outcome in curbing felony. This essay will discuss an argument supporting this view and
the other probable actions to subside crimes induced by alcohol.

First and foremost, alcohol prohibition has already been experimented in certain states
of India and has been found to be effective. For instance, in the Indian state, Bihar, the
crime rate has reduced by 27% after the ban of alcohol. This is because, countless
crimes happen owing to the aggravation and irrational behavior induced by alcohol.
When the availability of liquor is curtailed, people will be sober and hence will make
levelheaded decisions and will not pursue illegal activities impulsively. Therefore, liquor
restriction is an efficient proposal to control violation of law.
Over and above, rehabilitation centers for addicts can be established in different
regions, to ensure that the delinquents do not become repeat offenders. Moreover, the
social norm about drinking has to be changed through awareness programs. This is
because, a considerable number of people, start as social drinkers; deteriorate and give
in to alcoholism. Hence, the peer pressure should be nipped in the bud. This will further
serve as a step in solving alcohol abuse and in turn as a precaution to prevent crime.

In a nutshell, reformation centers and awareness programs will be instrumental in

bringing a change in the social outlook about alcohol and in turn in undermining the
crime rate. Meanwhile, alcohol prohibition will aid in reducing the occurrence of crime
instantaneously.

sample 3
Most of the time the criminals are drunk while committing the crime and some people believe
that the main solution for preventing the crime commitment is alcohol prohibition. I completely
disagree with this view, because of a major reason which I will discuss in the following
paragraph, and then debate what the effective solutions are.

However alcohol consuming would affect on committing the crime, forbidden the alcohol is not
the best solution for decrease the rate of the crime. Because in that case people drunk in their
privacy and as the result of that disobedience take place. Moreover, alcohol is imported by
trafficker; so, another crime happened. For instance, In Iran, the rule of alcohol prohibition
exists, but the hidden bar made up and the covert drunk people spread out in the whole
country, but, still the crime committed by drunken criminals and the increasing rate of alcohol
trafficker become another problem which police and governments are struggling with. So ban
the alcohol might not solve the increasing rate of the crime problem.

The solution of reduction of alcohol consumption in order to reduce the crime commitment
needs parents and governments attention. First of all, parents should control their children to
not drink alcohol before 18; besides, they should not consume alcohol obviously and openly in
front of their children's eyes. The Government should improve the educational goals and teach
the younger generation how alcohol would be harmful especially for their health and the safety
of the society.
In conclusion, some people consider that, ban the alcohol absolutely reduce the crime
commitment because most of the crimes committed by drunken criminals. We debate the
views and solution above.

Many people believe that having a fixed punishment for all crimes is more

efficient.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of having a fixed punishment?

Most of the individuals think that it is better to punish the criminal with an equal value in
sentences. I totally and strongly disagree with this view because justice is not to mean equality,
but, in this essay we just discuss the benefits and drawbacks of this opinion.

As one of the cons of fix punishment, People are different and have several behavior and
beliefs. So consider about the difference between people and their situation lead to having
several flexible punishments. For instance, a woman who robs some stuff in a supermarket for
her children because of starvation should be considered as a criminal who committed crime
intentionally or committed the minor offence as the comparison with a murderer who kills
someone because of earning money. One of the pros of flexible punishment is that the
influences of the crime have been emphasized. Each crime has its own reflection and affects
victim differently, therefore, it is essential to have different punishment for different crimes.
For example, the murderer punishment undoubtedly should be higher than shop robbery;
hence, the effect of killing someone is irrecoverable and it is not fair to punish the murderer as
the same as other criminal such as a robber.

The benefit of the fix sentences is to make the judge much easier. It just needs to write down a
law about crimes punishment and the court just run out the sentence. Judge need to focus on
finding the guilty persons and after that, it is the time to punish them surely and independently.
As an illustration, when a person kills someone no matter the murderer was mentally ill or not,
he/she should have maximum punishment and discrimination is not allowed.

In conclusion, most of the people considered that it would be fair if the entire criminal has an
equal punishment without thinking about what was the crime exactly. We debate pros and
cons above and give some examples.
sample 2

In today's world, crime is the major problem which is being faced by all the nations and
in spite, of several efforts, it's rate is increasing unceasingly. Now, many people firmly
believe that there should be one definitive penance for all the offences. On the
contrary, some are not in favour of this notion. Therefore, in this essay, I will shed some
light on the pros and cons of this ideology followed by my own opinion in the end of it.

To embark upon, the substantial benefit of it is that it will certainly dwindle the time
taken in giving the judgement. It is no exaggeration to state that there are innumerable
number of cases are hanging in air in the court's of every country and state. It is simply
due to the infinite time period consumed in the court proceedings. In fact, I can give an
excellent example of my own nation India where more than ten lacks of cases are
pending in Supreme court alone which is lamentable. Because of this delay, huge
number of innocent people are waiting in prisons for their hearing to start and are
bound to live a very wretched life.

In contrast, the considerable drawback of this kind of judiciary system is that the justice
done will no longer be fair. Allow me to elaborate this statement by presenting a
hypothetical situation where an individual has brutally murdered someone and there is
another men that has stolen some money from someone's purse. Now, is it justified to
give them the indistinguishable sentence. As, a murderer is liable to to be imprisoned
for at least ten years. On the other hand, to announce such rigorous penalty for a thief
would be absolutely cruel and inhuman.

Conspicuously, I would like to mention assertively that all human beings are different
and thus commit sundry sins. Though, it appears quite tempting at hurried glance to
implement one penance for all criminals due to its time saving approach and feasibility.
Nonetheless, it would be inequitable to look at everyone with the same prospective and
to give them all the identical punishment. I am of the opinion that the downsides of this
idea far outweigh any positive repercussions and also it is inevitably against the
humanity.
sample 3
Whether should we fix punishments for each type of crime or consider other factors, such as
the circumstances of the motivation, while deciding on the punishments? It is really a complex
question and different people hold different opinions.

Some people insist that each type of crime should have its own fixed punishments. Obviously,
there are several advantages to do so. First of all, if we set definite punishments for each type
of crime ahead, then the process of judgment would be efficient and hence the judgment
would cost less. In other words, the victims and the criminals would quickly know the judgment
and receive deserved compensation and punishment respectively. In addition, the fixed
punishments can act as a warning. That is to say common people know well the results if they
commit a crime and thus they would think twice when they want to violate the laws.

However, other people claim that it is essential to take into account that what is the condition
that a crime happens and why people commit crimes. The predominant reason for this is
because some offenders do not intend to commit crimes; instead, it is probably that they do so
out of protecting themselves from hurting by others. In such condition, the criminals should be
given less serious punishments or even free of punishments.

According to me, it is advisable to consider the circumstances of an individual crime, and the
motivation for committing it. Although taking these into consideration would cost more time
and money, the judgment could be fairer and the society would be more harmonious.

Some people think that the government should be responsible for crime

prevention, while others believe that it is the responsibility of the individual

to protect themselves.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

Crime commitment protection is the responsibility of government based on some people's

belief but on the other hand some consider that it is a personal responsibility. In my opinion, I
think that both sides are partially true and it needs to discuss both of them concurrently,
besides, I think first of all people have to protect themselves from committing the crime and
then if they are not successful , it would be governments' turn to control the criminals.
On the one hand, people are responsible for their actions, that means, each person is taught
about right and wrong behavior ,so, they are expected to act in right way, in another word, they
are expected to have self-control of doing unpleasant or harmful actions especially when their
act or behavior might hurt other people. Totally, a conscience person never commits the crime
and as a result of that, the crime rate would reduce, if people improve their self-control
behavior or listen to their conscience.

On the other hand, some people believe that government has to prevent the crime
commitment. It is partially true because a powerful government could run out the law or
increase the security in the community by training more police officers. Sometimes government
neglected some of the rules because of criminal connections with authorities and the lack of
strength in running out of the law increase the crime rates. What's more lack of security, make
it possible to committing the crime without fear of arresting or punishment.

Finally, in my point of view, it is essential to teach the younger generation how to have self-
control in order to create individual protection of committing a crime and the government
should increase their monitoring on punishments and security.

In conclusion, we have two groups of people. One consider that the cause of reduction the
crime rate could depend on authority controls and another group think that self-control is one
of the best ways of preventing a crime commitment

sample 2

With the increase in crime rate, the need to inhibit the occurrence of felony has become
the need of the hour. However, who should take charge of this responsibility is a moot
point. Before coming to a reasoned conclusion, this essay will discuss if it should be the
authorities or the people.

A section of our society concedes that, the government should be accountable for
curbing crime. This is because; they have trained professionals to handle the problem.
For instance, criminologists study the pattern of the crime and have the advantage of
their knowledge in criminal profiling. Moreover, the human force under their disposal
will be instrumental in curtailing the occurrence of criminal activities. Hence, they
believe that the authorities should be held responsible for controlling crime.

However, contrarily, there is a belief that each individual should be cautious and protect
himself. They presume, when each person is capable of defending, it increases the risk
involved in the crime. Consequently, occurrence of illegal activities can be undermined.
Furthermore, it will not be economical to expand the police force proportional to the
population and also we have to take the burden off the officials’ shoulders, so that the
whole system is can function more effectively. Owing to this, few people consider
individuals liable for their security.

Nevertheless, in my opinion, when it comes to repressing the manifestation of crime, it

should be a collective accountability of both the public and the government. On the
grounds that, police and individuals have their own superiorities over the other, a
combined effort is essential for a productive outcome.

sample 3
One of the primary responsibilities of the government is to maintain law & order, control crime
and protect the citizens. But

some people believe that more than the government, people should take the ownership and
measures for their protection.

People who emphasis that individuals should be made accountable for their security have some
points. First and foremost, government is involved in so many programs and may not focus on
every facts required to protect the each citizen. Consequently, there might be loopholes in
controlling the crime. For example, police stations keeps the records of the registered criminals
and set a watch on them, but there are numerous petty criminals in local area which go
unnoticed. Another point is that in most of the countries, government resources are limited and
in case of crisis, help may not be arrived on time and people may suffer badly because of
delayed help.
However, numerous people look up to government for providing protection and control crimes.
It is considered that government resources are well trained in handling crime situation
effectively in different circumstances. Police in most of the country are equipped with tools
required to control and prevent the crime. For instance, in case of unrest, police use light
weapons to arrest the criminals and save the victim. Also, government has local intelligence
service by which they get to know in advance about the perpetration of crimes. Therefore, a lot
more planning can be done to prevent the crime.

In conclusion, people should be alert and take steps for their protection. However, it is the
primary responsibility of government to protect the people and stop the crimes.

The death penalty is the best way to control and reduce serious crime.

To what extent do you agree?

odel Answer 1: (Agreement: Capital punishment is essential to control violence in society.)

Before talking about the essential role of the death penalty, you have to think about the
meaning, and the purpose, of any kind of punishment. If you consider that the purpose is to
prevent the guilty from being nasty again, you can be seduced by an argumentation in favour of
the suppression of capital punishment.

But you have to think about another aspect of the problem: a punishment is also useful to
impress people, to make them fear the law. In fact, let's take the example of a young misfit,
which has grown in a violent atmosphere, influenced by older delinquents, etc. He lives in the
streets; he's got no aim but to survive. This is the kind of person who could possibly kill someone
for money, or even for fun .Why would he fear prison? Life would be easier for him there. In
addition, in many cases, when you behave normally, you can benefit from penalty reductions.
This young misfit needs to be impressed; he needs to know that the law is a frontier. When you
cross it, you can lose your life. That is why capital punishment helps keep a distance between
robbery and murder. If you abolish it, you suppress the difference between these two types of
crime, which are completely different.

But there is also a limit to define: even if the death penalty is unavoidable, it would be a crime to
apply it to inadequate cases. If there is no premeditation or past facts which can justify such a
punishment, it is far too strict to apply the death penalty. That is why the lawmakers have to
establish precisely the context in which capital punishment car being pronounced. That is the
price to pay to limit violence without using excessive violence.

(Approximately 293 words)

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

Model Answer 2: (Agreement: Capital punishment is essential to control violence in society.)

Nowadays, the crime rate is accelerating according to many surveys. To rein this situation, there
should be a mechanism in place like jail for lifetime and death penalty based upon the crime
severity. The government should enforce such laws to create a high alert around the society and
endorse a secure ruling to its people.

Many incidents are the best examples of imbalanced society values in the recent days. Those are
like killing someone's own mother or a plan to murder the best friend due to immaturity. If there
is no mechanism to stop such kind of incidents would severely impact the society livelihood.
Hence, capital punishment is mandatory to implicate a fear among the people who create such
violence and which ensures the peaceful life among communities.

In fact, I believe the death penalty is the only way to punish the criminals as they commit serious
crimes which directly aid in controlling the violence at least to some extent. For instance,
recently a group of five men brutally raped and murdered a woman in the broad daylight. Due
to that, the high court had punished death penalty to that group which has created a sensation
as the capital punishment is very rare in my country and social volunteers said the crime rate is
gradually decreasing after that incident. Thus, violence is effectively controlled if the capital
punishment is endorsed by a society.
In some society, the crime is so violent and severer that the government and the law enforcing
authority have to handle that strictly. As a result, they do not have any alternative other than
imposing capital punishment. Capital punishment gives a message that you won’t be given any
second chance if you commit a serious crime like murdering someone. This message is strongly
needed in some society to control the crime rate. Without capital punishment, you can’t ensure
that the same criminal won’t commit the crime again. You can’t actually control the crime and
severe law breaking with the minor punishment in all of the countries. The theme that someone
who murdered another human will regret someday and after few years would lead a dignified
and free life when the relatives and family members of the victim would remorse forever. What
punishment do you have in your mind if someone is a psychopathic killer and is out of
redemption? Minor punishment and reformation facility? This does not just make sense.

To summarise, capital punishment is important to bring down the crime ratio and to also
provide the secured life. Otherwise, ambience in the society will disturb which is not
recommended for the common man. Hence, it is advisable to imply such punishment which
leads a peaceful life with less violence in these days and also in the future.

(Submitted by Haritha)

Alternative Answer 3: (Disagreement: Capital punishment is NOT mandatory to control violence

in society.)

The argument about the capital punishment or death penalty is a very controversial one. Some
people think that without death penalty it is impossible to retain the law and order in a country
while others stand totally against the capital punishment and describe it as inhuman. Both sides
have their logic to support their opinion. In my opinion, capital punishment should be only used
in a situation where there is no other alternative. Otherwise, penalties rather than death should
be tried to punish anyone.

Sometimes the law and order of a country become so fragile and out of control that the
Government and law enforcing agencies must show the mass people that a criminal is punished
severely and other should not dare to do the same crime. In these cases, many criminals are
hang till death or even send to the electronic chairs and there really left no alternative rather
than that. Again there come situations even in a very peaceful society that all the people show
contempt to the criminal and expect some exemplary punishment. For example, all the people
expect a terrible penalty for a serial killer or a lunatic rapist. Most of these killers and criminals
are severely damaged psychologically and the possibility of their being normal again is almost
zero. This kind of person who has taken other people's lives and dignity should be punished with
the highest penalty like death to make the society a better place to live in. Finally, those who
betray with the country and compromise with the enemy with the freedom of the motherland
should be hung till death in another word should be given capital punishment because of their
heinous act.

But we must consider that, we can't create a living being and we never have the right to take
the lives of a living being. So if we punish even a single innocent soul with the punishment
he/she does not deserve then the whole system will be corrupted. If an innocent people is
imprisoned and proved not guilty at a later time we can at least take him/her out from the
prison but what if we've already killed him/her? There would be no way to remorse and the
whole law will be condemned. Moreover, if there are chances that a criminal will remorse for
what he/she has done and will lead a normal and peaceful life, then he/she should be given a
chance.

I believe that some criminals are simply dangerous for the society and will always be no matter
how much opportunities and support they are given, and they should be given the death
penalty. But if there is the slightest chance that the criminal was a victim of the situation and
tried to save his/herself or any logic in favour of the crime, should be given chance at least once.
And the capital punishment should be used only in some extreme cases rather than using it as
the law prevailing policy.

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

Alternative Answer 4: (Disagreement: Capital punishment is NOT the only option to control
violence in society.)

Capital punishment is the process of killing the offenders for the crimes they have committed.
Capital punishment was very prominent in old days but these days capital punishment is
diminishing and the authorities are opting for a less barbaric way to punish the criminals. I too
agree with the alternative way of punishment which is less severe than death. There are various
arguments for supporting or opposing it which I will be discussing in this essay.

Opponents of the death penalty, like me, say that capital punishment is not a solution. First of
all, the human has no right to kill another human for any reason, no matter how severe the
crime is. My second argument against this is some crimes are committed by mentally sick
people. Those people are not responsible for their deeds. They can be put in safer hospitals for
their rest of life. Moreover, it may happen that the offender has been convicted and executed
wrongly. Later upon further investigation, he is proved to be innocent. We don't have any way
to roll this back. Somebody might lose their precious life which is not at all acceptable. In
London, a criminal was proved not guilty after 15 years; if he had been executed nobody could
have done justice to his life. At last, there are various alternatives available; for instance life
sentences. These alternatives also serve the similar purpose of making criminals realise their
mistakes.

However, proponents say that criminals should be shot dead for their mistakes. Why should the
government bear the expenses of criminals in the jails? The criminals should not be granted
anything less than this death punishment.

In conclusion, I don't agree and believe in this death punishment as we always have a less
severe alternative available. We should avoid the capital punishment (death penalty) and try to
make our society more humane one.

(Submitted by Muskaan Rathi)

Alternative Answer 5: (Mixed Opinion)

I think, imposing the death penalty as a punishment to all criminals to reduce crime have been a
constant subject of debate all the world in recent years. As the generations pass on, the way
people thoughts regarding issues related good and bad also changed. As technology goes on
improving day by day it serves for both positive and negative purposes. So, ultimately some
people think that capital punishment is the only way to make lives more secure resulting
decrements violence in society. I strongly believe that imposing of punishment should be
appropriate to the crime that had been done.

Firstly, there are many crimes that jeopardise the lives of society. Crimes like religious wars,
cyber crimes, robbery, addiction to drugs etc. All these crimes start with a single person who
involves many innocent people to have a role in a crime scene. So, assigning death penalty to all
criminals is not correct and not possible too. So, head of the gang to be taken into custody and
teachings relevant to moral values to taught so as for hand over this criminal to society as a
changed person who promotes peace. For, instance, cyber crime is common nowadays, to
control it control its initial steps to be taken to catch the criminal and investigate to find out the
purpose of crime. So, if a crime was done deliberately then imprisonment for a particular period
in more than enough.

Secondly, there are few other crimes which disturb society's peacefulness. Crimes like terrorism,
Murders, Gang rape etc. come into this category. These are the crimes which will have adverse
effects threatening the lives of innocent people. For example, the great scientist Noble, invented
dynamite for a useful purpose to blast the hills to solve transport problems but it was
mishandled by few people. Terrorists like ' …..... ‘who is responsible for wiping out many lives of
people ought to be executed. So, for these types of cases, capital punishment is first and final
punishment. By doing this, it admonishes other criminals thinking of doing crimes. Ultimately
violence will be diminished resulting fall in the crime rate.

In the conclusion, it is rudimentary for every individual to work for the society that no innocent
human should be punished and also protect peace in society. It is obvious that criminal who
devastated the peacefulness of world and hit the lives of many people ought to be hanged.

I thoroughly agree with the proposition, capital punishment should be made mandatory in our
society, where crime ratio is being increased day by day because we live in a world where
people are not even certain about how they are going to return, either on legs or on shoulders.
There is a law of physics, which is known as "Murphy's Law", which states that "Whatever can
go wrong, will go wrong". So whose duty is it to make it right again?

To start with, the ratio of crime and terrorism is being so increased exponentially. People feel
unsafe, even being at their own homes. Criminals show no compassion or mercy to those who
are being held by them as captives. I do not know what they get by doing such heinous and
diabolical acts. In my opinion, death penalty should be made as an essential punishment for
those criminals and insurgents who love to annihilate the humanity or the society we live in,
where people get massacred brutally just like flies in air. The good example of this is in most of
middle-eastern countries where criminals get beheaded or hanged publicly for their
wrongdoings, that is why their crime ratio is equivalent to almost zero. Crime is afterall a crime,
irrespective of how big or small it is. By this i mean that, adopting such policy might frightens
those criminals and make them to think at least ten times before bringing any kind of furor
among citizen and annihilate them.

On the other hand, many people or activists think that criminals are also humans so they also
deserve another chance to rectify themselves to become a better citizen in future.

From these facts, I would maintain that, no human-being happens to be an insurgent, criminal
or terrorist by birth. It is just the time which plays as a best teacher for some and worst for
some.

Crime and violence have existed and sustained in our world since centuries. In earlier times, all
crimes were designated as one and there was no differentiation between heinous and petty
crimes. Death penalty was awarded to all who committed crimes, irrespective of their
seriousness but now it is awarded for those crimes which are heinous.

Capital punishment for certain crimes is essential as it deters the culprit to commit the offence
again. It instils fear in the person to commit atrocious and brutal offences. If there was no death
penalty for such crimes, criminals would walk around free without any fear and repeat such
criminal acts of violence. It is only when a criminal or offender fears for one’s own life, does it
dissuade him to commit offences. We have had a number of cases in India whereby the death
penalty has been awarded. For instance, Kasab, the terrorist who was involved in the terrorist
attack in which many people were killed in cold blood at the Hotel Taj in Mumbai, was awarded
the sentence and was hanged till death last year. Apart from this, the victims and their families
also feel a sense of justice and security which in turn makes them live peacefully.

Yet capital punishment does not always lead to less crime in society. If the crime statistics are
given attention, it will be seen that crime has increased manifold over the years, despite the
death penalty being awarded in many cases. This can be supported by the recent rape case
which occurred in Delhi, whereby two criminals were given the death penalty but the incidence
of rapes have not decreased. In fact, the numbers are growing gradually and each year it
surpasses the previous year.

It can be concluded that capital punishment does not necessarily control crime in a society and
only has a deterrent effect but it is required in those cases where heinous and despicable
crimes have been committed.

While it is sometimes thought that prison is the best place for criminals,

others believe that there are better ways to deal with them.

What is your opinion?

Nowadays, crime is serious and growing problem in our country. Some people think every
criminal deserve strict punishment because they need to pay for what they did.The other
people thinks they should in better way as not all criminal are bad. I will discuss on both aspects
.

There are benefits of giving offenders longer prison punishment. Firstly , spending long time in
prison provides an opportunity to rethink what they did .For example, if some one did the crime
than he or she should provide re-education in prison so that he/she realize his/her guilty. I saw
one culprit who done some crime. But when he came back from prison it totally change .Now
he is doing job and living with his parents. He look like a gentle no one say after seen him that
he did that serious crime . Secondly, If offenders are in prison which is far from society there
might be possibility of reduction of crime in society.

However , some people are against that leaving people in prison for long time means they will
mix with other criminals so their character will not improve. If they mix with other criminal than
they get bad information and the higher possibility it is for them to imitate of criminals. As a
consequence they become serious criminals and will cause damage to society. Sometime culprit
do some minor crime such as stolen some minor thing.Those people should not provide long
time in prison sentence.To exemplify ,I have one experience in my life during winter session
that I boy stolen T-shirt from shop because he don’t have much money to buy cloths. So I think
those type of people should not be put on prisons they should put NGO.

In a nutshell , I concede Government should make one community which check the crime of
culprit .Long prison sentences should remain for those who commit heinous crime such as
murder and rape

Surveys depict an increased ratio of crime in many countries. Some intellectuals assert that
criminals should get long imprisonment whereas others argue to find other solutions for the
betterment of the society. I strongly believe in providing humane treatment in favor of reducing
criminal activities in the world.

It is rightly said that no one is born criminal. There are circumstances behind the birth of any
crime and criminal. So, the criminals should be kept in the rehabilitation center where their
circumstances can be understood by experts to provide them best solution to overcome from
it. For instance, sometimes psychological disorders would be accountable for any offense which
can be identified and cured. Moreover, skill centers can be developed where prisoners can
learn new skills to leave criminal activity and to live the graceful life. For example, the central
jail of Ahmedabad, Prisoners are learning skills of carpentry, cooking, arts and so on. At last,
disconnect from the outer world may increase their anxiety which can enforce negativity in
them. So, development center with the open environment can be the good solution in order to
reduce the criminal thoughts from the prisoner’s mind.

On the other hand, many criminals are very harmful to the society that requires strict
punishment owing to restrict the repetitive offenses. For example, drugs suppliers, forterrorist
are the threto the society. Secondly, some criminals are so powerful that they can operate their
activity by sitting in prison if they are not disconnected for long tenure.For example, there are a
number of incidents happened in the world when mafias and underworld have such strong
network that they can execute their awful activities by sitting in jails as well. Finally, criminals
who are not the victim of circumstances but involved in a crime purposefully are difficult to
reform. So, sometimes long term imprisonment can only be the solution left with the
legislation.
To conclude, long-term captivity can never be the solution for all type of criminals to get
developed. I strongly believe that crime ratio can be reduced with the supply of care and
development in place of strict imprisonment.

Recently, it has been noticed that crime rate has abruptly increased in every country . In
general, some people believe that to stop crime it is vital to keep criminals in prison for longer
time. On the same time, some think that this is not the only solution .there should be some
other methods to deal them. This essay will elaborate both concepts with my opinion at the
end.

On the one hand, some people think that offenders should get punishment for longer time .
They believe that it is a good way of treating them. They give two reasons in favor of this
argument. firstly, they think that this will be a good example for other people in the society. So
that no one else will do the same crime. secondly, they think that when criminals do not get
longer punishment they try to repeat the same crime and become more confident . Usually
they get more experiences from other offenders. So it is very important that they should get
long prisons . This will help remarkably reducing crime ratio in a society.

On the other hand, some people suggest that there should be some other ways to address this
issue. They insist their views with some reasons too. Firstly, most of the criminals are usually
first time criminals. So they should be given second chance. it is good to penalize them for
shorter time and then should be released with some warnings. It is better to observe them for
some time. Secondly, prisons could be a training institute for these new offenders. This will
create more anger and rage in them. It would be nice if they have some rehabilitation in their
short punishment time. This way these effected people can be a good asset of society.

In my opinion, both views have solid points. But I think it is more beneficial for society that
prisoners should get shorter punishment. We can make them useful part of community by
educating and improving their skills. This will give us a nice and productive society and will help
in development of country.

Crime rate, in most countries, is often higher in urban areas than in rural

areas.

Why do you think that is?

What can be done to reduce the crime rate?

The crime commitment in municipals is more that rustic regions. In my point of view, the cause
of the crime growth in the civic district is overpopulation and the reason for the decline of
crime level in the rural zone are the satisfaction of life. In this essay, the reasons and the
solution to reduce the crime measure would be discussed.

In the urban district, the crime rate has a significant growth because of overpopulation. The
number of people who live in the city is approximately high; therefore, it is tough to control a
large number of people, since, great societies always have difficulties of controlling or
preventing the crime commitment. Besides, it would obtain worse result when the rates of
rural-urban migration increase dramatically. Although people are forced to obey the laws in
major societies, still a large number of the peasants has willing to live in the overcrowded city.

On the other hand, we have a nearly low crime number in the country zones and that is
because of the satisfaction which villagers have in the life. That means, the main reason for the
crime commitment is enthusiastic from wanting more stuff, such as more money, more
calmness, more respects, more strength,…, but people who live in the villages found the lack of
motivation to commit a crime hence they are rightly satisfied. For example, the farmer,
although, have fewer facilities than businessmen in the big cities, seem to be peaceful and calm
and have whatever they want in their life.

Finally, about the solution to devaluation the crime level, in my view, the government should
enhance the welfare of the people of the rural country in order to reduce the level and cost of
rural-urban migration, so, that leads to control the urban areas better. Moreover, authorities
better to gain the security of the city by training a mass number of police officers in order to
maintain the crime commitment in the cities.

In conclusion, in most countries, most offenses committed in the urban part of a country in
comparison with the rural zone and in this essay we debate the causes and the solution of
reduction of the crime.

It is undisputable that the number of crimes in cities is greater compared to villages in majority
of the nations in the world. So many researches have been conducted to analyze this aspect.
Likewise, this essay also will discuss on this issue along with the solutions to handle this
problem.
To a greater extent, the anti-social activities are committed by immigrants from rural areas,
who unfortunately suffer from poverty. This is because, when the city becomes over-populated,
it is unable to provide sufficient employment opportunities and this Results in improper supply
and demand scenario. Consequently, the section of population below poverty line inflates and
the destitute are effortlessly lured into criminal activities.

To curtail the above mentioned issue, authorities should analyze the reason for the mass
movement from villages to cities and fill the gap accordingly. For instance, decline of income
generated through agriculture is a key cause for the migration. Hence, we have to discover
ways to restore farming to its old glory. This can be accomplished by educating farmers to
utilize modern techniques in agriculture. Therefore, they can achieve financial stability through
agriculture as well.

Another cause for ascending in crime downtown is the increase in drugs and alcohol usage than
in villages. For instance, alcohol has become a social norm in cities and eventually many social
drinkers gradually deteriorate to alcoholism. Eventually, when juveniles get addicted to drug
abuse, they become psychologically weak and hence, they become an easy target for anti-social
elements.

To surpass the hurdle, there should be more awareness created among people regarding the
harm caused by drugs and liquor. For example, Non-governmental organizations and the
government should go hand in hand and conduct awareness programs among youth.
Moreover, schools and families in cities should be conducive to the moral upbringing of
youngsters. Hence, we can avoid them go astray and curtail a major cause for the growth of
crime.

Concisely, controlling the population in cities by providing better employment opportunities in

villages and regulating substance addiction will assist us in bringing down the crime in urban
areas.

In the urban district, the crime rate has a significant growth because of overpopulation. The
number of people who live in a city is approximately high and it is tough to control the huge
number of people or force them to obey the laws, because, big societies always have difficulties
of controlling or preventing the crime commitment. Besides, it would get worst when the rate
of rural-urban migration increase dramatically.

On the other hand, we have a nearly low crime rate in rural zones and that is because of
satisfaction existence in the life of rural people. The main reason for the crime commitment is
enthusiastic of wanting more, such as more money, more calmness, more respects, more
strength,…, but people who live in the villages are rightly satisfied and they found no reason to
commit a crime. They seem to be peaceful and calm and have whatever they want in their life.

Finally, about the solution to reducing the crime rate, in my view, the government should
increase the welfare of the citizen of the rural country in order to decrease the rate of rural-
urban migration, so, that leads them to control the urban areas better. Moreover , they have to
increase the security of the city by training a mass number of police officers to control the
crime commitment in the cities.

In conclusion, in most countries, more crime take place in the urban zone in comparison with
the rural zone and in this essay we debate the causes and the solution of reduction of the crime
as well.

Some people think that poverty is the reason behind most crimes.

Do you agree or disagree?

As the larger part of the people's beliefs, the majority cause of crime commitment is
destitution. In my opinion, however, poor people motivate to sin more than others; I believe
that other factors such as illiteracy and parent or friends influence would be as important as
poverty.

Lack of education is one of the crucial parameters which lead a person to commit an offense. In
fact, People are taught how to have good manner and how to decide between right or wrong
ways in schools. So, analphabet persons who drop out of school would never know about the
ultimate result of their wrongdoing, hence, they are not educated about moral behavior.

Undoubtedly, parents and friends have the most significant impact on a person beliefs or even
characteristics. As a matter of fact, the youth who have criminal friends or parents easily
attracts to delinquency because of the peer pressure or perhaps the wrong pattern. So, the
friends or parents effect should not underestimate.

On the other hand, to some extent, I agree with that, the poverty affected the human being's
senses, but it is related to person's decision to be a criminal or not. For example, when a needy
person was starving, he/she would never attend to well-behaved or unpleasant moral in that
kind of situation but, he/she might choose to plan a shop robbery or request for help and food
or in preferable situation ask for a job with the minimum salary.

In conclusion, although, penury perhaps would be a cause of committing a minor or major

offense, other important factors such as illiteracy and parents or friends effects would have the
same level of importance as poverty.

As the most of the people beliefs, the majority cause of crime commitment is destitution. In my
opinion, however, poor people motivate to sin more than others; I believe that other factors
such as illiteracy and parent or friends influence would be as important as poverty.

Lack of education is one of the crucial parameters which leads a person to commit an offence.
In fact, People are taught how to have good manner and how to decide between right or wrong
ways in schools. So, analphabet person who drops out of school would never know about the
ultimate result of his/her wrongdoing because he/she do not learn about moral behavior.

Undoubtedly, parents and friends have the most significant impact on a person beliefs or even
characteristics. As a matter of fact, youth who have criminal friends or parents, easily attract to
delinquency because of the peer pressure or perhaps wrong pattern. so, the friends or parents
effect should not underestimate.

On the other hand, to some extent, I agree with that, the poverty affected the human beings
senses, but it is related to person's decision to be a criminal or not. For example, when a needy
person was starving, he/she would never attend to good or bad moral in that kind of situation
but, he/she might choose to plan a shop robbery or request for help and food or in better
situation ask for a job with the minimum salary.
In conclusion, although, penury perhaps would be a cause of committing a minor or major
offence, some other important factor such as illiteracy and parents or friends effects would
have the same level of importance as poverty.

Nowadays, the number of crimes, particularly in big cities, is increasing rapidly. Opinions differ
widely on the reason why such crimes are being committed, but the majority attributes it to
poverty. It is true that poverty is a global phenomenon and one of most serious problems in the
world, as it widens the gap between wealthy and poor people.

First and foremost, poverty can be the reason for all types’ crimes, which range from a petty
theft up to a murder. In wealthy West European states, most crimes are committed by people
of the Fourth World, who see the reach ones idling away their money to buy useless things,
while they cannot even afford essentials, such as food and heating. That’s why they feel
isolated and decide to make an offence as a reaction to this unfair society. Moreover, people
living in poor countries of the Third World commit crimes so as to prevail against others,
because bad life conditions make people unsociable, as well as result to robberies, violation and
exploitation, all of which violate basic human rights.

Although poverty is responsible to a wide extent, there are also other factors which play a
significant role in crimes’ outbreak. For instance, severe psychological problems, because of the
increased requirements of today’s society, could lead to such actions. In this way criminals
reduce their stress and feel a temporary happiness because of their ‘’achievements’’.
Furthermore, a lot of crimes are committed in order to take revenge for past actions. According
to a recent survey, people may become violent when they find their boyfriend or girlfriend with
someone else or even when somebody insults a significant person of their relations.

In conclusion, crimes torment our society, as more and more people are being involved in. That
is why governments and global organizations should be motivated by decreasing poverty rates
and confront other likely problems which provoke crimes. We deserve to ''live in a better
society, where people will see and say hello with a broad smile to its other'', as also a
philosopher has said…

Internet crime is increasing rapidly as more and more people are using the
internet to make financial transactions.

What can be done to tackle this problem ?

In the last decade global access to the internet has increased, causing the growth of internet
crime. Some of the crimes are minor, but others, such as sexual harassment and the spreading
of fake news, are problems that have to be addressed.

Parents are always worried when their children start to surf the internet on their own and they
have the reason to. One of the most common crimes on the internet is sexual harassment; a
crime that has risen a lot in recent years thanks to the birth of social networks. Usually,
teenagers are the ones that are affected the most by this phenomenon and it is not always easy
for a young girl or a young boy to understand what is happening and to talk about that with
their parents or with the authorities.

Another big problem with the internet and in particular with social networks, is the spread of
fake news, invented with the aim of influencing public opinion. Certain people in order to make
their personal interest make up news and exploit the fact that thanks to social networks, they
will become viral in few hours.(

Social network administrators have to be aware of these problems and prevent them in a
shared effort with the police. More control is needed and it is necessary to make people aware
of these crimes in order to recognise them. It is also important to enhance the possibility of
police intervention by increasing punishments as a deterrent.

In conclusion, the rising popularity of internet crimes has to be faced more severely and the
social networks themselves have an important role to play in this

In the last decade the global access to the internet by people has increased, causing the growth
of internet crime. Some of the crimes are minor. but others such as sexual harassment and the
spread of fake news are problems that have to be prevented.
Parents are always worried when their children start to surf the internet on their own and they
have the reason to. One of the most common crime on the internet is sexual harassment, a
crime that has risen a lot in recent years thanks to the birth of social networks. Usually the
teenagers are the ones that are affected the most by this fenomenon and it is not alwayseasy
for a young girl or a young boy to understand what is happening and to talk about that with
their parents or with the authorities.

Another big problem of the internet and in particular of social networks is the spread of fake
news, invented with the aim of influencing the public opinion. Certain people in order to make
their personal interest make up news and exploit the fact that thanks to social networks, they
will become viral in few hours. People on the internet are usually not aware of this possibility
and do not check the source of the news to verify the authenticity.

Social networks administrators have to be aware of these problems and prevent them in a
shared effort with the police. More control is needed and it is necessary to make people know
about these crimes in order to recognise them. It is also important to enhance the possibility of
police intervention by intensifying the punishments, as a deterrent.

In conclusion, the rising popularity of the internet crimes has to be faced more severely and the
social networks themselves have to do an important part in this.

These are some stylistic adjustments that you should consider applying to the text:

There are [...] In most cases, cyber-crime involves hacking into people's (bank?) accounts.

Firstly [...] For example, hackers often prey on people who assess their bank accounts via the
Internet.

being cautious [...] Therefore, people must exercise caution while using the Internet to do
banking.

There are many [...] There are many con-artists out there, who approach gullible individuals
online for the purpose of money extortion.
Secondly [...] Some people also make a deliberate point in browsing the web anonymously, in
order to be able to get away with harassing others.

There are [...] There are a few things that can be done by a person to reduce the risk of him or
her being victimized online.

In this way [...] This should prevent one's personal information from being shared with a third
party, despite the concerned individual's will.

To conclude [...] The last sentence is rather unintelligible.. You should consider shortening it.
You could say: Because cyber-crime is on the rise, people should never cease applying a
continual effort into making sure that their personal information is safe and secure.

Education Essay Titles

For centuries, important parts of education have remained such as reading,

writing and maths. With the advent of computers, some people think that computer

skill be made as a fourth skill to be added to the list.

To what extent do you agree? (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

Recently some people argue that the curriculum cannot be without computer subject because
of its key role in our life. I think this view should be considered both sides before deciding it is
true or not.

On the one hand, some people advocate that young students would take tremendous
advantages as the technological subject is emphasized. The first reason is that an early
exposure to the computer would help students broaden their knowledge and experience things
beyond where they live. For example, when they access to the BBC’s learning English website,
they likely have more chance to expose native speakers in order to perfect their grammar and
explore foreign costumes without costing a large amount for English classes. Besides, adding
this subject to children’s curriculum allows them to likely expertise in computer skills, which
apparently promote their future career path. In fact, nowadays, employers often require
candidates to have an influence on the appliances; therefore, the computer is extremely
necessary and should be appreciated.
Although these explanations are justifiable, I am convinced the fact that giving this subject a
priority on the same amount of literacy and mathematics in the first stage is completely
necessary. Firstly, computer subject would force children to spend more time on studying,
which hinders them to participate in outdoor activities to develop themselves comprehensively.
As a result, they might get obesity due to the lack of physical exercises. Another reason is that
the frequent interaction with appealing and various sources may interfere children with the
concentration. Therefore, they would likely to watch youtube videos or chatting with friends on
Facebook rather than concentrate on doing homework, contributing to their result degradation
at school.

In conclusion, I accept that computer can offer a variety of benefits, but it might be more
suitable for older students than the youngsters. Therefore, the number of traditional subjects
should be unchanged to avoid likelihood consequences for children

Apart from the three main sets of skills that are taught in the current school curriculum, some
people believe that students also need to learn computer skills. For a variety of reasons, I
totally agree with this opinion.

The first reason is that we are living in the age of modern technology. The source of information
available on the Internet is so huge that we can find almost everything we want on it. This
means that early exposure to technology in general and the Internet in particular is very likely
to help children accumulate both academic and common knowledge. For example, being able
to use a computer allows students to access a wide range of websites providing free education,
and thanks to this they can acquire deeper knowledge about the subjects that they learn at
school.

In addition to this, nowadays many tasks in working environments must be performed by

computers. The reason is that computers can do some jobs much faster and more accurately
than humans, and this improves the efficiency and effectiveness of a company. For example,
most organisations require their accountants to enter data in a Microsoft Excel file and use
accounting softwares to prepare financial reports. Computer skills are therefore one of the key
requirements when applying for a job, which means that the inability to use computers would
lead to higher risk of unemployment.
In conclusion, I completely agree that it is very important for children to be able to use a
computer, and so such skills need to be added to the school curriculum.

The government should allocate more funding to teaching sciences rather than

other subjects in order for a country to develop and progress.

To what extent do you agree? (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

Science plays an important role in the growth and progress of a nation. However, other subjects
are also important for the economic development of a country. Therefore, I believe that the
government should allot equal funds for the teaching of all subjects.

Science subjects are definitely helpful. They help to solve many problems affecting us and our
environment. Government funding will lead to improvement in medical research and the
invention of many cures. Health, after all, is wealth. In order for a nation to progress, its people
have to be healthy. Research in medical science facilitates this. In addition, scientific research in
agriculture can increase the fertility of the land and result in economic growth. Science subjects
like technology and engineering also play a crucial role in making our lives happy and
comfortable. Obviously, the government funding of science subjects helps the country to
develop and progress.

However, this does not mean that only science subjects are important. Other subjects like arts,
crafts, literature and humanities also play an important role in the overall progress of a nation.
These subjects make people aware of their history and culture. They improve our aesthetic
skills and enhance the overall quality of our life. Art subjects provide plenty of job opportunities
too. After all, no nation can progress only on the wings of science.

To conclude, government funding should not be limited to science subjects. For the overall
development of the country, the government should support the teaching of other subjects as
well.
The advancement of science, and its application in a wide range of areas, has improved the lives
of almost everyone around the world. As a result, it is essential that governments should
devote additional funds to teaching science, although other subjects still have their
importance.The primary reason for this view is that scientific education teaches critical thinking
[How?] Science is based on asking questions about the world that can be tested in order to find
answers that anyone can find for themselves. Without a sound scientific education, the average
person is more likely to believe superstition, old wives’ tales, and the beliefs of their ignorant
ancestors [What’s the negative result of this?], which makes it easier for them to be deceived
and taken advantage of by governments and other people in their daily lives. The fact is that
developed societies have high levels of scientific knowledge, while less developed ones do not.

Of course, it is also necessary for students to study other subjects so that they can become
well-rounded individuals [Why?] Science helps us to explain the world, but we also have to live
in it [So what?] Being able to appreciate art, music, and literature helps us to understand each
other and lead more satisfying lives. An advanced society needs both science to progress and
art to make life worth living.

In summary, science helps a nation to advance by allowing its citizens to think independently
and make decisions that are supported by evidence. Without a basic understanding of science,
the world would be – and was – a much worse place. (261 words)

Some people believe that authorities should provide a larger financial support for teaching
science as at is the main feature of nation’s progress. Others disagree and state that there are
other field that should be provided with a money. I strongly emphasise idea that field of science
education should not a first priority for the government.

First of all, there are several benefits of subsidising science education. It is believed by number
of people that science is capable of solving all world’s problems and it cannot be denied easily.
It must be remembered that due to inventions and discoveries in medicine, longevity of people
increased, as well as overall quality of life. Moreover, these days there is a serious problem of
pollution and thus it could be solved only if country will have enough people who could find a
solution for this problem.

On the other hand, it cannot be said that only a science is the cornerstone for the development
of the country. It is also important to subsidise language education in country, otherwise there
would be no benefits from having dozens of well prepared scientists, because they could not be
able to participate in international researches. Furthermore, culture and arts it is also vital for
civilised human-being, since it brings society together and is crucial for instilling moral values.

Taking everything into consideration, science is undoubtably important part of nation’s

progress and there needs to be people who are knowledgeable in it, but it share an equal
importance with other fields

Science is undoubtedly a major contributor to the thriving of a nation. There is, accordingly, a
recommendation that government should inject more money into science education rather
than other subjects . Even though this view seems rational, I tend to believe that investment in
other subjects is equally important.

Our life has indeed been changed positively by means of the rapid growth of science and
technology. On a personal level, technological equipment, for instance, laptop helps our daily
tasks to be completed faster and more effectively. Science also helps boost the productivity of
the whole society, which can be seen clearly in developed countries such as Japan or The US.
However, this does not mean that science is the only factor that promotes modern society. In
other words, the prosperity of a society derives from other underlying causes. Therefore, in
order that a nation can be developed, each individual needs receiving a well-rounded
education, not merely knowledge about science. Literature, art as well as soft skills are not less
crucial, all of which contribute hugely to train intellectuals and highly skilled workers - the
driving force of an advanced society.

Apart from this, if government fund prioritizes science education, this may lead to the trend
that learners look down on aforementioned subjects. They tend to pay little attention to non-
science knowledge because in their mind this knowledge is impractical and useless. Their
awareness about the world outside is not developed fully as a result. Moreover, when teaching
and studying science is highly acclaimed, the role of non-science teachers may not be
recognized. Accordingly, not only students but also parents are more likely to show a
disrespectful attitude towards such teachers.

In summary, I believe that though science and technology surely benefits our society on
multiple levels, other subjects have their own values in shaping a better world.
People hold different views about whether the government should only prioritize science
subjects in order to develop and progress. While it is true that focusing on science subjects are
conducive to the country, I would argue that other subjects share an equal importance.

On the one hand, there are several reasons to believe that concentrating on teaching science
subjects contributes considerably to the advancement of a nation. Firstly, it is evident that
various scientific breakthroughs around the world are attributable to knowledge on science
subjects such as mathematics, physics and chemistry. Specifically, in the field of medicine,
profound knowledge on chemistry enables scientists and researchers to conduct multiple
experiments and thus coin new drugs that cure and save thousands lives. Secondly, with the aid
of scientific knowledge, students are capable of solving a spectrum of real world problems,
which in return, cultivates their imagination and creativity. Such capabilities would stimulate
innovations that gain the country progress.

On the other hand, it appears to me that a sufficicent amount of money should be dedicated to
other subjects as well. Obviously, science is not the only factor contributing to the progress of a
nation. In the era of globalization, diplomacy and international trading between countries play
an indispensable role in fostering economic growth. Such activities cannot be engaged if there
exists language barriers, which emphasizes the need for investing in language teaching. To
illustrate, Vietnamese students nowadays are able communicate in English confidently and
fluently owing to the fact that their school curriculums focus heavily this language. Such
abilities enable them to work with abroad people, which gives rise to foreign investments from
around the world.

In conclusion, science subjects, though being vital and conducive to certain extent, should not
be the only focal priority. Rather, substantial focuses on other subjects such as language would
gain the country development and progress

Discipline is an ever increasing problem in modern schools. Some people think

that discipline should be the responsibility of teachers, while others think

that this is the role of parents.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

Nowadays the way in wich students are educated is really different to any other previous
generation. One of the most critical points is the paper that schools and parents play in the
development of the behaviour and manners acquired by the students.

While it is true that the technological era has introduced big changes in the way in wich
students are taugh , this changes focus in the personalization of the education to every student,
giving more freedom in the learning process.

On the one hand this personalization has given more autonomy to the students in their own
learning process, at the same thime it has lessened the paper of parents and teachers as main
references.

On the other hand, with alternatives learning process students need to have more control and
discipline to reach their academic goals, because they have created their own "system".

In my opinion, one of the biggest problems in this issue is the poorly communication between
educators and parents , 'cause both play an importatn paper to form the character of the future
members of our society.

In today’s fast paced life, there are growing concerns about how educating discipline should be
conducted amongst students. While it is believed by some that discipline education should
belong to educators’ duties, others argue that it should be indeed parents’ fulfillment. In my
opinion, both educators and parents hold equal importance in developing the trait of discipline
of the youth.

On the one hand, teachers remain significantly crucial in educating discipline to a wide range of
students. This is due to the fact that teachers hold the very key role of imparting from
fundamental to advanced knowledge; they should include the domain of developing discipline
in their learners. Particularly, it is universally accepted that academia is the formal environment
where teachers operate classes with clearly predefined policies and homework deadlines;
educators must have better roles to develop the punctuality and sense of responsibility from
students through various exercises and deadlines which directly affect their progress scores and
require strict adherence from young learners. As a result, students who undergo this rigorous
process could be naturally developed into disciplinal individuals in the future.

On the other hand, the impact of parents in developing discipline in their offsprings remains
vital. It goes without saying that children spend more time at home than that of other venues,
hence, parents indeed should be the ones to teach and set examples in terms of being
responsible and punctual for their children’s replication. Particularly, parents can put high
concentration on household chores assignments with clearly targeted completion time which
are proven extremely effective to develop the sense of punctuality and responsibility amongst
children. For instance, my sister’s eight year old son now can complete the stints at home with
ease while still manage to secure the National Award for Good Students, which should be
attributed to the trainings and examples demonstrated by his parents since he was much
younger that help him develop the ability of responsibility fulfilling.

In conclusion, I personally believe that both teachers and parents are equally vital in horning
the trait of discipline amongst children and it would be better for the society as a whole to have
all of them collaborate efficiently.

These days, discipline is an ever increasing problem in contemporary schools. Discipline is

extremely important so that children are well behaved, have self control and not become a
failure in society. Some people think that discipline should be the responsibility of teachers,
whilst others think that this is the role of parents. It is the aim of this essay to present the roles
of both parents and teachers and also share my opinion about the argument above.

First of all, I think one of the main duties of parents is to not spoil and pamper their child. Once
a child is pampered, it is extremely hard to sculpt the child into a person with discipline.
Therefore, parents need to be strict and show authority but also show their children some
respect so that they are not intimidated by their parents. Parents should also become a role
model and show some discipline to their children for example by obeying traffic rules and so
on. Furthermore, I think parents should educate their kids to be discipline by giving them
chores and making sure they do them.

Secondly, the roles of teachers. Teachers should not only educate students academically but
also educate them about discipline which is not emphasised in the curriculum. Teachers should
show them the consequences of not being discipline and also inspire them to become a better
person by telling them real-life success stories. Teachers should also punish students for their
wrong doings such as not doing their homework, not obeying school rules and many more.
Teachers should also monitor students behaviours on a daily basis. If one of the students does
not show any signs of discipline, it is mandatory to give the student one on one counselling so
that that student can be advised.

To sum it all up, parents cannot control their kids in school whilst teachers cannot educate
students at home. In my opinion, both sides are equally important in instilling the virtue which
is discipline into children. Lack of proper parental and school discipline brings too much
drawbacks to not just them but the society. I hope that both sides join forces and not argue
who has the larger responsibility to raise children that are disciplined.

At present, children behaviour is becoming a serious issue which erupt a debate that who is
responsible to groom a child to be disciplined. As it is thought as parents are fully accountable,
other portion put this liability onto teacher’s shoulders. Whilst both points of view continue to
exist, I strongly believe that it is a mandatory deed for parents. However I do not think teacher
have a peripheral duty on this either.

First of all people who think discipline is on the parents shoulders because, every child learn
their first word from their parents. Also Children know their world like their parents show them.
Before getting admitted into an educational institution, Children learn about positive and
negative aspect of life from their parents behaviours. For example, unhealthy family
environment can cause an indiscipline life for a child whereas sound environment can make
bring a descent life style for a kid. However, Parents are the one who plants the seed of
discipline into child’s mind because they learn a lot from their family. Moreover, At early age If
parents teach them about well organized life then kids can grow up their mind like that.

Secondly, other portion strongly argue parents accountability because they believe that it is a
Duty for a teacher. From their point of view, teacher are well trained no to teach only fixed
curriculum but also different aspects of a person’s life. At grown up age, they spent most of
their time in the education institution with their teachers where they learn a lot from their
educational environment also from their Teacher behaviour and acts. Moreover, it is found
that, children like to intimate their teacher in their daily life because they are role model to
them. So if theacher inspire the kids and describe them the result of being well organized with
consequence of indiscipline life that can create awareness into the children’s mind.
To conclude, A teacher can not look after at home while parents can not take care at school. In
this situation my opinion is that teacher and parents both are equally responsible for this. With
their join force it can be easier to groom a disciplinary child.

Today, imposing discipline and order in modern schools is becoming an intricate issue that
demand additional effort to fulfill order in class. Some people argue that imposing discipline is
the duty of teachers. Nevertheless, other people asset that this matter is subordinated to
parents.

On one hand, some people think that it is teacher role to impose order and good behavior to
children. In school, minors usually acquire unprecedented deal of discipline, especially if they
were surrounded with well-behaved peers. Each classroom has certain rules to be followed that
no one should break them. This vastly inculcate respect and abidance in children to follow
order and revere law in the future. Take first grade pupils as an example. They often show
disobedience, but with time they adapt listening and fulfillment their teacher requirements.

On the other hand, other people argue that it is father and mother duty in life to bequeath their
own children moralities and how to behave. Despite the fact of overwhelming shortage of time
owing to longer working hours and increased life demands, parents ought to specify a quality
time to spend with their minors. This can help them to observe wrong manners done by their
children and dealing with it.

To conclude, I believe that both teachers and parents have an indispensable roles in children
discipline. Nonetheless, it is fundamental for parents to nurture sense of respect and abidance
of orders in their children from the very early years in life to grow up a responsible and well
raised offspring.

Lack of discipline is one of the major concerns of the present day school system. Some people
argue that inculcating discipline in a child is ought most duty of a teacher. While others think
parents have more major role to play. I believe, both are fundamental for a child's grooming,
however, parents are more pivotal in laying the paradigm of discipline for their child to follow.

To begin with, high school is the initial platform for most of the youngsters, where they are
exposed to a strict environment. With proper interest and zest, teachers can guide their pupil
and direct them in a more appropriate fashion to achieve a task. To illustrate, formation of a
line in school cafeteria. This practice is healthy for psychological development of a pupil.
Thereby, orienting him/her to lead a more purposeful life in a well mannered way. It is argued
that, teachers can provide more strict environment at schools compared to home. Where
students have to follow the schedule irrespective of their choices. Thus, polishing young ones
and promoting compromising side of their psyche.

However, school teachers are not available throughout the day, whilst, parents are available
and more aware of the child's interest.There are alot of aspects that are not accessible to a
teacher but parents can reach and mold features. In addition to that, usually children consider
parents as a more reliable source than teachers. Thus, by giving attention a child would develop
certain qualities that are much needed in the outside world. For instance confidence, interest in
study and sports. Furthermore, parents can encourage their children to socialize in a
community by taking them to dinners and inviting them to new families. Hence, developing the
overall personality of that child. Moreover, in some parts of the world not every child has
access to the school. So, the entire responsibility falls into parents hands.

To conclude, discipline amongst youngsters is an important issue that needs to be tended. In

my point of view, parents are the elemental factors in personality development of a growing
child. I suggest, steps should be taken by governments to inform parents and aid them in
bringing up their off springs.

Some people believe that children should not be given homework everyday, while

others believe that they must get homework everyday in order to be successful at

school.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion. (Reported 2017, GT Test)

Introduction

1. Introduce the topic (e.g. People have different views about…)

2. Give a general answer, mentioning both sides and your opinion

One view (arguments against homework)

3. Topic (e.g. People disagree with homework for several reasons)

4. Firstly: homework does not improve educational outcomes

5. Example: achievements of countries like Finland

6. Secondly: school day is long enough, children are tired

7. Finally: play time is equally beneficial for development

Opposite view / my view (some homework is necessary)

8. Topic (e.g. In spite of the above arguments, I support the view that…)

9. Explain: encourage independent learning, problem solving

10. Explain: apply knowledge learnt in the classroom

11. Example: maths exercises to consolidate ability to...

12. Result: prepares people to work alone as adults

Conclusion

13. Repeat / summarise your answer

Teachers give homework to ensure that students revise their lessons at home. This aids the
process of learning. However, if too much homework is given, it will put students under
tremendous pressure and affect their performance in school. This, however, does not mean
that homework should be abolished. Instead, teachers should be advised to give less homework
so that students will have enough time to engage in activities that keep them relaxed and
entertained.
A lot of parents support homework but that is not surprising. Students who complete their
homework seem to have better grades. This clearly shows that homework helps children
assimilate the knowledge they acquired from school. Homework also encourages students to
complete their work neatly and correctly within the timeframe allotted. This will definitely help
them to grow into disciplined adults who can meet deadlines.

On the flip side, the practice of giving homework has its disadvantages. Now many teachers
burden students with excessive homework. They forget that students need time to play with
their friends, watch television or go out with their parents. Children spend several hours in the
classroom. They need a break from books at least when they reach home. Many students now
stay up late to complete their homework. When they reach school the next day they find it
difficult to concentrate on their studies. This affects their academic performance.

There is yet another argument against excessive homework. Academic performance cannot be
the only yardstick of excellence. Children need to develop well-rounded personalities. This
wouldn’t be possible if they do not get time to focus on extra-curricular activities.

To conclude, I don’t think that abolishing homework will help students or teachers. Homework
helps children master several skills they need for success in life. However, teachers need to
ensure that they are not burdening students with excessive work.

Giving school studies as homework by teachers is one of the most debatable question in the
society of school parents and many other public forums. Some people favour this argument
citing it could enhance their children learning ability, while others are opposing it as everyday
homework will reduce children’s free time which they should use for extracurricular and leisure
activities. However, I am of the opinion that teachers should give some reasonable amount of
homework, but then again, it should not take a lot of after school time as it restricts a child’s
freedom. Below essay illustrates this in detail and support my position.

Firstly, we must understand the purpose of homework and the reasons for regular homework
by teachers. This could be justified because teachers are not able to cover full syllabus during
school hours or a child is weaker than others in studies and need additional practice. Under
such circumstances teachers are forced to instruct regular and give extra homework to bring
them back to an expected levels. Therefore, it is obvious that some home learning activities
would support children, thus objecting in total cannot be accepted.
On the other hand, subjecting extensive amounts of homework by teachers would have several
negative consequences in child’s development. For example, excessive quantum of homework
will reduce children’s after school time, which they could effectively use for other
extracurricular and leisure activities. Further, disproportionate homework would exhaust the
child and reduce their interest in school studies or over pressured child might have some
serious illness issues in their later stage of life. Thus, care should be taken by teachers as well as
parents, whilst they are drilling additional home studies to the children.

In conclusion, homework is necessary part of school education as it provides substantial

support to child’s school activities. However, demanding excessive volume of homework from
child would have severe negative concerns in a child development. Therefore, I would like to
stress that all concerns must ensure that they should not overloaded with unjustifiable volume
of study works at home, allowing them to have sufficient time to enjoy their young age with
more freedom.

Giving school studies as homework by teachers is one of the most debatable question in the
society of school parents and many other public. Some people favouring this argument citing it
could enhance their children learning ability in fact, others are opposing it as everyday
homework will reduce children’s free time which they should use for extracurricular and leisure
activities. However, I am in the opinion that teachers should give some reasonable amount of
homework, but then again, it should not take child whole outside school time as it restricting
their freedom. Below essay illustrate this in detail and support my position.

Firstly, we must understand the purpose of homework and the reasons of teachers imposing
children to do regular school studies at home. This could be justified that teachers are not able
to cover full study syllabus during school hours or child is weaker than others in school studies.
As such circumstances teachers are forced to instruct regular and extra homework to bring
them back in required level of other students. Therefore, it is obvious that the home learning
activities would support children school studies, thus objecting in total cannot be accepted.

On the other hand, everyday extensive amount of homework given by teachers would have
several negative consequences in child development. As an example, excessive quantum of
homework will reduce children’s after school time, which they could effectively use for other
extracurricular and leisure activities. Further, disproportionate homework would exhaust the
child and also reduce their interest in school studies which might lead some serious illness
issues in the later part. Thus care should be taken by teachers as well as parents, whilst they are
drilling additional home studies to the children.

In conclusion, homework is necessary part of school education as it provide substantial support

to child school activities. However, demanding excessive volume of homework from child would
have severe negative concerns in child development thus, I would like to stress that all concerns
must ensure that they should not overloaded with unjustifiable volume of study works at home,
allowing them to have sufficient time to enjoy their young age with more freedom.

Some children receive almost no encouragement from their parents regarding their

performance at school, while other children receive too much pressure from their

over enthusiastic parents which can have a negative impact on the child.

Why do you think some parents put too much pressure on their children to perform

well at school?

What do you think the role of a parent should be in their child’s education?

One of the most controversial issue today relates to parenting and child education where
children lacks support from their parents at school and the others receives too much pressure
from over enthusiastic parents. In fact, these issues can have a negative impact on the child. In
this essay, I am going to examine both questions from my points of view.

Firstly, it is an indisputable fact that the love of a parent can sometimes be overwhelming to
children and they tend to misunderstood the pressure they get in their studies. Parents always
wanted the best for their children. They send them to good schools to gain appropriate
knowledge acquisition because they believe that success requires hard work and high
credentials which is achievable if a child performed well on education. Aside from the fact that
they are concerned about the achievements, parents are affected by social pressure. The
competition that rises into the family circle were outgrown by the parents and is passed onto
their off springs. One good illustration of this is during family gatherings where people brags
about their achievements and successful life.

Secondly, I believe that basic learnings start in the family. The vital role of a parent in nurturing
knowledge to a child during the first stage is morality and discipline. It is a significant learning
that cannot be taught personally by anyone. In addition, guiding and helping the children with
their home works is one of the fundamentals of parenting. The main reason for this is because
aside from the support, parents can build up the bond and trust from their off springs. A
particularly good opportunity to gain this is during primary schools.
As we have seen, there are no easy answers to these questions. In conclusion, in order for a
child to keep up the enthusiasm and motivation in school. A parent should provide the outmost
support and encouragement without involving any pressure.

One of the most factors that impact negatively educational outcomes of children is parenting
mistakes. Some parents are frustrating their children showing too much intention, while others
are just not involved in their kid's education. In my opinion, keeping a balanced approach to
children's learning is one of the most effective patterns.

Obviously, parents should encourage their kids and motivate them to be the best they can be.
But in attempting to do so, well-intentioned parents sometimes end up discouraging kids
instead and being a great source of frustration due to their constant questioning.

In the other side, many parents abandon their responsibilities and forget all about their duties
regarding their children's education which impact their abilities to get motivated and to make
good choices. Clearly, parent involvement in education is one of the biggest predictors of
student success. Whereas, neglected children are more likely to misbehave and act out in a
variety of ways impacting their own abilities to learn as well as those around them.

As a solution, a balanced approach is highly required to feed and foster children curiosity and
their eagerness to learn. It's obvious that creating and adopting a good behavior, by not putting
too much pressure and not neglecting children performance, is not easy as we can imagine but
how well family manage this can make a significant success.

To conclude, The key to ensuring a child is flourishing in the classroom lies in encouraging
learning. When parents demonstrate a sincere interest in education and set high expectations,
children are taught to value learning and strive to excel. Also, parents should not put too much
pressure on their children.

Nowadays, many children are heavily pressured by their parents to do well at school, which
sometimes has a detrimental effect on their performance.At the same time, other children are
left with little to no guidance from their parents, which can also have a negative impact.i
personally think that parents who put too much pressure on their children to perform can
cause anxiety and a drop in academic achievement.")
Firstly, there is lot of competition in the world. In order to keep up with that competition,
children have to read books, do exercises and learn different techniques. To stay ahead in the
competition, parents force their children to learn those techniques blindly without explaining
what those techniques are.

Secondly, the child’s education also becomes a status symbol in society. For example in my
country, working in engineering or medicine is a social status symbol. If someone is not an
engineering graduate or a medical student he is deemed to be worthless and his parents are
failures. Another point to mention is that, nowadays, parents are predetermining their
children's careers before they are even born. An interesting factor in my country is that there
are few parents who force their kids to prepare for a common entrance test for their
graduation at the age of 10.

However, in my opinion, parents should act as enablers to the child’s achievements in school by
identifying their hidden talents and encouraging them. They should honor the child’s vision and
mission.

In conclusion, no doubt that every parent is worried about their children's future, but they
should give importance to their child’s interests and beliefs.

The role of education is to prepare children for the modern world. Schools

should cut art and music out of the curriculum so that children can focus on

useful subjects such as information technology.

To what extent do you agree?

Education is the most important element to utilize in the competitions of the practical world. It
is believed that, Children should be encouraged to focus on scientific fields, for instance,
information technology. Thus courses related to arts and music should be dropped out of
school schedules. I believe that, arts is as much valuable as science for the upcoming
generations.
Scientific developments are considered to lay paradigm of the future of a nation. A common
argument put forward is that, courses in schools are getting tougher every year. It requires a
great deal of energy and time of the students. Amidst such complicated courses, including arts
in schools curriculum would serve as an extra burden on the students. Thereby, distributing
their attention in various subjects, subsequently, it would affect their grades. In addition to
that, it is favored by many that children should be appreciated to improve scientific or
computer skills instead of paintings and singing. However, children are more intrigued by
drawings and music, therefore, it can easily dominate a growing child's mind. Hence, by
removing arts from the schedule the element of deviation can be eliminated.

On the contrary, arts itself is a productive field and it holds positive impacts on overall
personality of a child. Firstly, some children are artistic by nature and pressurizing them to
pursue career elsewhere could be devastating for their future. Secondly, students cannot be
constrained in a particular place, meanwhile, activities for example music, singing and painting
develops their interest in school. Thus, inculcating discipline in children in a friendly way.
Furthermore, artistic activities in school provide an opportunity for those who wants to select
arts as a career and having arts departments in school can establish their interest further in
pursuing it as a career.

To conclude, although information technology and science are dominating modern era today. I
argue, that arts carry almost the same positive impacts and i hope that over education system
adopts a scheme in which they can carry arts and science in a parallel fashion.

Education is the basic building block in the human life for shaping his future. Variety of subjects
are taught to the children during school days. Apart from the main stream subjects other
subjects such as music and art are also being added in the curricular . It is refuted that music
and art should be removed from the school syllabus. These kind of subjects adds creativity and
generates interest among the students for their liking apart from regular subjects .

Learning the subjects such as art and music will add creativity in the mind of children . As in
modern time students are burdened with the huge pressure from main stream subjects studies.
Taking time out from regular subjects and leaning art, music kind of subjects will help to
remove the stress from children's mind. With free and refreshed mental state children can be
more creative and novel in their approach . Hence , non-curricular subjects can help in students
to be more creative in their approach.

Furthermore, teaching students these kind of subjects will help them to identify their non-
educational interest and they can get the platform from school days itself to be proficient in
their liking. For instance , every individual has its own area of interest . Hence some students
who are not performing well in educational subjects may be exceptional in the area of art or
music. Providing base from the school time will be instrumental for them in choosing these area
as a profession in future . Therefore , it is necessary to add music , art kind of subjects in school
curricular.

In conclusion, adding the subjects such as art and music in school curricular will not only helps
the students to become proficient in their area of interest but also generates creativity in their
mind and approach . we must not remove these subjects from school for the sake of new
technological one

It is often said that art and music do not have many benefits for children’s preparation in the
modern life. Personally, I agree with this to some extent; However, I believe that school should
not remove art and music out of the program.

On one hand, children should focus on helpful courses for some reasons. First of all, It is
obvious that without studying art and music, children can concentrate better to study in school
with a few of the courses. For example, besides the time for studying in school, children can
learn how doing the research or do the project, which require them spend a great amount of
time understanding and broadening the knowledge. As a result, children can get high marks in
school and also acknowledge some new aspects. An other good point is that focusing on useful
subjects will help children to get a good job in a modern life. With a development of technology
today, many kinds of work such as web designer, computer engineer, finance management and
the like, which ask students to have a specialized knowledge in these fields. It is clear that
studying useful subjects in school is really good for student in future life.

On the other hand, I believe that School should not eliminate art and music out of cirricular. Art
and music have a positive impact on every member of society especially children. To begin with,
It helps students to relax after hard – working time. Art and music are subjects which do not
require students to do so many essays or need to have logical thinkings. In fact, this allows
children to feel free from creating anything they want in classes. Therefore, children can reduce
pressures in school life. In addition, these classes provide a great environment for children to
improve their team work skills. For example, in order to have a beautiful music time, each
member in all sections in class must understand each other. In short, art and music classes can
help people feel relaxed and improve their team work skills.

In conclusion, I agree that art and music do not bring many benefits for children’s preparation.
But, I think that school should not cancel art and music program in school

Some parents believe that their children should do educational activities during

their free time. Others say that in this way children are under pressure.

Discuss both views and give your opinion. (Reported 2017, GT Test)

Today, education has become a priority for many parents seeking to secure a good future for
their children in this rapidly changing world. They believe that if their children apply themselves
and work hard at school, then they will increase their opportunities for going to higher
education and eventually getting a good job. Of course, they are right, and as access to the best
education and best jobs is becoming more competitive, then it is true that children have to
make the best of their study time when they are young.

However, the parents who do not allow their children sufficient free time for leisure activities
outside school hours are misguided. Such activities are far from being a waste of time for the
children simply because they are not academic. It is important to remember that children need
to develop skills other than intellectual ones, and the best way to do this is through activities
such as sports, games and playing with other kids. If they cannot play make-believe games, how
can they develop their imagination? How can they learn physical coordination or learn
important social lessons about winning and losing if they do not practise any sports? Many
children form strong, personal relationships with the friends they play with, and without the
opportunity to do this, they could grow up emotionally immature or unformed.

Finally, I think it is also important to remember that, children need to relax as well as work. If
everything they do must have some educational or academic relevance, then they will soon get
tired of studying altogether, which is the last thing parents would want.

(Approximately 271 words)

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

Model Answer 2:

The manner in which children spent their free time varies greatly from one to another. It is
argued that pupils should be involved in tasks which are related to education in this period.
However, I believe that utilising spare interval performing physical activities and watching
television will help recuperate their health and concentration.

To begin with, young people are required to perform body movements for improving their
physical abilities. A good illustration for this is the activity planned in the school timetable
which always include some periods dedicated to sports. As a result, they are forced to get
involved in the activities which require motion resulting in maintaining their fitness level. Thus,
it is apparent that doing such exercises will contribute towards the physical development of a
child.

In addition, continuous focus towards studies can result in the problems related to the
concentration. For instance, if a student is asked to perform an educational task in his extra
time also, there are chances that he might start feeling frustrated with studies. Instead, if he
utilises this span for watching television, he can feel relaxed and thereby, he will be more
attentive when he starts learning again. Therefore, it is obvious that such breaks will help them
to enhance the attention level.

In conclusion, getting engrossed in activities other than education not only helps to improve the
health but also fosters the mental fitness. Thus, this clearly debunks the idea that pupils should
only perform tasks which aim towards the acquisition of knowledge in order to avoid wasting
time. It is expected that parents will be made aware of the advantages of spending free
moments doing other tasks for the children in the foreseeable future.

(Approximately 278 words)

[ by - Aqeela]
Model Answer 3:

In the past, children had more leisure time to do various types of activities such as playing
games, walking in the parks and gossiping with others. But, now they have no free time due to
the fact that this world is becoming more competitive in terms of educational activities. While I
cogitate that this policy has some benefits, I believe that children should allow using their free
time, and it has more advantages.

On the one hand, there are some effective conveniences to the student life when they will
occupy with study instead of wasting time by playing, walking, and gossiping. Firstly, by
spending time with educational activities is one of the significant trends because students can
increase their knowledge with this habit. This could result immense advantages to the students
whenever they will confront their future life. Secondly, in some countries, it is not easy to get
admitted in colleges or universities without sound academic results. So students who want to
be a part of tertiary education in these countries need to learn whenever they get any time. For
instance, many countries like Sudan have few universities although they have a vast number of
students. From the above explanation, it is apparent that children should utilise their time
properly.

On the other hand, it can be argued why kids require free time to spend their own ways. One
important point is that the children, who expend their leisure time with play and other
extracurricular activities, they can improve their mental as well as physical growth. As an
example, if the students play cricket and football, they can learn leadership, responsibility, and
so on. Another important point is that the practical knowledge of the students will increase if
they involve with some extracurricular activities. As an example, many famous scientists like
Einstein was always engaging with extracurricular activities rather than studying. This example
makes it explicit that children should permit to use free time in order to increase their
intelligence.

In conclusion, it is consequential that children need to play besides the study in order to
increase their basic knowledge. I deem that students should bestow some free time to use their
own way that would be augmented to their bright future.
(Approximately 358 words)

[ by - Uzzal Khan ]

Model Answer 4:

Children should spend quality time in extra curricular activities apart from the study. Some
people think that leisure activities must include educational programs while some others
including me, think that we do not require mixing up education with leisure activities.

According to some people, if children have to learn faster and efficiently, they should include
some educational programs as part of their extra activities. They think that by keeping them
busy in such kind of activities we can help improving their skills and students become more
active in their studies.

As per my opinion, we should draw a line between the student's education and his extra
activities. Both of them should not be mixed up. Students nowadays have lengthy course work
to study entire year. They hardly manage time for their extra activities and so if we include
educational activities as part of their leisure activities then they may feel bored. They also
require changes in their routined-life and by providing some new creative tasks in their free
time it is possible to make them refreshed and relaxed. I think that it also helps to improve their
skills that actually require for their educational programs.

Moreover, engaging children in activities like singing, dancing, painting etc. improves their
thinking power and creativity. By participating in these types of activities, students can know
their inner ability and strength. Also, some of the physical activities like sports and exercise
keep them fit and healthy and help them to maintain their physical strength. One of the good
examples I want to mention is the summer camp. In summer camps, mostly children explore
different sports and creative activities that actually increase their self-confidence and keep
them relaxed and cool.

To draw the conclusion, we should not force children to engage in the leisure activities which
we want them to do. Let them decide on their own which activities suit them most
To begin with, spending all the times with books can lead to many health problems. For
example, spending most of the times with books can be stressful, which results in depression
and in worst case scenario suicide. Furthermore, students who spend more time with books are
not active and usually they have sedentary lifestyle, as result, students are at risk of being
overweight.Simply,all these affect could be result in long-term psychological problem and laso
put students under pressure while studying.In addition,pupils do not learn social skills as not
being able to spent time with friends or some events.

On the one hand, there are some effective conveniences to the student life when they will
occupy with study instead of wasting time by playing, walking, and gossiping. Firstly, by
spending time with educational activities is one of the significant trends because student can
increase their knowledge with this habit. This could result immense advantages to the students
whenever they will confront their future life. Secondly, in some countries, it is not easy to admit
in higher educated institute without great result so that students need learn whenever they get
any time. For instance, many countries like Sudan have few universities although they have vast
number of students. From above explanations it is apparent that children should utilize their
time properly.

Some people think that teachers should be able to ask disruptive children to

leave the class.

Do you think it is the best way to deal with a disruptive child in the

classroom?

What other solutions are there?

A large amount of people are likely to support the idea that teachers have the authority to
dismiss disobedient children from the class. From a personal vantage point, it is not a counter-
effective measure and there exist other solutions relied on.

On the one hand, the possibility that forcing disruptive children to leave the class is a
temporary method, what’s more, it can be arisen some adverse consequences. Firstly, as a
result of severely mental effects, bad-behaved children are prone to retreat into their shells
and turn into violent individuals as well. Secondly, this measure can not be achieved
educational goals. On the grounds of interrupting the class, learning’s quality might be affected
tremendously. Furthermore, the obligation of teachers providing academic and moral
education tend to be uncompleted.
On the other hand, there are some effective alternative to address this problem. The first
solution should be noticed is that parents and teachers ought to join hands together to
generate moral lessons for their children. Thanks to the intimate relationship, parents can find
easy to educate disruptive children and get them to turn over a new leaf. The second solution
concerns about other fruitful punishments. This can be exemplified by the case that in some
Japan school, disruptive children ask for plant trees, it is greatly constructive their heath.

All things considered, asking bad-mannered children to leave the class can not be considered an
optimal method. Additionally, other solutions should be mentioned to cope with this issue.

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 with this view?

Sample Answer 1:

One can safely assume that in every learning environment there is at least one student who is
boisterous and has behavioural problems. Some people are of the opinion that they can have a
negative impact on their colleagues. Putting them all together in a group is an effective way to
create a conducive learning environment. However, apropos of the statement, I am in
consummate discord with it. The bases for my opinion are psychological and academic.

From a psychological viewpoint, it is widely spread that students who do not receive sufficient
attention at home are more prone to the bad behavioural problem than those who do. As a
result, they will use all means possible, namely behaving badly to obtain the much-needed
attention from their teachers. Thus, grouping students with disruptive tendencies together is
not the most appropriate solution as it will only make them feel more ostracised.

From an academic point of view, putting disobedient students in one class will only limit their
educational opportunities and further discourage the students. It will be hard for the teachers
to educate the students when they are all the disobedient and at the end of the day, nothing
will get done.

It appears that combining the students, regardless of whether or not they're rebellious, will
serve as a more effective solution. On the one hand, teachers will have an easier time
controlling the student and figuring out what measures to take with each student. On the other
hand, having a well-behaving and intelligent student in the class will serve as a role model for
the disobedient students. Consequently, disobedient students will somehow feel compelled to
emulate the role model and change for the better.

( Written by - Jaclyn )

Sample Answer 2:

Ill-disciplined and ill-tempered school students and well-mannered students coexist in almost
every schools, colleagues and universities. From my perspective, it could be more efficient for
well-mannered pupils to study discretely, however, it can affect fatally to other ones.

It is evident that naughty students have a bad effect on other students. For instance, they
influence well-mannered students to smoke or drink alcohol. For this reason, the classes of
these students must be separate. They do not just treat with these kinds of things also they
make a lot of noise in the class and this lead to students to do not concentrate properly.
Therefore every school's superintendent must make a discipline system and be strict on them.
The classrooms get unsuitable because of such disruptive students who hamper a sound
teaching environment. These troublesome students would often deter the teacher to teach in
harmony. Their activities often include power exercising, getting involved in politics and other
harmful activities that might affect the overall study environment of the classes and this is a
serious issue in many schools nowadays.

On the other hand, there are some drawbacks, too. The main disadvantage of this policy is that
bad-mannered students will not be able to contact them and take examples from their
attitudes. Namely, the most efficient way is that to take good behaviours from well-mannered
students and with this policy, it will not be available. And this class will be unwanted by
teachers. Thereby it will be boring for teachers to teach their lessons and this lesson will be
inefficient for these students. If all the unmanageable and rough students are separated their
level of wrongdoing will increase significantly.
To sum up, while discrete classes might be very efficient and have a lot of advantages, it has
drawbacks for naughty and bad-mannered students.

[ Written by - Eldar Rehimli ]

Sample Answer 3:

A society is a mixture of virtuous and evil minds, so is a school where you could find children of
both natures. Now the question arises whether the mischievous students should be parted and
educated from others? Is this going to benefit the other students in the class? In my opinion,
this is not going to help, because such a distinctive line does not exist outside the realm of
school.

Considering school as a unit of society, where one's conscience is solely responsible for
choosing the right or wrong path, students should be familiar with the sources of shoddy
influences from their school life. Through exposure to such negative influences, the student
gets equipped with the sense to prioritise his social contacts and interactions. Overcoming such
hurdles in the schooling will help them deal with the sheer pressure of the society in future,
where similar sources of carnage are plenty. These students should be well supported and
guided by the teachers to avoid themselves from getting influenced by the black sheep of the
herd.

On the contrary, grouping all the disobedient and noisy students together would be like making
the matter from bad to worse. For example, a bad habit from one student of the group is going
to influence the rest of them, if one student smokes, probably rest are going to follow him.
Moreover, as said earlier, no one is born as a criminal, rightly so, the causative factor behind
their disruptive behaviour in these students should be identified and rectified by the school
force. They should be given chance to get influenced by the goodness of their counterparts.
I would like to conclude the discourse by stating that separation is never a solution for a unified
society that we all dream of. Whether a good or bad student - all should be schooled together.

[ Written by - Vineeth V. ]

Sample Answer 4:

Schools are designed to educate new members of the society. This education includes the
science, the culture and the rights. Today's schools do not arrange students to different classes
for their behaviours.

In my opinion, it would be efficient to make discrete classes according to students' moods and
behaviours. There are many reasons for not to group disobedient and well-mannered ones.
One of them is the discrimination that makes to feel anxiety. The noisy children will worry
about their personality when we divide students into such groups. They will probably think
their personal identity is inadequate to spend time with others and study together. And it is
likely to appear the disbelief to themselves, thus it is a big threat to society. Secondly, because
of this discrimination, they will not pay sufficient attention to their lessons which are not
enough good now too. This may cause the failure of their forthcoming future and career. It can
be also the reason of the creation of personality distortion and even existence of bad-intended
criminals for future.

Nonetheless, it does not mean that schools should allow the actions of disruptive students.
Schools have to be strict to this kind of actions and must not allow these students to distract
the successful students. To prevent this type of distractions there are some precautions at most
schools. The discipline systems are exactly for these actions. For example, if any student
disturbs their classmates or interrupts their teacher, this student is suspended from the school
for a while. Thus, the students can grasp the value of their school.
Education should be accessible to people of all economic backgrounds. All levels

of education, from primary school to tertiary education, should be free.

To what extent do you agree with this opinion?

In this modern technological era, learning plays a vital role for the development of a child. Now,
the question which arises in everyone’s mind whether this learning should be free of cost and
funded by the regime of a country. While, to some extent in my opinion, primary and secondary
education should be sponsored by the government. On the contrary, higher education after
secondary should not be completely free.

To begin with, no matter what standard of income someone has or what society they come
from, everyone should have the opportunity to have a good standard of education. However, it
is up-to the parent decisions where they want to send their kids for studies. For example, if they
choose the private schools or the public schools. But definitely there should be an option of
free schooling.

Nowadays, many brilliant students are not able to get a minimum education as their penurious
parents cannot afford costly school fees. This is the one of the main reasons, why many
countries cannot achieve hundred percent literacy rates. Apparently to improve the standard of
an education in a country, the higher authority should come forward and take the necessary
steps to make learning complimentary. Most of the developed nations UK, US and Australia, for
example, are already providing primary and secondary education as free of charge.

On the other hand, some people prefer that higher education, such as a university study should
also be made considerably free of charge. However, some people hold the opinion that the
regime should not make higher education completely free of charge, but at-least charge tuition
fee to run the institutions, as once the students would be graduated, they will start earning
considerable amount of money. Furthermore, scholarship is another option which government
should provide for all those students who score better grades in the secondary school, which in
turn would indirectly open the doors for impecunious students.
To recapitulate, in my point of view, to make every student know how to read and write, all the
schooling up-to secondary should be available free of charge. Obviously, this would help to
improve the literacy rate of a country. However, there should be a minimal charge on university
such as tuition fees. Moreover, there should be provision of scholarship for the betterment of
an education.

Model Answer 1:

Education is an important part of everyone's life and it plays a very important role in the growth
of an individual. Making education free for everyone and managing all by the government will
be a very big step towards the rapid growth of a society. All parents want to make their children
educated by sending them to school, colleges but sometimes due to the lack of resources, they
have to deprive their children even from the basic education. By making education free of all
will ensure that nobody will miss education just because they can’t afford to pay.

A government's step of making the education free will set an example in our society. It will
show that if you have a strong will and determination to study and prosper, not having any
money or resource will not stop you from making a paradigm shift.

Education with no fees will identify all those talents which can be at top given education and
guidance but get lost because their parents can’t afford to pay for schools. Everyone will stand
equal chance to succeed. It will increase the literacy rate of that country and will improve the
growth of that country as well. It was seen in the past that countries having higher literacy rates
have been more successful. By making education free, a majority of people will be educated,
making overall a positive environment in our society. There will be fewer crimes in society.
Educating people will be making them more responsible.

Governments should put more emphasis on education by making it free. Just like food and
shelter education should also be a basic right and free for everyone.

[ by - Ridhima ]

Model Answer 2:
The opinion that every citizen should have the right to study at school or university for free is
very controversial one. Those, who disagree, refer to enormous expenditures of government in
case of establishing such laws. Although, I hold the viewpoint that not charging people for
education could become very beneficial for a country and its economy.

First, young people from poor families could be very smart. Looking back to history and
biographies of distinguished people, raised in poverty can illustrate this best. Making schooling
available only for fortunate is not fair. Moreover, the state well-being could also be affected,
because there would be a lack of talented specialists, whose skills was not discovered and
developed by proper training.

Another advantage of making education free of charge is the happiness of the nation. An
individual's inability to collect the amount of money he needs to pay school or university fee
cause stress and anxiety in the middle-class society, which can even keep them from having
children. Nowadays we can see that the lowest birthrate is in countries where prices of
enrollment to highest education institutions are very high. This clearly indicates the fact that
citizens of rich countries do not feel able to provide their future offspring proper education.

Finally, nothing seems to be more beneficial to a country's economy than an educated and
intelligent nation. Free courses and study programs can prepare excellent specialists, who
would work to bring profit themselves and hence their country. That would surely compensate
most expenses of state budget caused by education of no charge.

To sum up, even though making all schools free can be very expensive for a state's economy,
advantages are invaluable. After several years such improvements would bring fruits of happy,
intelligent nation confident about its future.

Over recent years, more and more people have been attending university and arguments have
persisted as to whether students should pay for this privilege not. Although there are
convincing arguments on both sides, I strongly believe that it should be free.

One argument put forward in favour of charging students is that education is becoming more
expensive to fund as universities grow in size. Consequently, making students pay may maintain
standards and ensure the quality of the teaching. In addition, it is argued that most students
benefit from university in terms of higher paid jobs, so it is fair that they pay for at least some
of the cost, especially given that the majority of students attending university are from the
middle classes. Last but not least, in many countries, there is a shortage of people to do manual
jobs such as plumbing and carpentry, so making university more expensive may encourage
people to take up these jobs.

However, there are a number of arguments in favour of making university education free for all.
Firstly, it will encourage more people to attend and this will benefit society. This is because it
will lead to a more productive and educated workforce. Research has generally shown that
those countries that have a better educated population via university have higher levels of
innovation and productivity. In addition, there is the issue of equality of opportunity. If all
students are required to pay, those on a low income may be dissuaded from attending, thus
making it unfair. The reason for this is that they will likely not be able to secure financial
support from their family so they will be concerned about the debts they will incur in the
future.

In conclusion, I am of opinion that all education should remain equally available to all regardless
of income. This is not only fair, but will also ensure that countries can prosper and develop into
the future with a well-educated workforce.

326 Words

The current trend in education is to move away from traditional exams and

instead have continuous assessment over the school year.

What do you think of this trend?

ducation is one of the vital elements to all children. It is proven that there are lots of significant
developments occurred to the educational systems. Now it is in a major transition period such
as the early exams change to multiple frequent assessments. Obviously, the following counts
prompt me to agree with the given view of continuous tests on the following counts.

Indeed, exams are one the measurement criterion of gathered knowledge. Frequent tests
provide a quality way of keep memorize the study topics. In addition, it helps students to
evaluate their level. If they meet the desired grades in one assessment, they can ask support
from the respective subject teacher. Secondly, this helps to teacher determine the style of their
teaching or the evaluate the quality of pupils and uphold them to get better outputs.
Furthermore, this trend introduces more competitive manner activity thus can lead to
significant outputs. This method also reduces their stress and workload for the yearly exams.

Besides, this system can ensure the use of latest study materials instead of the long-planned
curriculum method. this also can be a positive side because students and teachers will have the
up to date materials and knowledge about the particular subject.

To conclude, In my opinion, educational system must introduce more challenging methods that
can emulate with the current principles. This helps our students to collect profound knowledge
in the respective study subjects.

ample Answer 1:

Evaluation methods of a student’s performance have always been an area of contention around
the world. Many believe that this can be done by continual assessment of their assignments
and project work. On the other hand, people are also in favour of formal examination. I believe
the latter is a more appropriate option. This can be proved by analysing the fact that the
homework and projects done at home can be copied and also the memory of a student can be
tested in a formal test only.

Firstly, the workbook assignments submitted by the students are not always done by them. A
study by the education department of India proved that many parents help their children in the
completion of assignments. Not only this, the projects are also copied in order to submit the
same on time. Thus, we can say that it is not a reliable method to judge student capabilities.

Secondly, the examination that is taken in education institutes makes students learn the
concept and also memorise the same that they have studied in their class. Moreover, these are
conducted in the presence of Invigilator. Hence, restricting students to take any external help.
This shows how much grasping power does an individual have. Therefore, this can be
considered as a more reliable method of testing one’s ability.

To conclude, looking at the discussion it is clear that advantages of formal testing outweigh the
advantages of testing by assignments and projects. I believe the method should be implied
across the globe and it can be predicted that many countries will adopt this way of assessment
because of its effectiveness.
[ by - Kapil Batra ]

Sample Answer 2:

Formal examinations have been used as means of assessing students on their understanding of
various subjects since time immemorial. Considering it in isolation or in combination with other
continual assessment such as course work or projects, it remains a subject of controversy as to
the best method of assessment. In my opinion, a combination of the two may be a better way
of assessing students.

First and foremost, the aim of the assessment is to quantify how much the student understands
the taught subject in its totality. An examination is usually administered on a single sitting. The
outcome depends on various factors such as whether the examination is conducted in a
conducive atmosphere, whether the student is healthy during the time of the examination and
also the student’s mood. These are all non-academic factors that may affect the result of the
examination.

Secondly, a single examination may not cover the scope of the subject completely especially in
broad subjects such as medicine and law. Continual assessments may then come in handy.

In addition, formal examinations are not flexible enough to assess other qualities possessed by
a student such as confidence and the ability of a student to present a topic to the public. These
can only be done through other assessments such as presentations and other course works and
projects.

In conclusion, formal examinations are a good means of assessment but should not be used in
isolation due to some of its shortcomings such as its inability to cover wide topics, being
affected by other none academic factors such as a student’s mood or health. Therefore,
continual assessments such as course work and projects should also be considered.[Formal
examinations are the only effective way to assess a student's performance. Continual
assessment such as course work and projects is not a satisfactory way to do this.]

Some people think that educated people are more valuable than people who have

learned skills through experience.

Do you think that educated people are the most valuable for society?

What kinds of skills can people learn through experience that can benefit

society?

Being able to speak a foreign language is an advantage these days. Some people

think that children should start learning a foreign language at primary school,

while others think children should begin in secondary school.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

Traditionally, children begin studying foreign languages at secondary school. Many individual
schools or educationalists have recommended to study foreign languages at an earlier stage.
However this policy may bring some advantages along with some disadvantages. This essay will
further discuss whether extending foreign language study to the primary stages is beneficial
and if disadvantages may occur in the later stages.

Obviously young children pick up languages much more easily than teenagers. Their brains are
programmed to learn their mother tongue which also facilitates learning another language. At a
young age, children are enthusiastic to explore and to learn new things. The primary time table
should allow more frequent shorter sessions for maintaining learner's enthusiasm and progress.
Acquiring foreign languages can also help them to understand other cultures.
However, there are some disadvantages. Primary school teachers may not have the necessary
language skills or they are not well trained for that particular languages. If any language
specialist is called then the flexibility of sessions is diminished. Primary language teaching needs
to be standardised, so that secondary schools do not face problems in their intake. Failing to
undoes the earlier gains. In some situations, it would become very stressful to the child when
he has to learn three languages i.e. native languages and foreign languages. Some researchers
have shown from their studies that such children have difficulties in deciding which language to
speak and may end up learning nothing,

In conclusion, a standardised policy can be adopted at primary schools which can also benefit
society culturally and economically. Young children's grasping power can make these benefits
more achievable.

Introduction: Topic = best age to learn a foreign language. Our opinion = better to learn at
primary school age.

Disadvantages of learning languages at primary age: other subjects are more important at that
age (maths, mother tongue language, science), learning a new language is confusing and wastes
time, could delay development of child's first language.

Advantages of learning languages at primary age: young children learn faster, they are less self-
conscious or shy, they pick up the pronunciation better, they enjoy copying and learning
through games, nowadays languages are just as important as maths etc.

Conclusion: repeat / summarise our answer.

The plan took us 10 minutes to write. With a plan like this, it should be easy to write a good
essay in 30 minutes.

Sample Answer 1:

Due to the advancements in communication systems, the relation among nations has been
increased markedly. As a result of this, learning a foreign language at an early age has become a
controversial issue in the global village. Some experts claim that primary school is the best place
for learning another language instead of secondary school. I firmly believe that there is a
defensible basis for this argument.
The proponents of this view discuss that there are many reasons behind of their claims. The
most important one is about recent research. The studies have shown that the children
between 4-9 ages have a great opportunity to learn new languages. Also, they clarify their
claims by an example, a survey among 200 pupils, has shown that the above mention ages have
a crucial role in children building character and developing their personality. Moreover, give the
special care and settle down proper curriculum could be much beneficial for them in this way.
Consequently, because of carefree mind children can catch more points in this level.

In parallel, I personally side with this idea. The key point to justify this attitude could be
illustrated by a personal tangible example. A couple of years ago, I met a German family with an
interesting story. To cut the long story short, Lucas, the first child of the family, has started
learning the English language at secondary school and now the level of his English skill is almost
intermediate. Conversely, his sister has started English and France together at primary school.
Now, she can speak very fluently both of them. On balance, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the
primary school can pave the way for learning a foreign language easily. Although, it should be
considered that the method and atmosphere of the school play a key role in learning.

All in all, we should own up to the fact that learning a foreign language has become a key factor
in our lifelong. It goes without saying, having a strong basis in a new language can uplift us
towards prosperity. Primary schools are the best places to enhance our children's language
ability. Also, in this special span, the pupil’s minds are dead ready to catch an awful lot of new
things and what could better than learning a second language than that.

[ by - Reza ]

Sample Answer 2:

It is widely believed that studying a foreign language in the first year of school is more effective
than in secondary school for children. Drawbacks and benefits of this topic will be covered in
this essay.

On the one hand, pupils studying only three or four years in the school even at that moment do
not properly concentrate on the lessons. It could be difficult to compel children to learn
something else besides their curriculum subjects. For instance, my little sister always wants to
play, even if there are loose ends. In addition, students of a primary school firstly should learn
the fundamentals of exact science such as mathematics and physics. Otherwise, they might not
understand them later. Furthermore, if a student does not know his native language perfectly,
it is useless to learn a foreign dialect for him.

On the other hand, this is a fact that children, who are approximately between five and nine
years, have the capacity to remember things twice as fast and effectively than people from
other age groups. For example, when I was in the third-fifth grades, I used to memorise new
words very quickly and for a long period. However, now I cannot even learn many new phrases.
Secondly, studying a foreign language is very helpful. Students can understand the expression,
lifestyle and culture of a different country and is helpful for enhancing their perspectives.
English is an international language on which over one billion of people are communicating.
Hence, being able to learn a second language will give competitive advantages for the children.

To sum up, the minor disadvantages will never prevent us from concluding that knowing foreign
phrases will be never excessive. In future knowing one more language might be very
prestigious.

[ by - Alima Imanbayeva ]

Sample Answer 3:

Learning a foreign language is a new trend followed nowadays. Even in schools’ curriculum, a
subject with a different language is a must. Many believe that students at primary schools
should start learning a foreign tongue and should not wait till secondary school level. I also
believe that it has several advantages. The growth of an individual brain and increase in
opportunities will support the argument.

Firstly, learning a foreign language is helpful for the growth of a child’s brain. A study by United
Nations has proved that learning any language other than the native one activates various new
parts of the brain which were never used before. As a result, it increases the grasping and
learning-power of a child. Not only this, it also accelerates the working of one’s brain.
Therefore, making kids to learn a new language at an early age will help them in their mental
growth.

Also, nowadays people are getting drifted towards multinational companies. Here,
opportunities are more for employees who know more than one language. Being multilingual
helps a person get onsite opportunities. Hence, getting growth in career depends on this.
Infosys, for instance, gives priority to their employees who have a good command over the
English language, for any vacancy they have in the USA. So, getting used to a language at an
early age will make one comfortable and confident.

Looking at the points discussed above, we can come to a conclusion that advantages of learning
a foreign language at an early age outweigh the disadvantages. Therefore, this practice must be
followed by all the nations. I believe many countries will include a foreign language in its school
as a mandatory subject for the advantages it has to offer.

[ by - Kapil Batra ]

Sample Answer 4:

Some experts think that the best time for young people to learn a new language is at primary
school. While this could bring many benefits and drawbacks. I believe that the advantages are
far more than the disadvantages.

Learning a foreign language at primary could have some possible disadvantages. Firstly, it could
be a waste of time since children need to focus on other subjects such as math, science, and
their own mother tongue language, which they might need it more than the foreign one.
Secondly, children may get confused because of learning many languages at the same time and
this could have a negative impact on their development. For example, it is claimed that bilingual
children develop the ability to talk more slowly than monolingual kids.
On the other hand, I think that children learn faster at a young age because they are less self-
conscious and shy. So they can easily pick up the right pronunciation and try to copy it.
Furthermore, children enjoy practising languages through games. Thus, learning and copying
others could be a fun in itself for them. In other words, for children learning languages is not a
hard task as it is for adults. In addition, languages nowadays are as important as science and
math. Acquiring an international language like English could be very important for young people
to get better job opportunities in the future.

In conclusion, it seems to me that the benefits of teaching children foreign languages as soon as
possible outweigh the drawbacks.

[ by - Omnia Touski ]

Sample Answer 5:

In today's modern world, language plays an indispensable role in both studies and jobs as well
as during socialising. Thus, some professionals encourage the children nowadays to start
learning a foreign language at primary school and claim that it will be too late for children to
learn it in secondary school. In this essay, we will examine both the benefits and drawbacks of
this issue.

Undoubtedly, learning a totally new language is tiring and requires more time to master it. It,
indirectly, increases the burden of a primary school pupil who is supposed to learn new things
in a stress-free environment. If they have to learn a new language in primary school, they will
be loaded with more tonnes of homework every day. In fact, more time should be allocated to
study more useful subjects such as Science and Mathematics. These subjects are considered as
stepping stones to a prospective job. If one day they become a scientist or a doctor, they may
contribute endlessly to our nation by inventing essential drugs in combating diseases.

However, there is another side of a coin always. To begin with, picking up a foreign language
enables the children to develop a better foundation in a foreign language. They are more likely
to speak it more confidently in front of the crowds. It is proven that children who learn a new
language tend to make fewer mistakes in writing an essay. Not forgetting to mention that, they
will have the ability to express things more clearly as they have a better vocabulary than those
who start late. In addition, they may come across with foreign cultures when learning a foreign
language. To illustrate, it can be learnt from the literature and poems. By knowing the culture
of others, they may not experience cultural shock and are able to adapt well when staying in
other countries for the purpose of studying. They are, obviously, become more knowledgeable
and more open-minded which help them to look at a specific issue from different perspectives.

In conclusion, the benefits of learning a foreign language in primary education apparently

outweigh the drawbacks. I believe a person equipped with more languages is definitely needed
in our society to make our country more prosperous and flourished in the decade to come.

[by - Lee Wing Qeen ]

Sample Answer 6:

In our modern society, the question whether the children should start to learn a foreign
language at the primary school has been widely discussed. A fair portion of people believes that
studying a new foreign language at primary school is better than secondary school for children,
while others hold the opposite point of view. As for me, I side with the first one.

On the one hand, children at a young age are fast learners. The recent research published an
education centre, indicates that children can master different languages as many as five. For
some kids in China, they can even start three different languages, such English, French and
German together when they are six years old. Apparently, young children have more ability to
learn foreign languages. In this case, as the first study institution, primary school should offer
the class of the foreign language studying for children.

On the other hand, more subjects open in secondary school is the other main reason that a
second language study should be started at a young age. Children start to learn some new
subjects, such as Chemistry, Biology and History. The more classes they have, the more
homework they need to do after school. Obviously, they would spend a little time on a foreign
language. There is no doubt that it takes time to master a foreign language, especially the
pronunciation. If they spend enough time on practising their speaking ability, how could we
expect Chinese children speak fluent English? Therefore, children should learn a foreign
language at primary school, instead of secondary school.

In conclusion, in order to learn a foreign language, it is better to start it at the primary school
rather than the secondary school for children.

[by - Wang Zhe, Veta ]

Sample Answer 7:

Scholars have recently debated an issue of whether or not a foreign language should be taught
in elementary school instead of higher level. There are, certainly, some consequences of
teaching foreign language in primary school, both positive and negative results. These points of
views will be elaborated through the following paragraphs.

To begin with, scholars believe that understanding a foreign language in elementary school may
contribute a more incredible communication skill of pupil in the future regarding their ability to
catch up insight is incredibly fascinating during this period. This phenomenon is related to a fact
that elementary school period is considered as “golden period” of pupils since their brain cells
grow remarkably connecting one cell another in the whole brain hemisphere. Indonesian pupils,
who learn English while they are in primary schools, for example, can speak English more
fluently than those who do not get the same treatment at the same level.

Despite, the gain, there can be a lack stumbling learning an international language in
elementary schools. Teachers’ ability is the real example. Most of the teachers in primary
schools are generalists and get used to deal with more general subjects in school. By asking
them to teach foreign languages, English, for example, may be a difficulty in conveying
knowledge over that such specific subject to students. And therefore, when entering higher
level school, there will be a wide variety of students understanding in English and will lead to a
problem of adjusting what particular topics should be given to students in the higher level.
All in all, understanding foreign speaking in primary school can be achieved through maximising
the golden period of students. However, the capability of teachers also must be considered in
order to ensure the subject distributed well to students.

[by - Linda ]

Sample Answer 8:

It is true that foreign languages should be taught at the primary school level for the betterment
of children. I strongly believe that it has more advantages than the disadvantages.

There are several advantages of studying a foreign language from primary level. First and
foremost, during this period, children are more flexible and they can grasp any language very
easily. But, if they try to learn in their secondary level, they cannot follow rules and regulations
of other languages easily due to the greater influence of mother language. Next, naturally,
children are more curious and eager to learn new things in their tender age. Therefore,
proficiency and fluency in new or unfamiliar language can be achieved at primary school which
would help them enormously in the long run. Lastly, excellence in foreign languages is greatly
beneficial for professional development as well as financial betterment. Since a long time is
needed for acquiring deep knowledge in every language, every child has to start learning a
second language as early as possible, otherwise, their future will not be safe.

However, there are certain drawbacks that cannot be avoided if a child starts learning a foreign
language in the very early stage. Firstly, they cannot understand the real meaning of many
aspects of the language as they are not mature enough. Moreover, they sometimes do not take
the language learning seriously. As a result, the importance of that language will be reduced in
their mind, which would cause many detrimental effects. Furthermore, sometimes, children
show disrespect and lack of interest towards foreign language because of the increased
workload in schools. As a consequence, they may develop a negative attitude in learning,
especially towards language learning.
To conclude, despite certain disadvantages, a vast amount of benefits should be considered by
society and individuals while deciding whether their school going children should learn a
foreign language or not.

[by - Jibins Poulose ]

Sample Answer 9:

Essay Topic:

Some experts believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at
primary school rather than secondary school.

Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

Answer:

As commonly seen in the most parts of the world today, the trend among children, especially
those in kindergartens or in elementary schools, learning English or a second language is on the
rise. Some people believe that it is a good thing, while others claim that it will be an extra
burden for them in such an early age and the learning of a second language should be started at
the secondary level. In my opinion, this trend, on the whole, brings more advantages than
disadvantages. I will analyse both sides of the arguments before a reasoned conclusion is
drawn.

On the one hand, the supporters of this trend emphasis on the adaptability and quick learning
abilities of juveniles. This is to say, children have a higher capability of learning new languages
as compared to elders. For example, according to a recent research conducted by UNICEF,
learning pace of children is 40% much faster in their early age rather when they are young.
Hence, it is certainly a welcoming effort to teach them a second language at an early age.
On the other hand, the syndicates who refute this idea show their concerns that toddlers are
usually highly occupied with their academic syllabus. Therefore, to get them learning a new
language will inevitably put an additional burden beside their studies. For instance, it can be
clearly seen that children who bear the extra pressure of studies eventually get affected by
health related issues. Thus, we should not neglect the element of health’s hazards in any
learning process.

To summarise, by analysing both sides of the view, it is clear that both sides present solid
evidence. However, I strongly believe that learning English at an early age is undeniably more
favourable in terms of adaptable and flexible nature of children. Therefore, advantages of
learning a second language in kindergarten outweigh its disadvantages.

The gap between education in richer countries and education in poorer countries

is a growing concern.

What solutions can you suggest to deal with this situation?

Sample Answer 1:

There is no doubt that the gap present clearly today between the poor and the rich is getting
wider by time and is affecting our way of life.

That was only observed in the past in some communities where the wealth of a country was
restricted to a few powerful and connected people. They used to own more than eighty percent
of the resources and income, while the rest is barely enough for the common people.
Nowadays, the difference is significant but not limited to the societies finest. The society is
divided into groups, the rich, the poor and the few managing to enjoy some of the rich benefits
but struggling to keep this level, they are bouncing between the limits of each of the other
groups.

As a result of today's situation, a broadband of the poor are striving to get a fair share of
prosperity with no actual hope, the fabric of the society is getting weaker and therefore each
group is more colonised to itself forming new habits and customs. Bridging this gap can only be
done if equality was achieved in the basic needs like education and healthcare. If an acceptable
ease was managed for the common people in their daily routines like public transportations
and business facilities, that would also be helpful. There must be transparent laws to manage
the use of the wealth and the equality of sharing it and monitor any possible corruption. The
sense of equal opportunity has to be delivered and believed by all people.

Briefly, no community can prosper and evolve safely unless the gaps are bridged between
people at all aspects giving a fair chance to everyone to live in comfort if they worked
reasonably hard to achieve it.

[ by - Mohamed Shokry ]

Sample Answer 2:

The amount of income of people is always an important topic in social sciences. Equilibrium of
society depends on how this income is shared among the people. Sadly, with the start of the
1950s, the gap between poor and rich has become wider and nowadays this gap has reached its
peak point.

The reason of this situation is the structure of our business system we have constructed over
years. This economic model is called ‘Capitalism’. Needless to say, the word Capitalism is the
derivative of Capital and obliviously, one who has capital has the chance to improve his
business and obtain welfare. On the other hand, poor guys are less likely to build a business
because of the absence of capital. One of the ugliest results of this system is that this system
makes people simply greedy. The community has started to think true happiness can be
reached only with more money. Another problem we face in this system is consumerism which
means to have a good stable mood it is obligatory to consume more and more. In future, if this
economic model preserves itself, it can lead to anarchy which may results disasters and deaths
of many innocents.

To improve our lives, to beat this endless unhappiness, we should teach our children the
importance of social justice. This problem is not going to be solved in following several years. In
the long run, we should change the way how we understand about life. We must alter the roots
and dynamics of our community. Nevertheless, we should preserve our hope because human
being had solved much more difficult problems in the history. There is a great number of
people who are aware of this problem.

A modern social and economic structure should be formed to address this issue. The
government policy to help the poor should be more emphasised and education in a country
should be free so that poor people can make their children educated. This educational
opportunity can play a huge role to mitigate this eminent gap.

In conclusion, the social and economic formation and revolutionary changed in current
capitalism is required to eliminate the gap between the poor and rich. More than three-fourth
of wealth is owned by only 15% of the total population in the world. This is an unfair
distribution and if not addressed carefully would only create chaos in the future.

[ by - Mümin Ozpolat ]

Sample Answer 3:

It is true that nowadays the difference between the wealthy and the poor is increasing: the
wealth is growing, while the poor are going deeper into debts.

We must acknowledge that life for some categories of the population is extremely hard. It does
not mean that they are people who have never worked in life or those with anti-social
behaviour like drug or alcohol addicted. I read in "Gold Coast Bulletin" that 700 households in
Queensland had been disconnected from electricity in the past 3 months because they had not
been able to pay the bills. It is true that it is more complicated for these citizens to survive and
adopt, as the cost of living is unreasonably high.

On the other hand, 1% of Earth’s population owns as much money as the rest 99%, which is
absolutely unfair. I doubt that all of them have inherited their wealth or have been working
hard for decades. The names of two wealthiest families –the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers
are known to everybody. The ways of getting such enormous sums are not always legal, but the
society prefers to ignore such facts.

Moreover, these people do not only live in multi-million mansions, drive luxurious cars, eat in
sophisticated restaurants, but they constantly show off their money, which many people find
offensive and irritating. Instead of spending a fortune on useless things, why are not they
involved in charity more? If they have billions of dollars and do not know what else to purchase
to attract others' attention, why do not their share a half of their wealth? They will not become
poorer, while the lives of less lucky ones can be transformed, and these people can at least get
a chance. The whole society would benefit because of that as the crime level would descend.

Overall, the gap between the rich and the poor is becoming more dramatic, if the Governments
do not take immediate actions, it is going to grow in future as well.

[ by - Helen Dmytriieva ]

Sample Answer 4:

The economic differences in the society create inequality among the people. The differences
between the rich people and the poor people’s income are increasing in the recent years. The
reason for them can be classified into the improper government policies and the individual's
talents.

Tax policies introduced by the governments are favourable for the high net worth people to
evade the tax. For instance, entrepreneurs have different tax slabs that make them avail tax
exemptions like, opening an office in a special economy zone can result in good savings and
increase in profit. However, we cannot discount the individual talents in making enormous
profits.
Talent is something that can be acquired by experience or inherited from the family. There are
several startup companies created by talented individuals who make it to the rich people
category in a matter of few years. In addition, there are few interesting people from the
wealthy segment who use their talents to bridge the income gap between the rich and poor.

For example, the companies like Microsoft and Google are spending the hard earned money for
the betterment of the society by investing in child education and infrastructure. If all the
organisations and the individuals spend a fraction of their enormous income in the country's
infrastructure, education and economic growth, then there are bright chances to fill in the gap
of the income difference.

I firmly believe that rich people spending the money on improving the lifestyle of poor people
and better government tax policies will increase the chances of closing the income difference
between the rich and poor.

[ by - Muthuraman ]

Sample Answer 5:

It is true that nowadays rich people are getting even richer and poor people have become
poorer especially in developing countries. This situation has presented a wide variety of
problems to the community and it has negatively affected a country's developments. To tackle
these problems I believe that governments and authorities should take necessary steps and
implement laws to improve the living standards of financially poor people.

To begin with, studies have shown that poverty and crimes are correlated owing to the fact that
people are committing crimes for earning a living. Furthermore, children's of poorer parents are
often not able to access higher education even they may have talents in their studies. As a
result, they are not hired for a wealthy job. This means that probably they will live their lives
under uncomfortable circumstances and poverty. That will present uncertainty in one country.
Moreover, the public health of one country would be deteriorated if people in one country are
living in extreme poverty.
To tackle these worrying concerns governments should need to do more works for minimising
the gap between poorer people and richer people. Firstly, governments should provide financial
support for people who are living under uncomfortable financial circumstances. Secondly,
governments should ensure the quality of education to all of their citizens. That will definitely
help to reduce the poverty as well as increasing the living standards of financially poor families.
Finally, developed countries should take more responsibility and efforts to eradicate poverty
from the world. These efforts already have been seen in some African countries and that have
helped many people to increase their living standards.

To conclude I believe that we as a human everyone has rights to get an access to the education
and a quality life. In addition, education is the most useful weapon to fight against poverty. In
this sense, governments should ensure a quality of education to all of their citizens. That will
certainly help to reduce the gap between richer and poorer people.

[ by - Shijoy Dsilva]

Sample Answer 6:

In this day and age, the gap between affluent and destitute is becoming increasingly wider. This
surging wave of differences among people leads to some problems, which are elucidated
below. However, these are not an insurmountable problem if the government takes some
suitable measure.

The most significant problem is that the rent of crime will increase because in wretched families
both parents should work outdoor and cannot pay enough attention to their children. As a
result, these kids will grow up in an improper way and almost all of them are serious dangers
for society in the future. In addition, these poor families always think that wealthy families spoil
their rights and so they want to revenge with theft or harshness from them.

The next problem in this situation is that illiteracy will be common since needy cannot afford
the cost of education. Therefore, their future becomes blurred as they do not get a quality
education. This deprivation (lack of education) causes their tendency to lawlessness and
violence become more.

While that the problems mention above, there are some solutions that can be taken to reduce
the problems. Firstly, governments should impose a heavy tax for affluent persons and spend
these gain money for improving the destitute lives. Also, governments can prepare the facilities
of education, free of charge for poor children.

In conclusion, today it is apparent that the gap between poor and wealthy is dramatic.
However, this situation should not ignore, because it creates some serious such as surging rate
of crime and illiteracy. The government can reduce this gap with some proper measures by
taking prudent decisions.

Some schools are very strict about their school uniforms and the appearance of

their pupils, while other schools have a very relaxed dress code.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of children of having a school

uniform?

Model Answer 1:

It is true that some secondary schools require their students to wear uniforms, while others
allow their students to wear free clothing. Both policies have their own positive points, but I
personally think that it is better for high school students to wear uniforms.

To begin with, it is common that some high schools do not require their students to wear
uniforms. They believe that uniforms should not be the main concern of education, and schools
should focus more on the curriculum quality and learning process than focusing on dresses.
Besides that, they also believe that spending on school uniforms is also a waste of money, as
the fund could be allocated for other important matters such as books or stationary.
On the other hand, for a number of reasons many secondary education institutions necessitate
their students to wear school uniforms. These institutions believe that by wearing school
uniforms, students will learn about discipline; and how to wear proper and formal clothing. By
allowing the students to wear free clothes, there might be a risk that students will wear
inappropriate clothing during school hours. And then with the existence of school uniforms, it
will not differentiate the economic class of students. Although some students might come from
a wealthy family, they must wear the same quality clothing as the other students who come
from various backgrounds.

In conclusion, it is a fact that wearing school uniforms has become mandatory for several
secondary education institutions, but there are other institutions who allow their students to
decide their own clothes. Both points of views have their own advantages, but I believe that
wearing school uniforms for high school students is more favourable than wearing free clothes.

[ Written by - Darwin Lesmana ]

Model Answer 2:

I think that the issue whether all students are required to wear school uniform is the one that is
open for debate. Some people think that all students must wear the school uniform. However,
others think that students should decide what to wear to school themselves or by their parents.
Personally, I believe that students should wear what they like. For several reasons, which I will
mention bellow, I think that school uniforms should not be required to wear at high school
level.

First of all, if students do not have school uniforms they can wear what they like to wear.
Personally, I like to wear clothes which are comfortable. Also, I am a female and I like to wear
jeans and shorts, and as far as I know girls must wear skirts as part of their school uniform. I
think many female students will agree with me that jeans are much more comfortable than
skirts.
Second of all, I believe that school uniforms must not cause any discomfort. For example, some
international students will find it unacceptable to wear some of the uniform's parts. I am from
Russia and when I was a student of the elementary school I was required to wear the school
uniform that included a dark blue skirt and a white or light blue shirt. I did not like it very much
because I did not like the fact that all students were dressed in the same colour. We dressed
the same way and we were permitted to wear any adornments. Personally, I did not like the
fact that girls always had to wear skirts and it was not convenient, especially in cold weather.

In short, I think that students should wear to school what they want. Otherwise, if a high school
requires students to wear school uniforms, I think that uniforms must be comfortable for all
students.

Nowadays, uniforms have become a prevailing type of clothes used in most schools on a global
scale. While a large quantity of students claim that they are forced to abide by their schools’
rules when it comes to uniforms, others are allowed to wear unrestricted kinds of clothes. The
essay will clarify both the benefits and drawbacks of having a uniform.

It cannot be denied that uniforms can form serious consequences to students. Firstly, having to
put on their uniforms will lead to students’ inability to express themselves with their own styles
of clothing. By contrast, those not wearing a school uniform can experiment with different
clothing styles in order to find something that will suit them. Secondly, there is no scarcity of
families who cannot afford the price of uniforms. As a consequence, strict rules in terms of
uniforms may put these families under severe strain of having enough money to buy them.

One should, nevertheless, consider the issue from another angle. The first positive aspect of
uniforms which can be seen is that they enable the school to cater for their students over a
large area with no difficulty. Consequently, if the child is lost, the uniform is the sufficient
facilitator to find him or her. In addition, uniforms play their roles in eliminating the gap
between poor and rich students. Due to the fact that all the students have to wear the same
thing, students will not distance each other for their families’ financial status. For instance, a
school in Vietnam embodies the usage of uniforms perfectly, and has witnessed radical changes
in students’ attitudes towards others.
To conclude, I am convinced by the view that uniforms have both advantages and
disadvantages which have been clearly mentioned in the essay.

Some schools consider the school’s outfit a very important thing to be carefully controlled for
all students, while others see that this should be left to the students choice. This essay will
discuss the pros and cons of forcing a united school uniform.

On the one hand, having a formal united uniform gives the students the feeling of unity.
Meaning, all of the school's pupils will act as one and will have a sense of connection to each
other. Moreover, when all students have to wear the same outfit every day, none of the less
financially able children will feel embarrassed about their looks. For example, schools can be a
tough place for a poor kid, especially when all of the other kids try to show their designers
clothes and their latest dresses.

On the other hand, giving the youngsters a control over their choice of what to wear will give
them the ability to express themselves. And the freedom even in small things will go a long way
in feeling more relaxed and control-free. Unfortunately, this is something that united outfits
can’t provide. A new study has shown that the children that were given the chance to choose
their clothes on daily basis shown a greater development of their right brain hemisphere.

In conclusion, United uniforms give the student a sense of being a part of one organization and
protect the feeling of the non-wealthy, but it also restricts their freedom and their ability to
express themselves which might cause a feeling of stress among the students.

In some high schools, part of the curriculum requires students to participate in

community work such as helping the elderly or disabled.

In what way do children benefit from this?

Do you think it should be part of the curriculum?

Answer 1: (Agreement)

In the last few years, many new ideas and beliefs arose aiming to improve society and reinforce
the relationship between members of a society. One of the proposed ideas, yet under
observation, is to make it compulsory for high school students to do some programmes, of
course, charity ones, to assist their community.

Firstly, I am completely supporting the idea that: helping promote the society is one of the main
duties of a righteous and positive member. Imagine that in the vacation, some youths, and even
all ages, work for charitable organisations which help the poor, the sick, the learners and
others. Imagine other group cleaning and decorating the streets- of course, that won't affect
their dignity- or teaching the young. Indeed that will lead to an extremely modern, civilised and
loving community. However, all these are examples, and there are many other ways to improve
societies, both charitable and uncharitable methods. Despite this, the idea of compulsory
charitable work doesn't sound good for me. I believe that making that compulsory, will not lead
to the heroic purpose of the charitable work i.e. the inner desire to help others, but, instead,
will make it a type of finishing your work.

I know that this proposed idea aims to teach high school students to be responsible to their
society and to take care of others, but I think there is a more efficient method. There are now
working groups in many schools in different places which do such charitable work and even
without inspiration from the school's administration. So why not make many groups in all
schools, and I think that will attract many students.

In conclusion, I think there are other better ways to promote the society without making it
compulsory; the sitting compulsory subjects are enough.

(Approximately 294 words)

(by Abdallah Hassan)

Answer 2: (Disagreement)

People have divergent attitudes towards the unpaid community services. Certain people
strongly argue that these types of services should be included in high school education such as
charity activities, teaching other children and activities for society. Even though it has some
positives, it should not be included in the high school education due to various reasons.
Unpaid community services should not be mandatory in the high school programmes. First and
foremost, students have a lot of subjects to study within a limited period of time and that
would become even harder in case the community programmes are made compulsory for
them. For example, in India, most of the schools have added more subjects recently in the
curriculum of high schools. Besides, if they are to perform such community activities, they
would definitely face challenges in the academic area and sometimes, they may fail in the
examinations.

Moreover, during this period of time, most of the students are not mature enough. Since they
are not capable of handling service programmes effectively, they may feel difficulties and
dissatisfied while implementing such activities among others. In addition, it would develop a
negative attitude towards the unpaid community services from the tender age. Consequently,
they may lose interest in doing those kinds of services later on.

However, one should not ignore the fact that if community services become a part of high
school education, everyone gets a chance to work for society. Thus, these programmes instil
moral and ethical values in the mind of children which is degenerating today’s generation
enormously. Nevertheless, I think that students should be more focused on education and
should not be forced to do something that might detract them from their main target and task.

To conclude, despite some advantages, unpaid community services should not be promoted in
the early stages of education.

(Approximately 301 words)

(by Joy Thomas )

Answer 3: (Agreement)
What is the likely outcome, if unpaid community services make mandatory part of the high
school programme? To comment on this subject, I am including a study, which collected
statistical data taken from polls conducted, recently, among diverse segments of society. The
majority of participants supported the idea, whereas others disagreed with the idea. In
subsequent paragraphs, I will discuss the opinion expressed by participants of study with a
personal choice of aligning myself with the majority of the society.

According to the survey, there should be no social unpaid work because such an activity will
hinder student’s studies. The students will have to take time out of studies diluting
concentration. In addition, if social community services are compulsory, then a child might
become a victim of bad society trends, especially in their teenage time. The study shows that
those participants who had the aforementioned views were in limited number. Some of these
opponents presented their ideas logically whereas some others were impulsive and rigid
followers of social taboos.

On the other hand, a large majority of those interviewed agreed with the idea, viz. unpaid
community services should be a compulsory part of high school programmes. They explained
that poor and needy families - which are a part of our society - will be benefitted by this idea.
Such a programme will help to build a healthy society.

I am strongly of the view that, the social unpaid work should be made a mandatory part of the
high school programme.

(Approximately 247 words)

(by Touseef Rana)

Answer 4: (Agreement)

Nowadays, many people held the theory that non-profit organisation services should be
implemented with secondary schools systems. While others believe that it will be hard and
much costly for both school teachers and students. Both sides will be analysed before a
reasoned conclusion is drawn.

According to one camp, emerging non-profit services to secondary schools will improve
students’ personalities and help to improve their skill in reacting with the community services.
Moreover, working with poverty and homeless will add more values to schools programmes,
and more variety the school subjects. This will be a good way of introducing skilled and smart
individuals to the community.

In addition, when primary schools students deal with sick people or poor people, they will have
a clue about how to deal with them in the future. For instance, in Asia, particularly in China and
Korea, they use this way to improve high schools students’ skills.

According to the other camp, firstly, employing charity tasks with secondary schools will make it
more difficult for teachers and students to keep their concentration with the regular school
programmes. Secondly, most parents will not feel safe about it because dealing with patients in
hospitals and streets’ homeless people demand more wise individuals to protect themselves
from various viruses. Thirdly, generally, non-profit and charity organisations are doing great
jobs, and merely more help and support from the governments will be enough. Also, we have
to take into consideration that these services don’t need more individuals; they need more
aids.

In conclusion, after hashing out the pros and cons of these two points of view, I completely
disagree with this statement.

(Approximately 269 words)

(by Walied Farag )

Model Answer 5: (Agreement)

One of the most controversial issues today relates to whether the high school should include
the unpaid community service compulsorily as part of the programmes. Many parents are of
the opinion that it will be beneficial to the students when they work for a charity and improving
the neighbourhood, just to name some examples. Personally, I am convinced that community
service should be part of high school programmes for several reasons.

There are a handful of advantages that community service brings to the youngsters. To begin, it
helps the teenagers to develop an excellent interpersonal skill. Admittedly, it is more valuable
to do the unpaid social work than staying at home playing with electronic devices. It provides
teenagers with an avenue to socialise with others, encourage them to exchange their thoughts
with people of the same interest. It is indirectly helping them to develop the crucial socialising
skill which plays an indispensable role in their studies and their prospective job. They will be
benefited by learning how to communicate with people around us and respect other's opinions.
In short, community service will benefit the students by giving them an opportunity to meet
new friends and thus widen their friend cycle.

Apart from that, teenagers will be more patient and have higher endurance after working for
the community service. To illustrate, when they teach the younger children about sports, they
are actually learning the value of being more patient which cannot be learnt from textbooks. To
pick up this good value, it can only be acquired through practising. On the other hand, teaching
children about sports is proven to be an effective way of destressing. In the twenty-first
century, even citizen including student is becoming more stressful than in the past. Thus, they
can keep their mind off from their studies when doing something not related to their academic
studies like community service. To put in a nutshell, community service can educate the
youngsters to be more patient which is essential in dealing with troubles.

In conclusion, I think that community service should be implemented in the high school
programmes as there are numerous advantages of carrying out community service. Our nation
will continue to prosper and flourish if there are more well-educated individuals being raised.

(Approximately 373 words)

(by Lee Wing Qeen )

Sample Essay 6: (Agreement)

Many individuals debate on whether or not voluntary works should be a part of the educational
system. Some citizens argue that it does not necessarily have to, however, some others believe
that doing important voluntary works like assisting other people, cleaning, or helping children
in doing exercise are integral parts that must be included in a school curriculum. This is not a
trivial question to answer; nonetheless, personally I incline to believe that schools must adopt
volunteerism into their academic subject based on improving attitude and behaviour point of
views.

To begin with, increasing cognitive value is considerably a rudimentary task of school. Since
school is a place for the educational process, it must be targeted to not only improving
knowledge but also effective insights of students. One of the ways to cope with this issue is by
managing to volunteer over social events by pupils as a part of lectures. This idea can help to
boost students’ willingness in understanding social needs and administering the prompt way to
overcome the social problem. Unpaid school internship, for example, has been imposed by
several schools and as the consequences, the pupils of those schools are more active in
assisting social events without any command from school than those who are from the school
where the same program is not applied.

Furthermore, the idea of involving free social service as the part of school activities can help
students to set their perception about volunteerism. It goes as a systematic way of thinking.
Knowledge can affect attitude and lead to behaviour subsequently. Adult volunteers in the food
bank, for instance, tend to work without earning money sincerely because they are accustomed
to doing volunteering since it was the part of after school program they attended.

All in all, as an educational agent, the school has to optimise student life skills, academic,
attitude, and behaviour, by involving social activities in the school program.

The best way to help underachieving pupils is to have compulsory after school

activities which they must attend. This way they will become more involved in
school and their grades will improve.

To what extent do you agree?

The researchers also discovered that children who participated in organised sports and physical
activities at any time during primary school had better social, emotional and behavioural skills
than those who did not take part.

Some people think that parents have the greatest influence on their child’s

academic development, while others think that a child’s teacher has more

influence.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

According to some people parents play an important role in the academic development of their
children, while other suggest that teacher has more influence than parents in child’s academic
development. In my point of view both have their own influence, so in this essay we will discuss
the importance of both parents and teachers.

To begin with, a child’s better education is one of the most important responsibility of their
parents. A child spent most of his time in their homes with parents, and parents need to keep
an eye on the curricular and extracurricular activities of their childrens. For example, they need
to check regularly their academic work, such as their home works, their daily school diaries and
to correlate with their teachers, which results in a good academic achievement.

Moreover, many children’s share their problems with their parents regarding their studies,
because of the friendly environment between parents and childrens, and it had a great impact
in the child’s academic development, and their were many issues which can be solved with help
of their parents and a child gain more confidence with these type of friendship with their
parents.
However, teachers also have a great role in the academic development of a child, because they
spent their growing and character building time with their teachers. They have the ability how
to deal with different types of situation that a student face in their academic level, and teachers
know very better solutions for these problems. So these teachers help very much in the
academic and character building of a child.

In my point of view, both parents and teachers have their main and enough role in the
academic development of a child, and their mutual cooperation with each other, helps a lot in
the academic development of a children and it is very useful for a bright future of a student.

Sample Answer:

There is too much debate about whether teachers or parents influence child development
socially and mentally. While I agree with the idea that teachers play an indispensable role in
child development, I believe that parents have a greater impact on children growing up too.

On one hand, teachers are the backbone of the education system. By this I mean that, in most
countries children begin to attend school from 5 years old and from this point they emerge
from the small family and join the whole society and being part of it, with the presence of
professional teacher this could be a huge development in term of social skills such as teamwork
and sharing activities. Moreover, through different classes in mathematics and science, for
instance, children can learn how to solve a complex problem in a short time and this is the most
important thing for brain development and intelligence. For illustration, it has been calculated
that nearly 30% of the whole brain development takes place at this stage of our life.

On the other hand, parents and particularly mothers, as the child stays most of their time with
them, play an important constituent in the growth of the child mentality. As a matter of fact,
the preschool stage is a crucial stage and children obtain and store vast amounts of
information. Hence, in this period children create their own environment and personality. For
instance, children copy their parents in their language and how they interact with each other.
Moreover, families can boost their children inelegant and cognitive skills through video games,
play, interactive discussion, advice etc. As a result, the crucial role of family is not forgettable.
To conclude, as we have seen. There is no easy answer to this question. However, I tend to
believe that both parents and teachers influence children social skills and mental development.

Child is another form of god that i can say which can easily mould in any shape whichever we
want. Few folks uphold that parents have more impact on child's development in academic
way. While others on the view that teacher has more influence on child than the parents have.
It is essential to look at both points before forming an amazing opinion.

Parents are producer of their children so they have some impact on child's academic
curriculum. First and foremost, parents are born given of their child so they pass more time
than anyone with their love once. To next, parents can give better civilisation to their children
than others. They can teach moral values of life as well as school knowledge. Finally, they can
help their children throughout academic way. For instance, they can help their children in
homework also after they come home because duty of teachers are limited within the school
only.

On the other hand, teachers are second guardians after parents that we can conclude. Firstly,
teachers have best knowledge about books and related to that owing to that they can provide
better academic source than anyone. Secondly, teachers know the ability of each student
mostly so they try to built future of that student particularly that way. Lastly, every children's
parents have sufficient knowledge about their academic purpose is not necessary so as a
consequence teachers are essential for development of child.

In my opinion both have equal importance in child's life parents as well as teachers.

To sum up, parents can develop their child by giving them moral value of life type education
while teachers influence in academic way on child. Both are essential and have strong bond
with child.

In some countries, girls and boys are educated in different schools rather than

in the same school.

What are the advantages and disadvantage of this?

The advantages and disadvantages of sending children to mixed schools have always been a
subject of debate. Some parents and teachers feel that mixed schools are better; others are
more in favour of separating boys and girls. In my opinion, both types of schooling have their
merits and demerits.

There are at least a few benefits to separating boys and girls. It is quite normal to feel attracted
to members of the opposite sex. This attraction often results in distractions. By separating boys
and girls distractions can be reduced to a great extent. This will make the atmosphere in the
classrooms more conducive to learning. If boys and girls are taught in the same schools, the
chances of boys getting hyperactive are pretty high. It is a general fact that boys commit more
mischiefs when girls are around. They want to impress girls and often fail to focus on their
studies. If boys are taught in boys’ schools, this situation can be avoided.

On the flip side, single sex schools do not facilitate interaction between boys and girls. As a
result children taught in single sex schools often find it difficult to interact with members of the
opposite sex. This can lead to awkward moments at social gatherings where they have to deal
with such encounters.

I think this is the biggest disadvantage of single-sex education. Mixed schools, on the other
hand, allow boys and girls to interact freely and help in the overall development of their
personality. When boys and girls study together, they get to understand the skills and
limitations of each other.

After analysing both sides of the argument it is not hard to see that mixed schools and single
sex schools have their merits and demerits. However, in my opinion the advantages of teaching
children in mixed schools outweigh the disadvantages. I hope that mixed school education will
be promoted by parents and teachers.

No one can deny that the education of our children should be one of our top priorities.
However, there is often a question whether separate classes or mixed classes are better for our
boys and girls. Below I will try to answer this question.
Placing your child in a separate school, where there are only children with the same gender,
has, undoubtedly, some advantages. Our child would be more focused on learning than on the
opposite sex, which is particularly important in that age. Moreover, the possibility of violent
behaviours, connected with sex, is also less. Therefore it is better for the teachers to control
such a class, as they know what they can expect.

On the other hand, youngsters will lose an opportunity to create relationships with boys or girls
and it may affect their lives in the future. Although mixed schools have some disadvantages and
they are sometimes perceived as a source of aggression among the youth, I think that they
prepare children better for a life in a modern society which, nowadays, is full of mixed
environments. Our boy can have a boss who is a girl, for instance, thus he will be better
prepared having a possibility to interact with another gender before.

In conclusion, I have more trust in mixed schools as, in my opinion, they learn children how to
behave in the modern society which will help them in their mature lives. In the end, every
parent wants the best for their children so I hope that they will choose the best option.

Different individuals have their own opinion about the type of schools for the young people.
Some believe that having a single-sex educational institution benefits the student's professional
development while others believe that they should be taught in co-educational schools. In this
essay, both the viewpoints will be critiqued before reaching the reasoned conclusion.

On the one hand, there are the groups of people who consider that the girls and the boys
should learn in mixed sex schools. The main reason for this belief is that these schools are the
representatives of the real life in which men and women have to stay together. In other words,
these institutions concentrate on developing children's social skills for the better adult life.
Thus, it is apparent that the students getting qualified from such schools can easily adjust in the
actual world, resulting in a peaceful life.

On the other hand, some individuals feel that the pupils passed out of the single-sex schools
have greater chances of a successful career. They believe this because according to them
studying with the same gender reduces the distractions and helps them to concentrate more on
studies. Furthermore, the boys and the girls may have different needs and ways of learning
which can be satisfied in the schools with same-sex students. Therefore, the theory that such
learners progress more in their profession is difficult to debunk.

In conclusion, although these students have a prosperous work life, they can lack the social
skills. Hence, it is proved that people should prefer admitting their kids in the mixed sex schools
for their personal as well as professional growth. It is expected that the government will try to
increase the number of such schools in the country.

First View: It is better to educate boys and girls in separate schools.

Better concentration in the class and achieving higher grades because they spend less time on
other activities.

Reduction the rate of inappropriate sexual relationship.

This does not contradict with some religious beliefs like Islamic belief.

It is observed that when boys and girls are separated, it would make them more disciplined.

Less report of sex discrimination (giving more opportunity to specific gender)

In this system, students tend to be more focused on studies rather than being distracted to all
fantasies of teenage.

This system is better in terms of students’ engagement in extra-curricular activities like sports.

Second View: It is better to have coeducation schools.

Better communication with opposite gender in real life (work, family, marriage).

Participation in more team working.

Being respectful to opposite gender.

Both genders have different abilities to learn different study materials, so they can help the
opposite sex to learn better.

Co-education system enhances the understanding between the two genders.

Maintaining co-education system would be less costly. Clearly, to divide girls and boys,
governments have to spend more money on education.

Each gender would be able to co-work as well as participate in competition with the other
gender. Such friendly competition and co-working would enhance the overall performance of
the students.

My opinion:

1. Both sides of the discussion have indisputable virtues and benefits. However, I agree that co-
education system is far better than the unisexual schools.

2. I opine that separate schooling for boys and girls has far more benefits and that's why I
support this system.

There is nothing that young people can teach older people.

Use specific reasons and examples to support your position.

Sample Answer 1:

Though older people have more experiences and sometimes practical views about life than the
young generation, but I not agree that young people have nothing to teach to the aged persons.

First of all, the young people can adopt technology faster and they can teach the old people
how to use these technologies to improve the lifestyle. For instance, I have noticed several
times that my 10 years old nephew was teaching my grandfather how to use Facebook, how to
operate a digital camera, where to search for an information in internet and lots of such things.
So obviously my grandfather learned from my nephew and there are such many technological
aspects the young people can teach the older people.

Secondly, the young people know the changes and trends of the current world better than the
older persons and that’s something they can share with the aged people. For instance, my sister
who is in the second year of her graduation shares lots of information with my father and aunt
regarding the politics, social progress, roles of Government, policy changes etc. and to me, my
sister seems to be well informed than the aged people.
From my experience, I can see that older people have a better experience and they can advice
what are the correct things to do. In fields like research, teaching, banking etc. they are better
performing than the young people. But the sectors where the innovation and hardworking are
required, young people prone to do better.

In my opinion, there are yet tonnes of things that the older people can learn from young people
including technologies where the young people always excel the elder generation.

Model Answer 2:

I have to totally disagree with the statement that there is nothing that young people can teach
older people. For several reasons, which I will mention bellow, I think that young people can
teach older people many things.

First of all, young people intend to learn new things faster. They faster learn new technologies.
Young people can always teach the older how to use technologies and those modern tools.
Second, young people are more motivated. They aspire to succeed and make a good career,
which requires good knowledge and experience. So, they try to get more knowledge and
experience from different sources like Internet, books, newspaper, magazines and of cause
from conversations with other people. In terms of knowledge sharing the young generation can
always motivate and teach the older generation the learned information from these various
sources. In addition to this young people bring many fresh ideas to the team they are working
in. For example, when my friend was hired as a software developer he surprised everybody
with his energy, a bunch of new and fresh ideas about what could be done to improve the
process. The fresh idea and innovation of young people are something older people can always
learn. He was the youngest person in the team but everybody listened to him and it was like a
fresh air, an impulse, which made everyone work harder. Even the senior employees of this
office learned from this young person.

Finally, young people often know more about new technologies and how to use those
technologies. For example, my husband is 26 years old and he is a good professional in software
development. So, he is often asked to read a lecture for different companies and audience.
Needless to say, the majority of people who attend those lectures are older than my husband
and definitely they can learn many things from the comparatively young person like my
husband.

To sum up, I think that young people have many things to teach older people. Moreover, I think
that people from every generation have something to learn from each other. People learn
trough their entire lives from books that hold the experience and the history of previous
generations as well as from their own experience and experience of the younger people.

In nearly all science courses at university, there are significantly more male

students than female students.

What is the reason for this?

What could be done to balance out the numbers?

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

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.

There is an old saying - 'Give me an educated mother and I will give you an educated nation'.
This prover emphasises the women education. Throughout the history men and women both
worked together to build a better world and whatever stage the current world is in, that has
been contributed both by male and female - surely not by one gender. As university education
is so important for the full bloom of one person's merit, skill and knowledge, equal opportunity
for both male and female students should be ensured.

To begin with, if only men go ahead in education, research, arts, history and women stay home,
then no good can be done. The history suggests that men are dominant in numbers in science,
arts, engineering, creativity and business sectors. But we cannot deny the contribution of
Mother Teresa and Madam Merry Currie who have devoted their whole life to the betterment
of the world. It is true that if the competition is arranged regardless of gender, more male
students will be ahead of women. But still, universities should accept an equal number of
students. If fewer females hold the important sectors of a country, naturally women will feel
deprived and this will lead them to compete with men.

It is a mother who is much more emotionally attached to their children and friendlier to
children than fathers. So they help the children in their study. So the importance of female
education in the higher level should get a priority considering this single issue.

In conclusion, universities should accept the same number of students from both sexes and give
an equal opportunity at every level.
(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

A. Whether a university should admit an equal number of male and female students in each
subject?

Agreement: Why universities should accept male and female students equally in every subject.

According to human rights, both genders must be permitted to study on their favourite subject.
In some countries, due to religious beliefs and social issues, male doctors are not allowed to
become Gynaecologists, and this has increased the rate of mortality and morbidity of cases.

Males and females pay the same rate of taxes, so they must be given similar opportunity.

Students will have a higher level of competition. To achieve higher encouragements from
opposite gender, students will have tougher competition than when they compete with the
same gender.

This can help both sexes to increase their communication skills when it comes to having closer
relationships with the opposite sex. Definitely, students of these schools will most probably
have less matrimonial problems in the future.

This will ensure the women empowerment and the society would benefit from this
arrangement.

Women in most of the society are underprivileged and this arrangement would ensure their
better education and thus contribution to the family, society and country.
If an equal number of male and female students get admitted in every subject offered in a
university, more areas of research and employment would be explored by women and that
would benefit the country as they would contribute more.

Chances of gender discrimination in the classrooms would greatly reduce.

If fewer females hold the important sectors of a country naturally women will feel deprived and
this will lead them to compete with men.

Disagreement: Why universities should NOT accept male and female students equally in every
subject.

Physically some areas of work and related study fields are not appropriate for the women and
that’s why they would naturally show less interest in those areas of study. For example, a
female construction engineer working in outdoor may become frustrated by heavy physical
activities that are normal for men.

Sensationally, women are more fitted to some areas of study than men. Nursing is a good
example in this case. So women in such subjects should get priority.

It can be costly. Governments have to consider larger budgets for admitting an equal number of
males and females.

The level of sexual violence can be increased fundamentally.

Reserved quota for females would be discriminating for some talented male students.

University education should be based on talent and performance, not based on equal gender
opportunity.
In reality, the identical number of male and female students in every subject in a university is a
fanciful idea that would deprive many talented male students of getting the university
education.

A form of natural selection will take place: survival of the fittest; and the end result would
benefit us all.

Model Answer 2:

(Disagreement: A University should NOT accept male and female students equally)

The society and educational system have changed significantly from the old era when it was
almost impossible for a girl to study in a university while only boys were allowed to do so. Now
a girl can enrol to a university at her wish and merit. In many universities, female students
exceed the male students in many subjects. I oppose the idea of granting the same number of
male and female students in every subject offered in a university bypassing the merit list.

First of all, a university aims to educate people and prepare them for the future and those
students would lead the country in the future. If the admission process prioritises sentiments
and tries to accept the same number of students from both genders in each subject, it would
not be a good idea for the country. Rather they should focus on talent and there is no harm if
more female students can get admitted to the university based on talent.

Second, the important qualifications are the academic performance and merit. Here gender
issue should not be considered. The equal number of male and female students in every subject
is a whimsical idea that would deprive many talented male students. Third, since there is no
restriction on the number of female students allowed for a subject, they can naturally compete
in a fair fight and show they competence rather than being pitied by a policy. Again, not all
male and female are equally interested in studying in every subject, they have their own
choices. Implementing the equal number of male and female students in each subject would
take away the freedom from students to study in their favourite subject.
In conclusion, the idea of admitting the same number of male and female students in university
level in each subject is not a good idea and the admission should strictly base on choice and
merit rather than emotion.

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

Model Answer 3:

Universities are the places for higher education that straightly directs one’s future career. Since
today’s belief is to obtain the equality between male and female, some may say that women
are able to do whatever men can do and thus, a university should maintain the same number
for both genders in every course. This is a very controversial issue and I shall hold the opposite
opinion.

Although male and female students can share the same ability to obtain and convey knowledge
of one specific expertise to the practical work, some majors just prefer one gender to the other.
For example, the job of civil engineering seems to fit better for men than women since it
requires strong physical ability. Or though not impossible, it is hard for a woman to work as a
firefighter or policeman. On the other hand, a fewer male would apply to work as nurses or
baby sisters since these jobs require some delicate touches or “a woman’s hand”.

Moreover, universities provide necessary education to train limited amount of qualified

candidates and thus, there should be a fair competition for all who wish to receive this
education. Balancing between genders may strip away the opportunity of some male or female
candidates. It should be let for the natural selection as the survival of the fittest that
encourages both men and women to fight for their right to pursue their dream jobs.

In conclusion, it is not necessary to hold a balance between male and female students in every
university course since different majors attract different genders and one has his or her free will
to join in any part of life with a fair fight.
[Written by - Ha Thanh Le ]

Model Answer 4:

(Disagreement: A University should NOT accept male and female students equally)

Many argue that to avoid any gender discriminations, an equal number of male and female
students should be accepted in every subject. This is a very controversial issue however, I hold
the opposite opinion.

First of all, I strongly believe that occupations are gender related. There are some tasks that
women do better than men. It may not be easy to admit that men, for example, make better
civil or electrical engineers. Although not impossible for a woman to be the police or a
firefighter, but due to the high physical demand for these jobs very few women would opt to be
one. Hence it seems useless to accept male and female students in such fields.

More importantly, I believe that the priority should go to the more capable individual. The aim
of all universities should be to accept the best candidate whether it is a male or a female. As a
result of this, we would expect to see varying proportions of male and female students in
different fields. Men would not be able to compete with women in some fields and vice versa
hence overall, this would be a fair approach.

Furthermore, this would encourage all male and female students to try hard to achieve a place.
A form of natural selection will take place: survival of the fittest and the end result would
benefit us all. The individual with the highest level of capability would be allowed to pursue the
career, and hence is more likely to be successful in the future.

To conclude, I hold the opinion that universities should not accept male and female students
equally. Using the above-mentioned techniques would be far more advantageous for all of us.
Model Answer 5:

Universities are the pillars of a society and build a sophisticated civilisation in this modern era.
Therefore the standard of education should be maintained at an optimum level in order to
ensure that the education. Many believe that university admission should be based on the ratio
males and females for each major to maintain the equilibrium among women and men. I
strongly believe that the taking up of students for each major should be based on the academic
grades as well as the talent.

I understand that the whole point of higher education is nothing but the opportunity which is
given to each and every one of us, to choose from a variety of fields, a suitable subject, which
serves the purpose of interest which in turn will help us to enjoy our future. Pupils often show
some sort of talent from childhood towards learning a specific subject which ultimately
attributes to their career. In this case, I presume the selection criteria should be the skills or
grades which they possess in that specific major, should be the most important thing to
consider. For instance, a doctor who has passed out of a university ought to have good hard
working skills and the interest in that profession, as his responsibility towards people is higher
than any other profession. Hence, such a person should be graduated only due to his excellence
in that field, not mere the gender reservation.

When thinking about equal reservations to men and women, it is significant to note that, there
are many varieties of education branches which are particularly suitable for a certain gender.
Though subjects like medicine, business and arts are equally attractive and productive for both
male and female students; we cannot deny that the jobs or field of studies which require more
of physical strength are best suitable for men. Needless to mention, such jobs are most
commonly chosen by boys, nowadays. Being said that, I do think that, the equality in the
number of admission of males and females is a very bright idea in some parts of the world, in
order to promote women empowerment. Having said that, I certainly do not think that, this
practice is of any benefit globally as a standard.

At the end of the day, though both the opinion are valid enough, I shall not agree to the point
that, the admission should be strictly based on the same number of men and women, rather
than grades or interests, when it comes to the global university education pertaining to each
major, I insist on implementing such practice to selected areas across the globe
Model Answer 6:

(Disagreement: A University should NOT accept male and female students equally)

Many people argue about the number of university students from both genders are accepted in
each program. Some people debate that it is the best to receive an equal number of both sexes
in each subject. However, personally, I incline to believe that it should not be an equivalent
proportion of men and women students in every discipline. This essay will take a look at this
issue from the preference we have in society and a different number of students enrolled in a
university.

Preference may be a considerable aspect in determining the subject of the student. Some
subjects are generally suitable for the different sex. Midwife, for instance, is only appropriate
and has been selected by women only. However, engineering is mostly preferred by men
students. Thus, it is hard to make a balanced number of students accepted in subjects especially
for those which are mostly preferred by one sex.

Furthermore, the different number of registered students in a university regarding sex might be
quite important. Since the number of male and female is also may not be equal, it does not
necessarily worthy to put both men and women students in an equal number for every subject.
For example, in engineering faculty, mostly there will be a higher number of men students than
women. Hence, it might be complicated to receive an equal number of students when the
proportion of registered student is also significantly dissimilar.

All in all, there should be no similar number of male and female scholars in each subject at
university. Women may enrol to the same subject as men and reversely, however, it is difficult
to ensure the number or accepted students will be equal in both sexes. It might be essentially
important to not stress the same quantity of different sex scholars in every single subject in
university.

(by Linda)

Topic: Universities should accept an equal number of males and female students in every
subject. To what extent do you agree or disagree.
Model Answer 7:

(Disagreement: Universities should NOT accept equal male and female students in every
subject)

Arguments over the proportion of male and female students in different universities have been
going on since the practice of teaching began. Despite this, it has disagreed that allocation of
seats in universities should be equal between male and female students. This will be proven by
looking at how different professions are gender-based and how females in certain professions
cannot proceed further in their career due to other responsibilities.

Firstly, different kind of professions demands one gender more than the other to cater its
specific requirements. For instance, a friend of mine worked as an intern in gynaecology
department, which he joined immediately after his graduation and end up with frustration
because of the non-cooperative behaviour of female patients. As most would agree, expecting
young female patients to interact with male doctors regarding their gynaecology problems
would be unrealistic in many parts of the world; the argument that universities should accept
equal numbers of male and female students can be debunked.

Secondly, it is easy to see the progressive rate at which females after graduation fail to proceed
further in their career due to the responsibilities of looking after children and other household
works. For example, a recent study published in Dawn newspaper in Pakistan has stated that
nearly 70% of the female students do not practice medicine after completing M.B.B. S. As such
a loss would impose an additional burden on the healthcare system if universities continue to
accept an equal number of female students. Thus, this makes it clear that universities should
not accept equal numbers of male and female students in every subject.

The above look illustrates that certain jobs and certain profession may be more fitted for the
different genders. It is thus recommended that regulating bodies of universities should weigh
the pros and cons before allocating equal numbers of male and female Model Answer 8:

(Disagreement: A University should NOT accept male and female students equally)

Around the world, university studies are highly popular and every year millions of students
enrol for various short-term and long-term courses. Although most experts emphasise on the
requirements to improve the quality of university education, many believe the idea of equal sex
ratio is also important. The base of this ideology is in the theory of egalitarianism and is
especially backed for women organisations, working for the uplift of women.

First of all, equal sex ratio ensures the burgeoning of respect for each other among both
genders. Moreover, this also fuels security, especially, in the minds of women students. To
bolster the statement, worldwide university crime-related data show low crime against women
in universities which have equal or approaching equal sex ratios across all subjects. Some
governments have even ratified reservation rules for maintaining a minimum percentage of
seat allocation in universities to women.

Secondly, some experts believe that this idea helps to create an environment of diversity where
healthy ideas and activities prevail. As a proof, we know that many organisations, especially
service industry companies, always maintain a ratio of gender diversity as it has been proved by
research that such workplaces produce high standard results.

In my opinion, it is paramount to maintain diversity in university studies to a certain extent as I

strongly support the idea of admission based on merit more. While universities should declare a
minimum percentage of women students in every course, there should not be any obligation to
enrol exactly 50% of each gender. Of course, I understand some courses like mechanical
engineering demand strenuous physical activities, and women students generally do not prefer
such courses at all. Hence, there should be enough provisions for exceptions too.

Some people think that it is beneficial for old people to learn something new

while others believe that once a person is past 65 years of age it is too late

to learn ielts

What is your opinion?

The 20th and 21th centuries are characterized by all the momentous changes they have made
in humans' lives. Perhaps one of the most important milestone[s ] of these two centuries is
education. One of the most contentious questions, which is often raised regarding this issue, is
whether adults and older people should study and improve their knowledge or not. There are
various perspectives toward this issue, as some people might believe that education is
necessary for all people and it is not important how old they are, while others maintain the
opposite perspective and do not believe studying could be beneficial for older people. I
personally concur with the former perspective. From my one vantage point, educat[ion] should
be regarded as one the most important priorities in humans' lives.{"humans" sounds a little bit
odd here, as if you are contrasting humans and animals - implying education is not very
important for animals - I would stick to "people's" and use "human" when talking about biology
or comparing humans to other animals}

The first point that is worth bearing in mind is the fact that the pace of development in
knowledge [today] c[an] not be compared with [that of] past years. Every day we can witness a
new scientific invention which affects life and if people want to go along with these changes
they should study and get acquainted with these new matters. To shed light on this matter, I
want to mention an example. My grandfather whose age is 75 {"grandfather, aged 75, did" is
more concise and sounds a bit smoother} did not know how to work with ATM and POS
devices. So, after [getting stuck] several times he stuck in a lot of places like stores and malls
because they did not accept paper money[,] eventually he decided to learn how use these
devices. Consequently, learning new things is inevitable for older people.

The second reason which deserves some words here is that I s[ee] a lot of older people who are
ashamed of their lack of knowledge. From a psychological standpoint, due to the[ir] lack of
studying and learning[,] old people do not feel comfortable to take part {"comfortable in taking
part ..." is more natural} in society activities, because they are afraid of some debates which
could be happened and they are not familiar with them {better to say "... afraid of some topics
of conversation arising of which they are not familiar, and so they ..."} and they are ashamed of
saying that they do not know anything about the issue. As result, they avoid society and prefer
to stay alone. The noteworthy statistics, conducted at Johns Hopkins University, indicate that
when a group of old people were taught about ongoing issues in the world and they gain[ed] a
lot of information about [a ]variety of subjects such as global warming and the internet[,] they
really felt that they [we]re more up to dat[e ] person and it boost[ed] their self confidence. In
addition, they could convey their information to other people and affect the[ir] society['s]
behavior[, b]ecause,{no comma here} lots of people pay attention to older people's advic[e
].{advice is non-countable singular} So, learning could have other indirect influences on society,
in addition to advant[ages] for older people.
To make a long story short, all the aforementioned reasons and examples lead us to [the]
conclusio[n ]that in the modern era, people are [required] necessitated to study and learn and
if they feel reluctant about learning, they w[ill] meet a lot of troubles in their private and social
li[ves]. However, that was the story in a nutshell; actually there are a myriad of other reasons
and examples supporting my opinion, which are not mentioned above due to the dearth of
time. All in all, it is highly recommended that a survey be conducted to assess what other
profound impacts [a] lacking of knowledge could have on people's lives.

It is thought by some that a school teacher’s role is to motivate and inspire

students. However, other people believe that a teacher’s primary role is to pass

on knowledge.

What do you think is the role of a teacher?

Some people think that teachers should be responsible for teaching students to judge what is
right and wrong so that they can behave well. Others say that teachers should only teach
students academic subjects.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

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

Write at least 250 words.

Model Answer 1:

In the education field, teachers consistently play an essential role. Some people claim that
teachers are only an occupation to teach students about knowledge and academic information.
Others advocate that teachers should teach not only subjects but also disciplines and basic
ethical judgments. In my own perspective, the age of students is the truly crucial indicator to
determine the aspect of teacher's role.
In kindergartens, children merely learn how to communicate with peers and how to be
socialised. The purpose of teachers is aimed to assist children's socialisation and their
personality development. In this stage, teaching academic subjects is not the first priority of
teachers. Instead, teachers are more likely to build up a role model for students so that kids can
establish adequately ethical perspectives, well-socialised behaviour and correct judgmental
foundation.

From primary schools to high schools, teachers, indeed, play a more complicated role in terms
of teaching. Juveniles get easily influenced by external environment and other peers'
behaviour. As a result, teachers are expected to guide those students in correct life pathway as
well as to teach them a wage diversity of knowledge for future career and study life. Among
this period, teaching and guiding students are equally important for teachers.

After that, in university and higher education, most of the students are, comparing to previous
stages, equivalently mature enough to take responsibility for their own behaviour. Therefore,
there is no need for teachers and professors to teach those students how to judge right and
wrong. Knowledge exchange is likely to be the major relation maker of the teachers and
students at this stage.

In conclusion, undoubtedly, teachers take participant into student's life. The role of teachers
does strongly associate with the age of students.

[ Written by - Kelly Chen ]

Model Answer 2:

There has recently been a debate regarding whether teachers are responsible or not for guiding
the school learners what is correct and incorrect, while some people think that it is not included
in teachers’ working criteria. In my point of view, teachers should teach the students in order to
help them to improve in every way possible.
Firstly, some people think that teachers are responsible for teaching what is correct and
incorrect because it might assist the learner to identify what should they behave in the society.
For example, if a child does not know anything when they are working in the society, it would
not help them to solve the problem. They might just continue with the false concept. Possibly
this will lead to a conclusion that everyone working in their own way. If this exists in Hong Kong,
there will be a huge argument every day non-stop as people think that their own idea is correct,
but actually not.

However, some people believe that teachers should only teach things that are related to the
school syllabus. It is because they think that the parents will teach their own child at home.
They will tell the kids what should they do and it is parents’ responsibilities to guide their own
child. Also, some parents think that teachers might teach bad things to their kids. For example,
there are some teachers at the University of Hong Kong telling the students to occupy Central.
This is extremely unacceptable. Due to this, parents only required the teachers to teach school-
related stuff.

In my opinion, I agree with teachers only teaching school-based stuff would be a better option
because for me personally, I do not listen to the teachers at all, I know that my parents will
teach me how to behave and what I should do. For example, some teachers told me that I am
doing something wrong, but still, I do not want to listen to them. As their words aren’t
influential at all, it won’t make any impact on me.

To conclude, I think teachers should only focus on academic studies instead of teaching the
learner about righteous and wrongness. Our parents will be responsible for that.

[ Written by - Lo Hannie ]

Model Answer 3:

It is often argued that teachers should be accountable for their student’s good and bad
conducts as they are responsible for teaching them the morality of their children. Others, on
the other hand, opine that educators’ role should be limited to imparting academic
(educational) curriculum among students. This essay will discuss both points of view and argue
that instructors can share the responsibility for inculcating socially acceptable manners in
students along with academic course training, followed by a reasoned conclusion.

Many support the teacher’s role in students’ behaviour modification. Firstly they think that
students spend much more time with their educators in school than with their parents. So it is
easy for the trainers to develop a good interpersonal relationship with students and, thereby,
can have a great influence on their trainees. In addition, they can give moral lessons through
moral classes. Moreover, most of the students find their teachers as their role model. So the
students accept the instructions of their professors’ than anyone else.

Alternatively, others advocate that academic subjects must be the only priority for educators.
They believe that this encourages teachers to concentrate only on course works and thereby
could contribute to better academic achievements of the students. This is true in the case of
pupils who follow the classes with great attentiveness. But this essay disagrees this view
because it cannot bring maximum outcome from other students if they are not motivated to
learn. So a teacher, who can impose good conduct in his students, who can divert his students
from immoral behaviour, can expect the best possible result from his students.

In summary, although teachers’ primary role is guiding students in academic course work, their
ultimate goal should be creating citizen with good conduct and better career prospectus.

Fewer schools are requiring children to learn and improve their hand writing

skills.

Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages of this trend?

Handwriting is a skill that we need to develop with practice. Before computers and printers
became commonplace, there was a great deal of emphasis on good handwriting. Both parents
and teachers encouraged children to write neatly and clearly. Good handwriting could even get
one better grades. Handwriting is still important but very few people now use a pen or pencil in
their everyday life. In my opinion, this is a negative development. It is okay to adopt technology
but it must not be at the expense of the skills integral for our growth and success.
Computerization has affected the handwriting skills of both children and adults. Now nearly
every office has computers. Schools and colleges are also computerizing their classrooms. As a
result, typing has replaced writing. This explains why handwriting skills are deteriorating.

Handwriting is a reflection of character. By simply analysing your handwriting, experts can get
clues about your personality traits. In fact, some businesses commission this analysis before
hiring employees. Obviously, those who write legibly have improved chances of getting jobs.
What’s more, many standardized tests are still paper-based. IELTS is a very good example of
this. A candidate with poor handwriting skills will have a tough time achieving a good band
score in this test. If handwriting is not legible, the examiner will not be able to find out what the
student has written. This will lead to poor grades.

Handwriting helps the brain development in younger children. It activates the brain more than
keyboarding. It is also known to improve reading fluency. For example, cursive writing is known
to help both children and adults with dyslexia.

To conclude, over dependence on computers is the number one cause of declining handwriting
skills. This is a negative development and can have an adverse impact on one’s career
prospects.

Reasons in Support of Children Learning Handwriting Skills

handwriting is a basic tool in many subjects, for example doing tests, taking

notes and writing homework. poor handwriting skills or illegible writing can

have negative effects on school performance.

learning handwriting is linked to learning to spell, basic reading and grammar

these are basic and fundamental requirements for any school child.

good handwriting skills should be taught at an early age to form good habits

as it is essential later in life in some situations it is better to write by

hand rather than type

 there is a link between cognition and writing by hand children learn better

when they are forced to write something by hand

Other Ideas

teaching children how to touch-type would be more useful being proficient

in the use of modern technological devices by touch typing is essential for

the future

focusing on handwriting which is less relevant today, is a waste of time for

children time could be better spent on developing other useful skills and

knowledge

handwriting is linked to learning to spell but spell check is a function that

all computers have therefore less time should be spent focusing on this

There are many high schools out there today that provide a plethora of
extracurricular activities. Some occur before school, some after school, and a few
may even take place on the weekends. While some parents are a bit dubious
about their children participating in extracurricular activities, these activities
actually bring with them many benefits. Allowing your child to get involved in
extracurricular activities at school is a wise choice, and it can be very important in
helping them to develop many working skills, people skills, and more. Of course,
while a few activities is a great idea, there is a point where you need to draw a
line. Here is a closer look at some of the benefits of extracurricular activities for
your child, and how you can know when these activities become too much.

The Benefits of Extracurricular Activities

If you aren't sure whether or not you should let your high school student get
involved in extracurricular activities, you definitely need to consider all the benefits
that come along with these activities. Here is a look at just a few benefits your
teen will enjoy if you allow them to get involved with these activities.

Benefit #1 – Learning Time Management and Prioritizing

– One great benefit of your teen being involved in extracurricular activities is that
they will learn about time management and prioritizing things in their life. As
adults we get very used to juggling a variety of different tasks and commitments.
Our teens need to learn how to do this as well, and getting involved in these
activities can give them some practice at it.

Benefit #2 – Getting Involved in Diverse Interests – Getting involved in

extracurricular activities also allows students to get involved in diverse interests. It
is important for your teen to be very diverse in their interests. These activities
allow them to explore various interests that they may have.

Benefit #3 – Learning About Long Term Commitments

– Teens learn about long term commitments when they are involved in
extracurricular activities as well, which is another excellent benefit. When the join
one of the activities or clubs, they commit themselves to that activity for a period
of time. If they don't hold up to their end of the deal, no doubt they'll hear about it
from their peers and perhaps even teachers. Learning to take on commitments is
important, and these activities can teach your child this important lesson.
Benefit #4 – Making a Contribution – Extracurricular activities allow your child to
make a contribution in some way. It shows that they are getting away from just
thinking about themselves and contributing to something else. This is important in
their growth as a person.

Benefit #5 – Raises Self Esteem – Many times, being involved in extracurricular

activities helps to raise the self esteem of teens. There are many teens that feel
worthless or that there is nothing they are good at. Teens struggle with self
esteem, and these activities are a way that they can build self esteem. Everyone
wants to find something that they are really good at, and extracurricular activities
provide them with a way that they can get involved in something and really shine,
giving their self esteem a boost.

Benefit #6 – Building Solid Relationship Skills – Your teen will have the benefit of
building solid relationship skills as well when they get involved in extracurricular
activities. Teens need to get involved in social activities and learn how to
appropriate act in social situations and these activities give them a chance outside
of school to do this, while they are still being supervised by adults.

Benefit #7 – Looks Great on College Applications

– Yet another benefit of allowing your teen to get involved in extracurricular

activities is that it looks great on college applications. Most colleges not only look
at grades, but they take a look at extracurricular activities that students are
involved in while they are in high school. They want to see that students are
getting out there and doing more than just book work. The activities that teens
are involved in reveal a lot about them, and definitely will say something to the
college admissions committees.
download elizabeth: the golden age film in hd formats

How Much is Too Much?

hd the king's speech movies

Of course, while there are definitely many excellent benefits to extracurricular

activities for your teens, you need to consider how much is too much. Getting
involved in a few different activities can be a great choice, and is definitely
beneficial, but too many activities can end up having negative effects. Teens
involved in too many activities often end up having academic problems, or they
may not get the rest and recreation that they need. It's important that you talk to
your teen and set some limits to extracurricular activities. Have them pick out a
couple of their favorites and make sure they can handle them. For freshmen, you
may even want to limit the activities to one, until you see how they handle the
activity and their school work. Then they can work up to balancing more activities
if they perform well. Some kids feel like they have to be involved in many activities
to be a success, and this is not beneficial to them. It's important that kids don't try
to "do it all," but that they have a passion and commitment to a few activities,
which definitely builds character.

If your kids want to get involved in extracurricular activities, let them. There are
definitely excellent benefits that they'll enjoy. While it can be tough to play taxi
driver to all these activities, keep in mind that you are doing it for their well being
and future success. Just make sure you put your foot down if they try to take these
activities too far.

Environment Essay Titles

Human activity has had a negative impact on plants and animals around the world.

Some people think that this cannot be changed, while others believe actions can

be taken to bring about a change.

Discuss both and give your opinion. (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

Humans are considered as more dangerous species in today's world than animals. As animals
have places to attack humans or similar creatures but humans have no boundaries. It is true
that globalization has taken us to another stage but not too late to start making changes.

For a start, human activities are greatly affecting on other living creatures i.e. plants and
animals. For example, overly populated nations causing slaughtering animals to feed the extra
mouths. In the same way, other developed nations kill the animals for making their luxurious
accessories like shoes, belts, jackets etc. This act eventually extincting some animals. In the case
of plants, many trees are cut-off to make an extra space for people living. The concept of green
environment has been faded away. For instance, the beauty of nature is eradicating as people
these days have started building their houses on hills and on the mountains. It is true, we are
not far from what people think that it is late to make any changes if the progress of hunting
animals and killing trees and plants continues.

On the other hand, precautions are urgently required to stop the bad activities for humans. For
instance, those people who have a hobby of hunting animals should be penalized heavily or if
required sentence imprisonment. In addition to that building houses high up on hills and
destroying nature should strictly be prohibited and banned. Government must take stern action
against these people who do that for their own good and do not care about the purity of the
earth. It is not just a part of Government of any country but also every human should held
responsible to do their best save the environment.

I believe that it is still not too late to take the initiative. If anyone like to stop this cruelty this is
the right time. let's be firm and make commitment to ourselves in saving the God's nature and
creations.

It is true that human activities, such as farming and industrialization have detrimental influence
on survival species on our planet. This impact is not restricted to plant species, but is also
evident in animal species. As a results of constantly damage activities, some of them already
extinct and some are become endangered species or going to be. Fortunately, the enlightened
human being has realized the devastating results of loosing plants and animals, so measures
have been taken to tackle this problem. Yet, some people claimed the measures are too late to
be effective since the damage has already done to some extent.

One has to know that it is inevitable that some of the species were extinct because of human
progress. When people start farming, they need to clean out the forest to make the land
available for farming that surely lead to some plants are being cut and animals are left without
proper habitual place, so they die out. Similar situation happened to industrialization, they
need land to build factories, materials for production. But the results are rewarding, the planet
so far has supported 7 billion people, that is most impressive result which cannot be achieved
without scarifies some species. Moreover, it is a survival competition in biology, otherwise
human being would have to be extinct one day.

Nevertheless, human being also suffer from the consequences of disturbance of the
biodiversity that push them to make manage to stopping take advantages of the other species
by using all sorts of measures to save the endangered species, and try to use the improved
method to limit the harm for the still existing species. Although, the efforts are unable to
reverse the already diminished species, but to the still alive one, even how much small the
number will be, such as panda, the efforts are crucial for their survival.

Admittedly, it is too late to take measures to save the already extinct species, but it is by no
means too late to save the future extinct species if there is effective measures and they are
being implemented from now on.

It is often said that governments spend too much money on projects to protect

wildlife, while there are other problems that are more important?

Do you agree or disagree? (Reported 2017, GT Test)

Preserving wildlife and tackling a variety of problems in our society such as education or
healthcare are among one of the most fiercely debated issues. While I agree that state budget
should be used to protect wild animals, I would like to argue that the government should also
spend funds solving other issues in our everyday life.

On the one hand, it is believed that the central authorities should allocate national fund for
wildlife preservation. Firstly, there is an array of endangered animals which are on the verge of
extinction. Without money funded for protection, those animals will die out, which has a
negative impact on our ecological balance. For instance, the disappearance of one species will
result in the collapse of the others, including human whose living depends on it. Additionally,
some people regard conserving wild animals is one kind of preserving the beauty and diversity
of our earth. It is the variety of fauna that contributes vastly to scientific research. In short,
protecting wildlife is also protecting people’s life.

On the other hand, I agree that state fund should be used for tackling problems in our society
because it is education, healthcare and the like that affects directly our life. Without knowledge
and a healthy body, mankind could not develop. For instance, in Africa, it is illiteracy and
epidemics that prevents the development of the countries, in contrast to the USA, a mighty
nation with standard services. That is the reason why better education and heath care quality
mean higher standard of living.

Additionally, money should be spent on such problems as environmental pollution. Nowadays,

contamination is among the most pressing problems as it has damaged our surroundings and
caused perilous diseases for people.

In conclusion, the government should take wildlife and other problems in the society into
consideration as these factors all have a great impact on our life.

In conclusion, the government should take wildlife and other problems in the society into
consideration as these factors all have a great impact on our life.

The governmental reserve is the hard-earned money of taxpayers which should be utilized
wisely in the service o citizens. We observe the government of many countries invest a chunk of
money behind the preservation of wildlife which I found prevarication from the objective of any
government for what they got elected by citizens.

Globally, there are several rudimentary issues existed which need to be addressed on priority
and in the service of humanity. For instance, In Africa, there is a huge count of the population
who are less fortunate to avail basic sustenance like food, dwells, employment, education and
medication. People are dying due to the lack of treatments and underdeveloped medical
facilities for the server ailments where the government should divert the high portion of funds.
Going forward, We all are aware that it is a natural phenomenon that some animals are getting
extinction over a period of time. For example, dinosaurs were the great threat to the human life
and their extinction was the blessing in disguise for human-being. So, there is no point of
wasting money in protecting animals which are dangerous for mankind.

Undoubtedly, there are few animals who are having an active part in nature's food chain.
Hence, their loss should be prevented by allocating optimum budget rather sacrificing future
advancement like space exploration which is having a crucial role in understanding life on
another planet to retrieve solution of many problems like global warming. For example,
reduction in the count of a lion can increase the volume of other animals in the forest can
imbalance the food chain. So, preventing lions are a valid investment but rescuing sparrow
which doesn't create any huge impact in a food chain, will be counted as a waste of money.

To sum up, many developing countries are already under a wet blanket of debt that their
citizens are struggling to pay back through the taxes. Therefore, spending people's money
blindly behind the saving wildlife is absolutely not a positive trend in my view.

To begin with, firstly some species of birds as well as animals are at extinction point due to loss
of their habitants (natural habitats) and imbalance in food chain. The quite obvious fact is that
the animals and birds have been advantageous to mankind in many ways from (in) last many
centuries. Secondly, their loss might prove harmful to some people since a large proportion of
population depends on non- vegetarian diet. To save some beneficial species and endangered
species of animals, the effective solution could be that the governments must ensure that the
people do not hunt animals on account of their selfish purposes. Apart from this, the cutting of
trees in their habitants (natural habitats) must be strictly prohibited. To achieve this, neither
too much efforts nor too much money are needed.

Sample Answer 1:

A large number of people possess the belief that spending money to save the wild animals is a
waste of national budget as these animals have almost nothing to contribute to the human’s
progress or lifestyle. I totally disagree with this view and strongly suggest that we should try to
save wild animals in every way possible.
It is a ridiculous idea that wild animals have no place in the world because we have entered into
the 21st century. I do not believe that planet Earth exists only for the humans and
modernization means we need to be more selfish. I would rather say that 21st century should
be the right time to make the planet Earth livable for all species. Letting the wild animals get
extinct would be one of the worst steps in the human history and if we do not take initiatives to
save those already endangered species, future generations would remember us as a selfish
generation.

Having said that, we waste millions of dollars on tobacco each day and I would say this is a
waste of money. Spending money to protect wild animals is a prudent investment as scientists
and ecologists agree that those habitats are important for the human survival. For example, to
preserve the wild animals we need to save the forests, plant more trees and stop exploiting
nature. This, in turns, saves the human species from being endangered. The human kind should
maintain the balance of the ecosystem and invest money in protecting nature and wild
creatures is rather a good investment.

To conclude, the planet is shared by all the species and as the most intelligent species, as we
claim ourselves to be, we need have rather great responsibilities to protect wild animals for our
own benefits.

Model Answer 2:

The natural inhabitants of wild animals and their way of life have been greatly affected by us
and in my opinion, we should try to take and initiate every possible step to save these wild
animals.

The 21st century is the era of technological advancement, but this technological advancement
does not mean that we have to alter the way of life. The lives of these wild animals have been
endangered because of human and some species are on the edge of complete distinction and if
necessary steps are not taken immediately, many of these species will be lost forever. Humans
can't give life to any animal so they do not have the right to let them be destroyed.
To keep the balance of the ecosystem, each species of the animal kingdom plays important
roles and the existence of one species largely depends on upon another. To say that wild
animals have no use for us is just a selfish statement and obviously, we should try to keep the
natural balance for our own benefit. Many useful domestic animals have evaluated from the
wild species and how can we even define a wild animal since they live in their very natural
environments? Wild animals even play many important roles for us directly. For example, many
wild animals kill lots of rats and save the farmers' crops from being eaten or destroyed by those
rats.

In conclusion, we must try to preserve all the endangered and natural animals and as human,
we should feel responsible to ourselves not to let any species be lost forever.

(Approximately 255 words)

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

Model Answer 3:

It is sometimes argued that wildlife has been declining in recent years at a startling pace and
that deploying any scheme to protect endangered animals would be wastage of money.
However, I completely disagree with this idea.

In one hand, it can be argued that wild animals are becoming increasingly extinct in present
decade .One of the grave reasons for this decline is ever increasing numbers of human on the
earth which have fueled up the demands for more houses and roads. At the same time, the
need of self-sufficiency in food for the human has led to a destruction of natural habitats. So
depletion of green spaces ends up with decreased number of wild animals. For instance,
chemical farming is required to meet the demand for cheaper food at any cost, and these
practices are driven by greater demands for natural habitats such as woodland, forests and hills
to be converted into farmlands. Urbanisation is another big factor with a greater number of
people tends to live in cities and more space needed to extend cities at the expense of
removing wild habitats.

Nevertheless, I believe that conservation of wild creature is crucial for the human survival as
well as for a healthy ecosystem and that it is worthwhile to utilise recourses to protect them. If
we do not bother to deploy any targeted scheme to save animal lives, then biodiversity and
ecosystem will suffer. As a result, it will have a devastating effect on the food chain for all living
creatures. So the government should take more initiatives to carry out different strategies to
ensure the survival of wild animals. Establishment of more zoos, as well as protecting natural
areas, should also be ensured by the government and the law enforcing authority.

In conclusion, I would argue that wild animals are the vital part of our planet and they should
be protected at every possible cost.

(Approximately 312 words)

[by Shamaila]

Model Answer 4:

Planet earth is a motherland of wildlife, marine animals, and human beings and so on. For the
past few decades, uncontrolled hunting of wild creatures has resulted in the extinction of few
species which is very alarming. Few people believe that protecting wildlife in this modern era in
not beneficial and I don’t agree with this assertion. This essay will analyse the importance of
wild animals on earth.
Firstly, wild animal’s helps in maintaining the ecosystem of earth, without which existence of
human race would be jeopardised. Their existence not only adds beauty to nature but it’s vital
for the growth of flora and fauna. For instance, waste produced from animals contains chemical
compounds that are of great value for the growth of plants and other forestries.

Moreover, these wild beasts attract tourism which is instrumental in increasing revenue and
improving the economic condition of a country. For instance, wildlife safari in Africa helps local
people to earn their livelihood and raise their families. They can also be used to educate
children and help scientists to study their way of living and behaviours which can unfold
mysteries and to validate different theories presented in ancient times by different scientists
like Darwin.

Furthermore, these wild species serves as a source of experimental subjects which could
potentially result in the discovery of important medicines and life-saving vaccines. For instance,
recently scientists conducted a research over the venom of python and they believe that it can
be used to treat neurological disorders in human beings.

To recapitulate, the aforementioned statements provide plausible arguments in favour of

preserving wild habitats and the importance of maintaining the balance of life on earth. Every
possible effort should be made at the global level to save animals for our future generations.

(Approximately 294 words)

[by - Tauseef Raza ]

Model Answer 5:
Since the explosion of population, humans have taken a large amount of space and resource on
earth. Some social scientists are convinced that it is pointless to spend money on preserving
wild animals, as it might not have sufficient places for them to survive in the 21st century.
Personally, I am inclined to the view that we should give priority to protecting wild animals over
any other things.

First and foremost, it is absurd to argue that it is not necessary to protect the wild animals.
They play an essential role on earth and we get together to share the world. If they were extinct
in the world, it would break the balance of the ecosystem. For instance, it is common to see
that if we over hunted sparrows, pests would cause severe disasters in the agriculture field. As
a result, without preserving animals, the living environment of mankind would suffer more
challenges.

In addition, I strongly believe that there are still a plenty of room for wild animals to live in the
world. More specifically, there are many environments are not suitable for people to live, while
those places are animals’ ideal paradise. Moreover, if humans protected animals‘ habitats，
they can create a better environment for us. For example, rainforest could produce oxygen,
absorb the carbon dioxide and make climate stability.

On the other hand, the opponents may argue that it is not necessary to prevent the wild
animals. However, this view does not seem justifiable because it fails to take into account the
validity of the two reasons noted above.

In conclusion, after all, the above factors considered, it could be argue that protecting the
ecosystem and the letting us having more comfortable environment are the main reasons of
the wild animals' conservation. It is better to live side by side with wild animals and make our
life peaceful and stability.

Some people think the best way to solve global environmental problems is to

increase the cost of fuel.

To what extent do you agree or disagree? (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

Model Answer:

The environment is facing many hazards continuously and the imprudent human action is the
first and foremost reason for this. Humans are getting resources from the environment and our
life on earth primarily depends on nature. If this continues, there will be an imbalance in the
future world. To protect the environment, some people suggest increasing the fuel price as
they think that fuel price would reduce the private car ownership and would give a check in the
uncontrolled industrialisation.

As per the statement, fuel is a part of the hazardous human activities which is harming the
environment. By increasing the price of the fuel, the authority might reduce the cars running on
the street but that will also be a burden to the fuel users. But they will find an alternative way
to overcome the price rise. Moreover, the increasing price of the fuel would also increase the
price of necessary products. Poor, thus, would find it even harder to maintain their daily
expenses. Therefore, this method will not be a solution to stop continuously increasing
environmental hazards.

Chemical wastages and solid wastages are also hazardous to the environment. These harms will
not stop by increasing fuel prices. Improper removal of electronic wastes is also a danger to the
environment. Usage of Chloro Floro Carbon (CFC) in electrical equipment such as the
refrigerator, is unavoidable and the use of such household electronics is increasing day by day.
This will not be controlled by increasing the price of the fuel.

This system might be useful to a certain extent in some developing countries. Due to economic
reasons, many people in such countries would not use their private cars. But this might not be
useful for developed countries since they could overcome from this situation easily. Also, in fuel
rich countries, such as Middle East countries, this will be useless and their profit margin from
fuel sales would increase.

Therefore, increasing the fuel price is one method of controlling hazards occur through fuel
gasification. But, we need to include many integrated systems to stop environmental damages,
especially for the benefit of our future generations.

ample Answer 1: (Agreement)

Over the last century, our cities faced unprecedented growth of traffic congestion and as result
of this, we encounter a litany of environmental pollutions. Some experts believe that a rising
cost of petrol is the best way to tackle these problems. I firmly believe that there is a defensible
basis for this argument. In this essay, some other possible solutions will be elaborated.

The proponents of this view claim that recent studies have shown that due to increasing the
price of petrol, the using of this energy has dramatically decreased. As result of this, the wide
demand of petrol has slumped. The key point to justify this attitude could be illustrated by a
tangible example. Our country “Iran” has a high reputation for having oil resources.
Consequently, the price of the petrol was not justified by comparison with another country. To
cut a long story short, after applying this idea in cities, the evidence has shown most of the
people turn to some Alternatives instead of the use private car. For example, by the time went
on, the rising price of petrol has caused majority the people use much more public
transportation rather than the past.

Alternatively, there are other possible solutions to address this issue. First and foremost, the
governments should give special care to renewable energy such as the water, wind, solar
energy and etc. Also, they should encourage people to use public transportation such as electric
tram, metro, bus and etc. Last but not least, we should own up to the fact that we need cultural
reconstruction about the true understanding of energy crisis on our planet.

In conclusion, from what has been discussed above, increasing the price of petrol can be an
effective factor to reduce consumption of this energy, at least in my country. Serious measures
should be taken by government and individuals as a duty for solving these problems. Also, the
government must assume responsibility, stop passing the bulk and settle down the effective
laws for control this issue. Finally, it is absolutely imperative we should not try to be wise after
the events.

[ by - Reza Paziresh ]
Sample Answer 2: (Disagreement)

It is considered that increasing the price of petrol is one of the most important ways to curb
escalating traffic and pollution problems. However, in my opinion, I completely believe that
using other sustainable sources of energy like solar, wind and hydro will immensely help to
tackle such issues.

On the one hand, there are people who think that increasing the price of petrol will reduce its
use and, thus, decrease rising traffic congestions and pollutions. However, in spite of increased
petrol price people will continue to use it as there are no other viable options available to run
vehicles. Hence, it will not bring much change in solving growing traffic issues and pollutions. In
fact, due to increase in petrol price cost of goods may increase because of increase in the
transportation costs, creating detrimental effects in the economy.

On the other hand, if more sustainable energy like solar power, wind power, and hydropower
are utilised to run vehicles and factories, there will be less emission of harmful gases like carbon
mono oxide and CFC which contributes increasing air pollution considerably. In addition, using
solar power to run public vehicles would result in cheap fare. This will encourage people to
travel through eco-friendly cheap trams, trains and buses.

To conclude, increasing the price of petrol is not the best way to resolve growing traffic
congestions and pollutions. Thus, effective way to control aforementioned issues would be to
use other renewable sources of energy in public transport system which can significantly bring
down traffic and pollution problems.

[ by - Vikash Singtan ]

Sample Answer 3: (Agreement)

Traffic and pollution have been being two major concerns worldwide lately. Several solutions
have been proposed to deal with these problems, improving the price of petrol for example.
However, whether or not it is effective is debatable. Yet, I personally agree with proposing a
more expensive price of petrol to reduce traffic and pollution based on demanding point of
view.

To begin with, a classic economic theory clearly argues that the higher the price, the lower the
demanding of a product and reversely. By increasing the price of petrol, more people may be
more aware of using vehicle considerably since they need to pay more to fill the tank. This idea
can lead to a systematic approach to reducing traffic and air problem through declining
possibilities of people to buy fuel needed to run their vehicle and this may result in reducing the
number of transportation tool subsequently. For instance, Whitehorse city has imposed the
expensive price of fuel and gas which influences the number of vehicles operating and as a
result, it comes up as the cleanest air city of the world.

Meanwhile, the other way to overcome traffic and pollution is by optimising the public
transportation. A good system of public vehicles accomplished by better infrastructure may be
delightful to everyone and can attract individuals to use public transportation more often than
their own vehicles. This idea certainly can minimise the amount of traffic and pollution as well.
Mass rapid train in China and Japan, for example, sophisticated transport and well-managed
train schedule have successfully brought up these countries in lessening traffic problem.

All in all, a wide range of solutions is available to help cope with traffic and pollution problem.
Improving fuel price and public transportations are true as proposed solutions.

Model Answer 1: (Disagreement)

It is true that skyrocketing the fuel price can make a nosedive on the use of vehicles in many
cities but curtailing the volume of energy we utilise is not an elixir as it would soar the daily
living expense as well. Hence, the human being ought to scout out renewable energy in an
attempt to halt the tide of environment upheaval.

To begin with, protecting the environment only through the buoyant price of energy sounds
somewhat over-optimistic. Developing other environment-friendly forms of momentum, such
as hydrogen, which is the most potent weapon to deal with this murky water is a far better
solution. Despite the exorbitant price of fossil fuel, there is still a kaleidoscope of transportation
that will need it. And by extension, airplane would be a concrete example- although the usage
of these kinds of gigantic transportations is bound to dwindle, it is undeniable that they still
emit a sheer amount of carbon dioxide. Therefore, diving deeply into the domain of substitute
energy can be served as a luminary that close Pandora’s Box.

Besides the renewable energy and the colossal fuel price, rearing a myriad of flora can usher in
a great preponderance. What renders an easy access to oxygen is the vegetation which would
absorb carbon dioxide – the most malignant element to our environment. In this dimension,
revive the biodiversity seems as important as importance can be. Shielding the rainforest from
deforestation and planting a broad spectrum of trees that spanning from alpines to bush on the
major boulevards can truly breathe life into the urban sprawl. Most importantly, it could
thoroughly eradicate the environment ailments.

With all that, it is reasonable to extrapolate that spurting the fuel prices can be described as a
blunt instrument. Nevertheless, impeding a wide range of anthropogenic activities and
cementing the cornerstone of ecosystem might be much more possible and practical to tackle
with this elusive enigma.

[Written by - Willie]

Model Answer 2: (Agreement)

Environmental or natural hazards are the results of physical processes that affect humans and
environment every day and harmful for both in the short and long run. As the use of fuel
increases to keep up with modern demands and increased population, the world is becoming
more vulnerable to environmental hazards and disasters. Floods, earthquakes, severe
thunderstorms, toxic or oil spills immediately come to mind when comprehending this issue,
implying that all these things are inherently hazardous.
One of the most effective solutions to these environmental hazards is to raise the price of fuel.
The use of petroleum and gasoline can release toxic chemicals into our atmosphere. These
chemicals escape into the air during refilling, from the gasoline tank and carburettor during
normal operation, and from engine exhaust. Transportation sources account for about 30-50%
of all harmful emissions into the atmosphere. The industrialisation is another reason for the
omission of harmful chemicals too.

“Smog” is another environmental hazard. It causes human respiratory stress, and damages
many plants, significantly reducing farm crop yields and the “health” of trees and other
vegetation. Burning gasoline emits significant quantities of a wide range of harmful gases into
the atmosphere. For example, carbon monoxide is a poisonous gas produced by incomplete
combustion. Carbon dioxide, a normal product of burning fuel, is non-toxic but contributes to
the greenhouse effect, which is also known as global warming and it is probably the most
dangerous threat to the human existence.

Raising the price of fuel would mean that people would use less petroleum and gasoline. They
would find other alternative means of transport to save money, which would mean using less
high-priced fuel for everyday purposes. For example, cycling is a healthy activity and it saves the
earth too. Also, for a long journey, people could try to find friends together for car-pooling.
Carpooling saves a lot of fuel and would save a lot of money too. But other things should be
considered to reduce the use of these dangerous fuels. A government should implement strict
rules of using cars, for instance no less than 4 persons should be allowed to drive a single car.
The price should be increased in a thoughtful way because if the price is so high it will hamper
the average people's life leading. There are so many people yet use public transportation for
movement and the increased price will make their life miserable. The prices of many necessary
daily ingredients also increase with the price of the fuel.

Many environmental hazards like “smog” and global warming are increasing around the world
due to the excessive use of petroleum and gasoline in our daily lives. Raising the price of fuel
could make all the difference to the environment. It would force people to use petrol in a more
responsible way and use it less, and therefore be the most effective solution to the problem of
ever-increasing environmental hazards though it might have some side effects but those can be
controlled by the proper initiatives by the Government.
(Approximately 501 words)

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

N.B: You should be able to pick up different points from this essay and organise your answer in
your own style.

Model Answer 2: (Disagreement)

There are several reasons that are causing the environmental harms and this has become an
urgent issue to discuss and bring a solution about. The number of ever increasing cars is one of
the reasons that leads to affect the environment negatively and there are some assumptions
that increasing the fuel price would solve this problem. But the reality would be different, and
increased fuel price will cause lots of other problems while it would contribute very little to
reduce the environmental pollutions and hazards. So this can’t be the best solution in any way.

First of all, the maximum numbers of cars are owned by the rich people and fuel price would
not restrain them from using the cars. The price of fuel, in fact, increased significantly over the
past 12 years and that has done nothing to reduce the car usages. On the contrary, the number
of cars running on the roads has increased more than expected. Besides, the fuel price
determines the market prices of other daily necessary products and increasing the price would
only bring misery to the low and medium earning class population. Electronic wastages,
industries, household electrical devices, deforestation, chemical wastages, unthoughtful
activities of people are causing more damage to the mother earth than the gas omission by the
cars. We should focus on those aspects as well before increasing the price of fuel just based on
an assumption.

The main idea of increasing the fuel price is to reduce the number of cars running in the street
and to restrain the car owners from using the cars less. But that would prove to be a ridiculous
solution especially when car owners are mostly high earning class and they would not bother
about the fuel price.
The best solution to address this utmost concerning issue is to introduce an environment
friendly energy source like solar energy system, to improve the public transportation system &
train system so that people mostly use these systems instead of always using their own cars,
increasing the awareness of the people so that they do not directly contribute to harm the
environment, and making strict rules so that deforestation, chemical wastages and other
harmful ways of environmental pollutions get reduced.

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

Model Answer 3: (Disagreement)

Increasing the price of oil is one of the main strategies elaborated in order to act against the
worsening of habitat condition. Nonetheless, such a solution could be not enough to stop the
phenomenon.

The idea of raising prices of environmentally risky goods is not a recent hypothesis. It is named
Pigovian tax, and it aims to reduce the use of such goods. It really affects consumption,
balancing the advantage of using a certain product with the disadvantage of a growing cost to
obtain it. Consequently, consumers tend to move toward less expensive goods. This tendency is
advantageous because the State doesn't need to deal with enterprises: the loss of clients
means a consequent interest in enterprises toward green energy. The market works as a
stabiliser, more than an element damaging the environment. Therefore, this policy can be
advantageous.

On the other hand, disadvantages are more influential than positive effects. Firstly, the
effectiveness of the Pigovian tax lies on the ability of actors in finding a good to be used as a
substitute. What if a country invested many resources in road transport? What if a State can
rely on massive oil reserves? In short, such a choice must consider both the existence of
alternative sources and the historical industrial evolution of the country. Moreover, the
importance of such an asset as the one of energy makes the use of incentives and changing in
prices an unreliable and dangerous tool. It could create too many damages for an excessively
unpredictable policy.

All things considered, many doubts remain about the hypothesis of using prices as a lever to
modify the way how people behave when dealing with energy and petrol. Some positive
consequences are certainly undeniable, but risks are still higher than expected benefits.
Consequently, betting on alternative solutions would be desirable.

(by - Francesco Finucci)

Model Answer 4: (Disagreement)

It is an irrefutable fact that to diagnose the ways for saving the environment is one the serious
matters among the countries. Many nations are finding the solutions to this ugly growth. As it
has been heard that increasing the price of fuel can be proved as an effective solution.
However, I do not endorse this observation.

While spotlighting to the above aspect, I can explicitly say that this prediction can have adverse
impacts on a society. Being price of fuel at the peak, the fairs get heavily increased. With that,
the people's life would probably get more miserable. This practice will contribute to deteriorate
the situation of poor people. For verification, it is illustrated that there are millions of people in
the world, who go to their work by public transportation. It has been proved both in developing
and developed countries, whenever the price of oil increases; the fairs of public transportation
do not take enough time for reaching the climax.

Furthermore, there is no full proof surety that after raising the price of fuel, the car owners
would abandon driving their vehicles. The dramatic increase in the folks' income has witnessed
that the societies are richer than the past. If they can afford to buy a car then expenditures of
oils are not beyond their approach. For instance, in both developing and developed countries,
the total number of car holder has increased markedly.
Fuel is not used to run cars only. It is also used to run industries and machines. So increasing
prices of it would hurt the industrial productions as well. By increasing fuel price Government
would be in a great dilemma and would not be able to control the price of the daily commodity.
The increased price of the fuel would only make problem to the poor people while rich people
who mostly own cars would find a way to buy it. The main concern is the pollution prevention,
not the fuel price. There are other ways of doing so rather than increasing the fuel price.
Increasing fuel price would create some international crisis and nations who produce fuel
would get benefits from that while the poor nations would struggle.

All things are considered, the obvious conclusion to be drawn is that increment in costing of
fuel is not an exceptional measure to reduce the environment hazards rather it is a reactionary
work. There are many other solutions that can be applied. Like government should prompt eco-
friendly vehicles and public transport by handovering them with extraordinary facilities. It
should also make people aware of the menaces of pollutions.

(by Jaspartap Singh)

Model Answer 5: (Disagreement)

The requirement and consumption of fuel have increased manifolds to meet the demands of
world population for industrial growth, power needs and transportation purposes etc. The
demand for fuel is only going to increase in the coming years as projected and forecasted by
the energy experts. Many governments are taking various measures to curb the demand for
this commodity due to the heavy cost involved in import etc.

While some people believe that increasing the cost of the fuel would save the environment
from more damages, others opine that that would only create more misery for the poor people.

Besides the financial constraints for many governments, a general but very important issue that
needs to be addressed on war footing basis is the environmental hazards associated with the
massive use of this commodity that is not only harmful to the mother earth but also poses great
dangers to the human health. These dangers include toxic effluent dumped into the sea which
can destroy sea-life, pollutants released in the air causing air pollution which can affect
agriculture, ozone layer etc. Human beings can suffer problems from breathing to some life-
threatening diseases as cancer etc.

So what option do we have? Perhaps one of the options but not the best one is to increase the
cost of fuel which will have its own negative effects in the countries where poverty level and
inflation is already high and the public miseries will increase. A better option might be to
conserve the consumption of fuel by promoting energy conservation and creating a national
policy suggesting various measures.

I would like to end my subject on the note that each country has to prepare a line of action by
keeping the interest of its people and economy in mind.

Some people think an international car-free day is an effective way to reduce

air pollution. Others think there are more effective ways do to this.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion. (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

The deterioration of air pollution is an alarming issue globally. While some people are of the
opinion that a day when cars are prohibited is a workable measure to alleviate this
contamination, I think larger – scale and long-term measures need to be taken to combat this
problem.

On the one hand, there is a common belief that a car-free day can reduce air-pollution severity.
Firstly, carbon dioxide emission from exhausted fumes may be significantly cut off, for cars are
not allowed to be used on that day. This expectation stems from the success of Earth hour
program that has been conducted for many years and made enormous contributions to the
reduction of electricity consumption. Secondly, if people do not commute by car on that day,
they have to resort to other means of transport such as walking, bus or subway, and therefore,
the rewarding experiences help them be aware of the convenience and mobility of other
commuting methods in comparison with cars. After that, these environmentally – friendly
transportation can become their preferred choice.

On the other hand, I think this answer is not feasible and sustainable enough to address severe
air contamination. Only applying car-free rules for one day decreases the greenhouse gas
emissions very minimally. Instead, government should impose higher luxury taxes on cars like it
has been implementing in many developing countries. Only after this policy is applied can fewer
people afford cars, and consequently car density on roads fall with the decline of its emissions.
Furthermore, other developed nations should invest in energy-efficient engines so that
commuters can still benefit from the safety and comfort of cars and the quantity of pollutants
in the atmosphere is controlled. For example, electric cars can be a feasible alternative for
petroleum ones for eco-friendly purposes.

In conclusion, the program that encourage motorists to give up their cars for one day is a good
idea to deal with air pollution, but government need to simultaneously take other measures
such as car price increase and advancements of car engines.

It is true that humankind have been encountering the unprecedented global air pollution. While
many individuals argue that curbing air pollution by introducing international car-free days is
promissing, I believe that other more effective methods should be taken into considerations.

On the one hand, there are various reasons why many people agree that the former approach
is conducive to reduce air pollution. It stands to reason that the number the number of private
cars has been increasing significantly in the new era as the result of the advent of state-of-the-
art technology in car industry as well as high standard of living. Consequently, the more cars
comsumed, the more exhaust emissions emitted, resulting in air pollution. International car-
free days, therefore, would reduce to some extent the amount of emissions stemming from this
mean of transportation and obviously contribute to environmental protection in the long run.

On the other hand, I would advocate with those who contend that there are numerous
approaches besides this above-mentioned one that would be more effectively. Firstly, it is fair
to say that air pollution is attributable to not only the increasing car comsumption but also
other resources such as emissions from industrial areas. State government, thereafter, should
interfere in this field by enacting environmental laws which restrict the amount of emissions of
factories. Moreover, residents could be raised awareness by encouraging them to be involved
in eco-friendly activites like planting trees, using public transportation or car-pooling system,
which curb a large number of vehicles in street including private cars. By doing so, not only
could it tackle this problem, it but also save national budget.

In conclusion, it seems to me that applying other methods would be highly advantageous,

although international car-free days could be promissing to some extent.
Air pollution is one of the environmental issues that attracts a lot of concerns around the world.
As such, a number of measures has been proposed to alleviate the severe situation. One of
which is the initiative of global car-free days and in my standpoint, there exists other feasible
and more effective measures as well.

On the one hand, there are several reasons to believe that having days on which cars are
discouraged plays a critical role in ameliorating the severity of air contamination. Firstly, an
enormous drop in the volume of cars leads to a considerable plunge of carbon dioxide emission,
which is one of the main culprits causing air pollution. This expection stems from the success of
the Earth’s hour program that has vastly contributed in reducing the electricity consumption.
Secondly, people would have to resort to other means of transport such as bus, bicycle, walking
and so on and therefore, commuters would then be aware of the convenience and mobility of
these alternative commuting methods in comparison with cars. As a result, they might opt for
public transport as their preferred choice.

On the other hand, I reckon that practicing global car-free days alone does not resolve the air
pollution comprehensively. Discouraging car use for only few days contributes marginally to the
reduction of carbon dioxide being released to the atmosphere. Instead, government should
impose higher environmental taxes on cars. Fewer people can afford car means a decline in the
number of vehicle and its associated emission. Another meassure is to improve the public
transport condition and service. Only when the public transport becomes more convenient,
friendly and timely can it attract more commuters. Besides, should the government allocates a
sufficient amount of budget in researching and developing of environmental friendly vehicles,
commuter can still enjoy the benefit of cars while the air pollution is being controlled.

In conclusion, government should combine other measures simultaneously to deal the air
pollution in addtion to the idea of discouraging car use for few days.

Air pollution is the biggest problem for the people in current generation and it would increase
more and more if it has not been stopped. Some global communities as well as people think
that international car-free day is the best way to get the pollution to decrease .I believe that
other more effective methods should be taken into considerations.
If people do not travel by car on that day, they have to resort to other means of transport such
as walking, bus or subway. After that, these environmentally – friendly transportation can
become their preferred choice.There is a common benifit that a car-free day can reduce air-
pollution . the carbon dioxide emission from exhausted fumes may be significantly cut off

I think the car-free day is not enough to address severe air contamination. the government
should improve higher taxes on cars like it has been many developing countries. Only after this
policy is applied can fewer people afford cars, and consequently car density on roads fall with
the decline of its emissions. Furthermore, other developed nations should invest in energy-
efficient engines so that commuters can still benefit from the safety and comfort of cars and
the quantity of pollutants in the atmosphere is controlled. For example, electric cars can be a
feasible alternative for petroleum ones for eco-friendly purposes.

In conclusion, the program that encourage motorists to give up their cars for one day is a good
idea to deal with air pollution, but government need to simultaneously take other measures
such as car price increase and encourage use public transportation, invest in energy-efficient
engines

While some people consider global warming to be the most pressing environmental

problem which we have at the moment, others believe that deforestation has a

more devastating impact on our world.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

It is a concern to many that global warming is becoming a most significant environment issue.
Some believe that people should pay more attention on the issue of deforestation because it
has a more serious influence on the world. In my opinion, the growing population is the core
problem which we should firstly address.

Global warming causes two serious environment problems. Firstly, it is increasing the global
average temperature linearly and this is caused by the greenhouse gas which is highly unlikely
to be reused. In other words, when the temperature starts rising, there are no tools or
technologies to decrease it or even stop it. Secondly, land mass is reducing because the sea
level is increasing considerably. For example, according to research, several islands will be
submerged by the rising ocean volume in the next few decades resulting in global warming,
leading to major environment issues.

The deforestation is becoming an irreversible problem especially in the developing countries.

These countries are biased towards deforestation for development of various economic
reasons, therefore they overuse deforestation for resources such as wood. Once the trees and
forests have be cut down, these affected areas need decades to recover, furthermore, some
areas may never be able to grow trees again. For instance, parts of the rainforest in some
developing countries have been destroyed completely. Therefore, deforestation has much
more negative influence than its economic profits.

The growing population is the main issue, which can lead to the problems stated above. More
people means more cars, buses and power stations, such facilities discharge large amounts of
greenhouse gas every day. Increased population means a need for more space, as well as more
food to live, resulting in increasing the size of cities and farmlands. In some countries,
deforestation becomes necessary because they need the land to feed the mass population. So,
we are facing the real issue in the world is the growing population.

In conclusion, it is true that global warming can cause some serious environment problems and
deforestation can be an irreversible issue in some developing countries. However, the real
global issue which we are facing is the growing population and if we solve it first, we could
address the global warming and deforestation at the same time.

Some people think that global warming is the most burning issue of modern era. Whereas,
others consider deforestation more destructive for the environment. However I believe that
both have adverse effects on our lives.

Global warming is a result of air and land pollution. Waste from factories and emission of
smoke from industries and vehicles have affected environment badly. Depletion of ozone layer
as a result of pollutants has increased temperature enormously. Firstly, soaring temperature
has detrimental effects on agriculture and crops. Moreover, fecund fields could turn into dry
lands due to global warming. Secondly, it is causative factor towards floods and other natural
disasters such as cyclones and hurricanes. Global warming creates imbalance in climate, hence,
resulting extreme temperature across the globe. Furthermore, aquatic life is also endangered
due to melting of ice burgs and fluctuation in temperature.

Some people think that deforestation is bigger threat than global warming. Ruthless cutting of
trees for wood and fire has resulted in immense shortage of woodlands globally. Additionally
illegal tree cutting by timber mafia has brought many forests on verge of destruction. Firstly,
deforestation causes escalation in temperature which forces terrestrial animals to migrate
hence affecting wildlife and other habitants. Furthermore, when swath of trees are cut down
the area becomes prone to floods and other environmental disasters

Finally, in my opinion, deforestation and global warming are equally disastrous. Both have
resulting in soaring temperature and rapid climate changes across the world. Creating
Awareness among the masses is a robust way to cope with harmful effects of both factors on
human lives

Today, many environmental problems need to be solve worldwide. This problems such as
increase in the Earth's temperature and deforestation. Some people believe that global
warming is much more detrimental, while others argue that deforestation is a major issue that
needs to be solve first. In this essay, both sides will be weighed prior to reaching a conclusion.

It is felt by many that global warming absolutely plays a vital role in our planet's destruction.
Scientists speculate that the ice in the North and South pole were starting to melt due to global
warming that will lead to a chain reaction of problems. Such as increase in the Earth's water
level and a terrible lost of habitats of polar animals. They also suggest that El Nino phenomenon
will be frequently experienced in the next coming years. It is really obvious that global warming
is a huge participant in killing our planet not only today but in the future.

On the other hand, some says that deforestation is a main concern that we must pay our
attention to. Since the trees are responsible in making our world alive. Deforestation would
result to some disastrous events like landslides, high concentration of carbon dioxide in the air
and tremendous flood events. This will be experienced especially to those countries that does
not have a strict law on proper logging.

To conclude, while deforestation result could result in catastrophic events, I believe that global
warming is much more of a dilemma. Deforestation might be solved by having a firmer policy
on logging and by continuously replacing the trees that were cut. While with global warming
has a huge difference. Solutions are still being figured out and the results might be much worse
than what scientists expect.

lobal warming is one of the major environmental concerns of recent times. Some people
believe it as the most important climatic issue to be tended. However others favor loss of
forests as more fundamental problem that carries more disastrous effects. I agree that both
conditions carry significant importance and must be addressed in a parallel fashion.

Firstly, every year a remarkable surge in global temperature is noticed. There are a number of
contributory factors responsible, for instance, industrialization, ozone depletion environmental
pollution and many more. In addition to that such climatic conditions can upset many
established natural orders. To illustrate, global warming results in melting polar glaciers which
in return rises the water levels in oceans and rivers. Subsequently, causing floods, loss of
aquatic life, destroying important crops and lands.

Secondly, forests throughout the globe are depleting. In the past decade a lot of tropical
countries carried out deforestation at an alarming rate. Thereby, wood become one of the
major exports of countries where forests are dense. Such actions has lead to devastating
climatic conditions for example environmental pollution has raised as a result of forests
removal. Furthermore, deforestation disturbed the natural habitat of wild life. Large portion of
animals either migrated or died. Consequently wild life decreased in such areas. Such actions
not only damaged wild life but it also brought deleterious impacts to aquatic life. Removal of
forests resulted in mud sliding into rivers polluting fresh water sources thus destroying fresh
water animals.

All in all, global warming and deforestation are environmental issues that need proper
attention throughout the world. According to my opinion both should be dealt with at the same
time as both the conditions are interrelated. I wish that steps will be taken to minimize the loss
that has already occurred.

The government should reduce the amount of money spent on local environmental

problems and instead increase funding into urgent and more threatening issues

such as global warming.

To what extent do you agree?

Undoubtedly environmental problems have become the most thread to the survival of the
humanity. There is a controversial debate that heads of the states should decrease the budget
that are allocated to the local environment issues and instead increase the fund with respect to
vital issues like global warming, deforestation, and etc. To me, this idea is appealing in the view
of the fact that these events would gradually not only contribute to vanishing of the lands, but
it would result in severe air pollution.

On the one hand, global warming is one of the important issues that would have detrimental
effect on the disappearance of the islands and shores throughout the globe. Reportedly, the
temperature of the earth is increasing annually by 1 degree of the Celsius. So, this phenomenon
would contribute to melting of the ice caps of the south and north poles. Hence, the increase in
the level of the sea and oceans may cause flood throughout the world and also disappearance
of the lands. For example according to the latest survey of the Michigan university, in the next
ten years, sixty percent of the island of the japan will drown. This catastrophic issue is mainly
caused by toxic emission of the old cars in the large cities. The old vehicles produce large
amount of the carbon dioxide that is one of the immense causes of this increase in the
temperature. Therefore, government should take action immediately with respect to this issue.
Accordingly, they should do something regarding the replacing old cars with new ones and urge
the car owner to have regular check up.

On the other hand, when it comes to air pollution, there are a lot of factors that lead to
acceleration of this phenomenon. One of the most mainspring factor that always is neglected
by people is deforestation. Reportedly, trees absorb carbon dioxide in the air and produce
oxygen that we all breathe. These days, people tend to live in urban area. Hence, they sacrifice
the forest in order to build new high rising building and roads. For example, thirty percent of
the forest in the north of Iran is disappearing in the light of the fact that people spread their
cities across the jungles. So, it would be wise if government confined people not to abuse
nature in order to build these infrastructures. Similarly, they can re-cultivate some areas,
people have exploited.

To sum up, in my personal view, the most urgent issues like global warming and deforestation
shouldn’t be underestimated. It is believed that government of the countries should consider
more financial support to handling these most threatening events. Not only would it result in
creating the superior earth to live, but also it would guarantee the next generation.
Environmental problems have become a threat to survival of humanity . Many people believe
that government should reduce the amount of money spent on local environmental problems
and instead rise funding of the more urgent and global problems. It is agreed that urgent and
worldwide threats such as global warming, deforestation or nuclear pollution require more
attention and funding from governmetn. These will be shown by analizing how global threats
may affect humanity if not given enough attention.

Global warming is one of the most important ecology-related problems of today as it affects the
entire planet. According to Global Warming Council, average temperatures across earth have
risen more than one degree celcius over a period of 10 years. If it continues to rise with such
pace, sooner or later it will lead to north ple ice melting. As a result, rising level of global oceans
may cause a flood in many countries. Some islands situated countries, like for example
Philipines, may become totally drawn under water. Therefore it’s very important to realize that
global warming is an urgent and threatening issue humanity have to deal with as soon as
possible.

Another urgent threat that may lead to catastrophic events is deforestation.

As we all know, threes are producing oxygen that we all breath, by absorbing CO2 from the air.
With high level of urbanization across the world, forests are being sacrificed to build new
infrastructure objects like roads, buildings etc. For example, Brasil has lost about 30% of its
forests during last 20 years. It’s obvious that if we will not recultivate what we have cut,
desserts will take place of forests. Thus, this problem must not be underestimated by
governents of all countries.

With all that is said, it becomes clear why threats such as global warming and deforestation are
so important. It is believed that governments of all countries should start to pay more attention
to this and increase funding into the most urgent and threatening issues. It is expected that all
countries will work together to solve these global threats the near future.

With increasing populations and ever growing urban centers, many countries are

losing their natural beauty spots.

What benefits are there to protecting places of natural beauty?

How can this be solved?

The rapid increase in term of people's number leads to a great demand in creating urban
centers on existent unpopulated areas such as natural beauty spots. The human habitat
extension has destroyed many green places for a long time. From my perspective, I consider
that preservation of natural beauty spots can be an escape from worst effects generated by
pollution.

Admittedly, the natural beauty has brought enormous benefits for existent life on the Earth.
Obviously, the green environment has defended the excess of dioxide carbon which is harmful
to several creatures. Unfortunately, human activities, for example burning the fossil fuels, have
generated a huge amount of dioxide carbon more than ever happened naturally on the Earth.
That is why, our planet is not capable of recycling immediately this gas accumulation. The more
destructive plans of natural beauty occur in our society, the more carbon dioxide will remain in
the atmosphere. It is important to keep the carbon recycle mechanics in touch with our existent
population and future generation.

The solution to this issue is related to the human dimension regarding space. A good idea is to
concentrate the population in the existent urban centers, offering better services and facilities.
To exemplify, this solution means a better space management in private and community
ownership. A counter argument is that everyone will be constrained related to how large their
household are. Another solution is promoting the eco-friendly building standards: underground
and tree houses. It ensures that there will not bring any radical modifications on the natural
beauty spots. The negative aspect is that these houses are not very secure. The underground
dwellings are often treated by floods, whereas, the tree-houses by the wind. A further solution
consists of colonisation of other planets around the Earth, but it is revolutionary because of the
difficulty in creating human comfort in those hostile areas.

After boxing of this issue, in this contemporary world, I consider that advantages of natural
beauty spots should remain for our future generations. I am convicted that overpopulation will
be solved once the time is passed.

In the threshold of a new era, we human have witnessed the colossal developments of urban
areas to meet the demand of ongoing population rate. In the same time, natural landscape and
primitive forests are forced to be replaced by mordent constructions and living areas. Whilst I
believe these changes are inevitable, I would suggest that there are merits of preserving beauty
spots and several measurements for this issue.

To begin, natural landscapes and green spaces in big cities could greatly contribute to our life in
many beneficial ways, both at individual and natural levels. Generally, it is widely considered
that green spots in the downtowns help improving the air quality, especially in big cities where
traffic congestion is comparatively high. Aside from that, natural spots namely parks could be
an incredible places for recreational activities and relaxing spaces, resulting towards the
betterment of healthy society. For natural beauty spots namely mountainous areas or forests
are believed to be potential tourist destinations, giving rise to the profits gained from tourism
industry and therefore, boosting up the wealth of national economy.

In reality, to tackle the challenges related to overpopulation, a wide range number of nations
have to sacrificed their natural landscapes and green spaces; however, I am convinced that
creative infrastructure and appropriate green campaigns could solve this problem for long-term
period of time. First and foremost, the government should promote more investments in
reforming the current construction and transportation complex by eco-friendly plans and
innovations. Taking Singapore as a particular example, they had successfully combined the
modern skyscrapers and commuting system with green complex, attract millions of tourist per
year and solving a huge number of environmental challenges.

Although many people value their public parks, this space could be better used

for other purposes such as residential areas for the ever growing population or

to develop business and boost economies.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this?

Parks are important to our life; they give us clean and fresh air and gives us an area of jogging,
walking and playing. It is argued by many that park space can be used for residential purposes
as there is a need of space due to the growing population in our societies. I believe, not only
park provides relaxation and greenery; it also takes us close to nature which is lacking due to
ever-growing increase of concrete buildings.

Nevertheless, after hard work everyone needs relaxation and rest which most of the times is
fulfilled by parks. The relaxing environment of park gives a soothing experience for anyone who
is looking for tranquillity. For instance, I go to office every day and after returning I sit and relax
in the park to cool down my mind from the stress which I took from my office ( Which is usually
taken from my office). Moreover, parks provide shade in summers and can be used for basking
in winters. People enjoy sitting under a tree or bushes which keeps them out from the hot
sunshine in summer seasons. Similarly, in winters, people love to sit in the park to bask and to
get rid of the cold waves.

However, due to the large area acquired by the park and growing demand for residential
buildings there is a need to contemplate on the need of parks. It has been evident in the past
that demolishing of parks and making space for the buildings is sufficing the need of residential
space. For instance, urbanisation is increasing day by day and covering large which was earlier
acquired for the parks. Therefore, it is discernible that space can be made out from these parks
for residential areas.

In conclusion, I believe, parks are a useful part of our life, they should be demolished to make
space for residential colonies. Not only they bring us close to nature, they also provide
necessary oxygen and greenery which is lacking these days in the urban areas full of concrete
buildings.

With deforestation, urban development and illegal hunting, many animal species

are becoming endangered as they lose their habitat and some are even threatened

to the point of extinction.

Do you think it is important to protect animals?

What measures can be taken to deal with this problem?

Hunting is one of our old traditional sports. Therefore, generation after generation follow such
games for enjoyment. Although, there need to be taken an initiative to stop illegal activities so,
we can protect animals and birds, and also, take precautionary measurements for
aforementioned activities.
Wildlife is a beauty for earth. Hence, this is gift from nature. For illustration, numerous animals
and birds play their significant role towards environment. While number of species are in
danger like polar bears who expel the beauty in the most coldest areas of the world.
Consequence of illegal activities, this has became rare among other species.

Precautions may help to draw boundaries to save wildlife. Government need to banned such
violent sports so, this could not promote further. In addition to this schools have to educate to
young children about how much wildlife is important. By adopting healthy and practical
practices we would win to protect animals and birds. Resultantly, we would able to save rare
species and our future generation would also enjoy beauty of such animals.

To conclude, harmful activities may destroy our environment. Thus, I would cast my vote to
protect those habitats which are in danger. Also, we need to pay our focus towards
measurements to handle with this sensitive issue. Being a responsible human, we could not
ignore our responsibilities towards our society.

It is true that many species of animals are in danger of extinction because of the loss of natural
habitats which is caused by deforestation, illegal hunting and an increase in word population. I
would argue that protecting animals is very necessary and there are several that could be taken
to resolve the issue.

There are some reasons why conserving species of animals is very important. Firstly,
deforestation, urban development and illegal hunting are contributing factors that destroy
wildlife habitats and the Earth’s ecosystems might be imbalance if there were a loss of species.
Secondly, the loss in the number of animals could not continue to maintain the biodiversity of
the planet where people are living. For example, if people continue to destroy forests and
hunting illegally some precious kinds of birds, there would be a loss of these types of birds lead
to the extinction of other species, since these birds are food sources.

In my view, there are several solutions to tackle the issues described above. One solution that
could be taken by the governments is that the authorities should introduce new laws which ban
people on hunting illegally and destroying the forests. Besides, natural areas and wild animals
should be protected by conserving with the invested money from governments and businesses.
Fining is also an effective way to solve the problems, police should fine people who commit the
laws about the rights of animals, so they will be awareness of what they have done to the
surroundings. Another solution that could solve the problems effectively is that educating
people about the importance of conserving animal species.
In conclusion, there are various measures that could be taken to tackle the issue, and I believe
that protecting animal species is an essential action to help our lives.

Global warming is one of the biggest threats to our environment.

What causes global warming?

What solutions are there to this problem?

Probably the most worrying threat to our planet at the present time is global warming. This
essay will examine the reasons why global warming is occurring and discuss some possible
solutions.

The predominant factors resulting in the warming of the earth are the emissions of CO2 and
deforestation. CO2, which damages the ozone layer, comes from several sources, but the most
problematic are those coming from the burning of fossil fuels from power plants. This releases
thousands of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. Another cause of these emissions
is the burning of gasoline for transportation, which continues to grow because of our demand
for cars and also our increasing worldwide consumption, resulting in an escalating need to
transport goods. Also, forests store large amounts of carbon, so deforestation is causing larger
amounts of CO2 to remain in the atmosphere.

Nevertheless, there are potential ways to solve these problems, or at least reduce the effects.
Firstly, governments need to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and promote alternatives.
Plant-derived plastics, biodiesel, wind power and solar power are all things that are a step in
the right direction, but governments need to enforce the limits on CO2 emissions for the
polluting industries in their countries for these to be effective. Also, individuals can play a part
by making lifestyle changes. People should try to buy cars with the best fuel economy, and only
use their car when really necessary. They can also switch to energy companies that use
renewable energy rather than fossil fuels. Finally, small things like buying energy efficient light
bulbs, turning off electricity in the house, and planting trees in the garden can help.

To conclude, although global warming is a serious issue, there are steps that governments and
individuals can take to reduce its effects. If we are to save our planet, it is important that this is
treated as a priority for all concerned.
 For the past few decades, we have observed a major shift in climatic conditions of planet Earth.
Drift in the environmental system is largely due to global warming which has become an acute
problem. This essay will analyse the root causes of global warming and will suggest remedies to
lower the risk associated with this alarming problem.

There are many causes of global warming, but it is mostly due to the greenhouse effect. The
greenhouse effect is a phenomenon where gases such as carbon dioxide trap heat from the sun
which causes the global temperature to rise above optimal level. Activities of human beings
contribute equally to the increase of global warming. Factories and vehicles result in the
emission of carbon gases and fumes which are depleting the ozone layer surrounding the earth.
Utilisation of fossil fuels and other hazardous chemicals are other reasons of global warming.
Moreover, countries are becoming more industrialised and are dumping waste into the
atmosphere without realising its harmful effects and severity of the issue. Rising temperatures
due to global warming would result in melting of polar ice-caps which will trigger severe floods,
droughts and other extreme weather conditions.

This critical issue which could potentially eliminate the human race should be death on
government and individual level. Governments should enforce strict policies and regulations to
control the emission of carbon gases from industries. More focus should be made on using
alternative petroleum products that are environment-friendly. Industries that are certified
green should be charged lower tax rate. Awareness programs should be organised to educate
masses. Apart from government, individual members of the society should step forward and
play their role. People should select green vehicles for their transportation requirement; they
should dump the waste properly, prefer to work in green certified industries and educate
others.

To conclude, global warming poses a serious threat to mankind, wildlife and ecosystem of the
planet. Governments and civilians both share equal responsibility to overcome this issue and
make planet earth safer for mankind and other inhabitants.

( Written by - Tauseef Raza)

Sample Answer 2:

Global warming is a serious worldwide problem that arises as an effect of gases like Carbon
Dioxide traps the heat from the sun causing the rise in the global temperature, this process is
known as greenhouse effects which have many causes believed to be a human effect. There are
many different measures that could be taken to tackle this pressing matter.

The main causes of global warming are due to human activities such as deforestation, building
factories, driving more cars, increasing numbers of aeroplanes etc. Human usage many fuels
and fossils and these all lead to the production of gases and hence rising in global temperature,
also the greatest increase in the number of the population leading to a great decline in natural
resources. Moreover the over-cutting of trees and destruction of wild life habitats which will
lead to animal extinction at the end, this all are causes of global warming.

Global warming has serious effects on the environment which are increasing of sea level and
arising of floods and droughts, melting of polar ice cap which in turn leads to extreme weather
conditions.

There are some solutions that governments and individuals should take in order to prevent and
put an end to this problem; firstly to put limitations for energy consumption by factories and
implementation of other renewable sources of energy such as solar energy and water power.
Also, governments should organise some campaigns that would promote waste recycling, put
rules to protect wild life, and encourage the growing of more and more trees. Furthermore,
governments and individuals could decrease the energy consumption by decreasing the
number of flights, using public transport to decrease using of cars. Eco-friendly transportation
like Bicycle should be used and the number of private cars should be decreased.

As a summary global warming is a serious worldwide issue that arises from human activities
which need the participation of both the governments and the individuals to be ended.

Speak up!
What’s the single biggest way you can make an impact on global climate change? “Talk to your
friends and family, and make sure your representatives are making good decisions,” Haq says.
By voicing your concerns—via social media or, better yet, directly to your elected officials—you
send a message that you care about the warming world. Encourage Congress to enact new laws
that limit carbon emissions and require polluters to pay for the emissions they produce. “The
main reason elected officials do anything difficult is because their constituents make them,”
Haq says. You can help protect public lands, stop offshore drilling, and more here.

2. Power your home with renewable energy.

Choose a utility company that generates at least half its power from wind or solar and has been
certified by Green-e Energy, an organization that vets renewable energy options. If that isn’t
possible for you, take a look at your electric bill; many utilities now list other ways to support
renewable sources on their monthly statements and websites.

3. Weatherize, weatherize, weatherize.

“Building heating and cooling are among the biggest uses of energy,” Haq says. Indeed, heating
and air-conditioning account for almost half of home energy use. You can make your space
more energy efficient by sealing drafts and ensuring it’s adequately insulated. You can also
claim federal tax credits for many energy-efficiency home improvements.

4. Invest in energy-efficient appliances.

Since they were first implemented nationally in 1987, efficiency standards for dozens of
appliances and products have kept 2.3 billion tons of carbon dioxide out of the air. That’s about
the same amount as the annual carbon pollution coughed up by nearly 440 million cars.
“Energy efficiency is the lowest-cost way to reduce emissions,” Haq says. When shopping for
refrigerators, washing machines, and other appliances, look for the Energy Star label. It will tell
you which are the most efficient.

5. Reduce water waste.

Saving water reduces carbon pollution, too. That's because it takes a lot of energy to pump,
heat, and treat your water. So take shorter showers, turn off the tap while brushing your teeth,
and switch to WaterSense-labeled fixtures and appliances. The EPA estimates that if just one
out of every 100 American homes were retrofitted with water-efficient fixtures, about 100
million kilowatt-hours of electricity per year would be saved—avoiding 80,000 tons of global
warming pollution.

6. Actually eat the food you buy—and make less of it meat.

Approximately 10 percent of U.S. energy use goes into growing, processing, packaging, and
shipping food—about 40 percent of which just winds up in the landfill. “If you’re wasting less
food, you’re likely cutting down on energy consumption,” Haq says. And since livestock
products are among the most resource-intensive to produce, eating meat-free meals can make
a big difference, too.

7. Buy better bulbs.

LED lightbulbs use up to 80 percent less energy than conventional incandescents. They’re also
cheaper in the long run: A 10-watt LED that replaces your traditional 60-watt bulb will save you
$125 over the lightbulb’s life.

8. Pull the plug(s).

Taken together, the outlets in your home are likely powering about 65 different devices – an
average load for a home in the U.S. Audio and video devices, cordless vacuums and power
tools, and other electronics use energy even when they're not charging. This "idle load" across
all U.S. households adds up to the output of 50 large power plants in the U.S. So don't leave
fully charged devices plugged into your home's outlets, unplug rarely used devices or plug them
into power strips and timers, and adjust your computers and monitors to automatically power
down to the lowest power mode when not in use.

9. Drive a fuel-efficient vehicle.

Gas-smart cars, such as hybrids and fully electric vehicles, save fuel and money. And once all
cars and light trucks meet 2025’s clean car standards, which means averaging 54.5 miles per
gallon, they’ll be a mainstay. For good reason: Relative to a national fleet of vehicles that
averaged only 28.3 miles per gallon in 2011, Americans will spend $80 billion less at the pump
each year and cut their automotive emissions by half. Before you buy a new set of wheels,
compare fuel-economy performance here.

10. Maintain your ride.

If all Americans kept their tires properly inflated, we could save 1.2 billion gallons of gas each
year. A simple tune-up can boost miles per gallon anywhere from 4 percent to 40 percent, and
a new air filter can get you a 10 percent boost.

11. Rethink planes, trains, and automobiles.

Choosing to live in walkable smart-growth cities and towns with quality public transportation
leads to less driving, less money spent on fuel, and less pollution in the air. Less frequent flying
can make a big difference, too. “Air transport is a major source of climate pollution,” Haq says.
“If you can take a train instead, do that.”

12. Shrink your carbon profile.

You can offset the carbon you produce by purchasing carbon offsets, which represent clean
power that you can add to the nation’s energy grid in place of power from fossil fuels. But not
all carbon offset companies are alike. Do your homework to find the best supplier.

Both governments and individuals are spending vast amounts of money protecting

animals and their habitat. This money could be better spent dealing with

fundamental issues in society such as poverty and health care.

To what extent do you agree?

Preserving wildlife and tackling a variety of problems in our society such as education or
healthcare are among one of the most fiercely debated issues. While I agree that state budget
should be used to protect wild animals, I would like to argue that the government should also
spend funds solving other issues in our everyday life.

On the one hand, it is believed that the central authorities should allocate national fund for
wildlife preservation. Firstly, there is an array of endangered animals which are on the verge of
extinction. Without money funded for protection, those animals will die out, which has a
negative impact on our ecological balance. For instance, the disappearance of one species will
result in the collapse of the others, including human whose living depends on it. Additionally,
some people regard conserving wild animals is one kind of preserving the beauty and diversity
of our earth. It is the variety of fauna that contributes vastly to scientific research. In short,
protecting wildlife is also protecting people’s life.

On the other hand, I agree that state fund should be used for tackling problems in our society
because it is education, healthcare and the like that affects directly our life. Without knowledge
and a healthy body, mankind could not develop. For instance, in Africa, it is illiteracy and
epidemics that prevents the development of the countries, in contrast to the USA, a mighty
nation with standard services. That is the reason why better education and heath care quality
mean higher standard of living.

Additionally, money should be spent on such problems as environmental pollution. Nowadays,

contamination is among the most pressing problems as it has damaged our surroundings and
caused perilous diseases for people.

In conclusion, the government should take wildlife and other problems in the society into
consideration as these factors all have a great impact on our life.

In conclusion, the government should take wildlife and other problems in the society into
consideration as these factors all have a great impact on our life.

ample Answer 1:

A large number of people possess the belief that spending money to save the wild animals is a
waste of national budget as these animals have almost nothing to contribute to the human’s
progress or lifestyle. I totally disagree with this view and strongly suggest that we should try to
save wild animals in every way possible.

It is a ridiculous idea that wild animals have no place in the world because we have entered into
the 21st century. I do not believe that planet Earth exists only for the humans and
modernization means we need to be more selfish. I would rather say that 21st century should
be the right time to make the planet Earth livable for all species. Letting the wild animals get
extinct would be one of the worst steps in the human history and if we do not take initiatives to
save those already endangered species, future generations would remember us as a selfish
generation.
Having said that, we waste millions of dollars on tobacco each day and I would say this is a
waste of money. Spending money to protect wild animals is a prudent investment as scientists
and ecologists agree that those habitats are important for the human survival. For example, to
preserve the wild animals we need to save the forests, plant more trees and stop exploiting
nature. This, in turns, saves the human species from being endangered. The human kind should
maintain the balance of the ecosystem and invest money in protecting nature and wild
creatures is rather a good investment.

To conclude, the planet is shared by all the species and as the most intelligent species, as we
claim ourselves to be, we need have rather great responsibilities to protect wild animals for our
own benefits.

Model Answer 2:

The natural inhabitants of wild animals and their way of life have been greatly affected by us
and in my opinion, we should try to take and initiate every possible step to save these wild
animals.

The 21st century is the era of technological advancement, but this technological advancement
does not mean that we have to alter the way of life. The lives of these wild animals have been
endangered because of human and some species are on the edge of complete distinction and if
necessary steps are not taken immediately, many of these species will be lost forever. Humans
can't give life to any animal so they do not have the right to let them be destroyed.

To keep the balance of the ecosystem, each species of the animal kingdom plays important
roles and the existence of one species largely depends on upon another. To say that wild
animals have no use for us is just a selfish statement and obviously, we should try to keep the
natural balance for our own benefit. Many useful domestic animals have evaluated from the
wild species and how can we even define a wild animal since they live in their very natural
environments? Wild animals even play many important roles for us directly. For example, many
wild animals kill lots of rats and save the farmers' crops from being eaten or destroyed by those
rats.

In conclusion, we must try to preserve all the endangered and natural animals and as human,
we should feel responsible to ourselves not to let any species be lost forever.

(Approximately 255 words)

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

Model Answer 3:

It is sometimes argued that wildlife has been declining in recent years at a startling pace and
that deploying any scheme to protect endangered animals would be wastage of money.
However, I completely disagree with this idea.

In one hand, it can be argued that wild animals are becoming increasingly extinct in present
decade .One of the grave reasons for this decline is ever increasing numbers of human on the
earth which have fueled up the demands for more houses and roads. At the same time, the
need of self-sufficiency in food for the human has led to a destruction of natural habitats. So
depletion of green spaces ends up with decreased number of wild animals. For instance,
chemical farming is required to meet the demand for cheaper food at any cost, and these
practices are driven by greater demands for natural habitats such as woodland, forests and hills
to be converted into farmlands. Urbanisation is another big factor with a greater number of
people tends to live in cities and more space needed to extend cities at the expense of
removing wild habitats.

Nevertheless, I believe that conservation of wild creature is crucial for the human survival as
well as for a healthy ecosystem and that it is worthwhile to utilise recourses to protect them. If
we do not bother to deploy any targeted scheme to save animal lives, then biodiversity and
ecosystem will suffer. As a result, it will have a devastating effect on the food chain for all living
creatures. So the government should take more initiatives to carry out different strategies to
ensure the survival of wild animals. Establishment of more zoos, as well as protecting natural
areas, should also be ensured by the government and the law enforcing authority.

In conclusion, I would argue that wild animals are the vital part of our planet and they should
be protected at every possible cost.

(Approximately 312 words)

[by Shamaila]

Model Answer 4:

Planet earth is a motherland of wildlife, marine animals, and human beings and so on. For the
past few decades, uncontrolled hunting of wild creatures has resulted in the extinction of few
species which is very alarming. Few people believe that protecting wildlife in this modern era in
not beneficial and I don’t agree with this assertion. This essay will analyse the importance of
wild animals on earth.

Firstly, wild animal’s helps in maintaining the ecosystem of earth, without which existence of
human race would be jeopardised. Their existence not only adds beauty to nature but it’s vital
for the growth of flora and fauna. For instance, waste produced from animals contains chemical
compounds that are of great value for the growth of plants and other forestries.

Moreover, these wild beasts attract tourism which is instrumental in increasing revenue and
improving the economic condition of a country. For instance, wildlife safari in Africa helps local
people to earn their livelihood and raise their families. They can also be used to educate
children and help scientists to study their way of living and behaviours which can unfold
mysteries and to validate different theories presented in ancient times by different scientists
like Darwin.

Furthermore, these wild species serves as a source of experimental subjects which could
potentially result in the discovery of important medicines and life-saving vaccines. For instance,
recently scientists conducted a research over the venom of python and they believe that it can
be used to treat neurological disorders in human beings.

To recapitulate, the aforementioned statements provide plausible arguments in favour of

preserving wild habitats and the importance of maintaining the balance of life on earth. Every
possible effort should be made at the global level to save animals for our future generations.

(Approximately 294 words)

[by - Tauseef Raza ]

Model Answer 5:

Since the explosion of population, humans have taken a large amount of space and resource on
earth. Some social scientists are convinced that it is pointless to spend money on preserving
wild animals, as it might not have sufficient places for them to survive in the 21st century.
Personally, I am inclined to the view that we should give priority to protecting wild animals over
any other things.

First and foremost, it is absurd to argue that it is not necessary to protect the wild animals.
They play an essential role on earth and we get together to share the world. If they were extinct
in the world, it would break the balance of the ecosystem. For instance, it is common to see
that if we over hunted sparrows, pests would cause severe disasters in the agriculture field. As
a result, without preserving animals, the living environment of mankind would suffer more
challenges.

In addition, I strongly believe that there are still a plenty of room for wild animals to live in the
world. More specifically, there are many environments are not suitable for people to live, while
those places are animals’ ideal paradise. Moreover, if humans protected animals‘ habitats，
they can create a better environment for us. For example, rainforest could produce oxygen,
absorb the carbon dioxide and make climate stability.

On the other hand, the opponents may argue that it is not necessary to prevent the wild
animals. However, this view does not seem justifiable because it fails to take into account the
validity of the two reasons noted above.

In conclusion, after all, the above factors considered, it could be argue that protecting the
ecosystem and the letting us having more comfortable environment are the main reasons of
the wild animals' conservation. It is better to live side by side with wild animals and make our
life peaceful and stability.

Some people argue that it is pointless to spend money on the protection of wild animals
because we humans have no need for them. I completely disagree with this point of view.

In my opinion, it is absurd to argue that wild animals have no place in the 21st century. I do not
believe that planet Earth exists only for the benefit of humans, and there is nothing special
about this particular century that means that we suddenly have the right to allow or encourage
the extinction of any species. Furthermore, there is no compelling reason why we should let
animals die out. We do not need to exploit or destroy every last square metre of land in order
to feed or accommodate the world’s population. There is plenty of room for us to exist side by
side with wild animals, and this should be our aim.

I also disagree with the idea that protecting animals is a waste of resources. It is usually the
protection of natural habitats that ensures the survival of wild animals, and most scientists
agree that these habitats are also crucial for human survival. For example, rainforests produce
oxygen, absorb carbon dioxide and stabilise the Earth’s climate. If we destroyed these areas,
the costs of managing the resulting changes to our planet would far outweigh the costs of
conservation. By protecting wild animals and their habitats, we maintain the natural balance of
all life on Earth.

In conclusion, we have no right to decide whether or not wild animals should exist, and I believe
that we should do everything we can to protect them.

(269 words, band 9)

As a result of growth in some urban centers, the environment in those cities is

deteriorating.

How could this issue be tackled by both the government and individuals?

Many countries of the world are currently experiencing problems caused by rapidly growing
populations in urban areas, and both governments and individuals have a duty to find ways to
overcome these problems.

Overpopulation can lead to overcrowding and poor quality housing in many large cities. Poorly
heated or damp housing could cause significant health problems, resulting in illness, such as
bronchitis or pneumonia. Another serious consequence of overcrowding is a rising crime rate as
poor living conditions may lead young people in particular to take desperate measures and turn
to crime or drugs.

In terms of solutions, I believe the government should be largely responsible. Firstly, it is vital
that the state provides essential housing and healthcare for all its citizens. Secondly, setting up
community projects to help foster more community spirit and help keep young people off the
street is a good idea. For example, youth clubs or evening classes for teenagers would keep
them occupied. Finally, more effective policing of inner city areas would also be beneficial.

Naturally, individuals should also try to address these problems. One way is to put pressure on
the government to ensure they tackle the problems by, for instance, forming action groups to
lobby the government and request intervention and adequate funding. They could also form
Neighbourhood Watch areas to try and help reduce the high levels of crime.

Therefore, it is clear that the problems caused by overpopulation in urban areas are very
serious. Yet if governments and individuals share a collective responsibility, then it may well
become possible to offer some solutions.

Some people think that current environmental issues are global problems and

should therefore be dealt with by the government while others believe that these

problems can only be tackled by individuals.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

Model Answer 1:

The environment has become a major concern over the last couple of decades, resulting in
several debates on who should be responsible for ensuring its sustenance for our future
generations. In this essay, we will discuss the point of views for establishing where the
responsibility for the protection of environment lies.

There is a strong argument that individually we cannot contribute materially to the cause of
preserving our environment because it encompasses several areas where individual efforts
become futile. Some examples are factories that are emitting hazardous gases in our air or
dumping dangerous materials in our rivers. If we want to take this up as an individual we
cannot be expected to be able to prevent this from happening. One could argue that if each
shareholder puts pressure on the companies that they own this could lead to building up of
pressure for being more responsible, this, unfortunately, is not workable because usually the
companies are mostly owned by funds that are managed by professionals, seeking profit and
environment is very low on their priority list.

The above leads us to deduct that if this movement of preserving our environment is a
collaborative effort by the government and general public we stand a better chance of being
successful. The government should provide the legal infrastructure to control the natural
instinct of profiteering of all investment institutions; with this, the individual efforts could start
making the difference. Continuing the above example if an individual member of the society
notices that same happening in his or her surroundings, he or she can call on an
implementation agency that would tackle the factory emitting hazardous gases and dumping
dangerous materials. Examples of these implementation agencies include Environment control
desk in the city office, environmental inspectors who randomly visit such factories and are
empowered under the law to impose a fine or completely seal the production facility found in
violation of the rules.

The responsibility surely seems to be tilting towards the actions of individuals supported
through government agencies and legislative framework, thus, in my opinion, the combined
efforts of the government and public would be more effective. This should not, however, be
interpreted as being absolved from keeping our environment clean and we can through cans
and other non-degradable materials on the beach.

[ Written by - Shakeel Haider]

Model Answer 2:

In today’s modern world, we are constantly confronted with the issue of environmental
problems which are becoming more severe nowadays on newspaper. Some people are of the
opinion that individuals can hardly make a change to the environmental problems, while some
believe that governments can help in solving the environmental issues. I strongly agree that
governments do play an indispensable role in tackling these problems.

Some people think that the environment problems are not an easy task for individuals to deal
with, but in fact, we can actually take up some good habits which could prove useful in dealing
with environmental problems. For example, we can always bring along recycle bags with us so
that we can cut down the usage of plastic bags. It can be clearly that individuals can actually
contribute to helping reduce environmental issues as fewer plastic bags being used means that
less air pollution which is caused by the burning of plastic bags in the rubbish dump sites.
It is certainly true that the environmental problems cannot be solved without the help of
governments. To begin, governments have more power than individuals in coping the
environmental problems. They can, for instance, set up laws that ban the emission of wastes
from factory directly into the air and water courses. As a consequence, less air pollution and
water pollution guarantee the good health of citizens. By doing this, citizens will be healthier
and they can now live in a pollution-free country.

In conclusion, environmental problems should be tackled immediately with the cooperation of

individuals and governments. I believe that the environmental problems will be solved one day
and our country will continue to prosper and flourish in the years to come.

[ Written by - Lee Wing Qeen ]

Model Answer 3:

Pollution becomes a major concern in the society all over the world. In the society, not only an
individual but also groups of people live. In the society, it is everyone’s responsibility to protect
the environment. Environmental problems caused by pollution, for example, fuel gases, cutting
of trees, gases released by factories. The government should take responsibility to reduce
pollution in order to protect the environment.

Every individual who is leaving in the society should take responsibility to participate in
protecting the environment. Firstly, people should grow trees at their houses, premises and
colonies. By growing trees there are huge advantages, for example, most of the polluted gases
took over by trees and they release the oxygen. Everyone should not throw the wastages on
the roads, maintain a healthy environment by using the dustbins.

At the same time if we consider the government’s role: government have authority to protect
the environment. By planting the trees all over the places, for example, all government places,
besides the roads, schools, and parks etc., what I know this type of programme called clean and
green environment. Thus the pollution can be controlled. Cleanliness is very important to
maintain a healthy environment, hence government should emphasise the cleaners to clean the
area thoroughly. Should place the dustbin every street and educate the individuals by
advertisements. Inspect the houses every month to check how the individuals maintain their
houses so that the individuals reflect themselves and self-correct themselves. Conduct
environmental talks in the school, that individual learns everything from childhood onwards in
the school.

I believed that it is every individual’s responsibility to solve the environmental problems,

however, impossible for only one individual in the society. So that government should take
actions to solve the environmental problems but encourage every individual to takes part all
those activities.

[ Written by - Sandhya Ch ]

Model Answer 4:

Environmental problems have dramatically increased over the last few years. Rapid increase in
population and other problems such as pollution, deforestation, global warming etc. have
further exacerbated the situation. Some people argue that these problems are too large to be
addressed by individual being. I believe that it is a mutual responsibility of both individuals and
countries to take pragmatic measures for its solution.

Overpopulation is one of the pivotal reasons that have detrimental effects on the environment.
Increase in population demand more food resources, living space and others basic amenities of
life. For instance, for the sake of accommodation many natural parks and forests have been
wiped out to fulfil the need of living space. This has lead to severe consequences that could
damage both for the people and the environment.

Individual efforts can contribute a lot to address the pressing environmental problems. Steps
taken in individual level can be an effective solution for the world. For instance, if the
government of a country takes initiatives to reduce the rubbish produced daily, can’t do much.
However, if the citizens take effort from their personal level, the rubbish production could be
controlled tremendously. Similarly, if administration of a country starts planting trees, the
effort would not go further without the collaboration of the individuals.
Pollution is also a great menace to the environment. It is not only the reason of environmental
problems but also has a dire effect on people. Factories operating within cities emit dangerous
smoke and others harmful toxic, which are enormously affecting people health and making
them more susceptible to diseases. Furthermore, pollution also contributes to global warming.
There has been a drastic increase in temperature around the globe, which in turn, melts
glaciers across the world. These are no longer national issues and all the governments of the
world should work together to address this pressing problem. That is why prudent decisions are
required from the government level and the ordinary citizens should be encouraged and
participate in every way possible to make the world a better place to live in.

To sum up, I would like to say that environmental problems should be addressed on large scale.
Everyone have to contribute in order to mitigate its vulnerable effects on the world. Even a
little effort by an individual can make a huge difference.

The damage to the environment is increasing at an alarming rate mainly due to human
activities. Even though a great deal of effort is being now made by governments all over the
world, individuals also have a major role to play in the minimizing global environmental hazard.

To begin with, one of the major reasons for the pollution of the environment is the
uncontrolled use of automobiles. If individuals can make a conscious effort to change their
lifestyle, by cutting down the use of private cars and use public transport, it would substantially
reduce the burning of fossil fuels. In other words, serious attempt could be made by individuals
to travel to work regularly by buses and trains, which are cheap and abundant. Hence,
Individual perceptive towards using these transports could help in the reduction of emissions
produced by vehicles, and there by playing a vital role in addressing this issue.

In addition to this, individual could play a significant role towards safety our environment by
not using enormous amount of plastic in daily life, which is a hazardous pollutant of the soil. In
other words, almost every consumer use plastics while doing shopping, and there is always use
and throw culture. Instead of using this, Individuals efforts could be taken into account opting
for eco friendly substitutes. For example, people can use paper and cloth bags instead of plastic
in supermarkets. So, use of plastics on the environment is devastating, and must find
alternatives to plastic from the individual perceptive.
In conclusion, it seems to me that environmental problem is the worrying concern and
individuals have a crucial role in joining hands with the government in reducing the harm
caused to the environment. Lack of individual participation could mean that addressing
environmental issue is beyond reach.

Global environmental issues are the responsibility of rich nations not of poorer

nations.

Do you agree with this opinion?

In recent decades enviromental issues have been attracting a great deal of media attention
worldwide due to its substantial impacts on the development of the humankind. Although the
proposal of developed nations’ accountability to the international community for these
problems sound reasonable, I think that it is the liability of every country.

There are a multitude of reasons why developed nations should be responsible for some
enviromental problems. First, affluent nations have more scientists and enviromental
connoisseurs with worldwide reputation than any other developing countries. This means their
co-operation would be conductive to the finding of a more efficient energy to replace fossil
fuel, which is the main factor of carbon emissions. In addition, Developed countries’ strong
financial muscles could be invariably associated with many capital investment activities in
projects developing advanced green technologies. For example,In some European states, the
application of solar and nuclear power for electricity production has remarkably reduce the
dependency on coal consumption, which acts as a deterrent for the accumulation of small
particles in the atmosphere.

However, Some developing countries are highly-recommended to liable for some

environmental issues for several reasons. First, As third world countries means a faster
development of highly-industrialized parks with many manufacturing factories than any
wealthy nations, which could lead to increase in the emission of exhausted fumes. This means
that the local official authorities should undertake some initiatives to curb carbon and methane
emissions, which could substantially rehabilitate the environment. Second, A low degree of
public awareness of environment preservation can culminate in some green issues especially
deforestation and overexploitation in developing countries. This means that the local
authorities should establish more education institutions to alert the citizens about the negative
repercussions of environment problems, which would remarkably raise their appreciation and
desire for protection.

In conclusion, Global environmental issues are the mutual responsibility both developed and
developing countries. The official authorities as well as the citizens worldwide should make
efforts to alleviate these problems.

Many people believe that global environmental problems should be dealt with

internationally rather than domestically.

What is your opinion?

Some people argue that environmental issues would be measured effectively by a global
organization rather than every national government. I disagree with this view.

On the one hand, I advocate that every national government should be mainly responsible for
dealing with environmental issues. The first reason is that the government often works with
large businesses which significantly contribute to causing pollution; therefore whether the
environmental problems can be done or not apparently depends on the government’s
decisions. The official departments should produce strict policies to hinder the mass production
of companies as well as punish strictly those which release a huge amount of exhaust into the
environment without treating. Besides, the national governments could measure the
environmental issues more effectively than international organizations as they have enough
budget for social causes. In fact, the government draws a large amount of tax money from
individuals and businesses annually in order to ensure a strong financial support when they
need to cope with problems such as pollution, enhancing the water treating systems in a short
period.

On the other hand, I believe that if the international organizations enjoy helping the domestic
government, problems of the environment would be easily eliminated. Firstly, the global groups
often are reputable, which is helpful to raise people’s awareness of the environmental
protection. For example, these organizations can use their fame and representation on the
media to encourage individuals to use public transportation instead of private vehicles in order
to limit carbon emissions releasing to the air. In addition to, global organizations can exercise a
positive fluence in the co-operation of national states when it comes to the environmental
protection. As a result, different governments would promise to reduce the emissions from the
manufacture and help each other with the problem of global warming.

In conclusion, I still hold the view that the national governments should be mainly responsible
for protecting the environment, with a strong support of the international organizations.

Many animals are being hunted to the brink of extinction in order to fulfil the

demand and greed of mankind for decorative purposes as well as for other

reasons, such as traditional medicine.

How can this issue be tackled?

In the 21st century, as the growing of human population, humans have to expand and move to
live closer to wild areas. The interference other animals are happened by human activities.
Most animals are killed and decreasing gradually because of humans. However, in order to
preserve wild lives, the government should release some regulations to solve this issue.

To begin with, there are many causes of this situation. First and foremost, since the over
growing population of the world, humans require more land and many natural resources in
order to supply all the population. People have to live in rural areas and some invade to wild
areas. Many human activities often disturb peaceful wild lives and can lead to some conflicts.
Moreover, the industrialization has also created many problems to these animals. Over
exploration activities in forest areas such as cutting down many trees or destroying
environments have greatly negative impact to animal lives. Consequently, wild animals will not
have place to occupy or cannot adjust to live in polluted environment.

There are some measures in order to preserve wild lives. First of all, it is very necessary to
outlaw over exploration in national resources. The government should release some regulation
in order to control hunting activities. All forest areas should be declared as national parks and
also be activated by protecting regulations. People, who are directly involved in forest or animal
hunting, have to be committed and punished severely by the city. As a result, if a nation steps
up very strict laws and declares all wild areas as national parks, many animals and endangered
species will increase eventually.
In conclusion, this issue is not only a responsible of the government, but it requires all
departments to protect all wild lives. States, social organization and all citizens should work
together to save endangered species from extinction. Hopefully, the extinction of wild live
creatures will be alleviated eventually.

The planet is meant to be shared by all species, humans, plants and animals. But, with
increasing number of people, an imbalance has been created leading to either animal species
becoming extinct or endangered. Deforestation, consumption of animal products, hunting and
pollution are the main causes for habitats to vanish. There are several methods such as sharing
money among communities, awareness, that can help save animals.

With rising population, we have slowly crept into the spaces of the animals. Since one needs
space to live, massive deforestation has taken place destroying the habitats of animals living in
forest. As a consequence, animals are forced to relocate and sometimes enter into the habitat
of humans. The second reason for such a threatening scenario is the increased levels of
pollution. For instance, air pollution is causing death among the birds and water pollution
among the fishes.

The first step towards saving the animal species is conservation. The animal habitat must be
conserved and human entry must be restricted in those areas. The next pragmatic step could be
to give incentives to the communities living near the animal habitat. If the tourism department,
gives a share of the earned money to people living near animal habitat, chances are they will
take ownership of animals and take extra care.

Overall, the main reasons causing extinction are the various disturbances such as deforestation
and hunting. However, measures like incentives for the community and conservation can help
protect the animals.

Restricting air travel is the only way to prevent air pollution.

Do you agree?

Some people believe that the only way to avoid air pollution is limiting the air traffic. I disagree
with this view. In my opinion, restricting air traffic will not completely prevent the pollution.
Also it can have negative effects on the nation’ economy.
To begin with, the main problem associated with aviation is the noise and gases emitted by the
airlines. This pollution can be controlled to a certain extent by limiting the number of
aeroplanes. But, it is almost impossible to prevent the pollution as the majority of the
pollutants in the air do not come from the airlines. It may be due to other factors. For example,
the increasing number of vehicles on the road or the human activity such as deforestation often
causes more pollution than the air contamination due to flights. Therefore, it is evident that
limiting air traffic is not the complete solution to deal with the air pollution.

What’s more, restricting aeroplanes to prevent pollution can have many serious consequences
on the country. First of all, the tourism industry will be affected due to the less availability of
the airlines for the international or domestic passengers. International imports and exports of
goods will also be affected. As a result, the country will not experience financial growth.
Therefore, I believe that the governments of the countries will not take such a risk by limiting
the air transportation when there are other options available .

To conclude, it is evident that the idea of restricting the air traffic is not the best or workable
solution for the problem of air pollution. Also, the consequences of such actions may adversely
affect the country’s economy.

Some people believe that the only way to reduce air pollution is to limit the number of flights. I
do not agree with this view. In my opinion, restricting air travel is unlikely to have any real
impact on air quality. At the same time, it may adversely affect the economy of the nation.

There is no denying the fact that aeroplanes cause air and noise pollution. They produce too
much noise and emit harmful gases. While it is possible to control this pollution by reducing the
number of flights, it will not fully solve the problem because the majority of pollutants in the air
do not come from aircrafts. It is true that air travel has become more affordable and popular
recently. However, aeroplanes still are not the primary mode of transport for the majority of
people and as such they cannot be considered the number one cause of air pollution. In fact,
cars and buses cause more pollution than flights because there are too many of them on the
road.

What’s more, restricting air travel can have disastrous consequences for the economy. The
tourism industry will be the worst hit because limited availability of flights will discourage
tourists from visiting foreign countries. Import and export of goods will also be affected. Since
both of these factors will affect the financial growth of the country, I do not believe that
governments will want to limit air travel.

To conclude, restricting air travel is unlikely to improve air quality much because aeroplanes are
not the biggest polluters on the planet. What’s more, any such move will have serious
economic consequences.

Some people believe that the only way to reduce air pollution is to limit the number of flights. I
do not agree with this view. In my opinion, restricting air travel is unlikely to have any real
impact on air quality. At the same time, it may adversely affect the economy of the nation.

There is no denying the fact that aeroplanes cause air and noise pollution. They produce too
much noise and emit harmful gases. While it is possible to control this pollution by reducing the
number of flights, it will not fully solve the problem because the majority of pollutants in the air
do not come from aircrafts. It is true that air travel has become more affordable and popular
recently. However, aeroplanes still are not the primary mode of transport for the majority of
people and as such they cannot be considered the number one cause of air pollution. In fact,
cars and buses cause more pollution than flights because there are too many of them on the
road.

What’s more, restricting air travel can have disastrous consequences for the economy. The
tourism industry will be the worst hit because limited availability of flights will discourage
tourists from visiting foreign countries. Import and export of goods will also be affected. Since
both of these factors will affect the financial growth of the country, I do not believe that
governments will want to limit air travel.

To conclude, restricting air travel is unlikely to improve air quality much because aeroplanes are
not the biggest polluters on the planet. What’s more, any such move will have serious
economic consequences.

Family Essay Titles

Nowadays parents put too much pressure on their children to succeed.
What is the reason for doing this?

Is this a negative or positive development? (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

One of the main reasons causing pressure is parents’ high expectation. In such a world of global
integration, there is a tendency that the young are motivated to learn a variety of things to
meet their parents’ demand. In addition, the society is actually becoming more and more
competitive. Apart from parental pressure, there’s also peer pressure. Take Vietnam as an
example, the youngsters are stimulated to take extra classes to widen knowledge. Some
children feel absolutely exhausted when having to attend evening class after a tiring day at
school.

As a consequence, the effects of this have been and will continue to be controversial. Firstly,
there has been a widespread concern in health related disaster amongst children who do not
spend enough time on some extracuricular activitives such as dance, sports as well as
recreation. They are likely to contract with some health problems such as short-sighted,
diabetes, and obesity. Moreover, career orientation which is made by parents is not always the
best for children. They could achieve their fullest potential when they have opportunity to do
with their all of dedication and passion.

In conclusion, it is evident that there are several causes of pressure on children, and a variety of
drawbacks. Both parents and children should take them into consideration and try to cooporate
to prevent this problem from deteriorating further

irstly,thanks to high-standard of living, parent try to do their best while bringing up the child by
raising with love ,teaching with right from wrong and making up the best career orientation.
Specifically ,they want their children are able to get acquainted with pressure when they merely
were an early age.Accordingly, they could feel anxious and stressful when they fail to live up to
adult’s expectation.

In addition, competition in prestigious university is another concern which needs taking into
account.No sooner had the youngster attended extra class to excel at every aspects and obtain
a place in gifted and talented class than they were imposed by constantly tested and evaluated
which impose tremendous stress on them.
As the consequence of parental and peer expectation, due to two factors discuss above ,the
youth have less time to socialize such as chatting with their friend and recharge their battery .
Not only they spend a huge times to overcome the test at school but they also be forced to take
part in extracurricular activities like sports,musical instruments and learn foreign languages.
Obviously , they nearly have no choice for do their favourite and study with all of their passion
and dedication.

In conclusion,I take my own stance that parental expectation combine to tighter school
schedules and stiffer competition all contribute to the increasing pressure on children.However,
as far as I concern parent should take care of the issues by creating the balance and free choice
for their children lives

To begin, not everyone who was forced by their parents to be successful achieved what both
their mother and father have been expecting from them. For instance, some will even reached
to a point to become rebellious, and things comes to worst through this action they did,they
get involved in drug addiction and they end up in jail. Most of the children who get into this
scenario are mentally and psychologically unprepared, for the fact that they would think that
they have no freedom to do whatever they wanted. Conceivably, they do not realize that this is
for their future's sake.

In contrary, other children who were brought up to be more obedient and disciplined are the
ones who succeed. They just keep on following what their parents are advising them to do. In
particular, these children were more successful in the end. As the saying goes," Parents knows
what is best for us." Honestly, in this situation parents and children has a great rule to play. If
only most of the children thinks and understands that their mother and father pushes them to
do this or that, for the reason that majority of the parents wants their children to be more
prepared and armed in whatever life's challenges may bring to their lives later.

In sum, we cannot blame parents to be so strict in imposing any rules to their children just for
them to be successful. In fact as the saying goes," A father cannot give a stone to his child if a
child is asking for bread." It only represents that everything that a parent does to their children
most probably provides them with lots of benefits than disadvantages

With the ever increasing competition and demands in life, a child’s family, school and society as
a whole expects too much from a child. While it is important to excel in study, sports, social
activities and in other aspects of life, those children should be shielded from the mounting
pressure by maintaining a balance in their life. Otherwise, the expectation would act as a
boomerang and hamper the proper development of a child.

The world has become more competitive than it was ever before. For instance, I did not have to
compete with anyone to get admitted in my primary school but my nephew had to take an
entrance exam to actually get enrolled in the same school and one in every twelve applicants
was successful to do so. Besides, my generation has plenty of time to enjoy besides attending
classes while this is completely opposite for the current generation. They attend classes, take
extra coaching, go to music and arts schools and read far many books and all these activities are
meant to fulfil their parents' dream that the child would be the top scorer, a math genius as
well as a great soccer player and a renowned artist. Is this a rational expectation? Not in my
opinion. Parents and the society have to draw a line on their expectation and find out the true
potential of a child rather than pushing them constantly. The state should discourage having an
entrance exam in elementary school and have sufficient funds to ensure proper entertainment
and sports facilities in schools. Teachers should not pressurize children to do homework every
day and make school a place to learn in a fun way. Furthermore, social perspective to prepare
every boy or girl to become a doctor, engineer or a higher-wage-earning professional should be
changed.

To conclude, children today are being pushed beyond their limit to achieve academic, social and
commercial success and this has unfathomable negative consequences. The parents and
teachers should find the hidden talent of a child, not try to make them something they are not
meant to be.

Parents now expect too much from their children. Most of them want their children to get into
prestigious institutions and secure jobs with six figure salaries. Consequently children are under
tremendous pressure to perform.

For example, in India most parents want their children to get into IITs or secure a medical
degree. They don’t care whether the child has aptitude for science or mathematics. They
understand that a degree from these prestigious institutions have the potential to change lives
for better.
However, parents who expect too much from their children aren’t doing them a service.
Students who fail to do well in examinations often fall into depression. Some even commit
suicides. They can’t come to terms with the fact that they failed to live up to the expectations
of their parents.

The media has played an important role in developing this culture. The media glorifies winners.
They are given too much coverage. Thanks to the proliferation of cable television and the
internet, every parent now wants their child to be featured on television programs and
newspapers. Actually, academic pressure isn’t the only burden on children these days. They are
required to excel in extracurricular activities as well. Most children attend singing, dancing and
drawing classes. A lot of them receive training in martial arts and musical instruments.

Reality shows are another culprit. Of course, they give talented children a platform to showcase
their skills. But they are also putting unwanted stress on children who lack these skills. Not all
children are born to be a singer or dancer. Parents need to realize this.

To conclude, unrealistic expectations are the number one cause of stress among children.
Parents must be sensitized about this problem. They must realize that children who are under
tremendous pressure to perform are unlikely to succeed in school or life.

Some people think it is better for children to grow up in the city, while others

think that life in the countryside is more suitable.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of both places? (Reported 2017, GT

Test)

Model Answer 1:

Some people believe that it is better for children to grow up in the countryside than in a big
city. However, other people think that a big city gives more opportunities and it is good for the
long run. Personally, for several reasons I think that it is better for children to grow up in a city
that offers numerous advantages.
First of all, it is very important for a child to grow up in a healthy environment. Children need
fresh air, not polluted by the huge amount of cars and factories of the modern city. In the
country, they can spend more time exercising and walking with their friends. Scientists say that
now children spend the same amount of time watching TV as they do at school. Probably, the
possibility to join their friends for a play will change this proportion. Another important aspect
of this is that parents will have more time to spend with their children as a result of eliminating
traffic jams and decreasing driving time as a whole.

From the other side, children have some advantages living in a big city. For example, they have
more opportunities to choose from what they want to do. They can choose to attend ballet
school, school of art, gymnastics, etc. For the long run, it is good for them. They will be better
prepared for a life in a "real world" and they will have more chances to make a good career and
succeed. Moreover, a big city usually has many entertaining centres with movie theatres and
play stations. When I was a child I liked to go to the movie theatre with my parents to watch a
premiere.

One more reason to choose a big city for a child is that a city provides better live conditions and
services such as medical, dental, etc. My friend lived in the country for a while and one time he
and his family had to drive a couple of hours to the nearest medical centre when his child got a
heavy cough.

To summarise, I agree with those people who want to raise their children in a city. The plenty of
opportunities offered by a city helps children to find what they really like and be the best at it.
Moreover, despite the air pollution, children get a better medical service that is good for their
health.

( Approximately 394 words)

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.You should be able to pick up the main points
from this essay and organise in your own style)
Model Answer 2:

Bringing up young generation in a big city is not as good as the countryside. I partially disagree
with this statement. In my view, cities are the best place to grow up children and to live.
However, cities have some drawbacks which will be discussed in this essay.

Many people opt to live in large cities rather than the countryside because they prefer to live in
the metropolitan area than remote areas. Such a good benefit is an employment. People, who
are living in a city can easily get a job in different types of professions.

Another reason is the easy availability of transportation services, large complex network maps
of buses and trains covering almost all surrounding suburbs of a city, which can save a lot of
valuable time spent by travelling with the own vehicle, which is more convenient and
economical when your children go to school. And you will know where they are.

However, the cost of living in a city is usually much higher than in the countryside. Inhabitants
of cities have to pay higher prices for housing, transport, and even food. Moreover, the big
cities have some social problems such as high crime and poverty rates in comparison with the
countryside. Furthermore, the air quality in cities is often poor, due to pollution from traffic,
and the streets and public transport systems are usually overcrowded. As a result, city life can
be unhealthy and stressful to our children.

After analysing the essay, we can conclude that those points are the important factors when
considering living either in the urban or rural area. Apart from those, entertainment facilities,
well-developed infrastructure and living with latest trends are other reasons for living in cities.

[ by - Ice]

Model Answer 3:

Today children predominantly live in villages and in the countryside, but many others live in big
cities. This can be seen in terms of their family, hobbies, interests, and undoubtedly, lifestyle. It
is believed that rural children are more skilled than children who live in big cities. This will be
proven by analysing of children's lifestyle in both countryside and big city in this essay.

Firstly, it is well-known fact that living in isolated villages can improve children's health, and
therefore, their physical development. For instance, if children constantly do house-working
and gardening, they will be healthy. This example clearly shows that working hard improves not
only health but also diversifies lifestyle. From this, it can be concluded that living in villages
accelerates physical developing and improves skills which they need in future life.

Secondly, there is no doubt to say that rural children can adapt and develop in big cities, which
are saturated by a variety of places. For example, they can visit and feel a sense of ethnic
places, restaurants, stadiums, despite adapting. It is obvious when looking at the example that
rural children slowly adapt for boiling city lifestyle. Thus, it would be better to live near big
cities.

After analysing the areas of both lifestyles, it can be concluded that rural children are healthier
than children of big cities. As has been shown, skills of rural children based on house-working,
albeit village is not an ideal place to develop life skills. It is predicted that children will live in
villages in the future.

[ by - Mama]

Model Answer 4:

At the present time, people say that children should be grown in the countryside rather than in
the big city. I totally disagree with this rubric, because in big cities the quality of education and
medicine are better compared with rural areas and huge occupation choice makes the city
more convenient place in nourish of the child.

Firstly, children should be educated by qualified teachers but the countryside can't create that
kind of condition for education and a large number of their teachers didn't even end up the
university education. Good education is the earnest of success in the future. But not only a
bright future depends on the education of the children, it also depends on proper medical
treatment and facilities of medicine.

Aforesaid medicine, one of the main necessary things in raising children. Without vaccination,
young children might get ill or even die from fatal diseases. To prevent this, in cities almost
every month child is gone through medicine check and necessary injections are done to him.

In addition to this, currently the development of big cities strongly differs from the
development of rural areas and it's another reason to grow children in big cities. Better
conditions for children in job selection, they can choose every career they want, for example, to
be a pilot, they can realise their dream in the city, but in a lot of countrysides, the airports don't
exist.

In conclusion, a countryside is not the best place to raise children and big cities either. But, in
my view nourishment of children should take place in the city due to high education and
medicine level and the big choice in job selection.

[ by - Akmal Sharipov]

Model Answer 5:

City life has improved significantly with the advancement of technology and it provides state of
the art facilities and services to its residents. Some people argue that children are more
receptive to new learning experiences that could only be practice in cities. Children can enjoy a
high standard of education, modern libraries, parks and many others technological services
while spending their lives in cities. However, others claim that countryside is environmentally
friendly and provides great physical activities that are mandatory for children health. I strongly
believe that life in the city has undeniable positive effects on children.
Education plays a pivotal role in children life. Educational institutions in cities are equipped with
modern teaching methods and facilities and have more qualified and trained professionals that
help students substantially to improve their knowledge and information about the subject.
Furthermore, the internet and mobile phone has become an essential constituent of children
daily life and are more prevalent in cities. New technological advancement also helps children
to achieve better grades by researching on the internet and by other positive use of these
technologies.

However, it is often seen that children in villages are healthier and less susceptible to illness.
Some of the reasons are clean environment and absence of pollution in their area and vicinity.
In addition to this, they are more interested in physical games and take parts in activities that
demand hard work and strength thus help them to remain active and fit.

To sum up, I would like to say that children grown up in cities are more dynamic and intellectual
due to finest facilities they had. This also helps them in achieving more success in long run.

At present, many controversial debates possess on a Global wide regarding the convenient
place for children either city nor village side area. Although, I strongly agree about children
should spend their childhood in countryside areas.

On the one hand, many people likes to live in city area, because everything is near to hand such
as college, schools, hospitals, some other educational centers and parks. Secondly, some
metropolitan cities provide high standard education and help to adopt an extracurricular
activity.

Even though, the countryside area are blessed with their own specialties so that these place
plays an important role for accomplished a person's characteristics. For example, in village,
most of the families live with their grand parents. So it may matriculate the specialty of culture
and traditions which our ancestors were followed. Village areas are less polluted than cities, so
it is suitable for youngsters. Even though, the village area have an attractive atmosphere and
blessed with a beautiful scenic landscape. Hence, the children has been attracted by village side
area than cities.

For instance, a child should be lived in village side area, through only they know the importance
of relationship, culture, and traditions.

To conclude, some village area plays an essential role for build a humanitarian personality in
children
It is very crucial things about people's mindset which decide children's future that they have to
bought up in city or countryside. However, I am with the former view and I would like to share
my opinions for both view in below paragraphs.

I personally believe that children grow up in the city will grow better as compared to children
grow up in countryside as child living in city have lots of facilities to develop their personality.
They went to prestigious schools and these schools supports lots of extra curricular activities
along with education which encourages child's overall character. City child have better
exposure to technology, and also aware about recent trends, face lot of competition and all
these things directly or indirectly support children's growth.

Children can opt for various classes like sports academy, hobby class, music class etc. which is
not available in countryside and child who live in countryside have to spend their lot of time in
traveling if they need all these amenities in their life. Overall environment and behaviour of
people who live in city is favorable for children's growth due to higher education and Access to
technology. You can't denied that nowadays technology plays better role in children's
development which is easily available in city.

However, it's not necessary that child who live in countryside will not grow up well because
there are few child which are born intelligent and hard working and with the help of
theirDedication and motivation they achieve better personality development even with less
facilities. Countryside people are uneducated or less educated , child us not getting an
appropriate environment for growth Butaccept that the number of these type of child is very
less.

In short, child who live anywhere can grow but the chances are more of child who live in city
because of access to various facilities, technology, highly educated society.

Some people say that cities are a better place for children to grow up in, while others believe
countryside is the right choice. Discuss both views, give your own opinion and examples.
People have different views about upbringing their children in city or the country. While some
argue that it would better for children to grow up far away from city, I believe that city is the
best place for them.

On the one hand, rural areas can take into account as the best place for children for several
reasons. Firstly, people are always looking for a quiet and peaceful place and all these coalesce
in a rural area apart from its beautiful scenery. People who live in these places are far away
from hustle and bustle of a city have more free time than city dwellers. Therefore they can
spend more time with their children. Secondly, due to the lower rate of committing crimes in a
rural area, parents feel more safety to raising their children. For example, when children spend
their free time in a playground without any supervisor. Finally, quality of foods and air are
fantastic. All ingredients are produced organic and fresh air are not polluted by vehicles.

On the other hand, living in a city also has a range of benefits. Firstly, nowadays, most of the
facilities such as best schools, university or other types of education facilities are primarily
founded in the city. Therefore, children who live in a city are privileged to continue their
education in the reputation schools. Secondly, apart from education facility, health system are
much better in an urban area than a rural area. Parents in cities have accessed to the best
doctors and there is wide range of hospitals as well. Thirdly, children who are lived in cities
have more chance to find a job in future. Finally, there are a wide variety of entertainment
facilities in cities such as museums, theme parks, cinemas and so on. Consequently, children
have more choice to do in their spare time.

In conclusion, there are convincing arguments both for and against upbringing children in the
urban or rural area, but I believe that living in the city has brought more opportunities for
children than the rural area.

In many modern societies, grandchildren rarely spend any quality time with their

grandparents.

What do you think are the consequences of this?

Grandparents are fun to be with and they shower blessings and affection without wanting
anything in return. Sadly in today’s world where large families are disintegrating into nuclear
ones, children miss out on spending enough time with their grandparents and remain off limits
from that sweet shower of love that they could have otherwise enjoyed from their
grandparents.

Spending little time grandparents can effect the growth of the child. Often parents don’t have
time to spend with their children, in these cases, if one does not have the support of
grandparents they tend to get mislead-ed in life. For instance, a child having no elder to tell the
right and wrong is most likely to fall in trap of the wrong doers, often disturbing the life of an
individual.

Secondly, grandparents provide the love and care to the child, required to form a positive
image of the society. A child living in the absence of grandparents has little or no awareness
about the culture and the family traditions. This often leaves them to live in a void. Example,
often parents even know less about the culture and stories of family, if a child misses out living
with grandparents they often don’t get to know about their family members and the bond
between the family is never strongly formed.

Overall, in my opinion, grandparents provide the support and the care a child needs during the
growing up days, missing out on which often leads them to live a life of void and deprived of the
true meaning of family.

t is true that in many modern societies grandchildren are rarely seen by their grandparents. In
my opinion modern world, some parents are very busy by daily job and they don’t have enough
time to spend with their children, so they let children educate themselves by TV, Video games,
FaceBook etc. Some parents think that grandparents influence to children behavior badly. They
don’t want to educate ourselves children by someone’s thoughts even by grandparents. For
me, grandchildren who meet with grandparents more often, will get more family warm and
they learn family tradition and they know how to live with other people. But there are some
disadvantages, for instance, maybe they seclude from their parents. Many grandparents want
to meet their grandchildren regularly, they want to contribute to children education, and soften
their parent’s responsibilities. Asian countries have tradition, by these tradition grandparents,
grandchildren, parents live together. And in these countries manner and education of child
highly influenced by their grandparents. And they teach them how to live, what need to do,
suggest to whom marry, what jobs to choose, almost everything from childhood. They raise
children dependent upon them. That’s why almost all Asian people they take care parents and
live with them very close. In western countries, parents are wanting to their children to rise
independently. They prepare and educate their children for choosing the path to success and
live independently

Children can learn effectively by watching television. Therefore they should be

encouraged to watch television regularly at home and at school.

To what extend do you agree or disagree? (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

In this high technology era, television as one of sophisticated technology can provide all
information and knowledge that we need. People, especially children, are able to catch new
knowledge without touching a lot of books and doing something else everywhere that provides
television. I totally support this statement and bring my own reasons.

First of all, television has many beneficial programs, such as BBC and School TV, for children. So,
when children do not have any activities, they must be better to watch television than go
somewhere and do something useless. For example, half of Indonesian children prefer to stay
at home and watch television after they get their selves at home because few television
programs have useful programs, like Laptop Si Unyil and Dunia Binatang. When children are
staying at home and watching a helpful television program, they are not wasting their time for
nothing.

Then, every year, all of technologies develop to be better than before. Therefore, the children
will be encouraged to increase their knowledge in order to use their television perfectly
because they will not be able to utilize their televisions if they do not understand how to use it.
In illustration, 2 decades ago, people did something hardly when they wanted to change a
channel of television, but now we can change the channel by a controller.

On the other hand, most of television programs show many useless programs that are not
allowed to be watched by children. For illustration, sometimes we find an appearance which is
vulgar and is only intended for adults. Also, the brightness of television is not pretty good for
children’s eyes, and most of children do not understand how to set it up. So, children will get
damage to their eyes when they spend their time too long in front of television.
All of all, there are many advantages and disadvantages from television. Parents only need to
pay more attentions for their children whatever the children do.

V, as a learning tool, is quite useful if children watch the right programmes for a certain
duration of time each day. Though some people regard watching the TV as a waste of time, I do
believe that this can be a very powerful learning tool for children and that is why they should be
allowed to watch TV programmes both at home and school, but within the teacher's and
parent's watch.

To begin with, though I am no longer a student, I can still learn better by watching TV rather
than reading books. Whenever I tune on to the History Channel, BBC or National Geographic
Channel, I can learn new things. This is also true for the school going children. My younger
brother, who is a college student with history major, heavily relies on History Channel
documentaries to enhance his knowledge in history. TV programmes are the audio-visual
presentation of an event, story or fact and thus have lasting impressions on our brain. If the
right programmes are chosen for a child, he/she will learn faster by watching TV. For instance,
one of our neighbours allow her 3 years old daughter to watch Rhymes on the internet TV
channels and she can recite most of those rhymes. According to her mother, the girl has
learned more effectively by watching those animated cartoons that have the rhymes than
reading books. Since TV is a powerful learning tool, why not use it in a school for educational
purpose?

On the contrary, people who opine that TV programmes are a waste of valuable time has their
own reasons. People cannot control the time they spend on watching TV. Moreover, many TV
programmes are not suitable for the children and thus can have detrimental effects on their
immature mind. They can mimic the bad habits of their favourite heroes and can become
violent in many cases. However, this can only happen when we don't have control over our
children's' activity. For instance, scientific research shows that a certain amount of chocolate is
good for a child's health and cognitive development. However, if a child eats too much
chocolate, he will surely suffer from many problems. In the same way, certain hours of TV
watching can actually help students learn many things but uncontrolled TV watching habit
would actually ruin his life.
In conclusion, as parents and teachers, we must pick the suitable and educational programmes
for our kids both in school and at home. My final opinion is that TV is a good pedagogical tool
and hence its use in the school for both educational and recreational purposes should be
allowed.

Television programms are full of violence and advertising these days. Television media is not
only a platform of spreading information, but it is also a commercial tool to influence people.
Children usually hardly have the ability to tell the difference between good or evil and they are
easily attracted by anything interesting. Thus, more and more advertising and tv programms
are specially designed to grab children's attention in order to achieve commercial purposes,
while educational programms are becoming less and less.

Not only that, watching tv is not a very active way for children to learn things as we think.
Scientific research has proven that the brains of people who are watching tv are passively
accepting what the tv programm is telling them and their thinking ability is curbed to a large
extent. Therefore, though some children are able to focus on an educational tv programm and
intend to learn something from it, their actual achievement is very limited.

In my opinion, watching tv is not the main means of learning. We should inspire children to
read more and watch less both at home and school. Books can contain all kinds of knowledge
illustrated by interesting pictures which can stimulate children's imagination. In addition, books
provide more time for children to dwell on the content they are reading and develop their
ability of critical thinking.

Some people think that the role of parents is to discipline their children and

teach them about right and wrong. Other people consider that the main

responsibility of parents is to nurture their children and provide them with a

safe environment to grow up in.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

There are several roles for parents to play. Among those, two are considered as the main role
for parents, which are the discipline and nurture. While parents discipline children to teach
them about justice, ethics and moral, nurturing provide children a comfortable environment
feeling safe. In this essay will discuss the both aspects of role of parents before reaching a
reasonable conclusion.

Parents have many responsibilities to guide their children into a right path. Some are involving
of educational roles whereas other roles may involve of caring roles. On top of this, the primary
roles are the discipline and nurturing roles.

Parents must discipline their children. Otherwise children become uncontrollable. For example,
since children are immature, most of their acts are derived from emotions. By doing that
criminal, violent and emotional actions are inevitable. Therefore, it is important for parents to
control those acts so that children can be a part of society as a society member. From discipline
children, they would be able to learn about justice, morality and ethics to play in society.

However, it is also important to provide a secure environment to children by nurturing them.

Since children are young and weak to be independent, the parental barrier is required. Under
this boundary, children can feel comfortable and learn various skills such as hierarchy of
society, the role as a family member as well as build up the personality before they face the
reality. As a result of this, children can be a society member.

In my opinion, both aspects are equally important. While boundaries provide feeling of security
and a great way to build a confident, discipline can teach children about the consequences of
wrong doing, just like society. In reality, there are consequences to be dealt with when people
did not follow the rules. A family can be seen as a small society where children can practice
various skills before they become a society member.

In conclusion, parents have many roles to be responsible of. While they have to punish children
for wrong doing, they have to provide a safe barrier at the same time. Both roles can be seen as
the primary roles for parents, because those are required primarily for children in order to build
up several skills to be a member of society.

Raising children is stage of life which parents go through and there are differences in opinion as
to how to effectively bring up their young ones. While some families believe that the main
focus should be on education that is teaching children between right and wrong others feel that
it is essential to provide children with a suitable surrounding which favours their growth and
maturity. I believe that both arguments are equal in value which plays a vital role for many
young children today.

Understanding what is and isn't acceptable is a crucial factor for growing children as it allows
them to realise their mistakes and avoid repetition. As parents do so, not only are they teaching
children moral values but they are also effectively reducing the likelihood of children to be
drawn into crime and other anti-social elements in the future. The vast amount of experience
and social knowledge which parents have makes them proper role models for their children as
they look up to them for guidance in the proper direction in life. In addition, teaching such
fundamental lessons about morality starts within homes so that children can carry these
qualities wherever they go, be it school or to any environment where they are in contact with
other young children.

Apart from proper guidance, it is also vital that children are provided with a place that is
suitable for them without any threats. For instance, if a child is constantly subjected to abuse or
violent behaviour of parents towards each other, then it is very likely that those incidents will
hinder a child's development and may leave them psychologically scarred for life. The external
environment molds the internal environment therefore, it is necessary that children receive
tender loving care and protection from their families. In doing so, children will learn to
appreciate the true value of families which they could also take as they progress in life. The
emotional bonding is also strengthened between parents and children which profoundly
decreases the likelihood of a child being socially deviant.

To conclude, I feel that children require an ideal environment for them to mature and develop
as well as having the ability to know what is right and wrong. It is prudent that parents instill
their young ones with all of these traits if they aspire their children to become socially accepted
and prosperous in their life.

Most modern families have both parents working and as a result children spend

less and less time with their parents.

What is the reason for this?

What problems can this cause?

Nowadays, in a society where lots of families are dual-income, hence, they do not have
sufficient time to take care of their children. There is one reason that lie behind parents to have
no time to spend with their children. This essay will analyse that this issue can cause possible
problems

The main factor is that parents use their time up working in an office. Apparently, parents are
working much more than a main part of day whereby They strive to provide their children’s
needs and giving them opportunities to get better education. Naturally, having worked for
hours on end, they become quite run-down and want to rest to be prepared for next tiring
workday. For instance, at 7 a.m mother and father leave their home to go to the work and they
return back at 7 p.m. Consequently, although either parents or their children want to do some
activites with their parents or children, it is unfeasible due to reasons that is mentioned above.
As a result child-minding is used in these cases. If managed properly, it can be perfectly viable
alternatives, but otherwise, this may call forth harmful trouble

As for probable problems which failure to give sufficent attention to and spend time with
children can make are several. Fisrtly, parents give their children to look after to after-school
care but it has to be advisable for parents to act as role models for behaviour by spending as
much time as possible with their children, this means that not being with family may increase
the risk of children failing victim to crimes such as abduction or coming under the impact of
negative peer pressure. Secondly, parents are unable to provide emotional support. Due to lack
of attention and care, they can be diverted their attention to some activities that may harm
them such as drug attention, alchocolism and to play truant from school.

To conclude, children must be attached importance like spending time with them, giving them
emotional suppor, assisting in their scholl assignements. Prvoding them with adequate time,
attention, and love are primary to have a secure and harmonious family

n a modern family, both father and mother go to work. There are no less families that parents
work from 7 a.m until 7 p.m. After ending a working day, they feel tired because of work
pressure. They don't have the health and time to look after or spend time for their children.
They hand all responsibilities in taking care of their children over schools, clubs or maids, etc...
Many parents don't know how their daughters or sons study at school, or which actions of
them today. In the weekend, it is difficult to have occasions to go camping, visit their
grandparents or play sports together, etc... Modern parents are too busy to do it. This means
that have no chance for children to show their desires or dreams, exchange ideas, or express
feeling and status in the daily life. Parents can provide fully physical demands but mental
demands. Maybe in one day, they can't realize how their children have changed. So that in
order to avoid these problems, parents should care about their children and spend more time
for them.

Sample Answer 1:

In the past, it was a custom for a father to be the only bread earner for the family. Fathers
would go out to work and earn money to fulfil the families’ daily needs and mothers would stay
home to take care of the children. However, nowadays, it is not rare to find both parents going
out to work. Whilst the additional income might bring benefits to everyone especially the
children, there are a number of drawbacks that cannot be overlooked. This essay will confer
whether or not it is necessary for both parents to go out to earn money for a living.

In some families, both parents are required to work not because of their own will, but because
circumstances demand them to. As living cost and everything is getting more expensive in
today’s competitive world, some families might not earn enough to cover their living cost if only
one parent goes out to work. That being the case, there is nothing anyone can do to help.
However, the benefit of the extra income for the children still remains unchanged. With more
income, parents will be able to afford more new toys, the latest gadget, and even vacation
abroad.

On the other hand, children might feel abandoned due to their parents’ never being there for
them. It is also proven that children’s, whose parents are never at home, are more prone to
behavioural problems. For instance, my friend, Elaine, whose parents is always working
overnight and is never there for her when she needs them, has to battle with her insecurity of
being unwanted every day, she, in turn, tries to seek the attention of her teachers by behaving
badly in the class. From my example, you can see how parents’ absence can affect children in
the long run.

As far as I am concerned, there is no need for both parents to be working unless it is really
necessary. While additional income is benefiting for the children, the presence of a mother will
be best for the children’s well-being in the long run.

( Written by - Jaclyn )

Sample Answer 2:

Modern world products and services put extra costs on families. This has led to many of
mothers work besides their husbands for their children’s welfare. Although some individuals
hold the view that working of both parents may cause problems in children upbringing, others
believe parents can pay enough attention to their children as well as work outside.

Some people argue that working of both parents is not good for children because of some
important reasons. At first, their children may have not appropriate upbringing. Parents don’t
spend enough time for children. Thus, they can’t educate necessary life lessons. This lack may
direct children to criminal activities. In addition, children may get moral sicknesses. It is because
they feel lonely without any support in the crisis time. The loneliness of children degrades their
self-confidence and self-esteem. Self-confidence shortage can affect their future life.

However, opponents are of the opinion that both parents can work outside without any
problem at home. To begin, they say parents can adjust their daily hours to have enough time
for their children. Mothers or both parents can work part time. They also can make an accurate
daily plan for all family members to use their time more effective and efficient. Furthermore,
parents can register necessary courses which cover children’s educational needs to both life
and school skills. Occupied parents have enough money to spend extra courses costs.

To conclude, though some people believe working of both parents is not useful for children,
others don’t believe in it. In my opinion, the career of both parents is necessary only if it does
not harm children’s life in any way. My 2 years child has extra costs which make my wife and I
work together. Of course, his living will need more money in future. Providing necessary
facilities and support for children’s progress needs enough money. Anyway, I hope parents can
make the balance between work and family affairs.

Parents and their children seem to be less close nowadays. Perhaps the main reason for this is
that both parents often work full-time and therefore spend less time with their children.
Whereas women traditionally stayed at home to cook, clean and look after children, many
mothers now choose to work or are forced to do so. This means that children may be left alone,
or with nannies or babysitters. Busy parents have less contact with their children and less
energy to enjoy family activities. Many families no longer eat meals together, and children are
given the freedom to go out with friends, watch television or chat on the Internet for hours.

The nuclear family is well adapted to move geographically due to its size.

Do you think children benefit in any way from moving?

Do you think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?

The fast pace of the modern lifestyle has meant that many people to nowadays change
profession much more than people did in the past. This might even to entail moving, along with
one's family, overseas for the sake of a better off job and a higher income. . Although some
believe that this may have a detrimental effect on the family and especially the children, I
personally think that moving to another location in pursuit a better lifestyle will develop
children's social skills and help them to be successful in their education.

To start with, resettling in another city or country will benefit children and improve their social
skills because they can meet and communicate with people with from different
backgrounds.They can find new friends and learn from other cultures. Some might disagree
with resettling of that children benefit by moving to a totally new place. However, research
shows that children are capable of adapting to a new environment considerably more easily
than adults.

Additionally, immigration to another country will open new windows of opportunities for
children. They will have access to a better educational system in developed countries which will
help them in their future life. Furthermore, living in another country gives the opportunity to
children to learn a second language. Finally, if they like to engage in sports, the sports facilities
are fundamentally more advanced in developed countries. All these factors make moving to
another place an attractive and useful option for the many people, especially those from
developing countries.

In conclusion, immigration is not only beneficial for children in terms of developing their social
abilities, but is also is helpful for their education and future

In many countries it is common for families to own and run their own business.

Some people think this is the best way to run a business while others consider

this a potential source of problems.

What is your opinion?

Family business involve many combinations of relationships such as parent-child, husband-wife,

siblings, also extended family members could be involved in board. This trend has many
benefits, although it has some detriments attached with it.

On the one hand involving relatives in business at different levels has many advantages. The
most important one is that family members are generally more dedicated to the common goals
and they do not hesitate to sacrifice for achievement of the company targets. In addition,
involvement of closed one in the business creates grounded and firm foundation for the
company, also their presence around provides support, trust and comfort. For instance, people
involved in the business know the consequences of their action on the business if they or their
relatives own it and so they would choose themselves for cut off in case of recession.
Furthermore, families are more lenient and forgiving when it comes to working hours,
schedules and even mistakes. When family is involved, there is a leeway to work flexible or part
time which in turn allow taking care of children, parents and other family members. For
example, researches have proved that people working in their own office or workshop are more
liberal about the work. Thus, kinsmen in company create a flexible environment with loyalty.

On the other hand, there are some challenges to run business in family. The biggest difficulty is
issue regarding succession which might causes conflicts in the relationship involved. This might
occur if the older generation does not permit the young generation the needed room to
develop and grow. For instance, if the elders of the family do not allow youngsters to take risks,
they would never understand how to deal an emergency. Furthermore, business owner might
prefer a relative for the job even though he or she does not have adequate skills for the
position. This can deteriorate the business, and cause harmful ripples among the employees
working hard to secure higher position. For example, no one denies that efficient employees
would leave the company if they feel any kind of partiality. Thus, inappropriate referral without
ability and clashes could affect the trade adversely.

To conclude, family business would be beneficial in terms of honesty, devotion and liberty,
although issues with heredity and favouritism can bring gloomy effects on the environment of
the firm.

It is thought by some people that family run business has some advantages with its unique
family bond relationship over the normal businesses. However, as the business grows, the
limitation of family run business will appear.

One evident benefit to running business with family members is that the business is based on a
more grounded foundation as each family member understands each other better than just
normal business partners. This benefit is especially critical for lots of start-ups. Family bond
relationship will definitely help to reduce the misunderstanding and disputes at the early stage
of a business. Also, family members tend to have more dedication to their common goals, this
is extremely helpful for a new business that is usually on the shortage of labours and cannot
afford big staff turnovers.
However, as the business grows larger and larger, the limitation of the family-run business will
appear. A fundamental drawback is that the staff is selected and hired purely based on the
family relationship instead of the skill set. When there is a position cannot be fulfilled by family
members, it is inevitable to hire personnel outside of the family. This is usually when the
problems come into the business. The old family based management system will not be suitable
for a larger business scale. The business will confront problems in human resources, succession,
sibling relationship, identity development and so on. Lots of family run company fail in this
transition from a family run start-up to a company in a larger scale if the care was not taken to
reform their management team and company structure.

In conclusion, while having family members as founding members within a company is

advantageous as the business started, better management system and company structure are
required as the business grows larger to overcome the limitation of the family run business.

It is true that family business is becoming increasingly common among people around the
world. In this regards, there are different views; while some argue that it would be the best way
to achieve the business goals, I strongly believe that workplace should be entirely separated
from the home atmosphere.

There are various reasons why some people believe that the most successful businesses were
based in the families. They assert that if investment on a new work is made between family
members, it is more likely to meet the targets. In fact, being in emotional relationship with each
other, tending to progress weather about themselves or their family members, they allocate all
their time and energy to achieve financial objectives. In addition, proponents of this idea argue
that rivalry between family members are lower and they are less likely to deceive each other.
As a result, economic growth in a society is going to be more rapid.

In spite of these arguments, I believe that this trend may make serious problems. Firstly, it has
been psychologically proved that worker's efficiency will be promoted provided that they spend
normal time at work and then allocate a specific time for their families. Establishing a family
business usually leads to lack of having a relaxed atmosphere at home. Because, in fact,
workplace and home are the same. Moreover, individuals should have this right to select their
way of life, according to their personalities. Not being interested in an occupation or not being
qualified adequately for a pre-specified position, they may escape from shouldering their
responsibilities. Consequently, the business laps into failing. Finally, in today's unforeseeable
economic climate, it would be not safe if all of family members were in a similar field to make
money.

In conclusion, although establishing a new business may bring some benefits to both individuals
and society, I personally prefer to work in a different environment based on my interests and
economic conditions.

In the past, the older generation were a source of knowledge and experience.

Nowadays, the older generation have little understanding or experience of the

modern world.

Has this had any negative impact on the way the elderly are treated by society

and the family?

What could be done to solve this situation?

In many western countries there is an increasing number of couples choosing to

have no children.

What are the advantages and disadvantages to couples having no children?

On one hand, couples who decide to have no children can save their living costs. For example,
they can spend less money on daily essential needs such as foods, drinks, clothes and so on.
Not to mention, without children, they do not have the responsibility to pay for diapers or
tuition fees. Moreover, those couples can concerntrate on developing their own career since
they have less concern about the family. The less family members they have, the more focus
they spend on the professional career.
On the other hand, although having no children saves living expenses, it does not worth
sacrifying the real meaning of family. On holidays or special occasions such as Christmas, New
Year, Mother’s Day and Father’s Day, it will be full of joy and happiness if family members
gather to share the ups and downs, to see the children playing and smiling. In addition to this,
couples seems to have less connection to each other and similar concerns unless they have
children.

In conclusion, children somehow reflect their parent’s personalities. Parents will feel like they
were born again when seeing their children grow up and enjoy their life.

It is true that the number of childless family is rising gradually in Western countries. Any life
choice has its positive and negative, and parenting versus not-parenting is no different. I will
discuss the advantages and disadvantages of having no children in society. Being a childless
couple is beneficial in some ways.

Firstly, it is immensely expensive to raise children. Many parents believe that they do not have
enough money to support a child or children from birth to eighteen years old. They fear that
they cannot give a child a good life, or they may want to save money for their future benefits
like vacations and health cares, instead of children. Secondly, many people decide not to have
children because they will not have to change their lifestyle such as having less time for their
sports, hobbies and travels. Moreover, it is easier for the couples to spend their time at work
and pursue a higher education. This may help them to obtain a lot of valuable experiences and
skills in their chosen profession. They can chase top positions and likely to progress rapidly in
their careers.

On the other hand, childless marriages can bring some obvious disadvantages. People will not
have anyone to take care of them in their old age. For example, the elders are unable to drive
to hospitals when they get sick or cook their meals. Furthermore, couples without children
often feel they are misfits from their friends who have one. They find it difficult to maintain
relationships with each other.

In conclusion, it seems evident that childlessness has its own unique benefits and drawbacks. It
is not right or wrong to live a married life without children. The most important matter is to find
happiness in their choices.
One of the main changes in our world today is giving a birth decision of young parents. It seems
as a tendency of time. In the size of this topic, based on my awareness and experiences I would
like to present some reasons, which will help to expose gradually my view on this phenomenon.

Origin of this tendency would have come from financial issue. We realize that nowadays the
cost of raising a child is very expensive and not all couples are able to pay such as if they decide
to have a child, they will always must live in headache and worry with milk price, tuition, and so
on. For instance, according to a research of Korean scientist, to raise a child from birth up to
graduate university will lost 262 million won. Similarly, in the UK is 200 thousands pound and in
the US is 290 thousands dollar, or 115 dollar per week. Clearly, it is a huge cost, which parents
must shoulder and having children later is consequently useful solution. Because that time later
will be great to earn money and make a fund for their children in the future.

Moreover, some parents want to use this time to accumulate knowledge about taking care of
children such as how to become friend with their son, how to make future plan for their
children. Indeed, this step is very important, especially in our social environment today.

Otherwise, some couples think that having kids after 5 years of marriage or even 10 years will
help them get more time to enjoy their own life instead of spend it for taking care of their kids.
They could use their time up for traveling, passion job. Even some ones take advantage of this
time to get promotion in their career. These mean that the kids are able to be obstruction on
their way.

As two side of a coin, although this way has plenty of good benefits however, I ought to
recognize that it also brings some bad impacts the family life and society. One of impacts is
aging population and marital breakup.

To conclude, I would like to say that depend on condition of each of us, we will be able to agree
or disagree with this statement. For me, I completely approve of it

These days people are living into their 90’s and beyond. As a result, there is

increasing concern about care for the elderly.

Do you think it is the responsibility of the family to care for their elderly

members or should the government be held responsible?

Looking after the elderly is an issue of strong argument at this contemporary age. Some believe
that responsibility should be taken by families to look after them however; others opine that
the government have to take care of the elderly. But, I think, families should be the prime care
provider to the parents.

To begin with, it is a general truth that parents contribute a lot to bring up the kids or look after
the family until the kids are self-dependent. Therefore, the children or families owe a debt to
the parents and if they are not looked after well by their issues, it would be morally and socially
wrong. Most importantly, the elderly should not be neglected and be deprived of any sorts of
necessities when they need more attention at the last stage of their lives. For instance, a sick or
unwell elderly needs prompt assistance from their love one. A small touch or affection may
bring a huge smile on their face despite their sickness. Thus, families have a great role to look
after the elderly and they should be well prepared to sacrifice their career and personal tasks to
provide the best care to their near and dear one.

On the other hand, some believe that families do not have enough time to take care of the
elderly and they would be better off at care houses funded by government. However, I still do
not accord with the idea because the elderly do not get love and affection which they have
expected from their offspring.

In conclusion, I strongly believe that family should manage the time to look after the elderly at
the end of their life as there is no one who can take place their children.

Model Answer 1:

Whether taking care of elder citizens is the sole responsibility of family members or that should
be supported by the government is a very controversial issue. With the increasing life
expectancy and modern healthcare system the number of senior citizens is increasing in most
of the countries and how those old people should be supported is an issue that indeed requires
a comprehensive discussion.
First of all, the people should themselves prepare for their old ages and save money so that
they do not have to rely solely on others for their maintenance. It is quite a hard reality that if
an old person has a good amount of money and properties the number of people to look after
him would be plenty. The reverse is also true and that’s why the people should always have
plans for savings for their rainy days.

However, old people not only needs medical support, a place to live and nurses to look after
them, they also need people to talk to them, care them and spend time with them which
money cannot buy. The family members must take care of their elder parents or grandparents
and spend time with them rather than sending them to a retirement home. It is quite inhuman
to send an old family member to an old home while s/he has cared for the family members for
the whole life. The debt we have to our grandparents and parents could never be repaid,
however, we should try to at least repay them some by caring them in a way they did when we
were children.

Finally, not all old people will have close relatives and family members to look after them. The
government would have to support the older generation who have served the country and
society with their every effort. The old people have all paid tax when they were employed and
thus the government has a natural obligation to support the old people by providing improved
medical support, retirement homes with all necessary facilities. The government does not have
control whether a family decides to take care of an old member or send them in a retirement
home. But proper arrangement and facilities for those elderly should be supported by the
government.

In conclusion, I believe that supporting older people is an issue that should be backed up in
every way possible. A young person should take preparation for his old age while the family
members and governments should play their role so that those fragile and helpless old people
do not suffer at all.
Sample Answer 2:

Nowadays people are living more than 80 or even 100 years and most of them are unable to
look after themselves. The controversy over who is responsible for providing service for elderly
people is hot debated. Some individuals suggest that families are required to care the old
people, others argue that the government should organise retirement homes for older people.

In many countries, people firmly believe that families should take care the old ones who are
unable to do it themselves. For example, in Russia and China, it is common believe that it is a
responsibility of families and if a family decide to send their parents to the retirement home it
is considered disrespectful. Therefore, most of the families do it themselves. There is a general
believe that families can care better and provide reasonable services to their old generation
rather than it could be done in the retirement homes where the service is poor and not
sufficient enough. Not only this, it is considered that the most significant source of happiness
can give grandchildren and children to the elderly whereas it cannot be provided by any of the
retirement places.

On the other hand, the different opinion exists that the government should ensure a place in
the retirement homes for elderly. For example, in Australia and Canada people argue that the
government should give a place to the eldest when they are unable to provide care for
themselves because the families should work, raise their children and live their lives most of all
looking after themselves and the next generation. In those countries, the way of thinking and
believes vary to Russia and China and people can rely on such institutions like retirement
homes to look after their parents where the service is good and pleasant.

To sum up, there are two opinions about who should look after the old individuals and for
different countries, there is a different way to go. In my opinion, no matter who takes care the
old parents, it should be done properly and from the bottom of the hard. In the perfect
situation, a balance is required between families and the retirement homes to look after the
eldest.

Old homes and proper care of the old people has been an intriguing issue for years. In my
opinion it is a family responsibility, in the very first place to take care of their elders when they
get old. After that government and society should take steps that old people and old homes get
all the proper care to live healthy life.
The old people have spent all of their lives for their families. They raised, support and made
them able to live in the society. They gave them values, courage and motivation to face all
hardships. So, when they get old and need moral and physical support, it is the family
responsibility to stand beside them. Give them respect, love and care as they gave you when
you are dependent on them.

In addition to that, there are circumstances when the family is not able to take proper care of
their elders. Such as, financial problems or the old one has no one left in the family. In such
cases, I would suggest it is the government responsibility to pay for their expenses. After all,
these individuals have paid taxes and support the government to run the state.

In all cases, old people cannot be left alone. These people deserve equal rights and care either
from their families or the government. And to make it applicable, the government should keep
checks on old homes, if the old people are getting proper care or not. And what lifestyle is given
to them in the old home.

Sample Answer 1:

A visible change of any living organism is getting older. Child, youth, adult and elder are some of
the stages in our life. Child and elderly stages are dependent stages compared to other two
stages. For both of these situations, a human being needs other’s support.

While we were children, our parents were there for our supportive role. When the parents
became older, definitely their children need to be the supportive role for their parents. This is
the role we carry among human beings vice versa. If the parents live with their children only
parents will feel safer, attached to family and sharing of love. Unfortunately, many of them
attending to works, they do not have time to look after their children neither their parents. In
this case, elders could be sending to some a common place where other elders are staying. But
payment cannot be made by the government.

Since it is the responsibility of their family, definitely family needs to pay for caring of their
parents. They may not have enough time to take care of their parents. Since the government
has employed special people for that, at least those elders’ parents need to be paid by their
family.

For an example, many of the parents were private sector employees and they did not have a
monthly pension scheme. But they have only Employee provident fund and employee trust
funds. It has been used by the children of the parents in plantation sector of Sri Lanka. Finally,
children will neither look after their parents nor elderly parents do not have own money in
hand. That is, all advantages utilised from elders. When they become a stage of the dependent,
families are trying to escape from their responsibilities. This is a kind of selfish. Paid by the
government should be stopped and families should be paid for them.

Especially the children are responsible for looking after the parents; they should definitely pay
for the parents and not the government.

( Written by - Niro)

Sample Answer 2:

At present, most of the elderly population are left under the care of home-cares due to the fact
that the younger family members are too busy with their work and could not provide sufficient
care and attention for the later. In addition, some of the family members even fail to provide
financial support. Hence, the government has left no choice but to pay for their care. Some
people believe financial responsibility should be given to the family, however, I strongly believe
that the government should take greater responsibility. This argument is supported by stating
some of the reasons why I agree.

First and foremost, there are variations in each family's financial capabilities. Some can provide
sufficient support for the elderly, while some fail to do so. This instability is risky, therefore the
government, which has the sufficient resources could somehow assist them instead. For
instance, a family member may have no job when an elderly needs hospitalisation. In this case,
giving the responsibility to the government will be an advantage.
Moreover, a majority of the elderly had been productive during their earlier life. Some of them
have paid insurances, government fees and taxes. These contributions had been helpful in
establishing the government. Hence, in return, the government should help them, now that
they already are debilitated. For example, as an intake coordinator for insurances, I am aware
that in the United States, productive citizens, who work in a company are paying monthly
contributions for their Medicare insurances. When the time comes that these citizens became
old and sick, the government is mandated to support their needs.

In summary, financial support for elderly citizens should be a responsibility for both the family
and the government. However, because the government is more stable they should take
greater responsibility.

( Written by - Arlyn Crescini )

Sample Answer 3:

The concept of old homes is very prevalent in modern societies. However, this trend has
dramatically increased in some developing and developed countries over the last few years.
Senior citizens prefer to live in those homes because of better interaction and care facilities.
Some people argue that state is responsible for looking after their people and should spend
money on their care. Others claim that expenses should be bear by family in response to hard
work and effort for providing health, education and other amenities of life to their family
members. I believe that it is a mutual duty of family and government to support them
financially.

Family plays a substantial role in providing comfort to their elders, therefore effort of senior
citizens should be acknowledged as they have spent all their for the upbringing and taking care
of children health, education and other necessities of life. During the old age of their parent, it
is a primary obligation of the family members not to deprive them of their basics financial
needs.
On the other hand, senior citizens had served their entire life while serving in both public and
private sector for the betterment of the country. They have deposited chucks of money in
government funds in term of taxes throughout their services, this makes them eligible for the
help of the government in the time of need.

To sum up, I would like to say that government should take necessary measures for making
comfort and ease in senior people lives. Their health-related issues should be urgently solved
while not taking even a single penny from them. Moreover, the family is also responsible of
their elders need and must put their maximum efforts to make them happy during their last
days.

( Written by - Fahad Sultan )

Sample Answer 4:

One of the most challenging and controversial questions of today’s society is that who should
be responsible for old people’s care and expenses: either it should be the government or the
family members. In my opinion, it should be a mutual responsibility of both the government
and the family.

To start with, parents plays the most important and strong part in a child’s life. They give them
values, manners, love and care. They provide them support morally as well as financially. They
try their best to give their child the ideal life they could imagine.

So, when these parents get old and need help and support in almost every manner, then
children should not run from their duties. They should take care of their parents as good as
their parents did when they were young.
On the other hand, all the families don’t have the same structures. Some might have problems
such as financial or accommodation. Then at this point, I believe that the government should
come forward and take steps to make senior citizen’s lives better. The people who are now old
have paid the tax in their whole life and that’s why the government should take their financial
responsibilities as well. Old citizens should have equal rights on government funds as they have
served and paid taxes which help the government to run the state. I strongly claim that
government should have a fixed fund or deposit for individuals and as well as for old homes.

In addition, I like the idea of the security deposit as for example, an old person can live with his
family without being a burden on them. Finally, in my opinion, both the government and the
family should possible responsibility to make senior citizens happy and give them a comfortable
life

Food Essay Titles

With a growing world population one of the most pressing issues is that of

feeding such a large number of people. Some people think that GM foods offer a

viable solution to this problem.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

t is indeed evident that the Earth is getting more densely populated on a daily basis as per
demographic studies. With an increase in the number of people, the demand of food required
also rises hence, the supply would also have to climb up to meet the requirements. Certain
individuals believe that an answer to this problem is the use of genetically modified foods.
Despite the numerous benefits that GM foods have to offer, I strongly feel that the evidence
supporting this falls short of scrutiny and that there are more risks associated with such types
of foods.

As the name implies, genetically modified foods are produced by the addition of desired genes
in order to achieve a certain quality such as a bigger size or resistance to insects or pesticides.
Unlike natural breeding where there are checks made during the biological process, this is not
the case in genetic breeding therefore, there is a danger of genetic instability. Because of this,
scientists aren't able to make accurate predictions about the long term effects of GM foods and
extensive testing would be necessary which is both time and money consuming.

Secondly, creating such hybrid types of foods would require an alteration in the genetic
sequence. It is impossible to isolate a single gene and modify that because one change would
cause a drastic overall effect. For instance, if a certain weed or crop was modified to become
resistant to pesticides or herbicides, this can become a concern in the near future especially
when those plants begin to grow in excess. Also, if genetically modified crops were to cross
pollinate with non genetically modified crops, this can also lead to resistance of a vital genetic
components necessary for development of vaccines or antibiotics; an important aspect of
health care. Hence, this could prove to be catastrophic.

To conclude, I stand firm in my opinion that genetically modified crops would have a negative
impact if they were to be introduced. I believe that more efforts should be made to focus on
organic practices of growing crops which are much healthier to people and more kinder to the
Earth. As well as production, the distribution of food is another key factor here therefore, this
should be made more effective with the help of both governments and non-governmental
organisations.

Whether GM foods are the ultimate answer to address the need to feed the ever-growing
global population has been a topic of fierce argument recently among intellectuals across the
world. However, I fully agree with the statement such foods are an effective remedy to
worldwide food scarcity.

One obvious advantage of GM foods is better production in lesser time which will ensure food
for more people that too utilizing a few resources. In addition, these foods and their cultivation
are a lot more environmentally-friendly than normal foods because the former are highly
resilient to diseases, pests and insects which reduces the need to use harmful herbicides,
pesticides, insecticides and so on. This also ensures that people get pure fruits and grains, for
example, free from chemicals.
Better texture, varied flavors and improved nutritional values are some other qualities which
make genetically modified foods a viable solution to shortage of food. When such high quality
foods are made available at cheaper prices, it will sure save governments and individuals
substantial sums of money, not to mention the obvious health benefits for people. Further,
longer shelf-life makes bioengineered foods easier to transport to distant places and store
them. Last but not least, their potentially non-allergenic nature makes them Manna from
heaven for the hungry millions.

In short, GM foods are the need of the hour. Therefore, the authorities across the world need
to spring to action to mass-produce genetically-engineered foods and make them available to
people thereby saving hundreds of thousands of lives from malnutrition and starving.

World population has exceeded 7 billion. This increasing population has led to an emerging
problem which is the food supply. Genetically modified foods have been significantly abundant
in the past couple of years. It is agreed that these kinds of food will provide a reliable solution
for such an issue. This will be proven through analyzing their advantages.

Firstly, abundance of production is the first merit of GM foods. Gene modulation has enabled
us to introduce modified crops with greater yield. For instance, in Hawaii, virus resistant papaya
has increased yields by an average of 40 percent. As a result, the same area of land acquired
the ability to generate a higher amount of produce. Thus, genetic modification can contribute
readily to solve food shortage.

Secondly, it is now possible to introduce better traits to plants. An example for that, in Egypt,
one of the major problems that was facing rice farming was the great quantities of water
required for irrigation. After importing genetically modified seeds, Egypt has been able to grow
rice with much less amount of water. As a consequence, it will be much easier for countries
with limited water supply to produce considerable amount of harvest. After analyzing this, it is
clear that genetic modulation will have a great role in feeding more people.

Following the analysis of the ability of genetic change to give bigger outcomes and acquiring
crops better characters, it is clear that genetically modified food will play a great role in the
elimination of food shortage which may face the increasing population in the future. It is
expected that further research will be held in this field in the upcoming years.
With a growing population, many people believe that we should focus on producing

more GM foods.What are the advantages and disadvantages of doing this?

List of Advantages of Genetically Modified Foods

1. Insect Resistance

Some GMO foods have been modified to make them more resistant to insects and other pests.
A report from the University of California in San Diego states that toxic bacteria (yet safe for
human use) can be added to crops to make them repel insects. This means the amount of
pesticide chemicals used on the plants are reduced, so their exposure to dangerous pesticides
are also reduced.

2. Stronger Crops

Another benefit that GM technology is believed to bring about is that crops can be engineered
to withstand weather extremes and fluctuations, which means that there will be good quality
and sufficient yields even under a poor or severe weather condition. As populations across the
world grow and more lands are being utilized for housing instead of food production, farmers
are prompted to grow crops in locations that are originally not suitable for plant cultivation,
and culturing plants that can withstand high salt content in soil and groundwater, not to
mention long periods of drought, will help them grow healthy crops. Also, animals and plants
that have been genetically modified can become more resistant to unexpected disease
problems. We can just think of the technology as a vaccine for the species, except that it is
encoded into their genes, rather than being shot into their immune system.

3. Larger Production

It has been easier to raise crops that are classified as genetically modified because all of their
examples have the stronger ability to resist pests. This attribute helps farmers with producing
greater amounts of crops or foods.

4. Environmental Protection

According to an Oklahoma State University report, the increase of GM animals and crops often
requires less time, tools and chemicals, and may help with reducing greenhouse gas emissions,
soil erosion and environmental pollution. This means the general health and beauty of the
environment that surrounds farms will be improved, contributing to the preservation of better
water and air quality, which can also indirectly benefit every person’s well-being.

5. Extensive Protection for Crops

GM foods were created with the use of genetic engineering—a technology that was designed to
make sure crops will never be damaged in a fast rate. The method also allows farmers and
merchants to preserve the good quality of foods more efficiently by using special substances.

6. More Nutritious Foods

According to the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, some GM foods
have been engineered to become more nutritious in terms of vitamin or mineral content. This
not only helps people get the nutrients they need, but also plays a significant role in fighting
against malnutrition in third-world countries. In fact, the United Nations recommends that rice
that is enhanced with vitamin A can help with reducing deficiencies of such nutrient around the
world.

7. Decreased Use of Pesticides

It has been proven that genetically modified crops do not need pesticides to become stronger
against various types of insects or pests that may destroy them.

8. More Income

With genetic engineering, farmers will have more income, which they could spend on important
things, such as the education of their children for example.

9. Less Deforestation

To sufficiently feed the growing population of the world, deforestation is needed. But with
genetically modified animals and crops, the use of this method will be minimized. This would
decrease carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which would, in turn, slow global warming.
10. Decrease in Global Warming

As more plants and crops can be grown and at more areas, including those that were previously
unsuitable for farming, oxygen in the environment is increased, decreasing the proportion of
carbon dioxide and, in turn, reducing global warming. In fact, British economists noted in a
study that genetically modified crops have made significant contribution to reducing
greenhouse gas emissions by over 10 million tons, which is equivalent to removing 5 million
cars from the road each year. This means that people would not have to give up their vehicles.

11. Decrease in Food Prices

Due to higher yield and lower costs, food prices would go down. As people in poorer countries
spend over half of their income on food alone, this means automatic reduction of poverty.

12. New Products

New kinds of crops are being developed to be grown at extreme climates, such as those present
in dry or freezing environments. As an example, scientists have developed a new type of
tomato that grows in salty soil. Another good discovery in genetic engineering of plants is the
exclusion of the gene responsible for caffeine in coffee beans, creating decaffeinated coffee
beans, which can then be grown naturally.

List of Disadvantages of Genetically Modified Foods

1. Allergic Reactions

According to research by the Brown University, resent genetically modified foods can pose
significant allergy risks to people. It states that genetic modification often adds or mixes
proteins that were not indigenous to the original animal or plant, which might cause new
allergic reactions in our body. In some cases, proteins from organisms that you are allergic to
might be added to organisms that you were not originally allergic to. This means your range of
food choices will be lessened.

2. Not 100% Environmentally Friendly

Though it is claimed by many experts that genetically modified foods are safe for the
environment, they actually still contain several kinds of substances that are not yet proven to
be such. And what’s worse? These substances are remained hidden to the public.
3. Lower Level of Biodiversity

One big potential drawback of this technology is that some organisms in the ecosystem could
be harmed, which in turn could lead to a lower level of biodiversity. When we remove a certain
pest that is harmful to crops, we could also be removing a food source for a certain species. In
addition, genetically modified crops could prove toxic to some organisms, which can lead to
their reduced numbers or even extinction.

4. Decreased Antibiotic Efficacy

According to the Iowa State University, some genetically modified foods have antibiotic
features that are built into them, making them resistant or immune to viruses or diseases or
viruses. And when we eat them, these antibiotic markers will persist in our body and will render
actual antibiotic medications less effective. The university also warns that ingestion of these
foods and regular exposure to antibiotics may contribute to the reduced effectiveness of
antibiotic drugs, as noticed in hospitals across the planet.

5. Unusual Taste

Genetically modified foods are observed to have unnatural tastes compared with the ordinary
foods that are sold on the market. This could be the result of the substances that were added to
their composition.

6. Not Totally Safe to Eat

It is proven by scientific studies that GMO foods contain substances that may cause diseases
and even death to several kinds of species in this world, including us humans. For instance,
mice and butterflies cannot survive with these foods.

7. Cross-Pollination

Cross-pollination can cover quite large distances, where new genes can be included in the
offspring of organic, traditional plants or crops that are miles away. This can result in difficulty
in distinguishing which crop fields are organic and which are not, posing a problem to the task
of properly labeling non-GMO food products.

8. Gene Spilling

It is unclear what effects, if there are any, the genetic pollution resulting from inadequate
sequestering of genetically modified crop populations would have on the wild varieties
surrounding them. However, it is stressed that releasing pollen from genetically altered plants
into the wild through the insects and the wind could have dramatic effects on the ecosystem,
though there is yet long-term research to be done to gauge such impact.

9. Gene Transfer

Relevant to the previous disadvantage, a constant risk of genetically modified foods is that an
organism’s modified genes may escape into the wild. Experts warn that genes from commercial
crops that are resistant to herbicides may cross into the wild weed population, thus creating
super-weeds that have become impossible to kill. For genetically enhanced vegetation and
animals, they may become super-organisms that can out-compete natural plants and animals,
driving them into extinction.

10. Conflicts

GMO foods can cause a lot of issues in the merchants’ daily life. How? These products might
encourage authorities to implement higher tariffs to merchants, who would be selling them.

11. Exploitations

Some countries may use genetic engineering of foods as a very powerful weapon against their
enemies. It is important to note that some scientists have discovered that these products can
kill a lot of individuals in the world by using harmful diseases.

12. Widening Gap of Corporate Sizes

This disadvantage can possibly happen between food-producing giants and their smaller
counterparts, causing a consolidation in the market. There would be fewer competitors, which
could increase the risk of oligopolies and food price increases. Moreover, larger companies
might have more political power and might be able to influence safety and health standards.

13. New Diseases

As previously mentioned, genetically modified foods can create new diseases. Considering that
they are modified using viruses and bacteria, there is a fear that this will certainly happen. This
threat to human health is a worrisome aspect that has received a great deal of debate.

14. Food Supply at Risk

GMO seeds are patented products and, in order to purchase them, customers have to sign
certain agreements for use with the supplier or creator. As the reliance on these seeds expands
around the world, concerns about food supply and safety also continue to arise. Furthermore,
these seeds structurally identical, and if a problem affects one of them, a major crop failure can
occur.

15. Economic Concerns

Bringing a genetically modified food to market can be a costly and lengthy process, and of
course, agricultural bio-technology companies want to ensure a profitable ROI. So, many new
plant genetic engineering technologies and products have been patented, and patent
infringement is a big concern within the agribusiness. Also, consumer advocates are worried
that this will raise seed prices to very high levels that third-world countries and small farmers
cannot afford them, thus widening the gap between the rich and the poor.

One way fight against possible patent infringement is introducing a “suicide gene” into GM
animals and plants, which would be viable for only a single growing season and would produce
sterile seeds that do not germinate, prompting farmers to buy a fresh supply of seeds every
year. However, this would be financially disastrous for them, especially those in developing
countries, who cannot afford to do this and traditionally set aside a portion of their harvest to
plant in the next growing season.
Conclusion

Genetically modified foods can potentially solve many hunger and malnutrition problems in the
world, as well as help protect and preserve the environment by increasing yields and reducing
reliance upon chemical pesticides and herbicides. However, it is important to proceed with
caution to avoid unfavorable consequences for the surroundings and our health, considering
that genetic engineering technology is very powerful.

Remember that there are really potential benefits and risks to these products, which you will
learn further as you dig deeper into this subject. You can also read a brief fact sheet to
familiarize yourself more with their purported benefits and problems. By doing so, you will be
well-informed about these foods and the way they can affect your life.

An increasing number of children are overweight which could result many problems

when they grow older both in terms of their health and health care costs.

Why do you think so many children are overweight?

What could be done to solve this problem?

These days, there is a controversy surrounding the issue of the obesity among children
throughout the globe. Some assert that being overweight would have detrimental effect on
children health and also financial support of treatment will get them in the trouble in the
future. I persistently support this idea, and in my personal view, children are involved in this
issue in the view of the fact that now they not only enough physically active, but also they opt
for intake of fast food.

On the other hand, when it comes to children, every one thinks of being vibrant and possessing
great deal of energy, although the children of this era do not benefit of these qualities. It is
widely said that there are some vital factors that have direct link with phenomenon. Of course,
people generally put new technology such as computer games and internet first given that
using excessive of these thing would readily contribute to particular sort of addiction. Hence,
they are not any more enthusiastic about pursuing sport or traditional kind of activities that
would end up with discharging calories. For example, according to the recent survey of the
medical university of the Tehran seventy six percent of the children between ages ten and
sixteen favor to play soccer by computer instead of playing in the sport centers. Therefore, it
would wise of parent have an efficient control of their child rime of using technology.

On the other hand, fast food is a newcomer that easily filled the place of the main meals for the
children that intensively lead to obesity among children. Recently, by advent of the
commercials that popularizes this junk food through the media, children are more motivated to
eat them. Not only would they exceed their weight constantly, but they would also squander a
large amount of their money every day. For example, in case of m university assignment, i was
asked to survey the money that fifty teenagers spend on buying fast food. Interestingly enough,
the result shows that the amount of the money that they have spent on fast food during one
month equals one fifth of their parent salaries.

In conclusion, in my personal view, the problem of obesity among children would be solved as
long as long as parent would be more cautious regarding using technology and consumption of
fast food. Finally , it is hope that following these policies would result in healthier and superior
generation.

With a fast pace of modern life more and more people are turning towards fast

food for their main meals.

Do you think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?

In today’s society, people are leaving traditional eating habits and enjoying fast food as main
meals to accommodate with rising contemporary lifestyles. While I accept that consuming
these prepared foods can sometimes have a positive effect on the eaters, I believe that they are
more likely to have a harmful impact.

On the one hand, having Fast food can be both time saving and entertaining. People have a
little opportunity to cook at home, because most family members are busy in professional job
life. Cooking at home is a time consuming and diligent task. After a day hard work, It will be the
most convenient choice for them to have a fast food as meal rather than cooking. For Instance,
both my wife and I should stay out of home from morning to evening for our daily office works,
and after a day tireless works we barely could cook for us. Thus we prefer to have fast food at
mealtime rather than cooking. In addition, having fast food is an opening for the person who
wants to amuse himself by altering usual meal flavor. People could get bored after long time
enjoying same tastes meal, and enjoying fast food offers them a new experience.

However, I would argue that these benefits are outweighed by the drawbacks. Most fast food
items have little nutriment value. Its contain sugar, cholesterol and salt component which are
extremely detrimental for individual well being. Eating fast foods daily will make us have
diabetes or gain obesity. The rise in overweight population has also been linked to these eating
habits. Another downside is that many restaurants food processing systems are not hygienic.
They have mixed different kinds of preservatives and chemical during cooking stages which are
unhealthy for human being. A recent survey shows that in Bangladesh 40% restaurants are
using chemicals for food preparation which could be initiate the risk of diseases like cancer,
diabetes, heart attack. Furthermore, the price of fast foods is more expensive, so it could
enhance our daily living cost.

In conclusion, it seems to me that the potential dangers of fast foods are more significant than
the possible benefits.

Nowadays because of the hectic schedule people tend to move towards the fast food as the
main course of the meal. In my view this has a more disadvantages than the benefits. I will
illustrate the points based on my view in the following paragraphs with supporting reasons.

Firstly, we see obesity as a major problem among most of the people and the main reason
behind this is eating at the fast food centers frequently. In the modern life style both the
husband and wife are working and they do not get enough time to cook some times and they
rely on the fast food restaurants. Also, I have personally seen many of my friends who are
staying away from family due to their work and other reasons having food outside rather than
cooking for themselves because of the busy schedules in office. Thus, it is leading to obesity of
the people.

Moreover, there are many health related issues which people get due to this habit of eating
fast food rather than having the hygienic food which is cooked at home. I personally
experienced this situation when I was admitted to the hospital as I was habituated eating at the
fast food centers regularly and this damaged my digestive system. Hence, I believe that having
food at the these centers leads to serious problems.

In conclusion, I would say that there are more disadvantages than advantages because of eating
at the fast food centers. However, It is fine to have it occasionally due to the fact that people
are occupied most of the time with some or the other work.

It is undoubtedly true that the modern living is increasingly heading in a fast pace stage. While
the existence of the fast foods made life easier, I believe that it has some serious drawbacks to
consider. It is agreed that the disadvantages of obesity-related diseases outweigh advantages of
effortless food preparation as it will be discussed.

The prime advantage of the easily ready to eat foods is the time essence. Since most of the
people are working or engage in some activities, relying on ready cook foods will make them
manage their time effectively. For example, in the recent survey at the University of Brisbane,
respondents who are mostly students in the higher years at the university, agreed that an
enormous amount of time was saved by simply consuming foods available in the fast food
chains. In contrast, if the student will cook every meal for themselves, the time that they can be
devoted to studying will be lessened.

The main disadvantage of fast foods recipe is its nutritional content. The reason for this is that
majority of convenience foods which is offered by most restaurants have a high content of fats.
This unwanted bad cholesterol in the body will not be burned and will possibly cause obesity
especially for the younger generation. For instance, in the research study at Medical Hospital of
Canada claimed that 80% of the patients who are at a high risk of the chronic diseases like
diabetes and heart disease are consuming a great amount of fast food. This is clearly evident
that the long-term consumption of fast foods will lead to a very serious medical conditions in
the future.

In conclusion, the disadvantages of a severe medical condition for long time consumption of
fast foods outweigh the advantage of less effort in the preparation of food.
Fast and preserved foods are becoming main meals modern life. Yes, it is true. They are cheap
and allow make foods in very short time, can be bought from almost every shop. In the modern
world, people don’t prefer traditional foods as they used to before. Some people made it their
way of life, but other people still use the traditional way of cooking. There are some advantages
and disadvantages.

The advantages of using Fast foods and preserved foods are the first they are ready to eat, so if
you don’t have time to prepare food then buy it. Also, there are cheap and you can choose
from many brands. The second, the time which you required to prepare food you can spend
with the more important things like playing with your children, doing your job or just relaxing
etc.

The disadvantages are health problems. Many preserved foods contain substances which are
used to allow the food conserve in a longer period of time. These substances trouble human
health. Also another thing is cooking the food is an amusement for some people. They get
enjoyment from the cooking the food. They want to share the food with others. Excessive usage
of preserved foods also might destroy that amusement of cookery. The influx of Fast foods
leads to obesity and diabetes.

In conclusion, I like to eat fast food but I eat it at most 3 times in a month. Sometimes I buy
preserved foods from a supermarket but I enjoy making food myself. For me the most
important, this is to find harmony. Don’t eat fast food too much, don’t use preserved foods too
much. Thank you for correcting.

With an increasing number of people eating fast food, which if eating too

regularly can cause health issues, some people think that the only solution is

to ban it completely.

To what extent do you agree?

Over the last decades, a growing number of people tend to eat junk food, consumption of
which may lead to health problems. While some believe that in order to solve this case,
authorities have to ban it totally, I do not think that it is possible and consider that governments
should promote the adverse effects of consuming those foods.

Banning to eat fast food for those who consume it on a regular basis is not the solution. Firstly,
prohibiting the junk food does not mean that all people will not be able to it anymore. Since
virtually the all can cook any sort of food, it will not be a problem for them to prepare and eat
fast food. In other words, only by banning it, the problem will not be solved completely.

In order to solve this problem, governments should raise awareness of those who consume it
regularly about the adverse effects of junk food. Authorities should create advertisements, in
which the negative effects of fast food will be shown with the serious consequences: obesity,
diabetes, or digestive problems in those consumers may occur as some of the threatening
diseases. Furthermore, the existence of media helps to spread this information among those
who consume it on a regular basis and do not pay attention on the possible consequences.

Although some believe that banning fast food totally solves the problem of appearing health
issues in those who consume it regularly, I am not in consummate accord with this opinion.
Moreover, I consider that it will not solve the problem because people can cook for themselves;
however, governments should try to advertise in media negative effects of consuming fast
food.

Nowadays, there is a high proportion of people consuming fast food around the globe. This has
caused some severe health problems to these people. Everyone loves fast food because it is
delicious. In addition, people can save the time to prepare food to their children especially the
parents who are workaholic. They ignore the bad effects of the fast food such as obesity.
Therefore, I agree that governments shall impose tax on fast food to some extent.

First of all, I think a higher tax shall be imposed on fast food because the health of the citizens is
important to the development of the country. For instance, if a person has his daily meals with
the consumption of fast food, he is likely to face the problem of obesity after a period of time.
Besides, high blood pressure and high cholesterol will be followed. With the health problems
suffered, he is likely to be the worker with the lowest productivity. This will affect the economy
of the country as a result.

Secondly, the reason why a higher tax shall be imposed on the fast food is because it can
remove the choice of people when making a choice as to what type of food to consume. It is
undeniably that people choose to eat fast food as it is cheaper and it can be prepared within
minutes. With a higher tax imposed, people will not choose fast food as the cost of consuming
fast food will become a burden to their expenditures. Consequently, people will prefer home-
cooked food which is much healthier and cheaper.

Many people make the assumption that imposing a higher tax on fast food will not reduce the
number of people who suffer health problems. They argue that the advertisements of fast food
broadcasted on multimedia such as television could be a reason for people to consume fast
food. As fast food advertisements often broadcasted during dinner time, children are attracted
to the images of the fried chicken. The result of this is children will ask their parents to bring
them to fast food restaurants and enjoy the meals at there. This explains why children face
health issues at a younger age. Therefore, I suggest governments can limit the time of fast food
advertisements broadcasted on television. The advertisements should be broadcasted during
the midnight instead of the dinner time.

In conclusion, I agree that with the higher taxes imposed on fast food, the number of people
consuming fast food will decrease significantly and thereby the health problems faced by the
people will decrease as a result. However, to solve the problem effectively, government should
take action by changing the time of advertisement broadcasted on television. It is undoubted
that fast food advertisements portray the fast food during dinner time can affect people in
making decision as to what to eat especially when they are hungry.

Model Answer 1:

In the present era, world’s people are facing the ultimate fact that our young generations are
experiencing severe health related illness from the very beginning of their life and it is due to
excess junk food consumption. To forbid the worrying condition, the state is approaching some
essential steps and one of them is an enhancement of taxes on convenience food. Thus, I
partially agree with the given opinion. As in today’s world, it is one of the most sparkling heated
debates. I believe that our leaders should have an eye for finding out some other solutions
because only increasing the taxes on fast foods will not hamper the ratio of junk food intake.

First of all, as we know that, our teenagers are the prime customers for the convenience meals,
where most of them are unaware of devastating health hazards of eating junk foods. At the
same time we can ask, is it their fault? I don’t think so. They should be made aware of the long-
term consequences of junk food consumption and it is plausible in several ways. For example,
broadcasting health related adverts on children’s TV channels, introducing topics into their
conventional education regarding dangerous health effects on fast food taking. In addition to,
parents could play an important role in combating this worldwide problem by giving their
children proper advice and guidelines of having balance diet.

Moreover, nowadays people are leading a busy pace of life. Thus they scarcely think of their
regular diet, even some of them have no idea about what they are eating. Therefore, people
are depending on takeaway meals for their daily livelihood. The government should impose
rules on the working schedules so that folks could enjoy their meals with adequate nutritious
knowledge.

To conclude, in some of the global areas folks are becoming more habituated to convenience
food despite realising that they will suffer from heart diseases, obesity and dyslipidaemia in
very near future, where only raising the food revenue will not slow down the tasty and unsafe
junk food consumption.

Everyone should adopt a vegetarian diet because eating meat can cause serious

health problems.

Do you agree or disagree?

When it is perfectly possible to lead a healthy life by eating plant based foods, I see no
justification for killing birds or animals for our food. Therefore, I completely agree with the
argument that everyone should adopt a vegetarian diet.

There are several benefits to following a vegetarian diet. To start with, plant based foods are
rich in vitamins, minerals, anti-oxidants and other nutrients required for good health. What’s
more, most fruits and vegetables contain little or no cholesterol or calories. Research has
shown that vegetarians are less likely to develop health problems like obesity, cancer or heart
trouble. Health benefits are not the only reason to follow a vegetarian diet. When we obtain
our food from plants, we can also stop cruelty to animals.

By contrast, non-vegetarian foods such as fish and meat are high in cholesterol, fat and calories.
Regular consumption of red meat is known to increase a person’s risk of cancer and heart
disease. In addition, unlike fruits or vegetables, fish and meat cannot be eaten raw. The
slaughtered animal may have some illness. If half-cooked meat is eaten, it can cause deadly
infections in human beings. In fact many cases of food poisoning are caused by the
consumption of contaminated meat.

The quality of non-vegetarian food has also deteriorated over the years. Seafood has become
contaminated due to the pollution of ocean water. It is a well-known fact that farm animals are
given steroids to grow rapidly. When we eat their meat, the steroid also enters our body. This
leads to several problems like precocious puberty in children.

To conclude, vegetarian foods are healthy and do not constitute cruelty to animals. Therefore, I
believe that everyone should adopt vegetarianism.

Planning Body Paragraph A

The main point: A vegetarian diet is certain healthy.

Supporting points:

a diet based mainly on vegetables is rich in essential vitamins and minerals

protein can be found in pulses and dairy products

avoiding certain meats can help reduce heart problems and diabetes

Planning Body Paragraph B

The main point: Not all meat is unhealthy

Supporting points:

not all meat is unhealthy

examples: fish and chicken

Planning Body Paragraph C

The main point: Having a balanced diet is key

Supporting points

A diet which has mostly vegetables and a small amount of meat is best

Eating meat in moderation is considered beneficial to health

Now try writing the paragraphs before you check the models below.

Models

Model Paragraph A

Firstly, it must be admitted that having a vegetarian diet is certainly healthy.

A diet which contains a high quantity of vegetables is rich in all the essential

vitamins and minerals needed to promote health. In addition, avoiding red meats,

which is said to lead to heart problems if eaten in large quantities, can also

be beneficial.

Model Paragraph B
However, while having a vegetarian diet is certainly a healthy way to eat, not

all meats are actually unhealthy. Take, for example fish, this meat contains

vital omega 3 oils which are essential in building health and it is recommended

by the medical profession to include fish in the diet at least once a week.

Another illustration is white meat, such as chicken, this meat is also

considered healthy when eaten in moderation.

Model Paragraph C

Finally, the key to health is to eat a balanced diet which consists of

predominantly vegetables but also some healthy meats, namely fish and chicken.

Having a balanced diet is generally more manageable for most people and would

require only small changes in their current diet to see significant changes in

their health.

Vegetarianism is becoming more and more popular for many people, particularly because of
the harm that some people believe meat can cause to the body. However, I strongly believe
that it is not necessary for everybody to be a vegetarian.

Vegetarians believe that meat is unhealthy because of the diseases it has been connected with.
There has been much research to suggest that red meat is particularly bad, for example, and
that consumption should be limited to eating it just a few times a week to avoid such things as
cancer. Meats can also be high in saturated fats so they have been linked to health problems
such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes.

However, there are strong arguments for eating meat. The first reason is that as humans we are
designed to eat meat, which suggests it is not unhealthy, and we have been eating meat for
thousands of years. For example, cavemen made hunting implements so that they could kill
animals and eat their meat. Secondly, meat is a rich source of protein which helps to build
muscles and bones. Vegetarians often have to take supplements to get all the essential vitamins
and minerals. Finally, it may be the case that too much meat is harmful, but we can easily limit
the amount we have without having to cut it out of our diet completely.
To sum up, I do not agree that everyone should turn to a vegetarian diet. Although the
overconsumption of meat could possibly be unhealthy, a balanced diet of meat and vegetables
should result in a healthy body.

Many processed foods and ready-made meals contain preservatives and chemicals.

What are the advantages to this?

Do you think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?

It is a widely known fact that treated and instant foods consist of chemical preservatives and
this has become almost inevitable in the recent days. However, like any other advancement of
technology, even this has its own edges and downside. This essay will discuss about this
practice and analyze if disadvantages dominate advantages.

First and foremost, using chemicals prolongs the preservation duration of the substance. This
assists us in transporting the commodity to faraway destinations. For instance, pickled
indigenous vegetables and meat are moved across the world. Hence, we have the edge of
relishing tastes unknown to us till now. Moreover, usage of artificial additives undermines the
fermentation of microbes. Consequently, the foodborne diseases are regulated.

Contrarily, when preservative medium are metabolized, they produce carcinogenic substances.
For example, treated vegetable oils contain less polyunsaturated fat and higher levels of trans-
fat. Consequently, this trans-fat increases the risk of cancer. Furthermore, a considerable chunk
of people are found to be allergic to certain preservative mediums. This can be seen in case of
emulsifiers that aggravate asthma in patients. Additionally, chemicals used for this purpose,
reduce the nutrition content of foodstuff. As an example, many water soluble materials are lost
by the end of processing food and hence, the main purpose of supplementing nutrients is
unachieved.

In a nutshell, from the above composition I find that, though there are a few benefits owing to
the usage of the chemical additives in preserving food, the disadvantages outweigh them and
hence, this process is often detrimental.

In recent times, people opt for ready-more foods and processed foods rather than traditional
foods. Irrespective of the fact that these types of food contains preservatives and chemicals to
maintain the freshness of the product. However, these type of foods has its own advantages
and disadvantages. Those consequences of the ready-made foods and processed foods will be
analysed in this essay before a position is concluded.

There are certain advantages of having processed foods and ready-made foods. Firstly, it is easy
to carry and doesn’t need any special preparation. The portability across the country fortifies
the economic growth too. For instance, one of the prominent noodles brands “Maggi” is
famous across the world and people prefer to have these kinds of processed foods during
travel. It can be prepared just in couple of minutes which saves time and accelerates cooking. It
goes through several tests to assure food’s quality. As this example shows, these kinds of foods
are widely popular and subside hungry instantly.

However, there are quite disadvantages of consuming these processed and ready-made food.
Mainly, the chief ingredient added MSG – Monosodium Glucamate is highly dangerous to
health on long time. Moreover, for enhancing the taste of the product, the manufacturer add
Kombu in addition to MSG which destroys immune cells. Children suffer from Autism if these
kinds of foods are feeded regularly. Thus, the above mentioned disadvantages precursor for
banning these types of foods in several countries like Canada, UK and the United States.

As the above discussion reveals, the disadvantages outweigh advantages of the intake of fast-
foods, processed foods and ready-made foods. It is my hope that these foods are banned in our
countries to

Most foods that are purchased these days in small stores and supermarkets have chemicals in
them as these are used to improve production and ensure the food lasts for longer. However,
there are concerns that these have harmful effects. In my opinion, the potential dangers from
this are greater than the benefits we receive.

There are several reasons why chemicals are placed in food. Firstly, it is to improve the product
to the eye, and this is achieved via the use of colourings which encourage people to purchase
food that may otherwise not look tempting to eat. Another reason is to preserve the food.
Much of the food we eat would not actually last that long if it were not for chemicals they
contain, so again this is an advantage to the companies that sell food as their products have a
longer shelf life.

From this evidence, it is clear to me that the main benefits are, therefore, to the companies and
not to the customer. Although companies claim these food additives are safe and they have
research to support this, the research is quite possibly biased as it comes from their own
companies or people with connections to these companies. It is common to read reports these
days in the press about possible links to various health issues such as cancer. Food additives
have also been linked to problems such as hyperactivity in children.

To conclude, despite the fact that there are benefits to placing chemicals in food, I believe that
these principally help the companies but could be a danger to the public. It is unlikely that this
practice can be stopped, so food must be clearly labeled and it is my hope that organic products
will become more readily available at reasonable prices to all.

Over the last few decades, the media has promoted the image of young thin women as being
ideal.

What problems has this caused?

What solutions can you suggest to this issue?

edia in the changing times has played a very crucial role in defining the decisions made by
people. With coming of the digital era and Internet, people are highly dependent on
advertisements to make changes in their lifestyle. One such change that has been observed, is
that women are now trying to be slim because the notion that things girls are pretty has
grounded people’s mind set. This has given rise to a new set of issues.

Firstly, with portraying slick women as the epitome of femininity, the society in large, makes the
women question about themselves. This has caused a shift in the minds, from the importance
of being healthy to be rather slim, even if it is at the price of becoming unhealthy. Secondly, this
has caused a negative psychology among young girls, who if are fat, look upon themselves as
inferior to the ones who are slim. The age when children are supposed to learn and explore the
world, the hassles of body, could be quite disheartening.

The most effective solution could be making deliberate attempt, to show all women are
beautiful. Movies, advertisements or songs, should portray women as human beings, who could
be either fat, short, black, slim, fair or whatever, and yet be successful. This method could act
as a counteract to the present notion.
Overall, often media forgets the importance it plays in the lives of people, and takes
irresponsible steps. But, if the media tries again, the notions present could be changed for
better.

It is true that nowadays due the widespread advertisements in the media, a perfect woman is
known as the slimmest one. Although there have undoubtedly been some negative
consequences of this trend, societies can take steps to mitigate these problems.

As all of programs in the media focus of thin women indirectly as the best one, several related
problems have been emerged. On the societal level, women's appearance has been the first key
factor to judge them. In fact, people, unconsciously, tend to communicate with tall slender
women rather than fat one. As a clear example, directors prefer to employ zero-size actresses,
even if they are less qualified than others, to attract regular viewers. From an individual level,
having compared with supermodels, a majority of women lose their confidence in different
facets. They may forget the positive aspects of their personalities and just feel negatively about
their bodies. Therefore, it may be that they begin to use dangerous chemical drugs to be thin,
which not only does not work, but also it may make new serious problems for them.

There are several actions that societies could take to solve problems described above. Firstly, a
simple solution would be to run a worldwide campaign in which successful women, whether
they are thin or not, are introduced to others. In this way, gradually, people realize that
appearance is not as important as they though. In other word, they find the insight that setting
the valuable goals and working hard to achieve them is much more worthwhile. A second
measure would be for governments to implement new rules in modeling industry. For instance,
specifying the minimum BIM for the participators in catwalk shows or made them to check their
health condition regularly.

In conclusion, various measures can be taken to tackle the problems that have been made as
the popularity of thin models.

People are eager to be attractive or beautiful, especially women. There are lots of T.V.
commercials and magazines that point out the looks which symbolize ideal shape like being thin
or slim. As more women are influenced by this idea, there are more problems that would come
along with.

First of all, women who do not have slim figure would feel pessimistic about themselves, and it
would cause them do something without considerations. For example, there are some women
trying to lose weight by taking drugs which emphasizes the effects of becoming thin. In this
situation, it causes the problems of health. Secondly, people would tend to be superficial by
judging a woman only by her appearance. It will lead to a problem and that is, people will not
focus on women’s abilities, instead on the shape. Once this idea influences people in
workplaces, it will be unfair to women’s career.

To deal with these problems, there are some solutions that I can suggest. First, trying to reverse
the idea of being ideal. People have different figures and it is one of the reasons why we are
unique. Secondly, people have to be aware that appearance is not the only way to know a
person. People have more important definition of who they are, not only what they look like.

To sum up, people should respect each other, whether thin or fat. Even though the media keep
on broadcasting the importance of having a slim body, people should understand that they are
at their best when they show who they really are.

Government and Politics

Should governments make decisions about people’s lifestyle, or should people

make their own decisions?

There is no doubt that life style of people in one particular country determines some important
aspects of country's development. Thus, while some people firmly believe that the government
should take part in deciding and regulating their life styles , I firmly believe that it depends on
the circumstances.

The first consideration is related to the urgency of government involvement. It is because the
government not only has a responsibility to make a policy in order to keep a harmonization in
society, but also keeps trying to educate and let their civilizations become much more mature.
Sticking "No Smoking" campaign in public area, for instance, is one of the accepted regulation
made by government which has already reached positive feedback from its civilization. This is
particularly beneficial to eradicate the high rate of victim because of smoking related-disease.
Having considered the aforementioned account, the involvement of government in another
case sometimes invites much criticism. In term of dressing ethic code which is likely to be
regulated in Jakarta, for example, is automatically rejected by some group of society as well as
practitioner. They have tendency to think that dressing code is clearly private right of every
person which is actually protected by the government.

Ultimately, there are pros and cons developing in society concerning the government
involvement in case of people' lifestyle. It seems to me that the government should reconsider
regarding the feedback from societies which may comes up due to government attitude
whether it must be proactive to make a policy regarding such matter or not.

Some people are concerned whether governments should decide what the public’s lifestyle
should be, or should people make decisions for themselves. In my opinion, based on some
lifestyles such as taking drugs, governments need to react responsibly. When people make their
own decisions, they should pay more attention to the consequences.

Governments can help people in making decisions on their lifestyle. For instance, people that
sell and take drugs, often encourage younger people to follow their lifestyle. This could have a
serious influence on society. As a result, governments should make decisions to encourage
these people changing the lifestyle of others and if necessary, governments have to use laws to
support and maintain their decisions. So based on this situation, governments should make
some decisions for people.

No matter what decisions people make, they must think about the consequences. Without
thinking decisions through, some decisions can lead to an unhealthy lifestyle and can become a
threat to lives. For example, smoking can cause a high rate of lung cancer, as well as those
exposed to the smoke. Drink driving can lead to serious traffic accidents, as well as threaten
other people’s lives. However, governments may never prohibit the selling of cigarettes and
alcohol as a deterrent to those not making the right decision. Therefore, people need to make
decisions on their own and they must think about the consequences of those decisions.

In conclusion, in some situations governments should make decisions, which may be based on
laws for encouraging as well as informing people to change their lifestyle, such as taking drugs
etc. At the same time, people should make their own decisions on their lifestyle and consider
the consequences.

Indonesia is one of the most food-wasted country in the world. It is contribute by the lifestyle
of people who live in city which are like to leaves some foods when they eat at restaurant. This
fact become so ironic since we know many Indonesia people outside the city who have
difficulty to get some food. Unfortunately, this people who have a food-waste lifestyle do not
realize the impact of their lifestyle to the rest of people in the country. In order to solve the
problem, I agree that Government should take part in deciding and regulating people’s lifestyle.

Food-wasted is becoming a morality problem because the more we waste the food, more and
more people are going to hungry and malnourished. As we know, the victims of this problem
not only the adults, but also the children. How can we make sure our existence if many of our
children died because our own ignorance?

Today, the hunger problem is more because the crisis of distribution and uneven allocation. I
believe in this problem, people don’t have power to make a policy about the distribution of
food. Therefore, Government should take an action by making policy and do the campaigns to
convince the people that food-waste lifestyle give bad impact to other people and the future of
the country.

I firmly believe as long as the involvement of Government bring the goodness for everyone in
the country, nobody will refuse it. Moreover, Government not only has a responsibity to ensure
the prosperity of its people who live in the cities, but also for everyone in the country.

In some cases, governments can help people to make better lifestyle choices. In the UK, for
example, smoking is now banned in all workplaces, and it is even prohibited for people to
smoke in restaurants, bars and pubs. As a result, many people who used to smoke socially have
now given up. At the same time, the government has ensured that cigarette prices keep going
up, and there have been several campaigns to highlight the health risks of smoking. These
measures have also helped to reduce the number of smokers in this country.

A government has a responsibility to its citizens to ensure their safety.

Therefore, some people think that the government should increase spending on

defense but spend less on social benefits. To what extent do you agree?
There is no doubt that safety of the population is one of the main obligations of the
government. Because of this, part of the society thinks that authorities should spend more
money on defense and cut spending on social benefits and I partly agree with this statement.

It should be acknowledged that social support is important for people, especially to the least
protected citizens - pensioners, children, young mothers and some other categories of society.
For example, many old people depend only on material support from country and do not have
any other choises to make their living because of the health issues. Consequently, reducing
social benefits of such groups of people could be harmfull for them and authorities should
review every specific case seperately.

Nevertheless, nothing can be worse than war. When people people die nobody cares about
their social benefits despite of government cuts of social support due to war; in such times
mankind only wants to survive. Therefore, government, spending more on defense, not only
protects its' citizens from the war horrors, but also secures social benefits of its' people and
people should concider such measures as vital. It is true that prepearing to war can prevent it.

In conclusion, social benefits are very important for protecting and supporting people and
government should carefully cut such spendings. However, as far as I am concerned, military
spendings are even more important in some situations to prevent war and I agree that people
should be ready to lost part of their social benefits in particular situations.

Defending and assuring the safety of its citizens is the prime responsibility of any government.
Therefore, many people believe that the state needs to focus more on defence expenditure
than on social benefits. In my opinion, although spending on defence is imperative, citizens
should not be deprived of the benefits of social schemes which are equally important for the
people.

Protecting its people at all times from external aggression is paramount to the sovereignty of
any state. In other words, attempts by neighbouring countries or terrorist organisations to
attack the security forces or civilians can cause huge loss to public life and damage to property.
This can be because of certain unsettled border disputes or political activism against
democratic ideologies or any other geopolitical tensions caused by terrorism activities. For
instance, the separatist movement backed by Pakistan in the Indian region of Kashmir has
caused tremendous irreparable damage to public property and claimed thousands of innocent
lives in the last 20 years. As a result, government has to deploy a large number of military
personnel in these border areas at the cost of billions of dollars. By contrast, if there was peace
on all borders, the government can allocate sufficient funds for social schemes.

However, the government should refrain from going overboard and ensure that excessive
defence spending is not at the cost of social spending. That is to say, citizens, especially from
the poor and lower-income class depend largely on assistance from the state in areas of
healthcare and education. The government needs to subsidise these activities for the
upliftment of the weaker sections of the society. This is vital to narrow the inequality gap
between the rich and the poor in the society. This is also equally as important as defence
budget because ignoring the people from the lowest strata of society can cause imbalance and
chaos in the country due to the stark inequality in people’s living standards. For overall
development of the nation, it is the administration’s duty to provide the social benefits to the
poorest of the poor. For example, the recent PAHAL scheme by the central government in India
to distribute free LPG connections to the poorest in villages has yielded favourable results by
helping them use clean cooking gas.

In conclusion, I believe that defence spending to thwart the aggression of unfriendly neighbours
is as important as providing assistance to poor citizens through various social benefit schemes.

Some people hold a view that the government should increase defense expenditure and cut
down spending on social welfare. I partly agree with this viewpoint.

It is understandable why people believe that the government should give priority to defense
budget. In some specific cases, maintaining security is an initial obligation because it lays a solid
foundation for the stability of a country. For example, archipelagoes are usually invaded so
military in those places should be invested to avoid any possible war. Similarly, when social
unrest breaks out, nobody cares about social benefits but their safety. It is obvious that when
war happens, most everybody could become the main target of being massacred, or even,
killed. As a result, a great number of individuals deem that a huge proportional budget should
be allocated to security system to secure themselves from external factors.Only after we ensure
we have a sufficiently strong national defense can we turn to the important domestic issues
that merit our attention.

However, it is still believed that government expenditure should also be spent on key sectors.
First and foremost, the authorities need to invest money in social welfare, such as healthcare,
education, or recreational, to provide benefits to citizens. Lack in social benefits could seriously
do severe damages to its residents. Take North Korea as an example, due to the lack of
government attention, a huge number of impoverished children and miserable beggars are
living from hand to mouth.Moreover, people pay taxes to bring the government into existence
and maintain its operation. Therefore, they deserve to get all services which generated from
that. This amount of money should be used for providing social welfare, which bring about
social benefit.

In conclusion, both defense spending and social expenditure should have equal government
priority.

Some people think that the government is responsible for the rise in obesity in

children, while others think it is the fault of the parents. Discuss both sides

and give your opinion.

Part of society thinks that government should be blamed for the rise in child obesity, in the
same time, other part of people thinks that parents is the reason of this tendency. From my
point of view, boths sides are partly right and the truth is somewhere in the middle.

First of all, government could be blamed at least for not making useful food widely avaliable to
the population and not giving people enough health education. For example, the most cheap
and widespread meal - is junk food and advertisment of it is presented all around us - on the
streets, on the TV programs, in the shops and so on. Furthermore, the information about how
harmful is such types of food is not shown or reality is distorted and almost all fast food chains
have advertisments about how useful is fastfood that they produce. Consequently, government
could provide more legislation regulations of such advertisment and food food production.

Nevertheless, parents often neglect health of their children due to the business at the work. For
instance, the children that are left at home only by themselves, often prefere junk food on
useful and healthy one in case that both types of meal are avaliable, becouse young people do
not think about harm and long term consequenses that can be produced by such food.
Therefore, in case that parents do not provide healthy food for their children and do not teach
their children to choose healthy products, the obesity of their children is their fault.
In conclusion, there are many different reasons of child obesity, but at least some of them
could be prevented by government on the legislation level and by parental control of the eating
habits of their children. Becouse of this, I think that rise in obesity in children is fault of both
parents and authorities.

t present, debilitating illness is one of the major healthy issues in the world since overweight
trigger some of diabetes case. As related, number of overweight has been growing up especially
in children. Some people believe that government has responsibility for the rising , another part
of society blame that parents have the biggest portion to their children, I believe that
government and parents have take into the account about this conditions.

To begin, this is government task since number of overweight in children increase significantly.
One of the major reasons is raising amount of junk food restaurant in the whole country. For
example, the fast food restaurant has been developing well by using franchise system and the
number still counting until now. Since this food has less beneficial nutrients to human body and
enormous fat percentage, government needs restricting the policy about it. Then government
also takes a part in making the rule to educate the individuals about having balance nutrients.
In fact, government provides little information about healthy foods. For instance, rarely society
find in media about how essential is healthy food in control obesity.

Besides the government, parents also experience the higher portions in educating their child
about food, health, and school. Firstly, the philosophy about everything begins from home, it
makes sense that environment of home reflect to children habit. For example, mostly
overweight children have uncontrolled eating habit by their parents, so children prefer
consuming sweet and potatoes without knowing the dire effects to their body. Secondly,
parents are busy in working, so they cannot manage well about their children meal such as they
just provide some money to their children for having a lunch.

To conclude, I confirm that ministry and parents probably make conditions of overweight in
children worse. Therefore, government and parents need to work together in order to decrease
the illness.

Model Answer 1:

There is plenty of evidence to suggest that children are overweight and the situation is getting
worse, according to the medical experts. I feel there are a number of reasons for this.
Some people blame the fact that we are surrounded by shops selling unhealthy, fatty foods
such as chips and fried chicken, at low prices. This has created a whole generation of adults
who have never cooked a meal for themselves. If there were fewer of these restaurants, then
children would not be tempted to buy takeaway food.

There is another argument that blames the parents for allowing their children to become
overweight. I tend to agree with this view, because good eating habits begin early in life, long
before children start to visit fast food outlets. If children are given chips, ice creams and
chocolate rather than nourishing food, or are always allowed to choose what they eat, they will
go for the sweet and salty foods every time, and this will carry on throughout their lives.
Parents decide what to buy and let their children eat and many parents know and feel that their
children are overweight and yet let them eat high calorie contained foods like fast foods. If
parents try to make their kids understand that those type of fast foods are not good for their
health and draw a restriction on how much their kids are allowed to eat then the problem can
be solved partially.

There is a third factor, however, which contributes to the situation. Children these days take
very little exercise. They do not walk to school. When they get home, they sit in front of the
television or their computers and play video games. Not only is this an unhealthy pastime, it
also gives them time to eat more junk food. What they need is to go outside and play active
games or sport.

The two views discussed play an equal role in contributing to the problem, but I think we have
to encourage young people to be more active, as well as steering them away from fast food
outlets and bad eating habits. We need to have a balanced approach.

(Approximately 360 words)

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)
Alternative Answer 2:

An increasing number of overweight children in many developing nations is a major problem

which is always open for a debate. This is a topical question nowadays. Regarding this issue,
some people think that problem is due to rise of the number of fast food centres while others
point out that parents are responsible for lacking care on children's health. I strongly opine that
food habits are completely transformed which need to be rectified immediately.

On one hand, different types of foreign dishes are spread throughout the world. As children are
more interested in these foods, they choose them without knowing cons about them.
Consequently, a developing country cannot deny the entry of foreign trades which affects
economic condition of a nation. The ingredients used to prepare an item in the fast food outlets
are of low quality but rich in fat contents and other elements which affect a child's health.
Factors behind increasing demands of fast food centres include - low cost, instant availability,
and finally, their distance from workplaces and our home. Fast food shops are located in every
corner of the streets and people are being attracted by the variety of different tasty yet
detrimental foods.

On the other hand, parents are more blamed due to this problem. There are many factors
relevant to this. In this challenging world, both parents are willing to have a job to adopt posh
lifestyle and also to show their status. Consequently, their vision on the child's food habit
plunged to the low level and thus results in unhealthy food habits. Other reasons like hormonal
imbalance or gene transfer from parents to children result in obesity. In this urban life, families
prefer to late parties, restaurant foods etc. These new interests devastated healthy food habits.

Finally, in short consumption of fast foods should be reduced gradually simultaneously parents
ought to pay more concentration on children habits and also force them to do exercises which
keep body it.

(Approximately 300 words)

( by Kalyan Chakravarthy.)

Alternative Answer 3:

All around the world, the living standards are becoming higher and all more similar to western
society. This changing in the everyday life brings also its contradictions and drawbacks, like the
dramatic increasing in the number of overweight people. This problem is even more worrying if
we consider the number of overweight children, which causes will be treated in this essay.

One of the reasons lots of people think is the cause of such a problem is the exponentially
growing number of fast food outlets in developed countries. Fast foods originally were places
where to eat a meal in few times, but now have become also the easiest and cheapest solution
to have lunch all over the world. Consequently millions of families prefer to eat in fast foods
where the food is appealing, thanks to the huge work on advertisements, and the cost is
reasonable. Therefore, parents bring their children to the fast food outlets, where food isn't
organic at all and the dimensions of a meal are completely over-proportioned.

However, parents are responsible for their children's diet and have to look after them in order
to avoid they become overweight or even obese. Parents have to find time to prepare healthy
food for children, for example, fresh vegetables or meat, that don't require more than half an
hour of cooking. Moreover, parents have to free their children's diet from sweets, exchanging
them with fresh fruit.

In conclusion, both fast foods and lack of parental control are causes of the increasing number
of overweight children. Consequently, a change in familiar eating habits and in fast food outlets
menus could prevent the risk of a future worldwide spread obesity problem.

(Approximately 280 words)

( by Luca Brotto.)
Alternative Answer 4:

I strongly believe that both components mentioned: the growing of fast food counters along
with parent's attention deficit over their children health could be blamed for the causes of
overweight young people.

In term of fast food counter, it should not be solely pointed as the contribution factor toward
this matter. The increment of cow milk consumption in toddlers, in a change for breastfeeding
milk, is also in charge guilty. Research conducted on this had proven that obesity is common
among baby who were given cow milk instead of being breastfed. Fast food, on the other hand,
contains high fats and unsaturated fatty acids, which are hazardous for wellbeing not only for
children but also for grown up people. Whereas, parents' lack of attention to their children's
eating habits must be taken seriously as well. They must be acknowledged the importance of
introducing nutritious meals to children. Children under five years of age, for instance, is best
given high protein contains food, which accounts for brain development and boosting their
cognitive ability. And as for obesity, one must be alerted on its impact on children's health
status for it had been recognised as one of the major factors resulting in cardiovascular disease,
diabetes and stroke.

In conclusion to this essay, parents' knowledge in a healthy lifestyle and early introduction of a
healthy lifestyle to the children must be given more emphasis to help anticipate the increase
numbers of overweight young people. In addition, a government along with the society must
also hold full responsibility for the children's wellbeing in general. It might be a good idea to
create a policy controlling fast food outlets opening in many cities.

(Approximately 270 words)

( by Nuke Amadeus.)
Sample Answer 5:

It is true that the problems of obesity children in advance countries have grown rapidly in the
past recent years. A group of people believe that it is due to the increasing number of fast food
restaurants in the areas, while another group thinks that it is due to the parents’ mistakes, as
they have given fewer attentions to the children these days. Although the growing numbers of
fast food outlets do affect the problem, but I also agree that the lack attentions of the parents
also give significant impact on the obesity cases.

On the one hand, it is undeniable that the significant growths of fast food outlets have truly
affected the case of overweight problem in children. In most public places such as in theme
parks or shopping malls, fast food outlets restaurant definitely exist, and they offer various
kinds of things which attract the children. For instance, Mc Donald regularly gives additional
bonus such as toys for the children’s meal package. As more and more children are attracted to
visit the fast food outlets, the existence of the outlets have grown rapidly nowadays and they
have outnumbered the healthy ones. As a consequence of the increasing trend, the children
have more option of outlets that they can select, and the probabilities of the children in
consuming the foods are getting higher.

On the other hand, I do believe that parents are also responsible for the problem as well. In the
modern days, the roles of wives have changed, as most of them have become career women
these days. Since they are focused on their careers, they have less time in doing the household
activities, which include preparing meals for their children. Instead of cooking healthy foods,
they prefer to give meal allowance to their children, which is more practical and efficient. As a
result, many of the children purchased their meal in fast food restaurants, and they have
become overweight.

In conclusion, although the increasing populations of fast food restaurants have given some
contribution to the problem of overweight children, I do believe that the lack attentions of
parents also play a significant role as well.
Some people think that the government should give money to creative people, suchas artists
and musicians. To what extent do you agree?

Some people think that governments should give financial support to creative artists such as
painters and musicians. Others believe that creative artists should be funded by alternative
sources. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

People have different views about the funding of creative artists. While some people disagree
with the idea of government support for artists, I believe that money for art projects should
come from both governments and other sources.

Some art projects definitely require help from the state. In the UK, there are many works of art
in public spaces, such as streets or squares in city centres. In Liverpool, for example, there are
several new statues and sculptures in the docks area of the city, which has been redeveloped
recently. These artworks represent culture, heritage and history. They serve to educate people
about the city, and act as landmarks or talking points for visitors and tourists. Governments and
local councils should pay creative artists to produce this kind of art, because without their
funding our cities would be much less interesting and attractive.

On the other hand, I can understand the arguments against government funding for art. The
main reason for this view is that governments have more important concerns. For example,
state budgets need to be spent on education, healthcare, infrastructure and security, among
other areas. These public services are vital for a country to function properly, whereas the work
of creative artists, even in public places, is a luxury. Another reason for this opinion is that
artists do a job like any other professional, and they should therefore earn their own money by
selling their work.

In conclusion, there are good reasons why artists should rely on alternative sources of financial
support, but in my opinion government help is sometimes necessary.

lthough Proficient creators like musicians and painters are the assets of our society, whether
they should be given sufficient fiscal support by their own authorities has triggered spirited
debates. Some assert that government is obliged to generate money for their skilfulness,
whereas others contend that alternative ways are to be taken into account. In my perspective,
the latter should be considered highly, for they provide clear-cut advantages.

The idea is that government must lend a helping hand to its artists does have a handful
benefits. One reason why people propose this is that artists could easily collect reasonable
income to bring forth remarkable creations. The perceived general idea is that this readily
available fund would encourage the talents to bring out the best in them, which, in turn,
enhances remarkable achievements not only to the artists but also to the government.
Nevertheless, it is highly likely that, if they get necessary resources as easily as ABC, they would
develop laziness and this drawback retard the overall cultural promotion and improvement of
their nation.

However, the counter arguments of supporting talents financially seem more likely to be
effective rationally than the former. This is partly because people who work hard to earn
money for their creative works will definitely value their job and thereby they strive tirelessly to
achieve their dreams. They will, for example, estimate the needed costs and use it adequately.
It is also relevant that artists can do further alterations in their creations as they are not bound
by any rules and regulations, and they can clearly do whatever they want for better
accomplishments. Moreover, each and every authority is mandated to rather consider other big
issues, which is chiefly important to protect its public.

To put it in a nutshell, while getting promoted economically by the government is supportive, I

believe, other options such as private funds are to be chosen, in addition to the government
budget, it would be argued, could be allocated for other necessary purposes.

[ Written by - Syama Stephen S ]

Model answer 2:

It is unquestionable that one very complex issue in today's world is the funding support to
creative artists. While there is a controversy that should be supported and funded by the
government. I do believe that there is also a case for saying that they should be funded by
alternative sources.
It is fairly easy to understand the reason why government support is vital to artists and their
projects. Perhaps by considering that proportion of artists are living in poverty. In fact, only a
few artists, who have achieved success in their fields, are able to support themselves, whereas
others are still struggling for life and some of them even living below the poverty line. Likewise,
the construction of a non-profitable art gallery, which helps the public to develop a sense of art,
requires vast sums of money. Therefore, without financial funding by government, our cities
would be much less interesting and attractive.

However, we can fairly understand that artists should no emphasis on the state to fund their
work. While most musicians and the majority of painters make a living by performing or selling
their artistic creations to fans or collectors. Besides, as to painters or musicians, they can expect
to gain their income as tutors giving individuals lessons. In short, these artists are capable of
gaining financial support in a number of ways.

In conclusion, I believe that there are good reasons why artists should not only rely on the
government for supporting them, but the alternative sources of financial support should be
suggested.

[ Written by - Ray Looi]

Model answer 3:

More and more artists are naturally born since the dawn of time. As a result, it has been the
subject of discussion on whether the state or a non-government institution should support
them financially. These points of view will be discussed in this order.

It is believed by some that the country's administration should finance the creative artists. For
instance, under President Ferdinand E. Marcos regime, all of our skilfully created arts by the
Filipino artists were provided by all the helps they needed. Like Fernando Amorsolo, one of the
most famous painters in the Philippines was funded by the late President Marcos and even his
first exhibition held in the National Museum of the country. Thus, he was known by visitors who
came and saw his creations internationally, and this led him to exhibit his paintings in different
countries. He made our country known around the world and he is indeed a Filipino pride.

On the other hand, many argue that NGOs (Non-government Organisations) should be the one
financing them. An idea that may support this is that the government has a lot of funding
already and they cannot afford to finance these creators of arts, so it is better to ask for a help
to a private institution. For example, the Pro-mil Milk Company has funded the concert of Sarah
Geronimo in Araneta Coliseum. She is the most popular singer in the Philippines because she
sings magnificently and can touch our deepest emotions. In fact, this private company can
make a lot of profit in her concert.

In conclusion, for reasons related to the Philippine pride and private institution making of profit
when financing arts creators is supported and refuted by many. However, after analysing these
two points of view, it is clear that the Philippine government should finance them. Thus, the
argument that the state should financially support creative artists can be supported and
expected to be realised.

[ Written by - Rona Lyn Olivar ]

Model answer 4:

A group of people believe that governments should provide subsidies for unpopular or amateur
artists, while other people think that artistic people should be subsidised from another
resource. The following essay will discuss both opinions, but in my personal opinion, I believe
that governments should fund them before they are sponsored by alternative sources.

Several people believe that creative artist such as street painters and musicians should not be
subsidised by the governments. They think that art activities are not the basic need of human
beings, and governments should focus on more important matters. For example, rather than
spending some budget for these street artists, the fund could be allocated for improving the
public education sectors, public transportations or public facilities. They think that creative
artist should seek sponsorship from private institutions or private companies.
For several reasons, some people believe that creative artist should be funded by governments.
Firstly, many amateur painters have painted some of the public areas, and they have changed
the look and the atmosphere of these places from a negative aura into a positive one. Secondly,
some talented artists have made artistic sculptures and placed them in public areas such as in
the parks, and they have made the parks become more beautiful and attractive. Thirdly, many
amateur musicians who are performing in public areas, such as in subways or in bus terminals
have entertained the public with their music. Therefore, it is undeniable that the existence of
these artists brings benefits for the society and governments should subsidise them.

In conclusion, people have different opinions about funding creative artists. Some people think
that they should be funded by governments, while others believe that they should be
subsidised by other resources. In my point of view, I think governments should allocate some
budget for amateur artists as they bring benefits for individuals and communities, but once
they have become professional, they should seek sponsorship from other resources, and the
government should stop providing the subsidy.

The government should lower the budget on the arts in order to allocate more

money to education. To what extent do you agree?

These days, the government spends a large part of its budget not only on public services, but
also the arts. Although I agree that it is important to spend money on public services, I do not
think spending on the arts is a waste of money.

There are several reasons for spending a significant amount of the government budget on
public services. First and foremost, public services are the things such as hospitals, roads and
schools, and these things determine the quality of life that most of us will have. For example, if
the government does not spend enough money on hospitals, the health of our society may
decline. Similarly, if not enough money is spent on schools, our children may not be properly
educated. Also, it will be the poor in our society that will be affected more if we do not spend
enough on these things because they are the ones more dependent on such services.

However, this does not mean that the arts should be completely neglected. To begin, it is
difficult for many arts institutions to generate much profit, so without some help from the
government, many theatres and other such places may have to close. Moreover, the arts also
have an important impact on our quality of life. Many people get great pleasure in going to see
music and theatre performances so it is important that the government assists such institutions
so that they can continue to provide entertainment to the public.

To sum up, there are clear benefits of ensuring a large amount of investment goes into public
services as this influences the quality of life for nearly all of us. That said, I do not believe
spending money on the arts is a waste of money as this too provides important benefits.

It is certainly true that the main responsibility of every government is providing the essential
needs to a society and developing a nation. There is an issue that the government should not
spend money on the artwork which is less important than other areas. However, some people
think that education is a very important for the future of a nation and the government should
pay attention on education rather than art, while others disagree with these and think that art
areas still need to be supported by the government. Both sides are very interesting that need to
be discussed carefully.

On the one hand, there are many reasons to support the idea that art play an important part to
a society. First and foremost, art is related to the identity and unity of people in a country. No
one can argue that art reflects the creativity of people in a certain time and place. Traditional
artwork can present national customs and peoples’ lifestyle in the past which can emphasis
people to realize the value of their culture and so pound with their tradition. Moreover,
subsidizing on art works not only help to increase harmony of people in a country but also
boost tourism of a nation. If the government beautifies a city by decorating art works, it can
attract the number of foreign tourists and also can boost economy.

On the other hand, there are multifarious reasons to support the latter idea. It is defiantly true
that subsidizing on education by the government is more important than paying attention on
art. Developing education can produce better quality citizens and advanced skill employees to
the work market. As a result, the high quality employees can help to develop and improve a
nation eventually. Without sufficient support from the government in education, it can lead to
lack professional workers or other quality workers to maintain services and develop a nation.
To sum up, in my opinion, even though national art work has sentimental value to a nation and
citizens, it is still not necessary over than education. I think the government should pay
attention to improving education rather than subsidizing art work. This is because improving
education can lead to the improvement of a nation in the future.

Some people think that only the government can make significant changes in

society, while others think that individuals can have a lot of influence. What

is your opinion?

n today’s world, making substantial changes in society has always been a major concern for
every nation. It is believed that these changes can be made only by the government, whereas
others argue that an individual can make a difference and eventually change the society. This
essay will address both sides of this argument and finally reach to a conclusion with an opinion.

On the one hand, It is considered that government of every nation can make important changes
in society by enforcing the law and conducting the awareness seminars. To put this in another
way, people’s safety can only be ensured if the government enforces law and order in society.
For instance, according to a social experiment, safety is a crucial matter in a society which is
being expected by people from the ruling administration. Moreover, government should take
effective steps in order to conduct the awareness seminars which will help people to aware and
understand the acute problems of a society. Thus, it is clear that government plays a vital role
in making a significant difference between a better and worse society.

On the other hand, Despite government aid, individuals should understand the responsibilities
towards the betterment of a society. Firstly, people can change the society by actively
participating in the social activities. For example, being social activists, they will understand and
resolve the critical issues of the society which cannot be felt without being socialist. Secondly,
youngsters should be encouraged to attain a higher education and set an example in a society
for others who have been demoralized in their life. Finally, a person should be helpful and kind
to others and especially to those who are needy. Therefore, it has been proven that every
individual has a potential to change the society by simply encouraging and motivating
themselves.
In conclusion, after discussing the both sides of an argument, in my opinion, although it should
be the prime responsibility of the government in making important changes in a society, the
individuals should also be matured and responsible in order to help society emerging from
worse conditions and to make it a better place.

Some people suppose that the government is the only factor which can influent on society
considerably, whereas others state that individuals can play an important role in social impact.
To my mind, I consider the effect on society of individuals as remarkable as the government.

First of all, the government has its own effective methods to control and improve society. In
particular, the government issues some policies for citizen’s benefits such as social welfare
policy, economic policy. For instant, the government proposes the education policy which
popularizes education for all classes in soceity; Therefore, the poor can have an opportunity to
study. This is really a useful policy helping society erase illiteracy and creating equality as well.
Furthermore, the government has its technique in order to maintain order and social security.
People in society can not be safe, nor the police force is not established. The police force
protects people from robberies, and dangerous criminals. In addition to, the government
expands relationships with other countries gradually which may bring people a lot of good
chances. Through these good relationships, the citizens can get many scholarships, job
opportunities, convenient exportation and many other benefits. Nevertheless, the government
can undermine society because of adverse policies. If the government sets a very high tax rate
instead of reasonable tax, society may become unstable because of citizens discontent.

Secondly, it is undeniable that individuals affect on society directly as well as indirectly. The
good individuals can contribute directly to society by complying with the law. They can merely
be observant of the traffic law, or they can pay taxes in full and on time. One person can not
have considerable influence, but the majority of people can change society. For example, if
everyone has the sense to stop and move in traffic lights, traffic congestion may be eliminated.
In the other hand, society may be worsened because of bad sense of people. Moreover, the
individuals can also contribute to society by having an impact on the government. They can
choose the person who can be good authorities in the government and can create some
realistic methods to improve society through an election.
In conclusion, although there are many different points of view about the impact on society
between the government and individuals, I personally claim that these factors play the same
important role in change society.

Every person dreams to live in a happy and peaceful society. However, it is a debatable

topic whether individuals or government can have more impact in making a society better

place to live. It is believed that government is in much better position to fulfil this

role. This essay will examine this by analyzing how government can make and impose new

rules as well as create awareness among people for developing a better society.

Each and every person has to follow some rules and regulations in order to maintain a

disciplined society. Government is an authority who can make new rules, and make sure

that people can follow these roles. As an example, people of different cultures and

religions are living in Dubai, government have made such rules and regulations which

each and everyone has to follow regardless of there culture and religion, in order

to maintain a peaceful society. This shows government has major role in developing

and maintaining a peaceful society.

Awareness among people also plays a vital role in maintaining and developing a peaceful

society. Government has got the funds and best resources, in order to raise awareness

among people regarding the importance of peaceful and healthy society. In London,

government run different awareness programs on different television channels and on the

radio. These programs helps in raising awareness among people regarding following rules

and regulations government has imposed for the betterment of society. This shows that

these programs are only possible by the help of government, as the require huge budget.

In conclusion,government has got more resources, so it should use these resources in

order to develop and maintain healthy and peaceful society.

Health Essay Titles

The prevention of health problems and illness is more important than treatment

and medicine. Government funding should reflect this.

To what extent do you agree?

It is sometimes argued that more money should be spent on preventive measures than
treatments, as they are of greater importance. However, I would argue that cure and
prevention are equally important when it comes to spending money in these areas.

There are several reasons why it can be argued that government should spend money on
tackling the causes of diseases. Cost-effectiveness is the key element when placing more
importance on these initiatives. By allowing people to have access to these health monitoring
strategies, governments can avoid the hefty priced hospitalised treatments or other
extravagantly expensive medicines. Take the modified gene coding as an example, the
technique of relocating genes in the DNA of human beings can help deliberately avoiding
inherited lethal illnesses in newborns such as diabetes. In this way, not only the financial
pressure on health care departments can be reduced, but also the painful suffering caused by
these contagious sicknesses. Hence, an improved quality of life for those who take these
measures is a better alternative. So, if government prioritises preventative approaches as a
mandatory element in tackling health problems, people would surely be leading healthy lives in
a near future.

I also believe that spending on treatments or medicines has of proportionately equal

importance as of managing causes. Some diseases are too fatal that cannot be left without an
intensive, holistic and advanced treatment. For instance, carcinogenic patients would have
never been recovered with ever greater speed today, if huge state budget were not invested to
produce chemotherapy. Similarly, without enough government funds for the best possible
treatments to vulnerable patients, people' life expectancy will be affected devastatingly. So
both these departments should be given equal money to keep them going.

In conclusion, governments have to make health reforms properly by investing equally in the
cure and prevention of epidemic health illnesses in order to have better outcomes from health
deprived people as well as ensuring a healthy and energetic living for them.
Health care and education are two key factors to the development and progress of a country;
ongoing arguments and discussions are becoming more intense pertaining to whether the
responsibility should fall to the government or individuals alone. I do not believe that it is
necessary for either party to take control of all the aspects but rather both sides must have
their own part on the issue.

Political leaders should be sensitive and mindful of the expansion and improvement of quality
in medicine and formal education. Public hospitals and schools should be set up and well
maintained for less well off citizens that do not have the means to access services from private
institutions. Making these services open to the public means more educated and healthy
country men; it would drastically improve the economy and quality of living in the nation.

Individuals should emphasize the need of health and education as tools to help them live well
and advance in the work force. It is a person's job to take care of themselves by eating well and
doing regular exercises. There are selfless folks whom are qualified to teach; these volunteers
willingly go to rural areas and educate the locals. There is only so much one person can do
without the support and assisstance of other people, organizations and the government.

Both sides are capable of different and contributing abilities; it takes two to tango, the
government and the people. In my understanding, leaders cannot lead with no followers and
followers have nothing to depend on if they have no leader. Health care and education is the
responsibility of both the government and individuals.

he government should allocate more funds for health education and preventive measures
because it is said that prevention is better than cure. I strongly agree with this statement and
will sight several reason to support my stand.

First, a healthy community can definitely help to cut-off the budget of the officials spending on
health and therefore, this money can be used for other measures in order to improve the
country's status. For instance, the government can develop infrastructures such as, widening of
city roads and maintenance in public transport to minimize the problem with regards to traffic
congestion.
Second, the community folks can perform their jobs well when they are not sick and it can
benefit the country by having more people who are working in the country, as they can perform
their roles and responsibilities at work, home and in the society. A person who is physically and
mentally fit is more likely a disciplined individual and thus, the likelihood for violence will
decrease, helping the government battle against crime.

Last, a healthier lifestyle like having a regular exercise and eating vegetables can help people
live longer and can spend longer days with their loved one's enjoying the different creations
made by the creator.

In my experience, working in a hospital and dealing with patients almost everyday, makes me
realize how good health can be a beneficial tool in attaining happiness. I believe that through
prevention, a person can achieve more in life and can function well in the society as a whole.

The conclusion of the matter is that, a person should start living a healthy life to contribute in
the society in general and the country's leaders can focus greatly in the promotion of health,
through education and preventive acts.

The number of people who are at risk of serious health problems due to being

overweight is increasing.

What is the reason for the growth in overweight people in society?

How can this problem be solved?

Obesity has become a major issue in countries world wide. This has led to the increase in
serious health problems among people. Although there is no one reason for the dramatic
change, several factors have played their role.

One of the chief causes is diet. People these days eat more and more high-carbohydrate, high-
fat burgers and pizza in fast-food restaurants. These instead of being good for health in turn are
responsible for deteriorating it. A possible solution to this could be awareness, among both
people and the sellers. Steps need to be taken to tell people about the effects of excessive
eating of fast food. Even more, the sellers must be given workshops to improve the quality of
the food.

The second major reason for obesity is lifestyle. People now work harder and and have
sedentary jobs. Moreover, they don’t exercise regularly. This worsens the situation because the
body that does not works physically tends to get weaker and adapt more diseases. A way out of
this issue is by bringing to notice the importance of exercise. Even more, individuals must take
steps to ensure that they are doing physical work to maintain a balance lifestyle.

Overall, obesity or even being overweight has serious effects on the individual and the society.
Although the problem is not out of hand and if proper steps are taken it can be reversed, it is
time that both individuals and society starts working towards solving the issue.

It is argued that obesity is increasing among young people putting them at serious risk of
several health problems. One of the main reasons for the rise in overweight people is the easy
and cheap access to high-calorie foods, such as fast foods and snacks. This can be solved by
offering cheaper, healthy alternatives for people to consume.

Firstly, the reason for the increase in overweight people can be blamed on the easy access to
unhealthy, high-calorie foods. Aisles in a supermarket are filled with snacks and it is possible to
find a fast food restaurant at every street corner in a busy city. This makes it very convenient
for people to find and consume large amounts of unhealthy calories which quickly add up and
result in weight gain. Secondly, the aforementioned foods are often very cheap compared to
the alternatives. For instance, a burger menu, including the drink and chips, can be less
expensive than a low-calorie, nutritious salad. People care about their money, so most of the
time they opt for the cheaper option, even if it is not as healthy for their bodies.

These problems can be fixed if the government, fast food brands and restaurants work together
to promote and support healthy eating while offering better alternatives to the society. The fast
food restaurants must offer cheap and healthy options with their products and on their menus.
The government can regulate this and implement a limit on the amount of fast food restaurants
that can be opened in a specific area.
In conclusion, if access to low-cost, healthy alternatives is made easy by the rules and
regulations of the government and changes within the fast food brands, it will effectively
reduce the number of overweight people in the society.

The amount of time spend on sport and exercise should be increased in schools in

order to tackle the problem of overweight children?

Do you think this the best way to deal with the problem?

What other solutions can you suggest?

Another solution to overweight problem amongst children can be reliance on healthy eating
habits. Meanwhile, the biological fat stored in the body can be reduced by fresh food such as
lean meat and vegetables. Obviously, junk food and fizzy drink should not be on their daily
menu. Food balance can influence how serious overweight can be.

In order to tackle about the overweight, the campaigns organised by schools can be the best
idea. Students will be familiar with the causes of triggering this epidemic. Therefore, this
activity can be a source of information related to this problem. In addition, this campaign must
include some question and answers games in order to check the children comprehension

Another solution to overweight problem amongst children can be reliance on healthy eating
habits. Meanwhile, the biological fat stored in the body can be reduced by fresh food such as
lean meat and vegetables. Obviously, junk food and fizzy drink should not be on their daily
menu. Food balance can influence how serious overweight can be.

In order to tackle about the overweight, the campaigns organised by schools can be the best
idea. Students will be familiar with the causes of triggering this epidemic. Therefore, this
activity can be a source of information related to this problem. In addition, this campaign must
include some question and answers games in order to check the children comprehensionThe
second cause of obesity is sedentry life style. It is true that the use of computers and television
is increasing in children. They spend most of their time watching television or playing video
games on a computer. This technological advancement has reduced the level of physical activity
in this specific age group. This issue can be resolved by encouraging children to do physical
exercises. Parents can take their children to park to encourage playing with friends.
Furthermore, schools can add sports in their curriculum to maintain physical fitness in their
students.
To sum up, it is clear that main causes of obesity are unhealthy eating and not enough physical
activities. This ailment can be prevented and treated by healthy eating habbits and physical
exercises.

Owing to the problems which a growing population of overweight people cause for

the health care system, some people think that the key to solving these issues

is to have more sport and exercise in schools. In my opinion, I completely agree

that this is the best way to tackle the issue of deteriorating public health in

relation to weight.

Firstly, dealing with the issues surrounding obesity and weight problems is best

solved by taking a long term approach and introducing more sport and exercise in

schools. This method will ensure that the next generation will be healthier and

will not have such health problems. At the moment, the average child in the West

does sport possibly twice a week, which is not enough to counteract their

otherwise sedentary lifestyle. However, by incorporating more sports classes

into the curriculum as well as encouraging extracurricular sports activities,

they will undoubtedly become fitter and more active.

Another point to consider is that having more sports lessons for children in

schools will probably result in children developing an interest in exercise

which might filter through to other members of their family and have a longer

lasting effect. In other words, parents with sporty children are more likely to

get involved in sport as a way of encouraging their children. By both parents

and children being involved, it will ensure that children grow up to incorporate
sport into their daily lives. This is certainly a natural and lasting way to

improve public health.

In conclusion, to deal with an increasing population of unfit, overweight

people, changing the lifestyle of the coming generation by introducing sport in

schools is the easiest and most effective method to use.

The number of overweight children in developed countries is increasing. Some people think
this due to problems such as the growing of number of fast food outlets. Others believe that
parents are to blame for not looking after their children’s health.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Nowadays, developed countries are suffering due to high rates of obese young citizens. Some
people believe that the boom of convenient restaurants and improper guidance of parents are
the reasons that have affected the health of children.

The convenient restaurants and processed foods are seen everywhere, especially in the
prosperous countries, where almost all the people are amenable due to the accessibility,
affordable prices and time saving for busy people. Some people are practicing their selves this
way of life in order to lessen the burden of preparing of foods at home. For instance, because of
my busy scheduled duties it is convenient and I prefer to eat in fast food restaurants so that I
will not waste my time and energy preparing food at home.

In addition to this, lack of knowledge of parents about the importance of proper food and
neglecting their children causes their children's health to get worse and for children to become
obese in the society. For instance, my parents are giving us allowances to buy our food outside
and that is why my sister turned obese.
However others cannot stop the growth of convenient outlets because these are their
livelihood and source of income. Moreover, parents cannot control the preferences of the
children's taste buds which make them eager to eat processed foods than nutritious foods.

I therefore agree that fast food causes the citizens to depend on fast food because of
accessibility, affordable prices and convenience to lessen the burden of preparing foods and
also parents lack guidance about proper foods that result in their children becoming fat.

More and more people are suffering from health problems caused by a modern life

style which cannot be treated with modern medicines. Some people think that a

return to traditional medicine should be encouraged.

To what extent do you agree?

An ever increasing number of people now face health issues caused by a sedentary life style
and high levels of stress. Some people suggest that traditional medicines can solve many of
these health concerns and therefore we should go back to them. I agree with this view. In my
opinion, traditional medicine holds the key to cure many diseases that cannot be cured by
modern medicine.

Firstly, modern ways of living and working has created an environment of excessive stress and
pressure, especially among urbanites. Lack of sufficient physical activities and frequent
consumption of processed foods has a very harmful effect on the body. As a result, people
become more prone to chronic diseases like cancer and diabetes, which are very difficult to
cure, if not diagnosed correctly in the initial stages. For instance, brain and liver cancer are still
incurable by allopathic medicine and there is no breakthrough solution in sight yet.
Interestingly, the occurrences of these diseases are uncommon among people who follow a
healthy lifestyle and consume natural herbs and roots.

It is, therefore, no surprise that some people have started advocating a switch from allopathy
to traditional medicines due to their proven history of treating major health problems without
many complications. In other words, such herbal treatments do not harm the body by inflicting
side-effects on other organs during the course of treatment. This is because ancient medicinal
systems such as Ayurveda treat diseases by attacking the root of the problem and heals the
body thorough a holistic manner. To illustrate a point, Cuticurin, a substance found in the root
of turmeric, plant has been clinically proven to be effective at attacking the specific cancer cells
in the body leaving aside the good cells. By contrast, modern techniques like chemotherapy
have dangerous side effects.

In conclusion, I believe that the absence of side effects and the ability to treat the body in a
holistic manner makes traditional medicines more effective at curing health problems caused
by the modern lifestyle.

The contemporary was of living has negative impacts on everybody’s health, which can not be
cured with current medication; therefore, some people think that conventional medicine ought
to be restored. While this is faithful to some extent, I considered the new development of
medicines saves millions of people in the world.

In fact, there are some disadvantages of modern lifestyle should be taken into consideration.
Firstly, fast food is quite prevalent nowadays which is typically in high in cholesterol and
calories yet offer little or no nutritional value. Science has proven that people who have the
largest proportion of diet are fast food have higher risks of developing several chronic illnesses
such as heart disease, diabetes, forms of cancer and obesity. Secondly, the wrong use of
available high technology machines is also one of the tops of reasons. People are addicted to
smartphones, tablets, but the lack of physical activities which lead to increase the risk of getting
diseases. The modern medication cannot cure them unless they give up their detrimental
lifestyles.

On the other hand, the latest medicines have saved millions of people every year. It is
undoubtedly true that inventing vaccines and antibiotics enable people to prevent the fatal
endemic diseases as well as bacterial infections. Moreover, they are effective in treating
wounds and ulcers. For instance, if vaccines are not discovered, people will properly be
succumbed by bird flu, rubella, etc. Another essential thing, the current medication strongly
support doctors in saving the patients’ lives such as open-heart surgery, organ transplantation,
etc.
For the above reasons, I believe that the current lifestyle has some adverse effects and the new
medication cannot cure unless people change their lifestyles, I am also undeniable the
usefulness of the latest medicines yet.

arious types of diseases in today’s advanced world are caused by new ways of life. This fact that
modern medicines are not often able to treat these diseases should not enforce humans to use
traditional medicines.

In my opinion, conventional medicines made of plants can affect only diseases which have been
less dangerous. Therefore, to treat acute sicknesses, old remedies would not be practical. A
large number of patients dying in the past prove this claim. Serious illnesses such as cholera and
plague killed millions of people around the world. In other words, if new medicines had been
used in ancient times, population of the world might be more currently.

Recent medicines introduced as a result of organized medical searches are more credible than
old types not proved by science. To more clarification, several different technologies are used in
order to provide new medicines. Before releasing these methods, they have been tested on
animals such as mousses and monkeys whose bodies are fairly similar to human ones. These
tests are examined to be sure that there will be not any side effects which might be harmful for
human. As a result, science and technology are going to present new efficient ways which are
more reliable.

To conclude, while traditional medicines are not applicable to decrease modern ills, new
scientific medical methods are becoming more and more popular.

It is true that some of scientifically untreated problems involving human derived from their new
ways of life and the trend towards conventional methods to treat this problem is becoming
common. While I agree that traditional medicine may be effective in certain conditions, I am of
the opinion that modern medicine has still the pivotal role to play in curing new types of
diseases.

On the one hand, various types of traditional medicine are highly recommended to address
some annoying problems. For example, having been under a huge volume of pressure related
to the work, people are often suffering from insomnia. In order to solve this issue, acupuncture,
as an oldest treating ways, can be much more effective than chemical drugs. In fact, not only
does it assist people to eradicate this illness, but also it is entirely free of side effects. In
addition most type of conventional methods are based on herbs and plants which are normally
consistent with human nature and may have a positive effect on their mind.

On the other hand, with considering all benefits of traditional medicine, it is not rational to rely
on them. Firstly, there are enormous evidences illustrating the high rate of mortality in the
past. It means that old methods had not been enough efficient in treating current diseases such
as cholera and plague just to name. As a result, these methods are not likely to be applicable to
cure today's serious problems like cancer or diabetes. Moreover, modern medicine is going to
be progressed with a rapid pace, while traditional remedies have been mainly constant over
time. Although it seems that there is not initially a certain treatment for new emerged
problems, extensive medical research are conducted continuously to find a solution, which are
generally successful. In other words, if these new diseases had been appeared in the past,
undoubtedly a great deal number of people would have died and ancient methods would not
been adequate to tackle with them.

In conclusion, I believe that traditional medicine can act as a supplementary treatment along
with modern ways to fight with novel diseases.

Health care should not be provided for free regardless of a person’s income. The

heath of a person is in their own hands and they should, therefore, be held

accountable for that.

Do you agree with this opinion?

The shown statement argued that because people should take full responsibility for their own
health, government are not supposed to offer free health care for citizens. This view is awfully
wrongheaded, and I am strongly against it.

First of all, there are enormous factors which affect the health of a person that it is simply
biased to blame individuals for their health problems. Environmental issues, for example, are
also detrimental to personal health. A real life proof is that there are thousands of people in
Japan who suffered from the Fukushima accident which resulted from radiation leak of nuclear
power plant. In this case, it is the government who should be held accountable for the health of
citizens rather than individuals. How could government walk away from the responsibility to
offer health care for the victims?

Furthermore, the fast development of capitalism as well as corporate lobbyist meddling in

legislation has significantly reshaped the health, medicine and insurance industry, which
unfortunately makes it incredibly expensive for the working class to access affordable health
care. In fact, the health insurance company commonly abuse their information advantage over
devastating patients, which usually causes them extra financial pressure to get reasonable
insurance coverage. An outrageous example is a hedge fund manager purchased the patent of
an effective AIDs medicine to raise the price from $13.5 to $750, in order to make a fortune out
of the suffering of patients. Therefore, government as lawmaker is crucial for protecting
unprivileged citizens from greedy corporations.

Not to mention the basic role of government is to serve for the wellbeing of its people
regardless of their social classes. It is defiantly irresponsible for the government to avoid to take
care of public health.

Model Answer 1:

As people have paid taxes to the government, it is believed that they should be provided with
free healthcare and qualified education. However, others disagree with the statement, as they
think that each individual should be responsible for his or her own health and education. The
following essay will discuss both views in details.

On the one hand, many people believe that it is the government's responsibility to provide
standard health care and decent education to their people. As people have paid income taxes,
property taxes, value added taxes and other kinds of fees to the government, these funds
should also be beneficial for the people as well. Some portions of the budget should be
allocated to fund medical activities and educational programs. Having a lot of educated and
healthy residents brings many benefits for the government, as there are a lot of skill and
productive labours in the country who would develop the country's economic sector.
On the other hand, some people believe that health and education is a personal matter as it is
the responsibility of each individual to maintain own their health and education. They disagree
if education and healthcare should be funded from the taxes. They think that it is unfair
because some people might be working hard and paid a large amount of taxes, but others
might be indolent or jobless and get the same benefits from the government. Therefore they
believe that healthcare and education should be standalone institutions, and each people
should pay for getting a good education and maintaining their own health.

In conclusion, to a certain point, I would agree that it is the government's task to provide
education and healthcare for their people, as some poor people might not be able to get a good
education and decent healthcare. However, although these services might be provided by the
government for free, each individual's must be responsible for their own education and
healthcare, as these services are funded by taxes that are paid by the public.

[ Written by - Darwin Lesmana ]

Model Answer 2:

In today's world, healthcare and education are two most important parts of people's life.
Further, without proper education and sufficient health care system, a country can’t develop.
However, the government has the responsible to create a healthy nation. Personally, I believe
that the government should provide basic needs to create a healthy life and an educated
nation independently.

Everyone prefer to have a fascinating life, but we cannot do whatever we want. Therefore, we
have sacrificed some, such as drugs, tobacco, alcohol, and junk foods etc. for a healthy life. In
the present days, people are busy with their day to day work. As a result majority of them are
not having balanced diets and some of them take fast food or junk food. They do not concern
health and also it will cause many diseases in future. For example, obesity, diabetes etc
Further, from the young age everyone should concern about their health. Especially people not
only should think about the physical health but also consider the mental health.
That is why the government should provide better health care and education for all citizens.
The government is created by the taxes from valuable workforces of their country. Therefore,
the government has the responsibility to offer them free health care facilities, heath education
programme: such as healthy diet, clinics or hospitals for free medicine, etc. Further, the
government can use social media to distribute health and education programme. Because
nowadays, the majority of people are connected in social media. For example facebook, twitter
etc. In addition, the government should implement such a law in order to increase a balanced
lifestyle. For instance, due to the overpopulation of China, they have limited only one child for
one family.

In conclusion, when I consider all given points it is clear that only the government cannot make
a healthy nation. Therefore, individuals should have concerns to prevent future health issues.
However, the government should enforce such a law in order to increase our standard of
lifestyle and also provide basic needs to the people who are expected from the government. In
fact, in my opinion, the government and individuals are both responsible for building a healthy
nation.

Model Answer 1:

A health care system is a very important part of a country as it is a key factor for the developed
countries. Some countries take the responsibility of the citizen's health and provide free
medical care whereas other countries think it is an individual’s responsibility. I would support
the second opinion as I believe that the health insurance is affordable and it helps to get the
better services.

"Nothing is free in this world", this saying is true when it comes to free medical services.
Though some countries provide free medical facilities, they indirectly get that money from
civilians via tax. For instance, in Australia the health service is completely free, however, the
income tax is as high as 35%. On the other hand, the insurance could be economical. For
example, a person is earning a thousand dollars a week can afford 50 dollars for the insurance
premium. Moreover, if the income increases, it is not mandatory that the premium would also
increase. It is understood that some people might not be able to afford health expenses.
However, due to growing competition between insurance companies, many affordable plans
are available in the market.
It could be argued that if an individual has to pay for his health, he can ignore it and that could
result in an unhealthy nation in long-run. However, a free service could encourage the
unnecessary visits as well. It is certainly an individual's responsibility to take care of his own
health. Moreover, if hospitals have only those patients who are unwell then they could provide
better service. For example, when a hospital has one hundred patients out of which only thirty
patients are sick, hospitals still has to spend a considerable amount of time with other seventy
patients. Patients who are actually sick could receive a far better service and attention if the
remaining seventy could be eliminated.

I believe a government could focus more on other areas like infrastructure development where
individual cannot contribute. Health care issue could be taken care by people with the help of
insurance and better lifestyle.

(Approximately 347 words)

(This model answer was written by Naaz.)

Model Answer 2:

A much-debated issue these days is whether citizens should take out private health insurance
or not. The cost of providing free medical care for both the wealthy and the poor are far too
great for any government, and most people agree that if you can pay for insurance, you should.
In this essay, I will argue that all who can afford it should be insured, but free medical care must
be made available for those too poor to do so.

The most important reason for encouraging people to take out private health insurance is the
cost to the government of health care. Free health cover for people who are able to pay for it is
a waste of public money. Of course, people will only pay health insurance premiums if they
know that they are getting good value for their money. If they get sick, they should pay very
little or nothing at all. In addition, the privately insured are entitled to special benefits such as
having the choice of their own doctors and being able to avoid long waiting lists for hospital
beds.
On the other hand, those who really cannot afford to pay private insurance premiums, which
are often very high, are still entitled as citizens to the best medical care available – they cannot
be expected to pay their own medical bills. However, if they are working, they should still pay a
percentage of their wage (say 1 to 2%) as a tax which pays towards the cost of providing "free"
medical services.

In conclusion, most people should privately insure their health, but it is unreasonable to
suppose that all citizens can afford it. Therefore, a safety net in the form of a basic free health
care system must exist for the very poor and the unemployed.

The best way to improve health is to exercise daily.

To what extent do you agree?

The advancement of technology has been very beneficial to us, however it hasn't come without
its consequences. Whether it be shopping online, or ordering food from a restaurant; pressing a
button can be the solution to this. Being enabled to do this, led us to becoming less active and
more lazy.The reduction of physical activities has undoubtedly made us unhealthy, and so the
only alternate option is to exercise daily. A person needs to burn a certain amount of calories a
day in order to maintain fitness, or to become fit. Going to the gym is not the only way to keep
us fit; there are lots of fun activities that manage to make us fit; if we choose to stick to them.
An example would be playing football or tennis which can help to burn down the required
calories. Thus, exercising daily is vital to maintain a good health.

Exercising is vital towards being healthy, but on the contrary, without the right diet, exercising
can be equivalent to doing nothing.Statistics point out that 70% of your body fat is a result of
what you eat, and the next 30% is how much you exercise. This shows how important it is to be
sure to eat the right food in right amount. Eating excessively oily food heightens the risk of
coronary heart disease. Eating a balanced diet does not only help our organs to be healthy, but
it also helps to maintain our weight and a healthy amount of body fat.

In conclusion, exercising everyday and indulging in healthy food is the key to stay fit and
healthy. With the help of each other, these two can definitely make an impact in our bodies. A
healthy lifestyle can make us and our bodies happy, so it’s important to look after our health.

Some say that the ideal approach to maintaining good physical status is to work out routinely.
In my opinion, while exercise is important in staying fit, following a balanced and healthy diet is
also of great importance.
Exercise is beneficial for our health in many ways. First of all, exercise helps keep our weight in
check. Exercising burns off excess calories, which would otherwise remain in the body and
transform into the fat that we are so annoyed of. The risks of suffering from chronic diseases,
like obesity and hypertension, rockets with the accumulation of fat in the system. Secondly,
working out can strengthen the locomotor system as well as the immune system; thus, on one
hand, there is a lesser threat of sprains or muscle degeneration, on the other, our body can
provide a stronger barrier against bacteria and viruses. Last but not least, some sports require
players to work in a team, through which cooperation and teamwork can be learnt. These traits
can be useful when getting along with others, and is also good for health, since the World
Health Organization specifically mentioned that the ability to adjust well in society is also part
of our health.

A healthy diet is also important. For one, a balanced diet can stop us from putting on weight
from the origin. By controlling the amount of calories consumed, the burden to strike a balance
would be much lighter. Also, adequate nutrient intake is essential in maintaining the body’s
function.

In conclusion, while frequent exercise is important for staying healthy, eating the right food at
the right time is also an important aspect of a healthy lifestyle that should not be neglected.

The most effective method to developing and improving health is considered to be daily
exercise. In my opinion, I agree that exercise is the key to health. However, I also believe that
diet is important.

Some people think that public health is a the responsibility of the government

while others think that people should be responsible for their own health.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

In this era , it is very obvious that health is a big concerning issue for development of a country.
Some people think that healthy life style is a personal choice .on the other hand some people
suggest that it should be a concern at government level and state should take responsibility of
this issue. This essay will elaborate both aspects of this issue with some examples.

firstly, some people assume that adopting healthy life style should be a personal effort. For
example for healthy body weight watching is an important factor. people should watch what
they are eating and how they are maintaining their weight. Similarly people who are smoking
should know smoking is bad for health .so they should quit smoking. so it is expected from
some people that adopting health living style is everyone,s own responsibility.
On the other hand ,some people think that Government should be helping to maintain better
lifestyle. For example, for healthy eating there should be proper labels indicating caloric values
on eatable items. this way everybody knows what they are eating. similarly government should
aware people about bad effects of smoking. Social media should help to aware people about
smoking hazards for body. Government should facilitate people for cheap access to gym. Most
important is to educate about healthy lifestyle. so it is mostly states responsibilty to take care
of healthy living style.

In my opinion both views are important for healthy population. it is very crucial that people
should understand importance of healthy living. at the same time government should help
people to access these facilities.

Nowadays most countries in the world have set up public hospitals and schools for residents’
overall health and improvement. Yet the disagreement is never stopped, as the opponents
insist that it is not the governments’ responsibility to do so.

Public medical care and education is of great importance to individual physical and mental
wellbeing, especially for those from less wealthy background. To be precise, not everyone can
afford the whole family’s medical consumption and children’s tuition fees. But only people with
healthy body and healthy mind have the capacity to contribute to the country’s development.
Obviously, a nation’s prosperity cannot rely on minor rich residents, who can pay for their own
health care and education, alone. In addition, governments’ tax revenue comes from all social
status. It indicates that all citizens have equal rights to enjoy operations and schools paid by
governments and governments should support them.

However, it is not realistic that government is responsible for all spendings of residents’ health
care and education. Decisions regarding the level of government’s investments should involve
the concern of a country’s economic situation. In other words, it would be a significant financial
burden if such expenses took up too much of government’s budget. Accordingly, it is not
reasonable to require government to take all responsibilities. For example, Chinese government
can only support children free primary and middle school education, in regard to the more than
1 billion population.
Personally, I believe that people have the equal rights to accept public health care and
education, and it is sensible and fair to arrange that. By doing so, citizens’ overall wellbeing can
be guaranteed; hence these educated people are all able to contribute to the country’s
development and society’s peace and harmony. However, it is not government’s responsibility
to pay for a huge population’s college and all the health care spendings, since it is not realistic
to do so. In that case, the charity, or other public organisations can participate in this project as
well.

Doctors should be responsible for educating their patients about how to improve

their health.

Do you agree with this?

Walking is known to be beneficial for health and yet fewer and fewer people are

walking these days.

What are the reasons for this?

What can be done to tackle this problem?

Sample Answer 1:

Since ancient times, the fundamental principle to remain fit and live a healthy life is in doing
physical exercises regularly. These exercises not only help in attaining a good physique but it
also improves the metabolism and blood circulation in the body. According to health
professionals, strolling daily has a great value in maintaining health but for the past few years,
few people have either reduced their walk or quit it completely. This essay will analyse what
lead to this cause and what factors can encourage people to increase their walking yards.

People are walking less due to many reasons but primarily it is due to the availability of
transport either public or private is abundance. They believe that by using transportation they
can save their valuable time. Weather also plays a significant role and people find it really hard
to walk in hot, humid and extreme cold climatic conditions. Moreover, they say that due to
increased rate of street crimes they have either shortened their walk or quit it completely.
Furthermore, people now have access to fitness centres where they can use different
equipment and machinery to walk or jog. For them walking alone on streets without a partner
is a boring activity.
In order to encourage and motivate people to walk more, one can make walking tracks covered
with shades to reduce heat. Walking tracks should be made more beautiful by improving the
landscape of the parks such that one should feel refreshing. Advertisement boards should be in
place and different activities should be planned to make walking a splendid experience. The
government should also hold health awareness programs and should emphasise the
importance of walk.

To recapitulate, the aforementioned highlights different factors resulting in reduced walk and
suggested few recommendations how things can be improved. It is medically proven that
walking is a very good exercise to acquire right balance in body structure and one should do it
regularly.

( Written by - Tauseef Raza )

Sample Answer 2:

Undoubtedly, walking is a very good form of exercise and is an effective method for improving
and developing the health of all people. But, nowadays people have less interest in walking
regularly due to various reasons. In addition, this essay also proposes some practical ways to
promote this exercise as follows.

The primary reason is the lack of awareness about the advantages of walking regularly among
common people. They always believe that walking is a complete waste of time and energy,
which can be utilised in their job sector for greater productivity. For example, most of the men
are working extra hours in offices to get a high salary for the betterment of financial status,
instead of doing exercise. This would cause many health problems in their life later on.
The sedentary lifestyle and technological development are also influencing people to walk less.
People are using their private cars even to visit a nearby place. The lifestyle and availability of
cars and other transportation system are causing this problem.

Moreover, people lead much more busy life due to both personal and professional
responsibilities. Therefore, they may not get sufficient amount of time for walking on a regular
basis. For instance, children have many things to study for achieving higher qualification in their
academic area, whereas youngsters are forced to work full- time because of a stiff target and
higher competition. As a result, they mostly concentrate only on duties and responsibilities
rather than healthy life.

The city life is another reason people walk less this days. They have markets, shopping malls,
schools, hospitals etc. near their living places and as a consequence, they need to walk very
little. Lack of proper pavement and green environment also a hindrance in many cities.

However, there are some practical ways to develop an interest in walking such as mass
awareness, providing adequate facilities in work areas as well as in educational institutions for
the greater betterment of the healthy society and so on. In this way, walking exercise can be an
inevitable part of everybody’s life. Consequently, people would hardly have health issues
namely obesity, high cholesterol level and blood pressure disorders. Parents should teach their
children the importance of walking and other forms of exercises. More strict rules should be
imposed in case of using frequent private cars and the proper pavements which are safe for
people to walk should be building by the government.

In conclusion, although it is a time-consuming exercise, people have to find enough time to do

walking exercise for longer distance without hesitation, which would help them enormously in
the long run.

In the developed world most families have cars. They don’t walk even to the nearest grocery
store. In the developing world, too, people are giving up the habit of walking because they have
easy access to public transport systems.
We all seek comfort. Walking on foot can be tiring. Needless to say, people prefer to travel by
buses or cars whenever they have access to them. Motor vehicles are fast and thus they also
help save time. Unfortunately, this habit of using the car or bus has several negative
consequences. Most of us now spend hours in the office sitting in front of a computer. Because
of this sedentary lifestyle, we have developed many health problems like obesity, diabetes and
heart trouble. We can avoid most of these lifestyle diseases by simply walking for 30 minutes a
day.

Many people who have given up the habit of walking are unaware of the health problems they
face. The government and health workers need to create awareness among the general public
about the benefits of walking. People who use a car should park their vehicle farther from their
office and take steps instead of the elevator. Children too should be encouraged to walk to
school. Once they get used to this habit, they are more likely to stick to it in the future too.

To conclude, lack of time and the need for comfort are the reasons that prevent people from
walking. However, most of us will start walking again if we are aware of its health benefits. So,
creating awareness is the key. The government and the media can play an important role in
this.

It is certainly true that the number of people exercise or even just walk has decreased in the
modern world. Many people try to reduce their exercises and walks as much as they can. They
choose to travel by a bus or subway, even though it is a very short distance. Some professions
mention that walking is the easiest way to keep fit in daily life and has some benefits to our
physical fitness. The issue of why people reduce their walk and how to persuade people to keep
fit and walk longer will be considered in further.

To begin with, there are many reasons of reducing walks in these days. Firstly, many people
claim that they do not have time for walking or exercising anymore. Walking to work or some
places can waste their time to do other things. Taking a bus or subway is much faster than
waking. As a result, people always use some vehicles for travelling rather than walking. Even
only a short distance, most people still drive or use public transportation because they do not
want to walk. Secondly, some people blame the public facilities such as pathways in a city.
Narrow and small pathways are dangerous for walking along a road. Some accidents can be
happened if a pedestrian is not peaceful or jog too fast on a sidewalk. All of these support the
issue that why people reduce their walking.
There are some effective solutions for this matter. Firstly, some necessary health policies from
government need to be released for encouraging people. All health organizations and hospitals
should apply those policies to stimulate people to change their habits. The introduction the
benefit of walking helps to promote exercise and walking. Secondly, offering convenient
facilities such as safety sidewalks or parks can also persuade people to go out for a walk. The
government can generate some investment on public health facilities and improving to be more
safety and widen.

In conclusion, going for a walk is the best an easy way to work out, even though people do not
have time to do that. The danger of pathways in a city is also considered that why many people
avoid their work. However, effective methods for this issue are some health policies and
develop pathways. By doing this, hopefully, the number of people goes for a walk or even walks
for committing will increase, eventually.

Not having enough time is an issue that people face nowadays, especially with individuals who
have hectic schedule, so they could not spend time walking to improve their health. Secondly, if
they finish their work, they will watch television or go to the restaurant for entertainment
instead of walking in the park. Thirdly, children only pay their attention on computer games and
spend hours playing them, because they believe that this is an interesting way for relaxation.
For example, my cousin neither goes to the park to go jogging nor playing games with his
friends, since he watses time on enjoying video games.

In my view, there are several ways that the governments and individuals could take to improve
their health and have time to go jogging. The local authorities should encourage people to join
team sports to improve their health. Another solution that could be taken by individuals is that
parents should walk with their children and reduce the amount of time they waste on computer
games. Also, they should spend approximately 30 miniutes in the morning to do plenty of
exercises and walk in order to boost blood circulation. Besides, the governments should
organize a walking competition to attract people and encourage them to do gentle exercise
including walking.

In conclusion, there are various measures can be taken to solve the problems described above
amd improve the health of people by walking to reduce risks of suffering from serious diseases.

Housing and Buildings Questions

In some countries, most people prefer to rent their homes rather than buying

them.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of renting a home? (Reported 2017, GT

Test)

Advantages

3. Topic sentence (e.g. There are several advantages...)

4. Firstly: easy, flexible and fast

5. Example: students and workers who move to new cities

6. Secondly: no maintenance costs

7. Finally: cheaper, no mortgage deposit

Disadvantages

8. Topic sentence (e.g. On the other hand, there are also...)

9. Main drawback: not a long term investment

10. Another drawback: landlord sets rules

11. Example: not allowed to renovate or redecorate

12. Furthermore: prices can suddenly go up

Conclusion

13. Repeat / summarise

p of people prefer to rent a house, others are in favor of buying one.

There are some significant disadvantages of renting a house that have devastating impacts on
the family unit. First of all, the majority of people have to spend a large amount of money on
renting a house. A salient example of this is UK in which finding accommodation is a nightmare
for the residents of metropolitan cities such as London since the rents are so high and almost
70% of individuals are not satisfied with the rent they pay. Secondly, some of the landlords are
imposing strange and exotic laws for the tenants such as not keeping a pet at house or holding
loud parties after a particular time. Finally, getting use to new neighborhood is a severe
challenge for the new tenants especially those who have children.

On the other hand, the advantages of renting an accommodation should not be neglected.
Renting a house give the individuals the chance to invest money on other industrial fields such
as funding a company, running a new market and the like. Furthermore, it is the best
accommodation for overseas students who seeks for a place of living and they usually prefer to
share a house with other students to mitigate the expenditures. Moreover, the tenants can
easily change their house in case of any difficulties that they encounter such as noisy neighbors,
inappropriate neighborhood and the like. To support my claim, I can refer to an article having
been published in Times magazine, indicates that in 2008 almost 40% of the immigrants to
Australia preferred to stay in rental accommodation for the first year.

In conclusion, although there are some disadvantages of renting an accomodation, the

advantages by far outweigh them and the renting method has its

advocates all over the world.

Selecting a place to live in and whether to rent it or own it is a big decision to make. Many
people prefer to own a house rather than living in a rented apartment while there are others
who choose to do exactly the opposite. I believe that owning a house has far more advantages
than renting an apartment.

To begin with, people often rent a house because purchasing a property requires a great deal of
money and the skyrocketing price in big cities makes it impossible for many to even dream to
own a house. These people naturally rent an apartment. There are certain advantages of living
in a rented apartment. First of all, the person does not have to pay a huge sum of money at a
time and does not need to pay taxes and bear the costs of maintenance. Moreover, such
people can change the living place based on the location of their workplace and children’s
school. The renovation of the apartment is the landlord’s responsibility and the tenants do not
need to worry about it.
On the contrary, owning a house gives a sense of personal achievement that tenants cannot
enjoy. A house is a permanent asset and with time its price increases. The landlord can rent the
house and this can be a steady source of earning for him. Furthermore, being the owner of a
house means there is no one over the shoulder to watch what someone is doing and no sudden
notice for evacuation. For instance, we had to vacant our apartment all of a sudden at least
thrice until we purchased our own house a decade earlier. This is a great freedom which only
house owners have. Besides, the owner can construct the house the way he likes and enjoy
open space, garden, and other facilities in the house.

To conclude, renting a flat has some benefits but the overall freedom and monetary
compensations house owners enjoy are far significant and this is why every tenant dreams to
own a house someday.

Planting trees is very important for the environment. Some people says trees

should be planted in the vacant areas of cities and towns, while other says

housing facilities should be build instead.

Do you agree or disagree ? (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

Reasons for Using City Space for Trees

Trees and green areas create a peaceful living environment which promotes a

better living standard and better mental health.

Trees produce oxygen which can counteract against heavy pollution in cities

and create a better quality of air.

Heat in cities can be better controlled by having more trees which filter the

sun’s heat and offer shade. This ultimately lowers the temperature.

Planting more trees in urban areas brings nature into cities which is

beneficial to people without access to rural areas.

Noise levels can also be reduced by planting trees which can act as a buffer
 against sound.

Planting more trees can make the living environment more pleasant which is

thought to reduce crime to some extent. Trees encourage people to enjoy their

neighbourhood and be more active in it which deters petty crime.

Trees offer urban wildlife a better environment to live in and play a part in

the ecosystem of a city.

Reasons for Using City Space for Housing

Lack of affordable housing can lead to rising crime rates. Thus by having more

housing, there are more opportunities for everyone to get housing.

Without more housing, a city is unable to grow and develop which is essential

in a world with an increasing population.

Housing is also essential for any country which is hoping to develop its

economy as workers must have access to affordable homes.

Shelter is a basic requirement for life.

Urban space is limited and priority should be given to shelter rather than

creating pleasant parks.

Without enough homes, people can become homeless which can leads to alcoholism

and drugs or slums can develop which can be detrimental to any country.

The issue is arising due to the increasing concerns on the urban environment. Someone
suggests it necessary to plant more trees than to construct new buildings in order to improve
the quality of the environment. I partly agree with this point.

To Begin with. Planting trees could be essential to the well-being of the city and residents who
live there. The urban ecological system may benefit a lot from increasing green scape. It could
provide the different types of animals with shelters and habitats. The clusters of trees could
also contribute to reducing the hot island effect and improve the micro-climate in the dense
area of the city. Moreover, human-being could have many health benefits from plant trees by
getting access to more green space such as parks, gardens, and playgrounds. The study shows,
people who live near the green resources in the city, may have a longer life expectancy than
those not liver near the green. All these benefits can't be achieved through the buildings.

On the other hand, news buildings are also necessary to a normal development of the city.
Although it undeniable that it could casue some air and water pollution to the urban
environment when constructing the new buildings, a city can not operate properly without
sufficient density of buildings. In the new district of my hometown, where the building density
is rather low but the density of the trees is higher, people don't like to live and work there. The
main reasons include that there are not enough commercial and service building, which make it
very inconvenient to live there. Besides, too many trees without a responding amount of
buildings could cause some safety concerns to residents.People, especially women and children
do not dare to go the large parks just because of their fear of crime, resulting in a waste of land
and investment.

In all, planting trees is important to the well-being of the city and people who's living there.
However, sufficient density of buildings also plays an important role in keeping the city
operating as it could bring the city with safety and convenience. It's really hard to which side
overweigh the other.

In many parts of the world, there is a trend that people plant more and more trees in open
urban areas. While I agree that this tendency has many benefits to the environment in general,
I believe that it is more important to build houses and apartments in those areas.

On the one hand, the benefits of growing more green space in towns are indisputable. It is
obvious that trees purify air, which significantly reduces dust generated by transportations and
construction sites; therefore, air pollution will be partially decreased. Besides that, it also
reduces noise pollution thanks to leaves’ capacity in sound distributing. Hence, generally, the
living environment in urban areas will be greatly improved.

On the other hand, the lack of shelter will have many extreme drawbacks. Firstly, in urban
areas, it will greatly raise the rental price because of the continuous increase in housing
demand, which creates highly financial pressure to most of the people who are living there. As
a result, more people can not afford an apartment, more social problems will appear, such as
raising homeless and crime rate. Secondly, building houses in rural areas also has some
negative effects on the economy. It is obvious that commuters will have to transport further
and longer to work in city centres, which not only reduces their productivity but also wastes
more expense for transport purposes.

In conclusion, planting trees in urban areas to protect the environment is very important. From
my point of view, I believe it is more considerable to continue to construct houses in those
areas. However, people should find efficient solutions to balance between housing demand and
environmental protection instead of sacrificing on of them.

Many countries are experiencing population growth and need more homes.

Should these new homes be constructed in existing cities or should new towns be

built in the countryside? (Reported 2017, GT Test)

Introduction: give your opinion e.g. it's better to develop new towns

Paragraph: explain why we shouldn't build more houses in cities

Paragraph: explain the benefits of building new towns

Conclusion: repeat / summarise your opinion

The demand for houses has increased rapidly these days, due to the significant growth of the
world population. Some people think that it is better for property developers to build more
houses in existing cities, while others believe that it would be better to build new areas. The
following essay will discuss both arguments in details.

It is a fact that the world population has grown rapidly nowadays which increased the demand
for housing. It is believed that building more houses in the existing town is better than to
expand to new areas. As most workplaces are located in cities surrounding, it would be better
for residents to have accommodation which is located near to their work. However, many
people do not realise that building more properties in the town means that the city would
become denser and traffic congestion would become worst. As a result, air pollution become
worst and it distracts the health condition of the residents.
On the other hand, developing new housing areas bring a lot of benefits for the people. Firstly,
new towns or cities have a lower property price than those who are located in the city centre,
therefore more people could own a house. Secondly, as some of the cities' people move to new
towns, it would gradually reduce the density, air pollution and traffic problems in the cities
themselves. Thirdly, by developing rural areas, it would develop the economic growth of the
rural areas themselves, as there will be new commercial areas and new workplaces as well.

In conclusion, it is obvious that the demand for properties has risen due to the increase of the
world population. To cope with the issue, people could build more houses in existing cities or
develop new towns. I personally believe that building and developing new areas is better than
building new houses in the existing towns.

Looking into the recent figures declared by world census, increase in the population and hence,
their dwelling requirements are asking thought to the issue. Many adepts are in favor of adding
the accommodation in existing city area while others support the city expansion towards the
countryside. My inclinations accord the later statement in the interest of nature and human
being collectively.

If we see the existing situation in the most of the metro cities in different countries, they are
already highly populated. Constructing additional buildings will not only dense the city area but
also affect many other aspects of human life. Firstly, there can be a lack of resources like land,
water, etc. which can increase the cost of living in the cities. For instance, Mumbai is the highly
congested city of India where the cost of land and other sustenances have touched the sky.
Secondly, more developments in left vacant places can reduce the open premises that can
cause traffic congestion on roads and streets at a cost of aesthetic beauty of locations. At last,
the environment of the cities is also getting polluted due to the increase in population and their
activities.More the houses will turn the more pollution in cities.

On the other hand, expansion towards the countryside can enforce government to develop
more facilities like transportation, water supplies, entertainment and so on. Hence, the living
standards of villagers can also be improved through the developments. Moreover, the
environment of the countryside is clean and quiet which is beneficial for the personal and social
health. Finally, spreading towards the undeveloped area can have economic prosperity for the
country. Business and residentials can hire more cheap resources like land, labor, etc. in a rural
area which in return will create more jobs for villagers apart from traditional occupations for
the personal and economic growth of villages.

To conclude, it is rightly said anything in excessive is dangerous. So rather overcrowding the

cities, moving towards the countryside will be the best option for overall development.

It is true that many countries are working on fulfilling the requirements of rapid growth of their
population in which making new homes is one of the biggest issue to be settled. In my point of
view, those new homes should be developed in current cities instead of countryside areas. I
feel this way for a number of reasons which are explained below.

First of all, we need to plan our solution in number of steps. For instance, what is the best area
to construct new shelters, how much land do we need to allocate people by creating new
homes, and what will be the consequences of our decision.

I believe that developing new homes in rural areas would not be a right choice. Firstly, it will be
difficult to start construction far from city as labours, machineries and construction materials
require to be sent to countryside. Secondly, I am afraid that the lives of countryside people
would get affected because they have a simple lifestyle, they live in open air and work in fields.
Their routine life would be damaged. Thirdly, there is a huge difference between the living
standard of rural and urban people and I am sure that they cannot mix up with each other.

Furthermore, there are some significant advantages if we construct new homes in existing
urban areas. We already have prodigious amount of land available in our cities which can be
utilized for providing accommodation to the increasing population. Moreover, if we are going
to make new homes, we should not forget that there are some other important necessities of
life that needs to be considered. For example, hospitals, educational institutes, shopping
centres and transportation services are the major requirements of people followed by shelters.
However, these facilities are already present in urban areas.
In conclusion, I would state that the apt choice would be building new homes in existing cities.
It benefits people by giving them other important facilities of life in a cost effective way and
would not affect rural life.

Nowadays, more than seven billion of individuals live on the earth. Consequently, finding a
home become one of the most important issue in populous countries. However, there are not
enough home for everybody, so we should build new house. There two idea for construct new
homes, create new cities for new homes or construct new homes in existing cities.

In my opinion, both idea have their own advantages and disadvantages. First, build a new town
seems be a very costly job. There are many factors, which we should thinking about that. A
town should build in good place and we should bring all energy source to this city like water,
electricity power and so on. Therefore, governments should allocate a lot of budget for this
new city. On the contrary, in current cities, we do not have this problem and all of these
sources are available.

On the other hand, for build new cities we can use all new technologies and materials that we
have today. Besides, when we prepare plan of a city, we can resolved all deficiencies that we
have in our current cities. For example, most cities suffer of their sewage system. Most of the
time these systems are very old and cannot do their duty as well. Besides, we can include
situation of city’s road as current city‘s problem.

To sum up, I believe build new cities is essential but the most important issue is time. Maybe
nowadays, we have enough land in our current cities. But someday will come we do not have
any land so we find new land and build new town.

Nowadays, a lot of buildings, such as offices and schools, are now being built

with an open plan design.

Why is that?

Do you see this as a positive or negative development? (Reported 2017, Academic

Test)

Trees and green areas create a peaceful living environment which promotes a
 better living standard and better mental health.

Trees produce oxygen which can counteract against heavy pollution in cities

and create a better quality of air.

Heat in cities can be better controlled by having more trees which filter the

sun’s heat and offer shade. This ultimately lowers the temperature.

Planting more trees in urban areas brings nature into cities which is

beneficial to people without access to rural areas.

Noise levels can also be reduced by planting trees which can act as a buffer

against sound.

Planting more trees can make the living environment more pleasant which is

thought to reduce crime to some extent. Trees encourage people to enjoy their

neighbourhood and be more active in it which deters petty crime.

Trees offer urban wildlife a better environment to live in and play a part in

the ecosystem of a city.

Reasons for Using City Space for Housing

Lack of affordable housing can lead to rising crime rates. Thus by having more

housing, there are more opportunities for everyone to get housing.

Without more housing, a city is unable to grow and develop which is essential

in a world with an increasing population.

Housing is also essential for any country which is hoping to develop its

economy as workers must have access to affordable homes.

Shelter is a basic requirement for life.

Urban space is limited and priority should be given to shelter rather than
 creating pleasant parks.

Without enough homes, people can become homeless which can leads to alcoholism

and drugs or slums can develop which can be detrimental to any country.

Modern architectural development has various designs and style like open-space, which is also
affected the structure of schools and office as well. However, there are many possibility to be
follow such innovative creations namely, enhancement of atmosphere, nourishing the
customers and students and so on. Although, such development would make problems in
privacy, and security, I believe this is a positive development, because of the flexibility of
interactions to the dealers, and development of imaginative thinking and echo friendly
atmosphere of the students.

To begin with, benefits of open space benefits in the office such as customers could reach the
officers in friendly manner. In other words, isolated rooms might reduce the dealings with the
officers due to the fear or anxiety to interact with them. Meanwhile, open space may eliminate
the customer and officer distance for the expressive feelings. instead of separate room every
one could wait and to understand the actual situations of the office.

On the other hand, in schools isolated classrooms would increase the selfishness of the
students instead of developing the creative thinking. open space would allow the students
imagination and increase the relation between the nature and earth. Students would develop
the creativity and entertain the open air environment. Furthermore, open air would enhance
the health of the students which would be flourish the brain to grasp the learning things.So that
schools must encourage the students to cope up with the environment in friendly manner
despite of the separate room.

In conclusion, my perception is that, for the health and wellness of the students and the nature
friendly atmosphere in the office, every schools and offices would change to the mind from
isolated to open. That would be a positive development in the working area and schools.

The shocking phenomenon of modern façade of the school & office buildings recently come to
the forefront. Some feel that new designs include lots of unnecessary open area which is
useless. However, I agree with those who say that open area is very important for our growth.
In the following paragraphs, I will explore the rationale for both beliefs as well as proffer
rationale for my own viewpoint on the matter.

Regarding those who feel that open area is useless, there exist valid reason. The main
justification is that modern structure contains lots of space which can be used for lots of other
activities. For example, corporate offices can deploy more technology& human force if they get
ample of space. Secondly, people point out that event organizers use this space and play a loud
noise, which disturbs in school and office activities. Recently, local development body published
a study that revealed these because of these open areas, now we have less land mass for
further developments.

Nevertheless, I cannot hold that opinion in good conscious. The fact is that with the new
designs we are exposed to more of an environment-friendly environment. In Portland, for
instance, an estimated equal number of office and school used solar energy which helps them
in the reduction of consumption of electricity. This not only reduces electricity bill massively but
put less pressure on electricity companies to produce more electricity. Secondly, these open
areas give us a space to put more plants and help us in reducing carbon emission.

In sum, if everyone put a moratorium on disadvantages and pitches in, normal people like you
and me can bring more advantages. I hope that soon everyone understands that open areas do
have more advantages.

Modernity has brought gigantic changes in the infrastructural development of offices and
premises. Presently, the trend of having adequate space while designing the school buildings
and offices is gaining prevalence. Some people assert that open space is required for additional
purposes. Here, i would like to account for merits and demerits of this happening with my
perception.

There are manifold benefits of this trend. First and foremost, open spaces keep buildings fully
ventilated and prevent rooms from suffocation. For instance, air passes through the rooms
easily if a healthy space is kept inside the offices or rooms. Hence, it is essential to maintain
space while making buildings. Space preserved in the rooms can be utilised to place other stuff
such as chairs, printer and tables if official formalities rise in future. On the contrary, it has
thorny side too.
Numerous drawbacks can be put down behind this happening. Initially, it is really difficult to do
sanitation everyday if the room size is bigger than normal. Surplus amount of money has to be
invested if space is extended inside the rooms. To demonstrate, management has to invest
extra money on materials such as floor tiles, paints, decorative material and so on. People who
sit in the rooms cannot listen the voice properly if rooms are oversized.

From my notion, both sides have their own significance. Undeniably, keeping extra space has
some disadvantages. However, multifarious benefits such as proper ventilation, decoration, and
commodities arrangements could be availed under the presence of extra availability of space.
Thus, official authorities must have open space in order to prevent themselves from
inconvenience.

To recapitulate, architectural skills enhance the elegance of modern premises. It is essential to

maintain proper space in the buildings to find out the best comforts and arrangements.

Language Essay Titles

As computers translate quickly and accurately, learning foreign languages is a

waste of time?

To what extend do you agree or disagree. (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

Scientists predict that all people will choose to talk the same global language

in the future.

Do you think this is a positive or negative development? (Reported 2017,

Academic Test)

Some people think that a person can never understand the culture of a country

unless they speak the language.

Do you agree with this opinion?

Some people think that you can never become fluent in a language unless you have

spent time living or working in that country.

To what extent do you agree?

Leisure & Free Time Essay Titles

Shopping is the favorite pastime for most of the young people.

Why do you think is that?

Do you think they should be encouraged to do some other useful activities?

(Reported 2017)

People around the world have different hobbies and activities, which are usually conducted for
amusement, leisure and joy. The new generation has opted shopping as one of the common
pastime in today’s society. This essay will provide an overview why more and more youngsters
are engaged in it, which other options are available for them and how they can utilize their
extra time more productively.

To begin with, the gigantic shopping malls, the colourful advertisements and the hotspots
development in these areas attract most of the younger generation. People who are keen to
know what’s new in the fashion prefer to go for shopping, when the items of their interest
arrives every time. For instance, one of my friend is fond of perfumes , he goes for shopping
every week in search of a new aroma.

Secondly, a lot of people visiting the shopping malls are engaged in window shopping as they
have nothing to buy and just want to spend their free time. To illustrate this, the Dolmen City
Mall is the largest shopping center of the country which is always filled with people roaming
around, however, you will find a few real shopper there.

In addition, young people should look for other options available where they can utilize their
pastime more effectively, For instance, a daily exercise can be a good pastime, which can help
them to maintain their health and fitness. Furthermore, sports activities will freshen their mind
and soul.

To conclude, shopping is now becoming the most respected pastime for youngsters, however,
they should be encouraged to look for other practices, which are more beneficial for their
mental and physical development.

Model Answer 1:

In recent years, the change in spending money to buy people's needs has occurred
dramatically. As a result, it always will be a controversial topic whether it is a bad or positive
trend relating to the shopping habit which has become a routine task and even a hobby. This
essay, as my point of view, leads to, will try to come up with several considerations as I believe
that an intermediate position can be taken relating to this issue.

Shopping, that contradicts the topic regards, is a "nightmare" because the impacts which are
dire & inevitable. Consumerism, in some ways, contributes bad things to the society as well as
the civilisations. People who overcapitalize their money can spend their revenues in nothing
and as a result, they suffer in managing their funding and try to borrow a big amount of money
for just their basic needs. Psychologists argue that addiction in shopping which creates
consumerism behaviour can lead to several criminal dire effects such as robbery and stealing.

However, without shopping and its relating things governments will face the problem in
controlling the economy. The thing which can grow the Gross Domestic Products indicator is
expenditures, especially the private one. Without increasing in this indicator, there will be
severe implications which the economist called unemployment. The improvement of spending
money indicates that people in the country are wealthy and also projects the prosperity of the
nation which influences the corporations to produce products in high quantity as well as high
quality. Throughout this trend, the employers will try to provide immense chances for people to
get their job in the corporations. As consequences, spending in buying products, even it is a
hobby or not, with larger portions helps economy matters indirectly.

To sum up, having considered the discussion above, I believe it will always create both positive
and negative impacts, but shopping habit can be useful if the shoppers expend their money
wisely.

[ Written by - Angga Cool ]

Model Answer 2:
People used to go shopping only because of a daily needs, while recently it changes to be a kind
of hobbies for people. Some state that shopping is an activity which can reduce boredom, thus
it is great for people to do so. I personally believe that going shopping is not only for spending
money, but you can find some benefits by doing this kind of activities. Therefore, through this
essay, I will support my view with some considerations.

The first idea is that people love shopping because it can refresh their minds. By going shopping
round you will be able to forget the things which burden you. For instance, young adults prefer
to do the shopping after having the final examination. They will try to entertain themselves by
buying something which is interesting and they will obtain a satisfaction at the time. As a
consequently, they directly forget about the difficulties encountered during the exam.

In addition, going shopping is not only the case of buying something such as clothes, bags or
even accessories. Shopping also means amusement in which people visit some shopping places
to gather with family or friends. They just tend to spend their time in the lovely places which
provide a lot of entertainments, thus they can enjoy their leisure time with full of joy and fun.

To sum up, go shopping could be a bad habit that can addict people to do so. However,
Shopping is a great hobby which can help people overcoming their stress or even anxiety. It
occurs because doing shopping will make them more relax and forget about their problems.

Nowadays many people go shopping in their leisure time that has turned into preference
among youth. It happens because of these days ostentatious life, for passing time and parents
charge for their children packet. Government and parents are responsible to encourage youth
to some lucrative activities.

Recently, most of the people hang out for keeping up with Jones because of this days luxuries
life and they have propensity for show off what ever they have. For example, woman often
change their house furniture, curtain or kitchen utensil and go shopping to find new brand and
modern things. So because of showing off they waste a lot of money and time in shopping
center.
In addition, shopping has become a common hobby for passing time among youth people. For
instance, girl and boy because lack of recreational center or other place to pass their time with
together inevitably go shopping center. Further more, parents, because of working all around
clock, don’t pay attention to their children and give them packet money as much as they need
and spend money for unnecessary things.

There fore, I strongly recommend that parent should pat extra attention to monitor own self
and their kids expenses and encourage their children do some other beneficial activities like
sport or education and spend their time and money in benefit activities.

To make long story short, turning shopping as a habit effect by this days flamboyant lives and
results in drastic problems in the personal and social lives and valuable habit like sports may
vanish. both parents and government should be careful about this matter

In recent times, fashion and clothing has influenced people in many ways, which has made
youth to spend more time on shopping. Let us discuss more about the cause behind it and what
can be done to overcome from these.

Firstly, western influence and movies has been the important factor for youth to spend more
time on shopping. Emerging IT companies and culture adopted by youth's working in these
firms has changed their perception towards shopping because of high income earned. Secondly,
movies in (deleted - the) recent times are concentrating mainly on fashion and shopping which
inspires the concept to impress their lover or friends. Which in turn is adopted by youth as a
favorite pastime during weekends.

In my thoughts, youth must be motivated to spend more time on developing sports and other
cultural activities like singing, dancing and reading. This could help them to learn an art or skill
that could indirectly help or support them in future, in terms of fame and money. Whereas
shopping will only help in spending money.

I am inclined to believe that shopping will not only waste time but also money spent during
shopping. Whereas encouraging them would result in building better economy and future for
youth.
Having more money and less free time is better than earning less money and

having more free time.

Discuss both views and state your opinion. (Reported 2017, GT Test)

Nowadays, the importance of money and time can’t reach the balance point when putting on
scale. Some people claim that life would be worthy to be wealthy and have limited leisure time
rather than possessing a large amount of free time without having deep pockets while others
suggest the opposite view. Although I am in favor of the former opinion, I would discuss both
ideas on this essay.

On the one hand, people hold the view that most of our time should focus on enjoying life
instead of earning for living. There is a widespread belief that money cannot buy happiness. For
this reason, being immersed in the wheel of making for living make people distracted from the
other precious values such as relationship, passion and emotional state in general. For instance,
nowadays, children often experience the feeling of isolation and depression in their own house
due to parent’s ignorance and inconsiderateness which stem from lacking of spare time. They
are up to neck in their workload and put aside little time to nurture sentiments among
members of family.

Notwithstanding, on the other hand, I take the importance of finance more heavily than time.
To begin with, it cannot be denied that money plays an indispensable role in our life. Money
provides comforts and other assets which even when having endless available amount of time,
we are not able to afford. Furthermore, restricted source of free time will make it more
treasured. Evidently, in comparison with resting all along the week, relaxation at weekend is
more meaningful and satisfied. If we possess too much time without being aware of how to
deal with it, time is throw-away.

In conclusion, there are both persuasive arguments for and against this issue. However, it is my
firm conviction that owing more money would help your free time spent more valuable and
purposeful in spite of in a short period.

People often face a problem of balancing earning money and resting, which are usually
considered to be incompatible things. That is why, each person to choose the point which is
more crucial for oneself and to concentrate on it. There are some arguments in favour of both
views, however, I believe free time not money makes us happy and enjoying the life.

To begin with, the decision of giving preference to money rather than to relaxing seems to be
reasonable. Firstly, money buy a luxury life: being rich enough one can afford everything one
has ever dreamed of. Undoubtely, the possibility of purchasing what is desirable looks like a
magic: there is no need in taking care how to live next week and in allocating family budget. To
add, the opportunity to help others appears when possessing much money. Money are often
donated by celebrities to ill children and animals, poor regions and to environment-saving
fonds. All in all, for some cases saving money is worth lacking free time.

On the other hand,i n most situations, earning luxury living takes all the 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week. Such people usually go the extra mile just to get more money. It seems like they work
against the clock: they have no spare time to spend it acompanied by family or friends. A
problem of lonely children lacking parents’ attention is a widespread one in developed
societies, as adults consider money earning to be a top-priority purpose of a happy life.

Personally, I am one of those who prefer free time instead of getting money. I feel like if a
person works so hard in order to get as many financial resources as it is possible, there are not
any chances to spend saving money. Being stuck at a job all the time makes impossible, for
instance, enjoying holidays in foregn countries or spending a evening with beloved partner in a
restaurant. Possesing a lot of money looks senseless if there are no ideas how to deal with it.

In conclusion, money makes people confident in tomorrow and makes everything in the world
affordable. But, obviously, lack of spare time limits the happiness and all opportunities
presented by finances. To my mind, time is the most valuable thing in our life and cannot be
replaced by being busy with earning for living

People have different views about the relationship between time and money. While some
argue that it would be better to have more money than time, it seems to me that owning more
free time would be more beneficial.
There are various reasons why people believe that maximizing earning money is top-priority.
Firstly, people might claim that they only have one stage of a lifetime in which they are able to
build their wealth; therefore, they should rush to achieve. Those who are in working ages
ranged from twenty to forty tend to devote their youth to jobs and career promotion. They
make a great effort to earn money for purchase things that bring about a sense of success and
facilitate their life such as houses, cars, technology products. Secondly, it is a common thought
that more money can bring about senses of happiness as well as peace of mind. For instance, a
stable and high finance could ensure a life without worrying about education fees or medical
service expense.

In spite of these arguments, I believe that people should have more time dedicating for taking
part in social activities and tightening both family and social relationships which could enrich
ones’ life in many ways. What would happen if one who is full of money in the pocket but find
no friend to appease when getting depressed. Furthermore, this kind of time plays a key role in
balancing people’s life. Instead of pursuing continuously money, it is also vital to take times to
adopt a hobby in which people are able to escape themselves from work, release pressure of
making money.

In conclusion, although it seems to be reasonable to work hard for money all the time, I
personally prefer the idea of having more free time to money.

Media and Advertising Essay Titles

Some companies sponsor sports as a way to advertise themselves. Some people

think it is good, while others think there are disadvantages to this.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion. (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

Model Answer 1:

Today it is quite common to see sporting events, teams and even individual players wearing
logos on uniforms and appear in television advertising, which means commercialization has
become a part of the modern game, with both positive and negative outcomes.
Advocates of sports sponsorship believe that commercialization enables players financially
secured and maintains professional sports to be of high quality and great entertainment. If a
major company sponsors an event, it is much more likely to get prime time television coverage,
which means bringing in greater advertising revenues and exposing more people to the sport.
This will bring in more fans, improve the profitability of local sports clubs, which in turn helps
the local economy and revives community spirit when the team is performing well.

However, others claim that this has had some negative impacts as commercialization has
changed the attitude of the players and jeopardised the true spirit of the game. The players no
more play for the thrill and love of the game but have been lured and entangled into the vicious
web of match fixing. They have become commodities to be traded and sold for extravagant
sums of money and even clubs are being sold to the highest bidders. This has hampered and
defamed the spirit of the game.

In my opinion, though there are scandals about players using performance-enhancing drugs,
which should be discouraged ,these situations are under control. And it is not necessarily wrong
for companies to sponsor sports with extraordinary prize money, which not only helps to
promote players’ skills and ensure their livelihood but also creates high-quality sports events
that generate economic growth as well as encourage people to get more exercise to keep
healthy.

While some people believe that companies can reap rich benefits by sponsoring major sporting
events, others contest that claim. In their opinion, the sponsorship of major events can
sometimes have detrimental effects on a company. In this essay, I will examine both arguments
and express my opinion.

Major sporting events are watched by billions of people all over the world. By simply getting
associated with an event like Olympics or World Cup Football, a company can increase its brand
value, sales and revenue. For instance, back in the 70s when the Olympics was sponsored by
Coca-Cola its market share reportedly went from 20 percent to 40 percent in the US. Today
Coca-Cola is a household name and much of that publicity came from the sponsorship of major
events.
Sometimes, however, the sponsorship of an event can earn bad publicity for the company. This
can happen when the event or the players get embroiled in various controversies. For example,
in the 1990s when a cricket tournament was held between India and Pakistan, there was a
massive fight between the players of the two countries. This earned a lot of bad publicity for
not only the tournament but also its sponsor Nike. In the aftermath of this ugly incident Nike’s
sales reportedly decreased by 10 percent in both India and Pakistan.

After analysing both sides of the situation, it is not hard to see that sponsoring a major sporting
event can sometimes earn bad publicity for a company. However, such incidents are very rare.
Since a company can become a household name by simply associating itself with a major event
like Olympics or World Cup Football, I strongly believe that the benefits of sponsoring such
events outweigh the disadvantages if any.

Violence in the media promote violence in society.

To what extent do you agree?

The question of whether the amount of violence on TV and cinema has affected young people
in our society is something which cannot be quantified or proved. My opinion is though that the
answer is “yes, it has”.

TV and cinema today do show a large amount of violence and, although we try and shield our
young people from seeing too much, they still get to watch it. At the age of eighteen in my
country, they can see everything anyway. Violence on the streets has increased. That has been
proved. The connection between the TV and the cinema obsession with violence and today's
street violence cannot be proved but it is logical that the two are connected. Young people
imitate what they see and it is logical that they see glamour in what they do when they commit
violence.

How can we lessen violence? Reducing the amount of violence on TV and in the cinema would
certainly be a good start. Being more vigilant about what age children are when they see
violence in these media, and raising the age limits would also help. Another good idea would be
to channel the violence of young people. I don‛t think that national service should be re-
established in this country but, if people are convicted of violence and sent to prison, then why
not give them the option of serving in the army. Their violence will be controlled and they will
be subjected to discipline so that they will be better able to control themselves when they
leave.

Thus I agree with the statement that cinema and TV violence affects the young people in our
society. There are some things that can be done to better the situation but I doubt whether
anything will be done.

Violence showed in the media may lead to the violence in community. From my point of view,
this cannot be true because of the psychological and physical conditions of those who watch
the media oftentimes prevent them from doing this act.

Psychologically, persons who watch the media often consider that it is not correct to do
violence or any other forms of crime. For instance, if a man watched a scene of violence in the
news, this does not mean that he would do it. Besides, the man might have a well-paid job and
family for whom he is living. Hence, it is not necessary for him to do a violent act. Additionally, a
large number of citizens are aware of the violence on the screen and they can distinguish
between right and wrong.

Physical conditions of those who were witnesses of violence in the media are also essential.
Since men are more capable of doing violence than women because of their muscle strength
and endurance to persist someone’s invasion, the men could have better opportunities to
accomplish violence. In other words, some might have done it because of their capabilities to
violate someone. Their physical strength allows them to punish or violate someone, whether he
or she is a man or a woman.

Physical and psychological significant aspects could prevent those who watch the screen from
violence in communities. In addition to these aspects, persons who watched this act in the
media could warn unaware others that violence in the media is a part of society.

Most people think that the truth should be objective rather than subjective when

it comes to the news.

Do you think all news is true?

What is the function of a newspaper?

The main function of news is to inform people about reality so that news should be presented
as objective as possible, But the fact says something different. Not all of the news now is based
on the truth. Mass media is used to spread an important issue to support certain party. I think it
is out of the main purpose of informative media that should be objective.

Back to Nazi era, Media, particularly newspaper, was used as a propaganda agent. Hittler used
media to direct people go with what he needed. By this way, we understand that news can be a
tool to some group brainstorming the public. It is clearly opposite with what news should be. If
we look at a definition of news in dictionary, news means noteworthy information, especially
about recent or important events. We can notice the word noteworthy here means essential
information that we cannot manipulate or make up a story to replace the fact. Once people get
wrong information, they will try to judge something the same with what they have got from the
news, even they have no idea about what the truth is.

One of traditional media, newspaper, is still used around the world. although it is now being
replaced by some electronic media, it is still popular in society to get information. Newspaper
can reach all social classes, started from the poor to the rich and the educated-man to
uneducated man. Beside of spreading factual news, newspaper can also be a means of
advertising purpose. Because of that, it is not surprising that newspaper is owned by
businessmen and some specific allies. While the function of newspaper enlarges, the fact
presented in the news is also turned. The owners, which are sometimes involved in a certain
party, try to get a support from society by informing lies or non-essential information in order
to scapegoat their opponents. It is completely faulty. The absolute truth will always be
mysterious.

To conclude, i agree with the statement that news should be objective rather than subjective.
As a citizen, i need a news by reading newspaper, watching TV and going on-line, yet i will not
always believe what i read and watch. I suggested to not directly capture a raw information. As
a smart society, we should categorize a news which is true (or only a rumor) and which is a
diverting issue. We must make sure ourselves to not be provoked as what we have learnt from
the past. The media should also ensure that the news is the truth as well.
Many people struggle to find out the facts from the news as it provides different versions of
truth, almost similar in nature but leads to confusion. In order to avoid such chaos in analyzing
the information, people believe that news should be objective and possibly exhibit only one
interpretation. I believe that not all news is true and facts are distorted.

Analysis of news becomes tricky if more than one variant exists and it is very difficult to endorse
the correct one. Generally it is seen that news channel produces news but with slight changes
and subjective in nature. As a result, people make different interpretation out of it and never
agree on the facts. For instance, simmering controversy regarding Russia interference in US
election, every news channel is covering the same news but some shows that Mr. Donald trump
had personally mat with Russian lawmaker while other shows that his son mat with Russian
team. Both news focuses on the election meddling but little deviation completely change the
facts.

Owing to such kinds of meddling with information, it can be referred that all news published
newspaper is not true. There are different reasons behind this. One of the main reasons is the
influence of political party on publishing. Another important reason is to get the popularity in
the market to be number one newspaper. However, people expect that newspaper should only
provide the truth but also make the interpretation clear so that people only understand the one
fact. Furthermore, newspaper should not publish the information focusing on fringe facts which
results in change the focus from main news. For example, Bollywood actor Sanjay dutt was
caught in drug case, though media shows the drug case but also added to be released film.

To conclude, there are numerous instance can be found where newspaper exhibit more
variants of news and try to conceal the facts. News published in newspaper should must have
objectivity for avoiding the confusions.

In modern world, media plays a remarkable role in not just upgrading the general knowledge of
common masses but indeed, it also influences their opinion to a great extent. Considering this
fact, many people believe that the news must be based on facts. Conversely, others advocate
that it should be personalised. In this essay, I will shed some light on the reliability of all the
sources of news and also an in depth discussion about the main aim of the newspaper in it.

To embark upon, the utmost goal of any news media is to reveal the truth and to bring out the
the reality in front of the public. However, nowadays, no media person is doing justice to this
profession. It is no exaggeration to claim that most of the news channels are showing the news
that is hugely affected by a slew of factors such as Political pressure, corruption and public
demand. In fact, they are more concerned about their TRP rather than telling the actuality. For
instance, recently a popular news channel relayed a sensational story about the ruling party
which later was quashed by other news channel by presenting the valid evidences. Hence, it
would certainly be unwise to trust the content provided by any news media.

Furthermore, the substantial purpose of newspaper is to spread awareness among nation and
to uncover the factuality. It is in fact, one of the best sources to fulfil the aforementioned
objectives simply because even today majority of people prefer to read a newspaper instead of
watching Television or surfing on Internet. The reason behind this vogue is that it is still the
most economical, easily accessible and above all the best way to utilise spare time. I can
reminisce, even today most of my family members, friends including me choose to read it
whenever we are free, to stay updated.

To recapitulate, I would like to quote assertively that journalists must not depraved from their
duties because it is not merely a job rather, it is their responsibility to be loyal with people's
expectations and with their respectable occupation too.

More and more newspapers and news channels are using photographs to support

their news articles and stories. Some people think that photographs are not a

reliable source of news while others consider photographs to be irrefutable.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

It is sometimes argued that TV stories and newspapers should be accompanied by pictures. I do

believe that it is very effective to accompany pictures with news.

On the one hand, pictured news can deliver the message quickly and effectively. The picture
always will tell much more than blind news. Therefore, when we see a short of an event in one
of our concerns, we try to get closer to the television and find out what is the matter. The role
of picture is very significant and should be considered, as news without pictures will tend to be
less attractive same like tough academic issue. For example, people now prefer the social media
over any other way of news or events because it has two advantages which will complete the
whole scene; firstly, all news or events are along with pictures. Secondly, it is an interactive
way, since you can also be inside the event and become news maker.
On the other hand, the imaged news overcome the language diversity for some reasons. First,
thinking globally is the most effective way telling the news and that could only happen by
making difference through invented ways like “news in pictures”. Next, calling for people to
participate in news by posting or sending photos through Facebook, Twitter or Whatsapp melt
the people and break the language barriers. For example, many newspapers and international
websites are allowing their readers to participate through posting and sending photos or clips
that way encourage the readers by motivating them by involving them making them a part of
the event and the most important thing it is also a way of getting trusted news from their
original sources, since sending a video or a picture does not need an experienced journalist.

In conclusion, imaged news will ever still the most effective way which has to be encouraged
and developed.

It is reasonable to believe that the photographs of a news story are more effective in contrast
with the numerous words. First of all, pictures can express the situation of a certain event or
incident more directly and efficiently, as people are able to obtain the basic information by
merely spending a few seconds browsing those photographs. In addition, a series of researches
have also demonstrated that most people have impressive proficiency in assimilating the
information or data depicted by pictures rather than words, since human memory is more
sensitive to visual images. Therefore, even after a long period, the memory of a certain news
story still can be triggered by going through relevant pictures.

On the other hand, some people believe that words are the more useful and valuable part of a
news story. The words provide readers with more comprehensive and specific information that
contributes to promoting the understanding of the situation of a certain occasion. A research
news article, for instance, the data results can be directly displayed by pictograms, but the
painstaking procedures and conclusion must be described with words for readers to
comprehend. In the light of such fact, pictures sometimes are solely the auxiliary components
of a news article.

In my opinion, words and pictures are the equally important parts of a news story. Pictures
enables readers to quickly and easily acquire and remember the basic information while words
are beneficial to the comprehension of the whole article.
As the world develops, the news is broadcasting 24/7 either on television or in newspapers.
Accordingly, a substantial proportion of people has prompted to have a vigorous debate
whether to broadcast news with pictures or with words. In my opinion, I sincerely believe that
both are important as they complete each other but there are some considerations.

Firstly, news media propagate with pictures since it assists in conveying the message to the
audience. For example, when public read Daily Mail newspaper, photos are significantly
prevailed on the each paper of the news. As a result, it contributes to envisage the story which
can be easily understood.

Words are inevitably deemed as a paramount factor as well because they not only provide
more details about the story but also associate with comprehension the news. To illustrate this,
if news published without words, it would be either incomprehensible or ambiguous.
Consequently, Words, which play an important role, cannot be apart from news.

However, there are some precautions which should be considered while promulgating the news
as there could be some harsh scenes that are inappropriate for either children or families. For
instance, some news media take advantage of broadcast pictures contain a severe view during
a war in order to attract more audience as it helps to earn more profit. Therefore, in these
occasions, I think it better to just publish news in words.

In conclusion, I think that words and pictures have the same importance when propagating
news. Nevertheless, tough news should be solely in words.

Band 7.5 essay sample

Print media as well as television usually include photos of the news coverage. Some people
believe that these visuals are often more powerful than words. In my opinion, visual media
does have a lasting impact on the audience; however, the use of words to describe the news
stories cannot be underplayed.

To start with, photos have a long-lasting impact on the viewers, as they make it easy to relate
better to the news story. Visuals keep the audience constantly engaged and curious to read or
hear the full story. For example, photos of coverage of a sports event thrills the audience
specially people who play that sport in real-life
In addition, pictures help modern media in effective depiction of facts when words fall short.
Not just that, photos also form a great source of indirect marketing and promotions in many
cases. For instance, a travel story coverage, which includes photos of beautiful cities and
locations, is pleasing to the viewer’s eyes and also indirectly promotes tourism.

However, the importance of words cannot be neglected because photos can excite the viewers
for only a short span of time and it is the actual story that keeps the audience interested till the
end. It has also been observed that some people are sensitive to pictures of news involving
crime and violence.

To sum it up, visuals do have a great impact on the audience. They not only play a key role in
exciting the viewers but also help them relate better to the story and keep their interest alive.

The majority of news being reported is bad news such as wars, famines, accidents

and crime.

Why do you think that is?

Do you think the news should be a balance of both good and bad news?

News play a crucial role in every individuals life. When a person lives in a society, he should be
aware of what is happening around him. In my view, news should be a balance of both good
and bad information as it creates a sense of positivity and interest in people.

The content provided in news are accurate and based on actual facts, due to globalization and
advanced technology, the crime rates, accidents and wars are at increasing rate. So its
responsibility of media to make people aware of the changes and dangers occurring around the
world, so as to help and guide them to take right precautions and measurements. When people
are affected by natural calamities like famines, news plays a vital role in helping the victims to
gain funds and relief. In contrast, when people read majority of bad news a sense of negativity
is created in them and they might lose interest in reading the newspapers.

Good news often makes a person happy, when he reads good things a sense of well being and
happiness is developed, it encourages a positive attitude and feeling of security in an individual.
I however, feel news should be a balance of both good and bad information because it helps in
balancing emotions and at the same time increase our interest in reading. On the other hand,
news should have factual information without any bias.
In conclusion, people should be motivated to read all kinds of news and direct their views in a
positive manner and try to have positive attitude towards bad news also.

sociologists find it a possible cause to the growing number of depression symptoms. Indeed,
despite a wide number of factors cause depression, it is undeniable how having such a
pessimistic depicted environment may play an important role in the development of this
disease.

Model Answer 1:

In today’s modern world, a growing amount of news and information on television or

newspapers have considerably influenced the public. Besides, what factors are impacted on
reporting information on news media is an issue many people feel strongly about. This essay
will discuss various influences as well as associated with phenomenon above.

As far as I am concerned, there is a wide range of factor accounting for publishing news and
broadcasts. The most noticeable, I believe, is that aiming at a high audience rating so as to
maximise profits. This leads to pursuing the increasingly diverse needs of viewers from all walks
of life in order to satisfy and cater to them. Another contributory factor is that for many
countries, news editors have to succumb to political pressure, distorting facts and misleading
the public. To put it another way, they are controlled entirely by powerful political parties and
enjoined to disregard the truth. This is particularly true in many undemocratic countries like
Chinese, North Korea, and Vietnam where information is seriously censored and even
disseminated political ideals to guide public opinions.

Moreover, living in the information era, people are bombarded with the daily amount of news,
including good and bad news, from multiple media. Today’s coverage and press might
sometimes be less trustworthy mainly because it often exaggerates the level of the real
information, in order to boost the attention of the desired audiences. Furthermore, some
media companies use the stories of people’s private life, seductive images and violent or
obscene contents to appeal viewers, especially teenagers. It means that their thoughts and
behaviours might be changed and shows a tendency to hatred, violence, jealousy, and even
copycat phenomenon. However, the role of news media in reporting good news, such as
someone’s achievement and human stories, should be acknowledged. That will make quicker
progress toward society better.
In conclusion, what today’s news and information on media we receive is influenced by some
main factors as hooking viewers, increasing profits, and obeying political regulations. Besides,
the news media can have a double-edged impact on society by the good and bad news. By
doing so, we can ensure that choosing information carefully before reading and watching are
indispensable to us.

[ by Jack Tran]

Model Answer 2:

It has often been said that "Good news is bad news" because it does not sell newspapers. A
radio station that once decided to present only good news soon found that it had gone out of
business for lack of listeners. Bad news, on the other hand, is so common that in order to cope
with it, we often simply ignore it. We have become immune to bad news and the newspapers
and radio stations are aware of this.

While newspapers and TV stations may aim to report world events accurately, be they natural
or human disasters, political events or the horrors of war, it is also true that their main
objective is to sell newspapers and attract listeners and viewers to their stations. For this
reason, TV and radio stations attempt to reflect the flavour of their station by providing news
broadcasts tailor-made to suit their listeners' preferences. Program specialising in pop music or
TV soap operas focus more on local news, home issues and up-to-date traffic reports. The more
serious stations and newspapers like to provide "so-called" objective news reports with the
editorial comment aimed at analysing the situation.

If it is true, then, that newspapers and TV stations are tailoring their news to their readers' and
viewers' requirements how can they possibly be reporting real world events in an honest and
objective light? Many radio and TV stations do; in fact, report items of good news but they no
longer call this news. They refer to these as human interest stories and package them in the
program specialising, for instance, in consumer affairs or local issues. Good news now comes to
us in the form of documentaries the fight against children cancer or AIDS, or the latest
developments in the fight to save the planet from environmental pollution.
(Approximately 300 words)

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

Alternative answer 3:

News both in print media and in television should reflect the authentic, unbiased and important
news for the audiences and that news play an important role in terms of educating people,
informing people about the current world and giving them an insight of political and social
view. But sadly this is always not the case and news editors are often broadcast and publish
biased and politically influenced news that does more harm than good to the society.

There are various reasons for that. First of all the personal views and political biasedness are
two important factors that cause this problem. Newspapers and TV news should ideally be two
great media to reach the people with the real and authentic news. People greatly rely on these
media to get updates on events and current affairs and the impartial and biased news misleads
them often. Often political views of editors and their link to a particular political party lead to
this problem. It is not uncommon that a chief editor gets appointed to the position by the
powerful political party and he is expected to present news in favour of this party. Second, in
many countries government impose strict rules on what type of news can be presented to the
public and that also causes problems in terms of fair and accurate news presenting. In many
cases, money and corruption are involved for such heinous act. Again, many newspapers
heavily rely on other renowned newspapers and internet for current news and if the source is
corrupted, that leads to the case of printing and broadcasting impartial and misleading news.
The personal threat, political reasons, power, greed, pressure and personal gains, business are
the main reasons editors sometimes decide what to broadcast and what to print.

I would not agree with the notion that we are used to the bad news as I have witnessed many
cases when a good news gets more attention and audience than bad news. It’s true that bad
news is by their nature is appealing to people, but as a whole, we want to know about the true
happening. Good or bad, people want to learn the truth. Often people’s attention can be
achieved by publishing and broadcasting bad and negative news, but this is now always the
truth as events like a peace treaty, world up, noble contributions, achievements, good deeds
and the political positive decision get more readers and viewers than bad news.

In conclusion, we are not used to the bad news and editors do decide which news to be
reached to the public or not based on their personal, business and political reasons.

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

Model Answer 4:

At the present time, editors decide what kind of news should be shown on television and what
kind of news should be printed in newspapers and magazines. It doesn’t matter for them what
sort of news, bad or good, their sole wish to make sensation even from bad news. Therefore,
there is a lot of bad news which became popular and they have an impact on people. Maybe we
have to announce only good news and hide bad ones.

If we look at today’s world, news sources like newspapers, magazines, television news etc. play
very important role in our society. These sources give us information about the world. Firstly it's
noticeable that you can see all types of information on TV or newspaper, beginning with the
opening of new car factories and culminating with disasters. But you can’t decide what kind of
news you want to read on your morning routine, it is decided by the news editors. They will
choose which news to publish.

Secondly, editors need your attention so they publish the most interesting news, like Death of
Laden or flood in Japan. Thus, people made familiar with that kind of news. In addition, news
has the big influence on people, one bad news can affect thousands of people and the same if it
would be a good one. To sum up, although some people believe that only good news should be
shown or published, in my view, everybody has to know what’s going on in the world and must
feel the reality of the life.
[ by - Akmal Sharipov ]

Model Answer 5:

Topic: News editors decide what to broadcast on television what to print in newspapers. What
factors do you think influence this decision? Do we become used to bad news? Would it be
better if more good news was reported?

It is true that the decision of news editor is the final judgment of the news report, which is
broadcasted to our media like television and newspaper. This is certainly true that there are a
number of factors that always affect to adopt these decisions. However, it can be argued that
good news may bring peace and happiness of a nation.

There are several factors that act as a precursor of the news editor that influence them to take
decisions what to broadcast or print to their media. Firstly, perhaps most news editors want to
increase the selling of their newspapers in order to rapidly rise up their profit. Secondly,
popularity and true news are other significant factors, which influence the news editors to
make a decision. Finally, some news editors of developing countries are affected by the political
governments to take a decision about their news report.

Recently, we see that many newspapers and televisions channels are publishing bad news. For
example, many media, NTV and BTV in particular in Bangladesh, are always broadcasting about
the lifestyle of celebrities, which is neither informative nor important. Moreover, this type of
news spoils the life of an adult person. If the media provides good news such as educational,
scientific and so on, these can motivate the younger to achieve more knowledge. This could
result in the immense advantage of a nation.

In conclusion, while news editors are inspired by the several factors to make a decision about a
news report, it can be argued that good news is more indispensable than bad news. Therefore,
news editor should broadcast and print such type of news, which can bring many benefits to
the human being.

In the last few decades there have been more and more cases of famous people
being hounded by the press. Some people think that famous people in the media

have no right privacy.

To what extent do you agree?

Media plays an important part in our lives. However, some people believe that the famous
people are negatively depicted by the media while others reckon that media is the first source
that produces the famous people. For many reasons, which will be discussed below, I strongly
believe that positive media does not affect the famous people, unlike the negative one which
interferes with their private lives.

It is widely agreeable that the positive media makes us well informed about the famous people.
To illustrate, we can become so familiar to those famous people and we can get benefit from
their good merits. Additionally, we will be able to apply their good conducts in our lives.
Needless to say, all people are affected only by the famous people. Consequently, we can
imitate them in whatever is positive. In this way, I believe that media should continue to show
us those famous people so that we can develop and lead a comfortable life.

Media plays an important role to make someone famous. Mass people from all around the
world know about the fame of someone through the media. So in a way, media helps someone
to get famous. It is a bad practice for reporter and journalist to take vengeance against some
famous celebrities. This should be completely avoided. I completely agree that the famous
people should be given their privacy and should not be followed everywhere they go to. This is
a basic human right that they often can't enjoy.

The second reason why the positive media is important for famous people is that it enormously
increases the fame of those people. Additionally, such famous people will drastically be known
all over the world. Hence, the famous people will not only gain their fame medially but rather
they will be materialistically and morally rich ones. Accordingly, it can be noticed that famous
people get their fame from the media and they will be so grateful to such promising and
positive media.
On the other hand, when the negative media is employed in the lives of famous people, it will
upset them. In other words, all of us know that some curious media always want to know
everything about the famous people. Moreover, it always interferes in their lives and chases
them wherever they go. Undoubtedly, such famous people will utterly become dissatisfied with
the so-called media since it penetrates their privacy. As a result, this kind of media is surely
unwelcome in all communities.

To recap, we have to differentiate between the two kinds of media mentioned above. Positive
media contributes widely to the production of famous people while the bad one extremely
affects the privacy of those famous people. Hence, we should do our best to encourage the
positive media and to prevent such negative one.

Being a celebrity - such as famous film star or sports personality - brings problems as well as
benefits. Do you think that being a celebrity brings more benefits or more problems?

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

You should write at least 250 words.

Sample Answer 1:

A celebrity works hard to get the attention of the public and once s/he becomes famous, s/he
constantly tries to avoid the attention. Being a celebrity is certainly not a piece of cake. They
get all the attention of the world at the price of personal space. It is a debatable topic whether
being a famous personality is a blessing or a punishment.

Firstly, let us look at the negative side of being a celebrity. As the majority of the world follows
the film starts or the sports persons, few of them are crazy about the celebrity. For instance, in
the headlines of few newspapers, we keep reading about the fans who write a letter by their
blood. I am certain that no one would like to receive such letters, constant annoying calls or
being stalked by strangers. These all scary things come with the tag celebrity. Moreover being a
celebrity is not an easy job. The film starts and sportsman has to continuously perform well
otherwise same fans would harm them. For example, when the Indian cricket team did not
perform well in one of the matches, their fans broke the cricketers’ houses.

There are always two sides of the coin. Everybody wants to be a special person. Many people
dream to become a celebrity so I am confident that the celebrity status must be giving a lot of
advantages. One of the biggest benefits is the money. Celebrities make a lot of money
compared to other people. It is known that a supermodel earns more than a school teacher.
Moreover, anyone can become a celebrity. For instance, no academic degree is required to
become a film star or a sportsperson. Sometimes, the film stars get a chance to shoot in foreign
countries or play in different locations. So it’s a great combination of holidays and work. The
kind of glamour and publicity received by them is hard to imagine for a common man.

I believe that being the role model for someone is the biggest achievement of a human life and
being a celebrity gives a chance to be one.

[ by - Naaz ]

Sample Answer 2:

Almost everything has two sides – positive and negative; being a celebrity is not different.
Sometimes it is good and sometimes is not, what makes a difference is the way they deal with
it.

I am not a celebrity; however, I can see the pros and cons of being one. I believe that famous
people suffer a lot because they do not have "peace" in their life. Most of the celebrities do not
have a social life, for example, if they go out with friends and family, they are followed by
people who want to take pictures of them to sell to magazines and internet blogs. On the other
hand, famous people have a lot of money to spend in what way they want. They always have
the best clothes, shoes, bags and also the most expensive stuff. They spend a lot of money
travelling to others countries and having fun. Additional to that, a lot of people want to be like
of them. I heard that there are some people who even do plastic surgery to seem like their
favourite actress or actor.

In my opinion, I believe that being a famous person bring more cons than pros. I think everyone
deserves a good social life, in another word, going out and having fun without being followed or
appearing on the front page of a gossip magazine or a blog.

Overall, celebrities like an actress, actor, singer and sports personality, likes to be famous,
otherwise, they would not choose this kind of job and occupations. More than that, I believe
that they are used with this kind of life.

[ by - Mariza Ichiy ]

Sample Answer 3:

People often believe that brightness and success provide them with advantages and drawbacks
as well. I strongly Support the idea that the positive part outweighs the negative ones.

On the one hand, being a film star or a bright sportsman lead people to be well known, loved
and have a lot of people attracted to them. They also find themselves to be admired and
respected by a numerous group of their societies and sometimes from around the world. For
instance, a film star would be successful and be well-paid besides being internationally famous
and revered. Another example is about sports people who are always appreciated for their
fulfilment since they lead their team to be well known and win many prizes from different
competitive games.

On the other hand, celebrities find themselves under the microscope as they are always
followed by the press and paparazzi that make them feel insecure and under stress. What’s
more, celebrities might get worried about misleading media which sometimes could be harmful
to their successful history. A typical example, when wrong news or a misunderstanding for a
conversation to the press is published, rumours spread like the wind. Hence, they sometimes
would rather stay away from the media in order to keep them secured and not to worry about
being bothered by people even though they feel admired by some fans.

To sum up, being famous and successful is like a sword having two sharp edges that we cannot
escape. However, celebrities should get the most of their position and always consider the
disadvantages.

[ by - Naji Lichaa ]

Sample Answer 4:

Almost every human on planet earth has a dream of being a famous celebrity. One has to
follow a punishing routine in order to get success. We will explore pros and cons of being a
famous person.

The most rewarding outcome of being a celebrity is fame. Fans adore and worship their
celebrity like a god. Wherever you go, people recognise you and you get unrestricted access to
almost everything at your disposal. Looking at another side of the coin, fame also creates
inconveniences. Wherever you go, people recognise you and try to pose with you and get your
autograph. As up the ladder of fame you go, less private life you have.

Next, the most precious thing is respect. People respect and treat you as a role model. People
and press follow actions of you and monitor even slightest move, you make. You can be an
inspiration to millions of people, which is an outstanding experience. At the same time, you
have to be very cautious with your public and private behaviour. Respect comes with a high
sense of responsibility and dignity.

Monetary gain is another bright side with achieving success. Successful people earn millions of
dollars with each assignment and can get everything, which money can buy. On the darker side,
they need to maintain the money wisely so that at the end of career they have sufficient money
to live a respectful life. For instance, a famous Indian actress like Saira Bano is currently living in
poverty after having a successful career.

In conclusion being a famous celebrity has both pros and cons. It is a gift which a few people get
out of millions. With a little inconvenience, I think it has more benefits than troubles.

People in the lime light have a responsibility to set an example for others by

their good behaviour.

Do you agree?

o begin with, stardom, fame, wealth and glory never comes alone. It brings a tremendous
burden of standing mannerism and cautious attitude. Those who fail to do so, not only put into
danger their position in people, but are also responsible for promoting negative trends in their
followers. Hence I acknowledge the statement that the celebrities bear huge responsibilities to
act as role models.

As we are living in a world of media today, it is not surprising that these celebrities remain in
limelight and are chased everywhere by cameras. The most influence is done to the youth. The
lavish, luxurious, colorfull and expansive lifestyles of these celebrities can inspire anyone who
loves to dream. The young people, try to imitate them in clothing, hair style and even in walking
and talking. At a certain level, this all remains bearable, however the problem occurs when
young boys start to detto them in smoking, drinking and trying to do all other things in their
favourite celebrities style.

Young people do not only imitate their outlook, but also start imagining the world from the
eyes of these celebrities, instead of nurturing their own thoughts and ideas. Young women
waste a wholesum of money in doing the same style of dressing and buying acessories, that are
only a waste of time and money, however, very attractive for the businessmen. T-shirts with
celebrities names and pictures are one of the examples. Young boys and girls imitate
themselves to be Leonardo Dicaprio and Angelina Jolie or expect their spouses to act in the
same manner.
This whole attitude of young people, brings a responsibility towards media and its people. As
celebrities should know, that their foot prints are being followed with curiousity and greed,
they should hold the symbols of honesty and welfare. It is often seen that interviews of these
celebrities are read with keen interest by young people. Young boys and girls are eager to know
the personal aims and attitudes of these people. They observe them closely and then imitate
them in every instance of their life. The youth pay great attention to their advises. Even more
than their parents, teachers and their well-wishers.

It is thus an immense liability of celebrities to act positively, not only in public but also in their
private lives. They need to show trustworthiness and honesty. A small change in their attitude
can affect much more than books and lectures of teachers and parents. We are living in an era,
where media is the most powerful part of our lives. We often blindly follow the trends of not
only clothing, but also the popular trends of thoughts and ideas, as spoken or shown on
television. Hence the media people, that is the celebrities play an important role in making a
positive impact on today's youth.

Nowadays celebrities are more famous for their glamour and wealth than for their
achievements, and this sets a bad example to young people.

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

It is true that some celebrities are known for their glamorous lifestyles rather than for the work
they do. While I agree that these celebrities set a bad example for children, I believe that other
famous people act as positive role models.

On the one hand, many people do achieve fame without really working for it. They may have
inherited money from parents, married a famous or wealthy person, or they may have
appeared in gossip magazines or on a reality TV programme. A good example would be Paris
Hilton, who is rich and famous for the wrong reasons. She spends her time attending parties
and nightclubs, and her behaviour promotes the idea that appearance, glamour and media
profile are more important than hard work and good character. The message to young people is
that success can be achieved easily, and that school work is not necessary.
On the other hand, there are at least as many celebrities whose accomplishments make them
excellent role models for young people. Actors, musicians and sports stars become famous idols
because they have worked hard and applied themselves to develop real skills and abilities. They
demonstrate great effort, determination and ambition, which is required for someone who
wants to be truly successful in their chosen field. An example is the actor and martial artist
Jackie Chan, who has become world famous through years of practice and hard work. This kind
of self-made celebrity can inspire children to develop their talents through application and
perseverance.

With the development of the media online, there is no future for the radio.

To what extent do you agree?

It is true, Radio, Television and internet media are playing important role in today’s
communication system and in entertainment. I agree to some extent that television and
internet media is effective but cannot ignored the existence of Radio in future.

In urban areas internet media are used a lot on different devices such as smart mobile phone
and on laptops. Easy availability and cheap usage plans encourage people to use the internet
more in their daily activities and work. As far as television is concerned, it is used more in metro
cities, due to availability of cable and Digital Transmission System. In addition, people in urban
areas can afford to buy expensive television sets. For example, LED or LCD type of television.

I am unconvinced that radio will no longer hold its existence in the future. It is considered, one
of the oldest technologies, used not only for entertainment but also in the communication field,
especially on the military battlefield, where television and internet cannot be reached. Due to
its radio signal and frequency, long distance calls and communication is made very easy and less
expensive. For example, aeroplanes heavily depend on radio signal as an important source of
communications. Furthermore, it is extensively used for entertainment. For instance, most of
the workers prefer to listen radio and work, consequently, finishing work in a good mood.
Farmers working in the farmland can listen radio while cutting his crops. Therefore, radio will
never lose its presence for communication or entertainment field.

In summary, I believe radio will always remain as an important source of communication and
entertainment, however, television and internet media cannot be ignored.
Media is one of the most important sources of information. TV, radio, internet and newspapers
somehow inform people in the world. These days, thanks to the develop knowledge we can see
a new source to gain lots of information such a satellite, E-mail, GPS and GPRS. Defiantly, after
five or ten years we will see other new media.

About 30 years ago radio was one the most popular medium. You could find at least one radio
at each home easily; because the people were informed about everything by radio. Even today,
it seems despite the appearance of other media such as the TV and the internet, the radio holds
its place as an important medium. In fact the people need to use the radio as an important
source of information. There are many advantages for radio. In fact the radio is more popular
than other media.

First advantage of radio is it’s free. You don’t have to pay lot of money to use the radio. You can
use it easily. But TV or internet are not free. They are very expensive therefore few people can
use of TV, especially Internet. If you want to use internet you have to buy a computer. Price of a
computer is at least $200 to $400 dollars; or the cost of using cable or internet is about one
hundred per month. But expense of using radio is only the price of its batteries.

Second advantage of radio is you can use it everywhere. You can use it when you are riding a
car, you are in the bus, tram or train with your MP3 player, MP4 player and your mobile, your
watch or very small and light radio. But TV and internet are not available to everywhere. For
instance, Radio is a regular piece of equipment in a car, and car users are listening to the radio
while driving. But car drivers cannot use TV or internet while they are driving. The drivers every
day and everywhere can use radio. The cab drivers say many advantages of radio. They say that
radio is popular and very cheap device. We can get informed about weather forecast, situation
of traffic, price of everything in market and world news. Also we can listen to music and lots of
other programs. It is a very enjoyable and exciting device and it’s not boring at all. Thus, TV and
internet almost are not very popular among people and they cannot use them very easy.

So, in conclusion, I disagree that the radio will lose its value in the future; because radio has
more advantages than TV and internet. Therefore, it will always remain popular.

With the rise in popularity of the internet, newspapers will soon become a thing of the past.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Model Answer 1: (Agree)

In the contemporary world, an ethical and business competition between the digital and print
media is quite visible. The future of print media in the digital era is a debatable issue. Though
some people hold the opinion that the popularity of printed newspaper will exist in the
forthcoming days, my two cents is this print news portal will soon disappear to make way for
the digital way of getting news.

One obvious reason for my viewpoint is that online portals and e-newspapers are gaining vast
acceptance by its sophisticated features such as clarity, video sharing, social sharing and instant
opinion sharing tools. Over and above, public goes by online news portals than print versions in
order to get instant and breaking news. The vast popularity of online editions of the
newspapers is the best epitome. When an Internet user can browse virtually any newspaper in
the world for free, why should he spend money on reading only a particular newspaper which
does not have last hour breaking news?

Some would argue that there is a different appeal to holding a printed newspaper than reading
on the computer screen. That’s true, but they should compare the old way of sending letters to
the latest email technology. The number of emails people send on an average is million times
higher than the traditional postal mails and in a similar fashion, reading a newspaper would
become a tradition of the past while online news portals would dominate the world.

To draw the conclusion, the newspaper will soon get its place in history. We can expect many
new trends in future not only in the case of the newspaper but also in other printed media and
that is obvious with the widespread acceptance of technology and its popularity among the
young generation.

Sample Answer 2: (Agree)

A typical day of a person starts with a newspaper. The newspaper was and still is an important
part of a family. Due to the popularity of the internet, the newspaper followers have reduced
significantly. It is controversial whether the newspaper will become a history or not. I believe
the digital newspaper would replace the printed newspapers in the future.
Firstly, let us look at the advantages of using the printed newspapers over the e-newspapers.
The feel of the paper will never be replaced by the internet. Moreover, the internet is
expensive. A device and the internet connection is required to read the news on the internet.
Whereas, for newspapers, someone just needs to buy a subscription. Another limitation on the
internet is its coverage whereas newspapers can be used anywhere, for example, garden, beach
or in the flight. The digital devices to read newspapers are harmful to the eyes as well.

Many people, on the contrary, would agree that the popularity of the e-newspaper is a proof
that people are accepting it over printed versions. Digital newspapers are eco-friendly. For
instance, the reduction of the newspapers would definitely lower the paper production.
Ultimately fewer trees would be chopped down. Another advantage of e-paper is unlimited
news access. For example, with the internet, anyone can get up-to-date news. The internet also
provides the benefit of various languages where the user can choose the language of his
interest. For instance, if members of a family prefer to read the news in different languages,
online news portals is their best option.

I believe, as the world is moving ahead with technology, we would not be surprised if the
printed newspapers become a thing of the past.

Sample Answer 3: (Agree)

The printed newspaper has dominated the last century but has already lost its appeal to a great
extent. As the online newspaper is gaining popularity at a rapid speed, I personally believe that
new generation will find it cumbersome to read the news in a traditional way and thus it would
become a thing of the past.

To begin with, technology has revolutionalised the way we want to read the news. Online news
media has far more technological tools to present news to the viewers than the printed
newspapers. Sophisticated technology allows us to comment, share and bookmark a news
which traditional newspapers have no way to offer. On top of that, the internet is more eco-
friendly than the newspapers. The less printed newspaper we use, the more trees we save. So,
the government and other environmental agencies would promote the use of eco-friendly
products and services and digital news portals will be more popular in upcoming years. Many
European countries’ paper use rates for printed media show a significant decline and it is
obvious that this trend will continue.
Many people say that the reading printed newspaper is not only a habit but also a culture for
many human beings. Perhaps it may be true to some degree, but we cannot deny that the new
generation is on the path of swift changing cultures and habits, according to the social changes.
They hold the view that the faster we accept the changes, the better it is and they mostly read
the news on their electronic gizmos such as smartphones and similar devices.

To conclude, despite printed newspapers' traditional value and a nostalgic appeal, the digital
version would surely replace it in the future.

Some people believe that what children watch on television influences their

behaviour. Others say that amount of time spent watching television influences

their behaviour.

Discuss both views and give own opinion (Reported in 2017)

It is true that watching TV becomes a dominant form of recreation. While I accept that the
amount of time children allot to watch TV significantly influences their ways of behaving, I still
believe that what broadcasted on TV has greater impacts on children ‘s behavior.

On the one hand, it is understandable why many people think that the amount of time children
spend on watching TV has an important impact on their ways of behaving. As a matter of fact ,
frequent exposure to TV might encourage children to develop a passive lifestyle, which greatly
impedes the development of social skills and negatively affects children’s behavior. This is
because this way of entertainment is extremely addictive, children might spend hours in their
room without communication with the outside world if they are exposed to TV on a frequent
basis. For example ,the number of children who show the propensity for isolating themselves
from society has been constantly growing at an unprecedented rate owing to watching TV for a
long time.

On the orther hand, I still belive that the content of telecasts has a more significant impact on
children’s behavior. As children tend to be indifferent to wise guidance given by older people,
vivid TV programs with high-resolute graphics which are available on T V can profoundly affect
their perception. These programs can heighten children’ awareness, radually encoureaging
them to change their behavior to become better citizens. For instance, many crime films on TV
in Vietnam inform young students about the dangers of committing a crime and what happens
to lawbreakers when they are caught. Knowing that there will be a chance of being condemned
to jail, which means losing freedom and living a miserable life in a cell, children who are having
intention of committing illegalities would reconsider going down the path.

In conclusion, although many people think that the amount of time children allocate for
waching TV greatly affects their ways of behaving, I still belive that what broadcasted on TV has
a greater effect on children’ behavior.

In recent decades have witnessed an increase in Media usage, raising many questions of
negative repercussions on children’s behaviours. Although the idea suggesting that the amount
of time spent for watching Television impacts their behaviours, I think that the content on
television is the main factor.

On the one hand, There are a myriad of reasons why the television’s content afflicts children’s
behaviours. First, A constant exposure to some horror and criminal psychology-related movies
would be conductive to some mental impairments in preschoolers due to their high degree of
obssession. This would be instrumental in the causation of some mental impairments, reducing
their interaction with the outside world. Second, Due to some misconceptions in children’s
perception, they usually have a propensity to minick exactly what is depicted on some
television’s movies and advertisements. For example, some inappropriate sexual and violent
materials would act as an incentive for commiting felonies in young individuals such as sexual
battery and homocide.

On the other hand, the time spending for television usage could also be fraught with negative
consequences in terms of children behaviours. First, A large amount of time consumed for
watching Television would be invariably associated with a reduction in family bonding due to an
insufficiency in interaction with family members. This could act as a considerable contributor to
children’s aggression and hostility towards other individuals, increasing the of their bullying and
mugging in educational institutions. In addition, Too much time spent for watching television
could culminate in the likelihood of isolation from modern society because of an inadequacy in
time to participating in outdoors activities. This could culminate in the dispositions to timidity
and reservedness in young people in order to engage in a real friendship, increasing the risk of
autism.

In conclusion, I think that inappropriate X-rated and violent content would lead to some
undesirable influences on bahaviours pertaining to crime commission and interaction reduction
in younger generation . The official authorities and parents are highly-recommended to
undetake some initiatives to reduce their exposures and prohibit these materials on
mainstream media.

It is true that watching TV affects children. While some people believe that the length of time
spent watching them that has a significant impact on children. In my opinion, it is the content of
the program that has a more marked influence on their behavior.

On the one hand, there are several reasons why watching TV for long periods of time has
negative effects on the development of children both about physically and psychologically.
Firstly, children are exposed to intermittent flashes of light from the television, this could cause
serious damage to the eyes and can cause temporary blindness if children watch TV excessively.
In addition, when children keep their eyes glued to screens for several hours, waves from the
television may cause a headache, even this can significantly increase the risk of developing
obesity and type 2 diabetes. Secondly, the enormous amounts of time are spent wastefully for
electronic devices by young viewers instead of it should be used in more useful activities like
reading, exercise and interacting with friends or their relatives. All of the activities are crucial
for a healthy lifestyle. When children watch television excessively, as a result they are less likely
to be spending time developing social skills. For instance, the productivity of group work will be
decreased if the lack of communication skill.

On the other hand, it is the broadcasted images that have the most direct effects on young
viewers. First reason is that in our modern consumer society, commercial advertising also
affects how children behave. For example, children are easily swayed by advertisements for
food, toy or video games and so may promote their parent to buy these goods impulsively.
Another reason is that the unhealthy content of television programs can be major reason that
children more turn to crime in the future. Through advertising on prime time television children
are not hard to learn about the alcohol and smoking use. Consequently, the number of children
who break a law increasing constantly in many countries.

In conclusion, though both two factors have their own implications, I believe that the content is
more considerable. Hence, parent intervention is essential in controlling children's TV viewing
habits and awareness of children about programs with a healthy mind.
There is much controversy surrounding effects of watching TV on children’s behavioral pattern.
While it is often said that TV programs have discernible impacts on the ways children behave, a
measure of time children channel into TV is also argued to be instrumental in shaping children’s
manners. This essay will discuss both arguments and give a concluding viewpoint.

On the one hand, numerous social members tend to back the conviction that several behavioral
ways of children can be shaped under the impact of television broadcasts. It would seem
undeniable that children have an instinct for learning from and imitating the patterns of those
who they may observe. In fact, in various parts of the world, the exposure to televised violent
scenes in the films may trigger aggressive behaviors in children. Besides, no sooner do children
get access to educationally oriented programs on the screen such as “Helping people to help
themselves” than most of them are likely to be encouraged to behave in friendlier and
thoughtful ways towards others.

Notwithstanding, the amount of time spent on TV programming also has deciding effects on
children’s behavioral pattern. First, when diverting a sheer quantity of time into sitting on the
screen so as to watch TV, various children, in all likelihood, are confronted with a sedentary
lifestyle because they seemingly sit down on the TV screen and rarely take part in physical
activities. Second, the long exposure to TV shows could deprive them of hours for participating
in creative activities and socializing with other peers in reality. Therefore, this may be the main
culprit of children’s poor social behaviors.

Overall, it is sensible for me to conclude that children’s behavioral pattern is strongly impacted
by both TV programs and the time they allocate for watching TV.

Companies spend millions each year on advertising online, in magazines and on

billboards. These adverts can encourage people to buy goods that they do not

really need.

What are the positive and negative affects of consumerism?

One of the prime times for advertising on TV is when children get back from

school. Some people think that advertisements aimed at children should not be

allowed.

What is your opinion?

Model Answer 1:

We live in a world which is full of advertisement and these adverts are consciously and
subconsciously shaping our purchasing habits. Adverts that target children, be it on TV,
billboards or the internet, should be completely banned as their marketing strategies to target
children are totally unethical and have detrimental effects on our young generation.

In the first place, children are not decision makers and not matured enough to differentiate
quality products from low-grade ones. Adverts that are primarily intended for young fail to
comply with the very fundamental norm of ethical advertising - to inform people. For instance,
many chocolate companies make advertisements to allure children and their adverts have more
fantasy than facts. Though they know that parents would be the potential purchaser, they try to
use the sentiments of children and their desires to trap parents to buy their products. Since this
is quite obvious that advertisements made for children have an immoral and unacceptable
objective, these adverts should not be allowed to be shown on mass media.

Furthermore, children these days watch TV more than ever before. This is why allowing
fabricated and immoral adverts would expose them to a pseudo-real world where they would
be brainwashed. Childhood is the most precious time for the proper psychological development
and that is why adverts that target children are detrimental to their cognitive development.

To conclude, all campaigns and adverts that target children have only one thing common -
mislead the young, allure them and force their parents to purchase products that they
otherwise would not have purchased. Those unethical and heinous advertisement must be
prohibited on TV by all means.

These days, advertising is an indispensable part of people's lives in the contemporary society
because humans need information about whether there are any new products in the market.
However, children gradually become the main target of most of advertisements, particularly
about junk foods, which exerts a harmful influence on children’s health, though the advantages
of stimulating children’s creativity cannot be denied.

It is undeniable that advertisements benefits children mainly because it can inspire their
creativity and imagination in a way that people never image before. This is especially true when
people consider the fact that the colorful cloth characters wear, the product they take or even
the way they talk can provoke children’s curiosity. It is reported by Children Research
Association that curiosity is the prerequisite for children to stimulate their creativity and
imagination. Therefore, children are inspired subconsciously by the moving pictures on the
advertisement.

However, advertising has a negative impact on children since their health problem like obesity
might be caused by junk food advertisements. It is widely known that children are an(removed)
extremely vulnerable audience and easily affected by the product promoted on the
advertisement because they are not mature enough at their age to distinguish whether the
messages in the advertisements are true or not. They usually take everything at face value and
believe without a doubt the messages in the advertisement. Therefore, advertisers make use of
the characteristics of innocent children to intentionally advertise something to attract their
attention. A convincing example is that there is increasing demand for junk food from children
after they watch a group of teenagers eating junk food deliciously in the advertisement. Under
this circumstance, they are unaware of the fact that eating much junk food is not good for
health. As a result, some young children are stricken with obesity which is considered as a
chronic killer in the modern society. Therefore, the government should ban these kinds of
advertisements that harm children.

No one can deny the fact that some advertisement brings benefit to children because it triggers
their imagination. However, I am convinced that children are susceptible to unhealthy diet
since some kinds of junk food advertisements have bad effects on children’s health.
Many people buy products that they do not really need and replace old products

with new ones unnecessarily.

Why do people buy things they do not really need?

Do you think this is a good thing?

Model Answer 1:

The purpose of advertising is to tell the consumer about any new product or service or any new
promotion on the existing product and service. We need it so we can make good decisions
when we go shopping. Advertising tells us when new and improved products become available
and lets us know which ones have the best price.

Through advertisements, we learn about new products. For example, many grocery stores now
sell prepackaged lunches. These are very convenient for busy parents. They can give these
lunches to their children to take to school. Busy parents don’t have time to look at every item
on the store shelf, so without advertisements, they might not know about such a convenient
new product.

Even products we are familiar with may be improved, and advertising lets us know about this.
Most people use cell phones, but new types of cell phone service become available all the time.
There are different plans that give you more hours to talk on the phone, you can send text
messages and photos, and next week probably some even newer type of service will be
available. By watching advertisements on TV it is easy to find out about new improvements to
all kinds of products.

Advertisements keep us informed about prices. Prices change all the time, but everyone can
look at the ads in the newspaper and see what the latest prices are. Advertisements also inform
us about sales. In fact, some people buy the newspaper only in order to check the prices and
plan their weekly shopping.

Advertisements improve our lives by keeping us informed about the latest products
developments and the best prices. Advertisements serve a useful purpose.
(Approximately 281 words)

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

Alternative Answer 2:

I think that everyone can divide all advertising products and services into useless ones and
useful ones. It is like looking through an information desk when you pay attention to those
messages that interest you. Take me for example.

I do not like jewellery. It does not mean I do not have it at all, I have a couple of inexpensive
rings as gifts from my parents. I just think people pay too much attention to this stuff. I believe
it is the result of mass advertising. Every day when I am watching TV, listening to the radio or
reading the paper I notice many ads about getting an expensive ring, chain, necklace or
earrings. From my point of view, these kinds of advertising contaminate people's minds. In this
case, you are encouraged to buy things you do not really need. They make you believe you
need such products in order to succeed or be happy.

From the other side, I think that advertisements of the new detergents with up-to-date
formulas to help you maintain your cloth in perfect conditions, the new cars with some extra
futures that make your travelling more comfortable and sports goods that make your life
healthier may help you to improve your life.

Recently my husband and I saw an ad on the Internet about a very interesting and inexpensive
vacation to Japan for a week. Is not it awesome? We like travelling. So now we are planning to
find out more about it and, maybe, make reservations. I believe that, without advertisements,
we would be unaware about plenty of opportunities that may make our life happier, easier and
less stressful.
My point is that every person has his own scale of values. So if he is vegetarian he will consider
an ad about meat products useless for him.

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

Sample Answer 3:

In a literal sense, Advertising is an art of showcasing a product to its future consumers. When a
company or a person advertise a product he is conveying how the product would benefit the
consumer with its unique and best features. Since the Inception of consumer markets
merchants have been using Advertising and marketing to sell their product and increase their
reach to maximum consumers. I am in absolute discord with the statement that Advertising
insists people to buy things they do not need. In my view, Advertising is a key tool in the market
mechanism and can benefit customers and ultimately merchants in several ways like spreading
awareness, increasing competition, discourage monopoly and help the overall economy.

Advertising has helped and is continuing to help spread the right information and makes a
consumer cognizant of what is available in the market. It helps drive the competition upwards
benefitting the end customer by getting varied options to choose. For example, when 'Colgate'
came in the market as the first toothpaste, consumers did not have any other option other than
Colgate until other companies like 'Close-up' started advertising their product. This resulted in a
boost in the competition which ultimately slashed the prices of the product. Thus, Advertising
plays a very important role in engaging the end customer such that the buyer gets the best
worth of what he is spending. While a consumer is the end target and beneficiary of any
product produced by a merchant, a consumer is also the best judge of the decisions he takes in
terms of what he wants to buy. In my opinion, it is inappropriate to blame the advertising for an
increased consumer spending. To curb the unnecessary spending both people and government
have to work collectively. People need to be wary of their spending and pay heed to their
finances by managing them smartly. A government can play its part in authorising and
monitoring the right contents to be published to the public. Hence, right and smart advertising
can help a nation and its population in great ways by exploiting the benefits of advertising.
To draw the conclusion, barring a few disadvantages Advertising can be used as a tool to
enhance the growth of an economy by increasing the spending, bringing the right products to
the consumer, boosting the competition. Even Government can use smart adverts to make
people aware of managing their finances and increase financial literacy. All in all, I would
recommend healthier advertising to benefit the consumer, merchant and ultimately the world
economy.

(Submitted by Deep Kagda)

Sample Answer 4:

I agree with the viewpoint that “advertising anchorages us to buy things that we really do not
need.” Another word for advertisement is ‘a tool of marketing strategy’. To introduce their
product or services or to promote their product or services this advertisement will highly useful.

If we have never seen an advertisement of a product and first time see that product in the
market, we never want to buy. That is, we do not like to just try. If we have already seen that
product in the advertisement, we may want to buy it and see how it works. That is by seeing an
advertisement over and over again, we indirectly become familiar with that product before we
buy and use it. To make us familiar with the products, the product owners make sure we watch
their advertisements again and again.

In the advertisement, they show only the advantages of the product. That is an advantage for
the marketers, but a disadvantage for the customers. While the marketing people encourage us
to buy the things, we need to identify its disadvantages only after experiencing the product or
services.

Some products are really essential for our life while some are not at all essential. Sometimes we
purchase products that are optional for us. We may experience a new detergent powder since
it was telecasted several times. This is the insisting part of advertisements on customers’ mind.
Each customer is different. All are not same. Same product will not convince all the public.
Some products target children, kinder joy, chocolates, toys, cartoon products and etc. Even
though parents know that a product is not good for their children, but they are insisted in
buying the product by the children. Children get attracted to a product after they see the
advertisement on television. Finally, I would conclude, that advertising encourages us to buy
things that we really do not need.

Many people think that fast food companies should not be allowed to advertise

while others believe that all companies should have the right to advertise.

What is your opinion?

In modern society, junk food retailers strongly promote their meals to the general public
through many media. This fast food can range from beverages to cooked meals. This essay will
present the drawbacks of this advertising such as the annoyance to consumers and the rise in
fast food consumption. On the other hand, fast food retailers are legal entities and have the
right to advertise what they sell, and offer food which is suitable for today's lifestyle.

Some buyers argue that fast food franchises should not exaggeratedly promote their products.
It is more than often that the retailers spam the customers at mall with the offering and
discount information via cellphone.(<--Reword to: "It is common for retailers to spam mall-
goers with offers and discounts via cellphone marketing.") Many people think this is annoying
because it wastes customers' time and attention. Another reason is massive promotions tempt
buyers to over consume. When consumers receive a buy '6 get 12' notification on their cell
phone from a doughnut retailer, it is hard for consumers to ignore this deal regardless of
whether they have just eaten something else as the result of some kind of promotion strategy
from another chain restaurant. Such over-consumption not only makes people spend more
money, but also might lead to serious health problems such as obesity, diabetes and heart
attack. Thus these facts make it clear why some buyers do not like heavy promotion done by
junk food retailers and want it to be stopped.

On the other hand, some buyers think that it is fast food companies’ right to promote their
products. Such buyers believe that nothing is wrong with the advertising since it is part of the
retailers’ business model. Those companies are legal companies who pay taxes and employ
many locals. They also are able to make their products affordable because they mass produce
them. Heavy promotion is their key to selling mass produced items. This way, they can run their
business and pay their duties. For this reason, some customers believe that it is the retailers’
right to advertise their food.

Heavy promotion by fast food franchises is disputed and supported by many people. I think it is
true that advertising the product is the companies’ right. However, fast food retailers should
not annoy people and give consumers negative consequences such as over-consumption and
health problems. I believe it would be wiser if they stop their aggressive promotion practices.

In some countries, fast food restaurants and companies give money to schools

provided that the schools promote their products to school children.

What do you think is the positive and negative of this in the development of

children?

Positive Effects

children benefit from the additional resources and facilities that schools can

afford due to the funding from companies

children can learn the value of money in order to buy the products being

promoted learning to manage money is a useful life skill

children learn to be selective about what they buy

Negative Effects

promoting companies such as fast food restaurants encourages a poor diet

poor diets, which include high quantities of salt and sugar, can be harmful

to a child’s health

this sets children up to be unhealthy adults which can be expensive for the

state in the long run

advertising and promoting to children can be exploitative and unethical they

are easily influenced they are not able to criticise or form their own opinion
 this form of advertising is aimed at the parents through their children

children are unable to distinguish what is promotional and what is

educational

Sample Answer 1:

Some schools are of the opinion that they can profit from fast food outlets and supermarkets
just offering their products in schools. In my opinion, this statement has both positive and
negative consequences and I tend to believe that it can affect both negatively and positively for
several reasons.

When fast food courts and markets offer their food in schools, schools can benefit from them
gaining some amount of money investing in school development and creating facilities for
schools such as building a gym, new rooms for learning, buying computers, gadgets, refreshing
library, gaining new books and hiring qualified teachers for pupils. Indeed teachers naturally will
teach them with contemporary and advanced methods in that case. This investment
presumably will promote children’s progress during studying in school and apparently they will
have a much more competitive advantage than other pupils. Furthermore, supermarkets
providing their foods in schools can advertise their goods, attract new customers and create
new workplaces for people.

Nowadays the majority of fast food courts and supermarkets offer unhealthy packed and junk
food which is an ever increasing problem and extremely harmful for people. Fast food outlets
and supermarkets distributing those kinds of products to schools will presumably affect pupil’s
health generating diseases which will influence on their health in the future. Hence, the
government should define the list of goods which must be distributed to schools and do not
contain harmful organisms in foods.

In conclusion, the health of children is the most important aspect and far-reaching problem,
therefore the decision which one is important, the health of children or investment for children,
must be comprehensively discussed.

( Written by - Arsen Jomardyan)

Sample Answer 2:

With the evident tremendous growth of fast food cafes and malls, there has also been a trend
to include the schools in the promotion of their products. Some opine that the schools enjoy
the profit from them while others argue that the schools should be kept free from them. I,
however, believe that there are probably equal pros and cons.

On the one hand, the economic standards of the schools will be uplifted by their collaboration
with restaurants and supermarkets. This is because of these companies, in exchange for their
promotional activities, offer commissions to the school administration which can be utilised in
improving the infrastructures, providing scholarships to the needy ones, subsidising the tuition
fees etc. consequently, the students will be in advantage.

On the other hand, there might be serious negative consequences. Firstly, the precious time of
students which is to be utilised in mastering the academic subjects will be taken up by the
corporate advertisements. Secondly, the school administration can rarely ensure that the
products of these companies are beneficial for the kids and finally, these kinds of activities
might lure the young brains in buying extravagant items and put pressure on the parents to buy
them. For example, once in my brother’s school, a company came to promote encyclopaedia
worth $800 which compelled my parents to spend that high amount although we already had
one.

In a nutshell, allowing commercial promotions in the schools can benefit them financially as
well as impose negative impacts on pupils. Thus, the school authority ought to make careful
decisions on allowing them.

Reading Essay Titles

Some people think books are losing importance as a source of information and

entertainment. To what extent do you agree? (Reported 2017, GT)

Although, books were a good source of information and entertainment in the past, some
people believe that books are increasingly becoming less important as a source of knowledge
and entertainment. I strongly agree with this statement for the following reasons: the invention
of the internet and the introduction of different kinds of entertainment.

To begin with, people these days are becoming less dependent on books as a source of
information. The invention of the internet has changed the way we gain information and
knowledge because of the easy access to such information. In the past books were the only
source of information but nowadays the internet has become the main source of such
information. For example, a recent survey in the U.S. found that ninety per cent of people
totally rely on the internet to gain information. As a result, books are becoming less important
as a source of information.

Furthermore, books are also increasingly being deserted as a way of entertainment because
there are many kinds of entertainment available these days. People are more interested in
other types of entertainment such as playing football and swimming as they all are beneficial to
our health. For instance, a study in Australia found that more than eighty five per cent of
people prefer other ways of entertainment because of their health benefits. Consequently,
books are losing their role as a source of entertainment.

To conclude, I absolutely agree that the importance of books as a source of information and
entertainment is fading in today’s world. The invention of the World Wide Web and the
introduction of other types of entertainment are the reasons for this argument.

It is true that technological innovations like computers and the internet have made books and
newspapers less important. When people can find all information online, they have hardly any
incentive to buy books or magazines. This, however, does not mean that books have lost all of
their relevance. In my opinion, books are still relevant to a certain extent.
Billions of people living in many parts of the world still do not have access to the internet. They
need magazines and newspapers to know what is happening around the world. Books are easy
on the eye. Computers can lead to several visual problems. Young children, in particular, should
not be allowed to stare at a computer for hours on end.

There is no denying the fact that internet has made information readily available at our
fingertips. Gone are the days when students had to frequent libraries to find information for
their research projects. In addition, most of the information available online is free and can be
accessed by anyone who owns a computer and an internet connection.

Books and magazines, on the other hand, are not free. They are not exactly environment
friendly either. Paper is made from wood and to make paper, you have to cut trees. Also books
have a short shelf life. Although they can last decades, they are not indestructible. By contrast,
information posted online will be there for all eternity. Also portable mobile devices like tablets
and laptops eliminate the need to go about classrooms luging heavy books.

It is not hard to see that information technology has made books and newspapers less
important. This, however, does not mean that they have become totally irrelevant. A lot of
people begin their day reading their favourite newspaper. To conclude, books and magazines
may have lost some of their relevance, but it is impossible to claim that technology has made
them redundant.

This is a universally acknowledged fact that there is a drastic change in each and every segment
due to rapid advancement in technology. Nowadays individuals can get information via internet
within some seconds. However, it is believed that the importance of traditional sources of
information have been effected by latest technology up to great extent but not at all. These
points of view will be discussed in the forthcoming paragraphs.

First of all, it is certainly true that the trend of reading books as well as newspapers via online is
booming day by day throughout the world. People have enormous sorts of electronic gadgets
which becomes much popular among youngsters. For instance, in this contemporary era, most
of the schools have started computer as a mandatory subject even from lower classes. So,
children prefer to use the computers and laptops for reading newspapers. It is undoubtedly
true; it is convenient and much faster mode for getting valuable knowledge. Inclusively, people
have no need to waste their precious time and to go away from habitation for purchase books.
Hence, they can get up to date news with audio-visual effects from all over the world.
Therefore, it is crystallized that people have started the usage of latest equipments in spite of
newspapers and printed books in their daily routine.

On the flip side, some people think that the traditional sources have not lost its prominence
even after advancement in technology. To paraphrase, in India, there is prodigious number of
individuals whose cannot afford the price of electronic gadgets that’s why they read the
newspapers in the morning after that they do other activities. Additionally, it has no side effects
on human eyes and one can read the books for long hours without electricity. It is cheapest
mode of communication and uneducated person can also use traditional sources. Thus, it is a
big reason that many thinkers gravitate towards this phenomenon.

After analyzing the aforesaid points, it is demonstrated that nowadays traditional ways became
less popular as compared to ancient times due to globalization. Though, we cannot fully ignore
it because of its numerous advantages even in this modern era.

Children who start reading earlier in life, perform better later on in their

school studies.

How important are early reading skills in a child’s academic performance?

What other preschool factors influence a child’s later academic achievements?

Reading is one of the most fundamental elements of learning. It is believed that, habit of
reading is beneficial for a child's academic performance. This essay will discuss the significance
and the role of reading and certain pre school extra curricular activities that boost students
academically.

Reading is the first step in the process of learning. Children, habitual of reading books, fairy
tales, story magazines usually find it easier to understand and overcome the obstacles and
glitches in school courses. Thereby, enhancing their efficiency in class, compared to non
readers. Furthermore, children are allergic to school books and courses, hence, they require
constant supervision during their study hours. Reading develops interest in books and children
find it appealing to study variety. Thus, requiring no supervision and children develop a sense of
responsibility.

Whilst reading is of the essence, there are other activities and factors that determine a child's
personality and academic standards. Firstly, toddler pre schooling, some consider it as a
wastage of time and prefer admissions in schools. Researches have shown that children
attending pre school sessions turn out more confident and competitive. Toddler schools
provide an environment where children can overcome their social fears. Such children are more
focused and confident in comparison to those, whose initial experience is school. Moreover,
family relations are of grave importance. Children with less exposure to family problems tend to
perform to their maximum academically , on the contrary, those with family issues show higher
tendency of deviating from the actual track.

To conclude, variable factors define academic caliber of a growing child. However with parental
awareness and guidance he/she can be put on a track before even the start of academic career.

It is commonly believed that children are more successful in school study if they were taught to
read in early childhood. Is it so essential for child’s education achievements to learn to read as
early as possible? Are there other preschool aspects affecting their further academic success?

There exist well-known fact that process of learning any skills in childhood improves mental
skills, and reading is not exception. Early literacy forms individual personal character and allows
to start advanced learning of other skills. Moreover, it trains brain and force neurons to work,
so that is guarantee that child will be able to complete tasks while studying at school. The
statistics represent that children who start reading late can not read well even in the primary
and secondary school and often have problems in mathematics.

Speaking about other preschool factors, which might help children in their later education, art
and logic lessons and physical education can be discussed. Majority of parents prefer enroll
their children on variable courses and, furthermore, join sport sections rather than leave them
in kindergarten. It is connected with importance of the balance in education. If young people
have capability of personal impression, they will grow up in confident, independent teenagers
who can solve not only personal difficulties, but also problems caused by studying process,
reaching achievements. One more reason why variety of educational preschool courses helps in
further study is that the lessons on different subjects make person cultured, educated and
literate.

In conclusion, sport activities, learning reading and other skills such as drawing or logic in
preschool period are significantly important for later education as it allows children impress
themselves and get necessary character features, making them mentally advanced.

Some people think that children who spend a lot of time reading children’s story

books are wasting their time which could be better used doing other more useful

activities.

To what extent do you agree?

In the past, children had large amount of leisure time to do various types of works such as
playing games, walking in the park and gossiping with others; but, now they have no free time
due to the fact that this world is becoming more competitive in terms of educational activities.
While I cogitate that this policy has some benefits, I believe that children should allow using
their free time, and it has more advantages
On the one hand, there are some effective conveniences to the student life when they will occupy
with study instead of wasting time by playing, walking, and gossiping. Firstly, by spending time
with educational activities is one of the significant trends because student can increase their
knowledge with this habit. This could result immense advantages to the students whenever they
will confront their future life. Secondly, in some countries, it is not easy to admit in higher
educated institute without great result so that students need learn whenever they get any time.
For instance, many countries like Sudan have few universities although they have vast number of
students. From above explanations it is apparent that children should utilize their time properly.

On the other hand, it can be argued why kids require free time to spend their own ways. One
important point is that the children, who expend their leisure time with play and other
extracurricular activities, they can improve their mental as well as physical growth. As an
example, if the students play cricket and football, they can learn leadership, responsibility, and so
on. Another important point is that the practical knowledge of the students will increase if they
involve with some extracurricular activities. As an example, many famous scientists like Einstein
was always engaging with extracurricular activities rather than studying. This example makes it
explicit that children should permit to use free time in order to increase their intelligence.
In conclusion, it is consequential that children need to play besides the study in order to increase
their basic knowledge. I deem that students should bestow some free time to use their own way
that would be augmented to their bright future.

Some people think that e-books are the death of paper books while others think
that paper books will never disappear.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

With the emergence of high-spec gadgets such as tablets and smartphones, young generation
considers e-books as a replacement for paper-based books. At the same time, more
conservative people admit the rising popularity of e-books, however, the think paper books will
not lose its popularity. This essay agrees that digital books will eventually prevail paper ones,
but both views will be analyzed.

Technology has rocketed the market share of e-books by alleviating the process of book
purchasing online and by improving reading experience on gadgets. Instead of going to the
physical bookstores, customers are able to purchase books with only several clicks and the have
them on their tablets/phones. Moreover, gadget producing companies are continuously
refining user’s reading experience, so that people can read e-books for a long time without
fatigue. It is therefore agreed that e-books can replace paper ones forever. Amazon Kindle
tablet is a prime example, by using it consumers can easily query and purchase whatever e-
book desired, and the tablets display books in high definition quality as well.

On the other hand, some readers prefer paper books by stating that e-books are harmful to
eyesight and health in general. Since e-books are read primarily via digital screens, users suffer
from blue ray they produce at a constant rate. This ray deteriorates eye vision and weakens
person in general. Nevertheless, tablet and smartphone screens are invariably optimized to
reduce blue ray effect on the e-book readers and in the forecastable future screen producers
can eliminate elements affecting human health. For example, gadget manufacturers
transformed their screens from ‘Liquid Crystal’ displays to ‘Light Emitting Diode’ screens, which
provide the e-book readers better visual representation of books and less harm to their health.

In conclusion, it is believed that e-books will substitute paper books eventually, nevertheless,
some people state e-book reading is harmful to health. However, technological developments
prove that in the foreseeable future all adverse impacts can be excluded.

Naturally, paper books will be always found in museums and in selected libraries (unless some
mad burning spree of books etc.) if the e-books would start to dominate the reading world.
However, currently the sales of paper books have not considerably diminished due to e-kindles
etc. The feel of paper and the keeping heavy or different sizes of books with different book
covers and extra materials cannot compete with e-books. It is the same that souvenirs could be
replaced by electronic gifts and all the (tourist) postcards by crafty emails. Certainly some books
will be harder to sell but many consumers that are interested in e.g. cultural or contrite topics
tend to choose hard copy books. The general belief is also that older people tend to read
genuine books.

Perhaps in some distant future the e-books will start to dominate the market but it will take at
least 25 years since the older generation is still roaming. In that time (2040?) it could be so that
many other things regarding the reading culture has changed dramatically. Maybe we do not
need to read at all? Everything could be reduced to so convenient ways that reading culture
would be redeemed similarly as manual labour culture in some high societal circles nowadays.
Where do we get intelligence, focus and muscles? Are they limited only to athletes and some
hermetic people who pursue academic careers which only seem to assist the persons who are
doing so, but not the “real” society that is surrounding them. Do we see a new kind of “monks”
that are to be persecuted by the zombie kind of illiterate people who redeem that everything is
available just by clicking the computer buttons? We should fight against this kind of notion of
apathia and loneliness produces by this fast pace torpor.

Naturally, this does not make sense, so that reading will at least continue, if not from the old
fashion books then from these e-books. Nevertheless some cultural aspects will change if the
majority will be reading everything from e-books. The long term memory could diminish since
one does not need to remember that many words when you can immediately check the correct
ones from dictionaries. The fastness that the computers promote can create unbalanced
society if the shift is too drastic. Maybe no jobs would be lost, as with technological turmoil in
general such as with changing to more environmental friendly solutions, but certain cultural
care that would assist people to cope with each other in everyday life in reasonable fashion.
Who knows?

Libraries should focus on improving their technological resources rather than in

building a larger collection of paper books.

To what extent do you agree?

Ideas for this topic:

Libraries should invest in books

 Not all books are available on digital format which means some specialised

books are still in paper form.

Paper books are not easily lost unlike e-books which can be deleted

accidentally or malfunction. Paper books are more reliable.

Libraries should be responsible for keeping paper books as one day the

internet may not exist. It is a known fact that paper books are the only

reliable and safe source of information.

Paper books help people focus and concentrate. They are not easily distracted.

Reading online tempts people to search for new books, visit websites, and look

up links rather than focus on the book they are reading.

Children should be given paper books to read rather than allowing them to read

online which opens them up to uncensored sites.

Seeing a shelf full of books and topics is inspiring and stimulates the

imagination.

Libraries should invest in technology

Technology, such as e-books, allow the same information to be stored in a

fraction of the space. This is more cost effective than paper books because

they need more storage space.

Computers allow users to locate information more quickly, providing better

customer service.

Looking for and using books online is user friendly. This means people don’t

need to leave their seat in order to find one or more books they want.

Technology is the way forward for all companies and services.

 Providing more technology makes more services available as people can access

the internet for more information than that provided solely by the library.

Public libraries will soon now longer be housed in a building as all facilities

and books will be available online for all to access.

Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of public libraries only existing

online.

It is true that all information known to the mankind is now available on the internet. Internet
accessibility has also improved over the years. However, this does not mean that public libraries
are no longer needed.

Libraries are much more than mere access points for books and information. They serve some
other purposes as well. For example, libraries provide a quiet environment where one can read
and learn. Distractions of everyday life can kill the joy of reading. Libraries offer a solution to
this problem. Also, when you are in an environment where everyone is reading, you will also
be motivated to get your reading done. This may not be possible at home, even if you can find
the same reading material online.

The internet is a vast pool of information but if you don’t know what you are looking for, it is
nearly impossible to find relevant information online. Libraries, on the other hand, make
research easier by grouping books on a particular topic together. Even if you don’t know
anything about a given topic, you will still be able to find relevant information on that topic.
Today’s libraries also provide access to computers and tablets so that users can search online if
they need more information on a topic.

Internet accessibility may have improved over the years, but there are still millions of people
who do not have access to the internet. Public libraries are the only sources of information for
them. If libraries were to die, they would be in trouble.
To conclude, despite the existence of all information online, libraries are still important because
they provide an environment conducive to reading and learning.

It is argued that in the future, libraries and books will be accessed through the internet, and
they will no longer exist inside buildings. This essay will discuss, firstly, the possibility of reading
books from anywhere as one of the main benefits of this change and secondly, the exclusion of
people who cannot access the internet as one of the main drawbacks, followed by a reasoned
conclusion.

One of the principle advantages of having books available online is the possibility for people to
access them from anywhere. Currently, it is not required for people to go to a specific building
to borrow a book. They can do it through their technological devices, such as laptops or mobile
phones. This is an advantage because people can read books even if they are travelling. For
instance, people can access a website called Bookrix and they can download any book to read
whenever they desire, for free.

One of the main drawbacks of having libraries and books available only through the internet is
that it automatically make impossible for individuals who cannot access the internet to read
books. In some countries, people are unable to go online, especially in poor countries. If books
become available only through the internet, these individuals will not be able to read these
books, therefore, it is a disadvantage. For example, in Brazil, a third world country, the majority
of population do not have access to the internet. For this reason, libraries housed in buildings
are necessary.

In conclusion, the benefits of having only online books and libraries, such as the possibility for
people to access these contents anywhere must be weighed against the drawbacks, such as
excluding people who do not have access to internet to read books.

Society Essay Titles

Many countries aim to improve their living standard by economic development, but

some important social values are lost as a result.

Do you think the advantages of economic development outweigh the disadvantages?

(Reported 2017, Academic Test)

Sample Answer 1:
Living in a high standard level is the ultimate goal of many people. All of us are doing our best
to live in comfort and peace. Governments try to satisfy their citizens' needs and provide them
with all means of happiness and advance. To do this the economy of should be improved.

Like everything else, this has its advantages and disadvantages as well. Developing the economy
is certainly useful not only for the living standard purpose but also for many other reasons; it
may impact positively on the country in many fields, such as politics, culture and military
power.

Some people look at this point from another point of view; they see that the economic advance
for improving standards of living has some drawbacks. First of all, it is better to governments to
satisfy the principle things for their people as food and medicines before thinking in providing a
lot of leisure and comfort way of living. Other reason from their opinion, easy come easy go.
The population may not act in a good way towards facilities which constructed by the
governments, especially if they were not funded by the people's tax. In addition, they think that
the social values may be affected by such development, as they are convinced that the
community will change and the morals of people like honest and truth will be modified, the
families won't gather with their selves regularly and the sense of help and support can be
vanished by the time due to availability of many things to all people.

I tend to see that, it's very important for countries to develop their economy for their citizens'
sake. I believe that the economy improvement advantages will have significant positive effects
on the societies and the normal result of this development will be the advance of the nations.

Last but not least, governments and the concerned regulatory authorities should try to make a
sort of balance between raising the population income and keeping the community's habits and
traditions stable and not affected by any changes from foreign cultures.

[ by - Waleed Hassanain ]

Sample Answer 2:
Economic development is essential for any country because the economic condition of a
country will leave a very heavy impact on the daily routines of the citizens of that country. The
economic development is directly linked to the better living standards of the people of the
country. If any country wants to provide a better living standard to the citizens and wants to
provide essential needs of living (i.e. food, clothes and shelter) to every citizen, a country
should be capable and have strong economic development.

If economic development is up to the mark, the living standards would be improved

automatically. Through stable economic conditions job opportunities will be created, circulation
of money in the market will take place in a suitable manner. I think if any country puts all the
focus to improve the standard of living through economic development, citizens of that country
will have to work hard and have to spend most of their time in their work and as a result, the
social value and social life of the people will cut off. Because economic stability comes in result
of impressive hard work and one should sacrifice something in order to earn another thing.

I personally believe that economic development is the best and most appropriate option for
good living standards and the advantages of that development always outweigh the
disadvantages. Economically developed nations do not suffer from social moral and social
bonding. Rather, it is deteriorating in countries where economic development is yet to achieve.

In conclusion, economic development is the most important part of a nation’s progress and it
does not mean that the development will degrade the social values.

[ by - Bilawal Ali ]

Sample Answer 3:

Over the last few decades, many countries are aggressively involved in improving the economic
condition and uplifting the living standard of the people. Whereas, on the other hand, there are
also people who believe that in the race of improving the living standard, people are neglecting
the social values. I also believe that people nowadays are more concerned about possessing
materialistic success which has overshadowed the need for social values.

Countries and people are competing with one another in order to achieve success in jobs,
business, and politics. However, in the competition of “who will come first”, they have
outweighed the importance of social value such as love, humanity, service, compassion etc.
Economic development has helped people to access latest technologies, possess wealth and
medical services but along, ith that they are losing social values.

Nowadays, people have good modern medical facilities but side by side they also have lots of
diseases such as high blood pressure, diabetes, depression etc. Even rich people are unhappy in
their lives and lots of teenagers are tends to commit suicide because they are lonely and do not
have supporting families, friends and societies who can encourage them.

In addition, people have car and vehicles to save their travelling time, cellular phone to talk
with people from one country to another country, internet services to connect with people
thus; they do not have time to enjoy with their families and friends. People are so busy these
days that they don’t even bother to know what is going in their neighbour’s life.

In conclusion, economic development along is not enough to satisfy human need thus, social
values are as equally important as possessing economic development and improved living
standard. In order to maximise the quality of life, people should not outweigh the social values.

[ by - Sajeeta Thapa ]

Sample Answer 4:

It is perceived by most countries that by developing their economy, the living standard of their
people could be improved, but there are those who believe that economic growth could result
in loss of social values.
It is certainly true that countries with developed economies have improved their people's lives
because of their advanced standard of public services such as health and education. Improved
health care can improve the quality of life through treating diseases and increasing people's life
expectancy. Also, increased educational standards can give the population a greater diversity of
skills and literacy. This enables greater opportunity and freedom. In my knowledge, I have
learned that education is seen as an important development of welfare and happiness.

However, while we can obviously see the benefits of a developed economy, there are other
people who perceive that this could lead to losing of social values. It means that with higher
economic growth, this may result in longer hours of work. Then working parents would not
have enough quality time to spend with their children. Hence, children will tend to emulate
their bad influence peers and eventually involve to an antisocial activity or juvenile
delinquency, for instance, the unguided young teenagers, mainly African and Caribbean
Americans in New York City in the 20th century.

In conclusion, I certainly believe that through developing national economy, it will give people a
better quality of life. Although it could affect families negatively, this would be just a little
impact compared to the many benefits it could give to its society in terms of health and
educational services.

In many countries women no longer feel the need to get married. Some people

believe that this is because women are able to earn their own income and

therefore do not require the financial security that marriage can bring.

To what extent do you agree?

Nowadays, the rate of unmarried woman is significantly increasing. One of the undeniable
explanations for this issue is that women are more and more independent in financial status
and are able to lead a comfortable life without setting up a family. However, in my opinion,
there are several other factors which contribute to foster this trend.

Getting access to education, the fair sex is gradually aware of their individual values. In the
heyday of sex equality, women become conscious that they possess sufficient physical and
intellectual capability to achieve the same position in society as men instead of standing behind
them. As a result, not taking the choice of burying the youth in supporting the family like the
traditional generation, women have desire to establish their own life and pursue their passions.

Another important explanation may have been concern for the cutting-edge point of view
about marriage. In this fast-paced society, sentiment is seemingly taken slightly. It is easy for
the youngster to be in and out of a relationship in the blink of an eye. The marriage certificate is
regarded as the handicap interfering with the state of freedom. Moreover, it is a widespread
belief that “Marriage is love’s grave”. There is a yawning gap between the period before and
after tying the knot. Admittedly, the number of divorces in many countries all over the world
has been grown in astounding rate. Viewing from this angle, women hold the doubt whether
getting marriage is the wise option or not.

In conclusion, it is my firm conviction that besides the reliable income which women are able to
supply for themselves, perception of self-value and pessimistic outlook are remarkable reasons
generating the women’s withdrawn to marriage.

In many nations, females no longer sense the urge to tie a knot. Some folks think that women
are not planning to wed, for the majority are financially independent and thus do not crave the
monetary guarantee, which marriage can usually fetch. I completely agree with this idea. This
essay will discuss firstly on how entering into marriage is economically valuable and secondly,
why women are postponing marriage with relevant examples.

To begin with, as many women tend to suffer gender discrimination in the workplace with
regard to their married lives, they typically receive a low salary as opposed to men. However, if
a woman had successful marriage, the net income would boost monthly because the husband
would supplement the wages that could make up a serious deficiency of an unmarried female.
On the second place, obtaining a long-term car insurance is another crucial benefit of uniting
with a male. Evidently, the coverage is exorbitant when a single individual applies for it, so
wedded couples are able to save 526 dollars, which can bring sheer happiness, a month
according to the recent analysis.

However, i strongly believe that the restoration of economic power in numerous states by
women relative to men is the principle motive of females to give a low priority for getting
married. For illustration, ladies are depositing personal savings in banks, shouldering heavy
responsibilities of the family alone and granting loans, which means that they are self-reliant,
financially stable and do not feel inner compulsion to become wives as to the previous times.
Next, a significant surge in the literacy rate among females have landed them to numerous
influential positions and the handsome wages that have granted women to curb their own
reproductive health, subjecting to a substantial decline in the marriage rate. This ascertains why
women are less likely to wed in various countries.

In conclusion, presumably, with the consideration of handsome salaries and great proficiencies,
women do not feel necessity for fiscal freedom that the marriage oftentimes delivers the
flexibility.

Most societies has its homeless people. Some people think that the best way to

help them is to give them money.

To what extent do you agree?

Some proportions of almost every nation's population is without a home. Many people believe
that providing them with some money would be the most appropriate solution. I do not fully
agree with this view point.

Shelter is one of the basic necessities of humans and thus I understand that everyone should
have access to a living space or the funds to buy it. However just giving money for homes is a
very superficial and temporary solution according to me.

Most people see the misery of the homeless but they overlook the root cause of this problem.
Many people who do not have a shelter also do not have any fixed source of income and in
many cases they lack education or required skills. If we decided to solve this by giving money,
may be people would use it to buy a shelter but that would not help to sustain it in the coming
times. They would still be struggling to make their ends meet, for education or for upbringing of
their children or whatever it is that their needs are. They may even consider reselling their
homes for more pressing survival needs.
I also feel this facility or help could be misused. Recipients of this aid may take it for granted
and ask for money every time they do not have money. According to me instead of giving
money, these people should be provided with employment opportunities so that they have a
constant source of income. Also to encourage them to have a home, they should be provided
with subsidised and affordable housing options. This will enable them to live a better life and
improve their standard of living substantially.

Thus I feel that though the homeless need money the mist, it should be given to them in the
form of employment and home financing assistance. This would be the most substantial
solution in my opinion.

Recent decades have seen a remarkable increase in the homelessness proportions worldwide,
raising many questions of societal sustainability. Although the proposal of pecuniary assistance
sounds reasonable, there are many more practical measures to tackle this problem.

There are many disadvantages associated when it comes to supplying homeless people with
money. First, government disbursements to homeless citizens would lead them to undermining
the value of making a honest living by their working capacity. This will discourage them from
finding a good job, worsening their living standards. Second, financial assistance to homeless
individuals could mislead other citizens with better living conditions to the assumption that
homelessness is the easiest way to make money. This, there by, can reduce their dedication to
work as well as motivations to climb the socio-economic ladders and incentivise their intention
of living a homeless life.

Additionally, official authorities should undertake some more effective measures to minimising
this social issue. First, the government should allow free access to educational institutions with
vocational training for the homeless ones. Plenty of evidence suggested that these places will
equip them with basic and practical working skills, promoting career prospects. In addition, The
government should send the homeless people to some modern nations with the shortage of
workforce. In fact this will not only benefits the homeless people with a higher remuneration
but also increases the general working productivity in the host countries.
In conclusion, I believe that monetary aid is not a practical approach to homelessness. Many
progessive initiatives such as free educational access and exported labour would benefits them
more.

n this twenty-first century, it is surprising that many people still have no homes. Some people
argue that the governments should help the homeless by giving them money. I do not agree
with this argument. In my opinion, giving cash to homeless people will only worsen the
situation.

Homelessness in most cases is a result of laziness. When the government rewards it with
monetary help, the homeless people will have no motivation to earn money to enjoy home
ownership. Instead, they will want to continue to enjoy government benefits. Worse, people
who are already struggling to make a living will start assuming that being homeless is the
easiest way to gain help from the government. So instead of doing anything to improve their
living standards, they too will start queuing up for benefits.

Being homeless is a miserable state. Also it does not reflect well on a society when people sleep
on the streets. So, in order to help the poor people, the government should put them in a
community shelter for a limited period and also get them involved in some work. To improve
their employability, the government should give them vocational training. And once they have
acquired the necessary skills they should be encouraged to find a job and a home on their own.
If the government continues to give them financial assistance, they will not do anything to
improve their living standards.

To conclude, instead of giving financial benefits and free accommodation to homeless people,
the government should provide them with training that will help them to find a job and earn
money. And when they have money, they can buy a home on their own.

More developing countries are given aid from international organisations to help

them in their development plans. Some people argue that financial aid is

important but others suggest that practical aid and advice are more important?

Discuss both views and give your opinion. (Reported 2017, Academic Test)
Many people believe that third word countries need financial support from the international
community whereas others take the opposite view and claims that developing nations need
education, infra structure development, health care and community based development
programs. While practical aid and policy programs have their own merits I would argue that
financial aid plays an integral role in supporting poor countries.

On the one hand, community based programs and strategic advice are extremely important for
developing countries. One reason is that, practical aid programs such as vaccination to prevent
major diseases, developing medical and education centers and supporting structures are
needed to resolve existing social problems. For example, thousands of vulnerable children in
Africa have been saved by International aid programs from agencies such as the International
Cross Organization and Doctors Without Border.s Organization provide aid which has proven
successful in rescuing the general population from these countries from disease and starvation.
Another reason is that most national leaders have their own limited vision or knowledge of
strategic development. Expert Consultants from international groups could help them optimize
and manage development policies for all programs. This would be a positive impact on all
aspects of their country's programs. The result would lead the nation to future prosperity for
their citizens.

On the other hand, I would argue that financial support from the international community plays
a significant role for poor nations. Firstly, if the governments had enough money in their
budgets, they could promote small businesses for people with low interest loan. The result
being, many people could make ends meet and stop the poverty cycle. Secondly, traffic
infrastructure in poor countries could be improved by investing aid money to build concrete
roads, highways and bridges which could connect the remote areas to cities. Therefore, trading
and traveling could help increase rural development and the economy. Furthermore, aid money
could be used to improve the educational system so that universal education could be
implemented. When children are educated and can use their knowledge, it helps develop much
needed career prospects for the future.

In conclusion, although specifiic aid and consultants are beneficial in some ways for developing
countries, I believe that financial support is more beneficial for third word countries
t is true that people have different opinions about measures to assist poor nations. While some
people think that financial support from international bodies is essential for those countries, I
would argue that practical aid and advice are more effective assistance.

On the one hand, it is undeniable that financial aid has a positive impact on developing
countries combat starvation and poverty. Firstly, external monetary flow from international
investment enables local and national authorities to improve infrastructure by upgrading and
expanding public transport provision, building more interstate roads and investing in hospital
facilities. As a result, thanks to the overwhelming support, it is convenient for citizens in those
place to avoid traffic congestion or minimize the risk of disease. Secondly, foreign cash
injections make a great contribution to creating more job for struggle residents living in rural
areas or harsh conditions. If financial aids from authorities focus on developing a wide range of
different jobs in the society, especially in poor countries, people who have whether or not
degree are able to earn money to make end meets.

On the other hand, I strongly believe that practical aid and advice are effective solutions to
maintain sustainable growth in the long-term. Firstly, undeveloped nations need experts in the
field of science, law, and medicine in order to encourage their development. However,
scientists, lawyers, and doctors can only be trained and professional and systematic education
and training programs are therefore more practice and suitable in the context of poor
countries. Secondly, without this funding, the poor will be incapable of maintaining the
economic development and independence. Therefore, it is better to give proper advice and
guidance by providing opportunities for students from developing countries to learn
comprehensive knowledge and experience from prosperous ones. For example, some
prestigious Japanese universities offer a large number of scholarships for million of students in
the area to enrich their professional understanding.

In conclusion, although additional funding to support poor nations is not a sustainable solution,
it seems to me that advice and practical aid are better.

Since the globalization has opened the doors of opportunities for everyone, many countries
have come together to support the needy countries in terms of finance and knowledge by
constituting world organizations like World bank. Many intellectuals welcome the idea of
providing support in terms of capital while others favor the assistance in terms of skill and
advice from international organizations. However, In my view that both, finance and guidance,
are equally important for thriving countries in their development projects.

Firstly, countries those are in need of development, are generating a very low gross national
product which depicts highly deficit economy. Financial support only can fill the fuel in poor
economic condition to put the first milestone of any development project. To illustrate,
countries like Ghana and Bangladesh where people are living on a hand to mouth, the
government would require the cash inflow to revive the economy and to handle the projects
like poverty removal through generating more jobs, education system set up and so on.
Moreover, observation shows that the slow influx of money and the beast of corruption gulps
the huge portion of the loan granted. Still, whatever money is injected into the system can
serve the purpose of project accomplishment to a certain extent.

On the other hand, skill and advice from the international bodies are carrying huge importance
due to the fact of two for tango. In absence of knowledge and guidance, the maximum portion
of finance can fall into the drain in experimenting ideas. To exemplify, India has recently
received a technical assistance and operational guidance from Japan for the development of
fastest public transport metro rail. Japan has already built up a strong and successful network
of metro rail in their country. Hence, they are well versed in analyzing the array of factors to
implement their strategy and providing assistance in developing the same facility for other
countries. What is more, skill and advice can channelise the capital for fruitful results
minimizing the risk factors of experiments.

To conclude, money and knowledge are reciprocal to each other. I strongly believe combination
of both the entity only can generate desirable results in developing countries.

It is clear that international assistance has been gaining a great deal of media attention in
recent decades due to its substantial impacts on the globalized world. Although the proposal of
finalcial help sound reasonable, I think practical aids and advices would pay more dividends.

On the one hand, there are several reasons why multinational organisations would provide
money for developing nations. First, pecuniary assistance from outside organisations could
solve the problem of inadequate public infrastructure as the local government has more money
for the construction of buildings and roads for citizen. This would mitigate the gridlock in the
urban areas and provide more shelter for homeless people, which promote better living
standards. Second, financial injection from international government groups could lead to and
increase in foreign companies and highly- industrialized parks in the funded nations. This could
create more job opportunity for those citizens especially young generation, culminating in the
decrease in unemplyment rate.

On the other hand,many practical and effective aids should be needed for a long-term
sustainable development. The first reason is that operation reliefs from outside governments
would act as an effective deterrent to the poverty and starvation. For example, many North
Korean people in the poverty-stricken regions have been saved thanks to food and medicine
from the neighboring affluent China, reducing the national officials’ financial burdens
remarkably. In addition to commodity support, international organizations should establish
more educational instituitions and professtional training courses in the developing nations. This
would give those citizens more opportunity to experience a standardised academic
environment, which help unlock their potential capacity.

In conclusion, effective and realistic assistance would be a foundational element for the
sustainability of both economy and society of the developing nations.

Some people argue that financial aid is the best approach for developing countries to alleviate
poverty and become more economically developed. However, I belive that receiving practical
aid and advice from international organisation could contribute more greatly to the sustainable
development of a country in the long term.

On the one hand, it is understandable why some people believe that it is best to provide
financial assistance for developing countries. First , external monetary flow might enable
executive bodies of those countries to carry out a wide range of functions, for example
infrastructural development and social healthcare and provide people who always struggle to
make a living with basic necessities such as food or shelters. As a result, citizens in those
nations will have a chance to enjoy a more decent standard of living, reducing considerably the
rate of poverty. Second, foreign cash injections also play a vital role in building up an effective
administration system by paying standard salaries for governmental staff members. With a
stable income, most officials would be motivated to be fully in charge of social, technical,
executive positions in courts of law, police stations and so forth. This will result in a decline in
crime rate and foster economic progress
On the pther hand, I still side with those who argue that practical aid and advice from
inetrnational organisations are a more effective solution to problems faced by developing
countries. As a matter of fact, as direct monetary resources are limited and can only act as the
short-term support to relieve some economic issues, sustainable development can not merely
depend on support in the form of money from international organisations. That is the reason
why it is more important to provide poor nations with professional and systematic education
and training programs which send high-level experts to train local workforce and introduce
advanced technologies. This would gradually create a more well-educated and productive
workforce, postively affecting the national economic expasion

In conclusion, while direct financial support form international aid is an effective solution to
tackle some problems, practical aid and advice is a more efficient measure in helping
developing coutries to achieve economic progress in the long run.

In many countries, people are moving away from rural areas and towards urban

areas.

Why do you think that is?

What problems can this cause?

In the last decade, we have seen a migration of people moving away from rural areas toward
modern towns. In order to understand this trend, we need to explain reasons, effects and
possible consequences.

The first reason for this phenomenon can be insufficient amount of the commodities or
services, which are extremely necessary to sustain their life in rural areas. As well, lack of high
standard medical services, which in terms of life are vital. For instance, living in these areas
appears to be not difficult due to the use of natural products; however, these products need to
pass several process of purifying to become clear and natural. To conduct certain processes the
machines require some elements that can break, lost, or stolen, depending on the
circumstances. This situation may lead to consequences such as the appearance of diseases
among people, the panic of the residents in advance or suffering of the animals.

The second reason is that globalization regarding cities is spreading much faster than those
from rural areas. Urban towns are becoming more developed from all angles due to the
sponsorship from the government or different organizations from the other countries. These
investors tend to contribute their money in towns rather than rural areas because of the lack of
potential profit of the latter. One living in rural area are not only prompted to move toward the
towns but also have to leave their relatives, friends and even sell their cattle.

The trend of moving toward urban areas from rural may lead to the declination of the cattle’s
quality, which provide people with meat, as well as the reduce of the agriculture.

In several nations, individuals are transferring from outskirts of the city to the metropolis. In my
perspective, the reasons for this phenomenon are to look for better job opportunities and
convenience in transportation while the downside of this is overcrowding and pollution.

To begin with, most companies are located in the city which offer more employment
opportunities than in rural areas. High-rise buildings will hire hundreds of qualified employees
to operate as a business. Apart from this, transportation is not difficult to find even in wee
hours of the night. Public buses and railways can take someone into their desired place in just
few minutes.

However, the predicament of metropolitan areas when most people will decide to relocate is
overcrowding. This is true in terms of population, housing space, and number of vehicles in the
road. There is a direct proportionality in these factors in making the area congested. Moreover,
pollution will be more prominent and felt as numerous of people are now in the same zone of
emitting unwanted gases and producing waste.

Overall, certain residents who have decided to move from rural to urban setting are justified by
seeking for more work opportunities and wanted to experience convenient lifestyle. Although it
would possibly result to dense population and affects one's health, the right to choose where to
stay is deemed to the person's preference.

The phenomenon of people moving away from rural areas toward big cities has affected several
countries in the last decades. In my opinion, this will be a huge problem in the future because it
is important to have a better balanced distribution of population.
One of the main cause of this movement is the lack of jobs in the countryside. People struggle
to find a good job and decide to move to the city in order to have a better chance to find it.
Moreover, we have to consider that it is not easy to live in rural areas with lack of facilities such
as a good internet connection, public transports and so on, that are very important in modern
days. People just want to make use of these facilities in order to improve their lifestyle.

Besides the reasonable motivations that can lead people to move, this phenomenon could
cause huge problems to the administration of the cities. Indeed it could lead to overpopulation
causing the decrease in the offer for jobs due to the rising demand for it, resulting in
unemployment. In addition to that, there can be difficulties in satisfying primary needs such as
food and water.

It is also worth noting that if the cities get overcrowded, the rural areas will be almost
inhabited. This would be a great problem because of the decrease in agricultural production,
which can lead to a lack of food in urban areas as a side effect. There are no areas to cultivate
there and there would easily be a drought of vegetables.

In conclusion, perhaps governments have to find a way to stop people from moving away, in
order to maintain a high standard of life in the country.

With the development of modern society is the loss of traditional ways of life.

Is it important to keep our traditional ways of life?

How can this be achieved?

Sample Answer 1: (Disagreement)

The issue ‘with the development of the technology traditional skills and the conventional
lifestyle die’ is a controversial one and needs deeper argument before supporting or opposing
the issue. Overall, I disagree with the opinion expressed; I would like to begin by pointing out
that ‘traditional skills and ways of life’ are not totally vanished from one country, culture or
community because of the introduction of technology.
In many ways, the history of civilisation is the history of technology: from the discovery of fire
to the invention of the wheel to the development of the Internet we have been moving on from
previous ways of doing things. Some technologies, such as weapons of mass destruction, are of
negative impact. Others, such as medical advances, positively help people to live better or
longer, and so very much help traditional ways of life. Surely, few people would seek to
preserve such traditions as living in caves. Technology will always follow its own footsteps no
matter what we, some people think about it. Technology advances because we need it. So
there is no way to prevent the advancement of the technology but we should embrace it
positively. The generation of a country is responsible for preserving their own custom and
tradition and if people feel eager to save a tradition then there is no way technological
advancement will destroy it. There are many cases where technology replaces human labour to
create certain things, for example, handmade sari, which is still popular in many countries.
Technology, in this case, has not destroyed the old tradition but has introduced a faster and less
expensive ways to create the same thing.

Interestingly, technology can positively contribute to the keeping alive of traditional skills and
ways of life. For example, the populations of some islands are too small to have normal schools.
Rather than breaking up families by sending children to the mainland, education authorities
have been able to use the Internet to deliver schooling online. In addition, the Internet, and
modern refrigeration techniques are being used to keep alive the traditional skills of producing
salmon; it can now be ordered from, and delivered to, anywhere in the world.

In conclusion, without suggesting that all technology is necessarily good, I think it is by no

means ‘pointless’, in any way, to try to keep traditions alive with technology. We should not
ignore technology because it can be our friend and support our way of life.

(Approximately 405 words)

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

Alternative Answer 2:
The technological revolution affects all countries around the world in many ways significantly. It
seems that the traditional skills and the ways life used to be present have disappeared. This
essay will discuss how the technology has led to this case and whether it is worth attempting to
save people's traditional life or not.

To begin with, there are various reasons why traditional skills no longer exist as it was many
years ago. One major reason is the development of technology. For illustrations, modern
technology has been used for many tasks such as agriculture, industries, and the machines have
replaced people’s manual tasks in most cases. Moreover, the internet alters the way of
communication dramatically; instead of visiting family these days, for example, people speak
with each other over the phone or chat using social media like Facebook or Twitter. Perhaps,
that is why the traditional skills are expiring with the demand if time and modernization.

Let's move to another point in the statement: some people argue that the traditional
experience shouldn't be saved. The principal reason for their opinion is that global advertising
encourages everyone to buy the same products. For instance, people wear similar clothes,
rather than traditional costumes, and eat from the same types of restaurants such as KFC and
Mac Donald and their branches are present all over the world. This shows that it does not make
sense to keep the traditional skills alive.

To conclude, this essay has looked at the possible reasons of die out of traditional life, such
as the revolution in technology and popularity of the internet, and also the reason why it is
aimless to keep them alive.

(Approximately 277 words)

(This model answer was written by Khalid Ibrahim )

Model Answer 3: (Agreement)

Whether the technology and its influences kill the traditional way of life and whether should we
try to preserve the tradition is a controversial issue and required an in-depth argument before
deciding. In my opinion, the technology definitely traditional skills, expertise and way of life
change and the change might be slow for many societies but it is a sure thing. About the later
part of the argument: ‘whether it is pointless to try to preserve those’ is something I opine that
that should not be imposed on people. Who want to maintain the traditional way of living
rather than embracing the technology should be given the option.

The history suggests us that the new invention and technology have greatly changed the way
people live and mostly these changes help them to choose for better alternatives. People who
used to cultivate lands with the plough and cow in many years before and that was a kind of
skill that became obsolete with the invention of the motorized irrigation system. People might
have lost the skill they had but the technology helped them to produce more crops than ever
before. With the invention of cell the phone, the internet, television, refrigerator people have
definitely adopted a different lifestyle than they had many years ago and those changes, in my
opinion, are important to ensure a better life. We would not blame the medical science for
killing the traditional unscientific treatment and would widely accept it. In most of the cases,
people used to do things manually and with the widespread of technology they have started
relying on technology than their own skill and that has caused the loss of traditional skill. But
we have to bear in mind that many technologies have been replaced by newer ones and people
always try to take the easy and better alternatives.

About the importance of conserving the traditional skill and way of life, I would say when
technology offers us a better alternative, we should cordially accept that but we should also
respect the people who among us maintain the old way of life. Technology would knowingly
and unknowingly influence our life but we should not make it a must for everybody.

(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)

Alternative Answer 4:

Technology is an important thing in people’s life and it clearly helps us to adapt with the period
of development. I disagree with an opinion that, when technology develops in a country, the
traditional skills disappear. There are two reasons that I will describe related to this case; which
is traditional skills can combine with technology and traditional skills still have a great position
in order to technological development.
On the one hand, traditional skill is the heritage from our ancestor. So we have responsibilities
to take care for it. The development of technology is huge advantages for ‘traditional skills’.
Using the technology we can improve these skills and while trying to introduce new innovations
to combine technology and traditional skills. For instance, ‘hand art painting’ is one of the
traditional skills, people can make a new creation by using technology touching use
‘Photoshop’. The combination between hand art painting and Photoshop software will be a
great innovation. People can create great works and earn a lot by doing this.

On another hand, although the technology is developing sharply, the traditional skill used
products are still having a high position in the marketing field. For example, Indonesian
traditional stuff namely ‘Songket’ is still creating great improvement in the sale. In my
hometown, an industrial Songket factory, in the end of 2014, received order 2000 to 3000
pieces ‘songket’ stuff from some country including USA, Italy, Japan and Vietnam. It proofs that
traditional products still stand up till now.

To sum up, traditional skills are still alive though the technology is increased dramatically. It still
has a special place in people’s life. Also, traditional skills’ popularity will increase if people try to
combine both traditional skills and technology.

(Approximately 281 words)

(This model answer was submitted by Keith )

Alternative Answer 5:

Increasingly technological developments are aggressively pushing traditional lifestyle and skills
out of the picture. Some believe that this diminishing process is too extraordinary to stop or
reverse. However, I believe that valuable traditions will be preserved in particular ways by
providing alternative ways of living, and being inspirations for modern technology
developments.
First of all, traditional lifestyle and skills are gradually becoming popular recently, particularly
among young people who live in a busy urban area, by offering alternative ways of life. For
instance, a cosy country style Thai restaurant where traditional cooking herbs and vegetables
are freshly harvested from its own backyard garden, and spices are 100% homemade with
traditional spicy preserving skills, has drawn much attention and popularity from people who
are bored of mass produced food and the highly industrialised environment. Such traditional
skills and way of life would continue to have their place in this modern era.

Furthermore, conventional skills can be a great source of inspirations for modern technologies
development. Evidence have shown that engineers and designers of modern times are still
constantly inspired by the traditional skills. For example, sparked by a traditional bamboo
braiding skills from a rural Asian area, a world widely famous furniture designer, working with
equally talented engineers, invented production lines to manufacture designed modern
furniture that however has that particular traditional braid style touch. Such inspiration has
boosted the business, therefore, in turn, would result in more money allocated for preserving
those valuable skills for further development.

To conclude, although it is hard to stop most of our traditional skills and ways of life vanishing
from this modern world, some traditional skills and lifestyle would not just survive, but also
thrive by proving alternative ways of living and being innovative for modern technology.

Every culture, throughout time, has recorded its history in one way or another.

In what ways can history be passed on to the next generation?

Why is history important to society?

To some people studying the past has little value in the modern world. Why do you think it is
important to learn the past? What will be the effect if children are not taught history?

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

Write at least 250 words.

Model Answer 1:

Some people give little credit and value of studying history as it is petty and in their opinion
does not have any importance in the modern society. Other people,on the contrary, reckon
that the past has prominent roles in understanding our modern life and taking important
decisions for the future. So in this essay, I will consider both points of views and state my own
assertion on the matter followed by the consequences if we do not teach history to our
children.

In the modern world, it cannot be denied that examining the past could be unbelievably
valuable in terms of understanding of our modern world problems. There is a saying that
suggests that "history repeats itself", for this reason, if we delve into history, examine it without
leaving any detail behind, we will have more opportunities to anticipate forthcoming problems
and it is undeniable that problems would be solved very easily. Human conflicts, inventions and
socials issues in all the ages are quite similar and this is what makes the study of past so
important. Without studying the past we cannot understand why a certain civilization
flourished among others and why nations were destroyed. This knowledge can give us such a
wisdom that would help us progress further.

History has a great importance in our lives, in spite of the fact that there are people who think
the past is useless and there is no point in studying history. However, it is undoubtedly true that
an explicit future awaits the one who has delved into history. Thus teaching history to the
children needs to be considered comprehensively. Because if children are not taught history,
there will be consequences. For instance, lack of knowledge of the past of their country would
have a tragic outcome in the society.

To conclude, studying and examining the past has a fundamental value in the modern world
and it is undeniable that the effects of the children who are not taught history would be more
catastrophic than anyone could imagine.

[ Written by - Eldar Rehimli ]

Model Answer 2:
Learning the history might not have any or little importance for some people in these days, but,
the history and past can’t be ignored. The present is built on the pillars of past and only learning
from the past can give us right direction for the future. In my point of view, something that
happened in the past, need to be learned to go ahead with the right decisions. If the new
generations are not taught history, they will not have any respect towards the past struggle or
glory of the country and thus they won’t become the citizens we want them to be.

Learning the past is the knowledge we require to learn about the right and wrong. This gives us
the opportunity to take the right decision for the future. If someone does not learn the past
history, he will never have any respect for the country, humanity and towards the world. He will
simply become a selfish citizen who won’t even respect the rich tradition of a country. To his
everything would be like an automated and programmed system. Through history learning,
children should be introduced to their country, culture, and tradition. This is hoped to become
a first step to building a soul of nationality in students themselves. If children do not know the
history of their country, they will have no idea how to build the nation. For example, if children
grow up without learning the past of their country and become a future policy maker, they will
never realize the need of their country and won’t be able to take a right decision.

Secondly, students who learn about history will understand how their ancestors survived to get
the independence of their country. So, from this understanding, children may have a good
motivation to develop their ability in order to contribute to the building of their country;
physically and mentality. Students without this ability usually will have a lack of contribution to
their nation. For instance, the children who live in another country for a long time and do not
learn about Indonesian history will tend to never come back to build Indonesia, even though
Indonesian society needs their contribution.

In conclusion, based on reasons mentioned above, history learning is needed by students to

build their nationality and motivate them to contribute to their country. Learning the past is the
first step to building a better future.

[ Written by - Shinta Sari ]

Model Answer 3:

Many people state that studying history has many important values in the modern life while
others have an opposite view on this. In my opinion, the very purpose of the history lessons in
schools is to educate students what the world was in the past and how to build a better future
from the lessons the history tells us. By studying and observing history, students can learn from
the past events of our past generations and their experiments, mistakes, success, dedication,
lifestyle, struggling and bravery can teach us to be ready for the hardships of life beforehand.

The past has always comprised of invaluable insights of great kings, thinkers and warriors like
Napoleon, Nietzsche and Aschille. Examples taken from their words and actions are great
source for those who are passionate about acquiring ideas and clues of how to survive and
thrive. Moreover, as my country's former president Haydar A. said "the one who do not know
their past do not have a future either"- hence if the children who study at all stages of school
are not encouraged by their history teachers to try to obtain observation and notions from the
people of past, their progress in life are not expected to be as thriving as the ones who do.
Furthermore when a person is not interested in history at school and travels overseas, how can
this person introduce themselves as a patriotic individual? They are incapable of talking about
anything that their country and nation went through. The future is written in the past and
knowledge about the past can encourage us to make a better future. How can we understand
the casualty or was if we do not look back at the major wars from history?

To sum up, history belongs to the community itself and therefore it is people's duty to transmit
it to the next generation. And as a result, by the help of the deductions from the predecessor's
experiences and insights beneficiaries will be able to live uneventful and relaxed.

Some people think that studying history is a waste of time while others think

that it is essential to learn. Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

History is a Waste of Time

Most people memorise dates, names and facts when they study history. This

information is not useful in everyday life or for the future.

If we could actually learn from history, history wouldn’t be full of the same

repeated mistakes. However, the same mistakes are made again and again which
 makes history irrelevant to learn for the future.

History is a subject that is rarely used in people’s lives so it would be

better to focus on science or technology which is more relevant to the future

and today’s society.

Each historical event has different perspectives. For this reason, it makes

learning history a waste of time because events can also be interpreted in a

different way which makes what we learn in history less valuable.

Many school curriculum have been set and are rarely changed. That curriculum

includes little current history which is the only type of history that helps

people understand the world they currently live in.

History is Important

History helps young people understand their own culture and how their culture

and country have evolved.

History gives identity and helps unify people. It gives people a sense of

roots and belonging.

History teaches people what their forefathers experienced and suffered in the

past in order to make their country what it is today.

History teaches us about travesties which have occurred in the past, such as

the Holocaust. It is essential for both people in the past, present and future

to never forget such events in order to honour the memory of those lost and

to ensure it never happens again.

History helps us understand change. It records and helps people understand

successes and failures. Through these studies people can learn about change

and how others are affected by it.

 It shows patterns of behaviour or events in the past and their outcome which

can help us avoid similar outcomes in the future.

Learn about the past often gives a glimpse of the future. It shows a path of

development that will continue past the present and into the future.

Valuable information can often be found in history, such as traditional

medicines. Learning about past lifestyles and techniques used by people in the

past can hold the secrets to remedies or cures no longer used.

All societies have their own music and art.

In what way are music and art important for society and for the individual?

Music is played in every society and culture in the world today. Some people think that music
brings only benefits to the individuals and societies. Others, however, think that music can have
a negative influence on both.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Sample Answer:

Music is considered as the foods for our souls and its relationship with human race is so intense
that we cannot think of a single country or society that does not have its own music. Music is
related to our relaxation, our festival, our national pride, prayer, daily activities, joys,
celebration and many important aspects of our personal and social life. I believe that pure
music is always pleasing and brings benefits to both society and culture. The negative effect of
music is so unheard of and I believe that we need music for our personal motivation, festivals,
celebration, different occasions and expressing our inner joys and respect for things we love.

First of all, music is a form of joy which is tied with our existence. It is a form of expression
which can be understood and expressed so easily. Possibly music is the only form of art that we
can feel so deeply and need in every part of our personal and social life. Music is the
composition of lyrics, melody, instruments, feelings and experience that articulate our life and
we have our favourite music based on our understanding and preference. Other forms of arts
are restricted within a perimeter but music has no boundaries- it lives beyond ages and
borders.
Positive influences of music are enormous – it heals our wound, it motivates us, it refreshes our
mind, it reminds us our past and the list goes on and on. The music a society or country adopts
reflects its traditions, cultures, history and unique features. The national anthem- which is also
a music- is revered by all the countrymen and inspires people. Music is a part of prayer in many
religions and cultures.

Now if we judge how music can bring negative effects, which I do not agree with, we will have
to consider the people who are basically claiming it. When people say that foreign music is
harmful to a particular tradition, they are not actually complaining about the music, rather
people’s choice of music. The generation gap is another reason that can bring up the opinions
that modern music is harmful to young people. That’s something I also disagree. This
generation gap exists in all centuries and it is pretty common that older generation would
complain about the choice made by the new generation, especially in music.

Finally, it is really hard to find an individual who does not like music. His music choice might be
different but his overall need and feelings for music are positive. The music is an important part
of a society and every society has its relationship with music. The music reflects a society and
the unique way of life in that society.

In conclusion, I think music plays an important role in our life and its relationship with a society
or country is unparalleled. The negative effects of music on an individual or society is a rare
issue which we can easily control with our love to our own tradition. The positive aspects of
music and its need in our life are endless.

The population of most cities is growing as people move to cities to find work

and new opportunities.

What problems does overpopulation in cities cause?

How can these problems be solved?

Overpopulation in the cities is increasingly becoming a social issue. This essay will elaborate the
major problem such as the lack of basic necessities and suggest a viable solution of relocating
the company’s operation. While it may be a challenge, it may definitely not impossible to
achieve.

The crucial problem of overcrowded cities is the issue of sustainability which includes lack of
basic needs such as housing and clean water. This is because most of the cities are specifically
designed to cater a designated number of people and will not be ready to be converted to
mega cities. For instance, the Times Newspaper recently reported that the population of
Sydney surpassed the average number of the required residents. In contrast, if its population is
within the normal average range, the authorities will find it less difficult to provide shelter and
portable water for everyone.

The potential approach to tackling this issue is for the government to mandate businesses to
move their manufacturing operations outside the city center. This will open the door of
opportunities to rural areas as more jobs will be available and the need to move to cities will be
discouraged. For example, the recent survey at the University of Queensland concluded that
more respondents are likely to move to an area where they can find an employment. This
clearly shows that if the employment opportunities are readily available within their location,
people will not be attracted to live in the cities.

In conclusion, although there are problems associated with overpopulation in the cities, these
problems are not insurmountable. To address the issue, the government should adopt a long-
term measure such as to relocate the plant operations of the company outside the city.

Life in cities has its drawbacks.

The cost of living is higher than in rural areas.

Housing is usually much more expensive.

Homelessness and poverty are common in cities.

There is a gap between the rich and poor.

Life in cities can be extremely stressful.

There are problems like traffic congestion and crime.

Cities lack a sense of community.

People do not even know their neighbours.

Cities are sometimes described as “concrete jungles”.

Model Answer 1:

Overpopulation in cities and urban areas is a growing problem that governments and
individuals have to take into account seriously. They should work together to reduce the
inconveniences caused by it. This essay will examine what are the issues caused by
overcrowding and discuss on solutions.

First of all, we can truly affirm that the first result of overpopulation in towns is without any
doubts congestion and traffic jams which lead to serious pollution problems. Another
inconvenience due to overcrowding is garbage from inhabitants. Many cities do not have the
means to handle the charge of rubbish casting away by its habitants which lead to unclean
cities.

The lack of decent accommodation is also a growing problem that cities must deal with. Many
people are unable to find a place to live in which is a step back for cities’ development.

However and fortunately, if we sit down a minute to think about what each of us could do to
tackle this problem it is not hard to find a solution. Individuals should use public transports as
often as they can rather than using their own car and the government should build more roads
and improve public transportation to address this issue.

To handle the garbage flowing in streets they should sort out rubbish they throw away. For
accommodation problems, the poorest should establish the sharing flats system. The
government can expand the area and can help building more building to handle the
accommodation issue.

On its own side, governments might set a tax for car owners and develop public transports back
with the earned money. For a cleaner city, they should create advertisements in order to
educate its people about what to do with rubbish and give a fine to someone spotted for
throwing a paper, rubbish or dust in the street. Finally, to overcome the accommodation
problem governments should build more infrastructures for people in need.
To sum up, we all know that these problems are worrying and growing but if every one of us
thinks about what they can do to make it better. I am sure that these issues could be solved.

[ Written by - Dhuicq Justine ]

Model Answer 2:

Ever since the industrial revolution, people have been migrating to urban centres in droves.
Hence, cities have become overcrowded, which in turn has resulted in many hardships for their
dwellers. It is argued that high costs of living and rising transport difficulties are two of the most
serious problems brought about by overpopulation in cities. To tackle these issues, suburb
developments and infrastructural changes will be analysed for viability.

To begin, costs of living in big cities have reached an exorbitant level in the past few decades
due to ever growing population density in these areas. One of the ways in which this alarming
issue can be addressed is via development of upscale housing communities in the outskirts of
major urban centres. For example, in Karachi, Pakistan, the government has initiated many such
projects outside of the metropolitan area, which has helped to curb the high costs of property
in the city. As a result, property ownership rates in the city have sky-rocketed in the last few
years. Therefore, the plausibility of establishing such housing arrangements can be clearly seen.

In addition, many cities now face the epidemic of regular bumper-to-bumper traffic jams due to
ever increasing the population. A feasible way to counter this issue is the investment in newer
modes of transportation. Take London, for example, where the underground subway system
has dramatically eased the traffic congestion in most parts of the city. Thus, the subway system
has become the preferred way of travelling for most inhabitants of London and as a result, the
numbers of cars on London’s roads have dramatically shrunk in numbers. Hence, the
effectiveness of this suggested solution is obvious.
As is clear, setting-up of housing communities outside of city limits and establishment of
alternative means of transport are effective ways to counter the negative ramifications of
overpopulations in cities. It is thus hoped that these strategies are put into practice by
governments the world over.

[ Written by - Sameed Qureshi ]

Model Answer 3:

The rising number of population in metropolitan places has caused significant repercussions.
This has resulted in the incessant spread of pollution and an escalation of poverty. However,
there are several preventive measures that the government can implement in order to address
this social problem.

Primarily, it is often said that an increase of inhabitants in a well-established region is

accompanied by a rise in pollution. In cosmopolitan regions, there are impoverished groups
who live in squalor. Some of them have chosen to settle in the city because they believe that
that they can easily find an employment in this place. For example, in the Philippines, there are
poor individuals who built homes in the boulevard of Metro Manila, thus contributing to the
amount of waste. Clearly, these people dispose of their rubbish to the ocean, which may harm
marine animals. In addition, it is apparent that most of the less affluent cohort has a large
number of families. These members have personal needs, which cause a burden to the
breadwinner of the family. Since the city has a number of educated workers the impecunious
group often seems to struggle in searching a better employment. To illustrate, they cannot
procure a decent job since they did not finish their education. Hence, these people will suffer
from poverty, which results in higher incidences of famine.

However, it can never be denied that the government can implement platforms, which will
mitigate the social dilemma. First of all, they can increase the number of employment offers in
suburbs such as providing them lands that can be cultivated. Therefore, impoverished people
will not aggregate in the city. Secondly, the government can provide programs such as sex
education to these individuals. As an instance, public health practitioners can orient them the
appropriate use of contraceptives, which will control the number of family members.

To conclude, the proliferation of pollution and the exacerbation of poverty are the negative
ramifications of a rise of residents in the city. Nevertheless, government’s projects can curtail
this social issue. It is very likely that the poverty will be in control if the government provides
them job opportunities in suburbs.

IELTS Overpopulation Essay - Sample Answer

Many countries of the world are currently experiencing problems caused by rapidly growing
populations in urban areas, and both governments and individuals have a duty to find ways to
overcome these problems.

Overpopulation can lead to overcrowding and poor quality housing in many large cities. Poorly
heated or damp housing could cause significant health problems, resulting in illness, such as
bronchitis or pneumonia. Another serious consequence of overcrowding is a rising crime rate as
poor living conditions may lead young people in particular to take desperate measures and turn
to crime or drugs.

In terms of solutions, I believe the government should be largely responsible. Firstly, it is vital
that the state provides essential housing and healthcare for all its citizens. Secondly, setting up
community projects to help foster more community spirit and help keep young people off the
street is a good idea. For example, youth clubs or evening classes for teenagers would keep
them occupied. Finally, more effective policing of inner city areas would also be beneficial.

Naturally, individuals should also try to address these problems. One way is to put pressure on
the government to ensure they tackle the problems by, for instance, forming action groups to
lobby the government and request intervention and adequate funding. They could also form
Neighbourhood Watch areas to try and help reduce the high levels of crime.
Therefore, it is clear that the problems caused by overpopulation in urban areas are very
serious. Yet if governments and individuals share a collective responsibility, then it may well
become possible to offer some solutions.

In many cities there is a lack of space to develop and as a result, in order to

modernise, old buildings are demolished and replaced with new buildings.

What are the disadvantages of knocking down old buildings?

Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?

Due to the growth of population and shortage of space in numerous cities, older buildings are
being torn down to construct new ones. I feel given the alternatives to space creation, this may
be a rational solution though in some case it should be reconsidered and avoided.

I think it is essential to create shelters to accommodate the increase in number of people. By

replacing old buildings with newer and taller constructions we are able to provide housing for
more people using the same area of land. This reduces pressure on cultivate or green land to be
cleared for building homes.

Old buildings can also be hazardous due to wear and tear or decay caused over years. Many
buildings are in poor shape and can fall down leading to major accidents. Demolishing and
reconstructing such buildings may be a better option reducing threat to life and increasing
space.

However, knocking down ancient building with all the advantages, may not always be the best
solution each time. We need to evaluate the architecture for its strength, cultural and designing
value. Some building may even hold historical importance and these should be preserved. Some
older constructions are built brilliantly with stronger foundations than most new buildings. They
should be upgraded and further strengthened instead of being demolished.

I also believe,as a more evolved species, we should also take the responsibility to use resources
given more carefully and take required steps to control population and eliminate wastage. If we
limit our space requirements and use the given land resources in a more optimum way we
would be able to create place without any destruction.

Overall, I believe substituting old buildings by new is a good solution but it is also situational. If
the ancient building holds historic or architectural or cultural value it should be preserved. In
other circumstances, the advantages of knocking old buildings for new over weighs the
disadvantages.

With explosion of population, there is dire crisis for space to live in many cities. Thereby, the
older buildings are being torn down to construct new ones. Though some old buildings are
significant for its aesthetic or archeological values, I think it is quite rational to make more
space to live.

To start with, old buildings represent a particular era and some of them have great aesthetic,
archeological or architectural worth. They provide an insight into the history of the city that
how the ancestors live centuries ago. And most importantly, they are symbolized either as an
integral part of culture or unique in the realm of architecture. Demolishing of these buildings
means harming the cultural heritage. Besides, these structures might be the source of tourism.

However, the old buildings that some people want to conserve are not worth saving. In fact, the
cities would benefit much more if the old structures are demolished and have high rise modern
buildings, shopping malls, etc. in the places of old buildings. By replacing old structures with
skyscrapers, we can provide home for more people occupying the same area of land. This
reduces pressure on cultivated land. This means that it not only solves the housing problem,
but also leaves more lands for harvesting crops. Aside from that, new shopping malls would
boost the economy of the town and could create new job opportunities as well. That is to say
that pulling down old building may enhance overall lifestyle of the city.

In pithy, the decision as to whether or not the old structures should be knocked down can be a
tough one, and in most cases, many different aspects will need to be considered prior to any
structure taking place. However, based on above discussion it can be concluded that the
advantages of demolishing old building for new modern structures are far more advantageous
than keeping the old ones.

Many old buildings protected by law are part of a nation’s history. Some people think they
should be knocked down and replaced by news ones.
How important is it to maintain old buildings?

Should history stand in the way of progress?

Most nations around the world have at least some, or possibly many, old buildings such as
temples, churches and houses in their cities, villages and surrounding areas which have
historical significance. In my opinion, it is very important to maintain these, but this does not
mean progress should stop.

Preserving certain old buildings is important for several reasons. Firstly, these structures
provide an insight into the history of our countries, showing us how people many centuries ago
lived their lives. Without them, we could only learn by books, and it would undoubtedly be sad
if this were the only way to see them. Many of these buildings are also very beautiful. Take for
example the many religious buildings such as churches and temples that we see around the
world. Not only this, but on a more practical level, many of these buildings provide important
income to a country as many tourists visit them in great numbers.

However, this certainly does not mean that modernization should be discouraged. I believe that
old buildings can be protected in tandem with progress. For example, in many circumstances
we see old historic buildings being renovated whilst maintaining their original character, and
being used for modern purposes. Also, in no way does history hinder progress, and in fact it is
the opposite. By studying and learning about our history, we understand more about the world
we live in, and this helps us to build a better future.

To conclude, I believe that it is very important to protect and preserve old buildings as we can
learn about our history as can others from other countries. Such knowledge can also help us to
understand how to modernize our countries in the best way.

Some people think that a life is good for people while others believe that

constant change can be too demanding on people.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

Sample Answer 1:
There are arguments that individuals should be refrained from doing new things and must stick
to traditional methods. However, some people are convinced that individuals need to venture
into some noble experiences in life. In my opinion, I would argue that alterations in some
activities and practices are essential to achieving progress and success.

Primarily, it can never be denied that some people may become comfortable with the routine
practices in life, which they are more accustomed. Clearly, people will not need to learn new
things as they are already more cognizant about the activities that they habitually perform. For
instance, in this modern era, the seniority group will find it confusing to read newspapers on an
electronic tablet due to the fact that they are not aware of its new features and the proper
operation of the gadget. For these reasons, the geriatric individuals do not need to learn the
settings and the high technology applications as it will take them a long period of time to adapt
this product of technology.

However, it can be argued that the life of people will become more adventurous if they opt to
new trends and experiences. As can be expected, the progress and success in life are often
achieved when a person tries to explore new ideas and practices, which might be beneficial for
the improvement of his or her life. To illustrate, a businessman, who have experienced failures
in his or her business, will resort to new strategies in order to make the business more firms
and highly profitable. This can be done by abandoning the old-fashioned styles and techniques
while accepting the modern ways, which could make the people’s lives more favourable. The
new idea, a new way of life and changes to the old way life often bring new opportunities to
people and getting adapted to the changes is the primary means of survivals and advancement.

In conclusion, there is a heated argument whether people must remain to the conservative
ways of life or resort to modern trends. However, I personally believe that the ideology of
success can be reached if people will embrace the new-fangled ways of living in the society.

[ Written by - Chino Bouquets ]

Sample Answer 2:

Masses are changing according to the environment needs. In the past time, all people preferred
to spend their lives doing the same things while only a handful of people did not prefer it.
However, nowadays the former category is lower in number. All people especially youngsters
prefer to change and they expect the changes would be enjoyable and for better.

Firstly, in these days only young generation give full preference to changes in most of the cases.
They embrace changes and think that changes will make their life meaningful. Secondly,
changes create new opportunities which make us leap forward. A new job, for instance, might
present challenges that push the person to adapt, acquire new knowledge, or add to their skill
set. Thirdly, a change can represent a break with the past and an old routine which has become
boring and predictable. Finally, as well as making life more fun and interesting, new experiences
can be good for our physical and mental health. We find that changes can make us experienced
and valuable.

On the flip side of the coin, people like old generation avoid changes in many cases because
they do not want to become materialistic. They opine we should give our full attention to one
thing and to the old way of traditional living. They mainly avoid major changes and thus remain
on a safe side while missing many opportunities that the changes might have bought. They do
not want to step outside their comfort zone, prefer following their daily habits. They feel
satisfied with their circumstance. Perhaps they feel that a routine gives them structure, maybe
they are not fond of surprises or confident enough to face new challenges. They believed that
staying secure and maintaining the current circumstance is the best way to live life safer.

To put it in a nutshell, both side seem to have their own merits. However, I also persuaded that
change is unavoidable and necessary if someone wants to keep up wit a fast pace of modern
life. Even if some people maintain a form of stability by following a routine, the world keeps
spinning and evolving.

It is sometimes thought that people who travel outside of their own country are

more tolerant and understanding of others.

To what extent do you agree?

International travel allows people to gain a deeper understanding of foreign countries and
cultures. It is also argued that it contributes positively to an individual’s way of thinking. I agree
with the argument that people who travel overseas are more likely to be tolerant and
cooperative.

To begin with, people of different nationalities have their own traditions, beliefs and
behaviours. If an individual decides to go abroad for a short-time, they may encounter many
challenges during their visit such as language, food and local culture. This experience helps to
broaden their horizons and their mindset. Studies have shown that a person is more likely to
improve his level of tolerance and understanding of cultures and people when they travel
abroad. Therefore, international travel is often seen as an important life experience.

Another point is that individuals who have visited international destinations tend to change
their view about social problems in their own country. For example, it is noticeable that many
countries face the problem of racism in certain ways. However, if people had some experience
travelling abroad, they are more likely to accept and respect race, beliefs and cultures.
Moreover, they try to imitate certain behaviours in order to feel more comfortable themselves
when interacting with local people. By contrast, if a society is less tolerant and less
understanding, the community as a whole will not overcome their social problems.

In conclusion, having the opportunities to meet and interact with people of different cultures
has an impact on the way people think about their own traditions. It helps to rethink and open
the mind to embrace more of the values and traditions of their own country.

Nowadays, travelling is considered the best way to build up the relations between different
countries. People travel in different parts of the world and try to know about their culture,
tradition, and living ways. It helps to raise the strong relationships between countries and
countrymen. By travelling people can move everywhere and promote culture, moral values and
trade of their countries.

In the past, when there were very low means of communication, people cannot go anywhere
easily; they were just limited to their home town. So, they did not know much about other
cultures and traditions. There were many demerits of this, they could not promote their
businesses at high level and could not understand others thinking. Even if any tribe entered to
the area of some other tribes, they would not bear them and there were battles held them.
These battles continued for long times and there were many losses of health and wealth.

Now in modern age, travelling is too much easy people can visit the whole world and know
about the other culture. If a man go abroad, he embrace with others and in this way two or
more nations come close and relations promote. People can set up their businesses at
international level and establish the economics of their countries. For instance, China has
strong economy, because, its people move all over the world and promote their trade. They
know very well how to treat with people and attract them towards their trade.

In conclusion, travel is important factor for developing the relations between different
countries. In this way, people have good opportunities to understand each other and establish
their trading for the betterment of their countries.

Space Exploration Questions

Some scientists think that there are intelligent life forms on other planets and

messages should be sent to contact them. Other scientists think it is a bad idea

and would be dangerous.

Discuss both views and give your own opinion. (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

For more than half a century, astronomers have been listening to space. They use powerful
radio telescopes, hoping to pick up signals from civilizations in distant space. They call this
project the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence, or SETI. The trouble is, they’ve never heard
a single ping, beep or “howdy.” The number of aliens who want to talk to us seems to be
exactly zilch.

So how can we get the conversation started? Scientists disagree.

Some want to follow your mom’s advice: Introduce yourself nicely. They think Earthlings should
start beaming signals out into the universe. Maybe it would improve our chances of hearing
back from aliens if we let them know we’re friendly and want to chat.
This so-called “active SETI” would deliberately beam signals out in hopes of reaching space
beings. Seth Shostak is an astronomer at the SETI Institute in Mountain View, Calif. He supports
the idea. He also concedes that it is “extraordinarily controversial.”

Indeed, some scientists question the wisdom of advertising our presence. After all, maybe the
aliens aren’t exactly what you’d call warm and cuddly. Do we really want to shout out to
whomever will listen: “Here we are! Come invade our planet!”? At the very least, these
scientists argue, people should discuss the idea and decide as a species whether we should try
to actively put ourselves onto the radar screen of more technologically advanced beings.

“There are some people who think it’s dangerous, because you don’t know who’s out there,”
Shostak says. “Maybe the aliens are just into yoga and poetry. But it could be that one percent
of them are aggressive Klingons.”

Shostak doesn’t share these fears. But some people worry that if the aliens are not peaceable
travelers, their response to even a friendly “hello” could be downright hostile. Some worry that
instead of a friendly chat, those aliens might, as he puts it, “launch an attack and obliterate the
Earth.”

David Brin doesn’t appreciate the Klingon jokes. He’s a scientist and science fiction writer. He
also is one of those people who argues that Earthlings should proceed with caution. It’s not a
matter of being afraid of some alien invasion, he says. “I know how unlikely those scenarios
may be.” Instead, he thinks of active SETI almost like a potential environmental hazard.

Broadcasting powerful signals would change the nature of our planet. It would make Earth
more observable from space. Other projects must go through an environmental review, he
says, and this should too. “What’s so hard about that to understand?”

As an astrobiologist, David Grinspoon studies the possibilities of life throughout the universe.
He works for the Planetary Science Institute in Washington, D.C. Whatever Earthlings do,
Grinspoon thinks it’s important for them to decide as a group.
“The more I think about it,” he explains, “the more it seems almost anti-human to say, ‘I’m just
going to be the ambassador for the whole human race and start broadcasting to aliens on my
own.’”

Alien life is likely, many scientists suspect

Inviting contact with space aliens might sound like the plot of one of Brin’s sci-fi novels. Yet
plenty of researchers are taking this idea quite seriously. Even though we haven’t found
extraterrestrials yet, many scientists believe that it’s quite likely that life exists on other
worlds.For one thing, science recently has shown that planets are much more common than
astronomers had once thought. There are probably billions of them in the universe.

Biology also has turned up plenty of life on Earth that can survive and thrive in extreme
environments — conditions that once were thought uninhabitable. These include places that
are very hot, very cold, very dry or even bathed in acid.

“Everything we’ve learned about other planets and the diversity of life on Earth points us in the
direction of believing there is abundant life elsewhere in the universe,” argues Grinspoon.

What’s more, even if life truly needed many of the same conditions found on our world, planets
have been turning up that may host Earth-like temperatures, atmospheres — and perhaps even
water. Such worlds exist in what’s known as “Goldilocks” zones. These are not too hot or too
cold — but just right to sustain liquid water somewhere.Whatever such alien life might be like
— even if most of those organisms are just algae or worms — some would likely be intelligent,
Grinspoon suspects. “It’s not just a fantasy that someone might pick up a signal if we broadcast
it,” he says. “It’s my belief that there probably are creatures out there. And some of them
probably have much more advanced technology than we do.”

Striking up a conversation
So how would people try to contact other worlds? Scientists have a few ideas. Like a message in
a bottle, people could put something into a capsule and shoot it into space. Or scientists could
flash lights at the aliens, training the beams of super-powerful lasers at nearby star systems.
Think of it like Boy Scouts waving their flashlights at girls who might be camping on the other
side of a lake. Researchers would send radio broadcasts out across the vast expanses of space.

Explainer: What is a laser?

Douglas Vakoch is president of METI International in San Francisco, Calif. (METI stands for
Messaging Extraterrestrial Intelligence.) In addition to other ideas for sending out signals, he
recommends beaming radio messages at other stars with huge radio telescopes, like the
Arecibo (Air-eh-SEE-boh) observatory in Puerto Rico.

Right now, Arecibo uses radar to probe our solar system. The telescope sends out a pulse of
radio waves. How long it takes those signals to bounce off things, such as asteroids, tells us how
far away those things are. Under Vakoch’s plan, the telescope would send out those same radar
pulses. But he’d aim them at nearby star systems. If all went well, intelligent aliens would
notice those radio tweets and answer our “beep” with a “boop.”Maybe some civilizations out
there are doing what we’re doing,” Vakoch says. “They’re listening, but they’re not
transmitting.” If they are, “we just wouldn’t discover them,” he notes. Active SETI, he explains,
“is an attempt to let any civilization out there know not only that we’re here, but also that
we’re interested in making contact.”

So why do we even want to talk to aliens? The search for extraterrestrial intelligence — or ETI
— is part of humanity’s larger quest to explore the universe, and understand the nature of life,
Vakoch says. “Perhaps more importantly, it holds a mirror up to ourselves.”

Throughout human history, any time civilizations have met, they have exchanged ideas,
knowledge and technology. Meeting a more advanced culture could give our species a new
perspective about life on Earth, says Vakoch. It might also show us new tools to solve Earthly
problems, he adds.
Brin sees it a bit differently: “It’s worth bearing in mind that every time human civilizations that
didn’t know about each other came into contact, there was pain.” Think about what happened
to Native Americans or Africans when European explorers arrived on the scene, he says.
Europeans coming to the “New World” brought along never-before-seen diseases. And their
advanced technology, such as guns and metal, led to the destruction of the Native Americans’
way of life.

That’s one reason Brin thinks scientists and government leaders should not act too quickly. He
advises that they think and talk it over before deciding what to do next. If we do contact aliens,
studying our own history might give us ideas about ways to keep our interactions peaceful.

“Why did some contact situations [in history] go better than others?” Brin asks. “It turns out,
there were some commonalities in the ones that were less painful. This should be something
we study, not something we avoid.”

E.T. may already know about us

It’s probably too late to hide from advanced space civilizations, many scientists observe.
Supporters of active SETI point out that FM radio and television signals both emit a high enough
frequency that they could be picked up in space. Then there are all of those signals flying
around between satellites, and those powerful radar pings from telescopes like Arecibo.

While people debate the issue, maybe the aliens are already watching our TV shows and
listening to our music, says Philip Lubin. He’s a physicist at the University of California, Santa
Barbara. “When someone says we shouldn’t transmit,” he notes, “you kind of have to say,
‘Okay, what planet do you live on?’ Because we’ve been transmitting for 100 years.”

Active SETI would take those transmissions to the next level. It would beam out more powerful
signals, focusing them on the closest star systems. “The real question,” Lubin asks, “is should
we transmit with the intention of being understood?”

Any civilization so advanced that it could visit Earth would already have the technology to pick
up our signals, Vakoch agrees. So it would likely already know we’re here. In that case, he
cautions: Maybe it’s in the best interest of the people of Earth to offer a peaceable greeting
before those aliens pay us a visit. “There’s the idea that doing something is more dangerous
than doing nothing,” Vakoch says. “But maybe it’s more dangerous not to say anything.”

He doesn’t want to wait to start active SETI. He does, however, agree that society should talk
openly about the search for extraterrestrial life — and decide what to do if aliens respond.
Most scientists have agreed to the “Protocols for an ETI Signal Detection.” This is a plan for
what to do if aliens make contact with us. (Step one: Tell other scientists so they can confirm
the discovery.) But Vakoch would like to see those policies debated and agreed to by the United
Nations.

He concedes, though, “So far, we haven’t convinced [U.N. officials] that this should be at the
top of their list.”

Grinspoon does think we should debate the issue before we broadcast messages into space.
But it’s not because he’s afraid of ET. Discussing the welfare and future of our planet “is the
kind of thing we humans need to get better at,” he says. In fact, the biggest threat to human
civilization isn’t alien invasion, he argues. It’s things like climate change, war and pollution.

The only solution to those problems is to learn how to think and act not as different races and
countries, but as one species, he says. “It’s actually more important to try to have a
conversation with our fellow human beings than it is to have a conversation with aliens,” he
says. “That is our survival challenge.”

The government is spending a lot of money to discover life on other planets.

Some people think that government is wasting money and should spend more money

addressing the problems of public.

To what extent do you agree? (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

Since the first rocket had been launched the mankind has been trying to find life in other
worlds. This endeavor would be impossible if government didn’t spent resources on it. There
are two distinctive prospects on this situation. Some believe that the money that has been
invested for decades is wasted, at the same time, there are those who support the search and I
am one of them. Below both points of view will be discussed in details.

Primarily, those who argue against the idea state that there are many Earthly problems that
demand our immediate attention. For instance, environmental issues that might have been
alleviated significantly if government had spent the resources devoted to search for extra-
terrestrial life on financing such ecologically friendly projects as construction of plants powered
by solar energy and wind. From this point of view, politicians misusing limited resources on
pursuing vague, if not useless, goals.

However, there is an alternative position on the issue. Many scientists claim that searching for
alien life forms has increased the volume of our knowledge about the universe, its creation and
development, and the more we know about the nature, the better we understand ourselves.
For example, while looking for other civilization, astronomers have collected huge volume of
data about other star systems and their mechanics. In fact, there has been found more then 10
000 Earth-like planets or Super-Earths. All the gathered information is used to better
understand the Solar system and its origin. Consequently, it is hardly possible to say that the
finances were wasted.

Furthermore, the search for aliens might be bringing some fruits in the future. Many pundits
aver that this discovery is only matter of time. If the mankind contacts another life form, it will
have a tremendous impact on all scientific fields from biology to philosophy. Having in mind this
prospect makes the spending reasonable.

To sum up, although search for life in the space is seemed by some as meaningless, it appears
that there are some benefits that outweigh the drawbacks.

Research on other planets for the presence of life is an ongoing process in all over the world.
Some people accord that government should invest lavish amount to learn life on other
planets. While others refute that it is a waste of money and they can spend on to solve their
problems on Earth. I believe that a middle ground exists between these diverging opinions.
On one hand, the population on Earth is constantly growing. Some day we run out of room on
the Earth for more people, especially if we do not want to destroy too much of the natural
environment here on Earth. To protect Earth from asteroids and comets. Any of these can be
end most of the life on Earth if they strike our planet. We could use space technology to give us
a chance to save ourselves. Viruses, volcanic eruptions, gamma ray bursts could also threaten
the survival of the human race at any time. By expanding human presence beyond Earth, we
increase the chance our species will survive long termination. Moreover, to search for natural
resources in space like asteroids contains metals and other material that could be moved for
use elsewhere.

On the other hand, an Earth face lot of problems like global warming, terrorism, deadly
diseases, poverty which require enormous amounts to solve. Vulnerable diseases like swine flu,
HIV, cancer which causes huge death every year. Medicines for swine flue and other new
deadly disease not yet found and requires advance research which requires large cost. Cutting
of trees, due to overpopulation increase use of natural resources which result in global
warming and government should prevent over cutting of trees and deforestation by investing
more money to protect forest. Terrorism is a worldwide problem and world leaders should join
hands and invest more money to eradicate terrorism as well as poverty.

To conclude, it is very important for the government should concentrate on both space
exploration as well as solve problems faced on Earth. It would be better the government should
equally spend money for both research on another planet and to solve basic problems of earth.

People have differing views with regard to the areas where the public money should be
invested in. Some people argue the government should spend money on searching alien lives
on other planets so that human beings may find alternative planets to live in the future. Others,
however, oppose this view and believe there are more important concerns on Earth waiting to
be addressed.

Supports believe that not only people’s everyday life but also the future of human race will
therefore benefit from launching alien projects. It is a fact that practical technology has been
advanced through space exploration. For instance, there are many inventions including pace
makers and smoke detectors, which are lifesavers in people’s everyday life, are the by-products
of space research. In addition, find a new planet with lives may ease people’s concern about
energy depletion. Due to the significance of the growing vehicle numbers and the expansion of
urbanisation, today’s demand for energy has increased on an unprecedented scale.

However, the opponents argue that the government should have more important concerns to
mitigate the problems on Earth. There still are many people in many areas of the world who are
suffering from disease, hunger and extreme poverty. The government has its moral obligation
to prioritise the public money to be spent on freeing these people from suffering. By providing
them a safety net, those people in need can be able to receive basic medical treatment, better
education and more job opportunities.

In conclusion, while many people can benefit from the outcomes from alien life searching, more
people can have a better life if the government can invest money in combating poverty.
Therefore, I believe the government should give the financial prioritises to address the
problems on the earth.

Some people think that space exploration is a waste of resources while others

think that it is essential for mankind to continue to explore the universe in

which we live.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

It is a true fact to consider that there has been a great debate on whether to spend a huge
amount of money to explore outer space or not. Considering this, there are some analysts who
hold an opinion that spending money for the exploring outer space is most important due to
the expansion of human knowledge, while other consider that as a money wasting activity and
opine that it can be better used to mitigate some urgent matters we have in this world. This
essay will show assertion on both sides of the contention before arriving at a reasonable
conclusion.

First and foremost, poverty could be a significant factor why space research should be given
less priority. It is generally seen thousands of people everyday starve or lack from very basic
human needs. A large number of people in the world are still struggling to find foods, clothes,
medicines etc. and the amount of money we are spending just to reach further in the space or
to know more is overwhelming. So many people consider space research as an unnecessary
activity while they focus on eliminating more pressing problems are living in. Fatal diseases
could be another burning problem that needs more research and prevention. So money and
manpower used for space exploration are not justified to many.

There are some groups who are in favour of spending more money to explore outer space for
the improvement of human knowledge, in spite of views discussed above regarding waste of
money that are valid reasons for spending money for the exploring outer space. These groups
of people believe that space exploration is required for our own benefits: to search for other
intelligent species, to understand the universe, to find more resources for human or even to
find a suitable place in another planet for human to live. They believe that wars, crime and
corruptions are causing more problems and costing more than the outer space exploration.
They feel that we should understand the model of our universe and learn the history of it for
the greater good of human.

In summary, undoubtedly, spending a portion of the budget to explore outer space should be
allowed; however, as far as I am concerned, governments should take more responsibilities to
improve nations and ensure basic human needs before spending too much on outer world
research.

Modern humanity aims to explore everything that surrounds us. Due to up-to-date technology
and scientific discoveries, mankind has a great opportunity to investigate the boundless space.
However, the controversial question appears: do people, in fact, need space exploration rather
than resolving actual “Earth problems”? While there are some good arguments in favour of
maintaining researching far universe, I believe the resources and efforts should be sent, first of
all, to solve crucial problems on our home planet.

Space exploration, obviously, is one of the major concerns nowadays. Moreover, the projects in
this area has already shown some valuable insights for humanity. The challenge of
ovepopulation and resources depletions is the general concern of scientists. Searching new
planets (which are suitable for people’s life or which are abundant in essential resources) is
what modern space science dealing with. In addition, by discovering the universe, scientists
may explore new forms of life. They might be beneficial for mankind for some yet
unpredicatable reasons. As it is usually shown in films, aliens can give people some tips on how
to improve our being. That is why space exploration is worth continuing.
However, there are some faults with this reasoning. To begin with, meeting with inhabitants of
unknown planets is impossible to predict. It may cause irreversible consequences for Earth:
people never know what is in their minds. To add, the existence of aliens is a disputable
concern: there are no scientific justifications in fabour of it. This way, people waste financial
resources on what possibly even never exists. Finally, there is no one space discovery yet that
could be an advantage in crucial mankind challenges such as pollution, poverty, obesity and so
on.

Personally, I view space exploration in not an urgent case for Earth. Did you know that World
Ocean has been explored by around 5% yet? It seems to be strange that mankind strives to
subdue the universe while there are still so many unexplored points. Maybe sooner or later
people can find all answers to their questions by studying their home planet?

To conclude, space exploration might be considered as a source of getting knowledge about

other planets and of finding solutions to the world challenges. However, I feel such
unpredictable discoveries may result in troublesome consequences. In my opinion, our planet
still needs deep studying, therefore, the resources are better to spend on it rather than on
unattainable space.

Space research requires huge amounts of money which can be invested for meeting the basic
needs of the people. Countries like Somalia are unable to fulfill the basic needs of their citizens.
Food, clothing and shelter form a primary need for the mankind and these should take
precedence before any other development. Therefore, it is important to satisfy the primitive
needs before spending money on exploration of universe. Developed countries should help the
poor countries to build these amenities instead of spending on space.

On the other hand, it also seems important to research the planets and the universe. If we had
not done enough research on space, we would not have found about the ozone depletion and
annual rise in earth’s temperature. Because of this research we had the opportunity to learn
more about the planet we live in, and plan to safeguard the Earth from unexpected disasters.
Also, space research has helped us to understand the nature and the precautions we should
take for natural calamities.
To conclude, even though space research provides significant knowledge about our planet and
the universe, I think we should initially spend on delivering basic needs of the people. Once
adequate funds are allocated for this, we can then look into space research and explore more
about the galaxies.

Sport and Exercise Essay Titles

Some people think that dangerous sports should be banned, while others think

people should be free to choose.

Discuss both views and give your opinion. (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

Activities, as it is said, keep a person young and energetic. It is in tune with it that a person
must always keep oneself occupied with an activity of any sort. Sporting activity is one of many
activities which pay no heed to the age barrier.

As a matter of fact, sporting activities contribute a lot towards the physical fitness, mental
ability / balance and overall characteristic of an individual. However, a ‘dangerous’ sporting
activity must be undertaken by an individual with an extra caution. Though a dangerous
sporting activity is generally performed due to a sudden rush of adrenalin but the
consequences of such an activity are not reasonably positively skewed. The probability of an
untoward incident, while performing a dangerous sporting activity, is always high.

It is due to this reason that State interference, to a reasonable extent, is welcome. The activities
which are more skewed towards the possibility of a fatal accident must be regulated and
consequently banned by the government.

However, there is another school of thought which is on the view that individuals must be
accorded the freedom to choose the sport according to their wishes. The ideology of the
followers of this school of thought is that the individual is matured enough to understand what
is more beneficial to him. However, they fail to look beyond the veil, probably reason due to
which an individual undertakes the performance of such dangerous acts. The reasons may vary
from peer pressure, family circumstances, financial needs or just momentary pleasure.
Whatever may be the reason, an individual must not be given the liberty to put his life, and
consequently the life of his dependents, at risk. The fortnightly sports magazine, The Risktakers,
did share the views of the son of the famous skydiver, Peterson, who met with an accident
while trying to attempt skiing after getting himself released from the parachute at a height of
only 15 feet above the ground level.

Yet another interview with the daughter of another renowned sports person, Robinson,
revealed the sad story wherein after the death of his paratrooper father, it became difficult for
her to make her both ends meet during her teenage. The only reason for the death of her
father was that he wanted to set a record of jumping from an unbelievable height.

In the end, I am of the opinion that there should be the complete ban on the dangerous
sporting activities as it is the survivors of the deceased who has to pay a heavy price for the acts
of their mentors.

While some people argue that extreme sports should be banned, others believe that they have
the right to join sport activities they love. In my opinion, it is better to allow players to do
whatever sports they want.

On the one hand, there are two main reasons why some people call for the authorities to
prohibit adventure sports. The first reason might relate to the level of danger. If players who
participate in these kinds of adventure sport have insufficient skills and ability performing these
sports, their risks of injury will be higher. They might be severely injured, sometimes may
become physically handicapped. Furthermore, in extreme cases, these sports may cause death
of a person. Another reason is that these sports not only make participants at risks, but
spectators can be seriously injured, especially in car races. For instance, if a Formula 1 car
crashes, drivers may not escape unharmed and there is also a chance that a bouncing tyre or
debris will fly into the crowd. Therefore, it is understandable why people object to extreme
sports.

On the other hand, I strongly believe that people should be free to take part in their favorite
sports, regardless of how dangerous these sports actually are. First, psychologically speaking,
players will become more successful if they have the right to join adventure sports they love.
Since when they are keen on playing dangerous sports, they would put all of their effort into it.
As a result, they can have opportunities to develop their talents and passion - important factors
contributing to the success of a person. Second, by playing extreme sports, participants can
gain the ability to stay centered. Some studies reveal that individuals who regularly perform
feats such as jumping out of an airplane actually change the chemical makeup of their mind.
When this happens, they become more capable of staying calm and centered during stressful
situations. In other words, extreme sports can make the rest of their life easier to manage.

In conclusion, although risks related to extreme sports are unavoidable, I believe that people
have the freedom to assume whatever risk they choose as long as they love these sports and
have enough skills performing the sports.

Nowadays, extreme sports become a new-trend activity among the youth to explore their
capabilities. However, some people think that it should be postponed due it is a bad-role
model. In a certain degree, people really can choose whether it is advantageous or not.

First of all, without a proper guidance from the professionals, a juvenile could follow the
extreme performance and can affect a severe cause. Take, for example, a child who always
watches an extreme motorcycle jumping on the rails wants to show off his friends that he
could. Afterward, due to the absence of knowledge, his motorcycle would crash the street and
he will suffer for some injuries. For this term, the raid trail motorcycle sports will get such
negative response from parents because of that tragedy. In that way, one of the family
members will prosecute the tournament and it could be banned.

Contrastively, extreme sports become a beneficial way to some attractive children in exploring
their limit. A bike would be only meant for transportation. But soon after, the creative
sportsman found the method to rotate over the air with a bike. It is finally recognized by the
alternative-sport tool. This riding method leads a creative community of freestyle bike to seek a
new talent. For some of the reason, if the dangerous sports is dismissed, then the creative
athletes never find a talent.

Above all, despite there is some minor cause due to extreme sport it also can support children
to find their talent. However, in my opinion, extreme sport should not always be tagged by bad
influencer as long as the parents can control the children and know exactly their
professionalism.

People hold different views about whether the governement should ban extreme sports such as
car-racing, boxing, parachuting and so on. While this argument seems reasonable to certain
extent, I believe that such prohibition should not be implemented.
On the one hand, there area several reasons to believe that banning of extreme sports is vital
and beneficial. Firstly, dangerous sports involve various unforseeable risks which could directly
put participant’s life into jeopardy. Parachuting, for instance, is a modern sport that captivates
many adventurous youngsters. However, should a player is not equiped with either knowledge
about how to use special equipments or problem-solving skills, they might be unable to operate
the parachute correctly and timely. This mistake, as a result, poses threats to their lives.
Secondly, the prevalance of extreme sports can bring violence into real life. To illustrate, car-
racers may possess a proclivity to break traffic rules due to their obsession to high speed, which
results in severe accidents.

On the other hand, though being seemingly reasonable, prohibition of dangerous sports is not
viable. Individuals should be entitled with right and freedom to take part in any sports and
activities they find enjoyable. If someone holds a desire for thrill and adventure then no one is
able to deter them from pursuing their passions. Besides, participating in extreme sports can
stimulate bravery and hone problem-solving skills, leading to success at work. Players are
unconsciously trained and sharpen their skills because they have to make right decision not to
endanger their own lives in such tense circumstances. For this reason, those playing risky sports
can build up endurance and stamina against stress and thus a boost in productivity.

In conclusion, extreme sports, albeit being dangerous and harmful to players, should not be
prohibited and freedom should be given to those who wish to achieve a sense of fulfilment by
taking part in these sports.

Some people think that sport teaches children how to compete, while others

believe that children learn team work.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Model Answer 1:

Nowadays, the purpose of education has 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 useful adults. There are advantages and disadvantages
for both of the arguments.
To begin with, what is good if a sense of competition m children is made? They could develop
themselves more and more as they learn and study a lot to win the competition. To prove this,
in Korea, it is popular - even common now - to have a tutor who comes to student's house to
teach extra pieces of study with paying a lot of money. They learn faster than what they learn
at school. Furthermore, during the vacations, students study abroad to learn English for a
month instead of revise school work. If they have experiments such as study abroad, it is one of
the greatest plus points to go to the famous well-known high-school. Moreover, there are four
big school exam and two national examinations to test students' level of studies. Generally,
only the highest 40% can go to the good quaternary high schools and colleges. Children learn as
much as they can, to win the competition to obtain good quality schools.

On the other hand, as they are busy to enter the schools and study individually with their own
tutors, there are problems. They become selfish. They become careless and don't help others a
lot if it is about studies. There will be no co-operations for them. Then, why are there
companies for many people to work in? Each of them is clever, however, there are weak parts
and strong parts for each person. To co-operate is to improve this part. People talk and listen to
what others thinking of and learn. That could also be a great opportunity to learn instead of
learning alone with one teacher.

In conclusion, I strongly agree with that children should be taught to co-operate rather than
compete. Nobody is perfect. People learn together, work together to develop each other.
Therefore, I want parents and teachers to educate children concentrating on co-operation, not
compete and ranking them.

Model Answer 2:

There is too much debate about whether children should be learned to be more competitive or
cooperative members of society. In my opinion, both behaviours are important and
cooperation is more important than competition.

On one hand, as we live in the very competitive society, we need to teach our children the
sense of competition in a positive way. The most obvious advantage to encourage competition
among children is that it makes them more creative and open minded and opens the doors for
better future opportunities for them. For illustration, children work hard in the study because
they compete with other classmates to receive high marks, this will help them to get a very
good job in the future. Moreover, they become more independent and rely on themselves
because they know that nobody else will be there to do their duties.

On the other hand, I believe that cooperation is mandatory to be encouraged for many reasons.
Firstly, cooperation helps children to learn from each other. For example, when I was at school
team, I learned how to play table tennis with my friends and we learn a lot of skills from each
other and when we play in the final round with other school teams, we get a very good score in
the final. Secondly, cooperation teaches children the skills linked to sharing, as a result, they
become a kind member of society. Finally, cooperation is the key component for better
personality as well as prevent from individuality.

To sum up, both cooperation and competition have their own advantages. However, I tend to
think that cooperation should be encouraged more in children.

[ by - Lubna Makawi ]

Model Answer 3:

There are various views of people on upbringing their children. Talking about competition,
some say that it must be inculcated in children while some argue cooperation plays a better
role. In this essay, both these contrasting views will be discussed and a conclusion will be made.

Those who believe that competition is necessary to present the following arguments. Firstly,
competition motivates the children and encourages them to do better rewarding the one who
stands at the top. Secondly, healthy competition maintains excitement and zeal in learning.
Otherwise, children may find the session too boring. Thirdly, these are places where
competition is of utmost necessity. For example, in sports, it is always necessary to come to a
conclusion of who wins and who loses. According to the opinions given by this group of people,
positive competition among children is more beneficial.
On the other hand, some highlight the negative impacts that competition might bring and so
choose to inculcate cooperation in their kids. According to them, when kids compete, they
might use alternative ways for winning like cheating. Sometimes, they might be highly de-
motivated if they are constantly losing despite persistent efforts. In contrast, by working or
learning cooperatively in groups, children learn attributes as respect, exchange of help,
tolerance etc. They also opine that the lessons learned in childhood lasts for the entire life and
the children who always compete would do so for the rest of their lives and this would include
both the positive and negative competitions.

Thus, in accordance with my view, both cooperation and competition are essential for children
in their own place. The guardians have to choose one appropriately according to the situation
and context in order to ensure their kids learn correct moral values and ethics.

[ by - Rupak Neupane ]

Model Answer 4:

In our society, many people believe that competition is a vital component in establishing a
positive personality and behaviour. Parents for instance, always say that life is a constant battle
and in order to become successful, training children to become competitive in the early stage of
their lives will be helpful. However, some argue that competition is not that beneficial and
might cause negative behaviours to children. In this essay, I will closely examine both views,
and would state my own opinion regarding the matter.

On the first side of the argument, people argue that competition is advantageous. In their point
of view, structuring an environment under a context of competition will be challenging and will
establish the need to strive and work harder to attain a particular goal that many aims.
Therefore, competition enhances motivation and gives a sense of fulfilment. For instance,
children in nursery schools join different contests and compete with other children. They try to
do their best and maximises their resources to win the competition because of the reward that
they may get from their parents or teachers.
On the other hand, some people believe that the drawbacks outweigh the positive effects of
competition and teaching the child to cooperate are better. They explain that cooperation
allows children a chance to understand and adjust to the needs of other children, hence,
training them to become more sensitive individuals in the future. For example, in our home, I
have never felt that my mum encouraged competition between me and my younger sister. She
always says that each has her own unique talents and skills that should be enhanced and be
shared to one another. Hence, every time that we need to do some task, we would rather help
one another than to compete.

In summary, establishing a competitive and cooperative environment has its own merits.
However, in my opinion, teaching children to cooperate is more beneficial in honing a mature
and useful individual.

[ by - Karen Kate ]

Model Answer 5:

In today's modern world, most of the people around the globe lead a competitive lifestyle as
they need to secure a decent job with a high payment. Therefore, there are a handful of people
who assert that there should be competition among the children so that they will reach their
goals in the future. However, some people are of the opinion that children should be taught to
co-operate as they have higher tendency to become a useful citizen once they know about
cooperation. Hence, it is important for us to examine both sides of the views before reaching a
reasonable conclusion.

Admittedly, if there is a sense of competition among the children, they are stimulated to work
harder when acquiring knowledge in school. It is, possibly, due to the reason that they want to
score better in examination than their classmates. With the existence of competition among
children, they are highly likely to perform well in school as they will always compare their
academic progressions with others. To illustrate, during a quiz or a test, the children will
probably try harder to solve the questions as they love the feeling of being praised by their
teachers and friends. Thus, with the existence of competition among children, they will have
more momentum in studying and achieving success.
On the other hand, it is believed that children who know how to co-operate with others will
attain success and contribute more to the society. In school, if the teachers teach them about
the moral value of cooperation, it will further encourage them to have good teamwork
between children learn how to respect others' opinions. It, indirectly, helps them to develop
the crucial interpersonal skills which play an indispensable role in their studies and prospective
jobs. Hence, any misunderstanding can be avoided among the child which is the key to
achieving their aspirations both in their studies and their works.

In conclusion, I believe that both the competition and cooperation should exist among the
children as each of them helps the young children to become a more knowledgeable and useful
individual who can contribute endlessly to the society. As a consequence, our nation will surely
continue to prosper and flourish in the decades to come.

[ by - Lee Wing Qeen ]

Model Answer 6:

Some individuals believe that it is necessarily important to motivate children to be more

competitive to perform better. Yet, it seems to others that children, who are supplied (exposed)
by the spirit of group-working, will be able to be more useful people in their life later than those
who presume that competition is a priority. This essay will discuss both of these opinions
through the following paragraphs.

First, citizens may think that the more competition someone faces, the faster the growth of his
or her cognitive values would be. This idea can be a better consideration to boost and to
explore people’s hemisphere to be more innovative in their lifetime as they are encouraged to
be the first and have a passion for defeating other's idea. Being the best student in class, for
instance, is one of the real examples. Students, who always get the first place, will try to
maintain their position by expanding their competitiveness through study harder than others.
However, living in the real community, besides competitiveness, people are also required to be
cooperative as their faith as social creatures that have to engage or be involved with other
people to achieve a goal. Individuals, who can be a good cooperative people, are those who
have been trained to do a team-work, moreover since their childhood rather than those who
always competitive. My uncle, Rian, is a real figure. He is always involved in a community work
and acts collaboratively with others because he used to do that since he was a little child and as
the result, their goals are mostly achieved easier.

Someone who always excels in education and jobs is not necessarily a person with competitive
mentality. Helpfulness and sharing with other expand the knowledge we gather. It is a good
human quality to help other rather than competing. Children who are learned to share, often
become better persons that those who always compete.

All in all, being competitive is considerably important to enhance knowledge, yet the communal
life needs cooperative people as well. Thus, individuals are cordially suggested to balance both
competitiveness and cooperativeness.

Ensuring that children have regular physical exercise should be the

responsibility of parents and therefore schools should not waste valuable school

time having sports lessons as part of the curriculum.

To what extent do you agree?

Physical exercise is one of the important subjects in the development of children. There some
opinions and methods are given to improve and increase the physical health of kids. One of
them is ensuring that children have regular physical exercise, and this should be the
responsibility of parents and therefore schools should not waste valuable school time having
sports lessons as part of the curriculum. however, do not agree with this idea because parents
are not physical education teachers, and children have to learn knowledge and physical skills
together.

Mother and father are people who spend their unconditional love for their children. They
always support their children, give them good advice, and offer them valuable criticism about
how to have a better life.Parents are one of the important teacher for children, but they cannot
always be the best in every subject for them. In order to let children develop their bodies in the
best way, children need to follow directions from a real physical education teacher. Parents
also can learn about physical exercises on YouTube, books, newspapers or televisions and then
they can teach their kids what they learned, but ut sometimes they might teach a wrong
physical movement and this can lead to bad consequences for children

Courses of study in schools are taught with the purpose of helping students improve particular
skills and increase essential knowledge. Scientists have shown that doing exercise and playing
sports strengthens the body, reduces some kinds of sicknesses and learn a patience. Children
who play sports every day will be more active and happier than children who play with
computers and televisions. Moreover, it helps to improve children's abilities to focus on their
studies, remember lessons longer and practice better in life. Therefore, it is a not wasted of
time to let children study the physical exercise in schools. Kids need to develop both their
minds and their bodies at the same time.

In conclusion, the physical education in schools should need to be taught in schools. Children
always need to learn the best directions and to have the best conditions and environments to
grow up healthy by playing sports

Many countries want to host international sports event, while other countries

think that hosting sports events has more problems than benefits.

Discuss both views & give your opinion. (Reported 2017, GT Test)

Model Answer 1:

Throughout the 21st century, a lot of significant global events have happened at different
locations. Sports, which is played among nations, is one such event which is becoming
extremely popular, especially among the youngsters of the developed nations. The discussion
that whether or not to host an international sporting program by a nation is advantageous is a
debatable one, with strong logics provided by the supporters of both the views.
On the one hand, a sense of patriotism will be increased among the citizens of the hosting
country due to the fact that they will be proud to see their country in the international
headlines, during the entire event. In addition to that, the nation's top leaders have an
opportunity to hand over the price to the winners. For example, in 2005 when Brazil hosted the
soccer world cup, every day the name 'Brazil' was seen in almost all media like newspapers,
televisions and the internet. Secondly, motivation will be cultivated among the youths of the
host country, and will actively try to play the game locally. This can bring up the sporting
potential of the citizens and later help to play for the nation. For instance, the proportion of
citizens playing cricket increased by 10 percent after India hosted cricket world cup in 2000.
Thus, a country can have many sportsmen in the pool and pick the best ones.

On the other hand, there are security threats especially from the terrorists or by opponents
from the start to the end of the program. A lot of money needs to be spent to deploy the
military forces, round the clock, to ensure that the nation is completely under control. In 2005,
Brazil spent 25 million dollars to ensure that the country is secure in all aspects. Moreover, this
money could be used for the starving people, especially in Africa. Thus, some people gravitate
towards this point of view.

In conclusion, although I understand that huge money needs to be spent for safety purposes, I
totally agree that hosting international sporting events are advantageous for both - the hosting
country and the attending countries. There should be regular sporting events held
internationally every year, to promote peace and love.

[ Written by - Zuhr ]

Sample Essay 2:

International sporting events held after every three to four year all over the world. A large
number of people travel across the world to support their team during the event. Some people
argue that these events bring prosperity, enthusiasm, entertainment and business for the
hosting nation. Others claim that it could have dire consequences and severe negative effect on
the lives of local people.

Firstly, sporting tournaments play a pivotal role in strengthening the economy of the organising
country. Numerous tourists and visitors attend these events to support and lift up the morale of
their teams. Local people observe a dramatic rise in the sales of their goods and services.

Secondly, sport is a source of entertainment and fun for its followers. People get the chance to
meet and enjoy the performance of their favourite sports star. Thirdly, it provides an
opportunity to meet new people and understand their culture and traditions that could
substantially decrease the tension between the people of rival countries. International sporting
events also popularise a country to the world and thus the potential tourism industry of this
country gets benefits from that.

However, it is often seen that people burst out as their team lose the match that could
exacerbate the situation in the ground and make it a battlefield. Additionally, congestion,
adequate accommodation and visitor’s safety are the few issues that are caused by these
events. During 2010 football world cup in Brazil, a record number of thefts and stolen cases
were reported. To tackle such problems required enormous funds and detailed planning. Not all
sports can attract international visitors and fans and thus many of these sporting events cost a
lot while earning a little.

To sum up, I would like to say that international events help in minimising tensions and create
stronger bonding among many nations. Successful occurring of event really helps in thriving the
country’s economy and provides adverse advantages to its citizen. However, it also has some
problems but that can be handled by imposing strict rules of laws and educating people.

[ Written by - Fahad Sultan ]

Model Answer 3:

A group of people think that hosting international sporting tournaments would bring a lot of
benefits for their country, while others believe that it would cause some issues. The following
essay will discuss both of these views but I personally believe that such an event has more
positive things than its negatives.

On the one hand, it is believed that international sporting events would bring some serious
problems for the host country. One of the problems is that the government needs to build new
or renovate existing sports facilities, which means that they have to have a large budget for
that. Many people believe that the budget could be spent on other important things such as
improving public health facilities or developing a better education system. Another issue is that
when the tournament is being held, tourists from all over the world would come to the country.
Some people are afraid that it might threat the national security, as some terrorists might come
to the country. Besides some others point that as a threat to the local way of life and traditions
a country has.

On the other hand, another group of people believe that hosting a world class sports
tournament such as Olympics or Asian Games would bring so many benefits and potentials to
the hosting country. Firstly, as the country needs to renovate or build new sports facilities, it
means that it will create new job opportunities for the local people. Secondly, as tourist and
supporters from all over the world would come to the country, it will also boost the local
tourism industry. Third, tourists who come to the country will spend their money on
accommodation, travel, entertainment and foods, which means that it would generate more
revenue for the local businesses and for the government through taxes. Again, the sporting
event would inspire local people to participate this type of sporting event and thus the country
will ultimately have a generation who are good at sports. Furthermore, the country would get
international exposure as a lot of people around the world would watch the sporting event and
would learn about this country. This has a great benefit in terms of tourism and international
trade for this country. Finally, hosting this type of sporting events often enhances the
diplomatic relationship among nations and that is a great way of maintaining world peace.
In conclusion, it is a fact that holding an international sporting event would have its own
positive and negative sides. In my personal opinion, I believe that the benefits of hosting the
event are greater than the drawbacks.

Some people think that companies should provide employees with exercise time

during the day.

What is your opinion about this?

According to death statistics from 2011 compiled by the CDC, the top three killers in the United
States are heart disease, cancer and chronic lower respiratory diseases like emphysema.
Collectively these diseases killed 1,316,211 Americans that year.

Far too many of these deaths were preventable. It’s no secret that regular exercise and a good
diet can dramatically reduce rates of heart disease. Nonetheless, nearly 80 percent of American
adults don’t get the recommended amount of exercise each week (2.5 hours of moderate
aerobic activity or 1 hour and 15 minutes of vigorous activity).

Given how critical fitness is to overall health, I think it’s worth taking a look at exercise in the
one place where nearly all of us will spend a good chunk of our lives: the workplace. My
observations are anecdotal — pulled from experiences in my own company — but I think the
lessons learned can apply more broadly.

In my office — we’re a tech company with around 700 employees focused on social media —
 exercise before, during and after working hours is encouraged. When we moved into a new
headquarters several years ago, we installed a small gym and yoga room, as well as showers
and changing rooms. Facilities are modest compared to those at some companies, but they’re
well used. Yoga classes are packed before work, at lunch and after work. In the gym, volunteers
from our company lead sweaty bootcamps and cross-training classes. Groups set out from our
office for lunchtime runs and evening hikes. We have a hockey team and a road biking team
and even a Quidditch team that does battle on broomsticks in the park.
But, when it comes to promoting fitness on the job, dedicated facilities and organized teams
like these are hardly necessities. Having the right workplace culture is far more important. Back
in the day, in our cramped startup offices on the industrial side of town, we couldn’t afford a
gym (in fact, we couldn’t even afford phones). But we did hang a fingerboard on the wall for
pull-ups. We brought in yoga balls for chairs. We encouraged employees to bike to work, even
though that meant cramming our office entryway full of bikes because it was too sketchy to
park outside. And we made it clear that anyone could block off an hour for exercise during the
day, provided it didn’t conflict with meetings and they made up the time (by having lunch at
their desks, for instance).

The manager’s job, after all, is to get results out of employees, not keep them fit. But even on a
ruthlessly practical level, allowing and encouraging employees to exercise at work makes good
sense. I see employees return from workouts refreshed and better focused on their jobs. Time
lost on exercise is made back and more in terms of improved productivity. There’s some
research to back this up. A study presented to the American College of Sports Medicine, for
instance, found that workers who spent 30–60 minutes at lunch exercising reported an average
performance boost of 15 percent. Sixty percent of employees said their time management
skills, mental performance and ability to meet deadlines improved on the days they exercised.
Workers in the study were less likely to suffer from post-lunch energy dips after exercising and
also reported improvements in mood.

Then there are the longer-term benefits to keep in mind. Healthy, active employees take fewer
sick days and bring more energy to the workplace. A 2011 study published in the Journal of
Occupational & Environmental Medicine showed that incorporating just 2.5 hours of exercise
per week into the workday led to a noticeable reduction in absences. Perhaps most
importantly, fit and healthy workers are less prone to exactly the kinds of preventable,
debilitating illnesses that take such a heavy toll on families and on society.

As a personal aside, I don’t think I could have steered my company to where it is now without
regular exercise. Over the past six years, we’ve grown from seven employees to a global
operation with offices around the world. It’s been a fun ride but not exactly the smoothest one.
In the beginning, I was responsible for everything from marketing and HR to sales, product
development and finance, often working 16-hour days for weeks at a stretch. Later came the
stresses involved with scaling a tiny company into a worldwide operation, adding dozens of new
employees a week and outgrowing offices every few months. For an entrepreneur, of course,
these are all good problems to have. But I wouldn’t have been able to maintain composure and
focus in the midst of this chaos without taking at least a little time each day for exercise and, in
particular, for yoga.
Growing up, I had always been active — playing lots of ultimate frisbee, mountain climbing and
cycling. But right at the time that Hootsuite was ramping up, back injuries caught up with me. I
turned to yoga as a way to strengthen my core and give my body time to heal. But I quickly
discovered that the physical benefits were easily matched by the mental benefits. Yoga is
literally a moving meditation. It gave me time to clear my head, unpack the volumes of new
information I was absorbing each day and then come back with a new, clearer perspective on
the problems at hand. On top of that, it’s a great workout.At the end of the day, however, it’s
not the type of exercise that matters so much as providing a space in the workplace where
fitness can thrive. There’s a saying that couples who sweat together stay together. I think it’s
just as true that companies that sweat together stay together. Over the years, the culture of
fitness in our office has grown with the enthusiasm of new employees and taken on a life of its
own. Today, our staff include ultramarathoners who run 50 miles at a stretch, elite cyclists and
triathletes, personal trainers, avid rowers and sailors, yogis and hardcore hikers and, of course,
lots of people like me who just like a good workout from time to time.

Exercise in the office isn’t a new idea. But it’s such a clear win-win — in terms of health, morale
and productivity — that I think it deserves to be put in the spotlight once more. Considering
how pervasive heart disease and other preventable illnesses are, it’s not an exaggeration to say
that our future — as healthy individuals, healthy companies and healthy societies — may
depend on it.

With an increasing overweight population some people think universities should

make sport a compulsory module on all degree courses.

To what extent do you agree?

With obesity levels worldwide reaching record highs, few would argue that physical education
should not be taught to children. Some people, however, have gone as far as to say that such
subjects should be obligatory in tertiary education also. This essay will argue against this
proposal.

As previously mentioned, sporting activities are important for primary school students.
However, the key difference between children and adults is that adults are capable of
exercising a level of considered self-control. They are able to prioritize their activities in such a
way as to maximise future benefits. They must be allowed to do this, especially when one
considers the academic demands placed on students nowadays. Simply put: If a mature person
spends long periods of time sitting and studying, it must be assumed they have made an
informed decision, which should be respected.

Furthermore, it must not be forgotten that universities are, first and foremost, places for
academic achievement and learning. Most universities already have sports facilities available
for those who are interested. This is more than enough to ensure an active lifestyle. If any more
emphasis were to be placed on activities such as football, it might dilute the atmosphere of
learning. These historic institutions, like libraries, should instill a sense of quiet awe and inspire
visitors to expand their knowledge of the world.

In summary, without discounting the importance of sport in maintaining a healthy lifestyle, it is

fair to say that there are more important things to be considered at university. Time spent here
has, historically, had one clear purpose – to educate one’s mind. The importance of keeping fit
pales in comparison to this lofty goal

Some people think that professional athletes make good role models for young people, while
others believe they don’t.

What is your opinion on that?

Sample Answer 1:

Each person has one or many role models in his or her life. They prefer to imitate style, method
of life and skills from their role models. Professional athletes are also good role models for the
people who prefer to watch sports or engage in similar sports activity. People, who have good
athletic skills, showcase their talents. They will accept both success and failure in the same
manner. This is a very good lesson learnt from professional athletes. People who think athletes
as their role model, they will try to imitate that behaviour in their life.

Athletes are playing a major role in influencing in other’s life. The example of attending to
practice, time management, continuous practice, self-confidence and many more behaviours
are learnt by many youngers. This is influencing in both male and female youngsters.

At the same time, professional athletes are not the only group of people act as good role
models. Good artists, good social workers, teachers, medical staff, government servants also
act as good role models in youngers’ life. According to the preferences of youngers, role models
also differ. Such as Youngers like to watch more films than sports, then, an actor or actress
would be a role model for them. If they prefer to involve in social service, previous leaders on
social service would be their role models, examples of Mother Theresa. Likewise, role models
are not only from the field of athletes but also from vast numbers of other fields.

Anyhow, as per my own opinion, I agree with the statement, ‘some people think that
professional athletes make good role models for young people while other fields of
professionals also make good role models for young people.

[ Written by - Niro Devi ]

Sample Answer 2:

As we know sports are very important in day to day life. Youngsters get more attraction
towards sports and try to play the same as professional athletes. They copy them in various
means like playing style, looking, hair style, speaking, body language etc.

Interviews from professional athletes play an important role for all of their fans as they
implement their tips and advice in their play strategies, which gives them guidance and path in
becoming successful. Likewise, they learn team building, teamwork, individual effort and
people management skills in their life.

Yet in the response of above, we see some professional athletes involve in advertisement,
movie making and promoting brands, which is basically a way to earn more money for them but
it gives wrong lessons to their viewers and fans. Young people think, to be good looking, is also
a part to become a successful athlete and somehow, they get distraction from their career
path. Hence, many good athletes remain unsuccessful in their career path and usually switch to
another domain when they face failure. Followers should understand everyone has one or
other merit in himself and different style to do any work, also to be true to their work only can
make them successful in their life; for Example: Mahendra Dhoni is a famous athlete and
famous for his batting style and long hair style, but he is also a dedicated person towards his
work which helped him to climb the success ladder.
Therefore, I truly believe if something comes to lesson giving to the viewers and fans, successful
people like celebrities should not give wrong lessons. They should always boost up their viewers
and come up with different ideas which can help them to lead their life in the right path.
Distracting youngsters in their career building age can bring serious issues for country's
development and put everyone in soup.

[ Written by - Namrata Jain ]

Sample Answer 3:

Professional sportsmen and women are and have always been inspirational idols in young
people’s life. In my opinion, youngsters take examples from them and attempt to become
successful forthcoming people of the same type. The young generation also mimics the styles
and fashions of their favourite sports person. I believe that the professional athletes can be
exemplary figures for the young generation.

Their persistence and perseverance are an incentive for young people. Because when children
observe some people around them that attain big successes they get thrilled and fall in the
desire of such resounding targets. No one can perceive this emotional reaction as a bad thing.
In sequence as children get older, they carry these targets with them and also they boost
ambitions by seeing other achievements of inspiring people. In addition, they proceed their
educational period with these ambitions.

One of the positive aspects of professional athletes' influence is that they do not only be an
insight and incentive for those who wish to become a sportsperson but also they exhibit
massive successes on account of at least that big efforts and hard working for other children
who intend to be successful engineers, doctors or business people. Athletes are also good
examples for children who are not in good condition and environment. These athletes such as
Usain Bolt, Muhammed Ali and others teach to tolerate hardships and learn from those. Most
successful sports people come from poverty and show their abilities that if they wish to achieve
and work hard they can reach their target.
To sum up, professional and successful sports people constitute a large part of children's
inspirations and their perseverance and hard work help their little admirers to try and take
initiatives to become like them.

Some people think that sports involving violence, such as boxing and martial

arts, should be banned from TV as well as from international sporting

competitions.

To what extent do you agree?

Sports not only improve the skills and abilities of athletes, but it also helps them
kerb their lust for the thrill, adventure and passion. Sports competitions often
result in brilliant and breathtaking performances which only amuse its viewers but
helps competitors to explore and gauge their true potential. Few people believe
that risky sports should be prohibited, while others do not agree in imposing a
ban. This essay will analyse the merits and demerits associated with menacing
games to present an opinion in a conclusive way.

People believe that threatening games like boxing, wrestling, rafting, bull fighting;
car racing and so on should be prohibited as there are myriad risks associated
with it. Proponents of this viewpoint argue that these sporting activities not only
put the life of contestant in jeopardy but at times also harm its spectators that
have flocked from different places to watch their favourites in action. They say
that sportsmen get severely injured and often killed, loss of life or an injury leads
them to a miserable life and results in the destruction of their families. For
instance, several horrific accidents in Formula One Grand Prix car race have
resulted in the loss of life of several spectators and drivers. Moreover, these fatal
accidents sometimes demoralise others to take part in different games. Another
example is of wrestling where hard punches on the head often cause mental and
nervous systems disorders.
On the contrary, another school of thought believes that these sports should not
be banned as they help sportsmen to kerb their desire for thrill and adventure.
They say that people love challenges and they want to gauge their core skills and
explore their strength through these sports. These sporting activities depict the
real courage and zeal of the competitors. It improves their decision-making skills
under extreme conditions because a single wrong move can have severe
consequences. Moreover, they argue that rather than banning these sports,
organisers and professional athletes should adopt safety measures like using
protective guards, deploy reinforced wall in front of spectators on a race track
and so on. Furthermore, stunning performances showcased in these events wins
the heart of thousands and make them happy.

To recapitulate, the aforementioned provide plausible argument over both views.

I personally believe that unsafe sports should not be banned rather proper safety
measures and regulations should be implemented to make them safe for athletes
and spectators.
In recent years, extreme sports are growing in popularity throughout the world, and more
people are taking part in dangerous sports and activities. Some of those sports such as
mountain climbing, bullfighting and so on, however, are considered to be far more dangerous
than the others. Due to the high risk of injury and death in these sports activities, many people
believe such activities ought to be banned. While in the other hand, those opponents argue
that it is their personal liberties to choose sports.

On one side of the argument there are people who believe that extreme sports can often cause
extreme injuries or even fatal death to the participants. For example, dangerous sports like
bullfighting which is set up to have a matador fight against an angry bull. Throughout the fight,
the bull fighter might get serious injured or dies if he is pierced by the bull’s horns. Moreover,
some of the dangerous sports lead to not only physically harms to participants, but also a
negative effect on young generation. To be more specific, teens are more likely to be more
aggressive and violent, when they see adults participating in a boxing match on TV. As result,
those teenagers may try to imitate their favorite boxers to hit someone or knock someone off.
In the other hand ,those people say that even they know the consequence of taking such
dangerous sports, they are willing to take the risks still. The main reason and the answer to this
is simply the money. Those participants taking part in violent sports are not because of the
sporting spirit, but because of the high rewards they bring. Vast sums of money are involved in
those sport events and matches, such as heavyweight boxing and ultimate fighting. For
instance, the tickets for the event are sold and there are millions of dollars profit from sports
broadcasting rights fees and advertisements, not to mention the enormous amounts of money
that are bet on the outcome of the events. Spectators are willing to pay huge sums of money to
see those sports, because bloodthirsty and violence are part of human nature. People enjoy
watching painful stuffs as long as it is happening to other people, not to them.

In conclusion, although people enjoy those violent and dangerous sports ,I believe they should
be prohibited because they are barbarous and uncivilized. If we banned those vicious sports, it
shows that we are moving one step closer to improving mankind

Even though violent sports appear as a dangerous sport, there are several reasons not to ban.
Some people would consider sports as a violent; as you can see that a lot of sportsmen are
retired due to their injuries. However, due to this reason, should we ban such a sport? I
completely disagree with this statement.

Every sport has levels. For example, boxing or whitewater rafting is considered as a heavy sport.
Also, there is an extreme sport classification, which is a bungee jumping, sky-diving or car rally
racings. If you are looking at boxing and sky-diving, which one you will be thinking as a
dangerous sport? Most people would say sky-diving as a dangerous sport, but, for violent
issues, people would choose for boxing. People believe that by just look at the action of the
sport think as a violent. However, any sports can be seen as a violent.

Like the one mentioned before, the violent sports which endanger lives are completely
different. Boxing and white water rafting might only results in some fatal injuries to the
sportsmen whereas sky-diving or car rally racings might kill people. Even though the boxers
have critical injuries, is this as bad as someone get crashed by car? In my point of view, all the
sportsmen are all aware of the circumstances. Even if they aware of the risks of the sports, but
they still play it, according to me this means that they are accepting any consequences. In my
perspective, sportsmen have accepted with their circumstances and acknowledge with all
future consequences there are no rights of restricting those activities.
Overall, the sports that are violent are different from the sports that are fatal to the lives of the
sportsmen. Some people claimed that such sports should be banned for the sake of the
sportsmen, however, I claim as should not. Sports are created by a human being, which means
that if any man who does not want to play sports, then does not have to play such a violent and
extreme sport. All these sports are the choice made by the sportsmen who are aware of
circumstances.

Technology Essay Titles

Many things that used to be done in the home by hands are now being done by

machines.

Does this development bring more advantages or disadvantages? (Reported 2017)

Last century has witnessed peoples’ living standards have also been improved due to the
advances of technology, such as the machines that used in daily lives, in the home. However,
some drawbacks emerges along with the merits, like unhealthy lifestyle.

It cannot be denied that the machines, nowadays, play a vital role in the home for several
reasons. To begin with, they are much more efficient than human beings in terms of household
routines, in both time and economic respect. For example, by using wash machine, a basket of
cloths can be washed at one time, rather than by hands, which saves householders’ time from
washing cloth one by one and cost from using less water. In addition, it is the machines that
more accurate than humans, which can be proved clearly in the kitchen. Both time and
temperature can be set upon the microwaves to ensure the food taste according to the
instructions. On the contrast, individuals can merely determine how much the food need to by
cooked by instincts and experience.

The demerits that the machines caused cannot be neglected as well, especially this tendency is
on an increasing rate. The most noticeable and significant influence is that it may lead to an
unhealthy life style. Since more work can be done by machines even without monitoring,
people at home have less opportunities to exercise and incline to purchase and utilize more
equipment that can bring convenience and less labour work. Secondly, an array of simple
household work can be educational for children’s growing up. In other words, parents can give
children pocket money in exchange of work done perfectly or have improved in progress.

Thanks to the technological development, we are enjoying the convenience of modern

machines by their efficiency and accuracy. However, people should be educated and raised the
awareness to exercise to avoid the sedentary life style and render it as education perspective
that brought by frequent using.

The issue of whether using of machine are bring many advantages to society is of great concern
to many people. In my opinion, although using machines have many benefits, we cannot ignore
its negative effects.

It is undoubted that machines can bring many benefits. For one thing, machines are more
effective than human. Not like human, machines do not need rest, which means they can work
as long as employers want and consistently produce high quality products without any
mistakes. For another, using machines can save company's money. Because machines never ask
for salary, over-time pay or pension, so employers do not need to spend money on employee's
welfare. The company only needs some technicians to make sure machines are working on the
right track or replace some part when machines are not working.

However, the disadvantages of machines that bring to us should not be neglected by people. To
start with, because of extensive of using machines, many people loss their job. Especially in
large population countries, high unemployment rate may cause crime and social instability.
Apart from this, using of machines are also pose serious pollution and energy dissipation. For
example, nowadays people prefer to use dish-washing machine to wash dishes and plates
rather than hand washing. But they did not know that compared with hand washing dish-
washing machine consume at least 2 times water and electricity to wash these tableware. As
you can imagine, if thousands of families use dish-washing machines, how many water and how
much electricity will be wasted!

In conclusion, although we cannot deny machines are play a vital role in people living and
working, problems posed by machines should draws more attentions as well.

Model Answer 1:
With the development of new technologies, people’s life is now more comfortable than it was
in the past. In these days it is almost unimaginable that one modern household functions
without refrigerators, washing machines, microwave oven, and other appliances. A rapid
development of these technologies brings with itself a lot of advantages, but negatively effects
these useful technological devices have on humans and environment could not be ignored.

With today’s available consumer goods, people do not have much trouble to keep their foods
or clothes in the condition that will be useful for them in every occasion. Time spent in
preparation of food, washing or ironing of clothes, is far less these days than it used to be in the
past, and thanks to new technologies. Just hundred years ago it was unimaginable that you
could keep your meats and other food items for months, to prepare some meals in just a couple
of minutes or to wash a large number of clothes in just 30 minutes. That is the biggest
advantage of these consumer goods, Modern people spend far less time in doing house chores
than they used to. In this way, people can save time, and time is the most valuable aspect in the
modern society.

But, on the other hand, use of appliances in such huge quantity brings with itself higher energy
consumptions that lead to a higher environmental pollution all around the world. Since most of
our energy is produced from the fossil fuels and coals, further increasing of energy
consumption will lead to greater consumption of these non-renewable resources of energy
which harm our environment. Even today the Earth is on the highest level of pollution in its
history. So it is understandable why people warn on use and overuse of consumer goods.

At the end, modern appliances are invented to make people’s life easier and they are successful
in that, but the question is- 'what cost it will bound us to pay?' I am sure that in the future these
consumer goods will be more energy efficient with lesser energy consumptions for their work,
and that will still make the life of people easier and more convenient like they do today.

[Written by - Nenad Nikolic ]

Model Answer 2:
It is a fact that more families these days have electronic households such freezers, vacuum
cleaner, hair dryer, room heater, water heater and laundry machines than ever before. This
trend has some positive and negative aspects but I personally believe that it has more
disadvantages than advantages and this is due to the environmental damage they cause.

It is noticed that the number of families that have consumer goods at their home has increased
rapidly in the past few years. The main reason behind this trend is because of people’s busy
lifestyle. They have less time to do their household activities and therefore they are relying on
their electronic devices. For example, city people who are busy with their works are relying on
their microwave oven and cooker for preparing their meals. The oven could be utilised for
preparing instant food which would save some time for them. Therefore, some people believe
that the existence of electronic household devices brings a lot of benefits for them.

On the other hand, another group of people believe that it is not a good trend because they
think that these devices could have some negative effects on the human body. For instance,
devices such as microwave ovens or refrigerators produce radiation that could result a serious
threat to the human body. In such cases, the usage of microwave oven has triggered serious
diseases such as tumour and cancer. Another example would be about the usage of CFC as it is
used in electronic products such as air conditioner and freezer. Many people do not realise that
the usage of CFC has a fatal effect on the environment, as it triggers global warming. No doubt
the modern electronic devices that we use daily have made our life easier and brought many
luxuries in our life but the damages those devices cause is a big threat in our existence.

In conclusion, it is true that the number of people who own electronic household devices has
grown significantly in the past few years. In spite of all the benefits, I personally believe that it
has more drawbacks for our life, as these electronic products could have some serious effects
on our body and the environment as well.

Some people argue that technological inventions, such as mobile phones, are

making people socially less interactive.

Do you agree or disagree? (Reported 2017, GT Test)

Due to the contribution of technology, like other electronic devices, mobile phone has
penetrated in our daily lives. Application of mobile phone is such a topic that seems to provoke
a lot of debate in people- those who support it and those who advice us against it. Thereby the
industry is booming and there does not seem to be any shortage of opening new mobile phone
outlets, so it can not be all bad.

Some people may think because of increasing uses of cell phones, people are getting
habituated to keep contact with friends and relatives only by this mode of communication
rather than visiting each other. People only use hand phone for all purposes, for instance, to
say hello, to express greeting, sympathy, condole, grief, request, complain, order by merely
sending a short message or talking one or two minutes over phone. Thus our feelings are being
rusted. In addition, it is said that youngsters are engrossed with hand phone to share message,
music, video, memory card, voice chat, voice mail among themselves neglecting their studies,
avoiding elders around them, even they do not like to see elder relatives when they are at
stake.

On the contrary, people who favor mobile phone possess quite positive view. They tend to say
that, over last half century, the pace of change in human lives have increased beyond our
wildest expectations. With other electronic devices, mobile phone has penetrated in our
everyday life style. Now swift pace of life and hectic schedule pushes people to be busy at any
time. To constantly adopt to keep pace with it, hand phone seems like a Godsend. Various
options of mobile sets allow one to be connected with all around him, even with long lost
friends, neighbors. Inside hand set we can save contact number and can get informed if
someone calls when the set is switched off too. So no one is beyond reach over very long
distances. Internet browsing, email checking options through cell phone also have made our life
easier and one can get latest news of any member over a second of time within his social circle.

To recapitulate, mobile phone has become a modern way of life that keeps us closer. At present
even people can go for a social gathering keeping their business work unhampered.

it is believed to be recently overused, leading to the lack of direct interaction among people. To
combat this problem, some consider that a ban on using mobile phone at particular places
should be implemented by authorities. This essay will discuss the opinions to show why it
would not be agreeable to have such a ban implemented.

This essay will start with the belief of the mobile phone being anti-social. It is true that the
invention of the mobile phone has assisted people to easily communicate with each other
without being kept waiting a long time when using traditional means like letters or desk
phones. The convenience of using the mobile phone, however, has raised people’s dependence
on the device. There have been less face-to-face interaction among people, especially among
friends, colleagues and neighbors who live not quite far from each other, expanding the
distance between those. Instead of being socially active, individuals tend to live in their own
world, only keeping in touch with society via their mobile phone.

On the other hand, the mobile phone should not be banned in public either. One of the main
reasons is the considerable advantages society can be benefited from the mobile phone.
Thanks to its size, the mobile phone can be carried along, keeping people always in touch
especially in case of emergency. Additionally, the development of technology has transformed
the original mobile phone into the smart phone, which can function as both a phone and a
tablet or a computer, assisting people not only to stay in touch but also to work everywhere.
Another benefit of the mobile phone is that it would annually play an important role in making
profit communication companies, greatly increasing the global gross domestic product.
Therefore, a ban on using mobile phones would not be an ideal solution to be agreed on.

To sum up, although the mobile phone has its own drawbacks, there should not be a ban on
using it in public.

Modern technology is now very common in most work places.

How do you think this has changed the way we work?

Do you think there are disadvantages to relying too much on technology?

Sample Essay:

Innovative and latest technology such as internet and computer have an intense effect on the
people, especially in their workplaces. As a result, the method of working is transforming
continuously. These days, technology has epidemically flared and even overtaking the humans,
who are the inventors of the technology. I personally believe that there are more pitfalls on
relying technology than the advantages it offers.

Technology made us work less and move even least. We rely on computer and the internet to
have our work done. The faster communication has made the global business a reality, though
not without a cost.
No doubt, technology has negative impacts on the human. Firstly, technology had made people
extremely sponger. For instance, people used to travel on foot to in the past especially, in India.
As a consequence people remained active and fit and also free from ample of ailments namely
fatigue, heart disease and severe disease like cancer as well. Their average life expectancy was
far more than the generation we see now. Though it is claimed that technological advancement
has enhanced people’s lifespan and cured many diseases, I do not see that it is true. When it
was common for people to live more than 100 years in the past, many people nowadays dies at
their early 60s.

Moreover, technology has a greater impact on the young generation. Most of the students and
children even cannot do brainstorming in time base task. In addition to this, scholars and
children, are losing their own personal skills, this is all because they are not using their own
knowledge and creativity. As an example, most of the students are using Wikipedia and
imitating the same text in their projects or assignment which is an abominable way to pass the
exam. The way people are becoming dependent on technology, a simple mistake on a
calculation or a wrong decision taken by a computer device will create a disaster. Consider the
nuclear research centre where everything is computerised. If a computer virus attacks this
station or a hacker hack this station, this could lead to a global catastrophe.

Our relationship with each other has seriously been affected due to the modern technology like
smartphones, computers and social networking websites. People no longer interact each other
in person so intimacy among them is plunging day by day. To illustrate, webcams and the
internet are the predominant reasons behind this. Technology has reached to the institution
where students get best study (smart classes) hence communications among students and
tutors are dropping.

To encapsulates, technology has alleviated humans to some extent but, when the technology
will advance to the redundant level and we will solely rely on this - it will be the Doomsday for
the Earth.

The revolution in industrial has led to the development of technology for the need of
governments and people. More companies require a specific level in computer using from the
employee. Our workplaces today is completely different from the 80s office. There are
advantages and disadvantages of relying too much on technology.
It cannot be denied that modern technology has an important position in workplaces, more
than 60% of your work based on computer program. For examples: Microsoft Word, Excel,
Powerpoint presentation,etc. Previously in the 80s, our grandparents had to do the paperwork
instantly, so that it was time-consuming and easy to make a mistake while processing their
work. Fortunately, modern technology has reduced the possibility of causing errors by using the
program designed specific purpose , yet people nowadays do have more chances to work
effectively and safely.

On the other hand, relying too much on technology do cause us more harm that it looks.
Businessman usually upload their information and work to their mail or "cloud", because it
helped them keep in touch with the information every moment. However, this action is like
playing with fire. The more people stick to their devices, the more easily they got hacked. Their
information could be sold on black market, or worse. Moreover, addicted to technology can
make children become anti-social, having problem with their eyes at a very young age. The
widespread of social media , the result of developing technology too fast, is also a major factor
affect adolescents in a negative way.

In conclusion, the current technology has helped us a lot in work daily life. It changes the way
we work significantly compared to the past, but it will not bring any benefit if relied on them
too much. People should balance their daily life and technology using time. In my opinion, it is
not safe to post personal information to social media or "cloud", as the companies do assure
that their cloud is safe but people should protect themselves.

Firstly If we wind a clock a little backward we can see people using loads of paper to maintain
the records however now they are using computers to do the same, data is now stored in hard
drive of a computer and not in files which doesn't only saves the environment but also reduces
the time required to fetch a random information, it would takes hours to search for it in files
and only a few search to search something on the hard drive.

In addition offices now use state of the art biometric attendance system and ages ago they had
to maintain registers to keep the attendance data, so the technology has helped in
enhancement of things in every possible way.

Some people think that the range of technology currently available is increasing
the gap between rich people and poor people. Others think that it is causing the

opposite effect.

Discuss both views and give your opinion. (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

Today, modernization has revolutionised humans’ lifestyles fundamentally. Industrialisation has

made our world a better place for living, although some individuals believe that this has been
more useful to more affluent citizens. From my perspective, these advancements have led all
humans to live better, even the deprived ones.

On the one hand, those who believe that by the development of technology, the rich have
gained more beneficiaries have their own reasons. One is that luxury lifestyle has become more
popular globally. The more luxury goods are produced by different companies, the more well-
to-do citizens have more choices to purchase more variety of magnificent items. For instance, in
2015, Apple, a well-known electronic corporation in the USA, has produced a new version of
Apple cell phone as size as a watch with the price of over $20000. Therefore, this watch will be
affordable to those having tremendous saving. In addition, in trading, richer countries have a
better access to the latest technology of e-commerce, while the poor ones, higher expenditure
avoids them to compete with the former and the globalisation has increased the gap between
the developed and underdeveloped nations.

On the other hand, I personally agree with those believing that modernization has had more
positive influences on both rich and poor people. One important impact is that all nations have
a better access to more highly developed health system. For example, even in remote areas of
Africa, MRI is used for diagnosing of diseases, and its technology can be compared to the one
which is being used in the USA. In addition, travelling facilities have been altered dramatically.
Had not aviation technology been developed so fast, less general people would have used low-
cost airlines. In the past, only the rich could pay the ticket of an airplane, but now even a simple
worker and his family can afford the fee of a flight annually.
In conclusion, some may believe that the more the technology develops, the more wealthy
citizens have better living conditions. However, I personally agree that this can influence the
level of accessing to medical services and travelling facilities, and the poor’s lifestyles have been
and will be improved far significantly.

Technology could increase the gap between rich and poor. Rich people have smartphones,
laptops, wireless broadband Internet etc. People in developed countries can now work from
home or from anywhere in the world. They can do their shopping online and have things
delivered to their homes. Technology improves their quality of life.

On the other hand, many people in poorer countries, who did not have normal telephones, now
have mobile phones. Also, the Internet is spreading to all parts of the world. In the past, only
people in developed countries had access to world-class libraries, but now the Internet gives
everyone access to the same information. This will lead to greater equality.

In recent times, technological advancement has been in the limelight and has aroused the wide
concern. Although some people are of the fervent conviction that the technological
development has led all humans to better, even the deprived ones, I would argue that the gap
between poor people and rich people is being raised by the available of individual’s high-tech
facilities.

On the one hand, there are many reasons why the technological advancement is proven to
bring numerous merits for low-income people. In the past, the deprived ones could not
approach the high quality education system, which is changing significantly. In recent times,
numerous courses from the education websites of famous universities over the world allow
students to enroll without any fees. To exemplify, information technology students from the
developing countries could take part in courses from international education websites such as
Udemy, Coursera, TreeHouse to learn particular program languages and obtain valuable
certificates after completing the courses, which sets the pivotal platform for the future career.
As a result, a percentage of people assume that the development of technology enhances the
quality of life of social.

On the other hand, those who believe that by development of technology, the rich have gained
more beneficial have their own reasons. Firstly, the more luxury goods are produced by
different companies, the more the more well-to-do citizens have more choices to purchase
more variety of magnificent items. To take a concrete example, the Apple company, a well-
known high-tech firm in Silicon Valley, has produced a new version of smart phones as well as
smart watch with the prices of over 2000 USD. Therefore, only wealth people with tremendous
saving could buy it. Secondly, technological facilities from hospital could treat a range of serious
diseases with the high cost, which is only affordable for the wealthy. The poor ones, especially
from the developing countries, suffer the severe pain or even die because of the lack of money.

In conclusion, while the notion of strengthening quality of life by technological development is

worthwhile in the view of some people, there are more convincing reasons why the available of
individual’s high-tech facilities raises the gap between the deprived people and the wealthy.

New household appliances have resulted in more free time for women and has

enabled them to both work and run a home with dependent children.

What are the advantages for a family when the mother works?

Do you think the disadvantages outweigh the advantages?

From decades ago, our household situation had dramatically changed by plenty of electric
appliances. The technology is rapidly exploring this field, so even though we are just sitting sofa
and browsing the Internet, laundry clean our washout and robot cleaner work to clean up the
whole of house. This convenience generated by technology would make our free time or enable
parents to care about their children. But some drawbacks can be considered.

At first, this stream can contribute to shrink the gender gap because women do not need to
stay home and do household working no longer. The society where lots of lively women can
gain their job and make living by themselves is ideal and desirable for many point of view, such
as economic, politics and gender equality. The technology of electric appliances is good for
children as well. If their parents spend many time to look after their children, parents tend to
think how to rise and how to educate, simultaneously, children can have some opportunities to
visit somewhere, to be educated and so on.

In terms of disadvantages, there is a concern about environmental issue. A number of

consumption of electric machines led to air pollution or garbage problem. To prevent our
society from these issue, some electric makers are keen on invention of eco-friendly products.

To sum up, although we need to take environmental issues into account, I think the technology
for household can cause the society of gender equality and leads some incentive to education
and rearing.

With the development of technology children are now living in a world that is

completely different to what it was 50 years ago.

What problems does this cause for society and the family?
The lives of the children have changed overtimes. The shifting weights of cultural emphasizes
has always caused notably different world than during the previous societal premises. Children
are particularly prone to be affected by even the smallest shifts in the society. One reason for
this is that they cannot support or provide the means of living by themselves similarly as adults.
Moreover, never in the previous ages has the technological development been as rapid as it is
now, not even immediately after the Second World War. Some children may become smarter
by modern technology but it can also induce stupor and overweight and social issues. A
computer can be a bad role model and a friend.

Many adults have also been affected by the relentless computers and kind of engineering
society where somehow everything should be known immediately. This cultural demand may
be addressed also to children who could be depressed if they cannot cope with the
overwhelming aspirations of that the society is throwing to them in a both implicit and explicit
ways. Sometimes adults want more results; sometimes the standards of society require them to
act quicker, faster, and stronger. Where are the modern days’ real doping scandals in anyway?
They are embedded inside the whimsical notions of grandeur that deprives us from our fellow
human beings and the love is subdued to wanting and beauty.

Families are certain indicators of the stability of the society. However, when computer
matching has become as common among as playing video games, so has also the unrealistic
concepts of the people, including children arrived. This has led to a quick pace culture where
many are evaluated just by mare status or current overview. The human value is lost inside the
grand notion of ultimate prince or princess that will save the day. The others are redeemed as
somewhat zombies. What can be done? Can the broken marriages and bewilderingly crying
children be sewed together just by electronic clues?

The Impact of Technology on the Developing Child

Reminiscing about the good old days when we were growing up is a memory trip well worth
taking when trying to understand the issues facing the children of today. A mere 20 years ago,
children used to play outside all day, riding bikes, playing sports and building forts. Masters of
imaginary games, children of the past created their own form of play that didn’t require costly
equipment or parental supervision. Children of the past moved... a lot, and their sensory world
was nature based and simple. In the past, family time was often spent doing chores, and
children had expectations to meet on a daily basis. The dining room table was a central place
where families came together to eat and talk about their day, and after dinner became the
center for baking, crafts and homework.
Today’s families are different. Technology’s impact on the 21st century family is fracturing its
very foundation, and causing a disintegration of core values that long ago were the fabric that
held families together. Juggling school, work, home, and community lives, parents now rely
heavily on communication, information, and transportation technology to make their lives
faster and more efficient. Entertainment technology (TV, Internet, video games, iPads, cell
phones) has advanced so rapidly, that families have scarcely noticed the significant impact and
changes to their family structure and lifestyles. A 2010 Kaiser Foundation study showed that
elementary aged children use on average 7.5 hours per day of entertainment technology, 75
percent of these children have TV’s in their bedrooms, and 50 percent of North American
homes have the TV on all day. Gone is dining room table conversation, replaced by the “big
screen” and take out.

Children now rely on technology for the majority of their play, grossly limiting challenges to
their creativity and imaginations, as well as limiting necessary challenges to their bodies to
achieve optimal sensory and motor development. Sedentary bodies bombarded with chaotic
sensory stimulation are resulting in delays in attaining child developmental milestones, with
subsequent negative impact on basic foundation skills for achieving literacy. Hard-wired for
high speed, today’s young are entering school struggling with self regulation and attention skills
necessary for learning, eventually becoming significant behavior management problems for
teachers in the classroom.

So what is the impact of technology on the developing child? Children’s developing sensory,
motor, and attachment systems have biologically not evolved to accommodate this sedentary,
yet frenzied and chaotic nature of today’s technology. The impact of rapidly advancing
technology on the developing child has seen an increase of physical, psychological and behavior
disorders that the health and education systems are just beginning to detect, much less
understand. Child obesity and diabetes are now national epidemics in both Canada and the
U.S., causally related to technology overuse. Diagnoses of ADHD, autism, coordination disorder,
developmental delays, unintelligible speech, learning difficulties, sensory processing disorder,
anxiety, depression, and sleep disorders are associated with technology overuse, and are
increasing at an alarming rate. An urgent closer look at the critical factors for meeting
developmental milestones, and the subsequent impact of technology on those factors, would
assist parents, teachers and health professionals to better understand the complexities of this
issue, and help create effective strategies to reduce technology use.
Four critical factors necessary to achieve healthy child development are movement, touch,
human connection, and exposure to nature. These types of sensory inputs ensure normal
development of posture, bilateral coordination, optimal arousal states and self-regulation
necessary for achieving foundation skills for eventual school entry. Young children require 2-3
hours per day of active rough and tumble play to achieve adequate sensory stimulation to their
vestibular, proprioceptive and tactile systems. Tactile stimulation received through touching,
hugging and play is critical for the development of praxis, or planned movement patterns.
Touch also activates the parasympathetic system lowering cortisol, adrenalin and anxiety.
Nature and “green space” has not only a calming influence on children, but also is attention
restorative and promotes learning.

Further analysis of the impact of technology on the developing child indicates that while the
vestibular, proprioceptive, tactile and attachment systems are under stimulated, the visual and
auditory sensory systems are in “overload.” This sensory imbalance creates huge problems in
overall neurological development, as the brain’s anatomy, chemistry and pathways become
permanently altered and impaired. Young children who are exposed to violence through TV and
video games are in a high state of adrenalin and stress, as the body does not know that what
they are watching is not real. Children who overuse technology report persistent body
sensations of overall “shaking”, increased breathing and heart rate, and a general state of
“unease.” This can best be described as a persistent hypervigalent sensory system, still “on
alert” for the oncoming assault. While the long term effects of this chronic state of stress in the
developing child are unknown, we do know that chronic stress in adults results in a weakened
immune It’s important to come together as parents, teachers and therapists to help society
“wake up” and see the devastating effects technology is having not only on our child’s physical,
psychological and behavioral health, but also on their ability to learn and sustain personal and
family relationships. While technology is a train that will continually move forward, knowledge
regarding its detrimental effects, and action taken toward balancing the use of technology with
critical factors for development, will work toward sustaining our children. While no one can
argue the benefits of advanced technology in today’s world, connection to these devices may
have resulted in a disconnection from what society should value most, children. Rather than
hugging, playing, rough housing, and conversing with children, parents are increasingly
resorting to providing their children with more TV, video games, and the latest iPads and cell
phone devices, creating a deep and irreversible chasm between parent and chi

An increasing number of people are now using the internet to meet new people and socialise.
Some people think this has brought people closer together while

others think people are becoming more isolated.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

The Internet has been in widespread popular use for just over two decades and serve as a
major tool for communication. Some people say that the Internet has narrowed distance
among people, while there are others argure that it isolates people from real society. In this
essay, I will look at both sides of the argument and give my opinion.

On the one hand, it is widely accepted that our relationship are closer thanks to the Internet.
The Internet helps people to maintain existing ties, often to strengthen them. A large amount
of the communication that takes place online is often with the same set of friends and family
who are also contacted in person and by phone. Social networks such as Facebook, twitter
enable us to find and contact with our high school friends who we has since lost touch with.
Moreover, people around global are online and using the same websites, which gives both
individuals and businesses more opportunites than ever before to extend our networks and
reach out to people we may otherwise never meet. For example, on Facebook, million groups
about music, fashion, sport, health,...have been built so that people can easily make friends and
chat with someone who share the same interests with them. Obviously, the Internet does bring
us closer together as it offers a platform through which we can interact with people we already
know as well as the unknown.

On the other hand, cyber is said to damage social connections of its users. Social media sites
can make it more difficult for us to distinguish between the meaningful relationships we foster
in the real world, and the numerous casual relationships formed through social media. By
focusing so much of our time and psychic energy on these less meaningful relationships, our
most important connections may weaken. The internet seduces people into spending time
online at the expense of time spent with friends and family. Internet-addicts tend to sit at home
and not going out to talk to their neighbors across the strees, visting relatives or traveling with
friends. Hence, it is clearly shown that the internet sucks people away from in-person contact
and fostering real-world disconnection.

In conclusion, although it is undeniable that online network has brought us enormous useful
services, I hold the view that cyber has ruined our interaction with reality. It is high time local
communities try to encourage people to take part in local activities for a better society
development
It is undoubtedly true that the used of the internet is prevalent in today’s generation. While
some people believe that the usage of the net makes the people’s relationships closer, others
argue that it isolate the people and communities. It is agreed that the web makes it possible for
the people to have a closer relationship. This essay will evaluate both arguments before a
reasoned conclusion is drawn.

On the one hand, for those who believe that the internet created a distant involvement of
residents in the communities may think that the internet users have become excessively
dependent on the computers. This may happen when they spent an enormous amount of time
in the front of the computer playing online games or surfing the net. For instance, in the recent
survey of the Central University of Queensland, most respondents who are usually students in
their younger years, opted to stay regularly at their home using the computer rather than to
actively participate in community activities.

On the other hand, I support the argument that the net made people’s communication more
effective which lead to closer family ties. This is because the internet, which is the information
superhighway, opens the communication gateway successfully. The existence of various
cyberspace platforms such as the facebook, the skype, and the twitter enable the people to
keep track of their lost relatives or friends and send instant messages or emails immediately.
For example, Boston University conducted research on the effectivity of the internet on the
user’s relationships and found that 80% of them expressed that the communication definitely
improved. This is clearly evident that the internet has positively affected the relationship of an
individual user.

In conclusion, although the uncontrolled access to the web might seriously hamper the
involvement of people in their surroundings, I believe that the overall usage of the net made
the possibility for every member of the society to have a closer interaction.

Nowadays, due to ease of access and economical internet packages, a lot of people spend most
of their time on internet. The social media sites have minimized distances and brought people
closer that is having both positive and negative impacts on society and individuals.

Some people believe that internet is playing a very important role in uniting nations and
developing respect for each other. Through social media sites, now people can have friends
from different countries that are living in different circumstances. It helps them to learn about
other cultures and practice foreign languages. People having similar interests can share their
view points and learn from each other. Any professional can explore and avail online job
opportunities from across the globe. Moreover, people can observe the solutions that other
nations used to resolve their issues and practice them for betterment of their own country.

On the other hand, it is commonly believed by many people that internet is making people
materialistic and selfish. They prefer to chat and have face to face discussions with their foreign
friends or relatives, while ignoring their parents, neighbors and close relatives. This way the
relationships are losing their value and respect. The immature young students often waste
hours in having useless discussions with other people over the internet. Sometimes they also
develop habits or practice traditions that are not acceptable according to their own religion and
social values. People are becoming lazy, instead of doing practical work and contributing to
society, they just keep on posting irrelevant material on the internet that spoils them and other
people as well.

I personally believe that internet is one of the greatest inventions of technology that is helping
people to globalize and broaden their vision. They are becoming patient enough to listen
differing point of views and develop understanding. When a student goes to abroad for higher
education then he can easily connect with his family, friends and relative in the native country.
The internet has become a platform for young generation to know about things happening in
their country, share their ideas and work together to resolve any issues. However, the excessive
use of it should be discouraged.

To conclude, it is certainly true that internet users are increasing day by day. Some people are
using it to learn and acquire knowledge while others are wasting their energy in having useless
discussions with other people. In my opinion, social media sites itself do not have any side
effects but a moderate and wise use of it is required.

More and more children as accessing the internet unsupervised and at a younger

age. This can sometimes put children at risk.

What problems do you think parents face when dealing with their children using

the internet?

How can this problem be solved?

The computer is considered as a wonder invention of modern world and young people are
more attracted to using computers than the older age.It may result in having detrimental
effects an children lifes so there are some solutions to tackle with this obsession between
young ages and the internet.
Firstly,anonymously using the internet is spread readily yo annoy,abuse,threaten or harass the
children who receive the communication via internet.Lots of family have worry for their kids
when they surfing because the child abuse and other offences related to clidren are getting
warmer around the world.Secondly,there are many con-artist out there,who approach gullible
individuals online for the purpose of money exaotation,after getting personal information
about parents from their kids.

There are a few things that can be done by parents to reduce the risk of children from the
deceptive individuals.The firt step could be that being kept a closer watch on children,who are
often connection to internet.Parents,therefore,have to control or browse which kind of sites
were visited once again.The second step,they should buy the limited access users ,thus anyone
would go surfing in safe and they could be protected the ongoing supervised dangers in
internet.

To conclude,the accessing everhthing contained in internet could be unstoppable so lots of

parents home to search the way of protection setting from any detimental effects will be
danger to kids in future.

Nowadays, internet has revolutionized the world of information.However, the access to

internet from the children at early age without parental guidance is a big problem. Parents have
to face different problems like controlling access to internet, and how to limit the information
on internet. These problems can be resolved by applying passwords to the devices and to set a
time for internet usage for children in presence of their parents.

Internet is hub of information, but the same time it contains information which is not good for
children.one of the major problems parents have to face is to control access to internet from
children. Nowadays most people use internet from mobile phones, it becomes very difficult for
parents to control children from using the mobile phones. Another major problem parents have
to face is to limit the children from prohibited information on internet, right now there is no
mechanism on the internet for limiting the access to any websites.

However, parents can take different steps to resolve the mentioned problems. Parents can
apply passwords on the devices like cellphones and laptops. By doing this, children cannot
access these devices for internet usage. Another step is to set a specific time for the usage of
internet for children. Parents have to make sure that children use internet in their presence.
This will limit the children from accessing the prohibited information on internet.

In conclusion, there are problems faced by parents when it comes to children usage of internet,
but at the same time parents can take different steps to overcome these problems.

Nowadays children watch a lot of TV and play video games. However, some people

think that these activities are not good for a child’s mental health.

To what extent do you agree or disagree? (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

It is generally accepted that spending too much time in front if the TV harms childrens’
development. Therefore, in my opinion, parents should by all means limit their childrens’ TV
and computer screen time, especially while they are younger.

Watching TV or using a computer can be addictive, even for adults. Parents must prevent their
children from developing bad habits, like spending a lot of their time in front of the TV, early
on. Not only should parents strictly limit their childrens' screen time, they also need to be role
models. Certainly, younger children will need more guidance, while teenagers can be given
more responsibility in how they spend their time.

Moreover, watching TV is a passive way to spend time with no social interaction. While this
point is not so much about computers, physical exercise and playing with other children are
essential activities for a healthy development. Spending a lot of time in front of computer or TV
screens limit’s a child time for such activities.

Especially younger children can not concentrate for an extended time span without breaks.
Watching TV or playing computer games for many hours can hurt their ability to concentrate on
their homework or a book later on. So even if the content watched is age adequate and
educational watching it for too long can be harmful for a child.
All things consideres, there are many reasons why parents are well advised to monitor their
childrens’ use of TV and computers closely. Especially younger children should be guided to
spend their time in active and healthy ways.

Physical activity plays an important role in the physical and psychological development of
children during the initial years of their life. However, urbanization and modernization have
replaced outdoor games with indoor games and thus increased the number of couch potatoes
among the current generation. In my view this is a negative development that affects the
physical and mental development of children.

Firstly, urbanization eliminated public playgrounds from cities and towns. Thanks to the
development of all those housing complexes and shopping centres the cities have become
more congested than ever leaving no room for little ones to enjoy outdoor games like cricket or
football. Since playing such sports in narrow streets cause disturbance to apartment dwellers
parents are forced to keep their children indoors.

The security of children has also become a cause for concern. Parents are becoming wary of
letting their children play outside. So, to keep them engaged indoors they equip their children
with video games, computers and smart phones. As a result, children are getting detached from
the benefits of playing outside. This, unfortunately, affects their physical and intellectual
development. Sitting in front of a computer or gaming console for long hours can affect the
eyesight of children and make them obese.

Studies have shown that physical activity helps the development of cognitive abilities like
decision-making and problem-solving. Sports and games also teach children crucial life skills
such as team spirit and the ability to take success and failure alike. When children do not
engage in sports, they are losing an opportunity to master these life lessons.

To conclude, video games might keep children engaged for hours on end, but they do not help
the overall development of children. So I strongly believe that spending too much time on
playing computer games can be very harmful for the upcoming generation.
Television is ubiquitous these days; I have not come across single household where there is no
TV. But is watching TV good for children? Well, I am a strong believer that anything done in
moderation is good and same goes with children watching TV.

Firstly, with the omnipresence of TV, it is impossible to keep children away from it. Moreover,
TV provides an efficient source of learning for children if right channels are watched. We
generally are able to grasp and remember more things when we see and hear rather than read
it and here is where TV is really useful. These days we have different channels focusing only on
children like cartoons or more educational channels like animal planet, discovery channel etc.
All these channels help in educating children in an effective manner. It is often seen when the
children are really young around 1-2 years, they react to TV; whenever a song is being played,
they start dancing, and they often listen to songs and starts singing. This definitely suggests that
TV helps children in their development and make them active.

Admittedly, TV also has some negative impacts on children. Sometimes, they squander too
much time in watching TV and watching wrong channels can also have a negative influence on
them. Therefore it is of utmost importance that parents keep a close eye on their children. With
the advent of technology, we now have televisions with child lock system in place, which could
prevent children from watching irrelevant and adult channels. Parents should extol the
importance of watching news channels to develop overall general knowledge of children. When
I was growing up, my parents made sure that I watch the news for at least half an hour in a day.
This really helped me in improving my General Knowledge and I gradually developed the
interest in politics and also watching different debates and group discussions helped me
improving my speaking skill and as a result, I won several prizes in debates and quizzes at school
and college level.

In a nutshell, I think as every coin as two sides, so does television. Watching TV in moderation
and under parents’ guidance is good for children entertainment and learning but it is important
that parents keep a check on the channels that their children watch and the amount of time
being spent on watching TV.

(Approximately 385 words)

(This model answer was written by Preeti Ghuraiya.)

Model Answer 2:

Some parents believe that watching television is bad for their children. So, they try to restrict
their children from watching TV. However, other parents think that there is nothing bad in
watching TV programmes. Personally, I think that watching TV brings tremendous benefits to
the children unless they spend a lot of their valuable time in front of a TV set daily. It is
recommended that children should spend less than a couple of hours daily for watching TV
programmes and those programmes should be suitable for them. For the following reasons,
which I will mention bellow, I believe that television plays an essential role in a child's
development.

First of all, television helps a child to extend his or her range of interests. Children can find out
many new things and make many exciting discoveries for themselves. In addition to this
practical benefit, television improves children's vocabulary, their memory and gives them the
opportunity to gain more knowledge. I think it is essential for a child's growth. Of cause,
someone can say that there are plenty of different resources of information such as books and
teachers. But, I think, in our modern world children must learn faster and use all contemporary
technology in order to succeed. Secondly, watching cognitive programs helps children to learn
more about wildlife, our environment and about the importance of preserving our forest and
wild animals that live there.

Scientists say that a child should not watch TV more than 40 minutes successively and not more
than 2-3 hours per day. For example, my mother always made us have a break after watching
TV more than half an hour and let our eyes rest for several minutes before turning on the TV
again. She did not let us watch the TV all day long as well. I think it is the best solution.

To sum up, I believe that television gives children and all people the opportunity to learn what
can not be learnt from books. Television and movies, in particular, allow people to feel the
reality and see what they will most likely not be able to see in their lives. Personally, when I was
a child I liked to watch cognitive programs about wild animals. Unfortunately, my family had
only one TV, but these programs were the only ones we all wanted to watch. So, we gathered in
our living room and watched them in complete silence and I always remember those moments
with a smile on my face.
It is common nowadays for each member of the family to have their own piece of

modern technology. Some people think this will lead to a break down in family

relationships and communication.

To what extent do you agree?

Tourism Essay Titles

Tourism is an ever growing industry.

What benefits do you think tourism brings to individuals and society?

Today, the tourism industry are on the rise. People around the globe tend to go once or more
annually vacating and discovering new recreation places. This brought to many cities wealth
and prosperity that enhanced and boosted their economy to a great extent.

It is indisputable that cities with unique amenities are different, in several aspects, from regular
cities and these felicities are the result of the touristic stigma that made it's uniqueness. Firstly,
the inflow of people into a certain city for recreation purposes enhanced the economy to a
great extent. Restaurants, hotels and resorts are competing for tourists satisfaction and create
offers as well as events to allure as much tourists as they can. This creates enormous job
opportunities for locals and generally boosted the average family income of the city dwellers.
Moreover, tourism boom the traditional products industry as travelers adore purchasing and
collecting souvenirs.

In addition, the benefits are not confined to merely economical aspect, though tourism vastly
alters people social behaviorism. It is explicit that a citizen from a touristic city is ideologically
different from a citizen from a regular city. The touristic city dwellers have the tendency to be
more friendly and more sociable than others. Another merit to be mentioned that many
surveys showed that significant number of people living in touristic cities are multilingual. This
is considered as an additional cultural felicity to the city.
To conclude, tourism truly brings about luxury and prosperity to the city in a myriads of aspects
other than economy and such cities considered a portray and a gain to the whole nation.

Nowadays, tourism plays an important role for developing countries. It represents a source of
income and support local economies of those countries. This essay will illustrate the advantages
that can be obtained of growing such an industry. It will also elicit how local communities can
be benefited of such a growth based on jobs opportunities and cultural exchange.

Undoubtedly, tourism is one of the main methods that it has widely been utilised by many
nations for economic purposes. The growth of tourism industry can be a substitute for some
countries who suffer from a scarcity in their natural and industrial resources. Recently, it is
observable that governments invest a tremendous amount of money to provide great facilities
and amenities in order to attract tourists worldwide. For example, it has been reported that
thousands of people visit Paris annually or even monthly. Consequently, such a massive number
of tourists would open doors for creating enormous jobs for individuals and that would be
directly beneficial for local communities.

In addition, tourism sectors can be advantageous for societies based on another extends such
as cultural exchange and diversity. People attend from different nations, backgrounds and
ethnic groups. Such gathering can be a platform for persons to meet and mix with each other.
Moreover, people share their values and customs in respectable manner. In fact, such growing
can make cities to become cosmopolitan. As a result, it can bring international investors to
those countries. Hence, both local communities and individual would benefit significantly.

To conclude, tourism industry can make an indispensable role for developing and prosperity of
counties. In particular, it provides vigorous economic and cultural exchange for local societies
and people.

As a result of tourism and the increasing number of people travelling, there is

an growing demand for more flights.

What problems does this have on the environment?

What measures could be taken to solve the problems?

Owing to the rise in number of travelers and tourists all over the world, more airplanes are
providing service to meet the demand. This brings environmental problems like air pollution as
well as over-exploitation of natural resources. There are a number of solutions which should be
implemented to deal with the negative consequences.

Firstly, the air quality will seriously be affected due to the pollutants emitted when the
airplanes are flying. For instance, carbon dioxide will be released when the fuel oil is burnt to
produce energy, which the amount given out is much higher than other transportations.
Secondly, more natural resources will be extracted, which, when too much are taken away to
provide crude oil for fuels, will result in resources becoming unsustainable. Obviously, this
brings disadvantages to the environment.

There are two effective key to the problem brought by the increase in number of flights. One
way to tackle this is to tax short-distance travelers heavier as the gas emission charge. By doing
this, the number of people travelling around by flight can be reduced, and people may be
encouraged to choose other alternatives with lower emissions. Another method of dealing with
the rise in number of flights is to ensure most planes are fully seated, since this can boost the
energy efficacy - to provide service to most number of passengers using the same amount of
energy. This solution would hopefully maximize the efficiency of an airplane.

In conclusion, adjusting the taxation to a higher level and ensuring a well seating arrangement
are effective in coping with this issue. If government implemented these measures, the
environmental problems resulted would soon be solved.

Tourism is one of the many vastly developing industries today, with more destinations
becoming available to tourists allowing them to literally reach any corner of the world. This is in
part to the inventions of modern technology, namely the airplane. As much as the advantages
that air travel has to offer, it does have it's consequences, particularly on the environment.

With more people resorting to airline travel, this leads to large volumes of gaseous emissions
from jet engines, owing to the copious amount of fuel required for each aircraft. These harmful
gases would contribute to the 'greenhouse effect', by forming a blanket above the Earth's
atmosphere and trapping the ultraviolet radiation of the Sun. Furthermore, more destinations
and aircraft would mean that airports would have to expand to cope with the demand such as
having more terminals or runways. This could result local forests or land giving way for airport
expansion, which can have a detrimental effect towards local wildlife and their habitats. This is
of particular issue especially to many activists who do not support the expansion of airports.
Not only animals, but humans can also be affected by this issue. Certain towns are located near
airports and by having more flights to a particular area, the noise levels would rise and would
add to sound pollution. This can affect the elderly living in such areas. Thus, there are
numerous issues at concern relating to the environment regarding the proposition of more air
travel.

In order to tackle this, certain solutions could potentially put into place. One way would be to
discourage people from frequently resorting to air travel. This could be achieved through
various methods such as increasing the cost of air travel by means of fuel taxes, carbon taxes
and airport taxes. In addition, airports can also help by limiting the number of destinations
available from a particular place. This would mean that there would be a less likelihood of
airport expansion, which would benefit many locals and conservationists. Another method
would be to promote tourism of various local places through means of media such as internet,
television and radio. This can indirectly divert people from using air travel and allow alternative
methods of transportation to be used. As well as promoting such places, reducing the costs of
attractions in a particular area would also draw more tourists.

In conclusion, it is clear that there are problems and possible answers to them however, careful
thought and implementation are the key strategies that one should consider before bringing
about a change because tourism should have a positive impact on both the environment and
airline industry.

With the coming of internet and globalization, the world has become a global village and
people are now readily expanding their horizons. This often means that more and more people
are choosing to travel overseas and find out about the various cultures. This new trend of
travelling has in turn increased the number of flights, which has had effect on the environment.

The biggest issue with the rise in number of flights is the increase in the carbon emission. The
high altitude jet emissions tend to produce an additional warming effect and the explosive
growth in air travel makes it one of the fastest-growing sources of carbon gases in the
atmosphere. One solution would be to increase the use of road transport where lower carbon
alternatives already exists.
Another problem caused is the increasing danger to the birds flying at the same altitude.
Increased number of flights tend to increase the air traffic which is not very favorable for the
birds that often migrate or fly at that region. For instance, often it so happens that due to less
visibility the bird gets hit by the plane, causing its death. Increased number of flights will
increase such accidents. A possible solution to this problem could be advancement in
technology such that no harm to the ecosystem is made.

Overall, with the increased human intervention, some problems have surely risen to the
surface. Although, a completely neat solution is not available but if proper steps are taken the
effect can surely be minimized.

Some people believe that to protect local culture, tourism should be banned in

some areas whereas others think that change is inevitable and banning tourism

will have no benefits.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

Tourism has become an indispensable source of income for many countries and communities.
Some people claim that some areas are susceptible to culture loss and therefore, they should
be closed entirely to tourists; however others insist that this measure is not beneficial to the
locals. In this essay, I will discuss both views and then give my opinion.

On the one hand, supporters of banning tourism often argue that religious, linguistic and socio-
cultural behavior will likely be more affected by the influx of tourists. Tourists often interact
with the local people in different ways, and the locals may adopt certain foreign practices and
customs. This may be bad for traditional local culture. For example, children in touristy areas
may prefer to speak foreign languages rather than native languages because they want to
communicate with the tourists. Some people, therefore, feel that closing such areas to tourists
is the easiest way to conserve local culture and traditions.
On the flip side, banning tourism can have an adverse effect on local economy. Also some
cultural changes may inevitably happen whether we allow tourists or not. There are many local
communities that survive on tourism. If tourists stop coming, local businesses will retire and
unemployment rate will increase. The negative economic consequences of banning tourism are
worse than any cultural loss that may occur from the arrival of tourists.

In my opinion, if we want to preserve our values and traditions it is not necessary to close
tourist places, because the consequences of doing that will be profoundly devastating. Local
authorities and individuals should work together to promote local culture and raise campaigns.
This can be done by using many forms of communication like television, internet or radio

For the last few decades, many nations have witnessed an overwhelming increase in the
number of tourists. While some people argue that prohibiting strangers in well known places
remains an appropriate way of safeguarding territorial culture, in my opinion, the correction
appears inexorable and restricting journeyers becomes seriously detrimental to a nation and
society. This essay will support my opinion with relevant examples.

On the one hand, the economic growth of the country may receive a significant blow when the
voyagers are denied entries. As it is clear that tourism accounts a marked percent of the Gross
Domestic Product, limiting travellers tends to strain negative impacts on the revenues, which
are usually allocated for public services. On the social level, there is a high probability where
people can be left unemployed for a long term. Because tourism opens up perfect job
opportunities for local people, hotels, shops and so on, societies can enjoy benefits
substantially. Therefore, it ascertains why tourism becomes truly instrumental for the state and
community.

On the other hand, critics of tourism insist that the sightseers ought to be banned since they
are generally found to disturb the local culture. Barcelona, one of the top most sites for
tourists, would be a good example. For many, drinking behaviours of foreigners, who have
swamped the regional areas, normally exert dominant influences on the youths. As a
consequence, drunken teenagers that often are responsible for vandalism and street crimes,
can be encountered in the every streets of Barcelona. Furthermore, generally speaking, the
intrusion of outsiders poses dire threats to cultural heritage. Take Venice, an outstanding
tourist destination, for an example. Owing to the constant flooding of tourists in astounding
ways, the historic pristine and gloomy city is gradually turning to a Disneyfied shopping mall.
In conclusion, tabooing newcomers wrecks the booming economy because of a remarkable
drop in fund and employment.

As a result of tourism, many historical buildings and sites are being damaged

beyond repair.

What could be done to prevent this?

Moreover, government can charge tourists to visit such places that can be used to conserve
such places or buildings and for the betterment of the local people.

Now its high time for us to think that in the shake of commercialize tourism we are killing our
history as well as our roots. There is a hell lot of way we can prevent the damage. But before
starting any positive changes the most important thing is to create the awareness.
Incorporating rules and regulation will not work until people are conscious. As a role of
government, they should incorporate some instructions, regulate and monitor some
disciplinary process, preserve not only the renowned one but also the surrounding sculptures.

Some people think that when a person travels into a different culture they

should adapt to the local practices and customs.

To what extent do you agree?

Sample Answer 1:

The tourism industry has been concerned in many countries and these days lots of investments
have been developed on this matter. But there are a lot of debates about some conflicts which
come to existence when visitors enter in some societies. In fact, some encourage people to
accept and welcome other cultures which have been brought to their countries by tourists and
some others believe that tourists should behave as the frame of the host country rules and
customs. This essay has tried to cover both of mentioned views and will suggest a solution for
this sophisticated issue.
The first groups who opine that people should respect tourists’ cultural believe that introducing
new cultures to a society can be suitable. In the other words, people can learn new things from
tourists and it can be helpful for increasing society awareness about the way of living in each
corner of the world. In the other hand, these groups believe that people and governments
should be flexible and admit other cultures if they want to be successful in the tourism industry
and attract more tourists. Actually, lots of countries are competing with each other for being
the destination of visitors in holidays and without respecting different cultures, they may be
lost in this competition.

By contrast, some others worry about their local customs and traditional cultures and they
think that bringing new cultures and behaviours to one country by visitors can make a serious
threaten for their cultures. Put another way, they believe that people may be interested in
other countries cultures when tourists come to their countries and by this way, they forget
their local customs. For example, a new style of wearing would be replaced by local clothes or
new foods would be developed instead of traditional ones. Hence, they always want from
tourists to behave as the host country allows. For instance, in some Islamic countries,
governments prohibit drinking alcohol for tourists or ask women tourists to wear some specific
dresses.

I think, therefore, tourists always would like to learn and visit local customs when they go to
new places, so, host countries can make a potential for tourists to be free and also encourage
them to follow local rules and customs by introducing and showing their benefits. Undeniably
visitors would be interested in behaving as similar as local people if the proper strategies would
be considered.

[ by - Milad Rahimi ]

Sample Answer 2:

It is always debatable whether visitors should follow local customs and behaviour or the
country should be accustomed to cultural differences. At first, I would like to discuss following
local customs and behaviour. As a human being, we have consciousness which helps us to
decide what is right or wrong that we apply in every sphere of our life. But everybody may not
apply consciousness or may not have the same level of consciousness to apply.

If one does not follow local customs, he/she may not be taken warmly by people of that
country. Due to this reason, I believe that everybody who visits other countries should follow
local customs and behaviour. Beside this, local customs and behaviour are mostly regulated by
the religion of the country which is very sensitive to most people. That is why I agree with the
view of following local customs and behaviour.

In the other hand, there are many reasons to agree with the second view that the host country
should welcome cultural differences. It is universally true that the civilisation is evolving from
the beginning of mankind and the main reason behind this is that people are travelling from
one place to another to explore the world which brings new cultures to new places. If one fails
to welcome cultural differences, he/she will not be able to cope with cultures of other
countries. This will impact the economy in terms of tourism and modernization as well as
evaluation of civilisation.

A good example of welcoming cultural differences is Malaysia. People of western countries are
travelling to Malaysia and most of them are not used to follow local customs and being a
Muslim country, Malaysia also providing freedom to visitors until laws are broken. Malaysia has
become an example for other countries to welcome cultural differences. That is why cultural
differences should always be welcomed until it hurts your philosophy or religion.

[ by - Safayet Ullah ]

Sample Answer 3:
Nowadays the tourism industry is growing at a tremendous speed. Due to the boom in
transport industries and holiday packages, people often travel other countries for holidays and
on official trips. There is a debate ongoing on whether the visitors from other nationality should
follow local customs and behaviours during their stay in host countries. I will discuss this in
below paragraphs.

Firstly, when the foreigners visit other countries they carry their culture along with them. But,
during their stay in the host country, if they adopt the local customs, it will be helpful for them
to get better communication with the local people. Meanwhile, when they adjust themselves to
the local people's behaviour, it will make them easier to socialise with them. Also, this will help
local people to better understand the foreigners.

Secondly, this will help the foreigner to have a good idea about local cultures and rituals. This
understating helps our culture to spread globally, thereby more and more people get attracted
toward the local culture. This, in turn, attracts a number of visitors from different country's to
visit. This will help in increasing the tourism industry and also helps in giving employment
opportunity in the related industries.

On the other hand, when the foreigners share their culture and behaviour with the local people
it gives an opportunity to local people to a better understanding of their culture and characters.
This will have an immense influence on local people's opinion about foreigners and their
culture. Also, this helps them to identify the negative aspects of their culture and gives them an
opportunity to correct it.

To sum up, by considering the above benefits, I personally believe that the balanced exchange
of cultures and behaviour of foreigners with local people will benefit both the countries to
come together and calm down if there are any frictions between the countries. Also, this will
have a positive impact on the economy of both countries.

[ by - Prakash Chandra ]
Sample Answer 4:

It is noticeable that people tend to travel more frequently these days than they used to do in
the past. While I agree that the travellers should follow the host country’s traditions and
cultures, I also think that the host country should welcome cultural differences.

On one hand, travellers should adapt to the culture of their host country and feel happy with
the idea of trying new things. Nowadays, people not only consider travelling as a way to relax
but also they think it is a chance for self-improvement and exploring the world. Travelling is a
good opportunity to try new things such as traditional cuisine, music and customs and those
who just travel to view landscapes waste a perfect chance to learn something new. For
example, people who have visited places like India, Egypt or China have been very excited when
they tried the local food or wore the traditional dress. An experience like this broadens people’s
horizons and enriches their knowledge.

On the other hand, for many reasons the host country should accept and understand the
different backgrounds of tourists. Firstly, for many visitors, it would be difficult to follow the
host culture and customs because these usually different than their own and in some cases
they may even be incompatible with their beliefs and morals. For example, Indian or Arabs who
go to European countries may find it difficult to get used to the European taste in food because
it does not contain as much spices as they have in their food. In addition, if travellers feel they
are welcomed in the new country despite the cultural differences they will feel more
comfortable to visit this place again.

In conclusion, I believe that it could be beneficial for travellers to get exposed to different
cultures and customs. However, tourist destinations should be opened to the cultural diversity
of its newcomers.

The development of tourism contributed to English becoming the most prominent

language in the world. Some people think this will lead to English becoming the

only language to be spoken globally.

What are the advantages and disadvantages to having one language in the world?

It is thought by some people that English, which is now the most widely spoken

language in the world, may one day predominate over all other languages and

result in their eventual disappearance. Having one language would certainly aid

understanding and economic growth but there will also be some drawbacks.

One evident benefit to having one global language is that it would enable

greater understanding between countries. In other words, if everyone spoke one

language, there would be complete understanding between not only countries but

all people throughout the world which would promote learning, the flow of

information and ideas. Another reason that one language would be advantageous is

that it would help economic growth. With all people speaking the same language,

there will be less barriers and therefore trade would flourish between

countries, resulting in a healthier world economy.

On the other hand, there are obvious disadvantages to having only one global

language. Firstly, it would mean that all other languages would eventually

disappear and, along with them, their cultures. The diversity of cultures is one

of the joys this world has to offer. Each culture is unique with its own way of

life and own perspectives of the world which would all be lost if there were

only one language. Secondly, it would result in the collapse of tourism because

there would be no reason to travel for pleasure and interest if all countries

had the same language and similar cultures. This would devastate many countries

economically that rely on tourism as a source of income.

In conclusion, while there are plus points to having one global language, too

much would be lost as a result. Maintaining local languages and cultures should

be prioritised to ensure a rich world heritage for future generations.

Owing to the growth of tourism, English has emerged as the most widely spoken language. It
can be predicted that one day this language would predominate all other languages and may
eventually lead to their disappearance. Having one language worldwide would certainly aid
understanding and economic growth, but there will also some threats to local culture and
customs.

To begin with, there are many business as well as economic advantages of single international
speaking dialect. In other words, travelling and trading across the boundaries will be eased and
promoted by using global language. For instance, with all people speaking the same language,
there will be less communication barriers and therefore trade would flourish between countries
which would result in healthier world economy. Apart from this, more international business
such as multinational companies will benefit the less developed nations to strengthen their
currency.

On the contrary, there are also some disadvantages of having single global language. Firstly,
owing to vanishing local languages, there must be negative impact on local traditions and
history. For instance, in India, most of the traditional songs are in Hindi and with appearance of
English as a single global language, these songs and related traditions would be diminished with
passage of time. Secondly, it would result into collapse of tourism because there will be no
reason of traveling if all countries have same language and culture. This may lead to devastating
economy of counties which rely solely on tourism.

To conclude, English as a single speaking language in all countries can promote international
trade and learning, but there are some possible threats towards preserving the traditional
customs and languages. Therefore, maintaining local culture should be prioritized in order to
ensure a rich world heritage for future generation.
Transport & Traffic Essay
In some cities and towns all over the world, the high volume of traffic is a

problem.

What are the causes of this and what actions can be taken to solve this problem?

Sample Answer 1:

It is undoubtedly the case that urban areas around the world increasingly suffer from traffic
congestion. In this essay, I will examine the reasons for this trend and suggest some practical
policies the authorities could implement to reduce the level of traffic in our cities.

The first step is to understand why traffic has increased in towns and cities. Broadly speaking,
there are three main reasons for this. One is that cars have become more affordable for the
average consumers and they are no longer a luxury item, but something that most families
expect to own. A second reason is that public transport has become increasingly unreliable in
recent years, not least because many bus and train services have been reduced because of the
difficulty in funding them. The third reason is that society has, in general, become more mobile
and this means more people are prepared to commute to work by car than they were before.

The biggest causes of traffic jam lack of proper road and bridges in cities. If there is an
additional way for buses and large trucks in cities, traffic jams reduce in cities.

There is almost certainly no one solution to this problem given the complexity of its causes.
However, one option has to be to improve the reliability of public transport to encourage
people to take the bus or the train rather than get in the car. It would also be possible to
discourage people from driving to work by introducing special tariffs for using the roads,
especially during peak periods.

In conclusion, there are a variety of different factors that have led to rising levels of traffic in
urban areas. While it may not be possible to find a complete solution but actions should
probably involve encouraging more use of public transports.Furthermore, taxes on private cars
should be increased and eco-friendly transportation like bicycles should be promoted.
[ Written by - Togrul Nesirli ]

Sample Answer 2:

It is a fact that traffic congestion has become a serious problem for many cities and towns.
More and more people get stressed with this situation, as they have to spend hours after hours
in the street and lose their productivity and valuable time. The following essay will discuss the
cause of the issue and some of the solutions that can be taken into account.

For a number of reasons, traffic has become the main problem of many cities and towns all
over the world. Firstly, as the population growth in many metropolis cities such as in Shanghai,
New York, Dhaka and Bangkok has increased rapidly in the past recent years, it means that
there are more cars in the city. Secondly, in some cities, such as in Jakarta or Manila, public
transportation facilities are poorly managed therefore the people choose to drive their own
vehicles. Lastly, in many countries such as Indonesia or China, the economic development is not
widely spread, and a result a lot of people from rural areas move to cities which would create
traffic related problems. The number of commuters in many cities has increased dramatically
but in proportion, the total number of roads remained almost same as it was in the past. Many
people are buying private cars and it is not unusual that many families own more than one car.
These two reasons with the poor traffic management system in many cities cause
unmanageable traffic jam nowadays.

However, there are several things that the government could do to reduce the problem. The
state government should provide decent, safe and clean public transportation facilities,
therefore more people would use public transports, instead of driving their own private
vehicles. And then the government should develop new industrial and commercial areas
outside of the city. It is hoped that some people would move to these new areas, and would
reduce the density problem. The government could provide some bicycle lane, as it brings a lot
of benefit for the people and the city itself. Bicycles as the primary means of communication
could reduce traffic. It is also safer for the environment and has positive effects on the rider’s
health. The roads and highways should be expanded and new roads should be introduced.
Severe punishment should be imposed for violating traffic rules and restriction should be
implemented in private car ownership. Finally, improved traffic system should be introduced
and unfit cars and vehicles should be removed from the streets.

In conclusion, cities and towns all over the world are facing serious traffic problem these days.
It is mainly due to of the population growth, density and poor public transportation facility. But
there are several things that the government could do to address the problem, such as
improving the public transports, developing new areas and persuade its resident in using
bicycles.

[ Written by - Darwin Lesmana ]

Sample Answer 3:

In today's world, traffic congestion is an extremely difficult problem for commuters around the
globe. A 10 minutes office to home ride had become a pathetic 40 minutes or even longer ride,
spending one's valuable time on roads. This essay will explore some of the causes and
recommended practices to reduce this issue.

The possible sources for increased traffic could be from several factors. Firstly, I consider
migration of people from urban areas to cities in search of making a living as one of the primary
reasons. This, in turn, leads to increased number of vehicles on the road. Based on a recent
study conducted by the Transportation Department of London, there is a 20% surge in volume
of car sale in the United Kingdom each year over the last decade. Secondly, failing to adhere to
traffic rules is another factor contributing to the waiting time due to traffic.

The government and public should be pragmatic about the actions that will solve this issue. The
government should encourage using public transport instead of personal vehicles because in
my country one will hardly find a co-passenger in a car other than the driver. In addition, the
traffic control department should implement stringent traffic rules, for instance, diverting
traffic in peak hours on a particular avenue.
In summary, a rapid rise in the car users is one of a major reason for increasingly pathetic traffic
congestion. The government and public should cooperate to reduce the number of vehicles by
using public transport.

Some people think that in order to solve traffic and transportation problems

people should be encouraged to live in cities rather than in suburbs or in the

countryside.

To what extent do you agree or disagree? (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

The number of cars on the roads is increasing every day. Traffic and transportation issues are a
growing concern in every major city. Many people believe that in order to solve traffic and
transportation woes people should be encouraged to live in cities rather than in the suburbs or
countryside. I strongly disagree with this statement. In my opinion, there are several other ways
to solve this issue.

Firstly, encouraging people to live in the cities may have a detrimental effect on the population
and environment. Overcrowding of the cities is a major issue in the world today. Also, cities are
expensive and people may not have the funds necessary to reside in the city. Lack of good
public transportation facilities is the prime reason for traffic congestion in cities, because this
encourages people to use their own vehicles. In addition, poor traffic co-ordination especially
during peak hours, repairing of roads and other problems slow vehicular movement.

The government and civic authorities should increase the frequency of their public
transportation services. In order to ensure public convenience and satisfaction, services should
be scheduled in a timely manner. It is also important to ensure the quality of roads and to
eliminate bottlenecks which hamper traffic flow. Organizations should provide transport
facilities for staff who travel long distances. Carpooling is the best way to mitigate traffic woes
and individuals should be encouraged to do this.

To conclude, there are a number of solutions to traffic and transportation woes. The
government and the people should work hand in hand to combat this issue.
Over the last century, an enormous problem with traffic have become more complicated that
many big cities couldn't have found a good solution for it. If the heavy traffics had attracted
attention of public institution of transport, they would have been reduced effectively.

As we can observe, the standard living in metropolis has deteriorated as a result of increasing
demand for cars which are blamed for traffic. Many people argue that traffics are caused by
people living in a suburb or in the countryside who go by car to work in a city. This essay will
look at the problem of traffic and give relevant solution for that.

Firstly, people should have an opportunity to choose where they like to live and they shouldn't
be forced to change their accommodation. The idea of encouraging people to live in a city in
order to solve traffic jump, doesn't make sense. Furthermore, we should be more focused on
finding answer what are the main reasons for traffic. In addition, there is a solid evidence that
many cities are overwhelmed by cars and by pollution from them.

Secondly, to solve the main problem of traffic the government should invest more money in
public transport so that people can travel by buses, trains or metro. If all people , who live in
suburb, came to city, the city might become overcrowded, overpopulated and there also might
be less privacy. In addition, this would cause even more traffic because there might not be
sufficient numbers of buses.

To sum up, people should choose public means of transport at peak time so that they can save
their time.

The impact that the growing demand for more flights has had on the environment

is a major concern for many countries. Some people believe that one way to

limit the number of people travelling by air is to increase tax on flights.

To what extent do you think this could solve the problem?

Over recent years there has been an enormous increase in the amount of air traffic around the
world resulting in various problems, and a major cause of this has been the growth of low-cost
airlines. Although some people believe that taxes should be increased for air travel, I disagree.
Those that support taxing airlines believe that this will result in a reduction in this type of travel
and thus solve the problems of pollution, noise and construction. This is because a tax would
make the cost of travelling more expensive, which will, they claim, lead to a decrease in
demand. Proponents of this solution believe that taxes are fair because everyone has to pay
them and it is a workable solution that will have the additional bonus of providing an income
for the government.

However, there are a number of reasons why this is not the right course of action. Firstly, a tax
is not fair because it will adversely affect people on lower incomes. Such a tax would have to be
a fixed amount paid equally whether you are rich or poor, which means that those on lower
incomes would find it more difficult to travel, but it would likely have little effect on the lives of
those with a higher income. In addition, such a tax would not work. For example, we have seen
taxes increase in most countries on cars, but this has had little affect, with car use continuing to
grow.

To sum up, it is evident that introducing heavy taxes on air travel is not fair or workable. If we
continue to explore alternatives, we can continue to enjoy the benefits that air travel offers.

Some people think that it should be compulsory for people to retake their

driving test every 5 years.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of doing this?

Sample Answer 1: (Drawbacks outweigh the advantages)

In most of the countries, people take a driving test before they are awarded the driving licence
and renewal of driving licence does not require the person to retake the test. Some politicians,
however, suggest that repetitive test should replace the 'test once in a lifetime' policy.
Undeniably, the proposed policy has some advantages but the drawbacks are far greater.

To begin with, the recursive driving test seems like a solution to the increasing driving offence
but in reality, people's carelessness, violation of traffic rules and driving under the influence are
the main causes for most of the accidents. Therefore the authorities should spend more money
and manpower for ensuring road safety than retesting driver's ability. It is a scientific fact that
adept drivers are less likely to forget their driving skill unless they get physically unfit.
Considering this, the authority should update the drivers about the changes of traffic rules, not
test their ability to drive a vehicle. Moreover, strict punishment and penalty should be imposed
for the traffic rule violation.

Furthermore, a periodic driving test would kill people's money, time and energy on the one
hand and drain the government's budget on the other hand. According to a recent report, new
applicants have to wait for several weeks to get a driving licence due to the insufficient facility
and manpower. Having the repetitive driving skill test would thus make this far worse.

To conclude, rather than questing people's ability to remember how to drive, strict policies and
road safety should get priority. Driver's should be educated not tested on their ability to drive a
car as this proposed policy would add burden both to the ordinary people and the authority.

Sample Answer 2: (Benefits outweigh the disadvantages)

The growing number of cars and reckless driving are the major causes of increasing road
accidents these days. Therefore, some people, as well as some politicians, express their view
that repetitive driving tests, not just once to get the licence, should be in place. This essay
presents my views in favour of the continuous testing process for driving with some
appropriate reasons and examples.

The road safety in a country is a major concern and so is the obligation of politicians regarding
this. This is because increasing vehicular movements can cause more accidents on the roads.
Additionally, drivers, on the other hand, get outdated to incorporate with road rules accurately.
For example, they may not be able to see the traffic signals and road signs easily when they get
older. As a result, such drivers may potentially hit other moving vehicles and the people.
Therefore, the repeat tests for driving, from time to time, will definitely improve the driving
accuracy of people. Moreover, in many countries young drivers often do not abide by the traffic
rules and having continuous tests would ensure their awareness in safe driving. Finally, when
people will have to take driving tests periodically, they will less likely violate any traffic rule.
However, the multiple tests for driving in our lifetime may unnecessarily impose a burden. This
is because we have to prepare for the test in order to renew the licence. Additionally, we will
have to pay the exam fees every time which is considered an unwanted expense by many. As a
result, many of us may tend to avoid the tests and this will lead to a situation that one day we
will get pulled over and fined for an outdated licence. Therefore, continuous tests may not
solve the raised issue easily while the drivers will always be under a pressure.

In conclusion, as reoccurring tests improve our driving accuracy, the benefits of such test
surpass the drawbacks.

[Written by - Kris Nirvana]

Sample Answer 3:

The number of cars on roads is increasing rapidly these days which is aligned with the number
of car accidents. Consequently, some authorities believe that all driving licence holders must
take driving tests every year, rather than doing it once in their life. The following essay will
discuss the positive and the negative sides of the routine test, but I do believe that it has more
benefits than drawbacks.

On the one hand, it is undeniable that doing a driving test annually would have some
disadvantages. One of the reasons is the time and preparation it would require. In addition,
people would have to pay every year for taking the test. Lastly, they also believe that it would
cost more for the government, as they must provide additional manpower in the driving test
centres.

Despite all the negative sides, performing a driving test on an annual basis would have some
benefits for everybody. Firstly, by having a yearly driving test, each driver would be refreshed
and updated with all driving regulations. Secondly, drivers would be more cautious and more
careful when they drive, as their license will be checked regularly. Thirdly, it will reduce the
number of traffic accidents, because the driver's physical condition would also be checked as a
part of the test. For example, each driver's eyesight would be examined as some driver might
have problems with their views.

In conclusion, it is indisputable that performing a driving test each year has its own drawbacks,
but I do believe that it has more benefits for everybody. By doing the test regularly, people will
be more aware and cautious of their driving style which will reduce the number of accidents.

Some people think an international car-free day is an effective way to reduce

air pollution. Others think there are more effective ways do to this.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion. (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

The deterioration of air pollution is an alarming issue globally. While some people are of the
opinion that a day when cars are prohibited is a workable measure to alleviate this
contamination, I think larger – scale and long-term measures need to be taken to combat this
problem.

On the one hand, there is a common belief that a car-free day can reduce air-pollution severity.
Firstly, carbon dioxide emission from exhausted fumes may be significantly cut off, for cars are
not allowed to be used on that day. This expectation stems from the success of Earth hour
program that has been conducted for many years and made enormous contributions to the
reduction of electricity consumption. Secondly, if people do not commute by car on that day,
they have to resort to other means of transport such as walking, bus or subway, and therefore,
the rewarding experiences help them be aware of the convenience and mobility of other
commuting methods in comparison with cars. After that, these environmentally – friendly
transportation can become their preferred choice.

On the other hand, I think this answer is not feasible and sustainable enough to address severe
air contamination. Only applying car-free rules for one day decreases the greenhouse gas
emissions very minimally. Instead, government should impose higher luxury taxes on cars like it
has been implementing in many developing countries. Only after this policy is applied can fewer
people afford cars, and consequently car density on roads fall with the decline of its emissions.
Furthermore, other developed nations should invest in energy-efficient engines so that
commuters can still benefit from the safety and comfort of cars and the quantity of pollutants
in the atmosphere is controlled. For example, electric cars can be a feasible alternative for
petroleum ones for eco-friendly purposes.

In conclusion, the program that encourage motorists to give up their cars for one day is a good
idea to deal with air pollution, but government need to simultaneously take other measures
such as car price increase and advancements of car engines.

Air pollution is one of the environmental issues that attracts a lot of concerns around the world.
As such, a number of measures has been proposed to alleviate the severe situation. One of
which is the initiative of global car-free days and in my standpoint, there exists other feasible
and more effective measures as well.

On the one hand, there are several reasons to believe that having days on which cars are
discouraged plays a critical role in ameliorating the severity of air contamination. Firstly, an
enormous drop in the volume of cars leads to a considerable plunge of carbon dioxide emission,
which is one of the main culprits causing air pollution. This expection stems from the success of
the Earth’s hour program that has vastly contributed in reducing the electricity consumption.
Secondly, people would have to resort to other means of transport such as bus, bicycle, walking
and so on and therefore, commuters would then be aware of the convenience and mobility of
these alternative commuting methods in comparison with cars. As a result, they might opt for
public transport as their preferred choice.

On the other hand, I reckon that practicing global car-free days alone does not resolve the air
pollution comprehensively. Discouraging car use for only few days contributes marginally to the
reduction of carbon dioxide being released to the atmosphere. Instead, government should
impose higher environmental taxes on cars. Fewer people can afford car means a decline in the
number of vehicle and its associated emission. Another meassure is to improve the public
transport condition and service. Only when the public transport becomes more convenient,
friendly and timely can it attract more commuters. Besides, should the government allocates a
sufficient amount of budget in researching and developing of environmental friendly vehicles,
commuter can still enjoy the benefit of cars while the air pollution is being controlled.

In conclusion, government should combine other measures simultaneously to deal the air
pollution in addtion to the idea of discouraging car use for few days.
If people do not travel by car on that day, they have to use public transport such as walking, bus
or subway. After that, these environmentally – friendly transportation can become their
preferred choice.There is a common benifit that a car-free day can reduce air-pollution . the
carbon dioxide emission from exhausted may be cut off

I think the car-free day is not enough to severe air contamination. the government should
improve higher taxes on cars like it has been many developing countries. Only after this policy is
applied can fewer people afford cars, and consequently car density on roads fall with the
decline of emissions.

In conclusion, the program that encourage motorists to give up their cars for one day is a good
idea to deal with air pollution, but government need to simultaneously take other measures
such as car price increase and encourage use public transportation, invest in energy-efficient
engines

It is true that humankind have been encountering the unprecedented global air pollution. While
many individuals argue that curbing air pollution by introducing international car-free days is
promissing, I believe that other more effective methods should be taken into considerations.

On the one hand, there are various reasons why many people agree that the former approach
is conducive to reduce air pollution. It stands to reason that the number the number of private
cars has been increasing significantly in the new era as the result of the advent of state-of-the-
art technology in car industry as well as high standard of living. Consequently, the more cars
comsumed, the more exhaust emissions emitted, resulting in air pollution. International car-
free days, therefore, would reduce to some extent the amount of emissions stemming from this
mean of transportation and obviously contribute to environmental protection in the long run.

On the other hand, I would advocate with those who contend that there are numerous
approaches besides this above-mentioned one that would be more effectively. Firstly, it is fair
to say that air pollution is attributable to not only the increasing car comsumption but also
other resources such as emissions from industrial areas. State government, thereafter, should
interfere in this field by enacting environmental laws which restrict the amount of emissions of
factories. Moreover, residents could be raised awareness by encouraging them to be involved
in eco-friendly activites like planting trees, using public transportation or car-pooling system,
which curb a large number of vehicles in street including private cars. By doing so, not only
could it tackle this problem, it but also save national budget.

In conclusion, it seems to me that applying other methods would be highly advantageous,

although international car-free days could be promissing to some extent.

Air pollution has become an issue of broad interest to the general public. Some people believe
international car-free days are essential in limiting air pollution level. Others claim that various
different measures should be applied. As far as I am concerned, a variety of ways should come
into effect rather than only car-free days are introduced.

On the one hand, days without automobiles bring about certain benefits to the environment.
As we all know, cars play a crucial part in residential life because people throughout the world
utilize them on a daily basis. Automobiles are used as vehicles to commute to work and travel
to schools and therefore play an indispensable role in daily life. Consequently, car-free days are
applied in order to control the volume of cars on the streets. The aim of this practice is to
decline carbon dioxide gas emitted excessively from cars. By prohibiting automobile use on
some days, a huge amount of greenhouse gases are reduced and this way also encourages
citizens to make use of public transport.

On the other hand, I strongly believe there are much more effective solutions to tackle the air
contamination. Authorities should launch environmental campaigns to raise citizens'
awareness, changing people's behaviours. Knowledge from the programs can help individuals
be more energy efficient on a regular basis such as flying less, using bicycles and buses. Another
measure is governments can impose 'green taxes' on factories which pump pollutants into the
atmosphere. This law can act as a deterrent to bar factories from releasing gases tremendously.
It is obvious that international car-free days are a temporary plan because on the other days,
residents will certainly utilize them again. Nevertheless, information dissemination and
regulations are such long-term strategies that can be used to mitigate the air pollution level day
by day.

In conclusion, even though free-car days are beneficial, I agree with many long-term solutions.
When educating local inhabitants or introducing strict laws to society, they will have permanent
influences on people's awareness.
One way to solve the problem of congestion on the roads is to increase the tax

on private vehicles. 20

How could this alleviate congestion?

What other measures can you suggest to deal with congestion in cities?

One way to eradicate the issue of crowding on the roads is to mushrooming the tax on the
private vehicles. However, it can plunge the overcrowding to greater extent but as a result it
will lead to many other problems. With time, more population is surging in cities and
consequently more traffic on the roads is becoming a common scenario.

Firstly, extending tax will have adverse effect on the middle class people because they have
brought their personal cars with many hurdles and if the tax is increased, they cannot bear tax
imposed by the government. As a result, they will stop using cars and will use private
transportation instead. People who are planning to buy a new car with give it a second thought
because of the increased tax. Apart from this, the tax amount could be used by the authority to
built more roads, improve pavements and parking facilities and thus the traffic jams in roads
will be reduced. However, this will not deter the rich people to use their private cars on the
roads.

There are ample of alternatives for alleviating the congestion. Initially, the structure of roads
should be the first priority for decreasing the overcrowding on the roads. In other words, there
should be distinct sections on the roads for the fast transports namely cars, buses and trucks
and for the pedestrians and slow vehicles such as motor cycles, scooters as well. To give a clear
example, in Sweden, the roads are divided in different lanes which reduced the congestion as
well as fatal accidents which reduced the number of road accidents to only 264 in the year 2014
from more than thousands in previous years. The plan was code named “vision zero” by the
Sweden Government and indeed that was an effective measure.

Secondly, the traffic signal and controlling system in developing nations as well as developed
nation should be improved. The traffic lights should be installed which itself change according
to the density of the traffic. For instance, the road which has more traffic should get more time
to be cleared as compared to other roads. By this way it will reduce the congestion on the
roads. Moreover, u-turn should be prohibited on the grand trunk roads. It is found that till now
most of the traffic jams are caused by u-turns especially the u-turn of heavy transports is
responsible for road congestion and that should be prohibited completely. Traffic rules should
be followed by every citizen and any violation of traffic rule should be severely punished.

To encapsulate, congestion problem can be comfortably solved if appropriate precautions are

taken and the government has to take their responsibility for controlling the redundant traffic
by constructing roads and installing the modern traffic lights. Above all the public should also
take the road signs seriously and follow it.

Some people think that in order to deal with the problem of congestion in

cities, privately owned vehicles should be banned in city centers, while others

consider this to be an unrealistic solution.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

In modern era, as a result of upsurge in human population and development in urban areas,
traffic clogging has become a serious problem being faced by citizens. banishing personal
automobiles can be a remedy to this issue according to some people while others pursue this as
an impractical approach. I am in consummate accord with this statement and will enlighten my
point of view.

Government should adopt a pragmatic approach towards this issue, lowering the load of
personal means of transport in large metropolis can prove to be beneficial to curb traffic
problems. Government shall take some measures to draw peoples concerns towards public
transport usage for travelling to downtown areas instead of personal automobiles. in addition
to this, another strategy that can be adopted involves introducing safe, cleaner, cheaper and
comfortable public transport system for public.

on the other hand, prohibition of personal vehicles has some drawback too; public transporting
facilities in our country is not properly developed and neither do they provide comfortable
travelling to passengers. moreover, public transporting system is overcrowded and unpleasant
that provokes stressful and less creative environment for its passengers.

Furthermore, a downfall in automobiles percentage in main city area is accompanied with

several advantages such as decrease in air pollution and global warming due to the reduction in
emission of toxic gasses like carbon monoxide and nitrogen dioxide through vehicles that have
hazardous effects on human health; as it is the precursor for various life threatning diseases.
implementation of this will also curtail incidents of crimes and accidents in main city areas.

In concluding, there are both pros and cons of this strategy implementation but the number of
advantages outweigh disadvantages and government should take these concerns into special
consideration accompanied by taking serious steps towards decreasing the rotation of cars
instead of restricting vehicles in downtown area in order to tackle this issue.

In Modern Life cars play an important role in daily activities. It's one of the inventions that make
human's life much easier, meanwhile it has it's own drawbacks as well such as pollution, traffic
and noise. Some people believe that although cars are useful, they should be banned in city
center while other group of individuals are totally against it.

According first point of view, cars make the environment polluted and noisy and conclude that
it should be banned in city center which is too crowded. They believe people have to waste
their valuable time in heavy traffic jams. Moreover, they believe by reducing the number of cars
in the streets government can save a huge amount of petrol.

There is another view which is against the previous one. People of this group believe that
government shouldn't banned cars in city center because a large group of people live and work
in this area not in country side. In their point of view there are solutions for solving the former
problems. For instance, by building multi-story parking spaces we can reduce the traffic
problem because many cars are waiting and rounding to find a parking space which makes
traffic jam or by using clean fuels for cars the pollution problem can be solved. In the worst
situation, for reducing the number of cars government can divided cars into 2 groups by their
number plates for entering the city center area .

To sum up, in my opinion it's not essential to ban cars. Government can train people about
using cars. It will be beneficial specially if they train children who are our next generation. The
can spread using bicycles instead of cars in some hectic areas.

Sample Answer 1:

There is a dramatic increase in private transportation around the globe over the last few years.
Increased wages, economic prosperity and depletion in vehicle prices made easy for people to
have their own personal car. However, this has led to various detrimental issues including
congestion, pollution and safety. For those reasons, I believe that limiting the number of cars in
bigger cities could mitigate those problems. Completely banning cars in big cities is not a
plausible solution as it is unrealistic, however, restricting the number of such private cars would
be an effective solution indeed.

Nowadays, traffic contributed a lot in widespread of pollution. Car smoke, traffic jams and loud
horns of vehicles are few reasons that significantly affect the environment and people in many
ways. People are more vulnerable to various diseases and many have serious health issues due
to pollution. In order to tackle this issues, restriction on private car ownership should be
imposed. Not allowing people to drive their cars in big cities is not possible while it is much
reasonable to restrict the number of cars a family can own, the number of minimum passenger
on each car while driving would be the two pragmatic solutions.

Additionally, in order to combat with traffic congestion, new road infrastructure have been
introduced by various nations that include deforestation to acquire more space to build new
roads, modern bridges and pedestrian pathways. Those development works could destroy the
natural habitat of various species that could lead towards the extinction of them from various
countries. Nevertheless, prudent decisions should be taken to enhance the number of roads
without doing any harm to the natural environment.

On the other hand, personal vehicles are more convenient and safer than other means of
transportation. This is not surprising that people often feel more comfortable and relaxed while
driving their cars. Completely banning the use of private cars in cities would deprive people to
travel freely and according to their own preference.

To sum up, controlling and restricting vehicles in large cities would definitely play a pivotal role
in improving people’s health and would also help in controlling factors that are the cause of
deteriorating situation of the environment. But banning the private cars completely in big cities
is not a pragmatic solution in my opinion.

[ Written by - Fahad Sultan ]

Sample Essay 2:

Two common problems usually faced by a big city - traffic jam and air pollution, which are
caused by many factors. However, most people tend to blame a large number of private cars as
the greatest contributing factor which leads to the some people’s opinion claiming that the cars
must be prohibited in the town. Although this statement seems plausible, I totally disagree that
this kind of vehicle should be banned from the metropolis.

The cars are not only beneficial for the citizen as a user but also for the state, in increasing its
income. If the existence of the cars in the large city is forbidden by the government, there will
not be car trade in that town which consequently will reduce total sales of cars nationwide. This
finally will decrease nation's earning because car companies will drop their production for that
country and the tax revenue from the car sales will diminish automatically. Furthermore, this
will also reduce annual car-tax revenue in which for some countries, this kind of tax is their
main earning source.

On the other hand, this will cause another problem, for the car owners in particular, in which
the government should be involved to overcome this problem. By banning the use of cars in the
big city, cars owned by the city inhabitants will be useless and eventually they must sell their
cars because this can harm them financially. If we look at the large total number of cars must
be sold and the fact that the owners do not want to sell their cars at a lower price, this might be
a difficult problem to be solved.

Finally, a huge budget must be allocated to improve the alternative vehicles in the city and
many countries will not be able to eventually do it successfully. The car is considered as one of
the most useful inventions ever and banning them is not a pragmatic solution. We should
rather take alternative initiatives to reduce the traffic jam and air pollution in big cities.

Personally, I strongly believe that prohibiting people to drive cars in big cities will generate
some problems both for the state and the owners. Even though the cars contribute to the
occurrence of traffic jam and air pollution in some cities, it must be the other ways to combat
those problems without banning the existence of cars, such as creating underground
transportation and green energies as a car fuel.
A poor infrastructure hinders under-developed countries from progressing and

modernising. Some people think that this should be the first problem tackled by

foreign aid.

To what extent do you agree with this opinion?

Developed nations are often seen providing economic assistance to the third world nations.
However, it does not always help in reducing poverty and therefore it is argued that less
affluent nations must be provided with an alternatives form of aid. This essay discusses why
poor countries can be better off from such assistance and types of help that can be offered.

One of the main reasons why developing nation should be assisted in other ways is because
money can solve problems only for the temporary period. It is not a long-lasting approach in
tackling the poverty. To illustrate, developed nation can build schools for poor nations but the
expenses that incur later in regards to student's fees and teacher's wages may force to close
the institution. This is because foreign aid may not be able to support for longer periods. Thus,
it is highly essential that developed countries should find alternatives when helping the poorer
nations.

There are different kinds of aids that affluent nations can provide to address this problem. First
and foremost, young people could be given necessary training in various fields such as
technology, modern agriculture, teaching, technical skill, communication etc. This helps them to
find an employment in their own countries or they can apply jobs to other rich nations. Another
important option is investing in prosperous and promising sectors in the poor nations. If first
world nations such as the USA opens its companies in third world countries like India, Pakistan,
Nepal etc. many people can be highly benefited as such industries can create many local jobs.

In conclusion, there are many advantages if rich nations can provide alternative forms of aids
instead of capital because financial support is only the short term approach in tackling the
issue. In future, it is suggested that such new approaches need to be continued.

billion of dollars of aid often goes into corrupt government or insufficient administration.And
corrupt administration think about their own benefits instead of helping their
people.So,because of following reasons developed countries should think of other ways to hep
poor.
Firstly ,opening up the barriers for trade to sell goods in those markets in which poor countries
are competitive could be a better option.Along with this,remove subsidies so that imported
goods from poor countries could compete fairly.

Secondly,Foreign aid projects are more suitable.for instance building huge dams and investing
in buildings like schools and hospitals which involves local people would help them in earning
their livelihood and these buildings are primary tools through which new generation fostered
and developed.

thirdly,forgiving huge debts or old payments would be a much better option instead of giving
them money.

work and employment

Some employers want to be able to contact their staff at all times, even on

holidays.

Does this development have more advantages than disadvantages? (Reported 2017,

GT Test)

Some employers or managers want their junior colleagues at their reach not only on working
days but also on holidays. This trend brings several benefits to the people. However, it also has
some drawbacks.

To begin with, some professions in the world demand the employers to be able to contact their
staff even on holidays. For instance, medical or nursing professionals should always be ready to
attend to the emergencies that occur in order to save people’s life regardless of holidays. In this
case the main advantage is they could play an important role in saving lives. Another benefit of
working on holidays for the employees is that they get paid for their work or overtime. It can
contribute to monthly income of the workers. Furthermore, the company also benefits
economically if the employee is ready to work without bothering about the holidays.

On the flip side, people find it difficult and tiring to work without adequate off days. There are
several employees who do not want to receive even a single phone call from their employers
when they are at home or on holiday because it makes them stressed out. Majority of the
people do not want to be interrupted by their bosses because they want to get relaxed or
refreshed on their holidays. Moreover, research indicates that people who work without
getting enough rest often fail to concentrate on the task they are given the next day. It may
affect the company’s productivity.

To conclude, even though both the employers and the employees benefit from getting their
work done on holidays, it can have many negative sides. This may cause increased pressure and
stress on the employees .So I believe the disadvantages are more obvious than advantages

n the time of cut-throat competition, employers are chasing their workforce to be in office
round the clock all throughout the year to churn out extra hours. While this strategy may work
in some cases, I think it has more negatives than positives. Also, the trend will eliminate work
life balance and may affect health in some cases.

On the one hand, it is observed that the employees who are asked to support office while they
are on vacations feel more exhausted, frustrated and tortured. Sometimes, it forces them to
take the decision of leaving the firm, resulting in loss of experienced workforce for the firm.
This trend negatively affects people’s lives too. Since they are not out of the work, that leads to
lesser time with family and friends. Thus, creating a vacuum between the relationships and
leading to unnecessary misunderstandings between them.

On the other hand, some organizations work round the clock to support their multi-national
clients. For instance, outsourcing and call center companies have processes set up where
people are contacted even when they are on a break. This maintains normalcy in the project.
Further, one is up to date with the current status and can immediately start when he/she
returns from holidays.

To sum up, it is need of the hour for the firms to contact their employees when they are on a
break. However, it is recommended to let them enjoy their holidays to keep them energized
and enthusiastic towards work.

More and more people are moving away from an agricultural background to relocate

to cities in order to look for work.

What will be the consequences of this? What solutions can you offer? (Reported
2017, Academic Test)

Farmers are shifting to urban regions of the country for better work and life, leaving their
villages and farmlands. While this trend poses rural and urban problems, I think the
government can take important steps to control the migration.

Firstly, movement of people from the village to developed areas of the country will not only
reduce farm production but also the shortage of food. And, the regime has to import from
different parts of the world to maintain food supply in the country. Additionally, increasing
inflation in the country since imported commodities are expensive. Secondly, cities will be
congested and overpopulated due to a sudden surge of people, mushrooming array of
problems and difficulties. For instance, traffic and pollution will rise in parallel due to increase
in vehicles. Lack of housing is another problem for the residents owing to places being
overcrowded.

However, this trend can be controlled with the proper and adequate measures by the
government and better collaboration between rural and urban areas. Firstly, local councils can
take steps to upgrade the standard of living in rural areas with better hygiene and sanitation in
villages. Further, with proper transportation and telecommunication, farmers can effortlessly
transfer their yield to different markets for better prices and sales. While these methods may
be enough, it is extremely important that next generation is well groomed in the village.
Developed societies and large firms can contribute funds for education and healthcare in the
government schemes.

To sum up, the trend has to be seized by improving standards in villages. And, the government
has a major role to play in order to stop the migration and maintain the state of equilibrium in
the country.

Urban migration is a term which has been discussed widely earlier than before, people are
moving from rural areas to the cities for better job opportunities and better life. We can see
this trend is very high among persons from agricultural background mainly because of the
recent changes in this sector.
There are number of consequencies if this trend continues. Firstly, cities are already stuffed
with large number of population, people find it difficult to get place to live. Furthermore, if the
population is concentrated only in metropolitan areas, that will eventually leads to economical
in balance in various parts of the country. Secondly, this overpopulation in municipal areas
creates pollution issues and over exploitation resources. For instance, we can see majority of
the worlds largest cities like Beinjing , Newyork are suffering from air and water pollution
problems greatly.

To tackle this situation, governments should spend their fund equally in developing basic
amenities around the country. they should not only concentrate in cities when they plan their
budget. Moreover government should provide adequate support to the farmers in terms of
money and resources. They are suffering huge losses and find it difficult to survive in this sector
because of the low returns from this field. In addition, government should encourage
industrialist and manufactures to open their facilities in rural areas as well. That will definitely
creates more job opportunities and people will stay their home land rather than migrating to
civic areas.

To conclude, Urban movement is the problem which faced by almost all the metropolis in the
world. In order to solve governments should act wisely. Otherwise they face some serious
problems that may affect the country's economy as well as the well being of its people.

Completing university education is thought by some to be the best way to get a

good job. On the other hand, other people think that getting experience and

developing soft skills is more important.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

It is considered by some that being a university graduate is the key to securing

a good job while there are others who think that it is better to have experience

and soft skills. In my opinion, I believe that having university education is

essential for academic jobs while soft skills and experience are more useful in

business.
On the one hand, many think it is easier for most people to find a good job if

they are university graduates with a good degree. In other words, having

tertiary education puts people one step ahead of others who do not and this can

be the deciding factor in getting a good job. The competition to get in to

universities and the increasing number of graduates show just how significant

this level of education is for people’s future work opportunities.

On the other hand, having work experience and soft skills, such as leadership

skills and other interpersonal skills, can also throw the balance in favour of

the applicant, according to some. For many positions there are an overwhelming

number of applicants and, therefore, it is often thought that having relevant

experience in that line of work or having acquired useful soft skills that can

be valuable to a company, can put one ahead of the game when applying for a

position.

Finally, in my opinion, whether needing high level education or skills and

experience, depends on the position being applied for. Take for example law,

medicine or teaching, it is impossible to be considered for a position without

the required educational background. In contrast, in business, it would be more

important for a candidate to have soft skills and experience in that line of

business so they can step into a position without further training and be of

immediate benefit to the company.

In conclusion, getting a good job requires a relevant background either in

experience or education depending on the type of work and field. People should

make sure they attain the necessary skills or degrees before applying for a job

in order to be sure of success.

First impressions are important. Some people think that doing well in interviews

is the key to securing a good job.

To what extent do you agree?

There is a catch word " first impression is the last impression "it is known mostly by all people in
the world. We believe that the interviewees are being asked a number of questions by the
interviewer with regards to certain job in specific field. Upon that, I agree that the most
important thing in the business's interviews is the first impression which you left after an
interview. As if you acted well in it, they will hire you undoubtedly. As it is very important to
know that interviewers have multiple choices in choosing the right person, there are an
enormous number of people applied for the vacant position before you. I am coming to explain
here in details why it is important the impression as following.

To begin, there are many well established companies post vacancies for different positions in
recruitment websites, and recruitment agencies as well. As a result, they will receive a huge
number of applicants who apply for advertised vacancies. Furthemore, you have to put in mind
that it is not only one who apply for jobs. However, you have to prepare well before you attend
the interview, in case of you were being shortlisted for the first interview. As you have to go
through comany's profile via internet, and collecting some information from its website, so that
you can perform well in the interview. In addition, you must wear a proper formal suit, because
of the first impression is important.

Furthermore, if you have prepared well for the interview, the more chances would have come
to you. For example, There is a prime example for explanation, one of my friend who work
currently, as HR head department said to me. " hiring is the most difficult job to do, because
you need to hire the right person, it takes days to process, if you hired the right person, they
can be a useful asset in the company". He said that " he has encountered numeric of applicants
who have applied to a certain position with low experience, adding that had also interviewed
people with strong experience, but their appearnce does not fit for the vacancy, as they look
mess and disorganised." Notably, self confidence in interview attendance is essential, such as;
shake hands before you set, smile, and setting in a good way, in way that you make your
backbone in straigt shape, as these thing consolidate the hiring process, it can help to success in
the interview ultimately.

To sum up, advance knowledge about company's profileand wearing a proper dress are keys to
hunt the job. Whereas, the more your performance was good, the more opportunities will
come over you.

First impressions can leave lasting impressions in people’s minds and this is often intensified in
job interviews.

Finding job satisfaction is considered to be a luxury in many developing

countries.

Why do you think that is?

Do you think job satisfaction is important?

It is commonly believed by many people that in unindustrialized nations, finding a work

gratification is bonus because in these countries there are not many companies which offer
skilled jobs with good pay and employee benefits and I believe that job gratification is most
significant both from employee and employer point of view, employee can look for long term
career and employer can retain the right talent to achieve the organization benefits.

In my view, developing countries are facing high unemployment ration this is due to the supply
of skilled man power is more than the available jobs so the competition is huge all the time
hence if somebody gets a job which gives job satisfaction in terms of good work environment,
quality of work and flexibility in working hours means a bonus for candidate.

Adding to the above point, certainly the job gratification is most important while choosing a
work. Firstly, the relationship with manager, co-worker and atmosphere is as important as just
earning a money because it brings a happiness in worker levels. Secondly, the many people’s
feelings of job satisfaction comes from their professional achievements, kind of skill they learn
and position they reach rather than money they earn. Finally, for any employer to achieve their
organizational goals is only by retaining the best talented human resource by having employee
friendly policies.
In my opinion, the job satisfaction is nothing but when the employer and the management
gives good working atmosphere so the employee is productive to the organization.

Job satisfaction plays key role in the life of working person. Proper and effective work makes
our professional career enjoyable. However, nowadays in many developing it is really hard for
any person to find work in their area of interest.

To start with, there are many reasons behind this trend. First, economy of these nations is not
in a good shape. Often people have to compete hard to find work and have to compromise with
their work and wages. Further, Higher inflation and unemployment rate make their life even
more difficult. They always have extreme pressure to earn sufficient money to fulfill the basic
requirements of their family. Apart from that they do not get sufficient support from state or
public organizations. Therefore, they require to choose whatever work offered to them. For
example, in countries like India and China many professional engineers are working on
irrelevant support work which does not offer them expected salary and technical knowledge.

As per my opinion, job satisfaction plays important role in our professional career. Proper,
effective and suitable work offers tremendous satisfaction. People enjoy such jobs and stick
with them for long term. It also helps them to maintain balance between work and family.
Moreover, I believe that at the start of career we should focus on salary rather than work and in
later part of the work life we should focus more on work. Further, before selecting our work,
we should also consider other factors like financial condition, family position and the economy
of nation.

In an nutshell, job satisfaction is the backbone of our professional life and we should always
give more important to it if possible in our work life.

A significant percentage of the working population in the developing nations is not satisfied
with its current job. By the laws of economics, it is therefore a luxury item . Major causes for
such dissatisfaction include unlikable work profile and poor work culture of the company. It is
agreed that a satisfied employee is more productive compared to an employee who is not
happy with his job.
Many people are not satisfied with their job profile. It has been found that most sought after
jobs lie in developed countries. Moreover, many of the jobs in emerging economies are the
ones that have been outsourced from the west. Many people do not like such jobs although
these opportunities are available in abundance. Most of the call centers of multinationals, for
instance, are located in third-world countries.

Another major reason for job dissatisfaction is the workplace culture. Many people complain
about work life balance these days. Extended working hours mean that employees are always
craving for giving time to their families. Additionally, bad politics at the workplace also spoils
the company's culture.

In my opinion, job satisfaction is highly essential as it means that people will be more
productive. A dissatisfied employee will yield lower efficiency. Job satisfaction acts like a
catalyst and leads to innovation and such companies grow at an exponential rate where
employees are happy.

To conclude, work profile and company's culture play key role job satisfaction. Satisfied
employees help in the growth of company in the long run.

Doctors, nurses and teachers make a great contribution to society and should be

payed more than entertainment and sports celebrities.

Do you agree or disagree ? (Reported 2017, Academic Test)

The great Mahatma Gandhi says," No job is smaller in this world". However, In the real life, the
income and wages are considered as one of the factors that categorized numerous professions
practiced in the society. Many intellectuals believe that the professional profiles like doctors
and teachers should be paid higher than the celebrities, who belong to the entertainment
industry. My inclination discord with the statement supporting the belief of justified
remuneration based on the complexity of work and nature of income involved with the
industry.
Universally, professional jobs are considered to be highly secured jobs in the market, and which
is why most of the parents guide their kids to adopt those professions for their bright future. To
illustrate, doctors and teachers get regular income during their working tenure as well as in
their retirement period in a form of pension whereas celebrities don't get any such social
securities.Moreover, the salaries those are drawn by professionals remain steadily increasing in
nature. There would be hardly any fall of income registered for these type of profession. For
instance, Even in the time of inflation, people never stop to hire services of teachers and
doctors. Whilst people will hold control in their recreational activities which in turn affect the
income of people associated with the entertainment industry.

On the other hand, the income of athletes and actors solely depends on their performance and
consistency. So, their source of income always remains fluctuating rather constant, unlike other
sophisticated professions. For example, Mike Tyson was the great boxing world champion but
his one defeat dug his grave and alienated him. Lastly, The public expectations to these
performers always keep them on their toe to deliver a pure form of innovation in their show
ever. Hence, to gain it they put lots of efforts in fine-tuning of their skills. To examplify, Priyanka
Chopra, a great leading Bollywood actress, who has performed a role of Mary Kom in her
biopic, has taken an extensive physical training to look alike a boxer.

To conclude, every profession has its own important role to play in the society. However, the
complexity of the tasks and uncertainty of income should be considered before going
judgemental about the compensation of any profession.

Firstly, in any emergency doctor and nurses are ready to serve their patient even in mid night
nights also, they do not work in a fixed time frame. Furthermore their job is so risky than the
other occupations because they are the people who directly dealing with the human life. If
there is serious surgery, doctors and nurses should pay more attention towards the patient.
Hence doctors and nurses should pay more salary because of their higher contribution to
society.

In addition to that engineers, teachers also do greater contribution to society for a example
teachers need to do lots of struggle to teach languages, disciplines and social behaviors to
nursery student, because she or he still new to learn those things. Furthermore the engineers
also do greater effort to make better society. For an example a civil engineer who currently
works in a delayed construction project need to do more nightshifts in order to complete
project. By considering all above factors professional workers should be paid more.

On the other hand sports and entertainment personalities like musicians also do a contribution
to society. They are the people who support to reduce the stress of a busy people. Further
more in some cases they brought great glory to their home country for a example Susanthika
Jayasooriya who won the medals in Olympic should be paid more. For those cases government
need to provide more funds to motivate them also they need to give a value to her effort to get
the medal.

Finally, after considering the all above mentioned points my point of view is the professionals
who do more risky jobs should be paid more than the entertainment personalities. In addition
to that we can`t forget the people who do entertainment programs. For those people all should
pay money after considering their contribution to the society.

IIt is true that some experts of medical and teaching fields have a lower income than celebrities.
The difference is still argumentative. However, I think the society should pay musicians and
teachers better for their contribution.

On the one hand, I believe that medical and teaching jobs should be paid a better income than
entertaining jobs for some justifications. The first reason is that medicine and education are key
factors contributing to the development of society, therefore, a shortage of employees in the
two sectors will cause the imbalance of a country. As a result, the government should impose
beneficial policies of income for people working in these fields in order to keep the labour
source sufficiently. Besides, a lucrative salary will stimulate musicians and teachers to enhance
their skills as well as create breakthroughs, benefiting the society in various aspects. For
example, the Nobel prize, with a valuable reward can afford the expenditure of scientists when
they do researchers and encourage them to put more effort into their professionals.

However, I think it is likely reasonable to pay an escalating income for celebrities. firstly, famous
people draw a great attraction of the public, which facilitates for companies. As a result,
businesses are willing to pay celebrities well with a purpose of hiring them to promote
products. Another reason for this issue is that recreational activities also contribute to
developing a country like other fields when it brings a huge amount of profit through tourism.
In fact, some authorities use celebrities to represent the national identity, spreading the fame
of the country out over the world. Therefore, the government need to give them plenty of
money to acknowledge their contribution to the public.
In conclusion, I partly agree that medical and teaching jobs need paying higher than any works
in the society because of the tremendous roles. However, it seems not reasonable when
celebrities are paid well and the government need to consider the advantages of each field in
order to have an appropriate support.

For many years, the distribution of country's wealth has been debated. Some have advocated
giving highly qualified professions such as doctors and teachers high wages than actors or
sportsmen. I completely agree with this notion for several reasons.Nowadays, movie stars and
football players are gaining much popularity and receiving all the attention either from public or
the government. That is why they are paid high salaries compared to other people working in
other jobs in the same community. That maybe due to the fact that these actors and sportsmen
are considered as role models for many especially children. Nevertheless, the vast majority of
people think these stars are over-rated since they have no essential role in the country's
renaissance. Conversely, health and education are the cornerstone in any country's
development. Accordingly, people working in these fields should be paid salaries higher than
other fringe jobs for several reasons. Firstly, health care professionals and teachers spend
tremendous effort and long time to be highly qualified. Moreover, paying attention to these
highly qualified jobs would encourage young generations to attain these prestigious jobs. For
example, if doctors and teacher were paid high salaries, children would be encouraged to study
hard to be qualified to attain these careers.In conclusion, although entertainment may be an
important aspect in our life, this does not justify paying people working in this field higher than
other vital jobs. It is high time doctors and teacher were paid wages higher than actors or
sports stars.

Many children are encouraged by their parents to get a part time job in their

free time.

What are the advantages and disadvantages to children of doing so?

Doing part-time job means working. Children that used to work from young age will turn into a
hardworking person. They know how to put some effort and give their best to their work. It
gives them a boost when doing school activities or projects. By working, children get to know
that money-making is a serious issue. This will help them to learn the value of money and not
wasting their parent's money. In addition, having part-time job means children get to know
more skills such as washing dishes and cleaning tables. On top of that, they will experience new
feelings too. For instance, happiness when get paid and anxious when complained by customer.
However, children who have job may devalue school and learning process. They think they can
earn money without studying, thus immerse themselves in their part-time job. This can develop
them to a greedy person that never feels grateful with the sum they earn. They get focused on
how to make more money even at school. In the worst possible case, they may drop out of the
school and choose to work instead. It is tough to keep up work and studies going on at the
same time.

To conclude, working is a good way to expand children's world. Despite that, parents should
give advice to help children manage their time on both studies and job.

I think that encouraging children to take part-time jobs is one of the best ways for parents to
help their teenage children prepare for adult life. My writing below will strengthen my view
point.

In the first place, what I put on my priority is that children can learn responsibility when they do
part-time jobs. It cannot be denied that when you work as an employee, you must follow the
working schedule. It means that every day you have to come to work on time. For example, if
your work starts at 8 a.m. you have to be there at 8 a.m. It doesn’t matter if you went to a party
a night before and do not want to get up. You have to get up. On the other hand, if you work
for a restaurant of a store, you will learn how to serve customers in a friendly manner.
Customers are gods and some of them are very fastidious. If you are not friendly and persistent,
your restaurant or store will lose business and you might lose your job.

In the second analysis, through part-time jobs, children can learn the value of money. It is
apparent that children often get money from their parents, but they do not realize how hard
their parents work for that money. When children work, they will begin to appreciate how
difficult it can be to make money. Knowing that it takes a lot of time and effort to make money,
children will make wiser choice when buying some things with their own money. Also, when
children spend their money for personal objects, they will appreciate them more than if they
had gotten money from their parents.

Last but not least, children can practice team-working skills when they work as a member of a
team. The fact is that nowadays, there are many works require employees to cooperate in a
team. Working children will learn how to share their works and count on each other to fulfill
the work on time. In addition, children will learn many good characteristics of friendship. If one
of the team members is sick or gets personal troubles, the others are willing to help him and do
extras work to compensate. This is a very great experience for children and helps them become
more mature.

In summary, taking into account of the reasons discussed above, we could reach the final
conclusion that taking part-time job can benefit teenager children a lot. They will learn
responsibility, value of money and skills of team-working. I strongly recommend that parents
should take my analysis in consideration to encourage their children to take part-time jobs to
prepare them for better adult lives.

Many people have the concern about how children should spend their spare time
appropriately. While the idea of letting the youngsters to learn how to utilize their free time for
good purposes seems promising and plausible, I reckon that parents should stimulate their
children to participate in social activities.

On the one hand, allowing the children to explore themselves in their spare time brings about
many benefits. First, children are able to access a great deal of information and acquire
knowledge on their own with the help of the internet and computers. In comparison to
academic lessons at school, this way of learning would be more captivating since the
youngsters can look for the subjects and topics of their interest. Second, it is a great
opportunity for the youngsters to ponder what they desire and therefore be able to set their
own goals. This would promote their independence, which turns out to be conducive to them in
the future.

On the other hand, I believe that it is advisable to instigate their children to take part in
community activities. The youngsters can get involved in many sorts of tasks and make new
friends, which would then broaden their horizons and expand their social circles. This would
benefit them tremendously in the long term. In addition, many children nowadays are more
inclined to a sedentary lifestyle in which taking up physical exercises and socializing are often
neglected. Hence, participating in social activities would help alleviate such an undesirable
lifestyle because these activities involve human interaction.
In conclusion, although it is children’s right to fully make use of their free time, parents should
take the initiative to suggest and encourage their children to take part in various social activities
for the sake of their children’s development.

In many developing countries, there is an increasing movement of workers from

rural areas into the cities.

Why do you think this happens?

What problems can this cause?

he phenomenon of people moving away from rural areas toward big cities has affected several
countries in the last decades. In my opinion, this will be a huge problem in the future because it
is important to have a better balanced distribution of population.

One of the main cause of this movement is the lack of jobs in the countryside. People struggle
to find a good job and decide to move to the city in order to have a better chance to find it.
Moreover, we have to consider that it is not easy to live in rural areas with lack of facilities such
as a good internet connection, public transports and so on, that are very important in modern
days. People just want to make use of these facilities in order to improve their lifestyle.

Besides the reasonable motivations that can lead people to move, this phenomenon could
cause huge problems to the administration of the cities. Indeed it could lead to overpopulation
causing the decrease in the offer for jobs due to the rising demand for it, resulting in
unemployment. In addition to that, there can be difficulties in satisfying primary needs such as
food and water.

It is also worth noting that if the cities get overcrowded, the rural areas will be almost
inhabited. This would be a great problem because of the decrease in agricultural production,
which can lead to a lack of food in urban areas as a side effect. There are no areas to cultivate
there and there would easily be a drought of vegetables.

In conclusion, perhaps governments have to find a way to stop people from moving away, in
order to maintain a high standard of life in the country.
Since the difference between countryside and cities are increasing, the migration of rural
people to urban areas is not a new phenomenon in many developing countries. There are
widely different explanations to reasons of this trend and its consequences toward every aspect
of the society and the economy.

First of all, as the development of rural and urban areas is not the same, while there are plenty
choices of jobs with higher salary in cities, the shortage of working choices is happening in
countryside. Moreover, the population of rural areas is increasingly rising due to the lack of
birth-control which derives from low educational level. Thus, people from countryside need to
seek for more job opportunities to live as well as afford to bring up their children. Lastly, the
well-qualified infrastructure, the better education, transportation and health care services are
also factors attracting more people including workers and their family from rural areas.

However, this trend affects negatively the development of the country. The initial consequence
is the explosion of urban population which puts even more tension on the overloaded traffic
system, infrastructure like accommodation, health care and education system. Another
problem that is happening commonly is unemployment in cities as there are not enough jobs to
meet the rising demands of too many job hunters. In contrast, if farmers leave their traditional
job and gravitate toward cities in search of better job opportunities, the scarcity of agricultural
products like rice, corn and wheat will be inevitable. Finally, booming urban population also
results in the rise of crime, which contributes to the unstable society and the downturn of
country’s economy.

In conclusion, to my way of thinking, the movement of rural people into urban areas leads to a
lot of problems. In order to prevent this trend, governments and companies should create more
jobs by relocating factories, improving infrastructure, facilities, schools and health centers.

In some developing countries, it is difficult to get good teachers to work in

rural areas which can have a negative impact on the education of children in

those rural communities.

Why do you think good teachers do not want to work in rural areas in developing

countries?
What could be done to solve this problem?

In developing nations finding teachers who are willing to work in the rural areas is becoming
difficult. As a result rural children often fail to get good education. There are several reasons
behind this trend. The most important is the disparity in the wages of a rural teacher and an
urban teacher.

In the developing or undeveloped world, people working in urban areas tend to earn a lot more
than those working in the rural areas. Teachers are no different. A teacher working in the
countryside earns much less than a teacher with comparable qualifications working in cities.
Since salary is the first thing that most people consider while choosing a job, few teachers are
willing to work in villages.

Rural areas also lack several amenities. Many of them don’t have facilities for recreation. For
example, many villages do not have movies or clubs where people can relax after a long
working day. Lack of internet connectivity is another problem that makes rural areas less
attractive to people.

Unfortunately, when teachers refuse to work in the countryside, rural students suffer. Just like
their urban counterparts, children living in rural areas also need quality education. For this
reason, it is imperative that schools find good teachers. The government and school
managements can encourage more teachers to work in villages by offering them salaries
comparable to those earned by teachers working in the city. The government can make this
happen by enacting laws that ensure that people practicing the same profession are paid the
same wages throughout the country. Teachers also need to treat their profession as a noble
vocation that has the potential to make difference to a lot of lives.

To conclude, low salaries are the main reason that discourages teachers from working in the
countryside. The only way to solve this problem is to ensure that regardless of where they are
working, teachers earn the same salaries throughout the country.

I]

As a matter of fact, the society in developing nations is .................. an increasing level of

poverty in remote areas.
witnessing

To make things worse, however, a large

number of teachers ................ move to such places.

are unwilling to

In this essay, reasons for such ................ will be outlined, and proper solutions suggested.

a refusal

[B1]

There are numerous factors behind good quality teachers' reluctance to ...................... in
poverty-stricken remote areas.

settle down

Finance is the ..................

first cause for concern

Certainly, payment in such areas will be insufficient for one to ...................., and this financial
crisis might be tolerated for short amount of time, but not in the long run.

make ends meet

Without ...................., it is demotivating to work, and

the quality of teaching will definitely suffer.

adequate income
Furthermore, living conditions in such areas are generally .....................

appalling

The lack of fresh water, electricity as well as limited communication will ultimately ................ a
sense of dissatisfaction in teachers.

inflict

Eventually even the most dedicated teachers will ...........

crack

[B2]

In order to ..................., certain steps can be taken on the part of the government.

tackle the issue

One ......................... concerns salary rise.

prominent measure

It is obvious that a handsome pay will produce the best performance: now that those well-
trained teachers have agreed to work in hardship, it is fair to offer them ............................ for
the sacrifice they have made.

appropriate remunerations

Besides, it is necessary for the government to .................. in remote regions.

further invest
They need to .........................., construct more facilities and provide assistance whenever
education is in need.

establish better living conditions

If teachers can work comfortably in such an area, they

definitely will .................. their career.

fully devote to

[C]

All things considered, it is noticeable that a considerable number of teachers, mostly of high
quality, ............................ work in isolated areas filled with poverty and toughness. Finance and
inadequate living standards appear as the ......................, and the government can dissolve
these problems in an attempt to ......................

+ express the least willingness to

+ major culprits

+ address the issue

Having a good university degree guarantees people a good job.

To what extent do you agree?

In some people’s opinion, obtaining a university degree is the only way to find a good job.
Others, however, believe that start work earlier instead of completing the university education
is better for one’s career life. I agree with the previous view to some extent, while as far as I am
concerned, getting a university degree should not be considered as the only way to a good job.

It is evident that having a university degree is the best way to find a satisfactory job. In the
university, people are supposed to work hard on their specific areas for their degree. Therefore,
they are likely to have a better understanding of the knowledge in their area than those who do
not receive any university education. These academic skills will become a firm basis for their
working skills. Furthermore, getting a university degree is usually regarded as a symbol of
intelligence and diligence. For employers, a certificated university degree is a convincing proof
of the competence of the employee. As a result, many top-level corporations prefer to provide
more job opportunities for people with a university background rather than the others.

On the flip side, completing a course of university education is not the only way to guarantee a
good job. There are some examples of people without a university degree making a great
achievement in their working life. Likewise, not all university graduates are able to get
themselves a satisfying job. It is undeniable that people who start career life earlier can gain
more working experience than university students. However, the absence of advanced
education may result in the lack of academic knowledge basis in their working areas, which may
inhibit the development of their career life. Research points out that the percentage of
university graduates getting a good job is much larger than people without a university degree.

To conclude, in most cases, completing the university education and getting a degree is the
easiest but not the only way to a good job. Whether to complete a university course or to start
career life early should depend on individuals.

The competition of getting a perfect job is very difficult in these days. Many young people have
become unemployed due to lacking good qualification. Some people assume that a certification
or degree from universities is an important criterion to acquire a satisfied job, while others
argue that it is not always right because some people, who start work early and gain a lot of
experience, are also be able to get a great job.

First of all, it is true that many companies require a high qualification before hiring an employee
in a certain work positions. Graduated degree, advance proficiency language level and
computer skills are all required for considering before hiring new workers. A certificate or
degree is guaranteed that individuals are already learned and trained all mandatory skills and
be able to work. Without having a degree from universities, it can mean they do not have
knowledge enough to work. Therefore, a degree from universities is very necessary to receiver
a rewarding job.Secondly, many professional works such as a doctor, lawyer or nurse are
required a certain level of knowledge and specific skills that they can only acquire from
universities. Pursuing in professional lines cannot only self-study at home or species with some
experts, but standard knowledge can be trained effectively in universities. All of these support
that why an academic degree is very important for entering a rewarding job.
On the other hand, in some fields such as mechanics, engineers or business lines may not need
a degree from colleges because it does not actually prove directly about individual’s experience.
Gaining specific experience for these careers is more value than having a degree. Therefore, in
some careers, individuals may need to work and practice in a certain areas which can help to
extend their experience and be able to get a great job.

From my perspective, I agree that having a degree can make sure that a person has sufficient
comprehensive and be able to work. Without any degree may hard to guarantee and may not
getting a satisfied job in this high competitive work market.

Recently, the competition of getting a great job has increased. Many people believe that
attending in a university is only one way to get a rewarding job than other people, while some
defenders say that it is not always right because some fields do not want any degree from
universities.

Firstly, it is certainly true that a degree is very important for applying a perfect job. Many
companies require many qualifications for a high position before hiring new employees. A
graduated degree, high language proficiency level and computer skills are all required in many
official jobs today. A certification or higher degree is only one way to prove that a person is
already trained or learned all mandatory skills and be able to work. Having a degree can make a
person more attractive to employers for offering a great job. Therefore, a degree is important
evidence with guarantee a great job in a person.

Secondly, some professional careers such as a doctor, nurse or lawyer require a certain specific
knowledge and skills which cannot learn by yourself at home or practice with some experts.
Attending a n university is only one way for pursuing professional jobs. This is because, all
standard necessary skills and comprehensive courses can be taught and practiced effectively
only in colleges or universities. All of these support that why a certification is very necessary for
working as a professional job.

On the other hand, in some line of works, a degree does not mean anything. For example, a
mechanic or business workers need only value experience need only value experience and
some skills which can get only practice in these works for a long time. Even though, a person
does not have any degree, if he/she starts work early and gain a lot of experience, it can also
easy to get a satisfied job and because a success in the future.

In conclusion, both sides have their own experience which is difficult to decide which way is
right. However, it is always right that having a degree will be a great guarantee for hunting a
rewarding job in the work market.

First of all, competition is getting a skilled job has become very hard. Unlikely post World War II
society, today the percentage of people with University degree is increasing every year,
whereas the real number of skilled job is remaining roughly the same. As result, many young
skilled students struggle to find a job that fits their expectations, both in terms of satisfactions
and incomes. For instance, many students with Master Degrees in Literature and Arts have no
other choice than to work, temporarily, as call center operators.

Secondly, for many jobs it is convenient to learn by doing instead of spending a great number of
years learning only theoretic approaches. In this sense, because University approach often lacks
of a practical side, students are required to have a period of training before drafting their
theses and getting their Degrees. Considering that the average duration of University degrees is
five years, one could wonder if this period could be better spent by working directly once
finished school. For example, a civil engineer could learn more, and faster, working every day
with a building company instead of studying five years before working on the field.

In conclusion, I strongly believe that considering nowadays job market, the best solution for a
student is to choose the professional area that suits him/her the most, then to start working in
that field. Beginning as trainee, he/she can learn more than another student attending five
years of University, entering the job market in the best way possible.

The number of people working online from home has grown in some countries.

What advantages and disadvantages can come of this trend?

Telecommuting has been gaining in popularity in recent decades due to its substantial impacts
on people’s work. Although the advantages associated with this pattern can be pronounced,
there still exists many limitations.
On the one hand, there are a number of benefits of working from home. First, Since
telecommuting requires no physical travels costing unnecessary time money and effort, people
can save an enormous amount of money spent on transportation services. Subsequently, In
addition to money savings, this working mode also acts as a deterrent for the emission of
exhausted fumes into the atmosphere. Second, Working from home is invariably a comfortable
working environment without the existence of office politics from other colleagues. This will
boost the working productivity and efficiency of tele-workers, resulting in desirable working
output.

On the other hand, tele-work is not without downsides. First, working from home can
remarkably reduce interaction and experience exchange among co-workers in the company.
This will lead to the loss of some fundamental skills to climb the promotion ladder, especially
team working and leadership. In addition, telecommuting usually requires many electronic
devices with good Internet connection to guarantee the working stability. It is implied that
those in poverty stricken areas in some developing countries cannot relish this advanced
working mode on the grounds that these high-tech gadgets are unaffordable.

In conclusion, given the clear advantages working from home has, there are still a vast number
of limitations. However, by acknowledging these downsides, the employers and workers can
find ways to dodge them.

In the wake of globalization and revolution of modern technology, the standard of living has
been improved and the way of working also changed. The Telecommuting is in trend nowadays
in which people can work other parts of the world through the internet, which has its own
share of merits and demerits, I would elucidate briefly in the following essay.

To begin with, it saves time as no time is wasted commuting to and from the office. It also saves
money as no need to spend on fares of public transport or on petrol or diesel if they use their
own vehicles. They can spend their saved time with family and friends which is very needed in
the fast-paced hectic lifestyle nowadays. Furthermore, the worker can perform in the minor
family commitment like dropping children for school. In addition, they can save from clothing as
well as they do not have to spend money on office suite. Telecommuting also help employer
because they not need to build and maintain big office. We all know that the rates of land are
exorbitant and even maintenance overpriced.

In contrast, the Tele-commuters face few difficulties in this trend. First and foremost, they have
to reserve a corner of the home for work and high-speed internet required. Sometimes they
can get bored as they do not get office environment. More to it, the expectation of family
members are increase and they forgot that the person should concentrate on work which
increases stress. What is more, the employers also find difficulty to supervise Tele-commuters.

To conclude, as every garden has weeds, similarly the telecommuting has also the downside.
On the whole, working from home gives great freedom and more beneficial than few
drawbacks.

Some people with a good education and experience in their field decide to move

abroad to work.

Why do you think that is?

What problems does this cause?

The standard of living in developed countries is considerably better than that in

underdeveloped or developing countries and that is what prompts most people to emigrate.
People who choose to live abroad almost always come from underdeveloped or developing
countries where they do not have enough opportunities for career or personal growth.

When talented youngsters move abroad, they get the kind of salary that matches their
qualifications. They may not get similar opportunities in the country of their birth. By moving
abroad, they will also be able to provide world class education to their children. Another
advantage is the availability of excellent healthcare in the developed world. It is a well-known
fact that people in the first world countries live longer than those in the third world countries.
People who immigrate to these countries may also enjoy this benefit.

On the flip side, when the talented youth move to other countries in search of better jobs, it
creates a dearth of talent in their mother country. While this is a disadvantage, it has another
side to it. A large number of Indians now work and live abroad. The money that they sent to
their loved ones in India makes a significant contribution to the Indian economy. According to
some statistics, annually India receives over 50 billion USD in foreign remittance. That’s a huge
amount that can significantly improve the quality of a living in a country. Foreign remittance,
for example, is the backbone of the Kerala economy (a south Indian state) where the literacy
and longevity rates are comparable to those in the developed world.
After analyzing both sides of the situation it is felt that moving abroad for a better job has more
advantages than disadvantages. Not only the people who immigrate, but also the country of
their birth benefit from this trend in more ways than one.

Paying all workers the same salary in a company promotes harmony and respect

amongst colleagues.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Getting promotion is one of the biggest drives for people to apply themselves

and work hard in the modern work place.

Why do you think people are so driven to get promotion?

What other factors influence people to work hard?

There are a lot of reasons that people have to try their best to work hard, to get a success; and
one of them is getting the promotion. Getting promotion is one of the biggest drives for people
to apply themselves and work hard in the modern workplace and it also is a higher and better
position in career.

Employees and workers always try their best abilities to succeed in the competitive market as a
company. The purpose of getting the promotion is to let employees reach and catch better
opportunities to challenge themselves. For example, for some of the people, they go to work to
earn money, to pay for the needs of themselves, so getting the promotion means they have a
chance to earn more money, to have much more than enough. Or, for some of the others, they
go to work to satisfy their dreams, to improve their skills, and to learn newer experiences, thus
getting the promotion is a good step to let them do the things that they want to see. These
reasons are efforts that make human always does not stop trying to gain the promotion. This
also means people always have more responsibilities for the job they do. However, the getting
promotion is always the best and happiest news to all of the employees.

There are many other factors that influence people to work hard such as transportation, house,
relationship, love...and in particular luck is gained thirty percent in a road to get an
achievement. There is a story about the French emperor Napoleon said to one of his generators
" I know he is good, but is he lucky?" Luck means here people catch opportunities at the right
time, use these skills in the right places. Opportunities very often depend on luck, but it does
not explain the success comes totally from luck, work hard can invite luck. Life is not rosy. If
each person does not work hard to get success, they only lose a battle. Nothing can replace the
work hard and when people are working hard at the same time they are preparing themselves
more opportunities knock on their doors.

Overall, the getting promotion is a good step to improve the quality of peoples' lives. We
should set a goal and try our best abilities to gain it. The getting promotion is a good purpose
and also a bright challenge and in life these challenges create some enjoyable things.

Bringing in foreign workers to fill positions that domestic workers are

unwilling to do can cause problems in the local community and should therefore

be stopped.

Do what extent do you agree with this?

First of all, foreign labour is always cheap. By hiring foreign workers a

country can get cheaper labour, which is profitable for the country. Secondly,

foreign workers are prepared to do any kind of job, they can do the job at any

location, they are comfortable for any shift timings, also sometimes they are
ready for risky or dangerous jobs too. Whereas domestic labour is not always

ready to do these kinds of jobs. They give preference to location, timings,

safety etc. Also, they ask for more salary than foreign labour. So for that kind

of jobs companies think of hiring foreign labour.

As I discussed earlier hiring foreign labour has both advantages and

disadvantages. Now I will discuss some of its disadvantages. Firstly they create

unemployment in the country. Secondly, they may not be loyal to a company or we

can say country. They can leave the country anytime and they can change job

anytime and thirdly they are ready to do the job at a lower salary which creates

problem for domestic workers they also have to compromise on lower salary. So

these are disadvantages of hiring foreign workers due to which people think a

country should not hire foreign workers.

To sum, I would say first of all a country should focus on providing jobs to its

domestic workers. After that country should think of hiring foreign workers so

that no unemployment will create in the country. Those kinds of jobs will be

given to foreign workers which are less paid and which are beneficial for

country’s economy.

Some people think that employers should ensure a supportive and pleasant work

environment where each employee is respected and valued equally while others

think employers should focus instead on providing better facilities and

equipment.
What is your opinion?

A business can be successful only if it has a great team ready to build the business. An employer
often has to make attempts to ensure that employees are comfortable with the job. Some
people argue that that a supportive and pleasant environment and must be provided, however
others believe employees must be given facilities and incentives. In my opinion, it is the
combination of both that leads to success.

Mostly people do a job because they know the work and it becomes easy to earn money in that
field. Providing a supporting environment could be of great benefits. Firstly, an individual will
feel more connected with the company. For instance, an employer who makes sure that
everyone in the company is treated equally is more likely to have a supportive staff, than the
one, where people are treated according to the rank they have. Secondly, the employee works
better in a pleasant environment. This is always good for the company.

However, some people believe it is better to provide facilities and incentives. For example, an
employer who makes sure that every employee working in night shifts is provided with cab
facility is more likely to find effective employees. Secondly, most people do a job for money.
Providing incentives could just serve the purpose.

Overall, I believe an organization is run not by the leader but the team. Providing some facilities
and a great environment to work in are the most essential things an employee looks for. The
organization must aim to balance between both to lead a successful journey.

Some people think that people should choose their job based on income in order

to provide security for their family.

Do you think money is an important factor when choosing a job?

What other factors should be considered?

Many people choose their jobs based on the size of the salary offered. Personally, I
disagreewith 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
ourjobs. 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 professionalachievements,
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 contributesomething
positive to society.

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

Model Answer 1:

It is certainly true that payment is a necessary thing to consider in preferring a line of work, but
it is not the most important one. This argument will be proven that a harmonious workplace
and love of work are the leading factors in choosing a job.

For one, working with people in our job area harmoniously is more significantly weighed in
work preference than what a person may earn. For example, I am currently working as an ICU
(Intensive Care Unit) nurse in a tertiary level and a private hospital called the Urdaneta Sacred
Heart Hospital here in the Philippines, and I have chosen to work in this unit because I have too
many companions in the hospital. My workmates, friendship and support for my career growth
are things that I considered more important than my earnings every month. So I believe that
working in a harmonious environment is more about taking into considerations.

In addition to this, loving what we do is as important as working in an environment

harmoniously when choosing an occupation. For instance, I have a strong compassion for other
people, especially for the elderly as well as I love touching their lives make a difference, which is
nursing is all about. Thus, I preferred to become an ICU nurse. I am also certain that all of the
professionals chose their line of occupation because they are happy with what they are actually
doing.

In conclusion, harmoniously interacting with our co-workers in our work environment and
being satisfied with what we are doing are the most important considerations in selecting a job.
It is not the salary. So choose an occupation with a supportive environment and that you are
happy to do with.

[ Written by - Rona Lyn Olivar ]

Model Answer 2:

Payment from a job is one of the essential aspects for people to consider but it is not the only
reason people take a new job or continue the existing one. I personally believe that there are
other important considerations while choosing a job.

Without any doubt, salary is essential in order for people to survive and a great proportion of
people rely on the money they get from their jobs. Most of the job-holders pay for their
housing, utility bills, food, treatment, travel, education and so on from the money they get from
their employers. It is evident that if employers stop paying the employees, there would be
virtually no one left to work in a company. Teaching, sports, painting, politics and research are
considered to be professions where passion is more important than money. However, if there is
no money at all, I have doubt that anyone would pursue these careers.

However, money is not the most important concern for someone to choose a job and there are
other important considerations to start and continue a job. Passion and interest to the work,
for instance, drive most of the people to work. For instance, many established artists, actors,
writers and scientists who have already amassed a great fortune would have stopped working if
the sole purpose of working would have been the money. From my personal experience, I can
say that while choosing a job people most of the time consider a job they would enjoy rather
than the money they would earn from it. Other important aspects, like the job security, career
prospect, work environment, relationship with the colleagues and bosses are all important to
choose a job. Personally, I would like to have a job that suits my educational background, let me
learn and implement my ideas, have a great working environment and then I would consider
the money I will get for the job.

To conclude, salary is an important aspect for picking a job but other factors in combination
play more vital roles and have more significance than the money.

Model Answer 3:

It has been proven that salary has been one of the important factors when people are looking
for a job but undeniably, different people have various opinions about their favourite job which
are directly depended on people’ ages, their characters, expectation, qualification and the
economic situation.

In fact, there is an acute difference between aged employees and fresh graduates to find their
desired jobs. In another word, the youths consider work experience and want to enhance their
abilities when they are choosing a job. While considerably ages and experienced people are
looking for the better salary as they have obtained enough skills on their professions.
Also, the economic situation is another important factor when people are choosing their jobs.
Put another way, some people prefer to have a job with a lower wage while the country is
experiencing the shortage of work. For example, these days some European countries such as
Greece or Spain are struggling with the bad economic situation and there are lots of
unemployed people living there. So these people just want a job no matter how much the
salary is. And the last parameter is related to people’s characters. It denotes that people have
various requests from their jobs and it is not possible to write a prescription for all of the
people on this matter. For instance, some find the work environment as the most important
factor of a job, some other pay attention to the quality of relations between colleagues and
some just are interested in the figure of the salary.

I think, therefore, satisfaction in a job is such a sophisticated issue and it is not logical to believe
that the salary is the most important parameter for a good job. Perhaps because of this reason,
lots of researches have been conducted to find the best job elements to satisfy employees.

[ Written by - Milad Rahimi ]

Model Answer 4:

In today's expensive world, needs of the people are growing day by day. To fulfil all their
desires, money is an important factor. Therefore, to some people, salary is the first thing to
look at when choosing a job. To an extent, this can be considered right, but, I cannot totally rely
on the amount of money I am being paid for my work. There are various other factors to be
seen when looking for a job. Some of them are discussed in the below paragraphs.

People enjoy their jobs when they are doing the work that they wanted. Hence, personal
satisfaction is the factor that matters. For example if a doctor works in a high profile hospital of
a city, where he gets a handsome amount of salary, but does not enjoy his work because he is
not getting to experience different types of patients and cannot experiment with his skills as he
would be doing if he were in a rural area. Then what is the use of having a high salary? His skills
are being restricted. Job satisfaction is, therefore, important for the person to give his fullest in
the field.

Second, vital factor to see is the ambience of the workplace. The colleagues, with whom he is
going to work and the employer should be cooperative, understanding, friendly and make up a
good team so that it is easy for the person to work with and feels comfortable and relaxed.
Finally, comes the reputation of the company or a workplace. Good rapport in the market and
with the customers is necessary to achieve success in future; otherwise, the growth will be
hampered.

To sum up, the aforementioned factors should be kept in mind when choosing a job. According
to me, salary off course matters, but it is not only the thing that should be looked for.

[ Written by - Fatema Mohammad]

Model Answer 5:

The salary is regarded as one of the most important factors while making a choice between
jobs. Salary is the real outcome of the job performed and hence it becomes a prominent part in
job selection. However, I completely disagree that salary is the most important part of choosing
a job. Job satisfaction and career growth are equally important aspects of the job to be
considered. I shall prove these parts in following paragraphs with more details.

Most people give preference to job satisfaction over the salary. Job satisfaction includes work-
life balance, vacation, quality work and many more parameters. It is scientifically proven that
job satisfaction adds to well-being and happiness to human lives. For example, a person earning
less will be happier than the person earning big bucks but going through extreme stress and
pressure at a workplace. Thus, job satisfaction should be considered as an important factor
while choosing a job.
People also give equal importance to career growth when it comes to selecting a job.
Promotions, new skills, job responsibilities are some of the parts of career growth. People tend
to give importance to these attributes of the job as it becomes path breaker for their future
career. For example, sometimes more salary can be only claimed if a person is holding a certain
level of position in an organisational hierarchy, thus, it becomes vital for people to be
considerate about this career growth aspect also.

In conclusion, I completely disregard the salary aspect of a job while choosing it. In my view, job
satisfaction and career growth should be seen as the most vital aspect while making a choice
between jobs. In the modern world, it is advisable to become circumspect about job choices by
equally evaluating all aspects of the job.

[ Written by - Noghan Odedra]

Model Answer 6:

Most people believe that the wage is the main factor of making a decision for a career. In my
opinion, I disagree with this idea as I will discuss in the following paragraph.

There are several reasons that make me not suppose to support this idea. Firstly, I believe that
job satisfaction will make people working with efficiency and productivity. Secondly, you might
get more stress when you get more salary. For example, most of the occupations including a
doctor, or a pilot get a higher salary. However, they are taking more responsibility in their roles
as they are working with people lives so they could make a smaller mistake or any mistake
could not be made while they are working. Finally, money is not everything. Some people are
addicted to the amount of money and spent a lot of time on their career without recreation, or
society with other people such as friends, parents, and loved one.
On the other hand, considerations in the earning with a career also have some positive sides.
To begin with, money is not everything but our quality of life depends on it. With a huge
amount of money, we are able to purchase a bigger house, a luxury car, and other things that
make our live convenience. Another reason to take wages into consideration is the more salary
will push us to work harder that it opens an opportunity to get into higher positions. Moreover,
a high salary represents a successful in our live. Most of the people who get higher payment on
their career are the one who has got an outstanding education, high level of technical skills, or
participated in many activities that benefit to the social.

In conclusion, I don’t believe that earning is the main features to take into consideration while
choosing a career, job satisfaction should be the first factor to consider while selecting an
occupation, without it, we will not happy with our roles and we can’t grow up with our career
path.

[ Written by - Napawan Srisuksawad ]

Model Answer 7:

Employee hiring and retention are two utmost important tasks of Human Resource department
of modern enterprises. Organisations spend a great deal of money studying the reasons of
attrition. And many of them conclude that compensation is the biggest reason why an
employee accepts a job offer. I too think that salary is the most important motivating factor for
one to accept an offer.

Firstly, one needs to understand the motive why anyone looks for employment. It is obvious
that one does a job to earn money, to support his family and so that he can lead a good life.
With time, everyone's need changes and one top of this, inflation makes things increasingly
unaffordable. An employee starts looking outside when he finds himself stretching to meet his
family need. Second reason is that when an employee feels he is not paid enough he would
start finding a new job. Infosys Technology's HR department's exit interview, when they try to
find the reasons why an employee has left the job, data reveals that 80% of people leaving job
has the salary as the first reason. This shows that compensation plays the biggest role in
employee's decision of switching job or taking new offer.

However, there are many other important reasons why one selects a job such as work-life
balance, the opportunity to rise in the organisation's hierarchy, work culture etc. Study by
Bangalore human resource organisation revealed that 50% employees provide non-salary as
one of the reasons for taking a new offer. From my personal experience, I have seen many of
my colleagues taking a new offer in search of other better opportunity or to switch career.

Therefore, we can safely conclude that salary is not the only consideration while choosing new
job but it is the topmost reason why one takes a new job offer.