Ielts Writing Sample Answer

WRITING
TASK 1
Question:
The table and pie chart illustrate populations in Australia according to
different nationalities and areas. Summarize the information by selecting
and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.
Answer:
The pie chart and table detail population figures in Australia and if
residents tended to live in rural or urban areas. Looking from an overall
perspective, it is readily apparent that the vast majority of the population is
Australian, followed by sizeable numbers for other and British nationals,
and more marginal figures for New Zealanders, Chinese, and the Dutch. All
demographics live overwhelmingly in cities, especially individuals from
China.
The pie chart indicates that 73% of the Australian population is made up of
Australians themselves. This figure is followed distantly by other at 14%,
residents from Great Britain at 7%, New Zealanders at 3%, Chinese at 2%,
and people from the Netherlands at just 1%.
In terms of livings areas, Australians are most likely to live outside cities,
though 80% still live in urban environments. Similarly, 83% of the Dutch live
in cities and 17% in the countryside. British and New Zealand residents
display nearly identical proportions with around 90% in cities. Finally, the
Chinese live predominately in the cities (99%).
Question:
Answer:
The table displays the data for international students studying in Canada
and the United States in 2002 and 2003. Looking from an overall
perspective, it is readily apparent that figures increased for all countries
except those going to the United States from India. Moreover, there were
significantly more international students in the United States, though
overall growth was higher in Canada.
In 2002 in Canada there were 5,400 international students from China, a

data point that rose by 45% to 7,850 the next year. In contrast, in the USA
this number rose just 6% to reach 116,600. There were more students from
India studying in the US both years (200,000 in 2002 and 182,000 in 2003, a
-9% decrease) while in Canada there were fewer despite a 35% surge (2,100
and 2,835 for each year).
In Canada, the number of American students rose by 9% from 5,000 to

5,450 and in the US, Canadian students grew by a comparable 7% to 33,170.
Finally, the total number of international students in all of Canada
increased 17%, a growth of more than 11,000, to 70,004 while in the United
States this figure climbed just 2%, ending at 592,230.
Question:
Answer:
The line chart displays data concerning production from the forest industry
in the UK from 1980 to 2000. Looking from an overall perspective, it is
readily apparent that paper and packaging not only accounted for the
most production throughout but also increased most significantly.
Production of wood pulp fell slightly but overtook sawn-wood, which
dropped steadily, by the end of the period.
Looking first of all at paper and packing, production in 1980 stood at

approximately 230 million tonnes and grew steadily to 250 million by 1990.
Over the next 10 years, output surged, finally reaching 350,000,000 tonnes
by 2000.
Question:
Answer:
The pie charts detail sales by a bookseller between 1972 and 2012 according
to genre. Looking from an overall perspective, it is readily apparent that
adult fiction became by far the most popular type at the expense of the
genres which declined in popularity (others, biography, and travel). Interest
in children’s fiction also increased.
In 1972, this particular bookseller sold relatively equal proportions of each

type with others leading at 25%, followed by adult fiction, children’s fiction,
and biography all at 20%, and travel lowest at 15%. By 1992, adult fiction had
risen by 5%, while others and biography declined by the same number.
Travel and children’s fiction grew by 3% and 2%, respectively.
In the final year surveyed, adult fiction surged to 45% and children’s fiction
ticked up slightly to 25%. The rise of adult fiction was compensated for by
dramatic drops for the remaining genres with others finishing at 12%, travel
at 10%, and biography 8%.
Question:
Answer:
The line chart displays data concerning robberies, car thefts, and burglaries
from 2003 to 2012 in New Port city center. Looking from an overall
perspective, it is readily apparent that burglaries declined dramatically and
were replaced as the most common crime by car thefts, which fell slightly
overall. Robberies were least common throughout yet also rose marginally.
In 2003, burglaries were prevalent at a rate of nearly 3,500 per year. This
number then peaked at 3,750 the next year before dropping considerably
to a nadir of 1,100 in 2008 and remaining generally around this level until
the end of the period. In contrast, car thefts began the period lower (2,800),
dipped to 2000 in 2006 and rose with minor fluctuations to 2,750 by 2012.
The least common crime was robbery. Statistics indicated just over 500
robberies in 2003 and incidences remained under 1000 the entire time
surveyed, finishing at 750 in 2012.
Question:
Answer:
The bar chart details coffee production in four countries from 1990 to 2010.
Looking from an overall perspective, it is readily apparent that production
rose in all countries except for Colombia. Brazil produced by far the most
coffee throughout the period with the other three countries finishing with
comparable totals.
In 1990, Brazil narrowly produced the most coffee at .9 million tonnes. This
figure increased steadily and reached 1.9 million tons by 2010, more than
four times higher than the next largest producer. In contrast, production in
Colombia began the period at .6 million tonnes and fell consistently
throughout the period to be even with Vietnam for the lowest total of just
over .3 million tonnes by 2010.
Vietnam increased from the smallest exporter at .1 million tonnes in 1990

and 1995 to equal Colombia 20 years later. The final nation, Indonesia,
underwent a steady climb from .2 million tonnes to double this figure (.4
million) to end the time surveyed.
Question:
Answer:
The pie charts display the sources of energy production in 1985 and 2003.
Looking from an overall perspective, it is clear that in 1985 the majority of
energy came from primarily oil followed by nuclear power, natural gas, and
coal with cleaner energy sources rarer. By 2003, renewables became
slightly more common or remained level, the use of oil decreased but was
still the most used, while both coal and natural gas underwent the largest
increases.
In 1985, oil represented 52% of all energy sourced, though this figure had
declined to 39% by 2003. Nuclear power, which was the second most
pervasive energy source in 1985 at 22%, had the steepest fall to just 8% in
2003. In contrast, natural gas rose from 13% to 23% and coal nearly tripled
to 22%.
In terms of the cleaner energy sources, hydro power represented 4% of

total usage in both years while other renewables quadrupled from 1% in
1985 to 4% in 2003.
Question:
The table below shows the number of visitors in the UK and their average
spending from 2003 to 2008.
Answer:
The table displays information regarding visitors, spending and the length
of their trip to the UK from 2003 to 2008. Looking from an overall
perspective, it is readily apparent that overall visits, total spending, and
average spending rose considerably with only average nights per visit
falling towards the end of the period. The largest growth proportionally
was for total spending.
Looking first of all at quantity of visits, there were 24,715,000 million

travellers to the UK in 2003 and this figure climbed steadily by around 2 to
3 million each year until 2006 when it plateaued at about 32 million before
receding slightly to 31.8 million to finish the time surveyed. Similarly,
average spending in billions of pounds rose sharply from 11.855 to a 16.002
in 2006, then leveled off and, in contrast, rebounded marginally to finish
the period at 16.323.
In terms of average spending, this figure began at 475 pounds in 2003,

declined moderately to 266 the next year and then rose consistently to
conclude with a final surge to 511 in 2008. The only data to decline was
average nights per visit which began at 8.2 in 2003, remained level for a
year and then rose by .1 each year until 2006, before a sudden drop to 7.7
nights in 2007 and 2008.
Question:
The charts below give information about the price of tickets on one airline
between Sydney and Melbourne, Australia, over a two-week period in 2013.
Answer:
The bar charts display information for the price of airline tickets from
Sydney to Melbourne and the reverse flight over a two week period in 2013.
Looking from an overall perspective, it is readily apparent that flights in
both directions displayed broadly similar patterns with higher prices Friday
through Monday. Compared to week 1, week 2 prices were either greatly
deflated or identical for nearly all flights.
In week 1, flights from Sydney to Melbourne started at 80$ on Monday,

were all under $40 over the next 3 days before a spike to $75, $70, and $50
on Friday, Saturday and Sunday, respectively. During the second week, the
prices were unchanged with the notable exception of a decline on Monday
to $50 fares.
In terms of flights from Melbourne to Sydney, the trend was comparable

with flights on Monday of week 1 elevated to $60, sub-$40 flights on
Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday and the most expensive flight on
Friday at $80. Flights on Saturday and Sunday were also relatively costly at
$60 and $50 each day. In week 2, Monday prices displayed a dramatic
decline to $40 and there was more variance later in the week. Friday fell to
$50 and Saturday to $50. All other tickets remained the same in week 2.
Question:
The diagram details the process of making leather products.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features,
and make comparisons where relevant.
Answer:
The diagram details the process by which leather products are made for
retail. Looking from an overall perspective, it is readily apparent that there
are 3 main steps to this entirely man-made process beginning with initial
transportation of the raw material to the factory, followed by preparation
and processing of the material, and finally the production of consumer
products.
Firstly, the leather skins from various animals are dried. Subsequent to this,
they are taken to a factory by truck where they are washed in water and
lime. The skins are then soaked in more lime for a period of time before
being run through a machine with large rollers that flattens them out.
Next, the flattened skins are soaked in tannin, which is composed of water
and vegetable matter. They are then polished by another rolling device and
taken to another factory by trucks. In this factory, the final products are
crafted and available to consumer shops.
Question:
Answer:
The bar charts detail men and women between the ages of 60 and 64
working in Belgium, the USA, Japan, and Indonesia in 1970 and 2000.
Looking from an overall perspective, it is readily apparent that men had
higher employment figures for all countries in both years with the largest
disparity being the difference between men and women in Belgium and
the USA in 2000. Proportions of males and females employed decreased
across all nations, especially in Belgium.
In the United States in 1970, 88% of men between 60 and 64 were

employed compared to just under 80% of women. These proportions were
broadly similar to Belgium (79% and 62%) and Indonesia (83% and 63%).
The disparity in Japan was slightly larger with 78% of men working and 55%
of women.
By 2000, figures for the United States had declined to 79% of men and 41%
of women, the second largest drop recorded. Belgium had the largest fall
for female employment (down to fewer than 10% working) with a more
moderate fall for men to 51%. In Indonesia, employed males fell to 72% as
their counterparts slipped by 12% to 50%. Finally, Japan displayed the
narrowest gap between genders with 51% of men working and 48% of
women.
Question:
Answer:
The map describes changes to a city since 1950. Looking from an overall
perspective, it is readily apparent that the city has expanded to become
considerably more residential and accessible, with the notable additions of
a long lake and nearby business district.
In 1950, the town’s population was 20,000 and it has increased tenfold to
200,000. Previously, there was a limited area for homes, all to the north of
the major road running east to west. At present, the residential area has
greatly grown in all directions and there are now additional major roads in
the southern half of the city.
Moreover, the narrow river running through the town has been dammed
to create a large lake that stretches from the western to eastern edge of
the residential area. The business district which was confined to the center
of the map is now larger and includes the northern and southern shores of
the lake. The bridge over the river is now over the lake and there is another
bridge near the dam in the east. Finally, there is presently a second
government building to the south and the airport located to the east has
more than doubled in size.
Question:
Answer:
The process details the steps to make cement and then how cement is
used as an ingredient in concrete manufacturing. Overall, the process
requires initial mixing and chemical transformation of the raw materials
clay and limestone, followed by bagging of the finished cement, before it is
then combined with other materials to form concrete.
Initially, limestone and clay are collected and crushed together into a fine
powder before being placed in a cylindrical mixer. The mixture is then
connected to a rotating heater which transforms the powder and it is then
ground a second time and sealed in bags as cement.
In order to form concrete, cement is next combined with water, sand, and
gravel in a concrete mixer. The proportions for each ingredient are 15%
cement, 10% water, 25% sand and finally 50% gravel (which is small stones).
Question:
Answer:
The map describes changes to West Park Secondary School over a period
from 1950 to 2010. Overall, West Park Secondary School contained fewer
buildings in 1950 and was located nearer residential and agricultural land.
By 2010, several facilities had been added for students and there was the
notable addition of a large car park.
In 1950, 3 rows of houses were located to the left of the school, just above a
large section of farmland and a playground attached to the school. By 1980,
there were significant alterations related to housing. The former houses
were replaced by a car park and science block and the farmland was
removed in favor of a sports field. The playground remained unchanged.
By 2010, the playground had been reduced in size in order to make room
for a small sports field. The most significant change by this time was the
expansion of the car park overtaking the area previously
Question:
The bar chart below shows the popularity of well-known Instagram
accounts in 2011 and 2021.
Answer:
The bar chart details the follower statistics for 5 popular personalities on
Instagram in 2018 and 2021. Looking from an overall perspective, it is readily
apparent that figures rose for all influencers with Christiano Ronaldo
becoming the most followed and Selena Gomez going from most to least
popular over the period surveyed.
In 2018, Selena Gomez had by far the most followers at 125 million, more
than 10 million above Ariana Grande (112 million) and Ronaldo (110 million).
By 2021, Selena’s follower count had nearly doubled to 245 million, while
Ronaldo’s surged to lead all celebrities at 315 million and Ariana Grande
increased more than twofold to 251 million.
The final two influencers, Kylie Jenner and The Rock, experienced similarly
dramatic rising trends. Kylie’s followers were just under 100 million in 2018
and The Rock was slightly lower at around 95 million. Both influencers
added approximately 150 million followers with the former finishing at 250
million and the latter modestly higher at 252 million.
Question:
The maps below shows university sports courts in 1990 and now.
Answer:
The map describes how a university sports courts area has changed from
1990 to the present day. Looking from an overall perspective, it is readily
apparent that the number of total courts for tennis and basketball has
increased at the expense of parking and a park, while a formal building
with a gym now houses various exercise facilities. These changes allow for
more varied activity.
In 1990, on the left side of the map was a park with trees and grass as well
as a car park. Today, the park has been replaced by a large basketball court
and the car park by 4 tennis courts.
On the right side of the map, a structure to contain the various athletic
facilities has been erected with only the indoor pool and reception area in
the same position in the new building. The changing room beneath the
reception area and pool has been lengthened and moved slightly to the
right so as to line up directly above a new, large fitness centre. The fitness
centre has replaced two tennis courts, now outside the main building.
Question:
The bar chart below shows transport preferences among young people in
four countries in a single year.
Answer:
The bar chart details transport preferences for young people in terms of
cars, motorcycles, and bicycles in the United Kingdom, the United States,
France and Italy. Looking from an overall perspective, it is readily apparent
that cars are more popular in the UK, the US and especially Italy while the
French prefer to ride bicycles. In all countries except the United States,
motorcycles are the least common option.
Considering the statistics for cars first of all, the United States and the
United Kingdom have identical figures at 60% each. Italy is noticeably
higher at 75% while just 40% of younger individuals in France drive cars. In
most nations, bicycles are also pervasive, with the highest number in
France at 47%, followed by 30% in the UK, slightly over 10% in Italy, and
precisely 10% in the US.
Motorcycles are only a significant choice for younger people in the United
States (30% ride motorcycles there), and in contrast the figures for France,
the UK, and Italy merely reach 11%, 10%, and 9%, respectively.
Question:
The bar chart below shows the average duration of housework women did
(unemployed, part-time employed and full-time) when compared to men
who had full-time work in the UK between 1985 and 2005.
Answer:
The bar chart details hours of housework completed in the UK from 1985 to
2005 by fully employed males and females with various states of
employment. Looking from an overall perspective, it is readily apparent
that time spent on housework rose for all groups with the exception of
unemployed women, which was stable overall. However, the latter
category undertook by far the most housework, while men with full-time
jobs did comparatively little.
Unemployed women led throughout the period in terms of hours, at a

peak of 7 hours in 1985 and 2005 and a slight dip to 6.5 hours in between. In
contrast, men with full-time work were unchanged at just 1 hour in 1985
and 1995, though there was a slight rise to 1.5 hours in 2005.
Women with part-time employment were slightly lower than their

unemployed counterparts throughout the period, beginning at 5.3 hours in
1985, before declining to 5 hours over the next 5 years, and then finishing
the period with a surge to 6 hours. The figures for women with full-time
employment resembled those of men, though they were marginally higher
at 2, 1.5, and 2.8 hours in 1985, 1995, and 2005, respectively.
Question:
The maps below shows the town of Lynnfield in 1936 and then later in 2007.
Answer:
The maps detail changes to a town called Lynnfield between 1936 and
2007. Looking from an overall perspective, it is readily apparent that the
town became more residential, commercial, and accessible at the expense
of natural land, agriculture and smaller shops.
In 1936, to the northwest and northeast of the town were several trees and
a river surrounded by untouched land. By 2007, the number of trees had
declined and the land around the river became a residential area. To the
southwest of the town, a cycling path was turned into a road for cars and
on the opposite side of the map a museum and golf course replaced
government offices and farm land.
In terms of the center of the town itself, there was a post office, sweet shop
and butcher’s in a single row with a lane separating those businesses from
the flower shop, bank and library. In 2007, only the bank (slightly expanded
in size), library, and post office remained the same. The flower shop had by
then been removed in favor of a travel agent, there was a shopping center
in the previously unoccupied space between businesses, and the sweet
shop and butcher’s were combined and transformed into a large
supermarket.
Question:
The maps below show a science park in 2008 and the same park today.
Answer:
The maps detail alterations to a science park dating back to 2008. Looking
from an overall perspective, it is readily apparent that the park has
expanded to include more areas for research, education and improved
accessibility.
Considering initially the northern end of the park, in 2008 there was
considerable untouched natural land that has now been replaced with a
research and development center (the reception area was also removed in
favor of a university hub, while the adjacent offices remain the same).
South of these new facilities, the car park has reduced in size, the business
units are unchanged, and, most significantly, the cyber security building
has been enlarged, overtaking previously undeveloped land.
In the southern section of the park, the circular IT centre has been
transformed into an innovation centre and there is a new train station on
the southernmost tracks with walkways branching off to various facilities.
Finally, there are additional biking routes along an eastern road and
running through the centre of the park past the car park and new
buildings as well as a bus stop on the eastern side of campus.
WRITING
TASK 2
Question:
Many supermarkets are selling more and more products that are imported
from other countries instead of selling food that is locally sourced.
What are the reasons for this?
Is this a positive or negative development?
Answer:
Some feel that supermarkets today sell too many imported products
compared to the number of locally produced ones. In my opinion, this is a
result of changes in consumer tastes and it is a negative overall.
The main cause behind this phenomenon is an exponential shift among

consumers. Over the last century advances in sea and air transport have
allowed supermarkets to import products from all over the world. As a
result, an individual living in New England can try exotic fruits like mangos
and pomegranates that cannot normally be grown in a four season
climate. Once a person tries a new food and enjoys it, they are more likely
to sample other new fruits and vegetables. They then recommend those
foods to others and shifts in taste quickly become mainstream and
irreversible.
This change is negative as it hurts local farmers and the environment. Local
producers must now compete with large companies that source products
such as bananas at lower prices and undercut farmers. Consumers
naturally buy the cheaper products and the result is that local farmers
often cannot survive without government subsidies or must close their
operations. Moreover, this development leads to greater consumption of
fossil fuels. Imported products allow consumers to shop out of season, for
example eating asparagus year round, but this requires shipping products
globally and increasing the burning of fossil fuels involved in
transportation.
In conclusion, though supermarkets now enable shoppers to have more

varied palates, this poses tremendous risks for local producers and the
environment. Therefore, tariffs on imports should be high.
Question:
Today, many young people spend too much of their free time at shopping malls.
This can considered negative for young people and society generally.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Answer:
In certain countries, it has becoming increasingly common for young people to
spend their free time at malls and this is often viewed as a negative. In my
opinion, though there are more productive activities, it should be considered a
positive overall given the most likely alternatives.
Proponents of this statement point out that malls are typically not a productive
use of one’s time. A person who goes to a mall is likely shopping, watching a
movie, hanging out idly with friends, eating from a fast food establishment, or
engaging in another similarly passive activity. A better use of time could involve
playing sports, reading a book, creating art, or working. The rise of malls globally
beginning in the 1980s signaled a period when younger individuals strayed from
healthy activities and took part in more socially and personally subversive
pastimes.
However, the fears detailed above are overblown compared to other free time
activities. These days, most young people who are free spend an outsized
proportion of their time doing truly unhealthy, passive activities. These largely
center around technology and include wasting time on social media, taking
pictures, playing online games, chatting online, streaming movies and videos,
and using the internet. The mall is now actually a better use of one’s time since it
likely will involve in-person socializing, precisely the domain that is most at risk
for younger generations and society today.
In conclusion, though time spent at malls is not the ideal activity for a younger
person, it is preferable to a more passive lifestyle and should therefore not be
condemned. It is likely, however, that malls will continue to decline in popularity
in the future so this concern will become less relevant.
Question:
Today, TV channels broadcast men’s sports shows more than women’s sport
shows.
Why is this the case?
Should TV channels give equal showtime for each?
Answer:
It is common practice for most TV networks to focus more on men’s athletics
rather than women’s. In my opinion, this is a natural byproduct of the history of
sports and there should be more equal emphasis depending on the sport in
question.
Men’s sports are more popular because they have developed further. In the past,
athletics was always the primary domain of men and women were relegated to
more domestic roles. Modern society understands this was discriminatory but
the result, higher quality of play among male sports, cannot be argued. A good
example of this would be professional basketball where the male leagues, such
as the NBA, feature some of the greatest athletes in the world, executing
complex coaching schemes, and consistently showcasing high skill levels.
Women’s basketball, while it has developed considerably in the last two
decades, is not the same level of entertainment though this may change in the
coming years.
As this situation may require time to remedy, only the ratings can justify equal
programming time. There are sports where this is already the case essentially,
such as tennis, where women receive equal prize money and the ratings are
comparable. In the United States, this also applies for international football
tournaments, where the female team regularly advances far beyond their male
counterparts. In these examples, it is warranted to give female athletics at least,
if not more, broadcast time. However, mandating this policy for all sports before
they are ready and the audience exists is likely to produce a strong backlash and
in fact hinder the progress of women’s sports.
In conclusion, there are institutional reasons for the disparity in the time
television channels dedicate to men’s and women’s sports and this should be
corrected on a case by case basis. Viewers will decide themselves which sports
deserve the most attention, regardless of gender.
Question:
Some people think the main purpose of school is to turn children into good
citizens and workers, rather than to benefit them as individuals.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Answer:
Many are of the opinion that the primary role of schools is to create good
citizens, instead of simply working towards individual betterment. In my opinion,
schools should aim to elevate the individual, not impose conformity.
Those is favor of this statement argue the value of a well-functioning society. As

the world develops and there are advances in medicine, safety, working
conditions, and so on it is easy to forget that this level of comfort requires
sacrifices for the common good. Individuals must work at companies to stimulate
the economy and the public must have a basic sense of community in order to
live peaceably with one’s neighbors. School is where this education can begin.
Teachers can explicitly and implicitly guide students to socially beneficial
behaviors and educate them well enough to establish a viable future career.
However, I would argue that focusing on the individual will accomplish the goals
detailed above but also be mentally healthier. Students who are taught to share,
work well in teams, and develop their talents will contribute to society as a
byproduct of pursuing their own seemingly selfish interests. Moreover, there
may be times when the focus on society will come at the cost of the mental
health of individuals. For instance, students who are taught to withhold their
personal viewpoints in school, as is common in many authoritarian nations, may
harbor resentment and not feel they can fully express themselves in a free
environment. Psychological research has shown that the key to healthy growth is
feeling safe to express oneself without fear of reprisals and repercussions.
In conclusion, although there is a valid argument in favor of social stability,

schools should aim to produce healthy, industrious individuals. Naturally, these
goals are not mutually exclusive and the overlap should be emphasized.
Question:
In many countries, children are becoming overweight and unhealthy. Some
people think that the government has the responsibility to solve this problem.
Answer:
Some feel that the current global obesity epidemic should be primarily handled
by governments. In my opinion, though the state has a key role to play, this is
mainly the duty of parents.
Those who argue in favor of this contention point to the power of governmental
regulation. Governments hold this responsibility not just because their job is to
safeguard public welfare but also because they are endowed with the authority
to enact real reforms. In some countries, there are strict laws about the products
that can be advertised during children’s programming and their maximum sugar
and fat content. Countries that do not have strong regulatory bodies to create
and enforce these laws naturally have considerably higher rates of obesity. In an
ideal world, governments would be more responsible for public health in this
crucial area.
However, since governments often fail to protect the public interest, parents
should take responsibility themselves. Parents can best achieve this by leading
by example. If children are not given sugary soft drinks, candy, and eat a diet
constituted of mainly vegetables and fruits, they are likely to develop lifelong,
positive eating habits. For instance, in nations such as France where food and
nutrition are taken very seriously, the majority of children do not grow up
addicted to unhealthy American fast food and obesity rates are lower.
Admittedly, this can be difficult for parents from lower socioeconomic
backgrounds who may struggle with finding the time, energy, and finances to
provide nutritious meals for their children.
In conclusion, government can regulate certain industries but parents must

themselves instill healthy habits in their children for there to be a meaningful
impact. This issue may have reached a high point and must now be addressed.
Question:
Some believe that younger family members should be legally responsible for
supporting older family members when they become physically, mentally and
financially unable to look after themselves.
Answer:
There have been recent proposals for laws that would require younger
generations to look after older family members when they are no longer capable
of doing so themselves. In my opinion, these laws are ethically responsible yet
should not be enacted considering the many circumstances they fail to take into
account.
Supporters argue elderly care is a basic responsibility. As parents age, there is a

near absolute chance they will have some combination of physical, mental, or
financial difficulties. Since most older people are unable to work full-time jobs,
the duty of care naturally falls to either the state or their families. The
government has other concerns and their care is impersonal, as in the case of a
state-funded nursing home. Children, who have an obligation to their original
care-givers, are in much better positions to provide loving support. This could
include living with them, supplying money, or helping them with medical bills.
However, this discounts the many contexts in which this care may not be
appropriate. Many parents do not want to be a burden to their children and
would rather look after themselves later in life. Others may not have been there
for their children, or even been abusive. Moreover, the help that children offer
will likely hinder their own progress in life. If they are wealthy, this is not a major
concern as they can hire someone to look after their parents and the financial
support will not be a burden. However, most working class families will struggle
to advance socially when slowed by a duty of care for elderly parents, especially
if this includes expensive medical bills.
In conclusion, despite the moral justifications, there are simply too many
situations where these laws would result in injustices and inconveniences.
Individuals should be given the opportunity to look after themselves.
Question:
Many people argue that in order to improve educational quality, high school
students should be encouraged to question and offer criticisms on their
teachers. Others think this will lead to a loss of respect and discipline in the
classroom.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Answer:
Some today contend that high school students should have greater latitude to
critique and question their teachers, despite the risks this presents for classroom
management. I am strongly in agreement as this enables the ideal classroom
environment.
Critics of this shift in mentality point out that the teacher position requires
respect. A teacher who is consistently being interrupted by students will not be
able to lecture and assign and mark homework well. Many students might
exploit a rule that encourages questions in order to intentionally derail lessons
and undermine the teacher. There is also the possibility that the negative
attitude of some students will create general unrest that is not conducive to
learning. However, I would argue that the appearance of respect, when in reality
most students question their teachers in private, holds little actual value beyond
preserving unwarranted pride.
Moreover, the free discussion of ideas is essential to the best learning. Students
who are sitting quietly and feigning interest in class are likely to become less
motivated. On the other hand, if a class is studying a work of literature or an
event in history, students will engage more fully in lessons given the opportunity
to ask questions. By asking questions, even if these queries are loosely defined as
criticisms of what is being taught, they will suddenly have a reason to learn and
the lesson will become more memorable for all students. The questions might
also lead the class to novel insights as long as the teacher is confident enough to
embark on collaborative explorations.
In conclusion, although certain educational institutions fear that questions may

undermine teachers, they in fact are the foundation of a positive learning
environment. Schools should embrace academic rigor in all its forms.
Question:
The governments should give each citizen a basic income so that they have
enough money to live on, even if they are unemployed.
Answer:
Some today are calling for the institution of a universal basic income for all
citizens. In my opinion, while this addresses legitimate fears concerning
automation, it would be ill-advised overall as work is central to the human
condition.
Those who advocate this legislation point out unemployment risks. Wealth is
today accumulated amongst a very small percentage of billionaires. In the future,
this situation will be exacerbated by rising corporate investment into advanced
robotics and artificial intelligence. For instance, 50 years ago there were
thousands of jobs for those working in factories assembling cars and other
products. Today, the vast majority of that work is done by machines and humans
must locate more creative avenues of employment. The fear that someday most
workers will no longer have a viable role in society does justify discussion of a
universal wage.
However, these future possibilities are not assured and work is still an essential
part of being human. Each person has duty in their personal lives, typically as
part of a family, as well as in public through their work. Only by fulfilling each
responsibility fully will a person feel connected to the history and present of
human progress. A universal wage would allow individuals to focus exclusively on
their family and their hobbies but it is nearly impossible to predict possible
deeper ramifications. Individuals may lose the motivation to innovate and the
world would, in that case, be run by unimaginative technocrats and machines.
In conclusion, though it seems that capitalism will someday necessitate a reform

such as a basic income for all, I believe there is enough value in work that
alternatives should be pursued instead. Idealistic dreams of a world without
work are naive and short-sighted.
Question:
Many doctors recommend that older people exercise regularly, but most
patients do not follow an exercise routine.
Why do you think this happens?
How can people be encouraged to exercise regularly?
Answer:
A large proportion of healthcare professionals find that their advice to elderly
people concerning exercise is not heeded. In my opinion, this is due to practical
concerns and the best encouragement would be through government initiatives.
The reasons senior citizens have difficulty staying fit are physical and economic.
Firstly, older people naturally suffer from a range of minor or major and
debilitating conditions such as poor cardiovascular health, arthritis, and
dementia. Each presents unique challenges to a regular exercise regular routine.
Moreover, older people are often unable to afford the costs associated with
learning a new sport or joining a gym. In the United States most older people
survive on a fixed income and must set aside money for medical bills. Sports
equipment is simply not a priority.
There is little that can be done to deter the natural ageing process but the
financial impediments can be effectively tackled by building more public parks
and facilities. An older person living in an urban area may lack easy access to a
park or the transportation to travel to one far away. However, if there was one
within walking distance they would be encouraged to exercise habitually. This
habit could also be reinforced by social interactions. Many older people are
lonely and seek companions from their generation. By making friends and
regularly meeting to walk to exercise in the park, as is common in many East
Asian nations, they can create lasting bonds that will also encourage them to
stay fit.
In conclusion, many older people are physically or economically unable to

exercise regularly and the this can be partly remedied with greater investment in
public spaces. The benefits of such a reform would impact other segments of the
population as well.
Question:
Some people think that enjoying the present is more important than planning for
the future for both countries and individuals.
Answer:
Many feel that being fully present in the moment is more valuable than thinking
of the future in terms of both nations and their residents. In my opinion, this
claim is untrue and shortsighted.
Firstly, countries must look to the future to ensure the safe flourishing of all
citizens. A country that simply looks to maximize current moments might make
unwise decisions that could quickly have catastrophic repercussions. A well-
known example of this would be the actions not taken by the United States
government in the build-up to The Great Recession of 2007 – 2009. Authorities
and governing bodies ignored the over-leveraging of assets and the potential for
foreclosures on real estate properties. When the worst scenario occurred, the
result was that millions lost their homes and the entire world plunged into a
period of stagnation. This same principle applies generally beyond economics
and includes the military, medicine, social welfare, and so on.
Secondly, the average person can best attain quality living standards through
careful preparation. Admittedly, this can lead to anxiety and a feeling of
dissociation with reality. These potential byproducts nonetheless pale in
comparison to the risk of not providing for one’s future. For instance, a person
who does not study hard in school or apply themselves fully to their career is
likely to always face financial pressure. This pressure will itself engender anxiety.
In extreme situations, such a person may fail to integrate productively with
society. In contrast, someone who thinks about the future, invests wisely, and
makes logical decisions is more likely to achieve a sense of happiness and
fulfillment.
In conclusion, looking to the future guarantees a higher standard of living and

the preservation of various national benefits. Countries in particular must always
prioritize consideration of future threats.
Question:
Some people prefer to spend their lives doing the same things and avoiding
change. Others, however, think that change is always good.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Answer:
Many people feel that change should be embraced without qualification while
others believe it is better to avoid new situations. In my opinion, though change
can be positive in certain contexts, it should not be pursued as valuable in itself.
Those in favor of change argue it is nearly always positive. Examples of good

changes might include moving to a new city, starting a new job, finding a new life
companion, or even something as simple as getting a pet. Each of these decisions
is a means of addressing a desire or feeling of dissatisfaction. One change that
has become prevalent in recent decades relates to nutrition and exercise. Such
lifestyle changes are based on research that has definitively shown the
importance of a healthy diet and identified foods low in certain kinds of fats and
carbohydrates. Combined with weekly exercise, the results are superior fitness
and improved longevity.
However, change is, more often than not, a means of disregarding one’s
responsibilities. Many individuals change jobs or leave relationships simply
because they feel they have lost their passion. This effort to re-energize is
typically unsuccessful because outward changes do little to alleviate internal
problems. Therefore, in the majority of cases, change is either an excuse to
justify selfish behavior or a temporary and superficial solution. The best-known
example of this would be the classic ‘mid-life crisis’ that particularly affects men
as they age and decide their life is not fulfilling their most basic desires.
Ultimately, most people would be better served by focusing on improving their
current situation rather than seeking transitory and exaggerated new
experiences.
In conclusion, change should not be sought as a means of escaping one’s primary

duties. Change should be an organic process and it is therefore advisable
individuals do not pursue it as a goal generally.
Question:
Today family members eat fewer meals together.
Why is this?
Is this a positive or negative trend?
Answer:
In recent years, it has become less common for families to eat meals together. In
my opinion, this is related to developments outside the home and is a positive
trend overall.
There is now a great variety of public activities. In the past, families traditionally
ate dinner together because it was rare to go out to restaurants and events.
Today, individuals can eat at cheap or expensive restaurants, attend concerts, go
to public parks, and meet a wider circle of acquaintances due to the rise of social
media. For instance, it is common to notice an event while scrolling through
social media, such as a gallery opening or a sports match, and make plans with
friends quickly through a group chat. The prevalence and accessibility of such
events explains why family meals are now uncommon.
This phenomenon is negative for families but positive for society overall.
Reduced time with one’s family can lead to psychological problems as a person
must feel loved by family members to maximize healthy growth. One method of
achieving this unconditional sense of security is through family meals. However,
there are other ways for a family to be close and the opening up of society
beyond the household is a massive boon for individuals. People who were stuck
at home and bored now have a variety of entertainment options and live overall
more fulfilling and richer lives. For example, a person who often goes to concerts
will likely make friends from various backgrounds and form lasting memories
with them.
In conclusion, family meals are less common because of developments in society

generally and it is positive on the whole given the freedom the average person
now possesses. Nonetheless, it is still important to balance time with family and
friends.
Question:
Some people believe that everyone has a right to have access to university
education and that governments should make it free for all students no matter
what financial background they have.
Answer:
Many today would argue that higher education is a basic right that should extend
to all, regardless of socioeconomic background. In my opinion, I largely disagree
since there is more value in improving the relationships between social classes.
Supporters of this policy point out that every taxpayer is entitled to equal
treatment. Those who are wealthy typically receive little financial support from
the government unless if they have earned a prestigious scholarship. However,
such families pay taxes at far higher rates than the average citizen. They have
contributed greatly to the federal budget and it is only just that they should
receive an equal allocation of their share of government disbursement for
university. Without financial aid, these individuals may feel they are being
unfairly treated simply because they are more successful.
Although I recognize the legitimate merits to the argument above, I would

generally side with those who believe a system that takes into account financial
differences is more sustainable. If average families are not allocated the majority
of funding for higher education, then they may not be able to attend these
schools at all. This risk does not exist for the more affluent. Over time, this could
have dire ramifications on society. The general populace might feel that upward
social mobility is nearly impossible and become demotivated. They may also
begin to resent the government and higher classes, creating the conditions for
social unrest.
In conclusion, despite calls for fairness under the law, certain distinctions should
be made for the betterment of society on the whole. Government policy should
be aimed at equality of opportunity rather than a reductive understanding of
equality.
Question:
Information technology is changing many aspects of our lives and now
dominates our home, leisure and work activities.
To what extent do the benefits of information technology outweigh the
disadvantages?
Answer:
Some today would argue that the revolution in information technology has a
pernicious impact generally. In my opinion, the drawbacks related to social
interaction do not outweigh the positive possibilities now available to the
average person.
The legitimately worrying disadvantages to information technology concern

interpersonal relationships. In the past, social interactions in person were more
common. Today, a majority of conversations take place through messaging apps
and on social media. The short-term result is that communication skills are in
decline. The longer-term implications will create wider social trends. As people
interact and form groups online they are more prone to groupthink and
radicalization. What would normally be mitigated by one’s circle of friends and
families, can now grow unabated in the virtual sphere with possible negative
results for all of society.
The main advantages of the current age are increases in what is possible. These
possibilities are most basically conveniences. Users can save time by taking
advantage of their phones to send emails, make calls, organize their day and
undertake a variety of other tasks. As technology evolves, it has even become
more common for employees to work remotely and therefore conserve time and
energy commuting to and from the office. Beyond these simple comforts, people
are able to accomplish more with digital devices. This includes the ability to write
with word processors, edit video on various applications, and then post and
interact with a global audience through the internet and sites such as YouTube.
In conclusion, despite the threat of a less socially active world, there are
justifying benefits concerning human potentiality. Both the positives and
negatives must be weighed and managed carefully.
Question:
Some think increasing business and cultural contact between nations is positive.
Others think it leads to the disappearance of the national identity.
Discuss both views and state your own opinion.
Answer:
Many feel that the effects of globalization on economics and culture are a
beneficial. In my opinion, although there is an argument for the financial
implications, the risks to the uniqueness of a national identity make it a negative
overall.
Supporters of such close contact point out the meaningful economic

ramifications. This is particularly important for more isolated and undeveloped
nations. There are countries where natural resources are extremely lacking or
unbalanced and this has slowed their progress historically. For instance, many
countries in the Middle East lack the arable land to support large population
growth. The discovery of vast reserves of oil in the 20th century allowed them to
exploit trade agreements to improve their economic outlook and basic
infrastructure. This same fact applies to varying degrees to nearly all nations as
trade enriches and a country without necessarily creating any negative
byproducts.
Nonetheless, the danger for culture is more lasting and therefore more
significant. The national identity of a country is not simply made up of the
dominant ethnic group. Every country has minorities and ethnic populations that
are most at risk through this process. For instance, in many parts of Asia and
Africa there are numerous indigenous groups that struggle to flourish in a
modern, global economy. For instance, the Hmong in Vietnam are famed for
their craftsmanship and attention to detail in hand-weaving and dyeing
sustainable clothing yet many of them must now abandon their traditional roots
to live in cities and work anonymous jobs for large corporations. Once such
cultures are lost, they will never return and the economic benefits will be little
comfort at that point.
In conclusion, despite the economic advantages of globalization, the possibility

of a country losing its individual cultural character is too great a risk. Countries
must therefore take steps to safeguard their culture.
Question:
Some people think that schools should select students according to their
academic abilities, while others believe that it is better to have students with
different abilities studying together.
Discuss both views and state your own opinion.
Answer:
Many are of the opinion that schools should determine classes according to
academic ability and distinguish stronger from weaker students. In my opinion,
though this must be carefully managed, it is a logical proposal.
Those who prefer mixed-ability classes argue the wider societal implications. If
all the brightest students are grouped together, this can essentially create a class
system within schools that may then persist later in life. The weaker students will
become insecure and feel they are being left behind. A student who has been
consistently studying in a lower level class will have virtually no chance of joining
a class that has been progressing at a faster pace for years. They are stuck within
their group and social mobility becomes virtually impossible. This mirrors the
class divisions that exist in society and puts less privileged students who tend to
be from vulnerable backgrounds at a sizeable and permanent disadvantage.
However, allowing students to learn with equally capable peers will lead to the
best overall progress. This applies to both students who excel at academics and
those who struggle. If a student, for instance, cannot master new mathematics
but is in a class with students who learn quickly, then they will never grasp the
concepts. If the other students in the class work similarly slowly, they may not
advance as far but at least they will be able to take the requisite time to
understand the math. Naturally, this is even more beneficial for more capable
students. They will be able to work quickly through units and subjects without
feeling bored by the pace of the lessons. Over time, their progress will grow
exponentially faster as the strongest students compete and push each other to
new heights of achievement.
In conclusion, the distinctions between students must be skillfully arranged but

any step that makes learning more individualized is positive. The ideal school
system enables students to work at their own speed.
Question:
Many jobs require ongoing training and research to stay competitive in a world
with rapidly evolving information and technology. Some believe that it is the
responsibility of businesses to pay for this training for their staff while others feel
it is up to the individual.
Answer:
In an era of technological disruption, it is becoming increasingly important for
businesses to consistently train their employees. In my opinion, though
individuals in certain professions should undertake training for their own self-
respect, this requirement is generally the responsibility of businesses.
There are particular sectors where the duty to continue training is a matter of
self-respect. This applies to professions where employees are well-compensated
and play a key role in society. For instance, doctors receive high salaries and
impact public health greatly. A doctor who works with cancer patients has a
responsibility to read the latest research in order to understand the best possible
options for treatment. Failing to do so would amount to wasting their potential
and not fulfilling their duty of care. However, these positions are the exception
and, for most jobs, lack of current training will not have such dire ramifications.
I believe companies should be primarily responsible for training as they possess

the means and motive. An illustrative example of this would be banks. At many
banks, it is essential for employees to understand regulatory changes and learn
about new developments in the field. Such training benefits the individual to an
extent but the bank itself gains the most from having a qualified staff that can
make sound financial decisions. However, the average bank worker may not
have the time or finances to afford such courses. Therefore, it is common
practice at well-run banks to provide free online or university courses for
committed employees. This strategy holds true not simply for banking but for
any job where new training will be beneficial for the overall business.
In conclusion, despite exceptions in certain professions, companies that are

financially able and also stand to benefit the most should be responsible for
training. This will only become more crucial in coming years as technology
continues to outpace other industries.
Question:
There is too much noise in many public places in cities.
What are the causes of this problem?
What can be done to solve the problem?
Answer:
Public areas in cities today are becoming increasingly noisy. In my opinion, this
change is caused by surging urban populations and shifting attitudes to personal
space. The best solutions involve innovative urban design.
The underlying reasons for higher noise levels in public spaces are growing
residential figures and changes in social behavior. Firstly, the migration of
individuals from the countryside to cities has been well documented over the
last century. This trend shows no sign of abating and it is self-evident that more
residents talking, operating vehicles, and interacting in public areas will create
more noise. Moreover, people are now less self-conscious. This is a uniquely
modern trend and is most apparent on social media. Most people are now
comfortable making videos in public, taking photos, and talking loudly on their
phones. This psychological shift has its benefits but one drawback is the
contribution to noise levels.
The most realistic solutions are adaptations by the authorities. I strongly believe
that the trends themselves cannot be countered since they follow the dictates of
human nature. Attempting to ban phones in public or restrict residency numbers
in certain cities would in fact engender greater problems. Instead, governments
can make myriad minor adjustments. Public spaces could include more
structures, such as trees and statues, in order to absorb sound. On public
transport, there could be softer padding so that sound does not bounce and
travel as far. There may also be steps that could be taken in terms of traffic and
residential areas that would encourage more spread out cities with lower
density. These are minor solutions to a large problem, however, their impact in
the aggregate would be meaningful.
In conclusion, although cities are becoming noisier as they become more

populous and people are more open today, this can be remedied if authorities
devise novel counters. In the future, this issue will only become more pressing.
Question:
Nowadays, a lot of offices employ open-space designs instead of separate rooms
for work.
Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?
Answer:
Many offices these days are opting for open designs over more traditional,
compartmentalized floor plans. In my opinion, despite the limited advantages for
efficiency, this is a positive change due to its social and work-related benefits.
On the one hand, an open layout can reduce efficiency. When individuals work in
private offices or cubicles, they are less likely to be disturbed and can therefore
work more effectively. Each time a person is interrupted, this not only requires
them to stop working but it may also take an indeterminate amount of time to
focus again. Over the course of a day, various interruptions in the aggregate can
massively reduce the amount of work completed. Recent research has in fact
shown that communication around the office, though beneficial in other ways,
does lead to declines in total work output. An office trying to achieve optimal
output thus should emphasize private working spaces.
On the other hand, increased communication is a boon both socially and

creatively. A standout example of this would be the offices designed by Apple
founder Steve Jobs for both Pixar and Apple. He intentionally created offices that
directed individuals to meet in common areas and that would facilitate
interactions between different divisions in the company. The impact of this on
morale is massive as individuals can make friends and enjoy each other’s
company throughout the workday. Moreover, the true intention of this design
was to facilitate creativity. By meeting others on a regular basis, employees are
more likely to combine diverse perspectives and be more imaginative in their
work.
In conclusion, although there may be minor tradeoffs in terms of productivity,

this is a progressive change as it allows employees to converse and be more
creative. Such offices should become the rule, rather than the exception.
Question:
Scientific research should be carried out and controlled by the governments
rather than private companies.
Answer:
Some feel that scientific research should be conducted by governments instead
of private entities. I am largely in disagreement with this sentiment since the
risks for public health entailed do not outweigh the competencies of
corporations.
Those in favor of state control over research argue governments are not
motivated to generate revenue. Companies are inherently concerned with
amassing capital and maximizing returns for shareholders and equity partners.
An illustrative example of the threat here would be the opioid crisis currently
ravaging the United States. Purdue, a privately-owned pharmaceutical
manufacturer, produced a pill with knowledge of its extremely addictive
properties and intentionally misled the public. The results have been millions of
deaths and rising addiction rates to opioids such as heroin. In contrast, the
government is able to prioritize public health since they do not have to earn a
profit.
However, the example above is an extreme exception as most companies are

motivated to innovate and contribute to the public good. The examples of this
behavior abound though they are less likely to receive excessive media attention.
Such breakthroughs include medicines such as the vaccine for Covid-19
developed by Pfizer and the technologies that companies such as Apple, Google,
and Samsung have pioneered in recent decades. These private companies are
able to hire and pay the best employees and are often led by visionary leaders
who are driven to excel and overcome competition from other firms. The
corporate environment creates the catalyst for scientists and researchers to
develop transformative devices and make discoveries that benefit the general
citizenry.
In conclusion, although companies are likely to pursue profits at all costs, they
are also more motivated to innovate. The role of government is therefore to
contain the worst excesses of the corporate world.
Question:
Some people think that children should begin their formal education at a very
early age. Others think they should begin after 7 years of age.
Answer:
Many feel that children ought to commence formal schooling from a very young
ago while others feel classes should start after the age of 7. In my opinion,
though there are social benefits to early schooling, many of these can be
replicated outside the classroom and there are emotional advantages to
attending school later.
There are legitimate reasons for young children to enter school related to
socializing. This can be best illustrated by the case of home-schooled children
who often have underdeveloped social skills that can persist into adulthood. In
contrast, children who are active members of a social group from a young age
are far more likely to develop outgoing, positive ways of engaging with others. As
they progress through normal childhood developmental stages and become less
egocentric, the presence of other children, and teachers to some extent, has
enormous benefits. However, parents can reproduce these advantages by
ensuring their children have time to socialize with neighborhood friends.
Furthermore, entering school after the age of 7 can serve as a long-term boon
for emotional health. When students begin formal schooling, they necessarily
feel stressed not only from competition with other children but also due to the
burden of homework and grades. If children remain home longer, they will form
stronger familial bonds that will encourage healthy relationships later in life.
Research has shown that the early years are essential in dictating how a child will
develop interpersonally. A child who received adequate love and attention is
considerably more likely to feel secure and establish healthy relationships with
friends and family in adulthood. Academics can always be strengthened later but
this is not always true for unseen emotional work.
In conclusion, despite the social benefits of schooling for young children, the
emotional ramifications of remaining home in a supportive environment are
more important. School administrators should consider this question carefully.
Question:
Many believe that it is important to protect all wild animals, while others think
that it is important to protect some, not all of them.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Answer:
Some have suggested that protection of wild animals should be selective. In my
opinion, humanity has responsibility for all wild animals, though it is occasionally
justified to divert resources towards more valuable species.
Those in favor of safeguarding certain wild animals argue the circumstantial

factors. These factors can range from the threat the specific animals face to the
value of the animal itself. For instance, tigers are an endangered wild animal and
require intensive conservation efforts compared with animals such as rats and
pigeons, which have adapted skillfully to urban environments. Most would admit
that there is little logic in providing equal support to species in different
circumstances. A more extreme critic could add that some animals are more
deserving of preservation. The tiger, to continue the previous example, is greatly
valued for its elegance. Other animals, such as bees, are valuable not for their
beauty but their usefulness to humanity.
However, all animals should be protected as humanity has been the catalyst for
their endangerment. Before the rapid industrialization and surging populations
of the last several hundred years, humans and animals lived on relatively equal
terms and shared the Earth. Since human development has outpaced nature and
now threatens the habitats of countless species, it is a duty for mankind to enact
safeguards for all animals. Without such forward-looking protections, there is
likely to be a “domino effect” as species die out and impair fragile ecosystems
globally. Therefore even if an animal is not on the verge of extinction, it might be
important to maintain their population levels so as to not start a cycle of
irreversible harms.
In conclusion, humans should endeavor to protect as many animals as possible

although there are exceptional cases where some species may be prioritized.
Governments and individuals should collaborate to ensure wild animals are not
unduly threatened by human progress.
Question:
Recent research suggests that the majority of criminals who are sent to prison
commit crimes after they are released.
Why is this the case?
What can be done to solve this problem?
Answer:
Historically, most people who were incarcerated commit crimes again after being
released from prison. In my opinion, this is related to economics and psychology
and the chief solutions are governmental.
The causes of high recidivism rates are identical to the original explanations for
the crimes in question. The vast majority of criminal activity can be traced back
to poverty. Individuals who are wealthy enough to afford a good standard of
living rarely have a motive for crime. However, those who lack financial means to
live a decent life are more likely to commit crimes and this is exacerbated for
past criminals who struggle to apply successfully for work with a past offense on
their permanent record. Moreover, there are psychological reasons that may
also persist. Many criminals had difficult upbringings and do not have access to
trained therapists who can help them work through their issues. These causes
combined are the reason that prison often fails to rehabilitate inmates.
The ideal solutions should be enacted by the authorities. Firstly, governments

must make consistent efforts to ensure released convicts can support
themselves financially. This might involve small stipends to help prisoners adjust
but the focus should be on education. An individual who has earned a high
school or university degree or learned a skilled trade has little reason to commit
crime after being set free. Secondly, governments could overhaul rehabilitation
methodologies. Though society is becoming increasingly secular, there is
research that suggests recidivism rates are considerably lower if a prisoner has
faith in a religion. Concern for one’s immortal soul is a powerful incentive for
ethical behavior.
In conclusion, many criminals reoffend due to economic and psychological

reasons and governments must take decisive action to counter this pattern.
Looking at successful models in other countries is also advisable.
Question:
The tendency of human beings to copy one another is shown in the popularity of
areas such as fashion and consumer goods.
To what extent do you agree?
Answer:
Some have suggested that the popularity of specific consumer trends evidences
a natural human inclination to copy one another. In my opinion, this is largely
true though there are other potential practical explanations.
Those who oppose this belief argue that imitation is rooted in reason. There are
legitimate practical justifications to follow others. If a product such as a new
smartphone is popular, then that is evidence it is a quality item. In this way,
people are copying on a rational basis, not out of an inborn human desire.
Moreover, popular items are likely cheaper and more widely available. A trendy
pair of jeans made by Levy’s, for instance, is produced in the millions and stocked
in department stores around the world. Individuals will encounter these jeans
frequently and their purchase is simply a matter of convenience.
However, I believe that copying others satisfies a deeper human drive to feel
part of a larger group. The natural tendency of humans to congregate also
compels them to adopt similar customs and habits. Imitation shows that there is
commonality and eases the fear of otherness. For example, Apple has built their
brand based on the power of an inclusive community of like-minded users. By
joining such an ecosystem, people are no longer isolated and feel part of a larger
whole that elevates their individual self-esteem and protects them from other
groups. Humans do not now face significant physical threats from nature but the
desire to copy one another in order to join a modern-day tribe persists in
contemporary consumer culture.
In conclusion, the popularity of similar consumer items illustrates an underlying

need in humans to imitate one another in order to feel safe and accepted. This is
not necessarily a negative insight though it should be managed carefully by
individuals.
Question:
Many claim that the fast food industry had a negative effect on the environment,
eating habits, and families.
To what extend do you agree or disagree?
Answer:
Some would argue that the prevalence of fast food in society negatively impacts
families, nutrition, and the environment. I am in complete agreement with this
sentiment.
Firstly, fast food has destabilized traditional family meals. In the past, it was
common for individuals to spend time eating a family meal so that parents and
children could share quality time together. Fast food does not make this
impossible, however, consumers are more likely to eat fast food while driving,
watching television, or outside the home. The impact on families is marginal
since fast food meals may be the exception though it is also decidedly negative.
Secondly, few would claim that fast food is healthy. The products at most fast
food establishments are extremely high in sugar, fat, calories, and chemical
preservatives. For instance, a cheeseburger from McDonald’s contains red meat
that has been treated with steroids, salty cheese, and various other ingredients
with, at best, doubtful dietary implications. This applies for the majority of fast
food and is the main reason many today strive to eat at home or at healthier
restaurants.
Finally, the production of fast food has significant environmental repercussions.

Firstly, this involves factory farming. In order to supply beef, chicken, and pork
there are massive farms that not only occupy land but also produce methane and
other gases harmful to the ozone layer. Secondly, the transportation of goods
that ensures consistency across franchises requires fossil fuel consumption. The
chief culprits here are cars, trucks, and airplanes.
In conclusion, though there may be limited benefits related to convenience, fast

food is an overwhelming negative in terms of families, eating habits, and the
natural world. Whenever possible, consumers should not opt for fast food.
Question:
Film stars and celebrities often share their views on public matters that have
little to do with their profession.
Answer:
It is common for famous figures with large platforms to share their viewpoints on
various topics. In my opinion, though there is potential for abuse, it is a positive
overall as they can contribute diverse perspectives.
Critics of the publicity celebrities receive for their comments argue they are not
always well informed. There are experts in every field, ranging from politics and
science to sports and the arts and yet stars in the entertainment world possess
outsized platforms. For instance, many actors, athletes, and singers have become
part of the anti-vaccination movement. The views of health experts and
epidemiologists are often subordinated to celebrity comments more likely to
generate online traffic and ratings. However, this argument is undermined by
research showing that professionals are notoriously poor at making predictions
concerning their own area of expertise.
Moreover, celebrities in film and music engender diversity. The entertainment

world, relative to other professional spheres, is made up of a wide variety of
ethnicities and socioeconomic backgrounds. Most actors move to Hollywood
from a different part of the world and then later become stars. In the music
industry, listeners actively seek out new voices, styles, nationalities, and
personalities. These individuals can then provide the average person an insightful
glimpse into another part of society. The most recent example of this would be
the awareness raised related to environmental issues by various singers and
actors when they accept awards.
In conclusion, although there is risk that celebrities will be uninformed on a
topic, their opinions are still important as they are typically candid, authentic,
and diverse. In this era of inclusivity, it is important to value all viewpoints.
Question:
Some people say that it is possible to tell a lot about a person’s culture and
character from their choice of clothes.
Do you agree or disagree?
Answer:
Many believe that fashion choices communicate information about an
individual’s personality and culture. I am largely in agreement though I would
concede globalization has partly obscured these distinctions.
Those who argue that a person’s culture and character cannot be determined
from their clothing point to the impact of globalization. There are now
international companies like Nike, Tommy Hilfiger, and Louis Vuitton that
manufacture and ship identical clothes all around the world for consumers.
These consumers are influenced by the same media and admire the same public
figures. This modern convergence of production and culture means that
disparate nations are more similar than at any point in human history. It is not
unusual to see an individual living in South America, for instance, wearing the
same shoes and clothing as someone in Asia or Europe.
Nonetheless, fashion preferences still reveal what a person values and what they
wish to project to the outside world. A person who wears a suit and tie appears
professional and this likely matches their personality. If they dress very formally
when at work it might also indicate the office culture in their country. For
example, it is common in East Asian countries for workers to dress very formally
for work while in Southeast Asia the clothing is more casual due to the tropical
climate. There are also individual differences that are, on average, greater than
the disparity between cultures. A person who is into sports is more likely to wear
sporty clothes regardless of where they live. Social media and globalization can
even contribute to this trend as a consumer can follow their favorite artist and
emulate both their personality and fashion choices.
In conclusion, though globalization theoretically makes it more difficult to

distinguish a person’s culture and character from their clothes, in fact, these
choices continue to be revealing. This self-expression is one of the benefits of
modern fashion.
Question:
Many young people today know more about international pop or movie stars
than about famous people in the history of their own country.
Why is this?
What can be done to increase young people’s interest in famous people in the
history of their country?
Answer:
Younger generations today are often more interested in international celebrities
rather than figures from their country’s past. In my opinion, this is a natural
tendency related to mass media and can be mitigated by improving history
lessons in schools.
Younger people today organically gravitate towards individuals they resonate

with and see in entertainment. This applies equally to those in the film and music
industries. For example, one of the most popular singers for the last decade has
been Taylor Swift, an artist who prolifically releases albums, updates her
Instagram, and is generally present online and in the entertainment world.
Young people listen to her songs and identify with her and then follow her
personal life closely in order to enjoy a vicarious, uplifting feeling. This stands in
marked contrast to historical figures who no longer contribute or offer any
present value.
This tendency to value current stars can be countered with more engaging
history classes. History lessons in most contexts focus on dry facts and
propaganda. However, there are historians who can enliven historical events
such as in Robert Caro’s non-fiction or Hilary Mantel’s historical fiction. If
students were introduced to passages from those sources, there is a stronger
likelihood that it would instill in them a lifelong passion for the study of history
and the figures that have shaped our current world. If such lessons were
combined with more relevant current events lessons, then students might be
more compelled to understand, respect, and continue researching great
historical actors.
In conclusion, though there is a natural inclination to pay more attention to

contemporary pop culture figures, an emphasis on quality texts could encourage
young people to care more about individuals from the past. This will not cause a
seismic shift but could have a marginal impact.
Question:
There are different methods businesses use to increase their sales.
What are the different ways companies use to increase sales?
Which one is the most effective?
Answer:
There are a variety of methods employed by businesses to grow their sales
revenue. In my opinion, these typically relate to marketing and innovation, with
the latter being the most effective.
Most companies choose to target increased sales through advertising campaigns

and new products. Marketing and advertising are self-evidently important.
Nearly every major company reserves a substantial portion of the budget for
television advertisements, online marketing, billboards, and so on. Companies
that excel with viral marketing, such as Starbucks, are able to dominate the
competition through brand awareness and grow sales consistently. Furthermore,
the introduction of new products is also a key catalyst. This can include new
menu items, such as the recent popularity of Popeye’s new chicken sandwich or
technological advances like the electric vehicles produced by Tesla.
Though advertising can be extremely persuasive, there is no substitute for a truly

revolutionary and unique product. The best example of this would be the most
successful consumer electronics product in history, the iPhone. When it launched
there was no comparable product, with Blackberry phones being the closest
analogue. The iPhone allowed users to make phone calls, send message, take
photos, check email, and use the internet. These are routine features now but at
the time these innovations drove rapid revenue growth and countless other
companies raced to replicate their success. This model applies to a range of
industries as a novel product can drive demand while a company need only focus
on maintaining their supply chain.
In conclusion, sales figures rise as a result of marketing strategies and successful

innovation, with the latter the single greatest method for generating more
revenue. Companies must balance both techniques yet prioritize new ideas
whenever possible.
Question:
Because many children are not able to learn foreign languages, schools should
not force them to learn foreign languages.
Answer:
Some feel that since it is challenging for children to learn a foreign language,
schools should not emphasize this subject area. In my opinion, the challenge is
the entire justification for supporting second language education.
Critics argue that the majority of children are simply incapable of learning an
additional language. The best evidence for this is anecdotal and relates to the
increasingly large burden of work placed on young children. Schools in many
parts of the world, particularly in high-achieving nations such as South Korea and
Japan, are in session for many hours and students learn an array of subjects.
They are usually taught English, the world’s lingua franca, and this is especially
difficult for speakers of Asian languages, where there is little shared linguistic
history. The end result is often that students waste time and may feel
discouraged and lack self-esteem.
However, children can learn languages better than adults and the challenge
presented is itself an important lesson. If the schools have invested in proper
training and use engaging materials then the lessons will not be boring and there
is a stronger likelihood of success. Research has shown that language learning is
most effective before the age of 7, with pronunciation becoming a stumbling
block for older learners who already have fixed vocal formations. Moreover, the
difficulty of learning a language encourages children to work harder and expand
their ability to learn in creative ways. This applies to all subjects but languages
stand out as students must seek novel memorization techniques and view the
world from a completely different perspective.
In conclusion, despite the low rates of success in many cases, the impact of
attempting to learn a language is itself tremendously beneficial. Schools should
therefore continue funding this part of the curriculum.
Question:
Governments should make people responsible for looking after their own local
environment.
Do you agree or disagree?
Answer:
Some would argue that climate change is such a pressing threat that
governments should issue mandates to make individuals responsible for
protecting the local environment. In my opinion, this might raise
environmental awareness, however it is not advisable as other steps are
more likely to produce results.
Those who suggest individuals should be compelled to accept

responsibility are hoping for a united effort from the general public. The
entire reason the Earth faces potential catastrophe is because of over-
population and consumer habits. There would be a noticeable
improvement if individuals were forced to recycle, clean up litter in their
neighborhoods and reduce their carbon footprint by not using private
vehicles, single-use plastics, and airplanes. There is the added argument
that it is important to instill public duty in the mind of the average person.
The government could fix these problems but that would only enable bad
behavior from citizens in the same way that an overly permissive parent
engenders a spoiled child.
However, the impact from the steps mentioned above would be marginal
compared to the regulations governments can enact on various industries.
Individuals might not follow the mandates from governments and they
would be extremely difficult to enforce in populous nations that value
individual liberty such as India, the United States, and Brazil. If
governments instead passed laws related to both small and large
businesses they could combat global and local issues. Companies that
contribute to air and water pollution could be severely fined and the
businesses that profit the most from mass consumerism could be forced to
institute more environmentally friendly policies. These simple reforms
would have tremendous impact.
In conclusion, although this policy would help individuals become more

active in their communities, it is more important for governments to enact
sweeping regulations on corporations. In this way, the most progress will
be made.
Question:
Some claim that men are naturally more competitive than women.
Answer:
Men are stereotypically considered to be more competitive than women. In
my opinion, though this is ostensibly true, in fact, competitiveness just
finds different expression in females.
The traditional argument in favor of this claim is that men are predisposed
genetically to aggressive traits. Men have elevated levels of the hormone
testosterone. This is supposedly an evolved adaptation as males in human
pre-history had to battle one another for dominance and required a
surplus of strength to hunt and provide for the whole family. In the modern
world, this translates to a heightened aggressiveness often reflected in the
number of ambitious men, driven to excel in their chosen field. Numerous
studies and tests have confirmed the surface-level validity of this
argument.
However, this ignores the fact that women simply have different outlets for
their competitive qualities. In the past, societal prejudices often
discouraged women from expressing an interest in competitive sports and
ambitious career paths. It is now more common for females to embrace
their competitive drive and strive for goals similar to men. However, this is
merely a redirection of innate desires that were already present. Instead of
competing in traditionally competitive fields, women in past generations
focused their energies towards more domestic matters. These might not
have been as seemingly competitive but women nonetheless had to
compete against each other to gain the highest possible position in society
available to them at the time.
In conclusion, despite the evolutionary evidence to support the natural

competitiveness of males, I feel that the sexes are generally equal in this
area though women express this desire more subtly. Such narrow
stereotyping of both genders is often overly simplistic.
Question:
Some people think that newspapers are the best way to learn about current
events. However, others believe that they can learn news better through other
media.
Answer:
Many are of the view that news is best received through traditional
newspapers while others feel that more modern media is preferable. In my
opinion, despite the better habits engendered by reading the newspaper,
it is impossible to argue convincingly against the convenience of newer
mediums.
On the one hand, reading the newspaper allows for a healthy, distraction-
free environment. This relates to both the content and the presentation of
newspapers. Newspapers undergo rigorous editing and articles are
necessarily published more slowly, allowing for better writing and fewer
sensationalist headlines. An individual reading the newspaper can be
compared to someone eating healthy foods or doing exercise. Similarly,
newspapers are not vulnerable to the wide array of potential distractions
on digital devices. There is less chance a newspaper reader will be
distracted by social media or their personal communications.
On the other hand, there are a wide variety of functions only provided by
more recent forms of media. Newspapers are primarily based on text, with
images adding slight variety. In contrast, online media enables an
individual to watch videos, listen to audio, cross-reference sources, consult
primary sources, and generally take full advantage of the digital world. For
example, a person who reads an article about a politician’s remarks can
then check for the video in order to hear their words in context and later
visit a site such as Twitter to analyze reactions from the general public,
journalists, experts, and the politician. This information can then be easily
shared through online messaging services or social media.
In conclusion, there are definite advantages to non-digital news sources,

however, these are overshadowed by the versatility of modern media. It is
the duty of individuals to ensure they enjoy the positives without the
drawbacks of spending too much time online.
Question:
Shopping habits depend more on your age group than anything else.
Answer:
Many would argue that an individual’s shopping habits depend more on
age demographics than other factors. In my opinion, age is relevant in
terms of a person’s tastes, however social class is a greater determiner.
Those who would argue in favor of age point out how a person’s
preferences are largely fixed. The past several decades have witnessed
seismic changes in culture, particularly related to technology. A person
who grew up before the digital age is more inclined to spend money on
books, holidays, furniture, and other non-digital items. The style of these
items is also likely to be more traditional and less modern. However,
someone under the age of 40, is more likely to spend on a new phone,
electronic vehicle such as a Tesla, or clothing and furniture that is more
modern and minimalist. These disparities widen when considering the
youngest generations who are even more inclined to value the virtual
world through purchases such as NFTs and cryptocurrencies.
However, for the majority of major purchases, wealth determines what a

person can afford and therefore buy. This is evident for a variety of products
ranging from food and wellness items to technology and fashion. For
instance, most individuals would love to buy the newest smartphone when
it is released, drive in a luxury car and shop for expensive and healthy
organic products at the supermarket. However, one’s financial status will
either allow a person to express these desires or force them to live frugally.
The best evidence for this is the lack of discretion children show when it
comes to shopping. They are uninhibited by financial concerns and
therefore attempt to buy whatever they like.
In conclusion, despite the clear differences in taste present in individuals or

different generations, financial flexibility is the clearest factor influencing a
person’s shopping habits. This has been true for most of history and still
remains the case today.
Question:
Smoking is a major cause of serious illness and death throughout the world
today. In the interest of the public health, governments should ban cigarettes
and other tobacco products.
Answer:
Many today are calling for a complete ban on tobacco related products due
to their health effects. In my opinion, since tobacco offers few tangible
benefits, such a prohibition would be justified.
Opponents of such a policy argue that it conflicts with individual and

economic freedom. Firstly, individuals should have the right to live their life
as they wish as long as they are not harming others. This is the basic tenet
that underlies most democratic societies and smoking cigarettes falls
firmly within this sphere of an individual’s rights. Secondly, there is an
economic factor. Tobacco companies produce billions of cigarettes a year,
providing employment and paying significant taxes throughout the
process. If these companies were suddenly forced to declare bankruptcy
and shut down, it would have catastrophic short-term effects on the
economies of both developed and developing nations. The economic
downsides alone could, temporarily, do more harm than good.
However, tobacco is an almost entirely harmful product in its effects. In

contrast to other narcotics, such as caffeine, alcohol, and cannabis, there is
no discernible sensation produced by smoking cigarettes or chewing
tobacco. Tobacco contains nicotine, which is highly addictive and
engenders a chemical dependency, and that is the reason it has become
such a common habit. Moreover, there are meaningful health problems
that for smokers as well as unintended parties through second-hand
smoke. It is common for long-time smokers to suffer from a weakened
immune system, conditions like emphysema, and increased risk for lung
cancer. These maladies place an added burden on the health system and
hospitals.
The limited benefits of cigarettes compared with the massive potential

health costs for individuals and society justify the ban. Individuals have
always had to sacrifice elements of freedom in order to ensure greater
security and this issue is only viewed differently for historical reasons.
Question:
The world should have only one government rather than a national government
for each country.
Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?
Answer:
There have been suggestions historically for a single government that
could control all nations. In my opinion, there are utopian benefits that
would result from this, however, the drawbacks related to autonomy make
it a negative theoretical proposal.
Supporters argue a single government would be more effective and

focused. This is best illustrated through major problems that all nations
currently struggle to solve such as climate change and the recent health
crisis facing the world. A single centralized government could better
protect the environment by enacting strict legislation against the burning
of fossil fuels and force all citizens to get vaccinated against Covid-19. In
purely hypothetical terms, such unilateral power could achieve
tremendous ends. However, in reality, there is a strong likelihood that a
government would either pursue different, less desirable goals or be
unable to enforce their mandates.
Beyond the infeasibility of such a world government, there are more basic
reasons to oppose its existence. Variety in government is valuable in itself.
Take for example the different governments currently in power around the
world. Each country has, to varying degrees, chosen a government that
represents their values and enacts laws based on the kind of nation they
wish to have. The result is that some countries, such as those in Western
Europe, lean more towards a socialist system that ensures a minimum
standard of living for all citizens, others place greater emphasis on
individual empowerment, others on transparency and still others on
security over freedom. This diversity is a defining feature of human society.
In conclusion, a single government for the entire planet could help resolve
global issues but would ultimately limit the distinctiveness of each
individual nation. Therefore, there are other solutions that should be
undertaken to remedy the current crisis of confidence in government.
Question:
Some people think personal happiness is directly related to economic success,
while others believe this depends on other factors.
Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.
Answer:
Many are of the belief that happiness is a result of financial success, while
others feel there are more crucial factors. In my opinion, a certain degree of
financial stability is a basic requirement for happiness but is less important
overall than one’s family and health.
Those who claim that happiness correlates highly with earnings argue that
it affords individuals a higher standard of living. A person with a
considerable salary is able to buy a nice house, provide for their family, and
purchase luxuries ranging from good food and frequent holidays to
expensive vehicles and fashionable clothing. Each item taken on its own
only contributes a small degree of pleasure, however, such purchases add
up to a generally content, comfortable and enjoyable lifestyle. If a person is
inclined to equate pleasure with happiness, then there is a legitimate
argument to be made for the pursuit of happiness being the pursuit of
money.
However, the majority of individuals, wealthy and otherwise, would state

that happiness is more a consequence of quality time with family and
good health. A comfortable home filled with luxuries is enjoyable but the
most sustained happiness comes from relationships. Someone who has
lost touch with their family and has frayed interpersonal bonds with their
relatives, is not likely to be able to fill such a void with physical possessions.
Anecdotally, towards the end of life most people recognize that their
happiest moments were spent in the presence of loved ones. Additionally,
good health is a more powerful pre-condition for happiness since no
amount of wealth can buy relief from chronic suffering.
In conclusion, happiness depends more on one’s relationship with their

family and physical health rather than financial success. There are,
naturally, exceptions as happiness is subjective and can be defined
differently.
Question:
Movies and computer games containing violence are popular. Some people say
they have a negative effect on society and should be censored. Others say they
are just harmless relaxation.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Answer:
Some feel that violence in entertainment is a root cause of problems in
society and should thus be censored. In my opinion, while there is
legitimate cause to establish reasonable boundaries, such content has little
actual negative impact.
On the one hand, there is a general level of acceptance that gratuitous

violence should be restricted. This is particularly the case if films are being
broadcast on public channels or it is possible to gain easy access to violent
games. In most nations, programming during the daytime has higher
thresholds for acceptable content due to fears of influencing
impressionable children. The worry is that very young children and
teenagers will become desensitized to violence and potentially establish
either a confrontational way of interacting or, in extreme cases, a pattern of
behavior. Studies have not shown much evidence for these claims however
they possess a commonsensical logic.
On the other hand, the majority of individuals have no difficulty

distinguishing between fiction and reality. Consumers of violent
entertainment are simply passing the time or experiencing a vicarious
thrill. There is even the slight chance that by watching violent
entertainment, audiences will be dissuaded from such behavior or feel
their need for violence has been sufficiently expressed. For instance, an
individual who plays violent computer games or is obsessed with horror
films, according to research, is no more likely to commit a violent crime or
display abnormal behavior. The actual causes of problems in society relate
to employment, economics, discrimination, income inequality, and various
systemic barriers.
In conclusion, though there are certain levels of violence that should be

censored depending on the context, most explicit content ought to be
permitted in games and movies. Efforts to heavily censor would be short-
sighted and misguided.
Question:
Some people say that individuals who make a lot of money are the most
successful. Others think that those who contribute to society like scientists and
teachers are more successful.
Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.
Answer:
Many would argue that those who contribute significantly to society, such
as artists, teachers and scientists, are more successful than the affluent. In
my opinion, although earnings can be a sign of success, one’s worldly
impact should be held in higher esteem.
On the one hand, wealth allows an individual to enjoy their life to the
fullest. It is common in popular culture to elevate values related to altruism,
however, most honest individuals would admit that success can be
equated with what one can afford. The wealthy can afford the possessions
and lifestyle they desire and also have the free time and peace of mind to
completely enjoy their leisure. In past centuries, such people were admired
as shameless examples of personal enjoyment. Therefore, this financial
freedom can be viewed as the strictest and more direct definition of
success.
However, money itself does not always engender a feeling of satisfaction in

the same way as more active pursuits in life. Many wealthy individuals feel
that they have contributed little to society and this diminishes their
enjoyment of their gains. Such dissatisfaction is less present in individuals
who, as long as they are not living in destitute poverty, pursue meaningful
outlets for their energies. For example, renowned scientists throughout
history are often not extremely wealthy, yet they are considered great
successes due to their contributions and the personal joy they derive from
the full exercise of their abilities. This fact can be extended to all other
professions that involve determination, creativity, and the growth of one’s
influence.
In conclusion, despite the material benefits of wealth, it is clear that one’s

ability to shape the world is a surer symbol of success. Every individual and
society must locate a balance between these two ideals.
Question:
In today’s world of advanced science and technology, many still greatly value
artists such as musicians, painters and writers.
What can the arts tell us about life that science cannot?
Answer:
Many people today continue to value the arts despite a growing emphasis
on science and technology. In my opinion, this is because only the arts
allow for self-expression and create fundamentally crucial and uplifting
truths about humanity.
The first reason the arts continue to be relevant relates to their capacity for
self-expression. This is important not only for individuals but also for society
at large. For individuals, the ability to express themselves is a crucial
element of being fully human and having strong mental health. This
explains the popularity of classes for painting, music, and dance as a
means of relaxing and expressing one’s thoughts and feelings. In the
aggregate, millions of people expressing their viewpoints leads to a
plurality of perspectives that can enrich society. For instance, all the most
revered periods of human history, such as the Renaissance, were defined
by a flourishing of the arts.
Secondly, art has the capacity to create value in a way that science cannot.
Although science is capable of making tangible improvements in the lives
of individuals, it is unable to impart meaning. In contrast, the arts are
interpretations of the world that can uplift and enliven. For example, great
filmmakers over the course of the 20th century have explored complex
subject matter in classic films such as The Godfather, not only entertaining
viewers but also presenting a vision and insightful understanding of
American history. If the arts are extended to include the writings and
teachings of religious leaders, it is easy to see their impact on values and
morality.
In conclusion, the arts still occupy a prominent position in society as they

allow for individual self-expression and the creation of ideals. Therefore, it is
important that governments continue to fund and support these
seemingly less worthwhile pursuits.
Question:
In many countries, people now wear western-style dress such as suits and jeans
rather than traditional clothing.
Why is this?
Answer:
It has become increasingly common in recent years for individuals globally
to dress in western-influenced clothing. In my opinion, this is a natural
result of corporate and cultural globalization and is broadly negative.
The main cause of this phenomenon is globalization. This relates firstly to

culture. The growth of the media industry generally and online media
more specifically has spread primarily American cultural values. Individuals
living in distant nations watch the latest blockbuster Hollywood movies,
listen to the same singers and emulate their lifestyle choices including
fashion. Secondly, mass production enables this homogeneity. Hundreds of
years ago, consumers had no choice other than to buy clothes produced
by local artisans. Now, companies like Louis Vuitton and Tommy Hilfiger
can fabricate identical items of clothing to be shipped globally at
affordable prices, forcing many local businesses into bankruptcy.
The positive side of this trend, lower prices and potential inspiration from
western fashion, are largely overshadowed by the injurious impact on
cultural diversity. For example, in many parts of Asia, there are the rich
cultural traditions of various ethnic minorities. These skilled garment-
makers follow traditions dating back hundreds of years. The clothing
produced is not only beautiful, but also more environmentally friendly and
unique. However, these days few local residents are interested as they
prefer wealthy western fashion brands that showcase their social status.
The result is that the values being espoused by fashion are material wealth
and appearances rather than tradition, culture, and artistic skill.
In conclusion, western fashion trends are ubiquitous today due to the

effects of globalization and this represents a negative shift in values.
Individuals should therefore strive to ignore these trends and purchase
clothes that express their culture better when possible.
Question:
Many adults nowadays prefer spending their free time playing computer games.
Why do they do this?
Answer:
A large proportion of adults now enjoy playing computer games during
their free time. In my opinion, this is a result of developments in mobile
technology and is decidedly negative since computer games encourage
passivity.
The primary cause of increased interest in games is their availability. In the

past, computer games could only be played on desktop computers at
home. Now, it is possible to play the same essential games on laptops,
tablets, and smartphones. This means that individuals are more likely to
become addicted over time as research has shown the strength of
intermittent rewards in forming addictive habits. For example, the average
worker can play games on their phone while on the commute to work,
during work on a desktop or laptop, and throughout the day whenever
they have a break. This creates a powerful feedback loop in the same way
as other drugs.
In my opinion, the entertainment value of such games pales in comparison

to their impact on sedentary lifestyles. Before computer games became
pervasive habits, individuals were more likely to spend time talking with
friends, reading books, participating in physical activities, and being
generally more productive. All these habits were better for mental and
physical health. Computer games, on the other hand, require a minimal
level of mental activity and feed users small bursts of dopamine that keep
them occupied and entertained for hours. The cumulative effect,
particularly when coupled with other passive activities such as using social
media and watching streaming sites, is a generation of less active and
creative individuals.
In conclusion, adults play computer games more often these days because
of the availability of mobile technology and this is harmful as it fosters
passivity. It is therefore important for adults to set limits for themselves.
Question:
Some countries are considering imposing curfews in which teenagers will not be
allowed outdoors at night unless they are accompanied by an adult.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this policy?
Answer:
Some governments are considering proposals to institute curfews for
teenagers that would require them to be in the presence of an adult after
certain hours. In my opinion, the marginal benefits of such a policy would
be greatly outweighed by its social drawbacks.
One the one hand, requiring teenagers to remain at home at night could
help curb juvenile delinquency. In certain cities, it is common for particular
neighborhoods to be full of criminal activity late at night. A teenager who is
either engaging in such activity or simply passing through those areas is at
significant risk. By staying home, teenagers would be forced to engage in
more wholesome activities and the authorities would be better able to
police the streets. In this way, governments could limit both crimes
commited by and upon teenagers.
However, the cases mentioned above affect a minority of teenagers while

this reform would impair the social growth of the majority. Ensuring
teenagers stay home essentially limits their social acquaintances to within
their family. In many situations, if the family is small or there are issues
related to abuse, this could foster an unhealthy psychological and social
dependence. When teenagers hang out with friends at concerts, malls,
parks, and other public venues they begin to develop their identity and
manage the demands of interpersonal relationships. Any reforms that
hinder such growth are negative for the progress of society more generally.
In conclusion, despite the positive effect a curfew would have on

misbehavior, such suggestions should be ignored in order to guarantee
the healthy social development of adolescents. There are less restrictive
methods of reducing juvenile deliquency that could instead be considered.
Question:
Crime rates will fall as advances in technology make it easier to detect and
prevent crimes.
Answer:
Many people believe that as technology advances, it will ease the
challenges of law enforcement. I am generally in agreement though these
innovations will not completely eliminate criminality as it is inherent to
human nature.
Critics would argue that crime is a natural human instinct. Crime has
existed in all human society for thousands of years and improvements in
law enforcement can only hope to limit, not extinguish, a basic element of
human nature. The reason for this is the natural conflict between the
desires of individuals and the expectations of society. In most cases, an
individual inhibits his or her impulses, but some lack this restraint and
violate the dictates of society. Many of these individuals, for reasons related
to nature or upbringing, would struggle to control themselves even if there
was near-certainty they would be apprehended.
Nonetheless, crime can be effectively countered by more invasive

surveillance. Governments now have the capacity to install cameras in the
physical world and watch individuals carefully online as well. The best
known examples of this would be in countries where cameras are
common. In these, often authoritarian nations, governments are able to
record footage of nearly every street. As criminals are aware there is a near
100% chance they will be filmed and arrested, crime statistics in those
areas are negligible. This reduction in crime due to an awareness of
ubiquitous surveillance can also be extended to the online sphere, where
law enforcement can monitor VPNs, IP addresses to detect and trace
illegal activity.
In conclusion, despite the likelihood that crime will never be completely

eliminated, the advent of increased surveillance in particular will lead to
drastic reductions in offences in the coming decades. Governments will
then, as always, have to balance the priorities of safety against claims to
freedom and privacy.
Question:
In many situations, people who break the law should be warned instead of
punished.
Answer:
Some feel that law-breakers ought to be entitled to a warning instead of
strict sanctions. I largely disagree with this sentiment as punishment is
crucial for society at large.
Those who argue in favor of warnings claim that incarceration encourages

a cycle of criminal behavior. For example, if an individual is arrested for a
low-level narcotics offense, there is a strong chance the incident will
become part of their permanent record. This then makes it more difficult
to apply for jobs or seek higher education. If the perpetrator in question
also spends time in prison as a result, they may have made connections
among the prisoner population. All these factors combine to increase the
likelihood of committing crimes in the future since other avenues have
become restricted. If the offense is insignificant, the punishment appears
to do more harm than good.
Though the policy detailed above is logical for very minor infractions,
punishment is needed for most crimes. The various justifications for
punishment typically include deterrence, rehabilitation, public safety and
justice itself. Of these, deterrence is the most often cited and effective.
Most potential criminals do not commit crimes because they are aware of
the punishments and this ensures a minimum degree of public safety. If a
person knew they would only receive a warning for a more serious
infraction, then there would almost undoubtedly be more crime. Even in
the case of negligible offenses, stronger punishments that are not part of
one’s permanent record would better curb future criminality.
In conclusion, though warnings may be preferable for certain minor

crimes, the principle of deterrence justifies punishment. If a system of
warnings were combined with other measures, such as improved
education and mental health support, this reform would be more feasible.
Question:
Some people think employers should not care about the way their employees
dress, but the quality at work.
To what extent you agree or disagree?
Answer:
Many are of the belief that corporations should prioritize quality work over
appropriate workplace attire. In my opinion, there are limits to this
sentiment; however, it is largely justified as other areas are more crucial to
success.
Those in favor of a strict dress code argue that it fosters professionalism.

Appearance is important not only for clients and customers but also
workers themselves. An employee who dresses well for work is similar to an
actor preparing for a performance. The appearance of professionalism is
likely engender the same level of diligence to their work. This becomes part
of a cycle as customers notice the attention to detail and workers become
aware they are essentially performing. The best illustration of this is
professions that require uniforms, such as doctors and police officers, and
thus fully embody their public role.
However, the quality of the work itself is paramount. In recent years,

corporations have relaxed dress codes in recognition of this fact. For
example, many technology companies in Silicon Valley including Facebook
and Google are famous for a more casual approach to attire. This policy
begins with the CEOs and executives who eschew traditional suits for
jeans, normal shirts, and comfortable shoes. This signals that the success of
a company depends more on the output of their work. An employee at
such a company who dresses well but cannot code or contribute
meaningfully to a high-achieving team is in fact a hindrance to success.
The focus on inner qualities and capabilities is reflective of an broader
social shift that places less value on factors extrinsic to true achievement.
Question:
Some people focus on news in their own country, while others think it is more
important to be aware of international news.
Answer:
Many readers now feel it is more important to stay informed concerning
international news items, rather than local ones. In my opinion, though
international news can be interesting, local stories contain greater
relevance and are therefore more important.
Consumers of international news point out its entertainment value. The

majority of people reading news from other countries recognize it has
essentially no impact on their own life. However, for many articles from
abroad also tend to hold greater appeal. An individual in the United
Kingdom, for example, might become bored of local politics and repetitive,
provincial stories. There is likely to be more excitement gained in reading
about global conflicts, trade disputes, foreign elections, political unrest and
environmental catastrophes in distant nations. The reader may not be
aware of their own intentions, but these stories are primarily a way to pass
the time and be entertained.
However, the entertainment value of international news is less important

than relevant local reporting. For example, local news has become
essential reading during the recent Covid-19 pandemic. Individuals have
little choice but to read articles about the particular strain in their nation,
the number of active cases, and the restrictions being urged or mandated
by public authorities. If an individual is unaware of such news, they may
violate a rule and put themselves and others at risk. The value of local news
applies to less pressing emergency situations as well and may include
stories about local elections, corruption in politics, crime rates, and various
other stories of interest.
In conclusion, despite the value of international news as a source of

entertainment, local news should be prioritized given its actual
significance. Individuals should strive to ignore as much news as possible
and only stay informed about pertinent issues.
Question:
Some people think that governments should give financial support to creative
artists such as painters and musicians. Others believe that artists should be
funded by alternative sources.
Answer:
Many believe that artists are entitled to federal financial assistance, while
others feel that they should seek different sources of revenue. In my
opinion, in certain cases government aid is justified but for the majority,
supplying their own income is a catalyst to create quality artwork.
Proponents of this policy argue that it can free artists to be more creative. If
an artist is concerned about paying their rent and buying groceries, they
will have less time and energy to dedicate to their artwork. Even more
importantly, financial considerations will influence their work. Many
painters, writers, and musicians are more likely to produce commercially
viable artworks rather than artistically honest ones. There have been
numerous examples in the past, such as during the Renaissance when
painters, sculptors and architects received patronage from the
government or wealthy citizens and artistic expression flourished.
However, these instances are distant exceptions and most artists now
operate in commercial fields.
The main reason this reform is unnecessary is that artists derive benefits
from independence. An artist who must sell his or her artworks is
motivated to strive for greater works. For example, an artist may begin
creating specialized artworks and fail to find an audience. They might then
modify their approach and still maintain a high degree of artistic integrity.
This interplay with market forces can result in a better product.
Noteworthy examples of this include the boom of the film industry in the
twentieth century, the rise of stand-up comedians recently, and great
works of literature that find large audiences such as the Harry Potter
franchise.
In conclusion, despite notable instances of the success of government

assistance, artists benefit from self-reliance. This will of course require them
to carefully balance artistic and commercial considerations.
Question:
Some people think that because children find subjects such as mathematics and
philosophy difficult, they ought to be optional instead of compulsory.
To what extent do you agree?
Answer:
Many feel that overly rigorous subjects such as mathematics and
philosophy should not be mandatory for children. In my opinion, though
there is a risk students will struggle to cope, teachers should be able to
adapt the subject matter.
One reason these subjects should not be mandatory is they are often too
abstract for young children. Numbers themselves are abstract. This is why
many children are unable to tell time as it is essentially a metaphorical
division of a circle into a clock. Teachers who place too much emphasis on
abstract numbers and ideas in their lessons will find that students may
become bored because they are unable to grasp the concepts. Philosophy
could also become tedious and inefficient if the students lack the cognitive
ability to apply general rules and ethical considerations to everyday life.
This capacity to recognize and apply abstractions typically develops later in
adolescence.
However, these subjects can be made accessible for children. The key is the
approach of teachers and choice of materials. Math, for example, does not
need to begin with complex, abstract equations but could instead involve
real world scenarios and simple logic. Numbers could be introduced later
as children tend to be confused by less grounded concepts. Similarly,
philosophy can be approached from a number of mediums, including
through stories. Many children’s stories and fables feature curious
protagonists and interesting morals. Instead of explicitly instructing
children through academic jargon, they can engage with the same
questions about life and its origins more directly through the journey of
characters in a story.
In conclusion, despite the risks of theory-heavy subjects for young learners,

schools should embrace the challenge and seek less explicit teaching
methodologies. This will help form the basis of a well-rounded education.
Question:
Some people think children should have the freedom to make mistakes, while
other people believe that adults should prevent children from making mistakes.
Discuss both sides and give your opinion.
Answer:
Some are of the opinion that children should be allowed to make mistakes,
while others feel that adults should take a preventative approach. In my
opinion, there are limits but it is nonetheless essential for healthy
development to permit children their errors.
Proponents of reduced freedom for children argue that mistakes can lead
to a pattern of misbehavior. This argument is often advanced by over-
protective parents who believe human nature naturally trends toward anti-
social activity. For example, a child who is mean to classmates and
performs poorly in academics and athletics will only continue this behavior
if enabled by understanding adults. To counter the child’s wayward
impulses, parents should instead either punish or reward in order to
motivate more socially acceptable behavior. The theory is that children will
then recognize the boundaries set by parents and society and later fit into
the adult world as well-functioning members.
Regardless, a sense of autonomy is crucial to mature development.

Children who are shielded from making mistakes often lack the skills that
encourage healthy growth. The majority of learning, for instance, is
achieved through mistakes. A child who is learning a sport makes mistake
after mistake but does it with a positive attitude and eventually improves.
Later in life, the attitude may become more negative but the process
remains the same for all disciplines, private and public. Parents and other
adults must therefore seek to impart unconditional support and ensure
children do not develop self-esteem problems based on their mistakes.
This approach of fostering a cheerful self-sufficiency will serve them best
throughout life.
In conclusion, although some adults may feel that are preventing children
from making mistakes for the public good, they are in fact doing great
harm to their child’s mental well-being. If larger segments of society
accept this perspective, it will benefit all of society.

Ielts Writing Sample Answer

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

Ielts Writing Sample Answer

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WRITING

In 2002 in Canada there were 5,400 international students from China, a

In Canada, the number of American students rose by 9% from 5,000 to

Looking first of all at paper and packing, production in 1980 stood at

In 1972, this particular bookseller sold relatively equal proportions of each

Vietnam increased from the smallest exporter at .1 million tonnes in 1990

In terms of the cleaner energy sources, hydro power represented 4% of

Looking first of all at quantity of visits, there were 24,715,000 million

In terms of average spending, this figure began at 475 pounds in 2003,

In week 1, flights from Sydney to Melbourne started at 80$ on Monday,

In terms of flights from Melbourne to Sydney, the trend was comparable

In the United States in 1970, 88% of men between 60 and 64 were

Unemployed women led throughout the period in terms of hours, at a

Women with part-time employment were slightly lower than their

The main cause behind this phenomenon is an exponential shift among

In conclusion, though supermarkets now enable shoppers to have more

Those is favor of this statement argue the value of a well-functioning society. As

In conclusion, although there is a valid argument in favor of social stability,

In conclusion, government can regulate certain industries but parents must

Supporters argue elderly care is a basic responsibility. As parents age, there is a

In conclusion, although certain educational institutions fear that questions may

In conclusion, though it seems that capitalism will someday necessitate a reform

In conclusion, many older people are physically or economically unable to

In conclusion, looking to the future guarantees a higher standard of living and

Those in favor of change argue it is nearly always positive. Examples of good

In conclusion, change should not be sought as a means of escaping one’s primary

In conclusion, family meals are less common because of developments in society

Although I recognize the legitimate merits to the argument above, I would

The legitimately worrying disadvantages to information technology concern

Supporters of such close contact point out the meaningful economic

In conclusion, despite the economic advantages of globalization, the possibility

In conclusion, the distinctions between students must be skillfully arranged but

I believe companies should be primarily responsible for training as they possess

In conclusion, despite exceptions in certain professions, companies that are

In conclusion, although cities are becoming noisier as they become more

On the other hand, increased communication is a boon both socially and

In conclusion, although there may be minor tradeoffs in terms of productivity,

However, the example above is an extreme exception as most companies are

Those in favor of safeguarding certain wild animals argue the circumstantial

In conclusion, humans should endeavor to protect as many animals as possible

The ideal solutions should be enacted by the authorities. Firstly, governments

In conclusion, many criminals reoffend due to economic and psychological

In conclusion, the popularity of similar consumer items illustrates an underlying

Finally, the production of fast food has significant environmental repercussions.

In conclusion, though there may be limited benefits related to convenience, fast

Moreover, celebrities in film and music engender diversity. The entertainment

In conclusion, though globalization theoretically makes it more difficult to

Younger people today organically gravitate towards individuals they resonate

In conclusion, though there is a natural inclination to pay more attention to

Most companies choose to target increased sales through advertising campaigns

Though advertising can be extremely persuasive, there is no substitute for a truly

In conclusion, sales figures rise as a result of marketing strategies and successful

Those who suggest individuals should be compelled to accept

In conclusion, although this policy would help individuals become more

In conclusion, despite the evolutionary evidence to support the natural

In conclusion, there are definite advantages to non-digital news sources,

However, for the majority of major purchases, wealth determines what a

In conclusion, despite the clear differences in taste present in individuals or

Opponents of such a policy argue that it conflicts with individual and

However, tobacco is an almost entirely harmful product in its effects. In

The limited benefits of cigarettes compared with the massive potential

Supporters argue a single government would be more effective and

However, the majority of individuals, wealthy and otherwise, would state