Ielts writing sample:

TOPIC: Some people believe that secondary school children

should study international news as a subject. Others say that
this is wasting time. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
It is claimed that international news should be added into the curriculums of
secondary schools. While some people advocate this, I hold a contrary opinion on this
matter.
There are some people who are in favour of making international news a
compulsory subject in the curriculum of secondary schools. As the world becomes more
open, it would be more necessary than ever before for children to know about what is
happening in the world. However, the effectiveness of this practice should be carefully
considered because secondary students are often too young to understand news, and they
tend to forget the information once the exam is over.
On the other hand, teaching secondary school children about world news would
mean that they have less time to learn about core subjects such as Maths and Physics,
which are proved to be more important to their education. Furthermore, international
news could be soon out of date, even before curriculums are completed. Therefore, news
that children learn is actually stale, and this can be viewed as a waste of time.
Of course, I do not imply that teenagers should be isolated from international news.
On the contrary, I suggest that secondary school children can access a great source of
information through the internet and television, provided that they find it helpful.
However, this does not mean that educators should include international news in the
school curriculums.
In conclusion, I tend to believe that international news should not be considered to
be a subject at the level of secondary education.

(255 words)
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

TOPIC: People in big cities prefer to live alone or in small

family units instead of large family groups. Do you think this is
positive or negative trend?
It is true that urban citizens now tend to live individually or in nuclear families.
Personally, I believe that this trend has many positive impacts on our lives, and thus
should be advocated.
Living alone will give people freedom to do what they want without annoying other
family members. In the modern world, the gaps between generations are gradually
widening, so it would be a bad idea for several generations to live in the same house. For
example, while the young prefer eating fast food for their convenience, their parents and
grandparents would like the whole family to have traditional meals together. When it
comes to entertaining demands, youngsters are apt to listen to various types of modern
music, ranging from pop to rock, which can cause some disturbances to their elder family
members.
Furthermore, living in nuclear families offers great benefits to all family members.
Firstly, parents have more time to care for the family and thus better raise their children.
For example, instead of spending time caring for a large family that is full of potential
conflicts between family members, parents can focus on teaching children how to behave
properly, or encouraging them to study. Secondly, fewer members means less household
expenditure, and this will relieve some financial burdens on working adults. Then, money
can be used to spend on better nutrition and facilities which can lead to a higher standard
of living.
In conclusion, I firmly hold the view that living individually or in small family units
has many benefits for all family members.

(257 words) 
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

TOPIC: Some people say that government should control

tightly the use of freshwater. Other say that individuals should
use as much as they want. Discuss both views and give your
opinion.
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

TOPIC: As a part of education, students should spend a period

of time living in another country to learn its language and
culture. Do you agree or disagree?
Sample:
It is argued that students should experience overseas life to learn the language and
culture of the host country. Personally, I would completely agree with this for the
following reasons.
To begin with, living in a foreign nation is always advantageous to experience a
different culture even for a short period of time. One day abroad is one day learnt. Hence,
students living abroad usually have better and more thorough understanding of the
outside world than those students who do not have these experiences; they also tend to
have more open minds to differences in culture and so become more tolerant to other
groups of people. Compared to those who learn the cultural values of foreign countries
from books and media, students who have overseas living experience can have a broader
perspective of the world we live in.
Furthermore, having first-hand exposure to the local language is the best way to
learn it. The truth is, no matter how much students excel in foreign language courses,
they do not usually master the language completely. For example, there are never enough
English native speakers in schools to provide a real English speaking community, which
may result in students knowing English very well in terms of grammar or reading, but
speaking and dialogue comprehension is a big obstacle for them. In contrast, living in the
foreign environment gradually improves the learner’s accent in speaking and
allows them to learn collocations that native speakers normally use in daily
conversations.
In conclusion, I firmly hold the view that living in another country for education
purposes is advantageous both culture-wise and language-wise.

(267 words)