Essay

IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 1 - People attend colleges
or universities for many different reasons

Details
Last Updated: Thursday, 19 April 2018 18:38
Written by IELTS Mentor
Hits: 105261
IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay:
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
Write about the following topic:
People attend colleges or universities for many different reasons (for example,
new experiences, career preparation, increased knowledge etc.). Why do you
think people attend colleges or universities?
You should give reasons for your answer using your own ideas and experience.
Write at least 250 words.
Model Answer 1:
People primarily enrol in a college or university to achieve the necessary education and
degree they require to build a career. Apart from the career, people seek higher studies to gain
knowledge, to enhance social status and learn more about diverse cultures.

The current society and its educational structures are far different than they had been a
century back when a self-educated person could gain a good career and parents could arrange
private tutors to ensure their children’s education. But in today’s world, universities are the
authority to declare a person to have the necessary education to be ready for the job. People
are going to universities because this is the most common way of getting the education. The
sole purpose of a college or university is to ensure the proper theoretical and moral education
to build the ideal citizens the country needs and this is the system which is unquestionably
accepted by the society. People who do not have the plan to use their certificate to get a job
either because they have other career plans or may be blessed with inherited fortune.
Many go to these educational institutes to learn values, gather ideas and education they
require to be good humans. In fact, education is a borderline between a savage person and a
good man and this is another reason the society has adopted the idea of education for all.
Some people go to universities to get further education to enhance their horizon or to improve
their job position and salary. Others go to the colleges and universities to let the world know
that they are educated. Funny this may seem but many people simply consider the higher
education as the status they require to get a higher position in the society.
In conclusion, education, experiencing diverse cultures and customs, getting prepared for the
future career, improving job position, subject matter interests and social status are the main
reasons for people to attend colleges and universities.

Idea Generation for this IELTS Essay:
Essay Type: Opinion Essay (Give reasons).
Main question of this IELTS Essay:
A. Why people attend colleges or universities?
Reasons: Why people attend colleges or universities?
 University degree nowadays is mandatory to apply for a good job. To find better job
opportunity after graduation and having higher salary are thus the main reasons many
students get enrolled in a college or university.
 This is the most common and perhaps the only method nowadays to enhance our
knowledge and skills.
 Becoming familiar with the latest technology, including computer, digital systems, or
medicine.
 Better social status. After graduation, socially they have higher prestige among their
family, friends, or other people.
 More probable to be able to apply and become prosperous a highly qualified graduate
abroad.
 To improve their social skills by meeting more educated people.
 To gain training and practical education.
 These days without the certification from colleges and universities it is almost
impossible for someone to claim a good job or to be certified to practice in a
specialised field of work.
 To learn the values, ideas, knowledge and skills.
 Sometimes promotion and increments are the reasons many professionals get enrolled
in further studies in universities.
 Many people enrol in a special course offered by universities because of their interests
in this subject or to gain the knowledge they need.
 Many people get enrolled in a college or university to maintain a status.
 For many people, this is an excellent opportunity to enhance their knowledge, skill
and experience.
 University and colleges are the best places to learn about diverse cultures, people and
social skills.
[The above points should be helpful to aid you generating your own ideas and then turning
them into a nicely written IELTS Essay. Add any point you think we have missed in the
comment section.]
Sample Answer 2:
Colleges and universities are often referred to educational, as well as skill-enhancement, hub.
Students enrol in colleges in order to acquire knowledge, which enhances their future career
prospects. However, there are other reasons why many attend colleges.
The majority of people attend universities to pursue their higher education, which gears up
their opportunities in the job market. Likewise, many have a far greater goal in their lives and
in order to reach their heights, they choose colleges. A college or university acts as the main
basement for the enlightened people. A great revolution has already occurred in the field of
technology and that is correlated with the job market. Students seemed to join colleges in
order to attain knowledge, which creates avenues for their dream jobs.
Moreover, exposure to the social world is the main constraint for a student and the best place
to develop such skills is none other than Colleges. Colleges inculcate a social behaviour to
the students and provide a wide range of facilities that allow an individual to enhance skills.
Some students join a college or university for social status and some who join from family
pressure may also get a good career guidance under the roof of colleges by the experienced
faculty who guides them how to develop their profile to match the desired target.
In my opinion, college environment acts as a precursor to a student’s successful career and

that is the reason many pupils join in colleges or universities to make their future dream come
true.
Write about the following topic:
Nowadays food has become easier to prepare. Has this change improved the
way people live?
Give reasons for your answer using your own ideas and experience.
Model Answer 1:
With the advantages of technology, the human has shifted to a lifestyle in which individual
requirement for delicious food has emerged not just to fulfil the hunger. They want to enjoy a
diverse range of foods with a varying taste and for that have invented many new and complex
recipes. They want to do it easily and swiftly with the help of modern tools and technology.
Has this really improved our lifestyle or has done more harms? Let us examine this in the
following essay.
People want to enjoy a diverse type of food - prepare them at home or eat at expensive
restaurants. People want to try new cuisines both at home and at restaurants and they want to
be served promptly. This is where the modern equipment takes part in, and food preparation
nowadays is easier and faster and this has definitely enhanced our lifestyle as it allows us to
enjoy food, not just satisfy our tummy.
Moreover, modern tools like the rice cooker, microwave oven, slicer, mixer, electric heater
and so on make the cooking process quick and convenient. This saves a great deal of time
unlike the past when someone had to be busy all day to prepare meals for the family. People
now have more time for recreation, hobbies and for the family. For students, busy corporates,
businessmen and researchers, this improvement remarkably enhances their lifestyle.
On the downside, the advancements in food preparation methods have led to the growth of
fast food industries and their restaurants pop-up everywhere, like mushrooms after the rain.
This might seem convenient for those who do not have time to prepare food at home, but the
health hazards are even greater. The obesity rate is skyrocketing in western countries and
more people, these days, are suffering from health-related issues.
In conclusion, the latest technology has undeniably improved the quality of individual’s
living standard but not without a cost. To make the best of this development we have to avoid
junk food but prepare more nutritious food at home.
[Written by - Mylene]
Model Answer 2:
Food is one of the fundamental needs of human lives, and from the ancient period till this
ultra-modern tech-time people have invented different ways to prepare and customise foods.
The improvement has definitely enhanced our lifestyle as we have more time to do more
productive things.
to begin with, the customs and ways people prepare foods and present to others vary
depending on the race, culture and country. But the most fundamental need of preparing
foods is to fulfil the very basic human need- hunger. Preparing foods was very cumbersome
in the past but with the advancement of human knowledge and technology, men have created
many devices and made many new ways of easily making foods. The number of restaurants
and fast-food shops are ever increasing and that have omitted the need to prepare the food at
all. The advanced technology like a rice cooker, meal cooker and easy availability of
ingredients nowadays help people to prepare food in no time and that has improved the way
of people’s lifestyle. People now spend less time preparing foods and can utilise this time in
other tasks like professional tasks, reading, entertainment and spending time with family and
friends. Thus people get more productive and social because of the increased time they have.
Quick food has become very popular which omits the needs of cooking and professionals,
students and business person are having those foods during their lunchtime. This is a
significant improvement in saving time and using it more productively. Though the fast foods
have some health issues, the ever-increasing popularity of it shows needs to have more time
in our busy life and saving this time from the allotted time from cooking. The cooking
machines help the housewives to prepare the foods easily and they do not have to spend time
in a hot kitchen to prepare food. This is a leap towards a modern life where foods can be
prepared virtually anywhere and in few minutes.
In summary, the improved way of cooking helps people nowadays to save time and cook in a
more convenient place. This helps them to spend time on more important things and lead a
life without much hassle.
(This model answer has been prepared by the site developer. However, please note that this is
just one example out of many possible answers.)
Essay Type: Discussion Essay.
The main question of this IELTS Essay:
A. Has the easier food preparation process nowadays improved the way people live?
Discussion Points: How the easier food preparation process nowadays improved the
way people live.
Ways how the easy food preparation has improved the way people live nowadays:
 Having more spare time for other activities, like entertainment.

 Control their diet by the calculation of calorie being used by appliances.
 Decreasing the rate of danger. The rate of explosions has been decreased by using
new appliances.
 People are able to prepare their food at their workplace or study by using appliances
like microwave ovens, rice cookers, coffee makers etc.
 Fresher products are more available thanks to the new technology of freezing.
 It saves time and people can get involved in more important tasks.
 Dependency on fast food shops and restaurant could be avoided.
 Saves the logs and woods needed to cook in the past time.
 It has reduced the workload for housewives and cooks.
 It is possible to cook a variety of foods with the help of latest technological devices.
Cases where this has failed to improve the way people live:
 Higher fat, salt, and less fibre applied to processed foods or fast foods have increased
the risk of obesity, hypertension, and cardiovascular diseases.
 Probable hazardous consequences of microwave radiation on humans’ health.
 Eating more meat products has increased the risk of cancer.
 Meals have become less tasteless compared to the traditional ones (GM foods).
 These latest home appliances for cooking consume electricity.
 Using juice instead of fruit has led people to intake insufficient vitamins and minerals.
[The above points should aid you to generate your own ideas and then turning them into a
nicely written IELTS Essay. Add any point you think we have missed in the comment
section.]
Model Answer 3:
Most of the food items that were hard to prepare and restricted to experienced chefs are now
easily available off the shelf or are made easy to prepare with modern recipes. But like any
other thing, this also has its advantages and disadvantages.
Firstly, most of these foods are high in saturated fats and eventually leads to obesity. They
cannot become substitutes for our staple diet that is still not so easy to prepare due to nature
of its cooking methods. For example, for most of the Indians, the staple diet includes a
combination of Indian bread, pulses and curries. It is not possible to make it much easier even
using modern equipment or methods. Secondly, most of the easy to prepare food items either
have a very little shelf life or they need to be kept frozen (or both). Thus they cannot match
the nutrition of freshly prepared traditional home food.
Having said that, these easy to prepare food items are a boon to students or other people, who
stay away from home. They are definitely better than eating in restaurants or street food.
Although not as good as home food, they definitely purpose the purpose to get “home-like”
food. Also, most of these food items come with handy instructions and pre-mixed ingredients.
With simple instructions, anybody can cook most of the recipes now. This has life easier for
many across the globe.
With the advent of easy availability of raw ingredients, it has not become much easier to cook
recipes at home that was previously possible to cherish only in high-end restaurants. For
instance, the Italian pasta, which requires many types of sauces, is now easy to prepare at
home and all these sauces are now just a call away from a local grocery shop.
In conclusion, this is a much welcomed and positive change and it has definitely improved
our lives.
(Written by Vikram Soni)
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 3 - Women make better

parents than men and that is why they have the greater
role in raising children
Details
Last Updated: Tuesday, 27 September 2016 12:14
Hits: 74187
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task:
Many people believe that women make better parents than men and that is
why they have the greater role in raising children in most societies. Others
claim that men are just as good as women at parenting.
Write an essay expressing your point of view.
Give reasons for your answers and provide relevant example and experience you might
have.
Model Answer 1: (Neutral Argument)

Parental responsibilities and roles are very important for the parents to make their children
prepared for the future. The way a father or mother treats a child affects greatly for his/her
future growth both mentally and physically. If parents fail to take great care of their children,
then those children might go astray and will claim their parents for their misfortune. Every
mother and father love his or her children more than anything in this world and they expect
them to be great persons and well established in future. Throughout the human history,
mothers mainly take care of the children and do most of the works for the children. On the
contrary, men are mainly busy outside the home to earn the living for the whole family.
This is not to say that men are not of importance in children caring and they do not know
their kids. They are most necessary if children are to appreciate fully the roles of both sexes.
But women have proven themselves superior parents as a result of their condition, their less
aggressive natures and they are generally better to communicate with kids. Men remain busy
at their works and have to stay outside the home most of the time, but women have lots of
spare times to share with their children. From the time they are little girls, females learn about
nurturing. First with dolls and later perhaps with younger brothers and sisters; girls are given
the role of career. Girls see their mothers in the same roles and so it is natural that they
identify this as a female activity. Boys, in contrast, learn competitive roles far removed from
what it means to nurture. While boys may dream of adventures, girls' conditioning means
they tend to see the future in terms of raising families. Girls also appear to be less aggressive
than boys. In adulthood, it is men, not women, who prove to be the aggressors in crime and in
war. Obviously, in raising children, a more patient, gentle manner is preferable than a more
aggressive one. Although there certainly exists gentlemen and aggressive women, by and
large, females are less likely to resort to violence in attempting to solve problems.

But if we consider that all women are good for their children and men can not raise a kid
properly then perhaps it would be a partial judgment. Is not there any family where the
mother has died or not present and it is the father who takes care of the children as well as
does jobs outside? Certainly, there are lots. In third world countries, fathers are comparatively
more educated than the mothers and the take care of their children's education greatly. A
child needs the affection and caring of both father and mother.

(Approximately 597 words)
Essay Type: Opinion Essay.
A. Do women make better parents than men or men are just as good as women at
parenting?
Discussion Points: Who can be the better parent? Men or Women?
Women are better than men at parenting:
 Mothers have a closer sensational relationship to their offspring than fathers because
of a better bonding between them and their children.
 Women usually spend more time with their children than men because, in many
countries, they are usually less engaged in working.
 Genetically women can be socially active and communicate better with their
surrounding than the men can.
 As a role of mother, mothers can transfer their experience to their daughters to
become perfect mothers in the future.
 A child spends most of the times, it's childhood with the mother and thus mothers
have a better understanding of their offspring.
 Genetically mothers have better quality in taking care of their children.
Men are better than women at parenting:
 Men have been more responsible to their family financially, so they can transfer their
experience to their children far better than the women can.
 Males’ hormones help better them to be more flexible to difficult situations happening
in their real life, and they can transfer their experience to their boys.
 Fathers are usually more serious in punishing of their children than mothers, so they
can control better their children to avoid crime.
 In many societies, fathers have better educational qualifications and diverse
experience. That’s why they can better prepare their children for the future.
 A father makes future of the child financially secure.
 Men's contribution to a child's development is found to be more effective when it
comes to imbibing discipline.
Men and women have equal role to raise their children:
 A kid needs the affection and caring of both father and mother.
 While mothers take care of their children, fathers work outside to bring the money
home.
 They both have qualities that should be learned by their kids.
 In many families, both parents work outside and that's why the responsibilities of
upbringing children should be equally shared.
comment section.]

Sample Answer 2: (Women make better parents)
Mother and father both play a crucial role in the upbringing of children. Some people assert
that women triumph over men to make better parents. In contrary to this, others claim that
men are as good as women in parenting. This is very perplexing for anyone to choose one.
According to me, women make better parents.
In support of my point of view, a mother is one of the first persons who gets attached to the
child from the birth. A child spends most of his time, his childhood with the mother. So a
child is more influenced by the mother. Secondly, a mother is the only person who takes all
sorts of care of the child, like- feeding, bathing etc. Thus, mother occupies most of the child's
time. This makes a strong bond between them. When a child becomes a little older and starts
to go school, a mother takes care of that child's study, homework, assignment, projects etc.
By this, a mother plays a crucial role in a child's education. In addition, a child learns moral
values which are main ingredients to become good human from the mother.
In our society, usually we find that women spend most of the time at home and men are only
breadwinners. In this type of situation, the person who can spend a chunk of the time for the
nourishment of a child is a woman. Thus, women can keep her eyes on every small activity of
children. Apart from that, owing to closer relationship children's shares it's emotions and
problems with the mother first. Thus, mother knows her child better than anyone.
On the flip side, to maintain the status of men, they argue that men are as good as women. In
spite of spending less time with the child a man earn for his child. A father makes future of
the child financially secure. As financial security is as important as building child's
personality.
To conclude, both women and men are equally important. But in our society women are
superior to men in better parenting as they rear child very well.

(Written by Dhruvita Bhatt )

Model Answer 3: (Both men and women have an equal role)
In order to be a great human being in future, a child should be raised with great moral
standards at home. The topic whether women or men get a major role in raising the children
is a huge debate nowadays. I think both of the parents share equal credit in raising kids. Let’s
ponder on the advantages on both sides.
Primarily, women are often treated as great caretakers and also the one for great future of the
kids. Children spend a major chunk of their time with their mums. So, women get to teach
kids on how to be a better person in the society and also on how to be a great human being.
She provides nutritious foods to the children which help them to become healthy. Children
learn about how to take care of others from their mums because mothers always take good
care of their children. This instils a great sense of responsibility in the children.

Secondarily, men (father) are termed as their ideal person for children. Men always struggle
so much in order to win bread for the family. This struggle teaches kids to study better with a
dream to help the family financially in future. Fathers are often a source of inspiration for
children on how to be a strong and better person in life. This helps them to grow as better and
responsible citizens in future.
After looking at advantages from both sides of the argument, I conclude that both men and
women share equal proportion in raising the children. Even if the proportion is not balanced,
there will be a huge impact on the children. So both father and mothers hold a major role in
the family.

Sample Answer 4: (Both men and women have an equal role)
Parenting is an extremely important factor for the proper upbringing of a child. While some
people are of the opinion that women make better parents, others think that men can also be
effective in parenting. I believe that there cannot be conclusions drawn in a generic sense
relating to the gender – Men or Women. What matters most is the one who has the qualities
of being a good parent; this can be either a male or female.

Women by virtue of having more patience, tend to handle children better during their infancy
when patience is an important factor. Ensuring a balanced and nutritious diet for a child is
again done better by women. For example, women are in a better position to understand what
a child needs to take in the lunchbox for the school. Further, studies have indicated that
imbibing the morals, values and ethics into a child during their growing up years is done
better by mothers.

Men's contribution to a child's development is found to be more effective when it comes to
imbibing discipline. This becomes important as the child's time management becomes a key
to his overall behavioural traits and personality. For example, ensuring the child wakes up in
time, spends the right amount of time on studies, indoor and outdoor games can be better
enforced by a father. Studies also indicate that children who get addicted to one particular
activity, for example, say computer games, tend to grow up as loners and whose ability to
interact socially becomes limited. Men tend to have better ability to control these activities in
growing children.

To conclude, it will be incorrect to draw a general inference that women make better parents
than men. No two individuals are the same and everyone possesses their unique strengths. If
that strength coincides with the quality required for effective parenting, they could make
good parents regardless of whether they are men or women.

IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 4 - Parents are the best

teachers
Details
Hits: 87436
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
Parents are the best teachers.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. You should give reasons for
your answer using your own ideas and experience.
Model Answer 1:
(Agreement: Parents are the best teachers)
‘Whether parents are our best teachers or not’ is a never-ending debate and people are
divided both in favour and against this argument. Both have a very strong contribution and
influence on a child’s learning but in my opinion, parents overtake the teachers in terms of
teaching their children.
First of all, I would like to point out that a teacher is not merely a person who takes a text
book and read texts from there to a student. Rather a teacher is someone who devotes his/her
times to teach someone everything that someone needs to know to advance to next step.
Morality, intricacies of life, subject matter knowledge, art, science, history, value of time etc.
are something that can’t be taught through academic books and a good teacher is someone
who teaches someone these all.
Now that we know the true responsibility of a teacher, we can easily compare our parents and
teachers. The things that we learn from our parents are far more important than what we learn
from our teachers. I am not denying the invaluable knowledge we learn from our teachers
through our academic years, but what we learn from our parents are incomparable. We learn
to survive, talk, and distinguish well from bad, values of life, morality and such important
other things from our parents. We are the true reflection of our parents and our characters are
shaped by their personality and behaviours. Later the teachers help us to enhance our
knowledge, horizon and our view of life but the very foundation and ground are made by our
parents.
The parents sacrifice so many things of their life just to ensure a better life for us and nothing
in this whole world could even be compared with their sacrifice for us. Think of a student
who is unable to pay his/her monthly school fees would be cast away from the school and the
beloved teachers would scarcely be there to help him/her. On the other hand, the parents
would always be there with their every possible effort to help the child.
In summary, the things we learn from our teachers are important for our lives and with those
valuable lessons and knowledge we prepare for the future but the things we learn from our
parents shapes who we are, who we become and their contribution is much more important
compared to the contribution of the traditional academic teachers and that’s why in my
opinion parents are best teachers.
Model Answer 2:
Parents can be the best teacher for every child coming on this earth. I agree with this
statement as no learning institution can be compared with the parents as they are role models
for their children since they open their eyes in this world till they are fully grown up and
matured.
To start with when the child is born he sees his parents as his guide, mentor & teacher who
will teach him how to speak, eat, drink, live, wear, interact etc. No one will be with him when
he is crying for anything it will be the parents who will be with him for every problem and
his / her every need. Even during his education days he will observe and learn that the school
although is the learning institution but the moral & ethical values learned from parents are far
greater than any learning center and parents will be the one who wants the children to be the
best in this world and they want their children not to repeat the mistakes that they have done
in their lives which any learning institution won’t care for as they can’t give individual
attention to every student.
On the other hand, we see that generally the children who are orphans or could not get the
attention from their parents don’t have that foundation of ethical, moral and social values as
compared to the ones who have been trained by their parents despite all of them have gone to
schools, colleges etc. The only difference between them is parents.
If the parents are not well educated they could still prove to be good teachers for their
children but that will be of less fruitful from the highly educated parents as educated and
learned parents will have more vision and more horizon as compared to the unlearned.
I would like to conclude with the statement that parents can be a turning point for his child if
he tries to teach every step of living this life.
(by Mubashir Noorani)
Essay Type: Argumentative Essay (Agree/ Disagree)
A. Are parents the best teachers for their children?
Agreement: Parents are the best teachers.
 Parents are more engaged in their children’s activities than any other person because
they spend more time with them than even teachers in schools, so they can find more
deeply their children’s personality weaknesses.
 Sensationally, they feel closer to their children than any other people are. Bonding
helps mothers to love their children more than any other else.
 We learn to survive, talk, and distinguish well from bad, values of life, morality and
such important other things from our parents.
 To care about their children, parents take more responsibility. They feel more
responsibility to protect their children from criminals.
 Parents are more devoted than the teachers.
 Parents would be with a child no matter what.
 We learn almost every aspect of life in our childhood from our parents.
 There is not any interruption in their teaching, and they continuously teach their
children. This can lead them to become more trustful than teachers.
 Parents understand the children better and thus play a greater role.
 Parents are more capable of instructing the children and guide them well.
 It could be far more economical. Instead of spending tremendous money on tuition,
Family can save it.
Disagreement: Parents are NOT the best teachers.
 In terms of the theoretical and academic knowledge, parents are usually less
professional than the instructors teaching in schools.
 Parents are less familiar with the latest training techniques which other tutors use.
 A huge generation gap between them, parents and children, may affect the parents’
performance to become perfect teachers.
 A conflict between parents and children in schooling may negatively affect their
emotional relationship.
 Morality, intricacies of life, subject matter knowledge, art, science, history, value of
time etc. are often taught by the teachers.
 Parents are sometimes too blind to notice the bad side of their children. In this case,
teachers make neutral judgments.
 Experiences learned from life have a far greater role in life than the things we learn
from our parents.
comment section.]
Model Answer 3:
(Disagreement: Parents are NOT the best teachers)
Parents teach a lot to the children and the ground made by them shapes the future of the
children. On the other hand, someone learns throughout his life and thus become the person
he really is. In this learning process, he himself contributes the most and teachers, friends,
nature, books, academic education are important as well. Though parents are very good
teachers, in my opinion, they are not the best teacher for someone and the person himself is
the best teacher for him.
After we learn to talk, walk and basic morality and intricacies of our life, we start going to
school and there we learn new things every day. The book, the teachers, the friends and the
environment shapes what we become. Parents teach their kid to a bright, good fellow and yet
there are lots of immoral and corrupted people who actually were transformed badly by
themselves. So someone himself is the best teacher for him. Besides this the things we learn
from our life experiences, teachers and books become far more important that what we
learned in our infant time.
Parents do their fine duty to raise a child to become a good adult and later he gets the
education and experiences from his life and school play the vital role for his future.
In terms of being our teachers, our experience and nature play an utmost important role. We
learn so many things from our surroundings and nature is a silent teacher who widely opens
the mystery and significance of our life.
The things we learn from our parents are of course important to our life but they are rather
some righteous lessons and good advises. Later in our life, we face the real situations and
learn the true lessons from our experience and in terms of learning this is the most important
part.
So considering all of the above, I would like to opine that, parents are very important teachers
for us but never the best teachers.
Model Answer 4:
(Disagreement: by Marlar Tinaye)
Our parents are the first teachers. They teach us how to talk and many other things which are
vital for leading our lives. There are many different parents who instruct the children and
handle their lives. Some parents want their child to conquer more than the efforts. They try to
be the best teachers for the children. They pay more attention and thus there are some
conflicts between children and parents. So the child looks for the avenue to escape. It makes
the child walk on the wrong road. Teachers at a school have the chance to guide many
children. So, they can compare different situations and potential of children more than
parents can do. So, they are more capable of instructing and guiding them properly.
In our town, we can see many negligent parents. They leave their children in another house
and sometimes the children play on the road and hurt themselves and become the victims of
accidents. Some concerned people have to return the child to his home back. Parents are not
teaching and showing the preventive measures and dangerous situations to the children. But
some parents can become better teachers for the child and thus prevented tragic
consequences.
Some parents will deliberately instruct the child in some dangerous attitude or philosophy
and they let the child adhere to evil things. So the children enjoy more in risky conditions and
grow up to be a very perilous person.
One, therefore, should not presume that parents are always the best teacher. Sometimes they
are the worst teachers a child might have.
Model Answer 5:
The responsibility of child development is often a subject that is discussed and debated.
While some would argue that since a child spends maximum time at school, the teachers
should take responsibility for ensuring proper development of children. However, I strongly
believe that it is parents who are the best teachers and they play a very important role in the
manner a child is groomed.

To begin, parents are the ones who could better control the disciplinary aspects of the child.
The manner in which a child manages his time, right through the day is better judged and
analysed by parents. This provides them with an opportunity to ensure that the child has the
right balance of all activities, be it studies, outdoor activities, indoor activities and reading.

Research has indicated that children do get addicted to one kind of activity, which is not good
for the overall development of a child. For example, there are several instances where
children spend more time say on computer games. This can result in the child losing out on
social skills. Further, such a child might eventually turn out to be a loner, with very limited
ability to interact, socialise and communicate with people.

Additionally, for a good healthy living and a steady mind, children need to have a healthy and
balanced diet. Parents do have better control over this aspect and can ensure that a child gets
a balanced diet with the right nutrients. Research has shown proper upbringing of children by
parents can lead to lower crime rates, lower health problems like obesity and higher literacy
rate.

To conclude, there might be some people who argue that schools are the places where
teaching happens, but this is not always the case. Nevertheless, the role of parents is even
more critical in ensuring that children imbibe the right values, morals and ethics. This will go
a long way in benefiting not just the individual but also the society.
[by Rajes]
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 5 - Violence and conflict

were more evident under male leadership than under
female leadership
Details
Last Updated: Saturday, 05 November 2016 18:22
Hits: 50317
Present a written argument to an educated reader with no specialist knowledge of the

following topic:
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.
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)
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 6 - Cricket has become

more popular than the national sports
Details
Hits: 40774

following topic:
Cricket has become more popular than the national sports in the sub-
continental countries.
What do you think are the reasons behind this?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own
knowledge or experience.
Model Answer:
Cricket, traditionally an English sport, is becoming increasingly popular in other parts of the
world like Australia, South Africa, Indian Continents etc. But the popularity is evidently the
highest among the countries of the Indo-Pak sub-continent, for reasons that are historical,
anthropological, geographical, and even commercial. There are more than 200 crore
audiences of cricket only in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Srilanka and they are certainly
the highest part of cricket fans than another part of the world.
The game of Cricket came to South-Asia in the hands of the English colonists centuries ago
and has seeped into the hearts of the people here while the cricketers of here have won over
the hearts of the English. This inter-continental love-affair perhaps has made the south-
Asians elope with the Bat and Ball from their national and ethnic sports. Also, World Cup
wins in the 80s and 90s, and phenomenal performers like Hanif Mohammed of the 50s and
Sachin Tendulkar of late, all have made Cricket more psychologically ethnic than the native
sports of this region. Mother Nature had her hand in it too. Cricket is compared with religion
in the country like India. Even when the war and conflicts hot the air of India and Pakistan,
the stadium tied the friendship these two countries.
Some opine that South-Asians are natural cricketers. It has indeed been proven that the sub-
continent players are more adaptive to the physiological demands of Cricket compared to
how they get naturalised to other international sports e.g. Football, Basketball etc. Also, the
climatic conditions here are relatively more suitable for playing cricket compared to the
climates of many other parts of the globe. Not to forget, the virtually uncountable population
of this region that continually fuels the ever-sprouting 11-member teams needed to stage only
half of a Cricket game and supplies the hundreds of millions of spectators to cheer the
players. Altogether, it is like a match made in heaven, “divine” enough to surpass any
hereditary bond.
Commerce plays its own amazingly profitable part too. Cricket enthusiasts of here have
become the primary consumer base of many global enterprises who mass-charm the sub-
continent customers through extravagantly sponsored tournaments. ICC, the governing body
of world Cricket, also cajoles the people here because of their financial utility and cossets
them from their sporting heredity. The national sport of the Indian sub-continent is only
official and in practice, they are not popular at all. The kids play cricket in the fields, streets,
rain harvesting fields and even in the terrace of the building. They show a little interest in
other national sports and thus how the appeal of those games are reducing.
Regardless of where it came from, the most certain conclusion to be made here is that Cricket
is to stay and sustain in the nourishment of the South-Asian pandemonium and will
indefinitely reign over the people here like the God-sent hero who conquers not only the
matter but also the nativity.

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:
Cricket, without any double, is the most popular game in sub-continent countries like India,
Srilanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal and this popularity is so bulging that many nations in
this part of the world know better about cricket than they do about their national games.
Strange it might seem, but it is a fact that less than 10% people are interested in their national
game while more than 90% people consider cricket as their passion in those countries. There
are several reasons for that and among them historical, anthropological, colonial, political,
commercial and geographical reasons are most substantial reasons for this.
Cricket was introduced to this sub-continent by the English and because of their colonies in
this part of the Asia, people politically got interested in this game. Like many other things
that people adopted from the English, cricket was no exception. Later this became a popular
game because people easily accepted it as an exciting sport and started participating in this
game. Because of geographical reason, people started doing better in this game and they
found them to be good at a sport which is widely accepted.
More than 180 crore people inhabit in this part of the world and that made it a commercially
hot spot for spreading the game and ICC found it to be a great part in increasing the
popularity of the game. Among the 10 test playing nations, 4 nations are from this sub-
continent and it is natural that people would prefer a game that they participate in world cup
level.
Apart from the political, commercial and colonial reason, people of this part are naturally
good at this sport and the world has seen many great players who came from this part. The
mass media also contributed in making this game popular and there are several sports
channels in this region that exclusively broadcast cricket all day long.
It is inevitable that people would participate in sports that they are good at, which they enjoy
and have international renown and that’s why the national and traditional games, which are
scarcely known to the rest of the world, have lost their popularity while the cricket has
acclaimed its own rights to the people of this sub-continent area.

Answer 3:
There is a very famous adage in India, "If Cricket is religion, then Sachin is the god". That is
a statue of a cricketer in India. Admittedly, Cricket is more popular than the national sports in
the subcontinent, be it India, Pakistan or Sri Lanka. Almost entire subcontinent came to a
standstill in April 2011 during the India and Sri Lanka World cup final match. High TRP's of
TV channel during the cricket season are evident.
I think the main reason for the popularity of this sport is the good performance of the team.
All the subcontinent teams are among the top playing teams and have won the world cup at
least once (except Bangladesh). Prior to India winning 1983 world cup, Hockey was more
famous as India's hockey team performed well and but after winning the world cup, people
started following cricket too and since then owning to good performance, cricket became
popular in India. People would hate to see their team losing all the time and would stop
following the game. Many Subcontinent players are among the best in the worlds and have
several records in their kitty. For Instance, when we go to foreign country and people asks,
where are you from? When I say "India", their first reaction is, "Oh! That’s where Sachin is
from". That instantly makes me proud.
Another reason of popularity is, Cricketers get more media attention, and they get good
endorsements and are constantly in public eyes. As compared to other sportsmen, Cricketer
earns better and have a high standard of living. Everyone wants to become professional
cricket player and get all the benefits that they receive. In earlier days, if you are not part of
an international team, your career is finished; earlier opportunities were very less but now
with the IPL, many players are getting chances to play in front to a large crowd and show
their talent. With the increase in opportunities, even parents are now encouraging their
children to take cricket as their full-time career, this leads to better engagement of people
towards the game.
In a nutshell, I think, people will love any sport, if it entertains them, make them feel proud.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 7 - To solve the ever-

increasing environmental hazards throughout the world
Details
Last Updated: Thursday, 26 January 2017 15:04
Hits: 53640

following topic:
To solve the ever-increasing environmental hazards throughout the world, the

best way is to increase the price of fuel.
What is your opinion on the above assumption?

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.
(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.
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.
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.

IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 8 - Safety standards are
important when building people's homes
Details
Hits: 43765

following topic:
Safety standards are important when building people's homes. Who should be
responsible for enforcing strict building codes – the government or the people
who build the homes?
Use your own knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples
and relevant evidence.
Model Answer 1:
(Viewpoint: People and owners should be responsible for enforcing strict building codes)
The population of the world is increasing and so does the needs for more houses, commercial
buildings and other constructions are escalating as well. The high rising buildings
constructions, wood-house constructions etc. require more safety & standard issues while this
is being violated often and accidents related to building constructions are increasing. Some
people opine that Government is solely responsible to ensuring the safety and codes while
others believe that house owners are the persons who should be responsible. In my opinion, a
government has a role in setting the rules and following it but it the owners and authority of
the building owners who should ensure the standard and safety while constructing the houses
and commercial buildings.
First of all, it is out of the scope for the government to appoint necessary manpower and
monitoring system in every place where the construction works would occur. Before building
any house, people must take the permission from the authority and build the house
accordingly. But any accident occurs due to the lack of safety procedure; improper use of
tools and materials, unskilled labour, unnecessary rush would be because of the owner’s
failure to comply the codes.
The workers, who work for contractions; including the architect, engineer and labour, should
know the safety rules and codes and also should protest when they believe that a rule might
have been violated and ignored. The labours should never assent to work in a position which
is harmful and risky for them, the engineers should maintain the strict rules instead of blindly
following the construction owners order and the local authority should time to time monitor
the constructions to avoid the hazards.
In conclusion, the Government does not have the necessary scope to monitor each & every
construction in a country and the house owners must know the safety procedures, standards
and rules to make sure the safety.
Model Answer 2:
(Viewpoint: Government should be responsible for enforcing strict building codes)
People or commercial constructors build homes for private dwelling or for commercial uses
and the number is increasing rapidly as the demand for new buildings is increasing. In all
cases of building a new construction safety of dwelling is important. It is home maker’s or
contractors responsibility to build houses complying with standard engineering requirements
and building codes set by the respective governments. I believe that the government should
always be there to strictly enforce building codes, and in the case of non-compliance
authorities should take punitive measures. Enforcement of the law is government’s
responsibility. Since non-compliance can not only cause hazards to the homeowners, but also
to tenants and if in a cooperative or apartment, many co-owners may suffer.
The building codes are regulatory requirements concerning safety and quality of the
construction, use of space and others. For example, in an earthquake-prone area, the buildings
should not be very high and the design and structure must have higher earthquake resistance.
Big houses and long buildings (i.e. academic departments, hotels and hostels) require
dilatation every 15-20 meters so that in a heavy earthquake, only part of a building collapses,
not the whole. Moreover, the quality of the materials used in construction and electric wiring,
and the gas connection should pass minimum safety standards. Adequate entry & exit
facilities and emergency exist, fire extinguishers are also very important is establishments
like factories, hall rooms, discos, party centres.
In cases of a wooden house, wood must be coated with fire-resistant paint. In large
apartments, office buildings, hall rooms and lobbies of hotels, fire-barriers made of rubber
and steel are used to prevent the spreading of fire. Similarly, in areas of frequent hailstorms,
skylights must not be used, and if so, must be protected by steel shutters.
Many constructors often tend to ignore the minimum safety requirements to minimise costs
which jeopardise people’s life. Many private homemakers do not know details of these
standards and precautions. It is the responsibility of the government to disseminate such
essential knowledge and monitor the compliance of builders, developers and makers of
houses. However, the builders cannot avoid their responsibility anyway.
In conclusion, in this modern world, the government is ultimately responsible for its entire
citizen’s safety and good life. It is also the government's responsibility to enforce strict
building code. If the negligence of any government agency jeopardises people’s life, the
government will be held responsible.

Model Answer 3:
(Viewpoint: Both Government & People should be careful and responsible)
People aspire to build their homes to suit their tastes as well as that of their family. While
several houses are constructed on a regular basis, there have been questions on the safety
standards adopted in such constructions, thus endangering not only the lives of homeowners
but also of those in the neighbourhood and the society at large. While some people opine that
the responsibility of ensuring a quality construction lies with the owners, there are others who
believe that the onus lies with the government. This essay will discuss both points of view.

To begin, houses that are being constructed by those in the lower income groups do look at
the most cost effective option. In the process, they invariably explore cheaper options that
include a compromise on material and construction quality. This ultimately leads to a house
construction that is inferior and might not comply with even the basic safety standards. For
example, there are several instances where even a moderate amount of rainfall has led to the
houses getting washed away. There are also cases where minor tremors have led to the
collapse of the entire building. Further, compromising on the quality of electrical wiring can
lead to short circuit and hence a fire, that can affect not just the house owner, but can lead to
severe loss of lives and property in the entire neighbourhood.

In my opinion, the solution to the problem lies with having a regulatory body to monitor the
quality of building constructions. The regulatory body should be under the Government. The
safety standards and the minimum specification of materials that can be used in any house
constructions need to be clearly defined. This should include essential parameters such as
foundation strength, structure strength, electrical wiring specification, water resistant material
etc.
Further, at various stages of construction, the owner needs to approach the authority for
approval. Upon such requests, the authority needs to carry random audits before approval.
This would not only put a system in place but also serves as a deterrent to house owners who
intend to compromise on construction quality.

In conclusion, while the quality of house constructions at present pose a grave danger to the
society, there is certainly an opportunity in this challenge, to put forth a system that would be
robust and go a long way in ensuring that building constructions of the future adhere to the
specified standards and are completely safe to both the owners as well as the society at large.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 9 - Many office authorities

impose restriction on smoking within the offices premises
Details
Last Updated: Wednesday, 28 September 2016 14:26

Hits: 38879

following topic:
Many office authorities impose a restriction on smoking within the office

premises. Some governments have even banned smoking in all public places.
This is a good idea but it takes away some of our freedom.
What are your opinions on this?
Model Answer 1:
(Agreement: Smoking should be banned in office premises and public places)
There is no scope of argument that cigarette smoking is harmful both for the smoker and
people around him/her. Cigarette smoking has two major effects on non-smokers-injurious
passive smoking and smoking display that has an invitational or persuasive effect on non-
smokers. I believe banning smoking in public places and offices not only will discourage
smoking but will also keep the smoking practice out of site, though it might apparently look
like transgress into smoker’s freedom. But I believe any harmful activity of a particular
person or group of people can not be a definition of freedom. If smoking right in any place is
a definition of freedom then why not other drugs? In m opinion, every public place including
office must be smoking free.
There are several reasons that government and private authorities are being strict on smoking
in offices and even public places. Firstly, this is an accepted fact that smoking is injurious and
deadly to health in several ways. Secondly, smoking causes health hazards to non-smokers
who inhale smoke passively from the smokers. Thirdly, smoking has a strong psychologically
influence on others, particularly on children and young who learns from their elderly.
Fourthly, in many countries, the cost of health care and insurance has gone up due to smoking
related illnesses. So health authorities and governments are trying to have been seen that due
to the restrictions, the habit of smoking is on a decline among office goers.
Though non-smokers think that restricting smoking in offices and public places is a good
idea, smokers often view it as an intervention into their right. Smokers argue that cigarette
smoking has a direct relation to their workplace performance, though passive smoking can
cause objections from colleagues. But considering the harm of smoking it should be banned.
Though pressure groups such as tobacco companies may discourage restrictions on smoking,
since the advantages of ban outweigh the disadvantages, mass public support such bans.
Moreover, offices have the right to regulate staff behaviour and activities and governments
too can ban smoking in public places for a greater societal benefit.
In conclusion, restricting smoking in workplaces and in public is a good idea. I can also
understand the opinion of smokers that banning smoking in such places limits their work
speed but I believe with little practice and determination they can overcome it. So I strongly
support the idea of prohibiting smoking in any public place including the office premises.
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: Smoking should NOT be banned in office premises and public places)
Without any double smoking is harmful to smokers and the debate whether it should be banned in
office premises and in public places came in light mostly because it harms the passive smokers as
well. But some consideration should be done before thoroughly banning it from the office premises
and public places. In my opinion, there is no reason for the advocacy in favour of smoking but totally
banning it in office premises and public places would not be a good solution.
First of all, if a government only bans the smoking in public places and allows the production,
marketing and selling of cigarettes in the country that point out a question if the government at all
wants to ban the cigarettes. Why would not a government restrict the selling of cigars but would
only refrain the smokers from having it? Rather government should ban this vile product in the
whole country so that people no longer have the option to smoke. A smoker would naturally smoke
as s/he gets addicted to the nicotine of a cigarette. Allowing them to purchase it and then not to
smoke it is kind of ridiculous idea.
Secondly, many offices restrict smoking in office premises and this is also a controversial idea. Why
hire smokers when you have such a strict restriction on smoking? Rather those offices should update
their hiring policy and should not hire smokers as many educational and religious organisations do.
Smoking in no way acceptable but restricting this only in office premises is in a way allowing the
employees to go outside and harm some other people rather than the office staffs. Instead of this,
the offices can either arrange a separate smoking zone with proper ventilation facility or allow the
smokers to smoke there or should hire non-smokers.
In conclusion, the cigarettes should be restricted in the production and sales level but not in the way
of stealing peoples’ freedom by restricting them in particular places while letting them easily
purchase them. Where is the good will when a government freely allows the product, distribution
and selling of tobacco and collects taxes from the tobacco companies and at the same time restrict
smoking to show that they are doing well for people?

Model Answer 3:
Use of tobacco products has become popular after the industrial revolution. Cigarettes are so
cheaply available that people do not bother to think about it before lighting one in every
minute. Society is engaged in very long debate, whether smoking should be banned
completely in public places or not. Some argue that it would encroachment to one's freedom,
while others support this idea. I think smokers should be allowed to smoke only in designated
areas away from the public.
According to world health organisation, smoking is biggest cause of oral and lung cancer.
Even second-hand smokers, people who inhale smoke releases by smokers, are equally prone
to the disease. Therefore, looking at this risk, smokers and non-smokers should be
segregated. In countries like the United States of America, designated smoking areas are built
and smoking in public places is banned and fines are imposed if anyone is found using
cigarettes in public place.
While it may be easy to argue that banning smoking is intruding to one's freedom. But
forcing one's smoke to other non-smokers is even a bigger crime. Advocates, who fight for
the ban of smoking, ask that why should an innocent bystander suffer from the smoke
released by smokers? Therefore, it can easily be concluded that banning smoking is public
place is not attached to freedom; it is rather imposing the right of freedom.

With above points, in conclusion, it can be concluded that with alternative options for
smoking location made available, smoking can be banned at all public location without
creating any controversy.
( Written by Ramanuj )
Model Answer 4:
'Smoking is injurious to health' is a widely known advice, written on all the cigarettes packets to
continuously remind the smoker of the ill-effects of smoking on health. Considering the health of
smokers, governments and organisations are taking steps to limit people from smoking inside office
premises. In my opinion, this is a good move by the authorities; however, some people argue that
such initiatives will curb our freedom.
Although our constitution allows one to do whatever one wants to do but if any of his action
involves impacting the health of others, then such rights need to be limited. Medical science has
proved that Smoking not only impact the well-being of the person who is actively involved in
smoking but also of the person, passively inhaling the smoke.

Despite the impact of smoking on the health of other people, some people think that prohibiting one
from smoking in the place of his choice, governments and organisation are curbing freedom of the
people. This may sound true if thought in terms of the right to freedom but if one morally considers
the bad effect of smoking on the other people who do not even touch cigarettes, this no more feels
apt to exercise such rights. One must exercise his rights as long as it does not impact others.
To summarise, smoking not only affects the health of active smoker but also degrades the immunity
of passive smoker. Therefore one must not smoke in places with public. We must exercise our right
for only for the benefit of us as a whole. Further, the move for restricting smoking in public places
should not be seen from the perspective of curbing freedom but must be supported for everybody's
good.
( Written by - Riya Nagpal )
Model Answer 5:
It is a fact that a lot of commercial offices have set strict regulations regarding to smoking within the
buildings. And even in some countries, governments have restricted their residents from smoking in
public areas. Some people think that the regulation is a positive thing, but others feel that it has
taken away some of the human's right.
To begin with, it is true that restricting people from smoking in public places is an unfavourable
regulation for smokers. In the perspective of smokers, the regulation has taken away some of their
rights, whereas everyone has the right to do anything that individual prefer to do, and one of them is
to smoke in public areas. They believe that cigarette would only be harmful to the smoker, and it
would not have any negative effect to others.
On the other hand, it is common that most office buildings are prohibiting their people from smoking
inside the buildings. And many government authorities have been banning their citizens from
smoking in public areas. These strict regulations have been set based on several reasons. Firstly, it is
a fact that smoking causes a serious or fatal threat to the smokers themselves. There have been
cases, where active smokers have a heart attack or lung cancer due to smoking. Secondly, it is also
proven that the smoke is also dangerous for the passive smokers. It has been reported that some
women have had problems with their pregnancy due to inhaling the smoke.
In conclusion, although it might seem to be unfair for the active smoker, but setting restriction on
smoking in public and commercial areas is something positive. Smoking is not only threatening for
the smokers, but it could also give a negative impact to the passive smokers as well.
Model Answer 6:
Smoking is proven to be deleterious not only for the smokers but it also puts the negative
impact on passive smokers’ health. The Government has put the ban on smoking in the
public places, however, many companies are adopting the similar footsteps and hence
banning it in the offices. Apropos to this, I support what many Governments and the office
authorities have done. Though it might seem a violation of freedom to some extent, the
positive aspects of banning free-smoking are far greater and hence this movement should be
welcomed, according to me.
There are numerous reasons why smoking should be restricted in the offices and in similar
places where people meet or work together. To begin with, many non-smokers work in an
office or gather in a train station, so the smoke of cigarette is pernicious and irritating for
them. Besides, if the smoking is allowed inside the office or in public places like an
auditorium, then the passive smokers will suffer from same ailments, as smokers will.
Finally, an office is a hub of many professionals and allowing smokers to smoke freely would
be the violation of non-smokers’ freedom in one hand and unprofessional in another hand. To
continue it, employees spend most of their time in their workplaces and if smoking is banned
there, then willingly and unwillingly many of them will stop smoking. In a long run, it is
going to give them the benefit, as they will understand that it is not such a hard nut to crack
for them to quit smoking. In addition, it will also save the time which is spent for smoking by
the employees; instead, they will devote that time doing the office work. The same argument
is valid for banning the smoking in the public places as well. Ultimately the banning should
be implemented to save the non-smokers, smokers and the environment.
However, another aspect of this statement also deserves the attention. To start with, as the
people who are in the habit of smoking feels disturbed and interrupted on banning the
smoking in the offices and other public places. They feel that it affects their performance and
thus they have the right to smoke as capable adults. I would like to opine that, the banning
should not be implemented all of a sudden and the smokers should be given the chance to
quit smoking before banning it in offices and in public places.
In conclusion, not a single positive aspect of smoking is proven so far while there are
hundreds of detrimental effects are already scientifically proven. Thus banning something in
public places which will bring benefits should be cordially welcomed.

IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 10 - More and more

foreign students are going to English-Speaking countries
to learn
Details
Last Updated: Saturday, 29 October 2016 12:03
Hits: 44931
Nowadays, more and more foreign students are going to English-Speaking

countries to learn the “international language – English". It is undoubtedly
true that studying English in an English-speaking country is the best way, but
it is not the only way to learn it.
Do you agree or disagree with the above statement?
Model Answer 1:
(Agreement: It is NOT the ONLY way to learn it)
There is no debate that being in a real English language environment will help anyone to
master the language in the fastest and most effective way and many international students
prefer to go to English-speaking countries to study and learn the international language. I
agree that this is a good way, yet students can learn English in other useful ways and those
can be even better than the first approach.
Being in an English speaking country helps students learn English in many ways. Firstly, the
surroundings and environment influence our learning. We are forced to speak, read write, and
slowly we start even thinking in English since we have to. Secondly, quick learning of the
language can become a strong motivation because, in turn, we will get quick feedback that
lets us find what we learn really benefits us in life and education. This inspires us to continue
to learn more. It’s a positive reinforcement Learning builds on progressively. The initial
learning serves as the basis for further learning. Thirdly, in an English-speaking country, you
will be learning from the life and culture which is not present off that land.
However, in this age of cross-culture communication and Internet, learning English in an

English-speaking country is not the only way. The English language learning opportunities
are available in many countries. Nowadays people are able to find various ways of learning
the English language in their home country that are highly effective and productive.
Watching English movies, television, listening to English music and browsing Internet can
open up a vast plethora of English materials. For instance, one can make use of the vast
storage of materials (video, sound, graphics, etc.) on the Internet to facilitate language study.
Sometimes non-English speaking students may need a different approach for learning
English. The principle of “different students, different teaching”, by the famous saying by
Chinese guru Confucius, maintains that different teaching approaches are useful for different
segments of students. The way a foreign student learns a language is quite different from
those of an English native speaker. For example, a foreign student higher level; however, it is
unnecessary for a native speaker. Last but not the least, on some occasions, students may find
teachers in their own countries do a better job in figuring out their exact weak points and the
remedies for them. A teacher of a non-English country understand the basic of a student and
can combine both the native language and English to make the study plan and this might be
more helpful than a native English teacher's approach of studying.
In conclusion, I believe studying English in English-speaking country is a good way but in

many cases, the other ways can be proven to be more efficient than being in an English
speaking country.
Model Answer 2:
(Disagreement: It is the only best way to learn it)
Language is a skill and like any other skill, it can be best achieved through practising. Being in an
English speaking country gives a competitive advantage of learning it faster and in a more efficient
way than other ways and that why I consider learning English can be best achieved by being in an
English speaking country.
Many people would argue that, if learning English in only possible by living in an English country ho
come people with really good English can exist when they have never been to an English-speaking
country. Yes, it is true that proper study and determination to grasp the language can bring success
to a person without living in a non-English-speaking country but there are some gaps yet. The
amount of effort someone needs to put in learning the language would be much more compared to
someone living in an English speaking country.
Firstly, being in an English speaking country would make the learner to communicate in this
language all the time and being in such a situation helps learn faster and more competently. They
would learn the language through practical experiences and that is more important than reading
tomes of grammatical rules from textbooks.
Second, the language is not merely how it is defined in the grammar books and how the words are
spelt. Rather it is a natural ability to express the feelings and thought to someone else in an effective
way and it is quite impossible to become a natural thinker of a language without actually being in an
environment where this is the only language.
Learning from experience is better than learning from text and that makes an English speaking
country living person more competent than a non-English speaking country living person in terms of
the command of the language. When the first person communicates naturally and without any
brainstorming, the later one would do that as less accurately. Pronunciation and language style is
very important in terms of communicating English and that can be best learned from the native
speakers of this language and that’s why being in an English speaking country to learn the language
is the best way. Because of this realisation, thousands of people from different parts of the world are
coming to English Speaking countries to learn the language.
In conclusion, though a language can be learned through reading, practice and other good ways,
being in a country where this language is the native language is the best way to learn it.

Model Answer 3:
(Agreement: It is NOT the only way to learn it)
Living in the 21st century, there is no doubt that English is the most commonly used and
important language for communication, education and career. Not surprisingly, a lot more
foreign students are studying abroad in English-speaking countries to learn English, as many
people believe that it is the best way to learn it. In my point of view, I agree that it is not the
only way to learn English and I will be explaining the reasons in the following paragraphs.

To begin with, English can be learnt anywhere by practising more. People believe that
studying in an English-speaking country is the best way. It is awfully correct simply because
foreign students are forced to speak in English instead of their mother languages. There
would be no people to communicate with if they speak in their own languages. If foreign
students speak and practice more in English in their own countries with their friends and
families, they can still be very fluent with native speaking skills.

Furthermore, foreign students can learn English easily through the media. They could watch
the BBC news and English drama without subtitles to enhance their listening skills. Foreign
students can write down the frequently used words and phrases that they hear from the show
or drama, and thereby learning more vocabularies. Moreover, they could read articles and
blogs written by BBC as it is an institution that is trustworthy and has accurate and complex
vocabularies.

In conclusion, studying in an English-speaking country is not the only way to learn English
and also is not always affordable for most families. There are a large variety of ways to learn
it even if it is not an English-speaking country.

IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 11 - Nuclear technology

should be used for constructive purposes
Details
Last Updated: Tuesday, 28 February 2017 12:52
Hits: 42791
Do you support that the nuclear technology should be used for constructive
purposes?
Give reasons for your viewpoint.

Model Answer 1: (Viewpoint: Use of nuclear technology for constructive purposes can
bring benefits for human.)
Many people are afraid of nuclear technology because of the dangers associated with its use.
And belligerent leaders and terrorists may cause great human disasters by the use of nuclear
weapons of mass-destruction. Though it is true that nuclear weapons pose the greatest threat
to life, I personally support the use of nuclear technology for constructive purposes can bring
human benefit.
The most worrying aspect of nuclear technology is its use for military purposes by many high
and mighty countries. Enough atomic bombs have already been made which are capable of
completely destroying the planet. An increasing number of countries now have nuclear
weapons or have the technology required to make such bombs, and there is an ongoing debate
about how to control the threat of nuclear weapons. After the fall of Russia, many Russian
scientists have found their nuclear technology expertise is in high demand in countries that
have an ambition with nuclear technology. Many believe that, at that time, technology has
been secretly made available to many aspiring countries such as Iraq, North Korea, India,
Pakistan and others. Experts believe that nowadays, many confrontational countries and
terrorist organisations have nuclear power and they know how they could use this power for
terrorism and mass destruction. However, it would have been better if it had never been used
to create nuclear weapons. If life on earth is to continue, we must control nuclear weapons of
mass destruction. To eliminate the threat of nuclear war, all the nuclear power nations of the
world should agree to disarm as soon as possible.
Nuclear power stations provide an important source of cheap power in many industrialised
nations and some developing countries. However, like most sophisticated technology, there
are dangers associated with it. Even though very high safety precautions are taken, there have
been few cases of disasters; two or three were major human disasters. Yet many experts
believe that in the coming days, nuclear power will be the most efficient source of energy for
the mankind.
Nuclear technology has been widely used in medical science. X-rays are widely used
technology that medical diagnosis. Radiotherapy is widely used to help cure some diseases
such as cancer. Controlled and measured radiation is applied on malignant cancerous cells to
kill them or stop their spreading.
In conclusion, nuclear technology certainly has many positive uses and offers lots of promise.
But we have to bear in mind that it is dangerous if not handled properly or goes to the wrong
hands. Nuclear technology should be only used for the true benefit of the mankind. If we
forget this, we have to take the responsibility of our own destiny.

Alternative answer 2: (Viewpoint: Nuclear technology should be used positively for the
benefit of the human.)
Like any other technological invention, the nuclear power has a great potential to be used
positively for the betterment of the people and at the same time, it can cause disaster if used
negatively. So the use of nuclear technology and its possible destructive power is an issue
which is much debated and in my opinion, we should use this power positively for the benefit
of the human.
First of all, the technology contains power and this power can both be positively and
harmfully used. Nothing is wrong with the technology or tool but with the people who
actually command it. We can’t think of the modern life without the use of cell phone, TV,
refrigerator etc. and are not they causing harm to the environment? Yes they are, and a single
gas cylinder can be used to cook foods and then feed people or run vehicles and on the
contrary can be used to blow up a house. Only because the gas has the power to blow a
house does not abstain us from using it for our benefits.
Second, most of the countries in the world, except few rich countries, struggle for the
electricity and similar energy powers and can’t improve because of the scarcity of it. The
nuclear power can be a great source of energy for these countries and can be a very effective
solution for them to improve their life standard and overall economic status.
In every sphere of life, we need energy: from irrigation to hospital operation and the use of
nuclear energy can ensure better lives for us. Obviously, the nuclear power possesses a great
power that can destroy a city or even a country if not properly handles, but this is not the
reason we should completely forget about a power that can change the world.
In conclusion, we should learn from our past mistakes about the explosions of the nuclear
centres and then come with better solutions to use this power towards the betterment of mass
people.
Sample Answer 3: (Viewpoint: Nuclear technology should be used for human benefits
but very carefully and under strict regulation.)
Nuclear technology has been one of the hottest inventions during the 20th century. However,
there have been heated debates about whether this technology should be used at all, even for
very constructive purposes such as power generation.
The reasons why we need nuclear applications are very dear. First of all, our society is
quickly running out of energy supply, and statistics even show a shortage of traditional fuel
within 50 years. Besides the poor supply of energy, we are also facing pollution challenges.
The CO2 generated in the past century has been roughly equal to the total amount of Carbon
dioxide released in the entire history before. In short, we do not have enough energy to use,
and can no longer afford to use it in the old way.
Nuclear technology is a much more available and cleaner solution to our possible energy and
environmental crisis. At the current level of technology, the discovered nuclear supply will be
enough to sustain the earth for more than a century. Its generation, if properly operated,
produces nothing other than heat, so it is considered super clean. However, I fully understand
the concerns from nuclear opponents.
First of all nuclear facilities will require strong capabilities to be operated safely. When the
operators are not experienced enough, devastating accidents can be created. These have been
seen in the former USSR and as well as in Japan. It takes time and resources to acquire such
capabilities and not every country can afford it. The other issue with nuclear technology is
that it can be easily modified into weapons, which can cost many lives when deployed.
Given the challenges we are facing, it is very necessary to promote the nuclear technology.
However, this must be carried out very carefully, under strict regulations and the supervision
by the entire human society.
(Written by Min)
Sample Answer 4:
Nuclear technology is a subject, which triggers many a debate. The use of nuclear power in
constructive purposes has been a moot issue, since its inception. In my opinion, if used with
diligence, nuclear energy can be the pivot of future technological breakthroughs. Let us
discourse on this below.
On a global perspective, when it comes to natural resources of power generation, the world is
witnessing its exhaustion at a faster pace than ever before. For mankind to survive, finding an
alternate source of energy has become inevitable, rather explicit. On this context, nuclear
power emerges as the most efficient and economical alternative. Many of the experts in the
field of technology assert that the need for an alternate energy source has reached such dizzy
heights that nuclear revolution is becoming a reality now.
"Necessity is the mother of invention" as the saying goes, need for an efficient and at the
same time cheaper energy resource has lead to the invention of nuclear power. Apart from
these enchanting features, power generation, nuclear sources are considered much easier. To
cite an example, labour force required in a nuclear power plant is less compared to others.
However, in the midst of the globalisation, among the many national frontiers, nuclear
technology and power pose the greatest threat. Improper use of his powerful technological
gizmo could lead to catastrophic effects. Another point relevant here is about the affinity of
terrorism and its ambassadors towards nuclear power. The threat posed by this insane breed
of people is both global and ubiquitous nowadays. Moreover, safety elapses from nuclear
production plants is another risk factor involved. The nuclear power plant leakage that
happened in Japan a few years ago and its atrocious effects on the Japanese would exemplify
this.
From an in-depth analysis of the above-discoursed points, though the threat posed by nuclear
technology is mammoth, I would still accord on its usage for constructive purposes. But one
should bear in mind that, it should be moderated by benevolent and diligent hands.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 12 - Men do most of the

high level jobs
Details
Last Updated: Saturday, 03 June 2017 15:04

Hits: 43067
Men do most of the high-level jobs. Should the government encourage a

certain percentage of these jobs to be reserved for women?
What is your opinion on that?
Model Answer 1: (Agreement):

Though some people would argue that women are working in high-level job positions in
many renowned organisations, the reality is that the number of such women employees is
very ignorable compared to their male counterpart. As a result, the issue appears that the
government should reserve a certain percentage of such jobs for women and this is supported
by a group of people while being criticised by another group. In my opinion, the government
actually should reserve a percentage of such jobs to maintain the equal opportunity, to
maintain a balanced workspace and in the overall economy.
First of all, the high-level jobs occupied by the male diminish the balances of power between
the male and female in such organisations. Since we are living in a century where we are
most sincere to establish the equal power of men and female, this is very reasonable that
women should actually work in such high-level positions. Second, the consumers, end users
and service receivers of a company and organisation are both male and female and female
decision-making employees for such companies are equally important compared to the male.
Third, the society would like to make a balance between the contribution of male and female
and again the power between them, without letting women work in high-level job position, it
would not be possible. The women are needed to participate in every sphere of society for a
better world and without letting them use their ability we can’t actually expect that.
Fourth, the women are improving in terms of education, power, contribution in the current
era than before and such a scheme is taken by the government would inspire them more to
run ahead. In third world countries, the fate of girl is determined when her parents decide if
the girl should go to school or should learn to cook and get prepared for marriage. The
privilege provided by the government in case of jobs for women would encourage such
parents to equally treat their boys and girls.
In conclusion, a certain reserved position for women in high-level jobs is actually a good idea
to empower the women towards the overall betterment of the organisation and society.
Equality for both man and women is the accepted underpinning philosophy of modern society
that we live in. Most constitutions maintain an equal right for men and women. Most public
institutions and formal organisations hold an equal view in treating either sex. Despite the
fact that male high officials outnumber female high officials by a great margin, in most of the
countries there is no legal or statutory bar against women going up in the ladder. I am against
any kind of positive bias towards women in the form of reserving a percentage of higher
positions for women. That will only encourage anomaly, imperfection in practices and most
importantly it is not going to serve the ultimate goal of escalating women’s positions in a
society or in a country's economy unless they earn that by themselves rightfully.
In the bygone days, women were primarily engaged in household responsibilities. Women’s
involvement in economic, organisational and public activities is not a very old practice. But
in the recent decades, things have changed dramatically and many women in the west are
going to the top in career and profession. Even in the third world countries of Asia, Africa
and Latin America, the presence of working women is everywhere, competing with the male
counterparts and even surpassing them in many aspects. They are acquiring the necessary
education, gaining proper knowledge abut their rights and are in the process of being
recognised as organizationally as valuable contributors. In Bangladesh, in many instances
girls toppled in open public examinations, and their success rate is generally higher than man.
Women are earning professional reputation in their job places as well.
Against this backdrop, there is no reason that government should go for reserving positions
for women. Instead, a government should take initiatives to eradicate any bias against women
and make favourable work environment for women. Firstly, governments can ensure
women’s access to education and thus empower them and make them prepared for life as in
many societies women lack education and empowerment.
Secondly, women suffer from gender discrimination, chauvinistic behaviour and worse even,
sexual harassment in workplaces. Governments should have clear and strict policies to ensure
an environment where workers from both sexes coexist with ease. Thirdly, women should be
entitled to have special conduct during motherhood. Due to the very role of a woman in a
family, supports from the workplace are important for working women.
Women and man both should be viewed as equally capable. If we look over our shoulder, we
can see that the number of eligible, skilled and executive-class working women is actually
increasing quickly in recent years. Govt. should no go for reserving a certain percentage of
high-level jobs for women. That will only undermine women’s ability and women will
grossly find that their self-respect is on declination. They can find their own way towards the
prosperous carriers by the of their own virtue and efforts.

The high-level jobs have always been held by men. Whether it is the head of the state or the
CEO of a multinational company historically its men who have conquered most of the peaks.
Although the history has seen women at the peak heights as well, the numbers of such cases
have been relatively small. The question whether there should be reservation for women in
the top positions has increasingly been contemplated by the governments around the world.
While, such as step would definitely see an increase in the number of peak positions being
held by women, it does have its disadvantages.
Proponents of the idea of reservation for women cite their under representation as one of the
causes. Women have traditionally been under-represented in the male dominated society.
This has taken a toll on the causes related to women, such as domestic violence. Offering
leading positions to women will significantly help such causes. Other people cite equality of
both genders as one of reasons for reservation. In many parts of the world, specifically in
developing nations in Asia and Middle East, women are not treated equally to men. This has
led several people to demand reservation for women. They suggest reserving top positions for
women would bring a sense of equality among both genders and harmony in society.
However, reservation would lead to several problems which are often overlooked. Bringing
in reservation would lead to "lowering the bar" for women. It will lead to many of the
positions being filled by women who do not have the required talent and experience, only due
the fact that the positions were reserved for women. This will eventually lead to a fall in
productivity and growth of the company or the nation. Such a move would also bring a sense
of inequality among men and women, since women would not have to work as hard as men to
get the top positions.
Rather than bringing in reservation for women for top positions, governments should
encourage and support women so they reach these heights rightfully. Support could be in the
form of financial aid, or free coaching. This would enable women to learn the skills needed to
get the top positions and get the top positions without compromising productivity and growth.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 13 - What changes do you

think this new century will bring
Details
Last Updated: Tuesday, 20 December 2016 21:51
Hits: 42156
Present a written argument to an educated reader with no specialist knowledge of the following topic:
The 21st century has begun. What changes do you think this new century will
bring?
Use examples and details in your answer.
Model Answer 1:
As we have already stepped into the 21st century, it is inevitably true that enormous changes
like advances in technology, heath care, and transportation will be visibly experienced. This
essay will highlight the beneficial growth in our health sector and transport system that is
possible to be made available in the new generation.
Development in the health care will be greatly observed in this century. First of all, the
diagnosis of severe diseases will be straight-forward as a consequence of the presence of high
technological apparatuses and innovative devices. Secondly, rehabilitation and cure to deadly
illnesses will be less complicated, this is due to the constant research of the professionals like
the medical team and scientists on the treatment like medicines, effective exercise, and
healthy eating. Lastly, the percentage of deaths of the human beings will significantly
decrease and therefore, the quality of life will enhance and chances of people to live longer
will gradually rise.
Another noticeable trend that we can look forward to in this era is the technological approach
to transportation. Faster and more reliable transport system will be made available to the
public at a cheaper price. Hence, people all over the world can step foot to the different
diversity of each country close to a blink of an eye. A good example is the constant
competition of the airline companies, therefore, decreasing their price range or offering a
more reasonable package holidays to the mass public.
In conclusion, there are several advantages that human beings will experience in the 21st
century. Through vigorous experiments and knowledge learnt from the previous generations,
people may expect a more convenient life such as able to live a longer and healthier as well
travelling will less financial worry.
[Written by - Stefanie]
Model Answer 2:
The new century comes with a different technology, inventions, political and social changes
and also brings the new brutality in human history and the 21st century has already brought
many changes in the world and human lives and certainly there are yet more changes to
come.
First of all, the technological changes and updates would become more frequent and the use
of the internet, cell phone and computers would become widespread. Even in very remote
areas people would use these technological advances and that would both positively and
negatively affect their lifestyle. Second, the religious fanaticism would diminish and except
few fanatic people, most other would live a life where religion would bring little conflicts.
Third, the improvements in genetic engineering and medical science would improve the way
of people live as it would eradicate many deadly diseases. However, the history suggests that
new devastating diseases would emerge without any cure. Fourth, the conflict among nations
would become more economic than the doctrine and politics. The world would be divided in
terms of capitalism and socialism and new political dogma would appear in many countries.
Fifth, People would learn more about the outer space as the experiment and scientific
research on outer space are going on more steadily than ever. Sixth, the nuclear power would
replace the traditional power sources and at the same time many countries would possess the
nuclear power and that would always be a threat to the world. I would not be surprised if
nuclear war takes place in this century and destroy a great number of countries. Then people
would explore the sea resources as the land resources would be less in number and that would
be a great new source for people.
In conclusion, the world would have newer technologies and a better life expectation in this
century while the political conflict would arise and that might lead to destruction. At the same
time, people would learn more about the outer space and sea resources more than ever.
Model Answer 3:
There is no doubt that 21st century will bring extremely advanced and innovative changes,
related to almost every field and it will help the human being to raise the standard of their
lives. What kind of changes are expected, it will be discussed in following paragraphs.
To begin with, one must acknowledge that 21st century is a technologically advanced
century. Inventors are doing extremely tremendous research work to make the new inventions
come into existence, which will ultimately lead to a sophisticated life for the human.
Advancement in the things, which someone can use in their daily life, can be seen, for
instance, gadgets and equipment, to make our work more reliable and accurate .Apart from
this ,exploration in the space related programs is also possible ,which will ultimately help the
human to protect the mankind as well as earth as such discoveries will be helpful to explore
more about the universe and they may be able to predict about the upcoming danger or helps
us to prevent them. Furthermore, in future, adequate medical facilities will be there as day by
day new inventions related to medical field are coming into existence, remedies for diseases,
which are incurable in the present scenario, might be possible in future.
To recapitulate it can be stated that in upcoming few years human will be blessed with
adequate facilities, which definitely will make their lives quite easier, due to advanced
technology.
(Written by Ranjeet Singh)
Model Answer 4:
Man, through the ages, has undergone many changes from the time when he depicted a herd
of mammoths on the walls of his cave to these days when he can create beautiful pictures and
even make coffee by use of computer technologies without leaving his favourite chair. The
20th century made huge steps in developing computer technologies and reached many goals
that made our life much easier. What should we expect in the 21st century?
First of all, I think that the pace of our life will speed up: we will move faster from one place
to another, from one continent to another using high-speed jet aeroplanes. Second of all, I
believe that we will be able to do many things that take much time now without leaving our
house. Computers will be everywhere including out clothes. Many people will have chips and
mini computers inserted in their heads to hold a huge amount of information and have a quick
access to it.
But what will be the most amazing thing in the 21st century is the flights to the outer space
and Mars that will be available to all people. Scientists say that Mars has many things similar
to the Earth's. Moreover, they say that with the help of modern technology people can
artificially create conditions that will allow people to live there on the constant basis.
Apart from that, Computers would become more powerful and they will have superior
artificial intelligence. We will have robots to do the hazardous works like mining and outer
space research. Surprisingly, e-commerce would be in more convenient form and most of the
people will purchase online rather than going to shops in person. In the field of education and
jobs, dramatic changes would happen. Online learning and freelancing would be very popular
and people would be able to earn almost all of their desired degree and diploma staying at
home. Finally, the cure for many deadly diseases would be invented and yet new diseases
may spread to cause some deadly catastrophic results.
To sum up, I am sure that many amazing changes will be brought by the 21st century.
Furthermore, I think that with the help of the contemporary technologies people can do many
things that were even difficult to imagine a century ago. So, nowadays it is rather difficult
and even impossible to imagine all changes that will happen in the next decades.
(Written by Trilok )
Model Answer 5:
Essay Topic:
following topic:
The 21st century has begun. What changes do you think this new century will bring?
Use examples and details in your answer.
Answer 5:
The beginning of a new era, 21st century, brings the question to anyone's mind "whether it is
the beginning of a great shift?" Well, in my opinion, the changes will definitely bring a
revolution to the mankind.
As the world is progressing towards the new and sophisticated technologies and inventions,
our lives are becoming easier and more relaxed. The mode of communication is faster and
cheaper as compared to early times. In a fraction of a second, information can be transferred
to the distant part of the world. All thanks go to the user-friendly applications, like the email
feature, that are being invented for the welfare of mankind. In this new century,
communication would be free of charge and more interactive.
Secondly, the technology in this century will improve the quality of health care facilities
given to an individual beyond expectations. The health care professionals will be more
qualified and adept. Due to the advancement of the research facilities, many deadly diseases
will be eradicated. The quality of life would be significantly better and our lifespan would
increase. Finally, space research in this century would unfurl some answers we have been
seeking for a long. Maybe at the end of this century human would be ready to live on another
planet.
But all these improvement and marvel would not come without the cost. There is no doubt
that human would become somewhat slaves in the hand of technology. Their personal lives
would be greatly affected by the over usage of technology. More powerful weapons and the
threat of nuclear war would be a great concern for the world population in this century.
To conclude, this era would bring many marvellous discoveries to our life but at the same
time, the perils of nuclear war would be a great anxiety for peace lovers all around the world.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 14 - A zoo has no useful

purpose
Details
Hits: 50826
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
A zoo has no useful purpose.
Use specific reasons and examples to explain your answer.
Model Answer 1: (Agreement: A Zoo has no useful purpose)

Keeping wild animals in cages for public exhibition is a tradition that people are performing
for a long and for majority people this is an amusement and educational purpose for kids
while others think it to be a very inhuman act. This is a much-debated issue and I personally
find no usefulness of a zoological garden where these animals and birds of different kinds are
kept for public entertainment.
First of all, the idea of keeping wild animals in cages is really a brutal one and human should
not be proud of act like this. Who has given us the power and authority to forcefully bring
animals to zoos and then being hilarious watching their activities? Do our weapon and brain
makes us superior and powerful enough to decide the lives of other species? No, if we are
superior to those wild animals, it is our humanity and superiority of thinking power and
where would that humanity is when we encage other species? There are thousands of
amusement parks and children parks and we should not make a zoo that would only represent
our brutality and the outcry of the animals.
Have we ever though if a more intelligent species arrives in our territory and encases us like
we do to other animals, how pathetic that would be for us? Many people would say that those
are educational purposes and to let the kids know about those animals. But in a zoo what we
see are encaged animals with their dismay and helplessness. Children would never learn the
true nature of those animals when they would learn it from a zoo. Animal Planet and
Discovery channels are two better alternatives for children to learn about those wild animals
than the zoo.
Zoo is many countries are used for commercial purposes and no matter what the authorities
do; they can’t ensure a free life for a bird which should be flying in the sky rather than trying
to escape from the cage.
In conclusion, the zoo serves no useful purpose and there are no good reasons to put the
animals and birds in cages.

Some people believe that zoo has no useful purpose while others argue that zoo is used for
recreational purposes. This is an issue which is greatly debated and controversial but I
strongly believe that a zoo interrupts our ecological system. There are several reasons for my
standing on the side why the zoo is worthless.
Firstly, animals always look beautiful in the forest which is their natural inhabitant.
Whenever we put animals in cages from the forest, we interrupt the natural law. Thus forests
lose their beautiful natural environment. It is also inhuman to put the free animals in cages.
Because day-by-day animals which are used for human entertainment purposes get
deteriorated in their physical growth as well as get interrupted their normal proliferation.
Thus many animals have become extinct. Besides, without the interruption an animal
wondering in a natural forest keeps our natural environment safe.
Secondly, sometimes many animals cannot cope with the cages. Moreover, many zoo
authorities don’t provide necessary foods and proper accommodation and right treatment
which are required for the survival and production of the animals. Furthermore, zoo
authorities earn a lot of money to display these wild animals among the general peoples but
this money is not properly utilised among this wild animals. As a result, these animals suffer
from various kinds of diseases and scarcity of foods.
Thirdly, another important point is that Zoo is destroying our food chain system. It is actually
destroying the food ecosystem nature preserves. At least not at least, Kids who captive
animals for their fun and entertainment, get a bad impression and this is not good for their
mental growth. Safari park, which is an alternative system of a zoo, where animals get large
places and greener trees and foods at the same time, can be a better alternative than a zoo.
General people can learn about the animals from these short of natural parks and this way we
can cause less harm to the wild animals and to the mother nature.
In conclusion, we can say that zoo is inhuman and serves almost nothing for us while it
destroys the natural equilibrium.
(Submitted by Rashedul Islam)
Model Answer 3: (Neutral Opinion)

I think that the question about whether a zoo has no useful purpose is the one that is open for
debate. It is a common question nowadays. Some people believe that a zoo has an essential
and cognitive purpose for instance; a zoo can save some species that might have been lost
forever. However, other people believe that a zoo has no useful purpose and people should
observe wild animals in their nature and it is completely unjust to put the wild animal into a
case for public exhibition. Personally, I think that both options have reasons to believe.
From the one side, a zoo has many benefits for people. First of all, children can learn about
animals not only from books and TV programs but from actually watching them alive and
observing them. They can see animals, touch them and even feed them. I think it is an
amazing experience for a child. He gains more knowledge and experience from this
"communication" with an animal. Secondly, a zoo is a perfect place for adults to see many
animals that people are not able to see in their lives. A zoo creates the opportunity for people
who otherwise could never watch these animals. The authority takes great care of the animals
they preserve and normally earns a lot of money which is used for the development of the
country.
However, from the other side of the view, I keep asking myself "What kind of benefits we get
by confining wild animals in the cages in a zoo?" Unfortunately, I think that wild animals
should live in their nature environment. Moreover, I think that we should observe them
through TV programs sitting in our favourite chairs, or people who like danger should try to
observe them in the native environment. I think that animals are not toys. I know that most
zoos try to keep their animals in the environment which is close to their native, but they can
not give them as much freedom as animals want to. It is a frequent matter that many wild
animals die after they are confined in the cages and this is really an abominable act.
I think that wild animals should be kept in a zoo only if the authority can ensure their safety
and good care of them.

Model Answer 4: (Disagreement: A Zoo has MANY useful purposes)

Whether a zoo has useful purposes or not and should we put the animals in a zoological
garden or not is an issue that has been much debated. People are divided in their opinions and
when one group says that, zoos should not exist; other group presents the usefulness of it. In
my opinion, a zoo has many useful purposes.
People, who are against the establishment of zoos, always show the logic that we should not
keep the free animals in cases and that’s completely a mockery of our true humanity. They
have their logics and to a degree this is logical but when they question humanity for this act,
they are wrong from many perspectives.
A zoological garden does not keep all the animals in cages and many recent zoos ensure the
natural environment for the animals they keep in their places. In most of the countries, a
zoological garden is monitored strictly and the health, treatment and food of animals are
ensured. The authority makes sure that the animals are properly taken care of and do not die
in diseases.
A zoo keeps only a few animals and this is not a threat to the natural inhabitants of animals.
When we talk about humanity about the ruthless act of keeping the animals in a zoo, where is
our humanity when we are killing thousands of animals and birds and selling them in well-
decorated shops?
The zoo sometimes saves the endangered species and becomes a safe house for many
animals. People do not visit the zoo to boast their superiority; rather they go there for
recreational and educational purposes. A child who visits a zoo can learn many things which
otherwise would not have been possible.
In conclusion, zoo indeed has many useful purposes and it is a great educational and
recreational place for many people.
Model Answer 5: (Agreement )

Captive animals are kept in closed enclosures for public viewing and entertainment, this
charade is named as "zoo". Does this place stand any purpose in our betterment as the human
being? In my opinion, a zoo does not serve any such purpose and it should be exiled.
Many incidents of animal attacks on humans and vice versa reports from zoo across the world
are readily available on the internet these days. The former takes place because these animals
are at times traumatised or ill-treated which attributes to the attacks, whereas latter is a case
where they are moulded to our purposes using insane methods . An exemplification would be
in India, where elephants are being trained through such methods to serve human purposes.
A zoo is basically animals devoid of their natural environment and lifestyles. Animals are
bound to roam around the jungle and we, as humans, have no right to put them behind bars.
Though they are fed and groomed well by some, most of the zookeepers are known to poses
notorious approach towards the zoo animals. The situation were animals and birds are caged
and displayed to feed human eyes is chaotic.
On what grounds would such a place could even be considered to serve a useful purpose? A
broader perspective would be, people especially children visiting a zoo have a recusant
impact about our fellow primates in their minds due to the over dominating nature of human
beings being displayed.
Considering the mentioned problems, any favours in running a zoo is outweighed. Thus it is
high time that all zoos should be either be shut down or replaced by natural sanctuaries where
animals are more close to their natural realm of life.
[ Written by - Vineeth V. ]
Model Answer 6: (Disagreement )

I had a great childhood and one of the most precious memories of my life was visiting the zoo
in my childhood. While I disagree with the statement that a zoo has no useful purpose, I also
agree that animals kept in a zoo might lose their freedom and this is sometimes disgraceful to
put them in iron cases just for our entertainment.
First of all, I have a very cherished and vivid memory that I visited a zoo in Singapore when I
was 6 years old. In another time I went to a circus and I saw that an elephant was so unhappy
and tired when it was performing. At that moment, I was so sad and felt pity for those
animals. Those animals were supposed to be in their natural inhabitants rather than
entertaining people. They either had been caught from a jungle or was sold out from a zoo.
Furthermore, the area for the animals in most of the zoos is limited and it is quite cruel for
animals. It's like taking away the freedom of a living animal and this is not justified according
to many.
On the other hand, zoos in general serve some useful purposes. The most useful purpose of a
zoo is to educate people, especially children. Children who visit a zoo get the chances to
know about different animals and can broaden their perspective. From my experience I can
say that zoos are educational for young and adults as well. A zoo is one of the best places for
family to go for a short trip. Furthermore, many animals kept in a zoo get good care and
researches show that saving endangered animals is one of the main purposes of many zoos
nowadays. In my opinion, if the proper environment, care, food and treatment are ensured for
animals kept in a zoo, it can further improve the true purpose of a zoo.
To conclude, some of the traditional zoos with limited area, fewer staffs and less facilities
should be changed to bigger and better zoos. A zoo has many useful purposes including
educating people and safeguarding endangered animals though keeping animals in a zoo
actually takes away their freedom.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 15 - People remember

special gifts or presents that they receive
Details
Last Updated: Monday, 17 October 2016 14:03
Hits: 37771
You should spend more than 40 minutes on this task.
People remember special gifts or presents that they receive. Why?
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
Model Answer 1:
A person in his lifetime receives many gifts and presents and with the span of time he might
forget about them. But special gifts are kind of gifts that he would remember for a long time
or even in some cases forever. There are various reasons why we remember those short of
special gifts and the most influential reasons are physiological, economic, memory and effort
related to the gifts.
First of all, a gift, no matter what it is, is always special when it is given by a very dear
person. Gift received from parents or children on special occasions are cherished by most of
us. In this case, the cordiality and attachment it more important that the gift itself. For
instance, many people treasure the gift they receive from a lover, friend, father, mother or a
special person for a long time. The gift I got from my father on my 12th birthday was merely
a diary and that I still consider a very special gift for me. This special gift reminds me my
childhood and the love of my father and that’s why I will always remember it.
Second, people often wish for certain things which are they usually can’t buy and if such a
present is given someone, it is likely that he will remember it for a long. For instance, when
my uncle purchased me a laptop when I was around 18 years old, I was very excited and I
will never forget the gift. Sometimes the surprise gifts are memorable and become special to
some persons. For instance, the gift I gave to my college on his birthday became one of the
special gifts for him as he later expressed. Thus these sorts of special gifts remind us the
goodwill and love we actually receive from that person.
Third, expensive gifts often surprise people and can become their special gift. If a car is
bought to someone which he would not be able to afford is ought to become a special gift as
well. It is common human phycology that they would remember such gifts for a long.
Finally, the memory related to a gift is the most important factor for a special gift. The small
gift given by a father who is no more with the children would definitely become a valuable
gift to that son/daughter. With time the gift might get lost or broken or even useless but the
memory remains and thus the memory involved with a gift is an important factor and that’s
why people would remember the gift.
Receiving gifts is always exciting and many people remember the gift for a long time. I think
that all people like to receive presents from their relatives, friends, co-workers, and people
they love and care about etc. Personally, I am sure that a person does not remember all the
gifts he receives because it is impossible. However, I think that all people remember some
gifts that were special to them. There are many reasons for people to remember those special
gifts.
First of all, I believe that people remember special gifts because they were from very close
and dear people. For example, I remember my parents gave me a ring when I was sixteen
years old. It was not an expensive ring but it was very valuable for me and when I left my
home and moved to another city, I often looked at that ring and felt like my parents were
somewhere near me. I felt their support, care, love and understanding. It is like people who
are close to us give their small parts of their souls with that gift. They want us to remember
them and they want to make us happy. Gifts sometimes remind us the memory of a certain
time. For example, if a child gets a toy at an early age and if he sees it when he grows older,
it reminds him about the childhood. Besides, special gifts always remind us the caring and
love of the person who gave it. These gifts are very valuable for people of all countries and
nationalities.

Another reason why people remember special gifts because they were exactly what people
wanted to have for a long time, but for some reasons, they just could not afford those things
or they did not buy them. So, when they receive those things as gifts it makes them very
happy and they remember those moments for a long time. When I was a child my mother
could not buy me a bicycle because we did not have enough money at that time. So, when my
grandfather bought me my first bicycle it was the happiest moment in my life. Moreover, he
personally taught me how to ride and I spent all my spare time after that doing cycling.
To sum up, I think that people remember special gifts because they are presented with love,
care and come from special people.
Model Answer 3:
Usually, we get gifts on several occasions like birthdays, festivals and special moments in our
lives but we remember only a few of them because of the special person who offered it and
certain moment on which we have received. I will elucidate the reasons, why we
commemorate the special gifts in our life, in the following paragraphs.
These presents inspire us towards our goals in life. For example, I got a wrist watch from my
grandfather on my first day of college. I studied very hard to get admission in that institution.
I rarely put on this watch and treat it as sovereign of my grandfather. It encourages me
towards my goals and energises me when I depress due to some failure. In addition, it makes
me feel that my grandpa is with me even he passed away five years back. There is one more
very special gift in my life from my university friends.
Some gifts maintain lifetime bondage between the people. For instance, in the final year of
my university studies, my friends gave me a computer laptop on my birthday. Even they have
settled in different corners of the world but I am still in touch with them because of this gift,
whenever I see it, I recall my college days and this instigates me to phone them. In this way,
our friendship has become forever.
To sum up, presents show a specific affection from the givers to their recipients and they
have a mysterious power which can encourage people.
(Written by - Atchuta Viswanadham Pati)
Model Answer 4:
A gift is always special, but is there any special gifts one would remember? My answer
would be a definite yes. Special gifts are always fondled and nurtured no matter how old it
gets. An ideal exemplification supporting this context would be a gift from your loved ones.
Gifts always favour a better place for two hearts - the one gifting and the other being gifted,
in my experience one gift I am going to nurture for the lifetime would be the birth of my
daughter. Another would be a gift from my wife on an anniversary day. These are always
remembered and cherished because these gifts made an indelible impact on my mind.
Remembering things, though not unique to humans, we are only living creature which can
distinguish and remember, human physiology explains it better. Anything special always
procures a place in our brain, which can be retrieved when needed.
In some cases, it is not the person but the present itself that is valued more. For example, a
student awarded as the best cadet of the year. Such gifts that one receives in childhood are
most likely to influence him for future. Another case of influential gifts would be an object or
living being that is going to stay with you for a long time. An example would be my case
when the puppy that I got gifted from my mother at age of fifteen went on stay as my best
friend further. Next category of gifts remembered would be one that was out of reach
always; a mediocre person being gifted with an expensive car which he never dreamt of
buying would serve an example. Though it is said that gifts should not be valued or weighed,
some gifts like the expensive car reserve place in our memory mainly on its market value or
price.
In general, people remember gifts that become special in their life, few examples are
mentioned above. This process is a part of human nature as we are made of such complex
emotional bindings with objects or things that could give us pleasure.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 16 - We are becoming

increasingly dependent on computers
Details
Last Updated: Thursday, 22 March 2018 21:21
Hits: 68550
As part of a class assignment you have to write about the following topic:
We are becoming increasingly dependent on computers. They are used in

business, hospitals, crime detection and even to fly planes. What things will
they be used in the future? Is this dependence on computers a good thing or
should we be more suspicious of their benefits?
Model Answer 1:
Today, the computer has become an indispensable tool in our day-to-day activities. In fact,
we find it very difficult to get through a working day without it. In this essay, we will discuss
the usage of computers in the foreseeable future. Also, we will analyse how this dependency
will have negative impacts on the society.
To begin with, computers can be used in performing daily chores at the house. For instance,
cleaning of the home can be done with the minimum effort and time with the advent of robot
maids. In addition, teachers can use computers for teaching their students by staying at their
own place. In other words, tutors can arrange multiple classes in different cities at the same
time by the help of this tool. Thus, it is obvious that the computer can be used in household
work as well as for teaching purpose in the coming future.
However, inordinate usage of this tool has many disadvantages. First of all, human beings
will be replaced by this machine leading to the increase in the unemployment which is
intrinsically tied to the rate of the crime within the nation. Furthermore, the absence of
physical presence of teachers in the classroom can raise the problems of discipline within the
students. In other words, social development of these pupils will be harmed and thereby, will
cause a hindrance in the nation's social growth.
From above, it can be seen that computers will be used for various activities at home as well
as at educational institutions in the future. But, excessive utilisation of this machine can boost
the issues related to job causing rise in the crime and afflict the young people's development.
It is thus hoped that people will be made aware of the harmfulness of relying too much on
computers.
[by - Aqeela ]
Essay Type: Discussion + Argumentative.
A. What things computers will be used in the future?
B. Is this dependence on computers a good thing or should we be more suspicious of

their benefits?
Discussion: What things computers will be used in the future?
 In space exploration, the breakthrough in robots will lead humans to have access
farthest planets and stars. While robots have been sent to Mars, they could be sent to
farther stars.
 In medicine, digitalization will revolutionise distant microsurgery, procedures which
are controlled from a distance, helping people all over the world to be cured far better
than being expected.
 Criminals and crimes will be detected far easier ways than now. More highly-tech
satellites will be used to track fugitives escaping from jail or criminals escaping from
the crime scene by using of more developed digital sensors.
 Present communication systems like fax, mail or telegram will be just history for the
next coming generation.
 Customers will be able to find, select, and purchase their favourite item through the
web far simpler. For example, digital scent technology will help people to smell the
items via online shopping.
 Pilotless passenger planes will be used be aviation companies as avian digitalization
will develop more.
 Undersea exploration and reaching in the deeper sea level would be possible. That
would enhance our knowledge about the creatures of the sea and would help us to find
more resources for our foods and other needs.
 The computer would replace many manual labours in most of the manufacturing
companies.
 Traffic controls both in the highways and air would be fully automated and any
violation of traffic rules would be detected and fined instantly.
 Weather forecasts would be pretty accurate and reliable forecasts of natural calamities
would be easier to predict.
 Devastating weapons would be designed and used with the help of computer
technology in the near future.
 Mathematics, statistics, chemistry and Physics would enhance further with the high
speed and unimaginable calculating power of the computers.
 Teachers would be able to arrange multiple classes in different locations at the same
time by the help of computer based educations tools and the internet.
Arguments: Why the dependency on computers is a good thing.
 In many cases where calculation and long hour works are required, computers are
more reliable than humans. The amount of calculation a supercomputer can do in few
seconds would take the entire lifetime for a human.
 We can save our time. Computers assist us uploading data faster than other devices.
They can also contain massive data in a tiny storage device.
 They are more economical. By spending few hundred dollars of money to buy a
laptop, we can improve many other abilities. For instance, online courses are less
expensive than the regular training, so we have to have a computer and Internet for
connection.
 To save information and files, less space is needed when it comes to using computers.
 They can be used in workplaces which are hazardous for the human.
 Humans are biologically unable to reach certain places like far away in the space or
bottom of the sea where computer-riven robots could be sent.
 Computers follow our instructions and always act as they were made. Their usages are
controlled by the human. So negative aspects of computers are not their fault, the fault
is ours.
Arguments: Why we should be more suspicious of the benefits computers offer?

 Cyber-addiction has led humans to become more isolated, inactive, and depressed.
 Our data might be hacked by the professional hackers. Using of highly-tech soft-
wares, our information can be stolen easily.
 Accessing to some important data is costly, and users might be targeted by cybercrime
and lose all of their saved data. For example, a user’s bank password might be hacked
by a professional hacker and thousands of dollars might be stolen by him.
 Human workers and employees will be replaced by this machine leading to the
increase in the unemployment which is intrinsically tied to the rate of the crime.
 Addiction to computers has increased the prevalence of obesity. The more people use
their computer, the more they will become inactive and overweight.
 Any error with the computers can affect lots of human lives and can create chaos.
[The above-mentioned points should be helpful for you to generate your own ideas and then
turning them into a nicely written IELTS Essay. Add any point you think we have missed in
the comment section at the end of this article.]
Model Answer 2: (Source - Cambridge IELTS Book 1)

Computers are relatively new invention. The first computers were built sixty years ago and it
is the last thirty years or so that their influences has affected our everyday life. Personal
computers were introduced as recently as the early eighties. In this short time, they have
made a tremendous impact on our lives. We are now so dependent on computers that it is
hard to imagine what things would be without them. You have only got to go into a bank
when their main computer is broken to appreciate the chaos that would occur if computers
were suddenly removed worldwide.
In the future, computers will be used to create bigger and even more sophisticated computers.
The prospects for this are quite alarming. They will be so complex that no individual could
hope to understand how they work. They will bring a lot of benefits but hey will also increase
the potential for unimaginable chaos. They will, for example, be able to fly planes and they
will be able to co-ordinate the movements of several planes in the vicinity of an airport.
Providing all the computers are working correctly nothing can go wrong, but if one small
program fails--disaster.
There is a certain inevitability that technology will progress and become increasingly
complex. We should, however, ensure that we are still in a position where we can control the
technology. It will be too easy to suddenly discover that technology is controlling us. By then
it might be too late. I believe that it is very important to be suspicious of the benefits that
computers will bring and to make sure that we never become totally dependent on a
completely technological world.
Sample Answer 3:
Computers are relatively new invention and it's been only 50 years or so when the first
computer was evolved and till then computers have become an inevitable part of our life and
we cannot think even a single day without the uses of computers. From a small departmental
shop to a large corporate business, from traffic signal controlling to launching rockets, the
computer is a must. Again hospitals, offices, defence & intelligent departments, educational
institutes use computers at every level of their work and service. To understand that, we will
just have to go to a bank, where account holders' information and other financial figures are
kept on a server computer. If anything goes wrong with the server computer, the result is
overwhelming and devastating. Similarly, in a hospital where all data and medical records are
stored in computers and even these computers are used to do many intricate operations. Any
error with the computers can affect lots of human lives. It seems that computers are a very
vital part of the current world and as the speed and capability of computers increasing day by
day, we are becoming more dependent. From personal entertainment to collecting outer-space
data, from traffic controlling to DNA research, computers are the main tools to depend on.
In the future, researchers will use computers and the Artificial Intelligence to bring out the
result from most of the research. Human will try to gather more data on outer world and the
computer systems and computer controlled machines will be used to find a suitable
alternative for the world to live in. Scientists will invade inner-sea environment for more
resources. The education system will be mostly dependent on computers. As Artificial
Intelligence will improve in future, so will the robotics to replace humans by computers to do
most of the jobs. Lie detectors and DNA testing system will be flawless and the criminal
investigating departments will use the computers to find the clues of any crime. Satellite
communications and internet would be a part of our lives and all the present communication
systems like fax, mail or telegram will be just history for the next coming generation. Most
people will read from a computer screen and will write through a keyboard or voice
recognition systems. In short, Computer will be used in almost all levels of life from playing
video games till digital cyber war in future.
Throughout the history, human always invented and still trying to invent new tools and
machines to make our lives more secure and easy. But no other single device or tool had been
so influential like the computer. Day by day we're becoming more and more dependent upon
computers. In my opinion, we cannot stop using computers or even we can't lessen the uses
of computers. The development of technology will follow its own track no matter what we
think about it. Dependency is necessary but too much of it can be malevolent for the whole
human race when it comes in term of computers. So we must make sure that we are
controlling machines, not the machines controlling us. We don't want a scenario like the
famous Hollywood movie "Terminator", where human fighting for their existence against
their own created machines.


Sample Answer 4:
In my opinion, there is nothing wrong in depending on computers. They play a major role in
our daily life. Nowadays, parents want their child to study in a school which has smart
classrooms. Smart classroom consists of a projector, laptop or palmtop for each child.
Usage of computers at a hospital is vital because it helps the hospital management to keep
track of every patient's medical history. Also, computers are used in Electrocardiogram test,
Echo test and in many other tests which save millions of lives. Moreover, this cutting-edge
technology is also used in many sports like cricket, football and tennis. For example, in
cricket, Hawk-eye technology is used to find No-ball and leg-bye wickets.
Furthermore, without computers, it would have been impossible for us to find the presence of
water on the moon. Consider satellite- it plays a humongous role in Telecommunication and
without it human kind cannot think of communicating with overseas friends or relatives. My
cousin is just six years old, but she is watching videos in YouTube on her own, which implies
that computers attract younger generations. Though this advent in "state of the art"
technology has many advantages, it also has few disadvantages. Nowadays, children are
browsing adult contents on the internet which will surely spoil them. Due to much
advancement in technology, it makes a person lazy which is the potential cause of obesity,
diabetes and many such diseases.
In spite of having few disadvantages, dependency on computers is more appreciable but it

should be in limits. There should be an equilibrium between science and nature.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 17 - Compare the

advantages and disadvantages of three of the following as
media for communicating information
Details
Last Updated: Sunday, 08 October 2017 20:13
Hits: 56274
Compare the advantages and disadvantages of three of the following as media

for communicating information. State which three you consider the most
effective.
 Comic
 Books
 Radio
 Television
 Film
 Theater
Model Answer 1:
In our daily life, we communicate information through lots of different media like the
internet, televisions, radios, books, cell phones, films etc. We are living in such a time when
information is one of the most important issues and the information technologies as well as
the communication media greatly influence our lives. The rapid-growing websites and TV
channels are many of few little examples how media are spreading to make information
easily accessible. All the media for information interchange have advantages and
disadvantages and not all can attract all types of audiences. Comics, books, radios,
televisions, film and theatre are all very powerful media for communicating information. In
my opinion books, televisions and film among those aforementioned six media are most
effective.
Books are the witness of history and the main source from which we gain knowledge. From a
very ancient period till now, books have been working as the light-house for our society. In
our childhood, we gather most of our knowledge and skills from books. It opens new
horizons in front of us. The writer writes down their experiences, imaginations, knowledge,
explanation etc. about each and every issue of our lives. Books are the long-lasting protocol
to make a bridge among writers and readers.
However, all are not happy to read books. They expect something easier and more vivid.
Music, radios, films etc. are more appealing to them. Television is another powerful media.
Watching television is a part of our daily lives. Most of the people who have a TV set, watch
programs, news etc. with apt attention. It is a strong medium for Government and other
organisations to send their messages to the mass population. Program representatives also
broadcast the people's view and opinions about different controversial issues in TV programs.
However, this medium has lots of demerits and bad impacts. Government and politically
biased organisations often send negative and misleading news. Again young people watch
different satellite channels and try to adopt the alien culture which is really harmful for the
culture and tradition of a country.
Films are an audio-visual representation and can catch the attention of people from different
geographical locations, races and cultures. A good film can shape someone's morality and
doctrine and the film-makers with their huge amount of money, are so careful to make their
films realistic and eye-absorbing. Every film has a direct or potential message or moral. On
the contrary, some films also bring a wrong message to us. For example, protagonists are
always smoking in the films and it seems that smoking is a good and smart habit. It causes
many younger people imitate them smoking.
In conclusion, I would like to state that books, televisions and films are the most powerful
and effective medias for communicating information.
Essay Type: Comparing the advantages & disadvantages + Discussion.

A. Pick three most effective media for communicating information.
B. Compare advantages & disadvantages of these three media for communicating

information.
C. Explain why these three media are most effective for communicating information.
Comic:
Advantages: 'Comic' as a media for communicating information.
 Comic books provide information in the most interesting and interactive way to the
readers.
 It is more efficient for kids who are yet to start reading big books.
 Comics are often very effective to convey information and to produce an aesthetic
response to the readers.
 Readers of comic books find it very easy to remember the information delivered by
stories and cartoons in comics. It is less time consuming to read a comic.
 Comic books provide information to the reader in the most interesting and interactive
way.
 Comics represent the oldest continuous form of communication in history and a
much-revered form of communication between generations.
 Comics can transcend language and cultural boundaries.
 Comics and comics’ techniques could be used in various types of business and
technical communications. When Google launched its Chrome Web Browser the
accompanying technical documentation was a widely distributed comic book. The
visitors guide for the European Organization for Nuclear research is also a comic and
that proves the efficiency of comics to educate people.
 Comic readers do not have to spend a lot of time on reading. This is preferred by
many readers who do not like reading pages after pages.
Disadvantages: 'Comic' as a media for communicating information.
 While reading comics readers often do not pay attention to the main information due
to irrelevant cartoon or story.
 It can be a waste of time for readers who wanted to receive useful information from
comics.
 Comic books are often published based on pure fiction and imagination and might
have negative effects on the psychology of young kids.
 However, because of the simplicity of comic books, they can only communicate short
information.
 Comics are not as much informative as books are.
Books:
Advantages: 'Books' as a media for communicating information.
 Books are very instructive and effective in conveying information as they comprise
the writer's thought and life experience and are usually written over a longer period of
time.
 The book is a significant media to receive information ranging from basic skills to
professional knowledge.
 Reading books help us to nourish our mind and keep us moving forward in a positive
direction.
 A reader always has a wide range of choices to pick a book based on his/ her interest.
 Books are everlasting while the basic formation of other media changes a lot over the
time.
 Readers pay more attentions while reading a book and that is why they can learn
better from reading.
 Books are the accumulated version of history, knowledge, experience and wisdom.
Books have endless offerings and stories to bring out the best of creative readers.
 Reading books can give us an insight into many different cultures, and civilisations.
 The secret to a successful life is knowledge and information. The answers to nearly all
our problems and query are documented in texts somewhere.
 Books can stimulate and excite a reader’s imagination as well as arouse his curiosity,
thus bringing out the creative oneself.
 Books help to articulate our thoughts and reading books improve our vocabulary and
communication skill.
 Reading the book is like peeking into the minds of the greatest people - A book is like
a conversation with the writer and reading many books gives us an insight into the
thinking process of different writers.
 Intercultural understanding will be developed by reading more related books. Humans
will become more familiar with demographic of nations as they read more books
about them.
 Individuals will have a better comprehension, grammar, communication skill, and
more variety of vocabularies.
 Readers always have a wide range of options to read books that would entertain and
interest them.
 Books are portable and people can access it from almost anywhere.
Disadvantages: 'Books' as a media for communicating information.
 Books are not always attractive to many people. For those people, books are not the
greatest source of information and knowledge.
 It required more patience and time to read books.
 Book production requires cutting down trees, and that has a negative impact on our
environment.
 Information presented on books could be outdated in many cases.
 Sometimes a writer can instil an ideology to a reader and can influence his thinking in
a negative way.
 People have to have a high level of literacy to read some specific and advanced books.
Radio:
Advantages: 'Radio' as a media for communicating information.
 Accessible in anywhere and anytime, during driving or travelling.

 Radio is less costly than the other media devices, like TV. Unlike TV, which users
have to pay a monthly payment for cable, Radio does not need this cost.
 It is available in the rural areas as well.
 Have less detrimental issues.
Disadvantages: 'Radio' as a media for communicating information.
 No access to any visual features which TV has.

 Less being developed compared to TV or other media devices. Every year, new
versions of TV, like introducing of smart TVs, have led users to be satisfied more,
while there are no any significant changes in the technology of Radio.
 Less accepted by the new generation.
Film:
Advantages: 'Film' as a media for communicating information.
 Becoming familiar with other cultures by watching movies.

 Watching films is a kind of entertainment. People have less stressful lifestyle by
watching more films.
 Some films improve viewers’ relationships. Family films are the best ones helping
families to have a better communication.
Disadvantages: 'Film' as a media for communicating information.
 Cultural invasion can happen. Young’s minds are more affected by watching other
countries’ films.
 Addiction to watching film may be costly and time-consuming. We have to pay fees
for Netflix or the cinema and have less enough time to concentrate on our work.
 It can reduce juveniles’ study performance. Instead of studying, they spend their
precious time on watching plenty of films each month.
 Violence and sex scenes that are shown on movies can phenomenally increase the rate
of crime among viewers.
[The above-mentioned points should be helpful for you to generate your own ideas and then
turning them into a nicely written IELTS Essay. Add any point you think we have missed in
the comment section at the end of this article.]
Model Answer 2:
Communication media plays a vital role in today’s world. It enables us to stay informed of
the happenings in the entire world, provides access to real-time information, and entertains
us. There are different kinds of media in use today, namely comics, books, radio, television,
film, theatre etc. out of these, the most effective are the television, radio and books.
Television, or TV for short, is an electronic device that enables us to see and listen at the
same time to an act that has been recorded. These can be replayed any number of times.
News on a TV enables us to view the current events occurring in different parts of the world.
Video of an event can be telecasted live as it happens through remote satellite links. A TV
can also be a source of education and entertainment. Educational channels, such as Discovery
channel, telecast several interesting programs on topics such as wildlife or solar system.
Other channels, such as Star movies, telecast movies throughout the day.
A radio is an electronic device that uses microwave communication to send and receive
information. Unlike a TV, a radio cannot display an image or a video, and the communication
is limited to voice only. Typically, a radio is used for access information such as news and
live traffic updates. The information is conveyed on fixed bands of microwave frequency
called channels. A user can set the frequency of the radio to access a particular channel.
Books are the one of the oldest kind of communication medium. A book typically consists of
several pages, made from wood pulp bound together. A book is typically identified by a title
and an author, and optionally an ISBN number which identifies a book uniquely. A book
usually contains a material on a given topic, divided by sub-topics in form of chapters. Books
are often classified by genre, which is a theme in which the topic can be classified. Examples
of genres include fiction, non-fiction, science fiction, mystery etc.
Of all the communication media available today, television, radio and books are the most
important and effective ones. These are also the most commonly used media in the world
today and they are responsible for binding the world together.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 18 - Discuss the advantages

and disadvantages of having a car
Details
Hits: 90331
Some people claim that there are more disadvantages of the car than its
advantages. Do you agree or disagree? Discuss the advantages and
disadvantages of having a car.
Give reasons for your answer.
Model Answer 1:
In our lives, we travel from one place to another for a great variety of reasons and while
travelling we greatly depend on cars, whether it is a private car or a public bus. The number
of car owners is increasing every day because every person expects the freedom to travel and
comfort while travelling. And that is why most of us want to own a car. However owning a
car have many advantages and disadvantages as well.
The main advantage of owning a car is it gives the freedom to travel. If you have a car then
you don't need to be limited to fixed routes and timetables. Moreover, a car-owner can take
is/her family members with him/her and other necessary goods whenever he/she wish which
might have been impossible otherwise. In addition, personal cars give comfort while
travelling on the contrary to the public buses which are so crowded and disgusting. You can
read books, listen to music or even can play with kids while you are in your own car but those
all seems to be impossible in a public transport. On the contrary, owning a car is very
expensive. The price of the car, the cost of the tax, insurance cost, fuel cost, driver's salary,
car repairing etc. all must be considered before buying a car and that is why it is out of reach
of the middle-class people.
Moreover, private cars can not carry many passengers at a time yet occupy spaces in the
street. As the number of cars is increasing in the road so does the traffic jam. Perhaps the
major disadvantage of cars, in general, is the huge damage they do to the human health and to
the environment. More cars mean more pollution. The environment pollution is a serious
issue today and at any cost, we must reduce the amount of pollution and if we consider it then
owning a car is never a good idea.
To sum up, having a car gives someone freedom but if public transportation system is easily
accessible, safe and efficient, then the idea of buying and owning a car should be abandoned.
Essay Type: Agree / Disagree as well as Advantages & Disadvantages.
A. Do you agree that there are more disadvantages of the car than its advantages?
B. Advantages of having a car.
C. Disadvantages of having a car.
Note: This essay topic is a bit tricky. It is a combination of both "Agree/ Disagree" and
"Advantages & Disadvantages" type essay. First, you need to write whether you agree or
disagree that cars have more disadvantages that the advantages they offer. Again you need to
write down the advantages and disadvantages of owning a car. In the introduction part of the
essay you need to mention whether you agree or disagree. Then in the following paragraphs
you can write the advantages and disadvantages of cars and at the end of the each paragraph
you can summarise why having a car has more advantages than disadvantages and vice versa.
Disadvantages of having a car:
 Owning a car is expensive and requires additional costs to maintain and repair it. Not
all families can afford it.
 Cars have increased the level of air and noise pollution in cities, causing more humans
to suffer from respiratory, heart diseases, or cancers.
 City travellers have to spend longer hours on traffic jams. Using more private car, the
density of traffic has been increased phenomenally and citizens have had to stay
longer time on traffic load.
 As the number of private cars increased, more car passengers have been injured or
died by severe accidents.
 More pedestrians’ accidents have been reported annually. As the usage of private cars
increases, it is more probable that people walking through the street die by them.
 Private car is more expensive than the public transportation. Paying huge money for
tax, renewing of licence, or air care, people have to pay more for using cars.
 More fossil fuels are consumed as more cars are used by people, leading other
generations to face a shortage of these fuels.
 The governmental expense will be raised far dramatically. To build and maintenance
of more highways for more cars, hire more police force, the local government have to
consider a larger budget.
 The use of cars to commute has decreased the average health of car users as they do
not need to do any physical movement.
 The consumption of fuels to run the car is contributing to the rise if global warming
and affecting the ozone layer.
 The car owners need to worry about the safety and parking places for cars wherever
s/he travels.
 It saves the time as the commuters can reach his destination quickly than it would be
required in a public bus.
Agreement: Why cars have more disadvantages than advantages?

Considering all the disadvantages the cars have to the health, environment, government
budget and the hassle and expenses the car owners have to bear, it is quite clear that having a
car has more demerits and the advantages it offers.
Advantages of having a car:
 The private car is a convenient mode of transportation. Having more comfortable

seats, ventilation or other novel technologies help people to feel better than using
other methods, like a bicycle or a public bus.
 Users have a more secure privacy compared to using public transportation.
 This will increase more job opportunities because more workers will be involved in
working in car companies or as drivers, reducing the unemployment rate.
 The local state will have more budgets, paid by car owners’ taxes, to renew the roads.
Annually, car drivers have to pay hundreds of dollars for renewing their car insurance,
licence, tickets, or air care.
 Other industries have been developed as car industries developed. The more humans
use more private cars, the more car companies have to raise their technology, leading
other mother industries to be developed too.
 People can have absolute freedom on deciding the schedule and roads to reach their
destination.
 A private car owner can utilise his time but it is very tough to do so on a public bus.
 In a car, a person does not have to worry about the dust, noise and fumes present in
the road while in public transportation it is not always possible to avoid those.
Disagreement: Why cars have more advantages that disadvantages?
Considering the advantages the car ownership offers, I would say that it is more beneficial to
own a car than using public transportation. Many people might argue against owning a car
but I think most of them would buy a car if their financial condition allows them to do so.
[These ideas should be helpful for you to generate your own ideas and writing an excellent
essay on the given IELTS Essay topic should be easier for you. If you have new ideas that we
might have missed, add them in the comment section and we will publish it.]
Owning a car is a birth-right for some people while other people try their life-long to
purchase one. Apart from these two groups, there are certain people who do not dare to even
think about purchasing a car because of their miserable economic conditions. However, for
all those people the four wheel car is a fancy machine with advantages and utility. Owning a
car can also bring some drawbacks.
Among the advantages of owning a car, in my opinion, freedom of travelling is the most
important one. Someone who owns a car can plan his route, timing and destination. He won’t
have to wait for the schedule of a public bus, stand in a long queue, wait for hours for the bus
to arrive, and sit in the public bus uncomfortably. A person car gives the freedom, saves time
and the owner can utilise the time while he travels. Apart from that, he can carry the grocery,
goods and other valuables in the car at his discretion. Owning a car also offers the flexibility
of visiting relatives and friends who stay far away without much hassle of a public bus.
Taking a child or an old person in a public bus is quite impossible and owning a car would
facilitate someone to take his kid, old relatives with him if needed. The comfort and safety of
a private car can’t be achieved in a public car. In terms of expense, sometimes personal car
saves monthly expenses that would otherwise be required for a person if he travels
frequently.
On the other hand owning a car has some disadvantages as well. First of all, private cars
require the garage place and parking hassle. Sometimes the expenses on hiring a driver and
purchasing fuel might exceed the budget for the people who could have easily availed public
transportations for infrequent journeys. The traffic issue, paper renewal issue, tax, police
cases are sometimes too much to handle for the personal car owners. For example, if a public
bus gets busted in the middle of a road, the passenger can easily leave it a look for another
one. But in this same situation, a private car owner who was riding in his car would have to
take the burden of taking care of the busted car and reach to the automobile repairing centres.
In summary, though owning a car has some disadvantages, it offers many advantages as well.
Model Answer 3:
People need different modes of transportation to move from one place to another. In the
ancient time, they used horses and donkeys for this purpose and to carry their loads. With the
development of technology, people invented novel things such as cars, trains, aeroplanes,
ships and this development has further enhanced the flexibility and convenience of
transportation. Out of these vehicles, the private car is one of the best and most preferred
vehicles for people to commute from one place to another but not without consequences.
Private cars have many advantages. Due to this, people who can afford a private car, want to
own it. People with low-income class also dream to own a car one day. This simple
phenomenon shows how advantageous of owning a private car can be. With a private car,
people can plan their own journey, go somewhere whenever they want, take diversions to
avoid bad traffic, avoid long queue for ticketing and enjoy the utmost flexibility and privacy
of a soothing journey. This is a very handy thing in the emergency cases. For example, when
someone gets sick, his family members can easily take him to a hospital regardless of the
time. Finally, owning a private car offers someone the freedom to enjoy his time during the
journey while it is quite impossible on a public bus.
On the contrary, private car ownership has many demerits as well. It is far more expensive
than public transportation. The cost of fuel, driver, licence, insurance, maintenance, repairing
etc. will often increase the monthly expense for a family. Furthermore, those cars produce
toxic gas such as greenhouse gases, CO2 and CO that are harmful to the human health and
the environment. Private cars are the main reason for congestion on the roads and the
increasing environmental pollution.
To some up, I think the private car is a very useful vehicle that offers more advantages than
demerits to its owner. However, the environmental issues due to excessive use of cars should
not be ignored and we should use private cars absolutely when it is necessary and at other
times, we should use public transportations.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 19 - A company has

announced that it wishes to build a large factory near your
locality
Details
Hits: 39898
A company has announced that it wishes to build a large factory near your
locality.
Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of this new influence on your community.
Do you support or oppose the factory establishment?
Explain your position.

Model Answer 1: (Oppose the factory establishment)
To meet the demand of increasing population large companies, factories, etc are growing
faster than any other past time. New factory means new job opportunity. Again, a new factory
means more pollutions and a new threat to the environment. In the whole, new factories bring
good opportunities to a community but the risk it creates by increasing the environment
pollution is too much. In my opinion, the benefits of having a factory near my community are
out-weighted by the risks. That is why I strongly oppose the establishment of a new factory
near my community.
It is true that a new factory offers many positive things to the people. For example, a new
factory creates lots of job vacancies as well as many potential employment opportunities. It
also creates small business opportunities surrounded the factory. The authority of the factory
improves the transportation and communication systems of the area. It is often observed that
a locality having a large factory or industry offers better economic freedom than an ordinary
urban area.
But I believe, people of my locality are happy with their current economic condition. My
community is a beautiful and calm area with almost ignorable pollution. My community
would be harmed by a large factory. In particular, the factory will destroy the calm and neat
environment as well as will increase the air, water and sound pollution. In the long run, the
environment will be seriously hurt and people's health will be affected. Again the newly
created factory will make the community crowded. To accommodate more workers more
homes will be needed. I don't want to see too many cheaply constructed townhomes in my
locality.
I heartily believe this growth will change my community too much. I was born here and most
of my memories regarded of the area. I love my community very much. I feel that dangers of
the factory are greater than the benefits. So I would strongly oppose the idea of establishing a
factory near my community.
Essay Type: Advantages & Disadvantages + You opinion.
Main questions of this IELTS Essay:
A. What advantages your community will get from the establishment of the large
factory.
B. What difficulties your community will face from the establishment of the large
factory?
C. Do you support or oppose the factory establishment? Why?

Advantages: What advantages will your community get from the establishment of the large
factory?
 Local residents will be able to find more job opportunity in this factory and have a
better social status.
 Local retailers will pay less for transportation of goods due to having better access to
this factory.
 Because this factory needs the better quality of roads, transportation will be improved
for local citizens.
 Hiring more workers, the population of the region will increase far significantly,
which will cause the local government to pay attention more to basic infrastructures,
including transportation, education or healthcare.
 Local people’s lifestyles will be improved remarkably. Having better businesses and a
higher salary, the level of economic condition will be improved. They will have less
stressful lifestyle due to being able to have more record of travelling annually.
 The tourism industry will gradually develop because its products may attract more
tourists.
 To be employed in this corporation, more young have to become more educated, so
the level of educated juveniles will increase notably.
 Overall infrastructure of the area will be developed.
 This establishment would attract more businesses in the area and it would finally
boost the economic development.
Disadvantages: What problems and difficulties will your community face from the
establishment of the large factory?
 Air and water pollution caused by this factory will ruin the local environment and
wildlife fundamentally.
 People may suffer from more noise pollution, produced by gadgets, constructions or
vehicles transporting products.
 Local residents will pay for renting or purchasing of properties due to increasing the
density of population.
 The level of crime might increase because of raising the local population and visiting
more foreigners.
 Passing more vehicles carrying goods for the factory, traffic congestion will rise
notably.
 This factory will destroy the calm and neat environment we currently have.
 The pollution would cause many diseases among the community people.
 The land required for the establishment of the factory might be acquired by
deforestation or seizing fertile farmland which would have serious long-run
consequences in our community.
[These ideas should be helpful for you to generate your own ideas and writing an excellent
essay on the given IELTS Essay topic should be easier for you. If you have new ideas that we
might have missed, add them in the comment section and we will publish it.]
Alternative Answer 2: (Support the factory establishment)

People have argued about the plan of building a factory near the residential area. Some
people think that it will bring many benefits for the local society, while others believe that it
will have a negative effect on the environment. The following essay will discuss in details
about the advantages and disadvantages of it.
On the one hand, it is true that building a new factory near the local residential area will bring
a lot of benefits for many parties. Firstly, it will generate a lot of job opportunities for the
local people. It is common that a factory will absorb many employments, and for efficiency,
it will give priority in hiring the local people. Secondly, the plan will boost the economic
development of its' surrounding area. Many investors will build mini market, gas station or
restaurant as many of the factory's workers will seek these commercial places. As a result, it
will positively affect the real estate business of the surrounding area as well.
On the other hand, it is undeniable that the plan could also bring negative effects to the
society and to the environment. It is a fact that many factories are generating wastes and they
could create harmful effects to the local environment. For example, the waste water from the
factory might be directly flown into the local river and contaminated the surrounding
environment. And then, the factory might also generate some smokes which might be a treat
for the local people. These people might have some serious respiration problems due to
inhaling the polluted air. Therefore there should be a clear regulation and strict monitoring
over it in the future.
In conclusion, it is a fact that the plan of building a factory near a residential area will create
some pros and cons. In my opinion, I do believe that the positive sides of the plan outweigh
the negatives, as long as the plan follows the government regulation and it is clearly
monitored by the authority.
(Written - by Darwin Lesmana)
Alternative Answer 3: (Oppose the factory establishment)

From the very beginning of the modern society concept human have structured the
community in such a way where the commercial and industrial areas are separated from the
residential area. Even after so many new concepts around residential buildings and modern
cities, the basic concept of separating the industrial area from the residential area has
remained strong among the city architects and its adoption has been worldwide. So, I would
absolutely refute the idea of having a large factory near my community as it would have lots
of negative effects. To support my opinion I would consider reasons like pollutions and
disturbance to the calm ambience of the entire surrounding.
Factories manufacture and process different types of goods including electronics and
chemical goods. While it generates employment and revenue, it also pollutes the
environment. A large factory can be responsible for high noise pollution, water pollution and
air pollution. Water pollution can contaminate the hydra resulting in health problems to the
people of the society. Air pollution can annoy the residents who look forward to a serene
society at the end of a tiring day. It will also adversely affect the children by exposing them
to the polluted air thrown out by the factory. As a result, children will have to stop playing at
the playgrounds in the society and their mental and physical growth would be hampered.
Thus, pollution is the last thing the people of the society would prefer to deal with, in their
day-to-day life.
My society is located at a very neat and calm location. Having a large factory near the society
would result into disturbing the peaceful environment near our locality. The society offers a
nice park alongside a small lake which is used by elderly, exercise enthusiasts and animals
daily to freshen up and enjoy the natural bliss. With the advent of a factory in the area could
lead to spoiling the ambience of the park and the locality. To add to the sufferings, factories
would also increase the traffic in the locality. An increase in traffic means more time on
commute resulting in more stress for an individual.
To conclude, I would say that large factories do have advantages like more employment and
more revenue but it should not impact the residential areas. The factories should be built
outside the residential zone thus not disturbing the people living nearby. Thus, I would
recommend having the factories out of the city in the factory zone to realise its real
unadulterated benefits.

(This model answer was submitted by Deep Kagda)
Alternative Answer 4: (Neutral Notion)

Since the inception of civilisation, industrialisation has been a paramount requirement of
growth around the world. In fact, every government has ratified certain sets of rules for
establishing industries along with relevant departments to look after the policies' compliance.
Like any other process industrialisation too has pros and cons, and subsequently, people have
been debating over the appropriateness and formulating ways to curb its repercussions over
denizens.
Firstly, institutionalising factories brings a lot of benefits for local communities. First of all,
most industries require huge skilled workforce and thus, these crops up a lot of exciting and
rewarding employment opportunities. This has profound positive effects on the upliftment of
life standards of citizens as it accelerates the per capita income and the GDP. Apparently,
successful industrialisation also spurs foreign investment. For example- the establishment of
Tata Group in Jamshedpur, Jharkhand in 1909 helped the region to stride and today the
region is one of the most developed regions in the country. Secondly, there are many other
indirect benefits too. Any industry just does not create direct job opportunities for the people
who work inside the company's premises; it also presents some jobs to people who are not
qualified to work inside the company. For example, in any enterprise, we find many indirect
housekeeping and canteen workers.
On the other hand, industrialisation has some minor and few potential issues too. First of all,
many industries require a large piece of land and generally, it is acquired by deforestation or
seizing fertile farmland. Also, companies' waste materials are generally hazardous and pollute
the neighbouring environment. This leads to diseases, allergies and sometimes even
epidemics. In most of the cases, the direct employees are under the highest threat. Also, the
awry effects of local ecosystems cannot be ignored. Moreover, the life risk of industrial
accidents over local lives cannot be disregarded. For example, today, every country is reeling
under the side effects of Global Warming, a phenomenon whose onset is contributed to the
discharge industrialisation waste into natural resources like water, air etc., which defines the
rising temperature around the world and causing climate changes. Apparently, the proper
treatment of industrial waste is a worldwide challenge.
In my opinion, industrialisation is necessary for growth, but it must be regulated. The proper
measures must be in place to reduce the negative impacts of byproducts on the environment.
This can be ensured by enacting strict laws to mandate the proper treatment of hazardous
wastes before their discharge. On the other hand, to tackle problems like deforestation,
companies must plant a certain number of trees depending upon the intensity of deforestation.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 20 - Not everything that is

learned is contained in books
Details
Hits: 58028
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task
It is said that "Not everything that is learned is contained in books".
Compare and contrast knowledge gained from experience with knowledge gained from
books. In your opinion, which source is more important? Why?
Model Answer 1: (Notion: the knowledge we gather from our experience is far more
important)
Books are our best companions and source of knowledge from our infant time till the end of
life. Our learning begins by reading books. Books open new horizons in front of us. But
sometimes the hardest and most important lessons we learn in life come from our
participation in different situations. The things we learn in real-life can never be learned
through anything else. We can't learn everything from books and in my opinion, the
knowledge we gather from our experience is far more important, than anything else.

Of course, learning from books in a formal educational institution and learning from books
for someone's own interest are highly important. Books are like open doors. Whenever
someone read books, it helps the readers to broaden their power of imagination, to introduce
them new ideas. In facts, books are a fine collection of ideas, experiences, imaginations and
innovations of writers for the readers. But everyone's life is quite different than others. So, we
sometimes face a whole new situation. I believe, most important lessons cannot be taught. It
must be faced and learned all by ourselves. The experiences we gather from our daily life
help us to rectify our future act. We learn from watching a situation even if we are not the
part of it. We even learn from the stories we hear from our friends or family members about
some strange situations that have occurred.

No one can teach us how to live alone, how to share our feelings, how to create self-respects.
Those all must be learned from our experiences. Experiencing our own triumphs and disasters
is really the only way to learn how to deal with life. Books, teachers, parents give us
guidelines and our experiences give the perfection of it.


Essay Type: Compare & Contrast + Your opinion.
A. Compare and contrast knowledge gained from experience with knowledge gained
from books.
B. Which one is more important and why?
Compare: Comparing the knowledge gained from experience with knowledge gained
from books.
 Books present us true facts, history, subject matter expertise, story and knowledge
that we need to evolve as a true human. Our life experience also gives us wisdom,
knowledge and teaches us lessons to become the better persons we are.
 Books are the primary source of knowledge and enhance our horizon. Experience
gathered in life also provides us guideline and wisdom to broaden our horizon.
 Both are excellent sources of knowledge and unparalleled sources of great wisdom.
 Without reading, we cannot home our brain. Without experiencing things we cannot
learn how to deal with difficulties.
 Without reading books we can't become wise enough to gather the right experience
and lessons in our life.
 Books give us knowledge and our experience and practice hones it.
Contrast: Contrasting the knowledge gained from experience with knowledge gained
from books.
 Books provide us theoretical knowledge while our experiences give us firsthand

knowledge.
 Theories learned from books are often pointless if you cannot use it in our life.
 Lessons learned from books are often forgotten but we never forget our first-hand
experience.
 Lessons learned from an experience could never be learned from reading.
 Most important lessons in life can't be taught, but experienced.
 Books contain the experience gathered by many generations and their observation.
Experience is limited to a person only.
 Some knowledge could only be learned from books like the atmosphere of Mars but
can never be experienced by a person.
In favour of Books:
 Books are important to raise our concept about important subjects affecting our life,
like science, nature, or health.
 The materials we learn from books can help us to become more competitive in our
real life, at our job or study.
 Books increase our abstract thinking. We will be able to have better conceptual
thoughts if we analysis them before by reading more books.
 Reading more books, we will have better basics to create better frames in practice.
Those only trusting on their sole experience may make more mistakes.
 Books improve our self-confidence. Reading about experts’ opinions, we will able to
rely more on performance in practice.
 Books can help us to become successful businesspersons than those who just rely on
their experience.
 Humans can save their money as they read more due to using other professionals’
knowledge and experience written in books.
In favour of Practical Experience:
 Practical lessons help us to have more deeply understanding, while theory learned
from books will be forgotten far easier.
 Having a better experience, we can save our time. We may have to review several
times a book to learn about its subjects, while by having enough experience it is not
necessary we review them.
 By having more practice, we will become more flexible to critical conditions.
 Experience assists us to become more socially active. Instead of studying materials in
an isolated condition, for example in a library, we can meet more people by practising
more.
Sample Opinion 1:
I personally agree with those studying more books than those just relying on experience.
They will have a better performance in their work and education, more competitive, better
confidence, and more rich by saving more time than those just use their experience.
comment section.]

Alternative Answer 2: (Notion : Knowledge gained from books plays a very important
role in the modern life)
People are learning and practising through their entire life. I believe that life experience and
practice are the basic reasons of the humankind's evolution. However, in my opinion,
knowledge gained from books plays a very important role in the modern life.

The most obviously important advantage of books is that they hold all knowledge gained by
previous generations. People write books about their discoveries and inventions, which are
gained through practice and experience. This knowledge is accumulated in books that are
passed from generation to generation. So, basically, people get all knowledge about the
previous achievements from books, analyse it and then, according to their experience and
new data, write new books. In this case, books are the holders of humankind's experience.

For example, at old times people thought that the Earth was flat. It was concluded from
observations and studying. However, the next generations, using the experience of their
ancestors, proved that the Earth was round. Personally, I think that books are very important
because they are able to give people the basic and fundamental knowledge. Books store
history, the important events and discoveries. Without them, it is difficult and sometimes
impossible to move forward, make new discoveries and inventions.
To summarise, I think a person should take basic knowledge from books because it will help
him to make his own inventions, conclusions and discoveries. Only using both books and
one’s experience one can move forward.

Model Answer 3: (Notion: Wisdom can only be acquired through experience)
It is said that "knowledge is knowing that tomato is a fruit, wisdom is not putting it in a fruit
salad". It contrasts the difference between knowledge and wisdom. Knowledge refers to the
awareness of the facts surrounding an object or an activity, while wisdom refers to the
judgment as to how and when to use that knowledge. While knowledge can be gained from
conventional sources of information such as books, but wisdom can only be acquired through
experience.

We refer to sources of information such as books for knowledge in our daily lives, yet the
only way to master those skills is by practice. It is only through doing that one realises the
subtle intricacies of the actions being performed. This can be seen in our daily lives. At
college, students are given a coursework in programming that lasts about a semester.
However, it is not the coursework that makes them a good programmer in their profession.
Rather it is the constant experience they gain while they are programming that makes them a
better programmer. After spending a certain time in the profession, they may not remember
what they learnt in books but they can still be a good programmer.

History is filled with numerous examples that only underscore the above-mentioned fact.
Michael Jordan learned to play basketball during his high school days. That is when he learnt
the rules of the game. However, it was 'practice' that gave him the required experience to
hone his skills. The rules of the game did not change throughout his gaming career; rather he
became more and more adept every time he played the game to become a legendary
basketball player.

Thus, while books may teach a person how to do a particular task, they cannot sharpen his
skills at that task. It can only be done through experience.

(by Pankaj Kohli)

Model Answer 4:
Books are the great source of information since the dawn of time. Throughout history, books
passed the information from generation to generation. What we study in our educational life
helps us in our professional life. In the following paragraphs, I will explain my point of view.
Firstly, information gained from books are as important as from gaining experience, books
help us to learn basic knowledge we can call it a guide for professional life. For instance, my
friend Asif recently start working as an accountant and he told me that what I studied in
university through books is very helpful in practical life. This makes it clear that learning
books help us in our future.
In addition to this, Knowledge gained through experience help us to understand more clearly
what we read in the book. For example, my friend Junaid told me that when he wants to go
somewhere for dinner, outing or a strange place he also uses his street directory for directions
rather than GPS because next time it will be easy to go to the same place without a street
directory. This makes it clear that Learning from book and use that in practical life increase
our knowledge.
To sum up, whatever we study in a book is as important as learning through experience. It

has been proven that both are very important for learning. Thus, it is recommended that
knowledge gained from books or experience is never useless it will help us somewhere in our
future life so keep learning.

IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 25 - Fatherhood ought to

be emphasized as much as motherhood
Details
Last Updated: Sunday, 19 February 2017 20:14
Hits: 58858
Present a written argument or case to an educated reader with no specialist knowledge

of the following topic:
Fatherhood ought to be emphasized as much as motherhood. The idea that

women are solely responsible for deciding whether or not to have babies leads
on to the idea that they are also responsible for bringing the children up.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the statement?
You should use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your answer
with examples and relevant evidence.
Model Answer 1: (Neutral Notion)

For nine to ten months, a woman endures the drastic physiological and emotional changes
that pregnancy brings about. Because of this, a woman has the greatest right to decide on
whether she will have a child or not. An ideology exists that because women take full
responsibility for decisions about childbearing, she also is responsible for rearing the child. I
believe that this idea is absolutely faulty.
Firstly, decisions on childbearing may be greatly affected by the woman's choice. However,
other factors are also considered such as a couple's financial ability to support a child's
growth. Aside from that, parenthood is a shared responsibility. A father's role is not limited to
sperm donation but also includes changing diapers in the middle of the night. Also, a father
should always be involved in child rearing because there are activities that are best suited to
be done by a father figure, such as bringing the child to a sports event. Consequently, a child
who rarely sees one's father creates a negative perception of him and may possibly create a
stronger relationship with the mother alone.
In addition, women are different in the modern era. More women are breaking the traditional
view that they are confined to the four wall of the home as a housewife. Therefore, there
should be a joint agreement between both parents to divide the tasks. To cite an example, a
mother would send the child to school while a father will be in charge of picking up the child
after class.
In conclusion, I firmly believe that it is time to abolish the idea of putting the entire child
rearing work on women. The idea of shared parenthood must be implemented to keep up with
the change in family dynamics that occurred over the years.
[Word Count =298 | Written by - Denise Tubat ]
Model Answer 2: (Neutral Notion)

I believe that child-rearing should be the responsibility of both parents and that, whilst the
roles within that partnership may be different, they are nevertheless equal in importance. In
some societies, it has been made easier over the years for single parents to raise children on
their own. However, this does not mean that the traditional family, with both parents
providing emotional support and role-models for their children, is not the most satisfactory
way of bringing up children.
Of crucial importance, in my opinion, is how we define 'responsible for bringing the children
up'. At its simplest, it could mean giving the financial support necessary to provide a home,
food and clothes and making sure the child is safe and receives an adequate education. This
would be the basic definition.
There is, however, another possible way of defining that part of the quotation. That would say
it is not just a father's responsibility to provide the basics for his children, while his wife
involves herself in the everyday activity of bringing them up. Rather, he should share those
daily duties, spend as much time as his job allows with his children, play with them, read to
them, help directly with their education, participate very fully in their lives and encourage
them to share his.
It is this second, fuller, concept of 'fatherhood' that I am in favour of, although I also realise
how difficult it is to achieve sometimes. The economic and employment situation in many
countries means that jobs are getting more, not less, stressful, requiring long hours and
perhaps long journeys to work as well. Therefore it may remain for many a desirable ideal
rather than an achievable reality.
Answer 3:
Traditionally, gender role issue has always discriminated women and it is considered a
woman to be responsible for the upbringing of children. Nowadays, these traditions are
changing gradually. It is agreed that both parents should share these responsibilities and at the
same time should support each other. This can be proved by looking at how fathers who
spend the whole day with their children can be a good motivator for them and mothers are
becoming the bread-earners for the family. Also, it is agreed that fathers motivate their
children more than mothers do. For example, males are more interested towards sports
activities.
Firstly, some people argue that mother should take care of the Family, especially the kids;
however these thoughts have changed over the time and nowadays fathers have started
sharing parental and domestic responsibilities. So, by taking their children to sports events
such as football matches, swimming, etc. will develop an interest for sports in them. This
shows that fathers can motivate a child to become a sports person.
Secondly, the tradition of women is to stay at home and bringing up children have changed
and women have started taking work from all fields, along with this they also take care of
their children. For instance, it has been seen that many working women take maternity leave
during and after their pregnancy period and continue to work after these leaves. Some women
prefer to do work from home if provided by their employer. In some cases, women may have
better career prospects than their husbands. So, the father had to take paternity leave and
become a househusband, which is becoming more common nowadays. Thus, it is clear from
the above discussion women can be a bread-earning person for a family.
Following this look at how both parents share responsibility for caring their children. Thus, it
has been proven that fathers are equally responsible for the upbringing of their children.
(Total words: 317 | Written by Zuber Mansuri)
Answer 4:
In the past, it was a common custom that the one who was responsible for the upbringing of
children - was the mother only; the fathers' responsibility was to earn the livings and provide
a good life. However, a change in the belief took place in the previous few years; nowadays,
some people claim that fatherhood should be emphasised much more. Although some people
see that fathers must contribute in the bringing up of children and it's not only mother's
responsibility, other people still see that it's only mother's responsibility.
"Of course me and my husband, George!" said Miss Karmen when she was asked who was in
charge of bringing up her child, she added, "Oh, I really cannot do this alone; my child needs
both of us". If a child interacts and plays with his mother only, that will lead to improper
dealing with other people including his dad. The fact that father for money and mother for
upbringing is absolutely outdated.

A kid needs both the father and mother's care but father would be mostly busy at works so
ultimately the mother would have to spend more time with the kind. But the father should
spend as much time as possible with his kids after getting back from the work.
Actually, some people still adhere to their point of view regardless the prior information
claiming that parents must contribute, yet in their way; each one is responsible for only one
thing. We have an example, Robert Frans, a teacher in a high school in Australia; he said:
"Why I have to tire myself more, it's my wife's own business". For me I actually think that
fatherhood ought to be emphasised, but not as much as motherhood. I think mothers' share in
upbringing should be more than that of fathers.
(Total words: 304 | Written by Abdullah Hassan)
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 22 - A University should

accept male and female students equally
Details
Last Updated: Tuesday, 28 November 2017 20:18
Hits: 66049
Present a written argument or case to an educated reader with no specialised knowledge

A University should accept male and female students equally in every subject.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the above statement?
Model Answer 1:
(Agreement: A University should accept male and female students equally)
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.
Essay Type: Argumentative (Agreement or Disagreement).
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.
1. 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.

2. Males and females pay the same rate of taxes, so they must be given similar
opportunity.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. This will ensure the women empowerment and the society would benefit from this
arrangement.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. Chances of gender discrimination in the classrooms would greatly reduce.

9. 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.
1. 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.

2. 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.

3. It can be costly. Governments have to consider larger budgets for admitting an equal
number of males and females.

4. The level of sexual violence can be increased fundamentally.

5. Reserved quota for females would be discriminating for some talented male students.

6. University education should be based on talent and performance, not based on equal
gender opportunity.

7. 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.

8. A form of natural selection will take place: survival of the fittest; and the end result
would benefit us all.
[The above points should be helpful to generate your own ideas and then turning them into a
nicely written IELTS Essay. Add any point you think we have missed in the comment
section.]
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.

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:
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.
(by Narges Mahmoudi)
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.
(by Anoop Veliyath Asokan)

Model Answer 6:
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 students in every
subject.
[ Written by - Syed Nouman ]
Model Answer 8:
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.
(Written by Rahul Rashu.)
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 27 - When a country

develops its technology the traditional skills and ways of
life die
Details
Hits: 58738

of the following topic.
When a country develops its technology, the traditional skills and ways of life
die out. It is pointless to try and keep them alive.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
You should use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your arguments
with examples and relevant evidence.
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.

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.
(This model answer was written by Khalid Ibrahim )

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.

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.
(This model answer was submitted by Keith )
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.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 39 - Nowadays we are

producing more and more rubbish
Details
Last Updated: Saturday, 16 December 2017 21:52
Hits: 62718
Nowadays we are producing more and more rubbish. Why do you think this is
happening? What can governments do to help reduce the amount of rubbish
produced?
Model Answer 1:
The modern society is generating an increasing amount of waste and the waste management
has become one of the pressing issues both in developing and developed countries. With the
inevitable rise in population and industrialisation, this problem will be further aggravated.
The government can help decrease waste production by educating the public and by
promoting recycling.
The global population has reached a staggering seven billion recently. Solid waste is a by-
product of this phenomenon. This number is expected to balloon to nine billion by 2050 if the
current trend goes on. The amount of trash produced is likewise expected to rise.
Manufacturing industries also contribute to the total of accumulated waste. While market
demands go higher, the number of factories built also increases to satisfy this demand.
This unsavoury problem has taken centre stage as the world focused on tackling global
warming. One way that the government can help alleviate this burden on the environment is
by educating the culprits – the general public. By promoting the use of reusable bags when
shopping, the amount of plastic bags can be greatly reduced. Furthermore, the government
can also run advertisements and put up posters in ways that a household can reduce the trash
it generates. Another step that the government may undertake is through sound recycling. It
must invest in a technology that can be managed through the municipal level. To encourage
its citizens to adhere to this program, collection areas for recyclable materials must be
accessible. Sweden has set these areas within 300 meters from residential areas and so far
they are succeeding.

To conclude, it is a fact that the human population will continue to rise. In order for the
world’s natural resources remain sustainable, the government and the public must cooperate
to find a solution to this ever-present problem.

(Written by - Rhod S )
Model Answer 2:
Of late, humans are producing a ginormous amount of garbage - both domestic and industrial.
There are many causes for the proliferation of rubbish these days. This essay delves into the
causes and the remedial actions by the government to subdue the acute problem of debris.
To begin with, the rapid growth of garbage is directly linked to the overwhelming number of
population. To elucidate, As the number of people grows the number of products they
consume also rises. This, in turn, inflates the waste production. Moreover, to meet the
growing demands, new industries have to be set up which aggravate the situation further. To
add more to that, modern life is practising throw-away culture. As the name suggested,
people are less interested in using repaired commodities. Instead, they dispose old project and
buy a new merchandise.
There are numerous steps that a government can undertake to alleviate this condition. For
instance, as plastic makes up almost 70 percent of the hoard of garbage, many authorities
have put a ban on polythene usage. The other steps involve, government to exert strict
ordinance to monitor the waste produced by industries. Furthermore, they can take up the
initiative to encourage citizens to keep their surroundings clean.
To recapitulate, the rise in population is the primary factor for an increase in littler. Another
prominent attribute is the fostering of the throw-away culture. The government can take many
measures to fight this problem. Few of them are banning eco-unfriendly products, applying
stringent supervising on factories and encouraging residents to keep the community clean.
[Written by - Mashood Basha]

Model Answer 3:
In our highly industrialised era, there is a growing awareness about the excessive amounts of
trash people producing. We are about to be flooded by different types of garbage if certain
measures will not be taken. This essay will explore some causes of this and propose ways to
solve the problem.
To begin with, different food producers decided that their products will be selling better if
they will pack them in small-sized boxes and packets. These colourful and attractive packs go
straight to the trashcan; the number of packs is growing along with the consuming growth.
More consuming produce more waste. Government and businesses encourage consuming
because it leads to high profits and development of state economy. They are not interested in
using something for a long time. Society is being bombarded with commercials, pleading to
buy, for instance, a new mobile phone; buying new things because throwing away old but
good things.
The problem of garbage is very complicated. As we can see, the government is not interested
in reducing consumption. Thus, the responsibility has to be taken by individuals and non-
governmental organisations. Certain laws, regulating the percentage of packaging material
per tonne of the product should be established. Moreover, interesting programs, involving
people to participate can be developed. For example, a bonus for not asking for a plastic bag
in supermarkets or for buying extra large packs of food.
In addition, everyone should become concerned about the future of human beings and our
planet. If we do not wish to be buried in rubbish, we should think twice before buying things
we do not need.

Model Answer 4:
Nowadays humans are producing more and more rubbish. Scientists argue why this problem
appears in human life. The role of governments in reducing the amount of rubbish should be
more or less.
The amount of waste we produce has increased. This problem is a result of our consumer
culture. Advertisers encourage us to buy the newest fashions. If something breaks, we throw
it away and buy a new one. Products are not made to last. The amount of household waste is
growing because most foods are sold non-biodegradable plastic packaging. This waste ends
up in landfill sites. People do not think about the consequences of dropping rubbish. They
assume that somebody is responsible for cleaning the streets, but they do not know who is
this somebody. Most of the litter seen on streets is fast food packaging. The plastic packaging
does not break down easily.
Companies should make goods that last longer. They should not use so much packaging.
Governments should be stricter, about waste produced by companies. They should put legal
limits on the packaging. Consumers should avoid buying over-packaged products. We should
recycle and reuse useful materials. There are collection banks for paper, glass and plastic
bottles. Households can use several rubbish bins to separate waste. Recycling saves energy
and raw materials. Governments should invest in transforming human culture, away from
consumerism towards a culture of sustainability. They could impose green tax on drivers and
airline companies. Government campaigns should promote recycling. Individuals should also
try to be greener. We should recycle as much as possible.
To summarise, it seems either governments or people should be responsible for the amount of
rubbish is produced. Also, all human being should learn to be more environmentally friendly.

(by Reihan )
Model Answer 5:
The environment today is threatened by many factors such as air pollution and so on.
However, among the most concerning is the increase in the amount of waste production. It is
argued that the main causes of this are the availability of poor quality products and over-
population. To tackle these issues, government's role will be analysed for viability.
To begin with, consumerism plays a key role in the rise of garbage around the world.
Nowadays, people prefer replacing the old items with the new one when the existing one
stops working, which in turn adds to the waste produced. In addition, the increase in the
count of inhabitants means more people throwing the products which directly increases the
quantity of sewage produced. Thus, it is apparent that both these factors are dependent on
each other and thereby, contribute equally towards the rubbish addition.
To counter this, the government can play a major role by monitoring the objects
manufactured by the companies. In other words, they can enforce these organisations to
produce durable items which can be used for the longer duration. As a consequence,
disposing of products will be minimised and hence, the amount of waste produced will also
be reduced to a greater extent. Along with this, legal entities should concentrate on educating
society about the negative effects of excessive population and work together for controlling
this growth.
As it is clear, that population rise and less robust equipment's have led to the boost in the
sewage within the nation. It is thus hoped that the government will implement regulations for
developing sturdy products and thus, discourage people from creating rubbish.

(by Aqueela Mansuri )
Model Answer 6:
It is undeniable that the increment of rubbish is giving problems to the society. In my
opinion, this issue did not exist in the past, until thirty years ago, the change of human
behaviour. There are a few reasons that cause the volume of rubbish increase. Let me
illustrate the causes.

First of all, from my point of view, one of the main reason for increasing rubbish is, overly
purchase habit of people. Often, people nowadays tend to buy more than what they really
need. It is very clear and obvious that whenever there are promotions, the sales volume will
increases. As a result of that, people buy items that will not be used for a period of time and it
will then be thrown away. Therefore the volume of rubbish is increasing.
Apart from that, I would say, the lack of recycling practices in the society is another main
reason. Recycling could reduce the volume of rubbish in the world by reusing the thrown
away materials. By doing so, it could also reduce the usage of natural resources.
Last but not least, a proper way of disposing of wastage and rubbish is a must. By
implementing a proper way of disposing of rubbish, it could save cost and manpower to
control the volume of rubbish at the same time.
In conclusion, it is essential to control the volume of rubbish in the society. The government
could educate the citizen with the knowledge of reducing rubbish in a good way. The
government could hold campaigns, advertise or even educate the citizen, starting from young,
maybe from primary school. If this issue continues to go on, it would cause damages to the
earth, action must be taken before it is too late. I believe, government and citizen must work
together in order to achieve this goal, as all things can be done with unity.

(by - Micheal Chai )
Model Answer 7:
It is evident that people are generating more waste these days. There are reasons that lie
beneath the issue and this essay will discuss them, and also will discuss some of the solutions
that governments could do to resolve it.
It is a fact that the amount of garbage that people produce these days has increased rapidly
compared to the past. The main reason is due to the significant growth of the world
population in the past few years. It is undeniable that waste production will automatically
increase when the world population grows, as every individual will surely generate some
wastages. Another reason is that people's lifestyle has changed these days and they have
adopted a throwaway habit. It is noticed that people prefer to use plastic bags or plastic
mineral bottles rather than to bring their own permanent bags or bottles. Many people do not
realise that plastic wastages need around one hundred years to be decomposed. People
nowadays change their electronic gadgets and appliances more frequently than ever before.
This kind of living has seriously impacted the amount of rubbish that is produced each day.
There are some considerable solutions that governments could do in order to resolve the
issue. Firstly, governments should make a clear regulation about limiting the usage of plastic
bags and bottles. For example, governments could give tax incentives to retailers who reduce
the usage of plastic bags and replace them with recyclable paper bags. Secondly, they could
also make campaigns to the society about the negative effects of plastic bags and bottles to
the environment. Campaigns could be made in the form of posters, short video clip or even a
documentary film which can be easily accessed by the public. Furthermore, people have to be
more careful about waste dumping and taking responsibility for waste recycling. By
considering to these soluble solutions, it is hoped that the garbage production will decline in
the future.
In conclusion, it is true that nowadays people are producing more garbage than ever before. It
is mainly due to the significant growth of the population, the usage of plastic materials and
people's lifestyle. Some of the solutions that governments could do would be by setting clear
regulations and making awareness campaigns to the society while people have to participate
in waste recycling.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 36 - The threat of nuclear

weapons maintains the world peace
Details
Last Updated: Tuesday, 04 October 2016 12:50
Hits: 47727
The threat of nuclear weapons maintains the world peace. Nuclear power
provides cheap and clean energy. The benefits of nuclear technology far out-
weight the disadvantages.
Do you agree or disagree?
You should write at least 250 words
Use your own knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and
relevant evidence.
Sample Essay 1:
Some countries are developing their nuclear weapons these days, and it becomes a serious
threat to the world peace. But it is undeniable that nuclear technology is clean for the
environment and offers low-cost energy source. Therefore a lot of people believe that nuclear
technology has more positive sides than its negatives. I personally disagree with the statement
and the following essay will discuss in details about it.
To begin with, even though nuclear power could be used as an alternative source of energy,
but some parties could misuse the technology. Nuclear power plants can be used as
propaganda by some countries, whereas they will tell the public that they only use the
technology for power generation purposes. But, the public would never know what lies
behind their plants, as they might be developing an advanced and sophisticated nuclear
weapons.
And then, although nuclear power plants are safe to the environment and cheaper in cost,
many people still believe that they are a serious threat to the surrounding areas. Some
countries have tried to manage their nuclear power plants cautiously, but sometimes
unexpected events happen and cause a serious effect on the surrounding areas. For example,
it is undeniable that Japan is well known for its advanced, effective and modern nuclear
technology. But in the year 2010, a tsunami had struck one of the country’s power plants, and
as a consequence, it caused a leakage in the plants and many casualties were found.
I believe that that weapon of much destruction is always a threat to the world and it is hard to
believe that a weapon can maintain world peace. The history tells us how the weapons have
destroyed millions of lives and have caused severe damage to our environment.
In conclusion, although nuclear technology could be used as a clean and cheap source of
energy, I strongly disagree with it. Even though strict monitoring is made sure for those
nuclear plant and research centres, some countries might secretly use it as a weapon. And
then, no matter how well the power plants are built, they could still be a threat for our
civilisations, as we could never predict that any natural disaster could hit these power plants
anytime.
[ Written by - Darwin Lesmana ]
Model Answer 2:
Nuclear power is an innovation of the modern science. It is the key source of nuclear
weapons. Nuclear technology can be used for our benefits as the natural resources are limited
and being exhausted every second. It can be the most efficient alternative to fuel, electricity,
and other types of energy. But yet nuclear weapons are a threat to our existence and single
misuse of this giant power can destroy our civilisation.
Many of the first world countries have achieved the nuclear power and have become a
superpower. It can initially seem that mono-polarization of nuclear power preserves world
peace but the idea is not agreeable always. The present world is not in a position where
powerful countries will shout at weaker and the peace will prevail. The reality is we notice
lots of suicide bombing attack and the hatred; the wrath of the people is so acute that they
won't even think about the existence of our civilisation. To maintain peace there must be a
peaceful way. Anger, Power threat and domination can't keep the peace in the worlds. So I
disagree with the statement that nuclear weapon can maintain the world peace and far-weight
the disadvantages but I do agree with the idea that nuclear power can be a great source of
cheap energy.
It is very much true that nuclear power is an alternative and perhaps the most efficient source
of energy during these days of the energy crisis. Unlike other natural resources such as
petroleum or gas , it is highly effective for industrial, transportation and other purposes and it
is pollution free. As it is limitless, there is no question of its being used up like other natural
resources like natural gas. Moreover, to control the over-increasing environmental pollution
we have to use this technology in every applicable field. One day we all will be bound to use
nuclear power to continue our life when there won't be any natural gas, fuels at all.
However, this power is not available to all walks of life. Even it is absent in many countries
who are searching for an alternative energy source. Only a few countries can produce it and
unfortunately they are very strict to conceal their technology. Without having easy-access, a
source of energy can not be a good one. Besides nuclear power needs the utmost and very
careful handling, in the case of any indulgence, or any misuse can cause a huge loss of life
and property. For instance, Chernobyl Nuclear Plant hazard affected a huge loss of lives. The
balance of ecosystem was completely disturbed and even now, after this long time, people are
affected by the nuclear side-effects. This is one but not the only incidence of radioactivity and
we must be cautious about what might happen in future.
In addition, nuclear power tends superpower to dominate others. It has become general that a
superpower can easily attack a weak nation with any lame cause but negotiate with
superpowers. But this is not going to be the common scenario always.
In conclusion, the nuclear power can be used for our benefit or even for destruction. This
totally depends on the ideology, humanity and our well-thinking. So we must use it for our
betterment, not for our destruction.

Model Answer 3:
Nuclear energy is a two sided sword. On the one hand, it provides sustainable clean energy, while on
the other hand, it provides weapons of mass destruction. However, I believe the benefits of using
nuclear energy far outweigh its disadvantages, and it is essential to the world peace.
Throughout human history, man has derived energy by burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil and
natural gas. Excavation and burning of fossil fuels on a large scale for factories and automobiles have
disturbed the ecological balance of nature and is leading to pollution and global warming. In
contrast, nuclear power provides a clean source of energy as it does not release any harmful gases
into the atmosphere. Energy generated using nuclear power is even cheaper than that generated by
burning fossil fuels. The radioactive waste products of nuclear energy can be kept in specially
created containers so that they do not disturb the environment.
Opponents of nuclear energy always cite the risks of a nuclear war by the development of nuclear
weapons. However, it is interesting to note that till today there has not been a single major war
between states possessing nuclear weapons. The United States and Russia were rivals during the
cold war. However, they never went to a war as doing so would mean destruction on a large scale on
both sides. India and Pakistan fought three major wars since their independence. However, after
possessing nuclear weapons, there has not been a single major war between them. Possession of
nuclear weapons acts as a deterrent to war, as a war between two nuclear weapons state would
lead to catastrophe on both sides. The only use of nuclear weapons the world has seen is on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the United States during World War 2. Both the cities were levelled with
tens of thousands of people killed instantly and more than thousands later by the radiation
poisoning. Mankind cannot afford such devastation.
In light of the above arguments, I believe the benefits of using nuclear energy far outweigh its
disadvantages, and it is essential to the world peace.

(Approximately 345words)
(by Pankaj Kohli)
Model Answer 4:
The use of nuclear power has been one of the most controversial issues over many years. Although
there seem to be clear benefits of this power, its drawbacks can never be underestimated. I,
however, strongly agree that the pros of this technology are much more than its cons which will be
discussed in this essay.
Those who are against nuclear weapons present their arguments on the base of the threat it
presents to the world. These powerful weapons, if goes into destructive hands, would be devastating
enough to wipe off an entire city in minutes. The two cities of Japan namely Hiroshima and Nagasaki,
destroyed during the Second World War can be taken as examples. Furthermore, natural disasters
like earthquakes and Tsunamis might, at any time, collapse the nuclear power plants. This will not
only kill thousands of people by their radio hazards but also might leave negative impacts on the
future generations.
Nevertheless, the merits that nuclear weapons bring are crucial to the world. Firstly, it is the
cheapest source of energy, a tremendous amount of energy can be produced to meet the demand of
the growing population with very little resources. So, the use of organic fuels can be cut down. In
addition to this, it is pollution free so the global warming and greenhouse effects might be reduced
to some extent by replacing fossil fuels with it. The natural resources like fuels and oils would not
last forever and then the nuclear power can be the best solution as a source of energy. It would be a
cheaper form of energy as a single nuclear power plant can provide the energy required to run a
whole city.
Therefore, I would like to conclude that in spite of some drawbacks of nuclear weapons and power,
their advantages are enumerable. They should however, be used with safety and precautions.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 37 - Alternative forms of

transport should be encouraged and international laws
introduced to control car
Details
Hits: 33621
Present a written argument or case study to an educational reader with no specialised

knowledge of the following topic:
The first car appeared on British roads in 1888. By the year 2000, there may
be as many as 29 million vehicles on the British roads. Alternative forms of
transport should be encouraged and international laws introduced to control
car ownership and use.
What are your views on this issue?
Model Answer 1:Modern life is almost impossible without motorised transportation and
people are to move so frequently that they always want to own cars. In fact, transportation
has become one of the most important parts and parcels of our lives. As the number of total
population is increasing day by day, so do their demands and needs for modern transportation
facilities and that is why the number of vehicles has increased rapidly all over the world.
However, for the last few years, the air pollution has reached an intolerable level and it is the
motorised vehicles that have been creating this acute problem with other factors. Currently,
almost 58 million vehicles are running alone on the roads of Britain and day by day this
number will increase geometrically. In fact, the problem began with the rapid development
and growth of the cities and because of increasing demand of people and it is badly needed to
control it for our own benefits.
It is true that with the development of the civilisation, the number of cars has increased on the
streets and resulting air pollution, accidents, scarcity of fuels, sound pollution, and so on. But
we can not avoid or cut off cars from our life overnight because life today has become hasty
enough with routine work, office jobs, travelling, holiday activities, amusement etc. and
without cars, it would be more troublesome. Therefore I believe that it is important to control
the use of cars and to introduce an alternative form of the transportation system as well.
Increasing the price of the fuel might be a solution as it will discourage people to drive cars
so frequently and for those who are settling their mind to buy a new car. The cars omit
Carbon dioxide, Carbon-Mono-Oxide and other harmful chemicals which are dangerous for
the environment as well as for public health.
To reduce the use of cars, we can introduce some alternative transportation systems like
underground railway, city coach service, train service, subtle train etc. If the transports are
easily available and comfortable, people will be encouraged to use those to reduce the cost of
owning private cars. Some non-motorized vehicles such as bicycles and rickshaws can be the
substitute for the motorised vehicles. Once people are aware of the effects of global warming
and air pollution, they will definitely use those forms of transportations for their own
betterment. Those vehicles are environment-friendly and in some countries people have
already started using bicycles instead of cars, for example, China. If we can introduce river-
based cheap and user-friendly transports and try to make them favourite among people, then
it will be definitely helpful for the environment. This type of river-based transportation
system has been already introduced in countries like Brazil.
On the other hand, introducing a new law to regulate car ownership is also important. If there
were an existing rule that any family can not buy more than one car, the rapid increase of the
car could have been controlled. Besides, Government should introduce a heavy tax on
purchasing cars.
In summary, increasing use of cars and fuels is an acute problem for all of us. This problem
can only be solved by introducing a new form of cheap and comfortable transports and by
enforcing and introducing new strict laws. Otherwise, life in cities will become tougher with
traffic jam and serious air pollution.
Model Answer 2:
Transportation is one of the human tools of development. That is why all countries are
concerned about that topic and support research and initiatives in this field. The quality of
transportation of individuals and goods affects strongly on economic growth. That article
focuses on individual transportation and how transportation modes have been changing
trough years from 1888 to 2000.
At the end of 19th century, there were few transport forms and all of them were simple with
very slow speed except cars. Number of cars in that time period was not so high to extend
that caused traffic, fuel or environmental problems. Therefore there was no motivation to
invent innovative transport systems and modes.
With the passage of time from 19thcentury till now transportation demands and needs have
been greatly increased. The dramatic increase of numbers of cars especially in last three or
four decades forces all states to establish bridges, tunnels, highways etc. These different kinds
of infrastructures and superstructures have extremely high costs. Such costs affect on the state
budget and lead to undesirable cuts of education, health and other services’ share in the
annual budget. As those sectors are so vital, essential and cannot be cut for the sake of the
transportation sector, stakeholders started thinking about new transport planning concepts and
strategies which contribute to solving all transportation-related problems.
Those problems are economical, environmental and social problems. Most of the experts in
the field of ‘Urban Planning and Transportation’ admit that decreasing number of private cars
is the best effective way to solve all the previously mentioned problems. There are many
ideas which can help reduce private cars in the streets like public transportation, carpooling,
and encouraging bicycles as transport modes. It requires many actions and promotion to
convince people to leave their own cars and use such alternative modes. These actions can be:
improving public transportation, providing a discount on bicycles, giving priority to public
transportation through special bus lanes and raising fuel prices etc.
In summary, the whole world should encourage alternative modes and forms of transportation
to compete with the traditional mode which is private cars. That will make our mother Earth
greener and a better place to live in.
[ by - Taha]
Model Answer 3:
In today’s fast moving world where cars play an important role, it is believed by a majority of
people that the transportation by private mode or private car is more convenient and simple.
Whereas others differ at the opinion that public transport is the best option in many aspects.
However, I believe that travelling by public vehicles is a good option for following reasons.
First, various transport modes are there and they can carry the majority of passengers at a
time which consumes same fuel and occupy road. Private cars which carry one person to four
maximum is a way of consuming more fuel, to block more space in the road and cause traffic
problems.
On the other hand, metro rail mode of transportation is simple and fast which is better than
car and bus. Loophole with this one is that it cannot cover all streets. This metro carries
passengers from one station to another destination both bus and metro rails reduce the
pollutions compared to the private travelling.
Otherwise, car pool is next option for transport, but the above all they are handier when time
management is considered. Certainly, alternative transports are mandatory and citizens must
be aware of this concept more over international control should be introduced to prevent
private car ownership. These actions lead us to save petrol and diesel for coming generations
where it cannot be manufactured
If new cars come on roads every day, it leads to traffic problem and lot of time consumption
is noticed to travel shot or near distance and hence travellers should notice and use bicycles to
cover surrounding areas which burn human energy and adds health benefits.
Lastly, utilisation of personal vehicles must be controlled for daily transportation

simultaneously passengers should look after the public mode of travelling.
[ by - Samuel Edward]
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 24 - News editors decide

what to broadcast on television and what to print in
newspapers
Details
Hits: 53095

News editors decide what to broadcast on television and what to print in

newspapers. What factors do you think influence these decisions? Do we
become used to bad news? Would it be better if more good news was
reported?
Use your own ideas knowledge and experience and support your arguments with
examples and relevant evidence.
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.
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.
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.
[ by - Jahangir Alam ]
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 23 - Television is a very

useful tool when it comes to education
Details
Last Updated: Sunday, 02 October 2016 00:46
Hits: 38824
Some people say that television is a very useful tool when it comes to
education. Others argue that television is a much overused, ineffective
teacher.
Discuss both of these views and give your opinion as to the usefulness of television as an
educational tool.
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge
or experience.

Model Answer 1:
There is a lot of controversy on the topic whether TV can play a role of a teacher. Some
people hold a viewpoint that it can never be educational at all. Others, although, disagree,
referring to TV's high potential of teaching through amusement.
As a matter of fact, television nowadays can hardly be called educational. All those talk
shows and soap operas we see every day are a complete waste of time and can even have
negative effects by distracting young and undisciplined people from their studies. Moreover,
the most of the so-called educational programs in channels like National Geographic channel
can not replace books and academic lectures because they tend to entertain people and have
not an aim to give deep and concentrated knowledge.
However, TV can be a powerful mean of delivering information and a nice part of learning
process. Educational Methodists have proved that the more senses are involved at the time of
studying; the more effective result can be achieved. Television produces both picture and
sound, so its usefulness is obvious. Many teachers already use this advantage actively by
showing students video cassettes which go as supplementary material to many language
courses. So why not to broadcast such movies through television?
The problem of the ineffectiveness of television as an educational tool is in fact not a problem
of television itself, but of people who decide the content of the particular channel. It is hardly
unlikely that content directors would abandon their high profits and change talk shows to
lectures and video lessons. Therefore, those, who insist on the uselessness of TV, maybe
right, but let us not forget that as technology improves new cheap ways of broadcasting
appear, for instance, video broadcasts. They can prove the exclusive power of such learning
tool as television.

People are divided in opinion if television is a great source of education and knowledge or
not. Both of these two groups have their reasoning and logic. In this essay, I will discuss both
the viewpoint to represent the effectiveness and drawbacks of TV as the source of education.
To mention the disadvantages, television channels are too much commercial nowadays and
they would produce any program to attract people no matter if they are authentic or not.
There are plenty of choices for channels and people tend to use their TV as an entertainment
media than an educational source. The biased news, politically influenced talk show etc. often
mislead people and that has a very negative impact on the society. Programs that contain
violence, the negative impression often distracts young people and the addiction on TV
programs often restrain people from doing other important activities. TV is a great source of
knowledge sharing but the programs choice must be prudent to learn something from it and
most of the people fail to do so.
On the other hand, there are lots of advantages of TV according to a group and these
advantages supersede the disadvantages as they opine. There are always options for a TV
viewer and if s/he takes it as a medium of educational sources, the can always do so. It is an
effective medium for updating people about the current news, different viewpoints and
current affairs. People no longer need to travel a great deal to learn about other countries and
it is TV that actually made it possible. Channels like Discovery, National Geography have
been successfully broadcasting education channels and they are hugely popular around the
globe. This is a strong tool for a government to communicate with mass people to deliver a
message. After a stressful day at work people often find it refreshing to watch music, movies,
soap opera, reality shows, travel shows at their homes and there is no argument that those
things have their educational references well rooted into.
In conclusion, TV can be a great source for education if properly and prudently watched and
also can be a negative factor for some people if their program choice is somehow negative.

Model Answer 3:
With the popularisation of high-end television being introduced to people, the functions of it
have significantly influenced the public regardless of the extent. Some people think it is an
effective as well as an entertaining device to educate, while others dispute that it has been
abused and cannot play a key role in teaching.
People’s reactions have been affected dramatically due to the contents are shown on
television. For the teenagers, the impact can last for a very long time, sometimes even
forever. Nowadays, the coverage about juvenile delinquencies has been noticed frequently
and parts of it are caused by the violent contents or extreme thoughts shown on TV whose
original purposes should be entertaining and educating. Also, not only have young people
been affected, some adults also became victims of television. The TV shows currently being
shown are sometimes compelled to put on schedule due to the pressures exerted by sponsors.
They want to boost the rating rather than entertaining the audiences. However, some shows
are extremely long and they oblige the audiences to keep watching. As a result of it,
audiences forget their works and get idle, sitting on the couch and staring at the meaningless
TV shows regardless of the length of them. Furthermore, for increasing the profits, different
companies put exaggerated commercials on TV and encourage consumers to try their
products. Although some of them may really satisfy customers’ need, others only want to
promote their products to the public. If the people sitting in front of the TV had no ability on
self-control, especially for shopping, they would dial the numbers displayed on the screen as
soon as possible.
On the other hand, not all the programmes are educational; especially the ones are
specifically designed for little kids. They can learn the basic communication skills by
watching cartoons. In addition, they can learn how moral code is essential while their parents
have not adequate time teaching them. Television programs are sometimes politically biased
and can mislead people. News presented incorrectly can harm some people and can mislead
others. TV programs are becoming more commercial now a day rather than their original
purpose of education and entertainment.
In conclusion, television is showing public the downward trend in terms of the contents. The
main purposes have shifted from education to misleading even instigation in some cases. In
my opinion, authorities should censor the programmes exigent before they are shown to the
public.
( By Kaiwen Liu )
Model Answer 4:
Nowadays, television has become an essential necessity in most homes. While some people
think that television serves as an efficient tool to enhance learning, others are of the opinion
that this is ineffective. This essay will discuss both points of view.

To begin, television in isolation may not be too effective as a learning aid. This is because
there might not be programs that are specific to what people want to learn. For example, if a
person is interested in learning the construction and function of an automotive engine, it
would not be possible for him to get a program scheduled as per his requirement. Further,
even with those programs appearing on television, the viewer might not necessarily get the
complete content and depth of understanding that he is looking for. Thus, television has
limitations with regards to the customization it can offer to different people with varying
learning requirements.

Nevertheless, in my opinion, television does provide considerable opportunities for people
who are looking to improve their overall general awareness as well as looking for subject-
specific information. For example, viewers can check the program content online on different
channels and tune into programs that are of their interest. Further, they can purchase CD's on
topics of their specific need and watch them on television to gain a better understanding. The
viewer has a choice to select a CD that offers him the required depth of understanding of the
subject. Watching the content on a 40-inch television may keep viewers more engrossed and
interested, and give them a better learning experience than looking at the content on a
laptop/computer.

Additionally, programs on channels like National geographic and Discovery are quite
exhaustive and provide vital information to viewers. For example, the program on analysis of
aircraft disasters can actually teach viewers/students the right approach to be followed in
carrying out failure investigations and performing root cause analysis.

To conclude, people being dismissive of the role of television in education is not entirely
correct. To a large extent its importance as a learning aid will lie with the user and the way it
is utilised. Television can certainly be an efficient tool to aid learning and enhance the overall
quality of education if the right approach is adopted.
(By Rajesh )
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 33 - Compare the

advantages and disadvantages of living in the city to living
in the country side
Details
Hits: 80546
Present a written argument or a case to an educated reader with no specialised

knowledge of the following topic:
Some people think that cities are the best places to live. Others prefer to live
in a rural area. Compare the advantages and disadvantages of living in the
city to living in the countryside.
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your experience.
Model Answer 1:
The places where people live affects greatly in their lifestyles and the living place is one of
the very basic needs for people. People opine differently while choosing the living places.
Some prefer and argue that city is the best place to live at since it provides so many
advantages over the rural area, but other think that villages are the best places to live a good
life. Both places have advantages and disadvantages.
It is true that a city offers so many opportunities and advantages those are absent in a
countryside. For instance, the modern transportation and communication systems are better in
any city compared to a village. In a city people have access to many different transportation
systems and have latest technologies to communicate; like cellular phones, internet, fax etc.
Moreover, when a new technology arrives at the country it is first introduced in the city area
and usually 2/3 years later to the village. Secondly, cities provide better security to its
inhabitants like the mobile police patrols, special forces, community police, security guards,
traffic police etc. But in the village, the number of security force persons are too low
compared to the overall population. Moreover, cities provide better treatment, hospitals,
qualified doctors, better educational institutes, and amusement parks etc which are really
inevitable to lead a better life. In many cases, those facilities are absent or rare in a village. In
my opinion, the reason for why most people tend to live in a city is the vast opportunities of
jobs. Most of the corporate offices, industries, factories, government offices, garments and
manufacturing industries are either situated in a city or close to the city. People have much
more employment opportunities in a city than a village. On the contrary, people living in a
village, are often forced to do a job that is not suitable at all for him since the job opportunity
is so narrow there. Again, schools or colleges are not equipped with a better environment,
labs, teachers and that's why students in a village might not get a better education he/she
deserves. If we consider the entertainment facilities in a city then citizens of a city have so
many options like theatre, park, art gallery, museum, amusement parks, libraries etc. But
people in the villages have only TV or books and very little facilities to spend leisure time.
On the other hand, Villages offer many invaluable advantages those are completely absent in
the cities. First of all, someone living in a village can get fresh air and water. There is no
intense pollution with smoke, Carbon-DI-oxide, Carbon-mono-oxide, Nitrous-Oxide and
people living in a village are less prone to suffer diseases like asthma, bronchitis etc. The city
can provide security against visible foes but it causes people to face some invisible and
dangerous enemies like toxic and polluted air, water and environment. Secondly, people of
villages live much nearer to the nature and breathe in the fresh air, as well as eat fresh foods,
vegetables, fruits collected directly from the garden. On the contrary vegetables, foods, fruits
in the cities are normally stored and mixed with preservatives and can cause serious harms to
the health. The living cost in a countryside is much lesser than that of a city. The density of
population in a village is much less than a city and village people are naturally grow up their
personal relationship among all people and live like a real community and take care of each
other. While in the city people do not know even who live in the next door and personal
relationship in a community is rare.
In my case, I prefer to live in the city. I feel relaxed and comfortable staying in my own city.
There are lots of facilities I can't deny are presented in my city and those are the invaluable
part of my lifestyle. Moreover, I like to lead a busy and challenging life and want to be
connected with the world. I enjoy visiting countryside but get bored there if I stay more than
2/3 days because all of my necessary stuff to lead my as usual life are absent there.

Model Answer 2:
Whether cities are better than rural area or vice-versa is a contentious question, it depends on
one's choice, as to, what they prefer. Both cities and rural areas have their pros and cons.
Rural areas have quaint environments whereas there is always something fascinating about
big cities.
Cities generally have better infrastructure, education system and advance health care
facilities. You get to meet people from all walks of life, learn to coexist with people from
different ethnicity, race, caste and culture; hence you become more tolerant, open minded and
start respecting each other differences. Whereas countryside people are less tolerant, caste
system still prevails and the powers lie with a certain group of people. If you see, today in
India, Love marriages /inter-caste marriages are very common in cities, whereas people are
being murdered in the name of honour in rural areas. Gender inequality is very evident in a
rural area, where women are being restricted only to household chores and do not have much
say in decision making, but in cities, both are treated equally. It is not uncommon to see
people migrating to cities for better jobs, better education.
People in the cities are always under tremendous pressure and stress, they always have to be
up to date with technologies and hence there is no time to relax. Recently studies have shown
a surge in the number of cases of heart attacks, which is due to increase in stress level. People
in cities are constantly exposed to high level of pollution, adulterated food and chemically
grown vegetables, which adversely affects their health, owing to which the average life of
people living is cities is less than people living in rural area. Increased cases of obesity,
suicides, diabetes are also resulting in stress and unhealthy living. Rural areas on other hand
have no or very less pollution, pure food item and less stress, people have more time for
themselves and their families.
To sum up, I think both cities and rural areas have their own charm. Cities have more busy
and hectic life but have better facilities, rural areas, on the contrary, have more relaxed, laid
back lifestyle but lacks in up to date technologies like computers and international standard of
healthcare and education system.
[ by - Preeti]
Model Answer 3:
Many people consider living in cities and they think that this is more advantageous while
another group prefers living in the countryside as they find it as a better alternative. Living in
a city and in an urban area, both has their advantages and disadvantages.
First of all, living in a city is very stressful as the life is very busy and competitive there.
Cities have lot more vehicles, industries and a large population and that pollutes the
environment which is very harmful to the health. It is particularly tough for low earning
people as the expenses in living in a city is always higher. People suffer from many health
problems that live in a city and especially they suffer a lot in the old ages. Recently I have
read a book and this book reveals some surprising facts about living in a city. I was pretty
surprised to find that ''people who live in country sides have more life expectancy than live in
an urban area.''
On the other hand, city life offers numerous facilities and opportunities compared to the
living in urban area. For instance, job opportunity and to run small businesses have better
prospects in a city than in the countryside. People can easily find a new job in case s/he loses
a job and there are many other earning prospects in a city that could not be found in a village.
For economically solvent people, the city offers many social and entertainment facilities like
Cineplex, sports event in stadiums, amusement parks, museum etc. Opposite to this, rural
areas do not offer many opportunities for social life and lacks the entertainment facilities.
Also, people can’t purchase everything they need from a village market and markets are very
rare in most of the urban areas. Regarding this, I would like to mention my own experience
that I had a few days back. I went to a rural area called Tillo and I had my cell phone
damaged there. I could not find any phone servicing centre there and I had to go to the city to
have it repaired.
In conclusion, both the cities and rural areas have their advantages and disadvantages.
Model Answer 4:
Our earth is home to around six billion people living all around the globe, many of them are
urbanites and other ruralites. One line of thought of society states that it’s beneficial to live in
urban areas, however, others stand opposite to it. But this thought is gyrated by many
reasons.
The urban society provides great means of basic amenities necessary for living life. We can
find lot schools and other education institutions in cities where the tiny tots make their future
and turn into better future civilians. On the contrary, the students from villages come to the
cities to have the education. Health facilities are also found in abundance in urban areas.
Whenever the people in a rural area have any serious health issues rush to the urban areas to
avail these facilities. Apart from this, the vast amount of transports facilities has made life
immensely easy to live in urban areas. On the flipside, the villagers have great difficulty in
transport as proper means are not present and if present the roads are not proper to run them
as they are never properly sanitised. The facilities of shopping malls and supermarkets have
helped to gain access to necessary items under one roof easily decreasing our time utility.
However, if take a glance at rural society, we will be able to find lush green fields, fresh air
and pure environment which is highly polluted in the cities. The villagers have a healthy
lifestyle which is very scant in urban areas. People of rural areas are more socialised whereas
that of urban areas are mammon worshippers, always running to make both ends meet.
Parents of urban society have very less time due to which they are slowly drifted in oblivion,
whereas the children of rural society share a great bond with their parents. The crime rate is
far less in rural parts as compared to urban where crime is found in every nook and corner of
the society.
At last keeping all the aspects in mind, we can conclude that living in any part has both
benefits and drawbacks, however, it’s totally subjective choice that which society cater our
needs better.
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 34 - Tobacco should be

treated as illegal like other drugs
Details
Hits: 22715
Present a written argument or a case to an educated reader with no specialised knowledge of

the following topic:
Tobacco should be treated as illegal like other drugs. Smoking has not a single
positive issue but lots of negative effects and therefore, it should be banned.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the above statement.
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your experience.

Model Answer 1 :
The drugs those are strong and cause harm to human are considered illegal and are prohibited
in almost all the countries considering the bad effects. Those drugs are very much addicted
and the people who take it regularly destroy his life and can not lead a normal life. Likewise,
tobacco is another phenomenon that has a strong beckoning towards people of all ages.
Considering the bad effects, therefore, it should be considered unlawful and prohibited.
There are lots of substances presented in the tobacco and people become much more
addictive to the tobacco because it is easily accessible and does not cost that much at a time
compared to other illegal drugs. There are enough scientific reasons to believe that once a
person becomes addicted towards tobacco, can't leave it easily like other strong drugs. Many
people even exhaust more than 20 cigarettes daily and eventually increase the possibility to
be infected with lung cancer or many other serious diseases. The person who smokes or takes
tobacco in other ways harms himself as well as the people surrounding them. Because it is
proven in medical science that second-hand smoking causes the same physical problems as
the first-hand smoking does. So considering the issue I strongly opine that all tobacco should
be banned like other harmful drugs.
Many people think that tobacco creates some opportunities. For instance, they mention the
number of people involved in these industries from farmer to manufacturing workers. They
also think that tobacco companies often help people by sponsoring big sports events,
initiating some social works like tree-plantation, star search programs etc. In my opinion, all
those are eye wash for people. The companies are uplifting their fortunes by destroying
innocent peoples' lives. Think about a family that has loose their only earning member
because he was a chain smoker for 20 years and recently died of lung cancer. The effects are
overwhelming compared to what tobacco companies do for us. I believe there are lots of
organisations who are happy to initiate the same social programs for the betterment of people.
Science has proven that the amount of nicotine contained in a cigarette is pushed directly into
someone's body, he will die at once. So tobacco business is a social crime at large.
Furthermore, those who cultivate tobacco, process it prepare cigarette and smokes ultimately
become the victims of many serious diseases like cancer, heart diseases and bronchitis. In
addition buying tobacco costs money which could have been used for some good thing.
Teenagers addicted to tobacco involve themselves to some other drugs and tobacco is always
the gateway to other drugs.
I don't think there is any one benefit we get from tobacco rather it harms us in so many ways.
There are huge scarcities of food in the world right now and a huge amount of fields and
many farmers are engaged in producing tobacco. So I strongly give my opinion to declare the
cultivation, production, manufacturing and selling of tobacco should be strictly prohibited for
all our betterment.
Model Answer 2:
Health is considered the most precious gift that we all have so it is essential to think carefully
about things that may have a harmful effect on individuals. Many people argue that tobacco
smoking should be considered illegal as other drugs because it has more detriments than
benefits. However, this is refuted by others. Both sides will be critiqued before a reasoned
conclusion is formed.
It is felt by many that cigarette smoking has deleterious effects on person's life. For example,
it has been shown in many research studies that tobacco is one of the risk factors to many
diseases including cancer, particularly lung cancer, cardiovascular diseases and others. This
example clearly shows that smoking can be very harmful and has a tremendous financial
burden on not only the personal budget but also health sector.
On the other side, many people think that smoking is a personal decision. In addition, it
cannot be compared to drugs as it provides health benefits like memory and attention
enhancing and preventing ulcerative colitis. Moreover, it is used in some medications.
After analysing these two points of view, I believe that the cons of smoking outweigh the
pros and the usage of tobacco should be limited for medical treatments authorised by
governments. Without a doubt, I think that smoking is an important topic that has effects on
various aspects of human's life and other people's life as no one focus on the passive smoking
issue and the government should pay more attention and invent new policies regarding
smoking.
[by - Saeed]
Sample Essay 3:
Most of the drugs are banned in all nations as they are the root cause of many incurable
diseases, mental instability and social problems. Tobacco is considered similar to these
drugs, as it engenders a myriad of negative impacts on the human beings. I totally agree that
tobacco must be banned as it can engender diseases as well as can cause addictions.
Firstly, it is apparent that smoking can lead to vulnerable diseases like cancer, as tobacco
contains a harmful ingredient called Nicotine. Moreover, smoking not only creates a physical
imbalance among the smokers but also attracts diseases among passive smokers due to the air
pollution created by it. A research done, in August 2014 by a group of scientists based in
California, illustrates that seventy percent of the people affected by smoking are non-
smokers. Therefore, it is crystal clear that Nicotine must be prohibited.
Secondly, almost all smokers are addicted to the smoking habit, due to the reason that
Nicotine attracts this peculiar characteristic. Furthermore, if a smoker forcefully tries to put
an end to the smoking habit, it is predicted that he or she will come under mental imbalance.
For instance, if a patient asks some remedies with a physician to give up smoking, definitely
the doctor would recommend decreasing the habit on a daily basis, instead of stopping
suddenly. It might take a few years to get rid of this habit. Thus, it is obvious that tobacco has
a huge negative impact.
Smoking does not have a single positive side and that’s why it should be immediately
banned. It costs a large amount of money, it puts our mental and physical health in danger
and creates many others diseases to people.
In conclusion, by analysing how tobacco can destroy the health of people as well as cause
addiction, it is obvious that Tobacco products must be banned. It is suggested that
governments give banning notice well in advance so that the smokers can quit the habit
slowly.

Essay

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Essay

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 1 - People attend colleges

or universities for many different reasons

IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay:

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Write about the following topic:

Write at least 250 words.

Idea Generation for this IELTS Essay:

Essay Type: Opinion Essay (Give reasons).

Main question of this IELTS Essay:

A. Why people attend colleges or universities?

Reasons: Why people attend colleges or universities?

In my opinion, college environment acts as a precursor to a student’s successful career and

IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay:

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Write about the following topic:

Write at least 250 words.

Essay Type: Discussion Essay.

The main question of this IELTS Essay:

 Having more spare time for other activities, like entertainment.

(Written by Vikram Soni)

IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 3 - Women make better

IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay:

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task:

Write an essay expressing your point of view.

Write at least 250 words.

Model Answer 1: (Neutral Argument)

Idea Generation for this IELTS Essay:

Essay Type: Opinion Essay.

Main question of this IELTS Essay:

Discussion Points: Who can be the better parent? Men or Women?

Women are better than men at parenting:

Men are better than women at parenting:

Men and women have equal role to raise their children:

(Approximately 325 words)

IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 4 - Parents are the best

IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay:

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

Parents are the best teachers.

Write at least 250 words.

(by Mubashir Noorani)

Idea Generation for this IELTS Essay:

Essay Type: Argumentative Essay (Agree/ Disagree)

Main question of this IELTS Essay:

A. Are parents the best teachers for their children?

Agreement: Parents are the best teachers.

IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 5 - Violence and conflict

Last Updated: Saturday, 05 November 2016 18:22

Written by IELTS Mentor

IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay:

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Present a written argument to an educated reader with no specialist knowledge of the

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

You should write at least 250 words.

(Approximately 388 words)

Thus it is recommended, to prevail peace in all circumstances irrespective of women or men

(by Nirmala Pagolu)

(by Fiona Lai)

IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample 6 - Cricket has become

Last Updated: Tuesday, 27 September 2016 13:05

Written by IELTS Mentor

IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay:

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.