Writing Ielts Task 2 Tong Hop Theo Dang de

TỔNG HỢP WRITING IELTS TASK 2
THEO DẠNG ĐỀ
TỔNG HỢP PHẦN ĐỀ
Topic – Opinion
1. The 21st century has begun. What changes do you think …
2. Some sports are extremely dangerous but……….
3. History tells that people have often thought about creating an

ideal society
4. Some languages are increasingly spoken in different countries
5. For some people shopping is not just about buying what is

necessary
6. Nowadays for many people the Internet is replacing regular books
7. Today, majority of children are raised by their grandparents
8. Small shops in towns and villages are closing and replaced
9. Competitive sports like football are considered to add a lot of value
10. Films can have effect on the children’s education

11. Some people believe the range of technology available to
individuals today
12. Fossil fuels (coal, oil, natural gas) are the main sources in many
countries
13. Some people think visitors to others countries should imitate
14. Some people think that cultural traditions may be destroyed
15. Nowadays, some universities offer graduate students skills that

assist
16. Some scientists believe that studying the behaviour of 3-year-old

children
17. Some people think that using animals for experimentation purpose
is cruel
18. In many countries, good schools and medical facilities are

available only
19. Some people think the increasing business and cultural contact
between
20. Some people think history has nothing or little to tell us
21. Some people think that teachers should be responsible for teaching
students
22. Some people think that national sports teams and individual men
and women
23. Some people prefer to provide help and support directly to those in
the local
24. Some people think museums should be enjoyable places to attract

and entertain
25. Some people think that the government should decide which
subjects students
26. Some people think that personal happiness is directly related to

economic
27. Some people think that schools should select pupils according to
their academic
28. Some people think that the government should provide assistance
to all kinds
29. Air transport is increasingly used to export types of fruits and

vegetables
30. Many developing countries are currently expanding their tourist
31. It is known to all that the technological and scientific advances
32. Some people think that studying in a college or university is the

best way
33. Many countries spend a lot of money in art
34. Some people think children’s spending time on TV, video

35. Old generations often hold some traditional ideas on the correct
way of life
36. Unemployment is getting increasingly serious in many countries
37. Some people think people can exploit animals for any purpose
38. The number of cars keeps increasing, so road systems should be

expanded
39. Some people think government should ensure the healthy lifestyle
40. Some people think that university students should specialize in one
subject
41. Some people think the cheap air flight gives ordinary people more
freedom
42. Some people think that children should obey rules or do what their
parents
43. Some people think students should learn more practical courses
like computer
44. Some people support development of agriculture, like factory

farming
45. Some people think that in the modern society individuals are
becoming
46. Some people think the main benefit of international cooperation is

in protection
Topic – Agree / Disagree
1. Many students have to study subjects which they do not like
2. Some people say that parents should control their children’s

behavior
3. Some people say that subjects like arts, music, drama and
creative writing
4. Some people believe that tourists should accept social and

environmental responsibility
5. The world would be a much poorer place without colour
6. Tobacco is a kind of drug. People have been free ….
7. Wild animals have no place in the 21st century…
8. People try new dangerous sports such as sky-diving ………
9. Some people say that the government should not put money on
building theatres
10. The computers are widely used in education and some people
think that teachers
11. Everyone should stay in school until the age of eighteen…
12. Mothers generally stay home to take care of their children after
pregnancy
13. In companies, promotions to high positions should be given to

employees
14. Animals should be kept in men made cells
15. Students at schools and universities learn far more from lessons
16. Some people think the government should pay for health care and
education
17. Do you agree or that improvements in technology reduce the role
18. Food can be produced much more cheaply today because of

improved fertilisers
19. Leisure is a growing industry, but people no longer entertain

themselves
20. The advantages brought by the spread of English as a global

language
21. The government is responsible for protecting a nations cultural

identity
22. Sending criminals to prison is not the best method of dealing with
them
23. Many employees may work at home with the modern technology
24. Some people think that the news media nowadays have influenced
peoples
25. The detailed description about crime will affect the people and
cause many
26. Some people think that people moving to a new country should
accept new
27. Children who grow up in families which are short of money are
better
28. The only way to improve the safety on our own road is to have
stricter
29. The speeding up of life in many areas such as travel and

communication
30. Advertising encourages consumers to buy in quantity rather than
promoting
31. The main purpose of public libraries is to provide books
32. Many people believe that scientific research should be carried out
33. It is more important for a building to serve a purpose than to look

beautiful
34. Some people believe they should keep all the money they have
earned
35. Some people believe that air travel should be restricted because
36. One long-distance flight consumes fuel which a car uses in several
years
37. In the last century when a human astronaut first arrived on the
Moon
38. Housing shortage in big cities can cause severe social

consequences
39. The best way to solve the world’s environmental problem is to

increase
40. It is better for students at university to live far away from home
41. Earlier technological developments brought more benefits and

changed
42. In order to learn a language well, we should also learn about the
country
43. Multi-cultural societies, in which there is a mixture of different

ethnic peoples
44. Some people think the main purpose of schools is to turn the
children into good
45. A country becomes more interesting and develops more quickly

when its population
46. Throughout the history, male leaders always lead us to violence

and conflict
47. Individuals can do nothing to improve the environment Only

governments
48. Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer

technology
49. With the increase in the use of mobile phones and computers,
fewer people
50. The society would benefit from a ban on all forms of advertising
because
51. Some people claim that public museums and art galleries
52. In many countries traditional foods are being replaced
53. In the past, lectures were used as a way of teaching large

numbers of students
54. As we are facing more and more problems which affect the whole
planet
55. Team activities can teach more skills for life than those activities
56. Some people say that it is the responsibility of individual to save

money
57. Today’s children are living under more pressure from the society
58. The government should pay for the course fees for everyone
59. Nowadays, a large amount of advertising is aimed at children
60. Some people think that giving aids to the poor countries
61. Some people think that criminals should be given longer terms
62. An American film actor once said, “Tomorrow is important and

precious
63. Some people think imported food exerts positive impacts on our
lives
64. People should look after their health as a duty to the society they
live
65. Aircraft uses more fuel than cars and produces more pollution
66. Teachers used to convey information, but now with wide

resources of information
67. Some children can learn efficiently by watching TV
68. Some people think that schools should concentrate on academic

classes
69. Some people think that media should not report detail of crimes to
the public
Topic – Advantage / Disadvantage Essay

1. Some people think that competitive sports have a positive effect
2. Today, people can work and live in anywhere they want, because
of the improvement
3. Some school leavers travel or work for a period of time instead of

going
4. As global trade increases between different countries, many daily

5. More and more measures to improve the security in large urban
areas
6. International tourism has become a huge industry in the world
7. Some people think that students benefit from going to private

secondary schools
8. It is suggested that all the young adults should undertake a period

of unpaid work
9. Some people think that good health is a basic human need
10. Exposure to international media such as films, TV and magazines

has a significant
11. Some people think that we should invent a new language for
international
12. Higher education can be funded in several ways including
13. Some people think it is better for children to begin to learn
14. The government should encourage industries and business to

move
Topic – Argument Essay

1. Some people claim that there are more disadvantages of the car…
2. Some people say that parents have the most important role……
3. When families have a meal together it is considered social……….
4. Some people think that children should learn how to compete

5. Some people think that charity organizations should only offer…..
6. These days many people leave their country to work abroad

and —
7. Some people think that paying taxes is enough to contribute to

the society
8. Scientists believe that computers will become more intelligent . .
9. Should old people live with family or separately
10. Do you think children should be given freedom to do whatever
11. Some people think if students are afraid of the teacher
Topic – Reason and Solution Essay

1. Young people these days tend to be less polite and respectful
2. In many countries, children are getting fatter and less fit day by
day
3. In recent years, the number of crimes committed by young people
4. Consumers are faced with increasing numbers of advertisements

from competing
Topic – Cause and Effect

1. People can perform everyday tasks, such as shopping and
banking
2. There are social, medical and technical problems associated with

the use of mobile
3. In many countries, the proportion of older people is steadily
increasing
4. In many countries today there is insufficient respect to old people
5. Nowadays, we are living in a throw-away society
6. We can see more disasters and violence shown on TV
7. Figures show that some countries have an ever-increasing

proportion
Topic – Problem and Solution

1. Discuss your opinion on how modernism can affect our health
2. Advertising influences people to buy things such as clothes
3. Road transport is taking over rail services
4. Many people say that we have developed into a throw-away

culture, because
5. Far too little has been done to prevent animals and plants from
dying out
6. The natural resources such as oil, forests and fresh water
7. The unlimited use of cars may cause many problems
8. An increasing number of people choose to live in big cities
9. International travel makes people prejudiced rather than broad-

minded
CÁC PHẦN BÀI LÀM

The 21st century has begun. What changes do you think this new
century will bring? Use examples and details in your answer.
Man, through the ages, has undergone many changes from the time when
he depicted a herd of mammoths on the walls of his cave to these days when
he can create beautiful pictures and even make coffee by use of computer
technologies without leaving his favorite chair. The 20th century made
huge steps in developing computer technologies and reached many goals
that made our life much easier. What should we expect in the 21st century?
First of all, I think that the pace of our life will speed up: we will move faster
from one place to another, from one continent to another using high speed
jet airplanes. Second of all, I believe that we will be able to do many things
that take much time now without leaving our house. Computers will be
everywhere including out clothes. Many people will have chips and mini
computers inserted in their heads to hold huge amount of information and
have a quick access to it.
But what will be the most amazing thing in the 21st century is the flights to
the outer space and Mars that will be available to all people. Scientists say
that Mars has many things similar to the Earth’s. Moreover, they say that
with the help of modern technology people can artificially create conditions
that will allow people to live there on the constant basis.
To sum up, I am sure that many amazing changes will be brought by the
21st century. Furthermore, I think that with the help of the contemporary
technologies people can do many things that were even difficult to imagine
a century ago. So, nowadays it is rather difficult and even impossible to
imagine all changes that will happen in the next decades.
Some sports are extremely dangerous but many people still like them very
much. Why dopeople take part in dangerous sports? Give some suggestions
on how to deal with thesedangers.
Some sports are extremely dangerous but many people still like them very
much.Why do people take part in dangerous sports? Give some suggestions
on how to deal with these dangers.
In recent years we have seen a considerable rise in dangerous or extreme

sports. This essay shall discuss some of the main reasons why people engage
in such sports and suggest ways in which some risks involved in such sports
can be reduced.
The main reason why people go for dangerous sports is that they get the
thrill out of them. They like taking risks. They like to challenge their
abilities and potentials. They feel a sense of satisfaction when they come
face to face with fears while bungee jumping, rock climbing and so on. In
addition, going through a dangerous experience gives them courage and
confidence to face the hurdles of their daily life.
Another reason for pursuing such sports is that there is a lot of fame and
money involved in them. They get attention by doing stunts on motorcycles
and jumping from tall buildings. They make headlines in newspapers and
TV News Channels. They feel great when their name comes in the Guinness
Book of World Records. Once they get famous they get a lot of
money also. For instance, many businesses hire them to endorse their
products. They also get jobs on the basis of such skills.
Many steps can be taken to reduce the risks are that involved. Firstly, these
sports should be done under strict supervision. All safety precautions should
be taken. Such sports should be performed after sufficient training and
under supervision of adults. Sport companies which cater to such sports
should require a license for providing such training. Some people
suggest banning some sports. However, I do not believe that banning is a
good solution. We all know that forbidden fruits taste sweeter and people
will do such sports in hiding which would increase the risks involved.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, people do such sports for fun,
for money and for fame. However, such sports should be performed after
sufficient training from licensed companies and under some supervision.
History tells that people have often thought about creating an ideal
society, but most of the times fail in making this happen. What is your
opinion about an ideal society? How can we create an ideal society?
If we look at history, it is clear that since time immemorial, people have

always wanted to create an ideal society but have been unsuccessful. In the
following essay, I intend to discuss what makes an ideal society and how we
can create one.
An ideal society is a society where needs of the people regardless of their

race, religion or wealth would be met. Many great thinkers, such as Plato,
Thomas More and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. have offered their opinions on
this to the public over the years. However, these dreams failed because
different people have different ideals about a perfect society.
To make it happen, either the ideals of all the people have to be fulfilled, or
all the people would have to have the same ones.
Imagine a society with no crime, no terrorism, no warfare, no conflicts of
cultures, no racism, no gender discrimination, no poisoned tongues, no
killing, no lying, no stealing, no adultery and no excuses. Such a society can
never exist. It would be wrong even to think of one. A perfect society needs
some kind of social inequality, or as I call it, a distinction in
ability. Those in the higher strata of society would be there because of their
superior abilities and have greater responsibilities and, therefore, a higher
social standing. An ideal society should have some struggle. If you had no
struggle in life would you be happy? No, because that takes all the fun and
enjoyment out of the difficulty, the losing, the failures, and the overcoming,
the victory, the success.
There are many ways in which we can make an ideal society. First of all,
there must be democracy and a strong government which has the ability to
rule over the country. It should try to make the citizens life better by
making better social and financial conditions to live.
There should be no corruption in the government. Finally, I believe, one of
the most necessary things of ideal society is freedom. No people and no
society are happy and ideal when they are not free. However, we must
remember that – ‘One’s freedom ends there where other’s starts’. If we will
feel free and do not disturb others freedom we will have ideal society. An
ideal society would allow complete freedom to everybody and complete
individuality.
To sum up, I pen down saying that, a perfect society is difficult to attain as
everyone has different concepts of an ideal society. However, if we all
respect our freedom and in doing so know our limitations, so that others
can enjoy their freedom then it can be called an ideal society.
Some languages are increasingly spoken in different countries, while
the usage of others is rapidly declining. Is this a positive or a negative
development?
Today, we do not belong to a big planet called Earth. We are part of a global
village and
there is more interaction among people of different parts of the globe than
ever before. Therefore, some languages are being spoken more and the use
of a few languages is declining. This is both – a negative as well as a positive
development.
On the positive side, the increasing use of some languages is easing

communication among people. For example, English is now spoken in more
than 86 countries of the world and French in around 33 countries. In fact
English has become the lingua franca in many parts of the world. Because
of this people do not face difficulty when they travel from one country to the
other. What is more, if people speak the same language then they also find
it easy to do business with each other. Global trade is based on good
communication. We all know that lack of communication gives rise to many
misunderstandings. Businesses cannot flourish if for every small
communication an interpreter is required.
Nowadays, we belong to a 24/7 society. Many multinational companies

have opened in different parts of the world. The rich nations who own these
MNCs provide jobs to millions of people worldwide. Naturally, a person who
knows their language is better placed in these companies. The pay package
is also better and chances to work abroad also go up. In a way the
widespread use of a few languages also helps to decrease the gap between
the rich and the poor.
On the downside, the decline in use of some languages is also something to
be concerned about. It is a well known fact that language and culture are
inter-related. If languages die out then culture also dies out. We all enjoy
life on this planet because of its diversity. If diversity decreases, then
boredom sets in and the earth becomes a dull and boring place to live in.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, the increase in use of a few
languages and the decline of others is both a positive as well as a negative
development. This situation is an inevitable sequel of globalization. If the
governments take steps to protect the endangered languages, then the
negative effects can be minimized.
For some people shopping is not just about buying what is necessary,
but a form of
entertainment. Do you think it is a positive or a negative
development? Give your opinion and examples from your experience.
Shopping is generally thought of in terms of fulfilling needs. Shopping is

seen first as a function and secondarily as something that serves emotional
and social needs. As incomes have grown, choices have exploded and free
time has increased, shopping has become entertainment as much as
anything else. This can be seen as both – a positive as well as a negative
development. In the following paragraphs I intend to explore the pros and
cons of shopping as an entertainment.
On the positive side, shopping satisfies our needs. Everyone needs the basics
of life such as items of food, clothing and shelter. Apart from that, needs
vary from person to person. The things which were considered the luxuries
of yesteryears have become the necessities of today. For example, the mobile
phone has become a must-have for even the lower income group of people.
Many businesses and jobs thrive on the connectivity provided by the mobile
phone and the internet.
Furthermore, shopping has given rise to the consumerist society of today.
This has given employment to many. For instance, people are working in the
manufacturing industries and in the retail sector also. Mega stores and
malls are also having a mushroom growth. What is more, psychologists
claim that the best way to cope with stress or any kind of strong and
negative emotion is to hit the shops and do plenty of shopping. It is called
retail therapy and, according to many, it is guaranteed to boost spirits.
On the negative side, excessive shopping makes us pile up things in the home
which we don’t even need. It also leads to a throw-away society which is
detrimental to the environment. To do shopping, people need a lot of money
and if this money does not come by fair means people resort to unethical
means of getting it which leads to violence and crime in the society.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, shopping is good as long as it
is done for need, but when it is done for greed then it becomes a bane. So we
should do shopping only according to our requirement and then it will be a
pleasurable experience also.
Nowadays for many people the Internet is replacing regular books.

What do you think will happen in the future and what is your opinion?
IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay Sample
Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that the Internet and the other forms of e-media have come
as a threat to the physical book. My view, however, is that despite the many
threats, the book will remain as strong in the future as it was in the past.
Many people fear that the book may not survive because of the many
threats it has been facing. Films were an early threat because they were
very effective in telling stories in a visual way. Next, there was the radio
followed by the TV and finally the internet. Surely, there are enough reasons
why the book ought to be dead. But, it is not just alive, it is hale and hearty.
To further strengthen my point of view, I would like to segment books in

three categories. In the first category are books that deal with academic
curricula of schools and colleges. Students will always need to buy these
books and carry them in their bags to schools and colleges for learning.
In the second category there are all the types of general education books
like dictionaries, thesauruses and the like. The use of these books may be
affected slightly because of uploading some of their content on the net.
Other books dealing with diverse subjects like history, geography, cookery
and hobbies will hardly be affected in any way. This is evident from their
robust sales at the book counters.
In the third category we have the books dealing with fiction. These are
companions for the traveler as well as the home bird. Their position can
hardly be affected. Added to this the book is such a practical tool; it doesn’t
cost too much; it is usually small enough to carry
around and it can be easily revisited.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, despite the threat of the
internet, the book has maintained its place. So I feel we’ll never go without
books because they have served usso well for so long.ample Answer 2:
The Internet as the mainstream of media plays a very important role in

transferring information. Some people assert that internet would take the
place of books in the future. However, in my opinion, each medium has its
own advantages and disadvantages. Books will always hold a place in our
lives.
Admittedly, internet has made our lives very convenient. Firstly, it can
transform information instantly. It can tell us what happened in the world
right away with very impressive pictures. Secondly, it plays an important
role in education. People can study history, culture, language and cooking
skills from the internet. Even the books are now available in electronic
format (e-books) and that is the reason some people find it a threat to the
traditional, physical, book.
However, we should not neglect the importance of books which are very
convenient to carry and easy to get. Books are available everywhere, such
as in the library, in the book store, in your pocket or beside the pillow. After
a day’s work we can relax in our bed or sofa by reading some book or
magazine. Books are also very good travel companions.
Moreover, it is very difficult to sit for long hours glued to the monitor
screen. Eye strain and back pain are also some disadvantages of the
internet. With so many power cuts, as in my country, we cannot rely on the
internet. Last but not least, the day is not far when all people will be able to
afford the internet connection.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, despite the threat of the
internet, the book has maintained its place. So I feel we’ll never go without
books because they have served us so well for so long.
Today, majority of children are raised by their grandparents due to
the fact that their
parents are busy working. To what extent do you think it affects the
whole family?:
It is irrefutable that both parents are working nowadays and as a result

children have to be raised by either maids or grandparents. Definitely,
grandparents are better than any other option and this situation affects the
family in both positive and negative ways which I shall highlight in this
essay.
On the positive side, looking after the grandchildren keeps the

grandparents energetic and vibrant. Grandparents bathe, feed and even
read books to the child. This leads to a sort of symbiotic relation in which
both grandparents and grandchildren are benefited. In other words we can
say that it is a win-win situation for both. Grandparents don’t suffer from
loneliness and depression which is very common at that age and children
are also well looked after.
Moreover, such a situation encourages joint family system. Therefore, all the
benefits of a joint family are there. There is security in the family as we all
know that there is security in numbers. Another big advantage is that
grandparents teach moral values to children. If grandparents do not look
after children then parents use TVs as baby-sitters and children can become
couch potatoes.
On the negative side, it is generally seen that grandparents are over-doting

and, out of love, may pamper and spoil the grandchildren. Another
disadvantage is that if there is not enough harmony between the parents
and grandparents then it can lead to frustration and spoil the whole
atmosphere of the house. In such cases children are the worst sufferers.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, it is very beneficial if

grandparents look after their grandchildren. Grandchildren learn moral
values, are looked after well and grandparents enjoy themselves and don’t
suffer from loneliness and depression.
Small shops in towns and villages are closing and replaced by big
stores. Explain your
opinion. Do you think it is good or bad?Sample Answer 1:
Commercialization has grown rapidly in the modern era. Consequently,

there is a mushroom growth of big shopping malls. As every garden has
weeds, this phenomenon also has its pros and cons. On the whole, the
advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
There are many advantages of big stores. To begin with, they save our time.
We do not have to waste time going from one small shop to the other.
Secondly, these stores offer a huge variety of goods. For example, in some
stores you can buy anything ranging from a sewing needle to a car.
Furthermore, such stores purchase items in bulk and so they can afford to
sell the products at a lower price than the other small retailers and
therefore the customers are benefited. To add to it, they sell mostly the
branded products and so the quality is assured. Another advantage is that
most of such stores accept credit cards and so you don’t have to carry heavy
chunks of cash.
On the downside, such malls promote consumerism. They pull the customers
through attractive displays and schemes and as a result customers end up
buying more than they need. Moreover, such shops are opened with huge
investments. So they can withstand adverse market conditions for a long
time. Because of this the small retailers and vendors are finding it difficult
to cope with them.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that big shopping malls are
definitely an asset to the customer and society despite their drawbacks.
Competitive sports like football are considered to add a lot of value by

bringing people of different states and nationalities together. Yet
some people argue that these sports divide people on the basis of
nationalities and age groups. What is your opinion? Write about each
view and then describe your answer supporting it with relevant
examples from your own experience.
IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay Samplemple Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that competitive sports such as The Football World Cup and
The Olympics
are watched by millions of people worldwide. There are divided opinions on
whether these games unite or divide people on the basis of age and
nationalities. In the following paragraphs, I intend to discuss both views
followed by my opinion.
Sports provide people with entertainment and something to get excited

about and they are topics for conversation. They provide a common bond
for complete strangers and a common team to cheer for. For example,
Brazil has a high rate of unemployment and crime because of which
Brazilians have a low self esteem. But, when the world cup starts, then the
people forget all their problems. An amazing feeling of pride and patriotism
comes in them and they cheer their team together.
The Olympic games are one of the best examples of how sporting events can
bring people of different nations together. In ancient times, the Greeks and
Romans would interrupt battles to participate in games. Even India and
Pakistan forget their differences on the cricket ground and the players
embrace each other after every match.
On the other hand there are many examples of violence and conflicts which
such games have brought about. Football hooliganism or football violence
is well known to all. The 1985 European Cup final between Liverpool and
Juventis in Heysel Stadium led to the death of 39 supporters. Any wrong
decision by the referee can lead to violence. A lot of emotion and passion are
involved and all reason and logic fly out of the window. That is why some
people hold the opinion that such games divide people.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that competitive games generally

bring people together. There are a few incidences when over-patriotism
prevailed and people got divided but such incidents can be counted on the
fingertips.
Films can have effect on the children’s education and teach them
many things. Do you
think it is always a positive influence? Discuss.Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that movies can be very educative for children. However, the
effect of movies is not always beneficial. In the following paragraphs, I
intend to discuss the positive and negative effects of movies on children.
On the positive side, movies are enjoyable for children of all ages. They
stimulate children’s emotions, imaginations and conversations. Movies also
introduce children to cultures and historical events. Movies used in the
classroom enhance learning. Therefore, if the movies are good they can
have a very positive influence on a child’s growth.
On the downside, children are negatively affected by movies with sex,

violence drug abuse and offensive language. Older children and adolescents
may copy the risky things they see in movies. What is more, movies
glamorize things like smoking and drinking and children are quick to pick
up these traits.
Furthermore, watching too many movies can impede the development of

healthy habits like playing outdoor games, reading and spending quality
time with family. Children who are avid film viewers are more likely to
suffer from obesity related problems throughout their lives.
I believe that as everything has its pros and cons, movies too can have both
– good and bad influences. It is very important for parents to check the
movie ratings before allowing their children to watch any movies. The best
thing for parents could be to watch movies with their children. Watching
movies together could be a very rewarding experience.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that movies can have a positive or
a negative influence on children but if parents take steps in choosing their
children’s movies, then the
effect can be largely positive.
Some people believe the range of technology available to individuals today

is increasing the gap between poor people and rich people. Others think it is
having an opposite effect. Discuss these points of view. What is your
opinion?
Sample Answer 1:
Some people believe the range of technology available to individuals today

is increasing the gap between poor people and rich people. Others think it is
having an opposite effect. Discuss these points of view. What is your
opinion?
Technology seems to promise infinite benefits for mankind. While it could be

argued that the development of new technology always expands the gap
between rich and poor, it is also true that the level of technology used in
developing countries and low-income countries has been quicker than the
developed countries over the last few years and this
has helped to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor. So, both views
have some ground which I shall be discussing in this essay.
There are many reasons why people say that technology increases the gap
between rich and poor. To begin with, new technology itself tends to be
affordable by only the richer elements of society and the poorer elements
are denied the opportunities that this provides, such as the ability to be able
to train for better paid work. It is understandable that because of their
ability to acquire new technology, the learning ability within the richer
elements of society is much improved. Therefore they get better job
placements and continue to grow further.
What is more, with the power that wealth and knowledge brings, richer
segments are more able to exert influence over the direction of society,
usually to their own benefit. The poorer segment does not have this ability,
and therefore their demands and needs tend to be driven lower down the
list of political priorities.
On the other hand there are reasons to hold the opposite view. While it is
true that the initial level of technology in lower-income countries was much
lower to begin with, there is strong evidence of catch-up between middle-
income and high-income countries. Technological progress increased 40%
to 60% faster in developing countries than in rich countries. Use of some
new technologies, such as mobile phones, has risen quickly.
Technology has created huge opportunities for the poor where none existed
previously. For example, some technologies such as communications or
networking give poor people a chance to earn a better living. It is not
uncommon for some people who used to live in poverty becoming
millionaires or billionaires by taking advantage of the internet. This has
definitely led to narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that technology can do both –

widen the gap between the rich and poor as well as narrow the gap if the
poor get access to it. Therefore, it is not the technology to blame for the gap;
it is the access to technology which is to blame. So, we should see to it that
everyone gets equal access to technology.
Fossil fuels (coal, oil, natural gas) are the main sources in many countries,
but in some countries the use of alternative sources of energy (wind energy
and solar energy) are encouraged. To what extent do you think it is a
positive or negative development?Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that fossil fuels are the main source of energy in many parts
of the world, but some nations are taking a step forward and using
renewable sources like wind, solar and
tidal energy. Definitely, it is a positive development. In the following
paragraphs I intend to support my views with my arguments.
The main advantage of using alternate sources is that the conventional

sources like coal and oil are non-renewable. They take millions of years to
make and we are finishing them at an alarming rate. This means that if we
finish the existing resources they will be gone forever as
far as our and the coming many generations are concerned. Energy from
the wind, the sun and the sea is an everlasting source of power. So, more
and more governments should come forward in promoting these sources.
Another big advantage of these non-conventional sources is that they do not

pollute the environment. We all know that global warming and damage to
the protective ozone layer are caused by carbon-dioxide and other by-
products of fossil fuels. If urgent steps are not taken towards the use of
natural sources like sun and wind, then the time is not far when the whole
earth will transform into a boiling pot.
Although the use of these alternative sources has some hurdles such as the
initial cost of setting up solar panels and wind farms is very high and these
are also dependent on the geographical locations. However, once the initial
cost has been met with, their maintenance is practically negligible.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that the use of these alternative
sources is a very positive development. It should be the global priority to
invest in such research and development.
Some people think visitors to others countries should imitate local customs
and
behaviours. Some people disagree; they think the host country should
welcome cultural differences.
Some people think visitors to others countries should imitate local customs
and behaviours. Some people disagree; they think the host country should
welcome cultural differences. Discuss the two views and give your opinion.
Today, with the passage of time each and every country is on the path of
development, and with this development there is a growing trend of visiting
different places in different countries. It is a highly debated issue whether
tourists should do and behave as the people
of the host country or should the host country accept visitors as they are.
Both situations have their own pros and cons which I shall discuss in this
essay.
There are many benefits of adopting host countries customs. Firstly, it

decreases chances of misunderstanding and embarrassment. For e.g. in the
UK it is offensive to ask about pay to
anyone, which is common in India. Secondly, a nation’s customs and
traditions arefascinating and offer a deep insight into that country. People
visit other countries to broaden their horizon. So, if tourists copy the
customs of host country, they learn more
about them and that too in an interesting way. Finally, visitors establish a
rapport with local people because people feel respected when their customs
are understood and imitated. They become a member of the host country
and so they don’t suffer any culture shock.
On the other hand there are many reasons why a host country should
tolerate and embrace foreign culture. To begin with, no country should
cling to its own customs and traditions and accept the new customs and
traditions brought by visitors. Secondly, there should be no
binding on the visitors to adopt the customs and traditions of the hosts. For
example, if the visitors are pure vegetarians, they should not be forced to
eat non-vegetarian food just because the host country’s people eat that.
On balance, I feel that someone who is moving to another country should

respect the customs, culture, traditions etc. of that country. This is necessary
because a newcomer is like a guest in someone else’s home. So he is
expected to follow the rules of that country. However, it is not reasonable to
compel a believer of certain religion to ignore his religion in
order to comply with the local customs.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, mutual understanding

between both the visitor and the host is necessary to maintain harmony. A
cosmopolitan society in which everyone is tolerant of each other’s customs
and traditions is the need of the day. After all,
today, we are part of a small global village and not a big planet Earth.
Sample Answer 2:
Tourism industry has been concerned in many countries and these days lots
of investments have been developed on this matter. But there are a lot of
debates about some conflicts which come to existence when visitors enter in
some societies. In fact, some encourage people to accept and welcome other
cultures which have been brought to their countries by tourists and some
others believe that tourists should behave as the frame of the host country
rules and customs. This essay has tried to cover both of mentioned views
and will suggest a solution for this sophisticated issue.
The first groups who opine that people should respect tourists’ cultural
believe that introducing new cultures to a society can be suitable. In the
other words, people can learn new things from tourists and it can be helpful
for increasing society awareness about the way of living in each corner of
the world. In the other hand, these groups believe that people and
governments should be flexible and admit other cultures if they want to be
successful in tourism industry and attract more tourists. Actually, lots of
countries are competing with each other for being the destination of
visitors in holidays and without respecting different cultures, they may be
lost in this competition.
By contrast, some other worry about their local customs and traditional
cultures and they think that bringing new cultures and behaviors to one
country by visitors can make a serious threaten for their cultures. Put
another way, they believe that people may be interested in other countries
cultures when tourists come to their countries and by this way, they forget
their local customs. For example, new style of wearing would be replaced on
local cloths or new foods would be developed instead of traditional ones.
Hence, they always want from tourists to behave as the host country allows.
For instance, in some Islamic countries, governments prohibit drinking
alcohol for tourists or ask women tourists to wear some specific dresses.
I think, therefore, tourists always would like to learn and visit local customs
when they go to new places, so, host countries can make a potential for
tourists to be free and also encourage them to follow local rules and
customs by introducing and showing their benefits. Undeniably visitors
would be interested to behave as similar as local people if the proper
strategies would be considered.
Sample Answer 3:
It is always debatable whether visitors should follow local customs and

behavior or the country should be accustomed with cultural differences. At
first, I would like to discuss about following local customs and behavior. As
a human being we have consciousness which helps us to decide what is
right or wrong that we apply in every sphere of our life. But everybody may
not apply consciousness or may not have the same level of consciousness to
apply.
If one does not follow local customs, he/she may not be taken warmly by
people of that country. Due to this reason, I believe that everybody who
visits to other country should follow local customs and behavior. Beside this,
local customs and behavior are mostly regulated by religion of the country
which is very sensitive to most people. That is why I agree with the view of
following local customs and behavior.
In the other hand, there are many reasons to agree with the second view
that the host country should welcome cultural differences. It is universally
true that the civilization is evolving from beginning of mankind and main
reason behind this is that people are traveling from one place to another to
explore the world which brings new culture to new places. If one fails to
welcome cultural differences, he/she will not be able to cope with cultures
of other countries. This will impact the economy in terms of tourism and
modernization as well as evaluation of civilization.
A good example of welcoming cultural differences is Malaysia. People of

western countries are traveling to Malaysia and most of them are not used
to follow local customs and being a Muslim country, Malaysia also
providing freedom to visitors until laws are broken. Malaysia has become
an example for other countries to welcome cultural differences. That is why
cultural differences should always be welcomed until it hurts your
philosophy or religion.
Sample Answer 4:
Nowadays the tourism industry is growing at a tremendous speed. Due to

the boom in transport industries and holiday packages, people often travel
other countries for holidays and on official trips. There is a debate ongoing
on whether the visitors from other nationality should follow local customs
and behaviors during their stay in host countries. I will discuss this in below
paragraphs.
Firstly, when the foreigners visit other countries they carry their culture
along with them. But, during their stay in host countries if they adopt the
local customs, it will be helpful for them to get better communication with
the local people. Meanwhile, when they adjust themselves to the local
people’s behavior, it will make them easier to socialize with them. Also, this
will help local people to better understand the foreigners.
Secondly, this will help the foreigner to have a good idea about local
cultures and rituals. This understating helps our culture to spread globally,
thereby more and more people get attracted toward the local culture. This
in turn attracts number of visitors from different country’s to visit. This will
help in increasing the tourism industry and also helps in giving employment
opportunity in the related industries.
On the other hand, when the foreigners share their culture and behavior
with the local people it gives an opportunity to local people for better
understanding of their culture and characters. This will have immense
influence on local people’s opinion about foreigners and their culture. Also,
this helps them to identify the negative aspects of their culture and gives
them an opportunity to correct it.
To sum up, by considering the above benefits, I personally believe that the
balanced exchange of cultures and behavior of foreigners with local people
will benefit both the countries to come together and calm down if there are
any frictions between the countries. Also, this will have a positive impact on
the economy of both countries.
Sample Answer 5:
It is noticeable that people tend to travel more frequently these days than
they used to do in the past. While I agree that the travellers should follow
the host country’s traditions and cultures, I also think that the host country
should welcome cultural differences.
On one hand, travellers should adapt to the culture of their host country
and feel happy with the idea of trying new things. Nowadays, people not
only consider travelling as a way to relax but also they think it is a chance
for self-improvement and exploring the world. Travelling is a good
opportunity to try new things such as traditional cuisine, music and
customs and those who just travel to view landscapes waste a perfect
chance to learn something new. For example, people who have visited
places like India, Egypt or China have been very excited when they tried the
local food or wore the traditional dress. An experience like this broadens
people’s horizons and enriches their knowledge.
On the other hand, for many reasons the host country should accept and
understand the different backgrounds of tourists. Firstly, for many visitors it
would be difficult to follow the host culture and customs because these
usually different than their own and in some cases they may even be
incompatible with their beliefs and morals. For example, Indian or Arabs
who go to European countries may find it difficult to get used to the
European taste in food because it does not contain as much spices as they
have in their food. In addition if travellers feel they are welcomed in the new
country despite of the cultural differences they will feel more comfortable to
visit this place again.
In conclusion, I believe that it could be beneficial for travellers to get

exposed to different cultures and customs. However, tourist destinations
should be opened to the cultural diversity of its newcomers.
Some people think that cultural traditions may be destroyed when they are
used as money-making attractions aimed at tourists. Others believe it is the
only way to save these traditions.
It is irrefutable that cultural traditions attract tourists from all over the
world and develop local economy. Some individuals are of the opinion that
these may be destroyed if they are modified to attract tourists. Others,
however, hold the view that if we don’t use them for tourism, they will die.
In the following paragraphs, I shall discuss both sides of the argument.
We have to make these cultural traditions alluring for tourists because we

need tourists.
Firstly, tourism boosts our economy and secondly we get a chance to spread
our culture to different countries. If our artists and artisans do not earn
money from their art, which depicts our culture and tradition, then this art
will die off and we’ll only be the losers.
Tourism is the backbone of any country’s economy and every country does
their effort to attract tourists. Many people depend on tourism for their
livelihood. People in the food industry, hotel industry and transport
industry depend on tourism. Presentation is very important to attract
visitors and to present nicely, some change is inevitable.
On the other hand, when cultural traditions are used as money-making

attractions, they lose their original features. Sometimes it makes cultural
traditions disappear altogether. However, I believe that culture and
tradition are deep rooted and minor superficial changes cannot harm them
in any way. Change is the law of nature and all we should look into is that
the changes are made with caution to retain the inherent elements of
culture.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, to save cultural traditions we

need to make some changes to make them alluring to the tourist of today. If
we don’t do so we’ll lose our cultural traditions altogether and we’ll lose
our tourists also.
Nowadays, some universities offer graduate students skills that
assist to find
employment, but some people believe the main function of a
university should be to access knowledge for its sake.
What’s your opinion?
( Similar Topic: Some people think that universities should provide As

university education is the last stage before the starting of career, many
people believe
that it prepares students for employment only, but the fact is that it serves a
lot many
purposes. In this essay I shall discuss the various functions of a university.
Universities provide specialised education in fields such as medical,

engineering, commerce
etc. They provide library facilities, which support the curriculum. They
provide laboratory
facilities for science and technology related subjects. They send students to
factories and
industries so that they get practical experience. This job-oriented training
helps them to
understand the working conditions and also gives them an idea about
competition in the
market. They also create job opportunities for the students by arranging
campus interviews.
On the other hand, universities also perform other functions which help the
students in
their personal life. They organise co-curricular activities such as cultural
programmes,
sports, debates, fairs etc. They gain many qualities such as self-confidence
and positive
attitude, which help them in their future life. Moreover, some people just go
to university
for gaining knowledge just out of interest for the subject. For example, a
doctor may want
to learn French language just for interest in the language.
Furthermore, a university is a place to know more about the world because

there are
students from across the globe in a university. For many, who may never
travel abroad, this
may be a chance of a lifetime for them to broaden their horizons and know
more about the
different cultures of the world. For example, in LPU( Lovely Professional
University), there
are 200 students from Malaysia, Korea and other parts of the world.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, universities do not simply

prepare a person
for employment, but also have many other functions.
Model Answer 2:
It is irrefutable that the main purpose of a university is for career

preparation, but a university has a lot of other benefits also – to have new
experiences, and to increase their knowledge of themselves and of the world
around them.
Career preparation is probably the primary reason that people attend

university. These days, the job market is very competitive. Careers such as
information technology will need many new workers in the near future. At
university, students can learn new skills for these careers and increase their
opportunities for the future.
Students also go to university to have new experiences. For many, it is their

first time away from home. At university, they can meet new people from
many different places. They can see what life is like in a different city. They
can learn to live on their own and take care of themselves without having
their family always nearby.
At university, students have the opportunity to increase their knowledge. As

they decide what they want to study, pursue their studies, and interact with
their classmates, they learn a lot about themselves. They also, of course,
have the opportunity to learn about many subjects in their classes. In
addition to the skills and knowledge related to their career, university
students also have the chance to take classes in other areas. For many, this
will be their last chance to study different subjects.
Universities offer much more than job preparation. They offer the
opportunity to have new experiences and to learn many kinds of things. I
think all of these are reasons why people attend university.
Sample Answer 3:
The primary purpose of tertiary education is to prepare graduates for their
future career. While thousands of people would enrol for the sake of
acquiring general knowledge and skills which will make them competitive
on the job market, there is a portion of them who would expect to obtain
the specific qualifications only for their dream job. Therefore, I strongly
believe that university should organise their courses’ programs in order to
provide future employees with all the skill sharpening professional training
for their specific occupation.
One compelling reason for this is that all the contemporary occupations
nowadays are task specific which makes it a necessity for workers to be able
to comply with every job requirement. Once they graduate they are
expected to take over all the responsibilities their job needs them to do,
have the know-how, as well as the expertise to carry out all the arduous and
demanding tasks. For instance, as soon as I graduated at the Faculty of
Philology I had to take a part-time teaching job. I was overwhelmed with all
the expectations my employer had in everyday practice, whereas there was
no need at all of all the theory I had mastered throughout my studies.
On the other hand, it is beyond doubt that most of the jobs would require
employees to do a lot of multi-tasking and to be capable of meeting
deadlines while conducting project work. Apparently, big companies would
prefer to employ a person well-equipped with all the necessary knowledge
related to several positions within their range, instead of over-staffing.
Notwithstanding the competitiveness among businesses, there is always a
huge demand for the top notch professionals within one sector. This will be
possible, only and only if universities raise their standards and provide
broad education and practice for their students.
In conclusion, I would maintain that tertiary education should be more

content-specific and ensure the fastest and highest quality for their
graduates. Not only will professionals be able to use their university
knowledge as a catalyst towards their career, but they will be able to make
a living out of it for a lifetime.
Sample Answer 4:
Universities play a vital role in student’s education. There is a general belief
that university provides the required ammunition for the students to get on
with their career. However, it can also be argued that the university is
another business model and should provide knowledge for its benefit. I
think university should service the society by creating better individuals
than being money making organisation. The essay will analyse the
individual and social benefits created by university in support of its service
to society.
Firstly, personality development is of paramount importance to any

student. For instance, a student from a reputed university like the
University of Technology, Sydney has good exposure to interpersonal skills,
soft skills and theoretical knowledge. These skills are vital for students to
perform well at the workplace. Additionally, these skills will get campus
placements before they can complete their degree. Thus, colleges providing
appropriate environment and skill development will result in the
production of individuals with the required talent in the professional career.
Secondly, society benefits cannot be discounted in the context of university

education. Creating individuals with better skills create a healthy society.
For example, students completing their medicine degree with better
communication and people skills create a society in which all the
individuals who go to that doctor will be delighted. If all the people in the
community possess the right level of expertise, especially the working
professional with the college degree, then the country’s economy will have a
positive growth. As you can see, there is a direct correlation between college
infrastructure and the society health.
In conclusion, university providing quality knowledge and platform for all

round development will aid the individuals and society to benefit out of it. I
believe that there will be an increase in the number of students who attend
university that results in the better society.
Sample Answer 5:
These days, universities provide various courses which were taught by
families earlier like tile fixing to makeup techniques. In spite of making such
arrangements for everyone to learn these skills, some exceptional people
believe that universities teach subjects only rather than focusing on real
world use.
First of all universities has to focus on whole class instead of a bunch of

students. So, universities have to come up with a course material which can
be grasped by majority of students. Employers do expect a specialised skill
from individual. However, it is an unrealistic expectation from the
universities to prepare each student as per the employer’s requirements.
Moreover, it is difficult for a student also to imagine the need of real world
and learn the subject without experiencing it. For example, you ask a
student to write a program to handle the security threats on servers. It
could be very difficult for a student to write such a program as there are
many viruses which targets only certain types of servers.
Another important area where universities focus is to provide the basic
knowledge of the entire subject and let the students choose the job of their
interest. For instance, computer engineering course teaches about
database, programming languages as well as hardware. It is up to a student
to choose whether he wants to be a programmer developer or a database
designer. It is certainly beneficial for the employers as well. If a fresher
knows many subjects, an employer can train him on any subject as per the
project requirement. For example, Infosys hires thousands of computer
engineers every year in place of a Java certified students. Infosys can train
computer engineer for testing or support department. However, it is
difficult to train a java developer for web designing.
I believe universities are just doing the best what they could do to prepare a
student for the upcoming opportunities and challenges.
Sample Answer 6:
Currently there are huge debates about the main purpose of educational
institutions; such as, their task should be to prepare students with
knowledge and expertise for employer needs or prove graduates with access
to the material for their own analysing. This essay will examine both sides
of the argument and will highlight the most important task of universities.
There is no doubt that graduates must be prepared to go to the work

having the knowledge and skills of the field where they plan to start work.
These will improve the quality of graduates’ work and give a good
impression to the employer. Also business will be benefitted from their new
employees and will allow to an organisation to survive in the rapidly
developing business environment. For example, it is highly important to
have necessary knowledge to work as an accountant, otherwise a person
would not know what to do, how to perform the tasks with requirements
which later will be checked by auditors. If the work was not done without
necessary accuracy, the company will face problem with government and
tax officers. Therefore, I firmly believe that it is highly important for
universities to teach their students the knowledge and skills, which are
essential to the business.
Despite these arguments, there is also a case for advocating that the main
task of universities is to provide their students an access to the materials
and other resources for their own learning and analyzing. Indeed, I believe
the access is extremely important, however, without teaching how
appropriate to use these materials most of the students cannot do it in a
proper way required by the employer. For instance, there are a lot of
different examples of preparing financial statements, the way its look and
only expert can say in which particular situations could be prepared,
analyzed and be used this way of preparation of financial statement or
different one as well as in what kind of area could be used.
Having considered both sides of the issue, I would argue that although
universities should provide an access to knowledge for their students,
educational institutions should teach how to use, learn and analyse them.
Sample Answer 7:
In today’s modern world, many students choose to go to university
immediately after they finish school to acquire the knowledge and skills
that are crucial in their future workplace. However, there are a handful of
people who assert that the university should teach the students for its own
sake without taking into considerations of whether it will benefit the
employer. In my opinion, I think the major purpose of attending to a
university is to gain knowledge that are useful in our future jobs.
In these times of austerity, people are spending most of their adult life in
working just to secure a decent job. Most of the organisations are,
undoubtedly, will attract the talented and knowledgeable potential
employees to work for them by offering a high salary. If a university is able
to provide the students all the required knowledge and skills which play an
indispensable role in their prospective jobs, it is, indirectly, opening up an
avenue for them to get a well-paid job. As a result, they would benefit their
family by supporting them financially. Thus, universities should teach their
students about the knowledge that are required in their future careers so
that they can secure a well-paid job.
In addition, most of the employers of the large companies are looking at the
academic qualifications which they believe will bring them advantages
during the interviews of job applicants. If the graduates are equipped with
the desired knowledge and skills in university, they are more likely to be
successfully employed owing to the fact that they can handle most of their
jobs well as compared to those who lack of certain knowledge in the work
field. Admittedly, it will help to lower the rate of unemployment which
becomes more severe than before around the globe. Hence, it is proven that
the graduates with high qualifications and knowledge required in a specific
workplace will definitely get a higher chance of getting a higher position in
an organisation.
In conclusion, if all the universities are providing their students with the
knowledge and skills which are important in their future careers, the
graduates can easily secure a decent job with a high paid in the twenty-first
century. I believe that all the graduates will achieve their aspirations in
their jobs if they are well-equipped with the required knowledge.
Sample Answer 8:
Function of university is debatable. Some people believe that it is
necessarily important for university to convey knowledge and skills to
graduates which are relevant to their work field later. However, others
argue that university should give access to knowledge for its own choice
without regarding to the impact on employer later. Personally, I believe
that the essential role of university is to provide students with basic
knowledge and skills for their future career which will be elaborated trough
the following paragraphs.
To begin with, university is responsible to share knowledge to graduates

that is relevant to the subject and their career later. Students who decide to
be nurse and enroll to nurse academy should be imposed abundant
knowledge about nursing. This, somehow, will enhance their insight about
nursing and make them understand about disease and proper treatment.
For example, providing general knowledge about rampant virus of Ebola
can establish student idea about how to recognize the symptoms of Ebola
and prepare diagnose and proper treatment to the patients.
Furthermore, university also immensely needs to boost graduates skill that

will be matched with their future job. Knowledge must be accomplished by
related skills to perform a better action in workplace. Some universities
support their graduates by various skills through various ways. For instance
is university internship. A dentist student cannot be a good dentist if he is
just supplied by knowledge about dental problem. Yet, he needs to gain
skills of how to identify and recovery dental problem through direct
practice in internship. While doing practice, he will receive several skills of
how to administer treatment on dental problem supporting his future
career after graduation.
All in all, basic knowledge and skills should be granted to graduates to

support their activity in workplace.
Sample Answer 9:
It is believed that a university has the role to educate people. Each
individual allows to pursuit their right to learn several of subjects relying
on their goals. However, it is argued that the most important function of a
college or university is to prepare learners for the job. In my view, a
university should regard people eagerness in term of their future work.
That is why the most valuable thing for a university is to create an
environment for giving space for learners to develop their skills for their
future job.
University has to spread awareness that becoming competent in school can

affect students’ performance at workplace. Even though, the essential of
learning in university is to pass exams, learners should realize that the real
exam is after their completion of the study. They will experience how to
combat with others for getting a decent job. Therefore, people who prepare
earlier will gain more benefits. Based on this case, university has
responsibility to create competitive circumstance such as in a workplace.
Again, preparing students for the future brings some challenges that the
university has to accept. Such challenges involved more practical education
rather than being confined to theoretical lessons. It is inevitable that
practical lessons are more important and effective than the theory we learn
in university.
Other reason is the best way to develop someone’s skill is by creating space
for learners in term of their interest. Nonetheless, this is the main problem
that learners face when they enter in higher education – they will lose their
passion due to school curriculum which deters them to get involved in
further on non-academic activities. As the result, university tends to limit
students community to express and show their skill.
In conclusion, university should understand that preparing students for

workplace is indispensible part in this era. University may start by setting
the lecture class such workplace environment for case and providing
beneficial program to enhance students’ skill as an individual or group.
Sample Answer 10:

Education is more important in modern era than it was in the past and the
percentage of students who complete their university education is rising
significantly. Many people argue that university education should be aimed
at better job prospects whereas others believe that prime objective of a
university is to provide better knowledge. However I believe that university
education curriculum should be modified to include more professional
training and courses to help students for their future career.
There is no doubt that university education is expensive. People mostly go to

universities to ensure a demanding job and better career prospects.
Obviously there are other reasons for people to attend higher education but
having a better career is the most dominating factor these days. If the
students could have applied to any job after they complete their schools, I
am sure the percentage of university going students would have decreased
dramatically.
In my belief, universities should include workshops and practical sessions in

their curriculum because the practical sessions are both job oriented and
have greater effects in learning. For instance, those who go to the nursing
courses have a specific goal in mind – to become a successful nurse.
Similarly if a medical student says that he is not studying to become a
successful doctor rather to understand the human body and mind, we can
take it as a possible lie. So if the universities only provide theoretical
knowledge, after graduation students will find it tough to apply the
knowledge in their work field. Every government funded university costs a
huge some of money and the government has an aim for all the cost it bears
–to make honest, skilled and better performing employees for the state. This
single example reveals how important it is for universities to focus on
creating future professionals with appropriate knowledge and skill set.
In addition, unemployment is a severe problem worldwide these days and

the number of unemployed graduate is a daunting issue. If the universities
focus more on career oriented education, this problem would be
significantly decrease. Many organisations recruit talented and experienced
individual and those sort of people have better prospect of career
development. Appointing fresher in jobs is burdensome for many companies
because they need to train them of several months and overall output and
productivity will decline during these periods. If the university education
includes some courses related to job prospects, students can perform well
immediately after their graduation.
On the other hand, some argue that university education should be for
improving the knowledge level of students. Including workshop or job
oriented courses will decline the value of education and it will increase the
course duration. They opine that better education makes people to have
better adaptability and even though they require some initial training, they
outperform others in the long run with their knowledge.
Taking everything into consideration, it can be summarise that university

education should be aimed to help students to prepare for their career.
Adding workshops and job related courses will enhance their knowledge
and they will perform well in the future. It is more beneficial for each
individual and for the society.
Model Answer 11:
Tertiary education is perceived as a prominent factor contributing the

fabric of society. Yet, people harbor different perceptions toward it. While
some people assert that the main responsibility of universities is to impart
professional knowledge to the learners, this essay is written to argue that it
is necessary for students to adopt both firm grasp and hands-on skills to
secure their employment in the latter lives.
As the constantly changing nature of the modern world, people have never
witnessed such a change in demands of employers. Dating back to the 20th
century, when the knowledge-focus labor market was much in vogue,
organizations customarily sought after job applicants with high
certifications. In the present time, the story is completely different. People
realized that not only knowledge but also attitude as well as practical skills
participate in moulding a success role model of employees. Therefore, there
is little doubt that universities must assume a predominant responsibility in
provide students sufficient hands-on skills to compete in such a keen
competition of employment.
Moreover, there are numerous researches supporting that people having a

good command of social skills are likely to prosper in their latter life. For
instance, the possibility remains that teamwork, leadership and
communication play an integral part in assist individual to combat
hardships, seize opportunities as well as maintain good relationships with
people. In addition, the advent of modern devices has posed a challenge to
employees to keep up with up-to-date skills such as using internet and office
programmes. Students are therefore in need of the support form tertiary
education in obtaining and improving such technical skills.
By the way of conclusion, I reaffirm that to secure a prosperous career path

of students is the most prominent responsibility of tertiary education. In the
light of this fact, universities have to provide adequate skills besides a firm
understanding to their learners.
Nowadays, some universities offer graduate students skills that

assist to find
employment, but some people believe the main function of a
university should be to access knowledge for its sake.
As university education is the last stage before the starting of career, many
people believe
that it prepares students for employment only, but the fact is that it serves a
lot many
purposes. In this essay I shall discuss the various functions of a university.
Universities provide specialised education in fields such as medical,

engineering, commerce
etc. They provide library facilities, which support the curriculum. They
provide laboratory
facilities for science and technology related subjects. They send students to
factories and
industries so that they get practical experience. This job-oriented training
helps them to
understand the working conditions and also gives them an idea about
competition in the
market. They also create job opportunities for the students by arranging
campus interviews.
On the other hand, universities also perform other functions which help the
students in
their personal life. They organise co-curricular activities such as cultural
programmes,
sports, debates, fairs etc. They gain many qualities such as self-confidence
and positive
attitude, which help them in their future life. Moreover, some people just go
to university
for gaining knowledge just out of interest for the subject. For example, a
doctor may want
to learn French language just for interest in the language.
Furthermore, a university is a place to know more about the world because
there are
students from across the globe in a university. For many, who may never
travel abroad, this
may be a chance of a lifetime for them to broaden their horizons and know
more about the
different cultures of the world. For example, in LPU( Lovely Professional
University), there
are 200 students from Malaysia, Korea and other parts of the world.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, universities do not simply

prepare a person
for employment, but also have many other functions.
Model Answer 2:
It is irrefutable that the main purpose of a university is for career

preparation, but a university has a lot of other benefits also – to have new
experiences, and to increase their knowledge of themselves and of the world
around them.
Career preparation is probably the primary reason that people attend

university. These days, the job market is very competitive. Careers such as
information technology will need many new workers in the near future. At
university, students can learn new skills for these careers and increase their
opportunities for the future.
Students also go to university to have new experiences. For many, it is their

first time away from home. At university, they can meet new people from
many different places. They can see what life is like in a different city. They
can learn to live on their own and take care of themselves without having
their family always nearby.
At university, students have the opportunity to increase their knowledge. As

they decide what they want to study, pursue their studies, and interact with
their classmates, they learn a lot about themselves. They also, of course,
have the opportunity to learn about many subjects in their classes. In
addition to the skills and knowledge related to their career, university
students also have the chance to take classes in other areas. For many, this
will be their last chance to study different subjects.
Universities offer much more than job preparation. They offer the
opportunity to have new experiences and to learn many kinds of things. I
think all of these are reasons why people attend university.
Sample Answer 3:
The primary purpose of tertiary education is to prepare graduates for their
future career. While thousands of people would enrol for the sake of
acquiring general knowledge and skills which will make them competitive
on the job market, there is a portion of them who would expect to obtain
the specific qualifications only for their dream job. Therefore, I strongly
believe that university should organise their courses’ programs in order to
provide future employees with all the skill sharpening professional training
for their specific occupation.
One compelling reason for this is that all the contemporary occupations
nowadays are task specific which makes it a necessity for workers to be able
to comply with every job requirement. Once they graduate they are
expected to take over all the responsibilities their job needs them to do,
have the know-how, as well as the expertise to carry out all the arduous and
demanding tasks. For instance, as soon as I graduated at the Faculty of
Philology I had to take a part-time teaching job. I was overwhelmed with all
the expectations my employer had in everyday practice, whereas there was
no need at all of all the theory I had mastered throughout my studies.
On the other hand, it is beyond doubt that most of the jobs would require
employees to do a lot of multi-tasking and to be capable of meeting
deadlines while conducting project work. Apparently, big companies would
prefer to employ a person well-equipped with all the necessary knowledge
related to several positions within their range, instead of over-staffing.
Notwithstanding the competitiveness among businesses, there is always a
huge demand for the top notch professionals within one sector. This will be
possible, only and only if universities raise their standards and provide
broad education and practice for their students.
In conclusion, I would maintain that tertiary education should be more

content-specific and ensure the fastest and highest quality for their
graduates. Not only will professionals be able to use their university
knowledge as a catalyst towards their career, but they will be able to make
a living out of it for a lifetime.
Sample Answer 4:
Universities play a vital role in student’s education. There is a general belief
that university provides the required ammunition for the students to get on
with their career. However, it can also be argued that the university is
another business model and should provide knowledge for its benefit. I
think university should service the society by creating better individuals
than being money making organisation. The essay will analyse the
individual and social benefits created by university in support of its service
to society.
Firstly, personality development is of paramount importance to any

student. For instance, a student from a reputed university like the
University of Technology, Sydney has good exposure to interpersonal skills,
soft skills and theoretical knowledge. These skills are vital for students to
perform well at the workplace. Additionally, these skills will get campus
placements before they can complete their degree. Thus, colleges providing
appropriate environment and skill development will result in the
production of individuals with the required talent in the professional career.
Secondly, society benefits cannot be discounted in the context of university

education. Creating individuals with better skills create a healthy society.
For example, students completing their medicine degree with better
communication and people skills create a society in which all the
individuals who go to that doctor will be delighted. If all the people in the
community possess the right level of expertise, especially the working
professional with the college degree, then the country’s economy will have a
positive growth. As you can see, there is a direct correlation between college
infrastructure and the society health.
In conclusion, university providing quality knowledge and platform for all

round development will aid the individuals and society to benefit out of it. I
believe that there will be an increase in the number of students who attend
university that results in the better society.
Sample Answer 5:
These days, universities provide various courses which were taught by
families earlier like tile fixing to makeup techniques. In spite of making such
arrangements for everyone to learn these skills, some exceptional people
believe that universities teach subjects only rather than focusing on real
world use.
First of all universities has to focus on whole class instead of a bunch of

students. So, universities have to come up with a course material which can
be grasped by majority of students. Employers do expect a specialised skill
from individual. However, it is an unrealistic expectation from the
universities to prepare each student as per the employer’s requirements.
Moreover, it is difficult for a student also to imagine the need of real world
and learn the subject without experiencing it. For example, you ask a
student to write a program to handle the security threats on servers. It
could be very difficult for a student to write such a program as there are
many viruses which targets only certain types of servers.
Another important area where universities focus is to provide the basic

knowledge of the entire subject and let the students choose the job of their
interest. For instance, computer engineering course teaches about
database, programming languages as well as hardware. It is up to a student
to choose whether he wants to be a programmer developer or a database
designer. It is certainly beneficial for the employers as well. If a fresher
knows many subjects, an employer can train him on any subject as per the
project requirement. For example, Infosys hires thousands of computer
engineers every year in place of a Java certified students. Infosys can train
computer engineer for testing or support department. However, it is
difficult to train a java developer for web designing.
I believe universities are just doing the best what they could do to prepare a
student for the upcoming opportunities and challenges.
Sample Answer 6:
Currently there are huge debates about the main purpose of educational
institutions; such as, their task should be to prepare students with
knowledge and expertise for employer needs or prove graduates with access
to the material for their own analysing. This essay will examine both sides
of the argument and will highlight the most important task of universities.
There is no doubt that graduates must be prepared to go to the work

having the knowledge and skills of the field where they plan to start work.
These will improve the quality of graduates’ work and give a good
impression to the employer. Also business will be benefitted from their new
employees and will allow to an organisation to survive in the rapidly
developing business environment. For example, it is highly important to
have necessary knowledge to work as an accountant, otherwise a person
would not know what to do, how to perform the tasks with requirements
which later will be checked by auditors. If the work was not done without
necessary accuracy, the company will face problem with government and
tax officers. Therefore, I firmly believe that it is highly important for
universities to teach their students the knowledge and skills, which are
essential to the business.
Despite these arguments, there is also a case for advocating that the main
task of universities is to provide their students an access to the materials
and other resources for their own learning and analyzing. Indeed, I believe
the access is extremely important, however, without teaching how
appropriate to use these materials most of the students cannot do it in a
proper way required by the employer. For instance, there are a lot of
different examples of preparing financial statements, the way its look and
only expert can say in which particular situations could be prepared,
analyzed and be used this way of preparation of financial statement or
different one as well as in what kind of area could be used.
universities should provide an access to knowledge for their students,
educational institutions should teach how to use, learn and analyse them.
Sample Answer 7:
In today’s modern world, many students choose to go to university
immediately after they finish school to acquire the knowledge and skills
that are crucial in their future workplace. However, there are a handful of
people who assert that the university should teach the students for its own
sake without taking into considerations of whether it will benefit the
employer. In my opinion, I think the major purpose of attending to a
university is to gain knowledge that are useful in our future jobs.
In these times of austerity, people are spending most of their adult life in
working just to secure a decent job. Most of the organisations are,
undoubtedly, will attract the talented and knowledgeable potential
employees to work for them by offering a high salary. If a university is able
to provide the students all the required knowledge and skills which play an
indispensable role in their prospective jobs, it is, indirectly, opening up an
avenue for them to get a well-paid job. As a result, they would benefit their
family by supporting them financially. Thus, universities should teach their
students about the knowledge that are required in their future careers so
that they can secure a well-paid job.
In addition, most of the employers of the large companies are looking at the
academic qualifications which they believe will bring them advantages
during the interviews of job applicants. If the graduates are equipped with
the desired knowledge and skills in university, they are more likely to be
successfully employed owing to the fact that they can handle most of their
jobs well as compared to those who lack of certain knowledge in the work
field. Admittedly, it will help to lower the rate of unemployment which
becomes more severe than before around the globe. Hence, it is proven that
the graduates with high qualifications and knowledge required in a specific
workplace will definitely get a higher chance of getting a higher position in
an organisation.
In conclusion, if all the universities are providing their students with the
knowledge and skills which are important in their future careers, the
graduates can easily secure a decent job with a high paid in the twenty-first
century. I believe that all the graduates will achieve their aspirations in
their jobs if they are well-equipped with the required knowledge.
Sample Answer 8:
Function of university is debatable. Some people believe that it is
necessarily important for university to convey knowledge and skills to
graduates which are relevant to their work field later. However, others
argue that university should give access to knowledge for its own choice
without regarding to the impact on employer later. Personally, I believe
that the essential role of university is to provide students with basic
knowledge and skills for their future career which will be elaborated trough
the following paragraphs.
To begin with, university is responsible to share knowledge to graduates

that is relevant to the subject and their career later. Students who decide to
be nurse and enroll to nurse academy should be imposed abundant
knowledge about nursing. This, somehow, will enhance their insight about
nursing and make them understand about disease and proper treatment.
For example, providing general knowledge about rampant virus of Ebola
can establish student idea about how to recognize the symptoms of Ebola
and prepare diagnose and proper treatment to the patients.
Furthermore, university also immensely needs to boost graduates skill that

will be matched with their future job. Knowledge must be accomplished by
related skills to perform a better action in workplace. Some universities
support their graduates by various skills through various ways. For instance
is university internship. A dentist student cannot be a good dentist if he is
just supplied by knowledge about dental problem. Yet, he needs to gain
skills of how to identify and recovery dental problem through direct
practice in internship. While doing practice, he will receive several skills of
how to administer treatment on dental problem supporting his future
career after graduation.
All in all, basic knowledge and skills should be granted to graduates to

support their activity in workplace.
Sample Answer 9:
It is believed that a university has the role to educate people. Each
individual allows to pursuit their right to learn several of subjects relying
on their goals. However, it is argued that the most important function of a
college or university is to prepare learners for the job. In my view, a
university should regard people eagerness in term of their future work.
That is why the most valuable thing for a university is to create an
environment for giving space for learners to develop their skills for their
future job.
University has to spread awareness that becoming competent in school can

affect students’ performance at workplace. Even though, the essential of
learning in university is to pass exams, learners should realize that the real
exam is after their completion of the study. They will experience how to
combat with others for getting a decent job. Therefore, people who prepare
earlier will gain more benefits. Based on this case, university has
responsibility to create competitive circumstance such as in a workplace.
Again, preparing students for the future brings some challenges that the
university has to accept. Such challenges involved more practical education
rather than being confined to theoretical lessons. It is inevitable that
practical lessons are more important and effective than the theory we learn
in university.
Other reason is the best way to develop someone’s skill is by creating space
for learners in term of their interest. Nonetheless, this is the main problem
that learners face when they enter in higher education – they will lose their
passion due to school curriculum which deters them to get involved in
further on non-academic activities. As the result, university tends to limit
students community to express and show their skill.
In conclusion, university should understand that preparing students for
workplace is indispensible part in this era. University may start by setting
the lecture class such workplace environment for case and providing
beneficial program to enhance students’ skill as an individual or group.
Sample Answer 10:

Education is more important in modern era than it was in the past and the
percentage of students who complete their university education is rising
significantly. Many people argue that university education should be aimed
at better job prospects whereas others believe that prime objective of a
university is to provide better knowledge. However I believe that university
education curriculum should be modified to include more professional
training and courses to help students for their future career.
There is no doubt that university education is expensive. People mostly go to

universities to ensure a demanding job and better career prospects.
Obviously there are other reasons for people to attend higher education but
having a better career is the most dominating factor these days. If the
students could have applied to any job after they complete their schools, I
am sure the percentage of university going students would have decreased
dramatically.
In my belief, universities should include workshops and practical sessions in

their curriculum because the practical sessions are both job oriented and
have greater effects in learning. For instance, those who go to the nursing
courses have a specific goal in mind – to become a successful nurse.
Similarly if a medical student says that he is not studying to become a
successful doctor rather to understand the human body and mind, we can
take it as a possible lie. So if the universities only provide theoretical
knowledge, after graduation students will find it tough to apply the
knowledge in their work field. Every government funded university costs a
huge some of money and the government has an aim for all the cost it bears
–to make honest, skilled and better performing employees for the state. This
single example reveals how important it is for universities to focus on
creating future professionals with appropriate knowledge and skill set.
In addition, unemployment is a severe problem worldwide these days and

the number of unemployed graduate is a daunting issue. If the universities
focus more on career oriented education, this problem would be
significantly decrease. Many organisations recruit talented and experienced
individual and those sort of people have better prospect of career
development. Appointing fresher in jobs is burdensome for many companies
because they need to train them of several months and overall output and
productivity will decline during these periods. If the university education
includes some courses related to job prospects, students can perform well
immediately after their graduation.
On the other hand, some argue that university education should be for
improving the knowledge level of students. Including workshop or job
oriented courses will decline the value of education and it will increase the
course duration. They opine that better education makes people to have
better adaptability and even though they require some initial training, they
outperform others in the long run with their knowledge.
Taking everything into consideration, it can be summarise that university

education should be aimed to help students to prepare for their career.
Adding workshops and job related courses will enhance their knowledge
and they will perform well in the future. It is more beneficial for each
individual and for the society.
Model Answer 11:
Tertiary education is perceived as a prominent factor contributing the

fabric of society. Yet, people harbor different perceptions toward it. While
some people assert that the main responsibility of universities is to impart
professional knowledge to the learners, this essay is written to argue that it
is necessary for students to adopt both firm grasp and hands-on skills to
secure their employment in the latter lives.
As the constantly changing nature of the modern world, people have never
witnessed such a change in demands of employers. Dating back to the 20th
century, when the knowledge-focus labor market was much in vogue,
organizations customarily sought after job applicants with high
certifications. In the present time, the story is completely different. People
realized that not only knowledge but also attitude as well as practical skills
participate in moulding a success role model of employees. Therefore, there
is little doubt that universities must assume a predominant responsibility in
provide students sufficient hands-on skills to compete in such a keen
competition of employment.
Moreover, there are numerous researches supporting that people having a

good command of social skills are likely to prosper in their latter life. For
instance, the possibility remains that teamwork, leadership and
communication play an integral part in assist individual to combat
hardships, seize opportunities as well as maintain good relationships with
people. In addition, the advent of modern devices has posed a challenge to
employees to keep up with up-to-date skills such as using internet and office
programmes. Students are therefore in need of the support form tertiary
education in obtaining and improving such technical skills.
By the way of conclusion, I reaffirm that to secure a prosperous career path

of students is the most prominent responsibility of tertiary education. In the
light of this fact, universities have to provide adequate skills besides a firm
understanding to their learners.
Some scientists believe that studying the behaviour of 3-year-old

children can tell which children would grow up to be criminals.
To what extent in your opinion is crime a product of human nature

or is it possible to stop children from growing up to be criminals?
Sample Answer 1:
Some scientists are of the opinion that hereditary characteristics are

responsible for the
person’s temperament and hence future career. I disagree with this notion. I
believe that
genes do play a role but the primary determinant is nurture – education
and bringing up. It
is definitely possible to mould a child into any direction by proper bringing-
up.
If we adopt the mindset that if parents are criminals so will the children be
then we are
limiting or even damaging the individual’s basic right to achieve his very
best. Children can
rise above the gene pool and rise to great heights. Even if a child is born to
criminal parents
but brought up away from that environment and provided quality
education, he will not be
a criminal.
The debate on nature versus nurture has been raging for ages and no clear
cut answer has
come forward. A child prodigy can be born to ordinary parents and many
intelligent parents
can have ordinary children. A talented person can go unnoticed in the
absence of right
environment and upbringing and an ordinary person can reach great
heights with proper
training. So, interplay between hereditary and environmental factors must
be there.
It has been seen that children born to intelligent parents also are intelligent
and successful.
But it is also possible that such parents provide an environment which
nurtures the
development of their children. When we see some programmes such as
‘India’s Got Talent’
and ‘Little Champs’, we notice some extremely gifted children who are born
with talent and
also some who have achieved great heights with great perseverance and
proper coaching.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that both nature and nurture play
a part in
determining the character of a person. It can also be concluded that both
are inextricably
linked with each other. But nurture weighs over nature and it is definitely
possible to
prevent children from growing up to be criminals.
Model Answer 2:
There is a multitude of people who subscribe to the notion that by

observing the behaviours of young children, we can predict their likelihood
of becoming criminals in the future. However, it is believed that other
external factors can also heavily influence children’s development and their
mannerisms in adulthood.
Through various researches, scientists found that delinquents, in fact, share

some personal traits in their childhood that can help foretell their
criminality. Generally, these individuals were more aggressive and
impulsive then their peers when they were kids. For this reasons, it is
understandable why some people contend that learning about how one
behaves as a child can help foresee their chance of committing crimes as an
adult.
Nevertheless, compared to other extrinsic elements, such as upbringing and

schooling, genetic characteristics appear to be less influential on children’s
behaviours. It is no surprise that children who are raised in a healthy and
educational environment often grow to be ethical citizens. On the contrary,
most convicts have some extent of tragedy in their childhoods, such as
parental divorce and family breakdown. Without their parents’ guidance
and sufficient attention, kids lack the ability to judge right and wrong, a
skill that is vital in a moral society. For that reason, it is necessary that
adults need to monitor and control youngsters’ behaviours and
undertake/take/implement any corrective measure when it is needed.
In the light of the aforementioned discussion, there is no point arguing

whether there is a nexus between one’s genes and their behavioral patterns.
However, it is strongly supported that when children receive good care and
ethical education, it is unlikely that they will take any unlawful action in the
future.
Model Answer 3:
Today, the rising crime rate raises citizen’s concern and scientists begin to
explore the reasons of criminal acts. The opinion that children in the age of
three have the characteristic of becoming a criminal in the future has been
put forward by some scientists. From my own perspective, criminal
behavior is a product of nurture rather than nature. Parents and the media
should be responsible for the crime.
Parental upbringing background is one of essential parts for the breed of

crime. Some parents take extremely method to combat problems no matter
what problem it is. Young as the child is, their parents tend to scorn them
loudly or beat them strictly if they make little mistakes, such as go back
home lately, which hurts the vulnerable heart and mind of their child. As far
as child’s concerned, they don’t have the capability to distinguish right from
wrong, easily following the violent behavior their parents did. Apparently,
the parental environment will lay groundwork for the behavioral tendency
of a child in the future.
Additionally, the media is the second to be blamed for criminal acts.

Journalists are inclined to report something new to attract the reader’s
attention, regardless of violence. Teenagers who are exposed in the media
coverage which is full of bloody death incidents easily go astray because of
imitation of the violent behavior. Also, individuals are curious about the
new things and commit crimes unconsciously as their curiosities may easily
be taken advantage of.
In order to prevent the crime, parents, the media and the government
should joint efforts together. Parents should afford a good environment for
the growth of youngster. Proper guidance should be provided through daily
activities. Further, Media press should pay more attention to the quality of
their report and avoid excessive report the bloody news. When it comes to
the government, the authority should advocate a harmony society with
sharing and understanding among the citizens.
To conclude, the willingness of parents, the media and the government to

address the crime problem will put it on the right track in finding solutions.
I am sure that the increasing crime rate could be curbed through people’s
efforts.
Model Answer 4:
The age-old nature vs nurture debate is concerned mainly with reaching a

conclusion over genetic and environmental influences on criminal
behaviour, which has long been a subject of interest to psychologists and
criminologists. Some scientists subscribe to a view that studying the
behaviour of 3-year-old children can help foretell their criminality. To the
best of my knowledge, both genes and environment have a bearing over the
development of one’s behaviour patterns, including criminal or violent
behaviour.
The notion that some individuals have a genetic predisposition for

criminal behaviour can seek support from a large number of facts. For
example, aggression and impulsivity, two personality traits commonly
found among adult criminals, are in fact evident from as early as those
people’s preschool years. Criminals are also diagnosed to share a similar
set of psychological problems, indicating their heritable nature. If given the
right circumstances,individuals with those genes would eventually engage
in criminal activity. For example, the children raised in an environment
where violence and illegitimacy are norms are more likely to commit
similar crimes in adulthood. It is therefore fair to say that the effect of
heredity isworsened by the environment.
While the impact of genetic predisposition is recognised, genetics is not

solely responsible forunlawful acts. Criminal tendencies are admittedly
clear among those children whose parents have a long criminal history.
However, the chances for their engagement in criminal activities would not
become bigger until they are exposed to an environment that breeds such
activities. Environment can modify, weaken or reinforce one’s
characteristics. It is the reason why a child can act in a different manner
from his or her parents. It is neither practicable nor rational to make a
moral judgement on a child simply by their genetic makeup and label him
or her as a criminal while ignoring the influence of factors like education.
A proper understanding of the impact of environment on individual
behaviour also enables people to recognise the influence of some other
elements, such as schooling andupbringing. Children, whose biological
parents have criminal records, have the potential for personal success, if
adopted and reared by well-educated and upper class families. Likewise,
children who experience family problems like family breakdown and child
abuse are more likely to commit violent crimes later in life. These elements,
working either in isolation or in groups, lead to a child’s criminal behaviour.
In the light of the facts outlined above, one can conclude that the
interaction between genes and the environment is a predictor of criminal
behaviour. Certain genes, when combined with certain environmental
factors, lead to criminal behaviour. To prevent individuals with criminal
disposition from committing crimes, schooling, parenting and some other
factors are of critical importance.
Some people think that using animals for experimentation purpose

is cruel, but other people think that is necessary for the
development of science.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Animal experimentation has been a debated issue for many decades. Some
people believe
that scientists’ locking up animals in a laboratory environment is not what
nature intended –
and they are probably right. Others believe laboratory animals perform a
great service for
humankind.
For many years now, scientists have been working hard to develop cures for
diseases.
From time to time, new medicines and drugs are created which may be a
solution to a
serious illness affecting mankind. In order to determine if there is any level
of danger in
these drugs, these are first tested on animals. For example, who has not
heard of the
Thalidomide case? In 1952, a drug was used for vomiting of pregnancy.
Obviously, it was not
tested properly. All the children born had seal-like limbs. By the time it was
known that
thalidomide was responsible, it was too late and much harm had been done.
Another reason for justification of animal experimentation is that the life

span of guinea pigs
used for experimentation is very small, only 3-4 years and so the effect of
drugs can be
tested over generations. Even if humans volunteered for testing, it would
not help to test
whether the effect passed from one generation to the other.
The arguments against animal experimentation are that animals are also
sentient beings
and we have no right to exploit them for our selfish motives. Secondly, they
are very
different from humans and so what is tested on animals cannot be applied
to humans.
Finally, unnecessary experiments are done just for new cosmetics which are
not even
needed, which is bad.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that animals are not humans.
Although the life of
animals in a lab is regrettable, I much prefer a guinea pig to die than a
human being. The
human need must always come first. It is sad that any living thing must
suffer but the use of
laboratory animals in testing new products made today goes a long way
toward helping
humankind enjoy a better tomorrow.
Model Answer 2:
It is true that using animal as subject for scientists experiment is not

ethical. While some people agree with that opinion, but I believe that this
experiment can be used as improvement of science technology development.
In the growth of science technology, many scientists use animal as subject

for their experiment such us mice, monkeys, fish, and pigs. People who do
not know what the purpose of this experiment will say that scientists do not
care about animal welfare. The scientists use that animals and make them
genetically engineered. For example, scientists put camera and machine to
goliath beetle so they can control the beetle movement whether it has to
turn right, turn left, go up, or land in a desk. People argue this experiment
has changed the natural structure of this creature’s body to the structure
that scientists want. Another experiment is scientists put bio-luminescence
to fish, monkeys, and pigs so they can spark a light in the dark. Many people
assume that it is not logical, and there are no benefits from this experiment.
The scientists are doing research without expecting the implication that
will occur.
On the other hand, there are many experiments that scientists and
researchers have done and the benefits have been seen and solve human
problem in this world. For example, drugs that we use for daily life is the
result from try-and-error experiment from scientists. Another example is
cloning technology that scientists did to horse and pigs for the purpose of
preserving endangered animals.
In conclusion, although scientists and researchers have many experiments

in animal and these seem cruel, I believe that it is for the good of science
growth and there are many benefits that we get from these experiments. We
have to thank them because they found the answer from our problem
related in health, science, and knowledge.
Model Answer 3:
There is a general discussion these days over animal experimentation. A

large number of people tend to live under the illusion that it is inhumane to
carry out animal testing, while others accept that is a part of scientific
research.
Admittedly, few would disagree that laboratory animals serve to boost the
safety of new vaccines and drugs act on humans. Advances in the animal
experimentation have enhanced our physical well-being, comfort, and life
span. Moreover, cosmetics testing on animals are crucial to cosmetics
companies in promoting their products. Without the assurance of security
and reliability, customers will never accept these products. Plus these
enterprises produce and sell substandard products shall be investigated for
legal responsibility according to law or even facing the situation of
bankruptcy.
Aside from the foregoing two provisos, however, I fundamentally disagree

with the claim above. From the view of morality, animal testing is morally
wrong and inhumane behavior. Animals, especially those lovely pets give
the greatest pleasure to the greatest number of people in the world today.
Years of keeping pets have shortened their owners’ loneliness and relieved
their owners’ stress. Dolphin, a kind of large mammal, has been proved that
can treat chronic fatigue syndrom, headaches, depression and autism.
Accordingly, humans ought to build harmonious relationships with animals
and protect them. From the view of animal rights, by no means should
animals be considered as the experimental subjects, sharing the earth and
survival are all animals’ basic rights. Mankind is on no account unnecessary
to respect their rights. From the view of national laws, animal testing,
broadly defined as legitimate behavior, has a possibility of abusing rights.
Some organizations or individuals may indiscriminately killing or slaughter
animals in the name of the law. Take Japanese as an example, people in
Japan have hunted thousands and hundreds of whales along with legal
protection.
To sum up, though animal experimentation has produced benefits to us,

through reliable alternatives and computer simulation programs can also
reach these effects. I assert that animal testing should be limited and
humans should not narrowly separate humans from animals, animals can
be a friend, and a teacher.
Model Answer 4:
In some countries, a number of scientists use animals for the purpose of

experimentation, in which some people content that it is essential for
people, because the experiment is helpful for people to develop science.
However, others say that it is too brutal, for the animals such as mice, dogs,
and apes are living organisms like a human. In this essay I will discuss both
negative and positive views regarding using animals.
On the one hand, the purpose of experiment plays a major role in people’s
life, because some medicine is made by the experimentation. For example,
an AIDS drug has been developing by this method, and also many vaccines
such as influenza, and measles rely on animal tests. Additionally, if we use
only humans, it leads to grave impacts on society like the Second World
War. Therefore, it is considered as important for people to make medicine.
On the other hand, the animals such as mice, dogs, and apes are living
things with feeling. For instance, it is reported that an uncountable amount
of animals are killed by humans for test, where they are to feel dreadful and
suffering why they are not a human. Thus, those who oppose to using
animals for experimentation tend to say it is cruel.
Despite the fact that the using animals leads to advantages because it gives
people opportunities to develop science. Still, in my opinion, the
experimentation should not be in the world, because, the animal could feel
like us when they are killed by someone.
Model Answer 5:
Concerning the issue whether scientists should use living animals for
scientific research, people hold different views. Some people claim that it is
cruel, while some other people argue that it is beneficial to the development
of science. As far as I am concerned, I am in favor of carrying out
experiments on animals.
Firstly, scientists can do initial experiments on animals to test the effect of

new medicine. Scientists have founded so many milestones on the way to
medical development. But they can not find effective treatment to some
diseases like cancer and AIDS, which are fatal to peoples health. Through
experiments on animals, scientists can not only understand the pathology of
some diseases, but also try the effect of medicine and find the most effective
treatment to these diseases, making great breakthroughs in the field of
medicine.
Secondly, using living animals in the laboratory, the teachers in the

university or some research institutes can demonstrate the anatomic
knowledge to the students majoring in medicine, rendering students a
direct understanding of biological knowledge, which can improve the level
of medical research and make great contributions to the medical science.
Without experiments on living animals, genetic technology would not have
developed so quickly. Actually, most scientists attribute their success and
breakthroughs to experiments on animals.
Finally, Some animals can provide human beings with essential organs for
transplantation. Genetic technology will change the genes of some animals.
In the near future, organs of animals will take the place of artificial organs
like heart pumps, prolonging patients life.
However, researches on living animals face a moral problem because

animals are also creatures in the nature, which possess equal rights as
human beings. On second thoughts, it is worthwhile for the purpose to
accelerate the development of science and the progress of human
civilization.
Sample Answer 6:
It is true that medicines and other products are routinely tested on animals
before they are cleared for human use. While I tend towards the viewpoint
that animal testing is morally wrong, I would have to support a limited
amount of animal experimentation for the development of medicines.
On the one hand, there are clear ethical arguments against animal
experimentation. To use a common example of this practice, laboratory
mice may be given an illness so that the effectiveness of a new drug can be
measured. Opponents of such research argue that humans have no right to
subject animals to this kind of trauma, and that the lives of all creatures
should be respected. They believe that the benefits to humans do not justify
the suffering caused, and that scientists should use alternative methods of
research.
On the other hand, reliable alternatives to animal experimentation may not
always be available. Supporters of the use of animals in medical research
believe that a certain amount of suffering on the part of mice or rats can be
justified if human lives are saved. They argue that opponents of such
research might feel differently if a member of their own families needed a
medical treatment that had been developed through the use of animal
experimentation. Personally, I agree with the banning of animal testing for
non-medical products, but I feel that it may be a necessary evil where new
drugs and medical procedures are concerned.
In conclusion, it seems to me that it would be wrong to ban testing on

animals for vital medical research until equally effective alternatives have
been developed.
In many countries, good schools and medical facilities are available

only in cities. Some people think new teachers and doctors should
work in rural areas for a few years, but others think everyone
should be free to choose where they work.
Discuss and give your own opinion.
Sample Answer 1:
As a big gap is there between the urban and rural areas, some people opine
that teachers
and doctors who are fresh out of college should work in villages for a few
years. However,
others believe that the choice of where to work should be left on the
teachers and doctors.
In this essay I shall discuss the merits and demerits of both approaches and
finally give my
opinion.
There are many advantages of having teachers and doctors work in rural
areas. Firstly, the
people in the villages will have access to medical care and education which
they are
deprived of normally. Secondly, it would be good for the teachers and
doctors who are fresh
from university to translate their theoretical knowledge into practice. In
urban areas there
already so many experienced teachers and doctors. Therefore, people would
naturally not
opt for fresh ones. In a rural setting, they would gain a lot of confidence
very early on in
their career. Finally, a few of these doctors and teachers may choose to live
permanently in
those villages to serve humanity.
On the other hand, this compulsory policy may have some negative effects.
To begin with,
we belong to a democratic country and everyone has a right to work where
one pleases.
Such enforcement may result in working passively and there will be no
motivation. So the
rural residents may not get appropriate treatment and service. Secondly,
fewer and fewer
students would choose such majors and careers and so in the long run there
would be
shortage of such professionals.
In my opinion, it would be better to have such a rule. It would be a win-win

situation for
both, rural people and the professionals. It would also help to bridge the
gap between the
cities and the countryside. The government can, however, make fresh
teachers and doctors
want to work in the rural areas by offering higher salaries and other
incentives.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, sending doctors and teachers
to rural areas
would be an ideal situation but the government should offer some financial
and non-
financial schemes.
Model Answer 2:
The well-established civil facilities in cities are one of the key contributing
factors to the rural-urban shift. However, people have different opinions
regarding whether these inexperienced teachers and doctors should work in
the rural areas. In this essay, both sides will be examined.
On one hand, educational and medical workers are able to enhance their
working skills significantly compared to those who stay in cities. Because it
is human nature to stimulate their potentials under a poor condition. For
example, our ancestors learnt how to use fire and stone to strike beasts in
the stone-age. However, one problem associated with this phenomenon is
that people who have lived in the remote areas for a long period of time
may have problems in reintegrating into the city lifestyle. Consequently,
what would happen is that they might be unable to get used to the cut-
throat competition that undermines confidence and working passion.
On the other hand, everyone should respect the fact that individuals are
entitled to do anything they want. In contrast, if medical workers are sent
to a distant place against their will, perhaps they could become less
productive, showing a negative attitude towards career. Nevertheless, when
it comes to the freedom of personal choice, people need to consider the
influence of their behaviours. If all teachers opt to work in the city schools,
then the education quality at the other side of the mountain would become
cumbersome. Needless to say, the gap between urban and rural places
would not be diminished
To conclude, I believe that young teachers and doctors should be sent to

rural places for the sake of their personal prospects. However, we shall not
forget that the final choice is given to them.
Model Answer 3:
Undeniably, educational institutions and specialized hospitals are located in
the urban areas in almost all countries around the globe. To equalize these
facilities among the citizens of a country, most of the people have the
opinion that government should make regulations for compulsory rural
service after the graduation by the professionals. Whereas others believe
that it is an unethical interference with someone’s freedom. This essay
delves both these views before arriving to a logical conclusion.
On one hand, mandatory service after graduation by health professionals

and educational faculty are astonishingly beneficial to the rural people. For
instance compulsory one-three years rural service for new teachers,
doctors, dentists etc. will alleviate the scarcity of trained professionals in
the village area. In addition, those who have qualified from the government
institutions receiving grant from the government have their responsibility
to serve the government and the people. Moreover, because of brain drain
system community is getting very less service from the talented
professionals and compulsory work in rural areas by new doctors and
teachers will ensure that they concentrate more on serving people rather
than planning to migrate to a rich country. Rural people have to move to
city areas for better treatment and for their children’s education and this
has a negative consequence like over population, increased crime rate and
pollution in city areas. Adopting this strategy by the government will ensure
a better distribution of population in both rural and city areas. Finally
professionals like doctors and teachers should focus primarily on serving
people, not to amass fortunes. Unfortunately teachers and doctors in many
cases are far more concerned about money than helping people and few
years’ compulsory work in rural areas at the begging of someone’s career
would be a great leap toward appositive mind-setup by these professionals.
On the other hand, some others believe that in an independent country

everybody should have the freedom to decide where to work and where to
live. Any restriction and mandatory rules would violate their rights and
would cause them to become frustrated. These professionals would then
dislike to work or stay in their homeland and will try to migrate to a foreign
country. Furthermore this should be spontaneous decision made by a newly
became doctor and teacher and should not be a forced decision. Hence the
supporters of this view argue that compulsory work in rural areas is both
unfair and harmful.
Put everything into consideration, I personally feel that for a rapid and
complete development of a nation both rural and city areas should get
focus for facilities and development. Government should ensure the equal
distribution of services and placing new doctors and teachers in rural areas
for few years would be a great idea to help rural people and also to build a
service oriented mentality among these young professionals.
Model Answer 4:
Although the living conditions, such as medical and school facilities have
been enhanced in the past few decades, rural areas still experience the
scarcity of such infrastructures. Therefore, some people are of the opinion
that teachers as well as doctors should be assigned to these remote places
helping the local communities, while other are opposed to this opinion,
arguing that it is against the free wills of those teachers and doctors.
Personally, I support the latter.
Admittedly, allocating medical and educational professionals can help to

alleviate the current situations in remote areas to some extent. To be
specific, under the guide of new doctors, not only can local people receive
more advanced medical attention, but also establish community medical
centers, which will benefit them even in a long run. Moreover, it is teachers
who can foster the next generation. Thus, more and more specialized and
knowledgeable youngsters can be cultivated, which in turn will dedicate all
their techniques and knowledge to the development of their hometown.
Nevertheless, reaching the conclusion that newly arrived teachers and

doctors can help to develop the rural places does not necessarily indicate
that this is the best solution. In fact, such compulsory policy may trigger
negative effects. For instance, some of the teachers and doctors may not
want to be allocated to these remote places due to the fact that they cannot
be separated from their families or they consider the living conditions there
are very harsh. Under these circumstances, it would be wrong and inhuman
to implement this policy. Furthermore, if these professionals were assigned
against their wills, they would be reluctant to perform their jobs and would
even hold resentment towards their jobs.
In addition, instead of sending new teachers and doctors, the government

should improve the local infrastructures. This is the fundamental solution to
tackle this problem. That is to say, without the construction of local
facilities, the allocation of teachers and doctors would be neither productive
nor attractive. Only after the development of local hospitals and schools,
can the problem be addressed.
In conclusion, as far as I am concerned, sending professionals to rural

places cannot combat the problem completely. Instead, the government
should give priority to the construction of schools and hospitals, which is
the essential solution.
Model Answer 5:
In many countries, good schools and medical facilities are available only in
cities. Some people think new teachers and doctors should work in rural
areas for a few years. But some others think everyone should be free to
choose where they work .Discuss and give your own opinion.
In this day and age, it can be generally observed that the disparity between
cities and the country has been aggravated by relentless urbanization. With
respect to educational and medical facilities, a yawning gap has emerged
between those in cities and the rural ones. This manifest chasm has
prompted some to suggest that teachers and doctors fresh out of university
work in the country for a few years.Yet many are opposed to this view on
the grounds that it infringes upon individual freedom to choose where they
work.Personally, I think both these two views have merit and demerit.
Granted,assigning new teachers and doctors to the countryside may create

certain benefits.To begin with,this practice can help foster a strong sense of
obligation in many teachers and doctors.They can experience first-hand
how the rural residents are held back by the out-moded teaching and
medical facilities and this, in turn, can inspire a host of professionals to
commit themselves to the alleviation of this disturbing situation.
Moreover,the inferior living and working conditions in the country can
temper many of these young professionals’ soul.They are very likely to be
more tenacious and determined and hence more successful than their urban
counterparts in later careers.
However,there are even more drawbacks that this practice can engender.In
the first place,many young teachers and doctors will feel unmotivated or
frustrated if they are sent to rural areas against their own will.They may
have a hard time getting accustomed to the shabby housing and primitive
facilities and slack off at work.In the second place,if new teachers and
doctors are coerced to work in the countryside, a considerable proportion of
them may find it daunting when it comes time for them to relocate to cities
after a few years in the country.They will feel intense occupational stress
when they cannot operate efficiently equipment much more advanced than
the devices they are used to back in the country school or hospital. Last but
not least, given the inferiority of the rural educational and medical
facilities,it is highly probable that the inexperience of new teachers and
doctors will lead to unsatisfactory job performance in rural schools and
clinics.We really cannot expect fresh recruits to work wonders with
outdated tools.
In the final analysis,I concede that sending teachers and doctors fresh out of
college to the countryside may produce specific advantages. However,if we
enforce this indiscriminately,that will surely generate even more banes. On
balance, I am convinced we should optimize our workforce and honor the
individual freedom in determining where they work.
Some people think the increasing business and cultural contact

between countries brings many positive effects. Others say it causes
the loss of national identities.
Discuss on both sides and give your opinion.
Sample Answer 1:
Globalization has resulted in more business and cultural contacts among

different nations.
This also means that in many ways people around the world are becoming
more and more
similar. This situation has both pros and cons which I shall discuss in the
following
paragraphs.
There are many benefits of globalisation. To begin with there are more jobs
because of
globalisation. Multinational companies have opened in many parts of the
world providing
jobs to thousands of people. Secondly, there is more efficient trade between
different
countries around the globe thereby improving the economies of developing
countries.
People have more opportunities to travel and therefore have awareness of
other cultures.
What is more, today people have more choices of products because of
globalisation.
There are also many reasons why people say that national identities are
being lost. We eat
the same food, watch the same TV programmes, listen to the same music
and wear the
same clothes. People have also started speaking one language, English, in
many parts of the
world. In fact, English has become the lingua franca today.
However, I feel that this is a very narrow definition of national identities

and nations are as
different as they were ever in the past. Cultural identity is based on far more
than just the
films we watch or the clothes we wear. For example, take my own culture of
India and
compare it to the west. We may wear any clothes, but we never take the
names of elders
and call them with respect. In the west, it is quite OK to call anyone by
name. In fact, they
appreciate it more. I believe that after knowing about other cultures, we
learn to respect
our culture even more. So, some very deep rooted national identities will
always be there.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that there are more advantages of
increasing trade
and cultural contact among nations. Whatever similarities we see today are
only on the
surface. Total loss of national identities can never take place.
Model Answer 2:
In this global economy, multinational companies and all kinds of NGOs can
be seen everywhere in the world. Whether globalization is a boon or bane
has been a frequent topic of discussion.
There are three main reasons why many people are in favour of
globalization.First and foremost, it helps to boost the economy in both
developing countries and developed countries. For example, companies
from developed countries like japan have benefited a lot from the cheap
labor in developing countries such as China and Vietnam.At the same time,
millions of dispossessed in Asia and Africa find their jobs and lift their
families out of poverty. Secondly, globalization promotes intercultural
communications by breeding immense opportunities for individuals to go
abroad ,such as a working holiday,a simple business trip ,or a volunteer
program).People can gain valuable experiences and thus have a better
understanding of different cultures. Finally, With a variety of exotic cuisines
and imported goods,globalization also enriches people’s life.
However,some people fear that globalization may lead to the loss of

cultural identies.It is true to some extent. A great number of young Chinese
girls have no problem wearing kimonos in a cosplay show,but face a
psychological barrier when asked to wear traditional chinese dresses,which
they consider are only wore by restaurant waitresses. However,although
absurd things like that happen from time to time during the course of
globalization,I do not think globalization is the culprit for this.And instead
of blaming foreign cultures for invasion,government need to figure out how
to resurrect its own culture and make its people proud.
In conclusion, the increasing business and cultural contacts are beneficial to

people all over the world. When enjoying the benefits brought by
globalization,governments and their people need to protect their native
cultures too.
Model Answer 3:
Globalisation has increased the integration between nations in terms of

economic, cultural, and social aspects. Some hold the view that the
influences are beneficial, while some suggest that it might therefore reduce
the identities of nations. In this essay, the advantageous impacts as well as
the disadvantageous ones will be presented.
To begin with, the economic activities increased enormously through the

process of globalisation. For instance, foreign companies can set their
production factories in the areas where human resources are less expensive,
such as China and Vietnam, to reduce their costs. This can also improved the
local economies in these developing countries. Nevertheless, these industrial
activities are often lack of regulations. Worker safety and pollution, as an
illustration, are sometimes ignored, which can lead to serious problem like
fatality rates in the areas.
Furthermore, the growth of international contacts would reduce the

uniqueness of the countries. A good example for this is the phenomenon of
Americanisation. The United States of America is so powerful in every field
that people in other countries assimilate into American culture, from huge
fast food chains to the “English Mania” in countries like China and Japan. It
is a fact that the fast food culture has branched into places where there
were originally an incredible diversity of cuisines. In addition, the dominant
status of English as a lingua franca has resulted in language death.
To sum up, it is no doubt that the influences of globalisation can be both

beneficial and detrimental, by means of economy and culture. Nonetheless,
we have to keep in mind that it is exactly because of the diversity that
makes our planet exceptional, and it is certainly that we do not lose our
values as well as identities when making our lives better.
Model Answer 4:
In this era of glabalisation the world is considered to be a global village as
trade, tourism, politics, films, music, literature and arts are not restricted
within a country’s border. This international business opportunity and
cultural exchange surely bring many positive aspects while the negative
impacts cannot be ignored as well. This essay delves with these two views
and expresses my personal opinion on that.
On one hand, the positive outcomes of cross cultural activities and
international trade are immense. In this age of modern technology and
Internet people have access to films, music, arts, language, cultural and
many other aspects of other countries. The international trade and business
opportunities have helped people all over the world to purchase and sell
products at a competitive price and they have far more options nowadays
than the past. Crops grown in a distant village or dresses designed by a
rural labour have got a world market and this has helped to fight the most
vicious problem in the world- hunger. Someone can feel hatred and anger to
other nations only if his vision was blurred with the propaganda. For
instance, Muslims around the world have a very negative image to the
Western people and this could be resolved only by cultural contact.
Eventually people will find that they are all the same apart from their
religious and cultural differences. So from this point, it can be inferred that
cultural contact between nations can maintain the world peace.
On the other hand, people who are worried about the globalization,
international trade and cultural exchanges opine that this very trend is
detrimental for a country’s own culture and tradition. They are right to
some extent but I personally believe that culture is ever changing and if
people exchange culture, it will not diminish their own culture. Rather it
would enrich a country’s own culture. History also teaches us that many
cultural and traditional aspects are borrowed from other nations and this
has in fact a positive impact.
Considering both of these views, I would surmise that protecting our own
culture or tradition would depend on us and it would not be harmed from
our business relation and cultural contact with other nations. National
identities are represented by its citizens and heritage and that is why when
citizens of a country would be benefitted from the international business
and cross cultural contacts, they would also be able to highlight their own
cultural aspect to the world.
Sample Answer 5:
The growing global business relationships and interaction between various

cultures have resulted in greater economic development and better
understanding between people across the globe. However, some people
believe that such developments have led to the degradation of the
individual identities of many countries.
On the one hand, the establishment of large international businesses firms

has created a great number of jobs for the educated and skilled youth in
many underdeveloped countries. For example, the arrival of software and
outsourcing companies like Google and Accenture from the United States
have created enormous jobs for engineers in India. At the same time, these
companies have been able to reduce the cost of their operations by
relocating to less expensive locations of the world.
Similarly, today people in many countries are able to enjoy music, dance,
theatre and other cultural practices of other countries. This has helped
them to appreciate other cultures and it has often become a positive impact
on their own cultures. For example, western music and movies are very
popular in many parts of the world, and in India films and film music have
been greatly influenced by the technical advancements of the west. At the
same time, Indian spiritual and cultural practices like yoga and meditation
have been extensively practiced by many westerners, especially in the recent
times.
On the other hand, People’s food and dressing habits and entertainment
options are dominated by international business firms, whereas traditional
lifestyles becoming unpopular. This has led to the internationalisation of
culture directed by multinational companies. This is evident in the
increasing popularity of fast-foods like Pizzas, Burgers and fried meats of
multinational chains like KFC, Pizza Hut and MacDonald. In contrast, many
traditional dishes are becoming less popular or even extinct all over the
world.
In conclusion, although we need to acknowledge that globalisation has

resulted in a certain loss of cultural identities, it has enormous benefits in
terms of economic development and cultural evolution of the world.
Therefore, from a broader perspective, accepting such changes can only be
considered as a positive development.
Model Answer 6:
One of the most noticeable trends recently is a closer connection among

nations in terms of business and culture. While many argued that it may
lead to the demise of countries’ identities, I believe that it brings about
opportunities for one’s progression.
There are several reasons why national identity can disappear if cultural
and business bonding among countries is strengthened. Firstly, the invasion
of foreign cultures, either through media or through business interaction,
has made the locals have become more accustomed to exotic cultures,
especially younger generations. Many young Asians are captivated by the
Western culture which has changed their ways of life. Secondly, taking a
look back in history, a plethora of civilizations are vanishing, this started
by the loss of own language. Many small communities want to come out of
their isolation and seek interaction with the wider world; therefore, they
learn other languages to exist.
Nevertheless, I believe that business and cultural relationship between
countries have resulted in greater economic development. To begin with,
trade throughout global thereby improves the economy of underdeveloped
countries. Many multinational companies have opened in many parts of the
world providing jobs to thousands of locals. Furthermore, those countries
can get a chance to spread their culture to others. A unique culture can
attract foreign visitors and become a huge income source for a nation. For
example, Vietnam is famous for “pho”, a traditional food made from rice,
and many tourists want to visit to Vietnam and enjoy it.
In conclusion, although there are some reasons why the increased of

interactions in both business and cultural aspects between nations has
brought concerns over its impact on the identity of each country, in my
opinion it can promote the nation’s development
Model Answer 7:
The world today is characterized by the free flow of information and

commodity. The frequent interaction and growing interdependence among
countries have ended the days of regional isolation and absolute national
sovereignty, but they have also sparked off heated controversies over the
positive and negative impacts that a global culture can bring into our life.
Some people say that the widening international exchanges, both in the
field of business and culture, have exerted positive influences to a nation as
well as its people. To begin with, they promote business cooperation among
nations. For example, large multinational companies spread the latest
technologies and experience around the world, and international trade has
helped so many less developed economies grow. Also, they enrich people’s
lives because people of one nation are given opportunities through
international tourism, exhibition and fairs, TV programmes and films, etc.
to enjoy the achievements of other cultures across the globe.
However, other people argue that these conditions also create the possible
danger of undermining a country’s national identity. In the first place,
traditional cultures might fall victim a global media and entertainment
force. This is the most evident in some parts of the world where
“Americanisation” is threatening the preservation of their indigenous
culture. In Viet Nam, for instance, few youngsters like or understand “Hue
Court Music”, the quintessence of Vietnamese culture; they go for Hollywood
movies and rock music instead. Moreover, in the process of globalization,
the world is getting less linguistically diverse, as a growing number of
people give up their native language for the dominant language in the
world – English.
From my point of view, both arguments are the true reflections of the
possible consequence of an increasing economic and cultural interaction
among nations. It boosts economic integration and speeds up
modernization but also creates tensions between global culture and a
country’s national identity. Therefore, we should take the initiative in
fighting to protect our distinct culture and identity from being submerged
by other cultural or economic influences.
Some people think history has nothing or little to tell us, but others
think that
studying the past history can help us better understand the present.
Please discuss the two views and give your own opinion.
Idea For This Essay
History is a Waste of Time:
• Most people memorise dates, names and facts when they study
history. This information is not useful in everyday life or for the
future.
• If we could actually learn from history, history wouldn’t be full of

the same repeated mistakes. However, the same mistakes are made
again and again which makes history irrelevant to learn for the
future.
• History is a subject that is rarely used in people’s lives so it would

be better to focus on science or technology which is more relevant
to the future and today’s society.
• Each historical event has different perspectives. For this reason, it

makes learning history a waste of time because events can also be
interpreted in a different way which makes what we learn in
history less valuable.
• Many school curriculum have been set and are rarely changed.
That curriculum includes little current history which is the only
type of history that helps people understand the world they
currently live in.
History is Important:
• History helps young people understand their own culture and how
their culture and country have evolved.
• History gives identify and helps unify people. It gives people a

sense of roots and belonging.
• History teaches people what their forefathers experienced and

suffered in the past in order to make their country what it is today.
• History teaches us about travesties which have occurred in the

past, such as the Holocaust. It is essential for both people in the
past, present and future to never forget such events in order to
honour the memory of those lost and to ensure it never happens
again.
• History helps us understand change. It records and helps people

understand successes and failures. Through these studies people
can learn about change and how others are affected by it.
• It shows patterns of behaviour or events in the past and their

outcome which can help us avoid similar outcomes in the future.
• Learn about the past often gives a glimpse of the future. It shows a
path of development that will continue past the present and into
the future.
• Valuable information can often be found in history, such as

traditional medicines. Learning about past lifestyles
and techniques used by people in the past can hold the secrets to
remedies or cures no longer used.
Sample Answer 1:
History refers to all the things that happened in the past, especially the
political,
social, or economic development of a nation. Literally, everything, including
a nation, a
city, a town, a subject, a business, and even a product, has its unique history.
Some
individuals are of the opinion that studying past history is useless today but
others
believe it is very essential to know history to better understand the present.
I intend
to discuss both sides of the argument in this essay.
Undoubtedly, the present is the continuation of the past. Therefore, studying

the past
history can enable us to better understand what is going on around us. For
example, if
we are equipped with relevant knowledge of history, it will be easier for us
to
understand the evolution of mankind. It would also tell us how we
progressed and
reached where we are today. We would also know how technology
developed step by
step. History can serve us as a guide because of which we do not repeat the
mistakes
of yesteryears. We also get inspiration from the great men of the past
through history.
Those opposed to the study of history argue that the past was very different
from the
present and we cannot apply that knowledge to the present. For example,
they say
that the French Revolution and the freedom struggle of India have no need
to be
learnt because those situations will never arise again. What they forget is
that this
knowledge makes us realise the importance of liberty and self governance.
Opponents of the study of history also claim that history has nothing to do
with
professionals such as architects and accountants. I believe they would be
better in
their professions if they know something about the history of architecture
or that of
accountancy. As a matter of fact, you are supposed to demonstrate some
evidence of
historical ability if you want to pursue almost any career.
To sum up, studying the past history can not only deepen and widen our
knowledge
but also help us develop the power of analysis. Thus, we are able to look at
what is
happening at present from a historical perspective and better
understanding.
Model Answer 2:
History tells about the old civilizations, their strategies, their way of living,
world-conflict and the ways people overcame it. So I don’t agree that
history has a little to tell us.
The basic characteristics, sufferings, crisis and wit are same for all the ages
of human kind. The way people struggled to achieve a better life in the
primitive time is very much resembles to the present time. The ways may be
different but the theme is same and there is lots of evidence that the study
of past history reviles a new invention to the present people. Though it is
true that history itself is disputed as it has been written by the winners and
sometimes history differs from place to place. For example: according to
Indian History, English came to rule the country and had destroyed the
peaceful lifestyle there by treachery and cunning strategies but in English
history the English are heroes and they claim to modernize the Indian. In
my opinion, nonetheless history has it’s invaluable importance to all of us
will remain till the end of the human race.
How could we know about the great people who had sacrifices their lives
for the betterment of the world or those who have cruelly tried to bring
suffering for people? History tells us a lot about the people of all centuries.
History suggests the different techniques that can be malevolent or
beneficial for a country by presenting practical evidences. Again, history
tells us about the devastating wars and potentially warns us about the
conflict of nations. History suggests us about the good and evil and helps us
to choose the appropriate way.
Model Answer 3:
It goes without saying that human beings have a tendency to look back
before they take a step forward. However , history is essential part of
culture . We learn a lot of things from history like law , technology and
research . When we do new invent technology . We look in past and do study
of history. An argument has been put forward that some people say study of
history is not valuable . According to me . This statement does not hold a
valid ground .
There are a plethora of reasons why I think we should study history . First
and foremost which comes to my mind that learning history is crucial in
today’s life. By studying of history we can understand the lifestyle of the
past . We feel improvment in our life . Secondly, study of history is also vital .
Because by studying , we can get information about our culture , tradition ,
ritual and festival . Thirdly, young generation must study of history .
Because they can avoid bad accident happend in past . Youth become more
aware about future , if they study of history .
On the other hand , some people argue that we should not study history . It
can be adversed impact on children and youth . Because in the past , a lot of
bad things happened and were happened . Some people say , history will no
value , because in future more people do focus on skills .
In conclusion , after pondering over a great deal of thoughts and

deliberation with my self . I come to this conclusion that we must study
history . It gives us motivation and knowledge about bad and good things .
It also play indispensable role in our life. Someone beautifully said those
who forget the history . They have Lost their culture.
Sample Answer 4:
History, in common parlance, is the record of the past events. In many
circles, history is considered as an important tool by which people can
comprehend people, while others say that history does not matter. Although
there are good arguments against the importance of history, I personally
believe that history plays a crucial role apprehending the present situation.
On the one hand, it can be argued that history has a faint function or no use
at all in the present context. The proponents of this argument contend that
the present situation, most often, is different from the past events. The
experiences that history share us have very little worth or relevance in the
present context. Moreover, in many cases, histories are recorded with
different motivations and personal biasness influenced it largely.
Consequently, history might misleads people. Therefore, studying history is
nothing but wasting of time and money.
On the other hand, there are people who believe that history is the key to
understand the current situation and the world in which he or she lives. I
subscribe the view for several reasons. History is the account of past events,
and present is constituted by the past events. So, if one wants to
comprehend present situation accurately, he or she have to delve into the
history. For example, people can understand the spirit of modern
democratic state only when they study the history of French Revolution as it
unified French and inaugurated the epoch of modern state. Besides, our
society is crammed with complex cultures, heritages, or traditions have not
been emerged on the spur of the moment. It has been formed with the
practice of generations. So, if one is keen to understand the present
condition of society or human beings, he or she has to visit history.
In pithy, I want to say that each individual is born with a personal
distinction of an inherited genetic template, known as the genome, which
has developed during the entire life span of human species. And history acts
as a conduit between past and present that allows people to understand the
facts of past events, which in turn helps comprehend the present better.
There is no doubt that when we have a lucid comprehension of past and
present, we can build a bright future on it. So, history is not just useful for
present, but for future as well.
Model Answer 5:
Everything around us has a history, long or short. A technology, an

invention, or a family all has its own past whether we like it or not. To some
people, however, learning history is a boring task of memorizing long lists
of names and dates which they will never use, while others consider
learning history useful and fun.
People who do not like history say that studying the past is a waste of time.
They think that ways of thinking, science and technology and social systems
in the past were outdated and therefore bear little relevance to the present-
day problems and their possible solutions. They ask questions like “What
does the history of African slaves have to do with me?” or “How does
knowing when humans learned to make fire benefit my job as a computer
engineer?” Also, they argue that we should not spend too much time
studying the past as it simply distracts us from focusing on the present.
However, thousands of years of human experience and wisdom to have

something to teach us. For example, Charles Darwin taught us that only the
fittest can survive, which is more than ever true in today’s competitive
society. Thomas Edison gave us an inspirational example that success only
comes after persistence and hard work. Furthermore, learning history can
help us develop a thoughtful and critical mind. As we try to understand why
things happened in the past, we can make more informed decisions in our
present-day life and work.
I think history has a lot to offer us, and we have to study it in order to better
understand the present as well as preparing for the future. But learning
history is not the same as learning from it. It is sad to see that people have
been learning history but are still repeating the same mistakes again and
again like war, violence and injustice.
Model Answer 6:
It has been argued by some that studying history is beneficial while others
contend that benefits gained from learning history are indisputable .
Personally , I believe that history is intrinsic for forming one’s national and
cultural identity and , therefore , should be taught and boosted .
On the one hand ,it is thought the impact and outcomes of studying history
are not as essential as those of science and technology . An example
illustrating this in action is that it is physics that has led man to Earth and
even space , not history . Equally importantly , though it is the study of
biology and chemistry which has resulted in eliminating and treating
diseases , not history . Thereupon , time and efforts should not be addressed
learning history and , instead , should be directed to the most influential
subjects . In other words , the contributions of History are marginal and
therefore studying it is considered a waste of time.
On the other hand , advocates argue that the benefits of studying history
could never be ignored or trivialized for a couple of reasons . Firstly ,
Through studying history , an early deepened sense of belonging and
patriotism within children is created . secondly , through examining the
feats and misdeeds or the rise and fall of our ancestors , a lot of lessons and
manners could be derived to help people to promptly tackle future
ambiguities .
In my opinion , I believe that history bears within printed pages and

chronicle inscriptions the cultural identity of a country which could be
seriously distorted and weakened if history is not aptly taught and passed
to all generations .Equally importantly , though studying history creates
sense of nationalism and pride . Take the history of ancient Egypt which is a
taught under the theme ” Egyptology ” , it brings pride to all Egyptians all
the world over .
In conclusion , it is indisputable that the benefits of learning history

outweigh the drawbacks . If teaching history id given its due time and
efforts , culture and good manners of our ancestors will be aptly reserved
and exquisitely passed to coming generations.
Some people think that teachers should be responsible for teaching

students to
judge what is right and wrong so that they can behave well. Others
say that teachers should only teach students academic subjects.

Ideas for this IELTS Essay:
Agreement: Parents are the best teachers.
• Parents are more engaged in their children’s activities than any

other person because they spend more time with them than even
teachers in schools, so they can find more deeply their children’s
personality weaknesses.
• Sensationally, they feel closer to their children than any other

people are. Bonding helps mothers to love their children more than
any other else.
• We learn to survive, talk, and distinguish well from bad, values of

life, morality and such important other things from our parents.
• To care about their children, parents take more responsibility.

They feel more responsible to protect their children from criminals.
• Parents are more devoted than the teachers.
• Parents would be with a child no matter what.
• We learn almost every aspect of life in our childhood from our

parents.
• There is not any interruption in their teaching, and they

continuously teach their children. This can lead them to become
more trustful than teachers.
• Parents understand the children better and thus play a greater

role.
• Parents are more capable to instruct the children and guide them
well.
• It could be far more economical. Instead of spending tremendous

money on tuition, Family can save it.
Disagreement: Parents are NOT the best teachers.
• In theory and academic knowledge parents are usually less

professional than the instructors teaching in schools.
• Parents are less familiar with the latest training techniques which
other tutors use.
• A huge generation gap between them, parents and children, may

affect the parents’ performance to become perfect teachers.
• A conflict between parents and children in schooling may

negatively affect their emotional relationship.
• Morality, intricacies of life, subject matter knowledge, art, science,

history, value of time etc. are often taught by the teachers.
• Parents are sometimes too blind to notice the bad side of their
children. In this case teachers make neutral judgments.
• Experiences learned from life have far greater role in life than the
things we learn from our parents.

Sample Answer 1:
A well known adage from India says “Acharya devo bhava,” which means
teachers are
next to God. Right from the ancient times, teachers are put on the highest
position. It
is a highly debatable topic whether teachers should be concerned with only
academics
or also teach manners and etiquettes to children. In this essay I intend to
discuss both
sides of the argument.
Teacher is like a potter who moulds the earthen vessels in whichever form
he wants. A
child’s mind is like raw clay and is very much ready to be moulded in the
shape it is
guided to. A good teacher always feels responsible to develop a child’s
conscience. He
has the potential to become a friend, philosopher and guide for his students.
With this
special position in students’ life, he often acts as their role model. His words
highly
influence the minds of the students. Students always try to imitate his
actions or
implement his teachings, so he has to be much careful of his behaviour. So,
in that
respect a teacher has a much more role than just teaching academic
subjects.
Furthermore, teachers convey many good things to parents and society
through
students in many parts of the world. For example, in Nepal, where illiteracy
rate is
very high, teachers convey many valuable messages such as of personal
hygiene
through students. When a student goes home and tells his parents that my
teacher
says we should wash hands before meals, then parents listen. In such set-ups
teachers
are playing a much greater role than academicians.
On the other hand, those who say that teachers should only concentrate on
teaching
course material, argue that competition is stiff and if children lag behind in
curriculum,
they will never be able to catch up with their counterparts in other parts of
today’s
global village. They opine that rules of behaviour can be taught by parents
at home.
In conclusion, I believe that teachers have a much bigger role than just
covering the
syllabus.
Model Answer 2: (Agreement: Parents are the best teachers)

Whether parents are our best teachers or not’ is a never-ending debate and
people are divided both in favour and against this argument. Both have a
very strong contribution and influence on a child’s learning but in my
opinion parents overtake the teachers in terms of teaching their children.
First of all I would like to point out that a teacher is not merely a person
who takes a text book and read texts from there to a student. Rather a
teacher is someone who devotes his/her times to teach someone everything
that someone needs to know to advance to next step. Morality, intricacies of
life, subject matter knowledge, art, science, history, value of time etc. are
something that can’t be taught through academic books and a good teacher
is someone who teaches someone these all.
Now that we know the true responsibility of a teacher, we can easily

compare our parents and teachers. The things that we learn from our
parents are far more important than what we learn from our teachers. I am
not denying the invaluable knowledge we learn from our teachers through
our academic years, but what we learn from our parents are incomparable.
We learn to survive, talk, and distinguish well from bad, values of life,
morality and such important other things from our parents. We are the true
reflection of our parents and our characters are shaped from their
personality and behaviours. Later the teachers help us to enhance our
knowledge, horizon and our view of life but the very foundation and ground
are made by our parents.
The parents sacrifice so many things of their life just to ensure a better life
for us and nothing in this whole world could even be compared with their
sacrifice for us. Think of student who is unable to pay his/her monthly
school fees would be cast away from the school and the beloved teachers
would scarcely be there to help him/her. On the other hand the parents
would always be there with their every possible effort to help the child.
In summary, the things we learn from our teachers are important for our
lives and with those valuable lessons and knowledge we prepare for the
future but the things we learn from our parents shapes who we are, who we
become and their contribution is much more important compared to the
contribution of the traditional academic teachers and that’s why in my
opinion parents are best teachers.
Model Answer 3:
Teachers are important people in education. Without teachers, many

students cannot read, write, speak and learn everything in the world. They
have much responsible for teaching and educating students. Some people
point out that teachers have tasks to teach students how to behave well and
to show which one is true or false. However, others state that teachers are
only accounted for teaching students the subjects in the school.
On the one hand, several people state that teaching pupils can be done by
giving information about the right one and the wrong one. Pupils also
should know how to have good attitude to other people. Teachers should
teach them about it. Teaching attitude is not easy because teachers must be
a model, so that pupils can see the behavior of teachers. If the students have
seen that their teachers have good attitude, it is fast for them to do the right
things. In this case, teachers do not only expect that pupils can behave well
in the classroom, but also pupils must implement it outside of school.
Having good attitude is crucial because if pupils do not know how to behave
to other people, they will not be appreciated and people will think that they
are not good students. Even though pupils are smart or clever, but if they do
not have good attitude, it is not like educated people. It is because educated
people must have good attitude. The more behaved someone, the more
educated he or she is.
On the other hand, others reveal out that teachers only teach students
about the subjects at school. In this case, teachers just think about academic
of students. Teachers do not consider the other things besides teaching all
lessons. To improve students’ academic is quite hard because teaching all
the subjects is not easy. Teachers need well preparation to demonstrate the
materials in front of students. They must master all the things which will be
taught. Students are expected to get much knowledge, such as math, social
science, natural science, religion and sports. Furthermore, students are
hoped to understand about the lessons and apply it in their daily life. As
information, if students get achievement in academic, students have a
chance to get scholarship. For example, if students get winner in
competition or the first rank or the best scores, they have an opportunity to
get the scholarship either in their country or oversea. In brief, it is true that
teachers have role to teach students all subjects in order to develop their
ability in terms of academic. In this case, teachers must know all the
characters of students and the weaknesses of students in learning because
after knowing about it, teachers can find the appropriate method and
assess them objectively in order to increase their ability.
In my mind, teachers or educators should combine teaching and educating

in the classroom. It is because students do not only want to be better in
learning all subjects, but also in behaving to other people. You can imagine
that if someone is clever in making nuclear, but he or she does not have
good attitude. Surely, he or she can use a nuclear in inappropriate way. For
example, someone uses a nuclear to destroy another country in the world.
In brief, teaching subjects and behavior must be balance.
To sum up, teachers have a big role in terms of education. Several teachers
only educate students about good behavior. While several teachers only
teach students about lessons in the school. I believe that good teachers do
not only teach students about the materials which are existed in the
curriculum, but also they educate students how to have good attitude either
to older people or younger people. Therefore, teachers must undertake their
responsible as well as they can. If the teachers can educate and teach
students well, students will be clever or smart not only in terms of
academic, but also they will be smart in terms of attitude.
Parents can be the best teacher for every child coming on this earth. I agree
with this statement as no learning institution can be compared with the
parents as they are role model for their children since they open their eyes
in this world till they are fully grown up and matured.
To start with when the child is born he sees his parents as his guide, mentor
& teacher who will teach him how to speak, eat, drink, live, wear, interact
etc. No one will be with him when he is crying for anything it will be the
parents who will be with him for every problem and his / her every need.
Even during his education days he will observe and learn that the school
although is the learning institution but the moral & ethical values learned
from parents are far greater than any learning center and parents will be
the one who want their children to be the best in this world and they want
their children not to repeat the mistakes that they have done in their lives
which any learning institution won’t care for as they can’t give individual
attention to every student.
On the other hand we see that generally the children who are orphans or
could not get the attention from their parents don’t have that foundation of
ethical, moral and social values as compared to the ones who have been
trained by their parents despite all of them have gone to schools, colleges
etc. The only difference between them is parents.
If the parents are not well educated they could still prove be good teacher
for their children but that will be of less fruitful from the highly educated
parents as educated and learned parents will have more vision and more
horizon as compared to the unlearned.
I would like to conclude with the statement that parents can be a turning
point for his child if he tries to teach every step of living this life.
Model Answer 5: (Disagreement: Parents are NOT the best teachers)
Parents teach a lot to the children and the ground made by them shapes the
future of the children. On the other hand someone learns throughout his life
and thus become the person he really is. In this learning process he himself
contributes the most and teachers, friends, nature, books, academic
education are important as well. Though parents are very good teachers, in
my opinion they are not the best teacher for someone and the person
himself is the best teacher for him.
After we learn to talk, walk and basic morality and intricacies of our life, we
start going to school and there we learn new things every day. The book, the
teachers, the friends and the environment shapes what we become. Parents
teach their kid to a bright, good fellow and yet there are lots of immoral
and corrupted people who actually were transformed badly by themselves.
So someone himself is the best teacher for him. Besides this the things we
learn from our life experiences, teachers and books become far more
important that what we learned in our infant time.
Parents do their fine duty to raise a child to become a good adult and later
he gets the education and experiences from his life and school play the vital
role for his future.
In terms of being our teacher, the nature itself plays an utmost important
role. We learn so many things from our surroundings and the nature is a
silent teacher who widely opens the mystery and significance of our life. The
things we learn from our parents are of course important to our life but
they are rather some righteous lessons and good advises. Later in our life
we face the real situations are learn the true lessons from our experience
and in terms of learning this is the most important part.
So considering all of the above, I would like to opine that, parents are very
important teachers for us but never the best teachers.
Model Answer 6: (Disagreement)

Our parents are the first teachers. They teach us how to talk and many
other things which are vital for leading our lives. There are many different
parents who instruct the children and handle their lives. Some parents want
their child to conquer more than the efforts. They try to be the best teachers
for the children. They pay more attention and thus there are some conflicts
between children and parents. So the child looks for the avenue to escape. It
makes the child to take the wrong road. Teachers at school have the chance
to guide many children. So, they can compare different situations and
potential of children more than parents can do. So, they get more capable to
instruct the children and guide them well.
In our town, we can see many negligent parents. They leave their children
in another house and sometimes the children play on the road and get
injury and become the victims of accidents. Some concerned people have to
return the child to his home back. Parents are not teaching and showing the
preventive measures and dangerous situations to the children. But some
parents can become better teachers for the child and thus prevented tragic
consequences.
Some parents will deliberately instruct the child in some dangerous attitude
or philosophy and they let the child adhere to evil things. So the children
enjoy more in risky conditions and grow up to be a very perilous person.
One therefore should not presume that parents are always the best teacher.
Sometimes they are the worst teachers a child might have.
Model Answer 7:
According to public the student should be monitored by their class teacher

to think about good and bad things, and in what way to behave well among
the society. While others would argue that teacher should be taken only
teaching responsibility for giving theories and experiments skills, I believe
that it would be more beneficial when teachers are not only tutoring the
lessons, but also guiding about morality.
First of all, the success of student in their academic almost depends on the
role of teacher. This is the main reason why much people has a perspective
about the key role of teacher in school. They are merely tutoring the subject
in class rather than other activities. Most parents of pupil think their
children must be teaching about the lessons, and they took onto count on
teachers related to their boys and girls to obtain a remarkable academic
achievement. In fact, some school have a policy to regulate the role of
teacher in class by 75% in class includes teaching academic subjects and
laboratory experiments.
on the other hand, success in academic is not guarantee for student to be

succeed in their real life, such as seeking a job after graduated from school.
Much pupils faced a ne problem when interacting with community. They
seem like do not know how to behave well. They also cannot make a
distinction between a good and bad thing. Even, they shown bad attitude
when taking a conversation with elder people. The one of reasonable
answers is they never getting about morality lesson during study. It can be
said that, it would be more beneficial when student exposing the morality.
Thus, as a parent who wanted their daughters and sons succeed both of
academic and social, morality must include in the school curriculum.
In conclusion, the student who acquired the combination between academic

and how to behave good attitude become more easily pursuing a success in
their life.
The responsibility of child development is often a subject that is discussed

and debated. While some would argue that since a child spends maximum
time at school, the teachers should take responsibility of ensuring proper
development of children. However, I strongly believe that it is parents who
are the best teachers and they play a very important role in the manner a
child is groomed.
To begin, parents are the ones who could better control the disciplinary
aspects of the child. The manner in which a child manages his time, right
through the day is better judged and analysed by parents. This provides
them an opportunity to ensure that the child has the right balance of all
activities, be it studies, outdoor activities, indoor activities and reading.
Research has indicated that children do get addicted to one kind of activity,
which is not good for the overall development of a child. For example, there
are several instances where children spend more time say on computer
games. This can result in the child losing out on social skills. Further, such a
child might eventually turn out to be a loner, with very limited ability to
interact, socialise and communicate with people.
Additionally, for a good healthy living and a steady mind, children need to
have a healthy and balanced diet. Parents do have better control over this
aspect and can ensure that a child get the balanced diet with the right
nutrients. Research has shown proper upbringing of children by parents can
lead to lower crime rates, lower health problems like obesity and higher
literacy rate.
To conclude, they might be people who argue that schools is the place where
teaching happens. Nevertheless, the role of parents is even more critical in
ensuring that children imbibe the right values, morals and ethics. This will
go a long way in benefiting not just the individual but also the society.
Nowadays, we are living in modern life and much more facilities in different
fields which make the life easier for the people, on the other hand the life is
full of challenges and situations facing us specially dealing with society,
different people, different cultures and ages.
Apparently, when we have started life trip we came with zero experience
and the lucky one of us who came to the life with guides people who arrived
before him and people are dedicate their times, power and feelings to help,
those are good Parents.
Parents are teachers, they always teaching us in many ways intentionally

and unintentionally, however vocal guidelines and acting in daily bases
activities are the ways of the life experience knowledge transfer regardless
different culture, language, facilities or economy level of the family. But in
my opinion for this modern life the education level of the parents is a major
factor and considered in the quality of the knowledge and experience
transfer.
There are many teachers around the world which can teach you lot of life
experience but parents always special and the flavor of the knowledge you
gain is unique and neat because it always comes with the feelings which is
impossible to get it from other teachers. Regardless the knowledge is good
or bad, right or wrong parents are best teachers. Finally you will discover
and decide about our life when we reach the rational age. And when we
become parents for the new comers, we would make the best decision for
them.
No one on this earth could deny the fact that parents are the messengers of
god. I firmly believe that I am really blessed to have such supporting
parents. They are the treasure hunt of knowledge. I personally consider
them as the best teachers.
Right from childhood, they teach us in each and every phase of life. When
we are kids, they train us in all kinds of activities crawling, walking and
talking. During schooling they educate us on the difficult subjects. When we
grow up a bit, they assist us in choosing the right path. They support our
career aspirations. They teach us what is good and what is bad.
In addition to the above, parents enlighten us by teaching moral values.

They explain us their past experiences in life from which we can extract
some of the do’s and don’ts. We learnt a lot from them on the culture and
traditions of our region. They advise us in many tough situations.
In my opinion, teacher is not someone who merely teaches us how to read,

write and to gain an academic degree. Rather this person teaches us the
morality, value of life and inspires us to live a positive life. In this regards
parents put more emphasize and effort that a teacher we find in our school.
In our life we learn about life from our parents more than from anyone else.
On the other hand, some of the students deny this fact as they may not
consider the abilities of their children and force them to take subjects of
their choice. They feel that parents should take into account their opinions
and discuss with them the pros and cons of their choice.
To conclude, I strongly affirm that no teacher in this world can be as best as
our parents. We should respect their opinions and abide by their valuable
suggestions.
Teachers are believed to be in the toughest profession in the world. Not

because they are in a physically challenging job or a hostile work
environment but because they have a responsibility to shape the behavior
and thought process of children. Children have extremely fragile mindsets
and tend to emulate the behavior of people surrounding them. Given the
situation, they are extremely prone to behave as their parents whom they
observe on a daily basis. Hence, in a way, parents are also teachers on a full
time job.
However, I do not agree with the statement that parents are the best
teachers. Different children have different cognitive abilities and hence
different learning styles. Research also proves that in order to maximize the
learning experience of any individual, it is important to facilitate the
learning process as per the learning style. Teachers are professionally
qualified and experienced to do this job better. They have both the skills and
knowledge to excel in this as compared to parents.
Parents, on the other hand, are not trained to understand the learning style
of their children. They usually use positive reinforcement in way of rewards
and negative reinforcements in the manner of punishments to teach their
children. In this way, they may unknowingly end up hampering the
development of their children by enforcing a particular way of learning.
I believe if parents could be coached on different ways in which their

children could be taught, they would be the best teachers.

time job.

Some people think that teachers should be responsible for teaching

students to
judge what is right and wrong so that they can behave well. Others
say that teachers should only teach students academic subjects.
Ideas for this IELTS Essay:
Agreement: Parents are the best teachers.
• Parents are more engaged in their children’s activities than any

other person because they spend more time with them than even
teachers in schools, so they can find more deeply their children’s
personality weaknesses.
• Sensationally, they feel closer to their children than any other

people are. Bonding helps mothers to love their children more than
any other else.
• We learn to survive, talk, and distinguish well from bad, values of

life, morality and such important other things from our parents.
• To care about their children, parents take more responsibility.

They feel more responsible to protect their children from criminals.
• Parents are more devoted than the teachers.
• Parents would be with a child no matter what.
• We learn almost every aspect of life in our childhood from our

parents.
• There is not any interruption in their teaching, and they

continuously teach their children. This can lead them to become
more trustful than teachers.
• Parents understand the children better and thus play a greater

role.
• Parents are more capable to instruct the children and guide them
well.
• It could be far more economical. Instead of spending tremendous

money on tuition, Family can save it.
Disagreement: Parents are NOT the best teachers.
• In theory and academic knowledge parents are usually less

professional than the instructors teaching in schools.
• Parents are less familiar with the latest training techniques which
other tutors use.
• A huge generation gap between them, parents and children, may

affect the parents’ performance to become perfect teachers.
• A conflict between parents and children in schooling may

negatively affect their emotional relationship.
• Morality, intricacies of life, subject matter knowledge, art, science,
history, value of time etc. are often taught by the teachers.
• Parents are sometimes too blind to notice the bad side of their
children. In this case teachers make neutral judgments.
• Experiences learned from life have far greater role in life than the
things we learn from our parents.
Sample Answer 1:
A well known adage from India says “Acharya devo bhava,” which means
teachers are
next to God. Right from the ancient times, teachers are put on the highest
position. It
is a highly debatable topic whether teachers should be concerned with only
academics
or also teach manners and etiquettes to children. In this essay I intend to
discuss both
Teacher is like a potter who moulds the earthen vessels in whichever form
he wants. A
child’s mind is like raw clay and is very much ready to be moulded in the
shape it is
guided to. A good teacher always feels responsible to develop a child’s
conscience. He
has the potential to become a friend, philosopher and guide for his students.
With this
special position in students’ life, he often acts as their role model. His words
highly
influence the minds of the students. Students always try to imitate his
actions or
implement his teachings, so he has to be much careful of his behaviour. So,
in that
respect a teacher has a much more role than just teaching academic
subjects.
Furthermore, teachers convey many good things to parents and society

through
students in many parts of the world. For example, in Nepal, where illiteracy
rate is
very high, teachers convey many valuable messages such as of personal
hygiene
through students. When a student goes home and tells his parents that my
teacher
says we should wash hands before meals, then parents listen. In such set-ups
teachers
are playing a much greater role than academicians.
On the other hand, those who say that teachers should only concentrate on
teaching
course material, argue that competition is stiff and if children lag behind in
curriculum,
they will never be able to catch up with their counterparts in other parts of
today’s
global village. They opine that rules of behaviour can be taught by parents
at home.
In conclusion, I believe that teachers have a much bigger role than just
covering the
syllabus.
Whether parents are our best teachers or not’ is a never-ending debate and
people are divided both in favour and against this argument. Both have a
very strong contribution and influence on a child’s learning but in my
opinion parents overtake the teachers in terms of teaching their children.
First of all I would like to point out that a teacher is not merely a person
who takes a text book and read texts from there to a student. Rather a
teacher is someone who devotes his/her times to teach someone everything
that someone needs to know to advance to next step. Morality, intricacies of
life, subject matter knowledge, art, science, history, value of time etc. are
something that can’t be taught through academic books and a good teacher
is someone who teaches someone these all.
Now that we know the true responsibility of a teacher, we can easily

compare our parents and teachers. The things that we learn from our
parents are far more important than what we learn from our teachers. I am
not denying the invaluable knowledge we learn from our teachers through
our academic years, but what we learn from our parents are incomparable.
We learn to survive, talk, and distinguish well from bad, values of life,
morality and such important other things from our parents. We are the true
reflection of our parents and our characters are shaped from their
personality and behaviours. Later the teachers help us to enhance our
knowledge, horizon and our view of life but the very foundation and ground
are made by our parents.
The parents sacrifice so many things of their life just to ensure a better life
for us and nothing in this whole world could even be compared with their
sacrifice for us. Think of student who is unable to pay his/her monthly
school fees would be cast away from the school and the beloved teachers
would scarcely be there to help him/her. On the other hand the parents
would always be there with their every possible effort to help the child.
In summary, the things we learn from our teachers are important for our
lives and with those valuable lessons and knowledge we prepare for the
future but the things we learn from our parents shapes who we are, who we
become and their contribution is much more important compared to the
contribution of the traditional academic teachers and that’s why in my
opinion parents are best teachers.
Model Answer 3:
Teachers are important people in education. Without teachers, many

students cannot read, write, speak and learn everything in the world. They
have much responsible for teaching and educating students. Some people
point out that teachers have tasks to teach students how to behave well and
to show which one is true or false. However, others state that teachers are
only accounted for teaching students the subjects in the school.
On the one hand, several people state that teaching pupils can be done by
giving information about the right one and the wrong one. Pupils also
should know how to have good attitude to other people. Teachers should
teach them about it. Teaching attitude is not easy because teachers must be
a model, so that pupils can see the behavior of teachers. If the students have
seen that their teachers have good attitude, it is fast for them to do the right
things. In this case, teachers do not only expect that pupils can behave well
in the classroom, but also pupils must implement it outside of school.
Having good attitude is crucial because if pupils do not know how to behave
to other people, they will not be appreciated and people will think that they
are not good students. Even though pupils are smart or clever, but if they do
not have good attitude, it is not like educated people. It is because educated
people must have good attitude. The more behaved someone, the more
educated he or she is.
On the other hand, others reveal out that teachers only teach students
about the subjects at school. In this case, teachers just think about academic
of students. Teachers do not consider the other things besides teaching all
lessons. To improve students’ academic is quite hard because teaching all
the subjects is not easy. Teachers need well preparation to demonstrate the
materials in front of students. They must master all the things which will be
taught. Students are expected to get much knowledge, such as math, social
science, natural science, religion and sports. Furthermore, students are
hoped to understand about the lessons and apply it in their daily life. As
information, if students get achievement in academic, students have a
chance to get scholarship. For example, if students get winner in
competition or the first rank or the best scores, they have an opportunity to
get the scholarship either in their country or oversea. In brief, it is true that
teachers have role to teach students all subjects in order to develop their
ability in terms of academic. In this case, teachers must know all the
characters of students and the weaknesses of students in learning because
after knowing about it, teachers can find the appropriate method and
assess them objectively in order to increase their ability.
In my mind, teachers or educators should combine teaching and educating

in the classroom. It is because students do not only want to be better in
learning all subjects, but also in behaving to other people. You can imagine
that if someone is clever in making nuclear, but he or she does not have
good attitude. Surely, he or she can use a nuclear in inappropriate way. For
example, someone uses a nuclear to destroy another country in the world.
In brief, teaching subjects and behavior must be balance.
To sum up, teachers have a big role in terms of education. Several teachers
only educate students about good behavior. While several teachers only
teach students about lessons in the school. I believe that good teachers do
not only teach students about the materials which are existed in the
curriculum, but also they educate students how to have good attitude either
to older people or younger people. Therefore, teachers must undertake their
responsible as well as they can. If the teachers can educate and teach
students well, students will be clever or smart not only in terms of
academic, but also they will be smart in terms of attitude.
Parents can be the best teacher for every child coming on this earth. I agree
with this statement as no learning institution can be compared with the
parents as they are role model for their children since they open their eyes
in this world till they are fully grown up and matured.
To start with when the child is born he sees his parents as his guide, mentor
& teacher who will teach him how to speak, eat, drink, live, wear, interact
etc. No one will be with him when he is crying for anything it will be the
parents who will be with him for every problem and his / her every need.
Even during his education days he will observe and learn that the school
although is the learning institution but the moral & ethical values learned
from parents are far greater than any learning center and parents will be
the one who want their children to be the best in this world and they want
their children not to repeat the mistakes that they have done in their lives
which any learning institution won’t care for as they can’t give individual
attention to every student.
On the other hand we see that generally the children who are orphans or
could not get the attention from their parents don’t have that foundation of
ethical, moral and social values as compared to the ones who have been
trained by their parents despite all of them have gone to schools, colleges
etc. The only difference between them is parents.
If the parents are not well educated they could still prove be good teacher
for their children but that will be of less fruitful from the highly educated
parents as educated and learned parents will have more vision and more
horizon as compared to the unlearned.
I would like to conclude with the statement that parents can be a turning
point for his child if he tries to teach every step of living this life.
Parents teach a lot to the children and the ground made by them shapes the
future of the children. On the other hand someone learns throughout his life
and thus become the person he really is. In this learning process he himself
contributes the most and teachers, friends, nature, books, academic
education are important as well. Though parents are very good teachers, in
my opinion they are not the best teacher for someone and the person
himself is the best teacher for him.
After we learn to talk, walk and basic morality and intricacies of our life, we
start going to school and there we learn new things every day. The book, the
teachers, the friends and the environment shapes what we become. Parents
teach their kid to a bright, good fellow and yet there are lots of immoral
and corrupted people who actually were transformed badly by themselves.
So someone himself is the best teacher for him. Besides this the things we
learn from our life experiences, teachers and books become far more
important that what we learned in our infant time.
Parents do their fine duty to raise a child to become a good adult and later
he gets the education and experiences from his life and school play the vital
role for his future.
In terms of being our teacher, the nature itself plays an utmost important
role. We learn so many things from our surroundings and the nature is a
silent teacher who widely opens the mystery and significance of our life. The
things we learn from our parents are of course important to our life but
they are rather some righteous lessons and good advises. Later in our life
we face the real situations are learn the true lessons from our experience
and in terms of learning this is the most important part.
So considering all of the above, I would like to opine that, parents are very
important teachers for us but never the best teachers.
Our parents are the first teachers. They teach us how to talk and many
other things which are vital for leading our lives. There are many different
parents who instruct the children and handle their lives. Some parents want
their child to conquer more than the efforts. They try to be the best teachers
for the children. They pay more attention and thus there are some conflicts
between children and parents. So the child looks for the avenue to escape. It
makes the child to take the wrong road. Teachers at school have the chance
to guide many children. So, they can compare different situations and
potential of children more than parents can do. So, they get more capable to
instruct the children and guide them well.
In our town, we can see many negligent parents. They leave their children
in another house and sometimes the children play on the road and get
injury and become the victims of accidents. Some concerned people have to
return the child to his home back. Parents are not teaching and showing the
preventive measures and dangerous situations to the children. But some
parents can become better teachers for the child and thus prevented tragic
consequences.
Some parents will deliberately instruct the child in some dangerous attitude
or philosophy and they let the child adhere to evil things. So the children
enjoy more in risky conditions and grow up to be a very perilous person.
One therefore should not presume that parents are always the best teacher.
Sometimes they are the worst teachers a child might have.
Model Answer 7:
According to public the student should be monitored by their class teacher
to think about good and bad things, and in what way to behave well among
the society. While others would argue that teacher should be taken only
teaching responsibility for giving theories and experiments skills, I believe
that it would be more beneficial when teachers are not only tutoring the
lessons, but also guiding about morality.
First of all, the success of student in their academic almost depends on the
role of teacher. This is the main reason why much people has a perspective
about the key role of teacher in school. They are merely tutoring the subject
in class rather than other activities. Most parents of pupil think their
children must be teaching about the lessons, and they took onto count on
teachers related to their boys and girls to obtain a remarkable academic
achievement. In fact, some school have a policy to regulate the role of
teacher in class by 75% in class includes teaching academic subjects and
laboratory experiments.
on the other hand, success in academic is not guarantee for student to be

succeed in their real life, such as seeking a job after graduated from school.
Much pupils faced a ne problem when interacting with community. They
seem like do not know how to behave well. They also cannot make a
distinction between a good and bad thing. Even, they shown bad attitude
when taking a conversation with elder people. The one of reasonable
answers is they never getting about morality lesson during study. It can be
said that, it would be more beneficial when student exposing the morality.
Thus, as a parent who wanted their daughters and sons succeed both of
academic and social, morality must include in the school curriculum.
In conclusion, the student who acquired the combination between academic
and how to behave good attitude become more easily pursuing a success in
their life.
The responsibility of child development is often a subject that is discussed

and debated. While some would argue that since a child spends maximum
time at school, the teachers should take responsibility of ensuring proper
development of children. However, I strongly believe that it is parents who
are the best teachers and they play a very important role in the manner a
child is groomed.
To begin, parents are the ones who could better control the disciplinary
aspects of the child. The manner in which a child manages his time, right
through the day is better judged and analysed by parents. This provides
them an opportunity to ensure that the child has the right balance of all
activities, be it studies, outdoor activities, indoor activities and reading.
Research has indicated that children do get addicted to one kind of activity,
which is not good for the overall development of a child. For example, there
are several instances where children spend more time say on computer
games. This can result in the child losing out on social skills. Further, such a
child might eventually turn out to be a loner, with very limited ability to
interact, socialise and communicate with people.
Additionally, for a good healthy living and a steady mind, children need to
have a healthy and balanced diet. Parents do have better control over this
aspect and can ensure that a child get the balanced diet with the right
nutrients. Research has shown proper upbringing of children by parents can
lead to lower crime rates, lower health problems like obesity and higher
literacy rate.
To conclude, they might be people who argue that schools is the place where
teaching happens. Nevertheless, the role of parents is even more critical in
ensuring that children imbibe the right values, morals and ethics. This will
go a long way in benefiting not just the individual but also the society.
Nowadays, we are living in modern life and much more facilities in different
fields which make the life easier for the people, on the other hand the life is
full of challenges and situations facing us specially dealing with society,
different people, different cultures and ages.
Apparently, when we have started life trip we came with zero experience
and the lucky one of us who came to the life with guides people who arrived
before him and people are dedicate their times, power and feelings to help,
those are good Parents.
Parents are teachers, they always teaching us in many ways intentionally

and unintentionally, however vocal guidelines and acting in daily bases
activities are the ways of the life experience knowledge transfer regardless
different culture, language, facilities or economy level of the family. But in
my opinion for this modern life the education level of the parents is a major
factor and considered in the quality of the knowledge and experience
transfer.
There are many teachers around the world which can teach you lot of life
experience but parents always special and the flavor of the knowledge you
gain is unique and neat because it always comes with the feelings which is
impossible to get it from other teachers. Regardless the knowledge is good
or bad, right or wrong parents are best teachers. Finally you will discover
and decide about our life when we reach the rational age. And when we
become parents for the new comers, we would make the best decision for
them.
No one on this earth could deny the fact that parents are the messengers of
god. I firmly believe that I am really blessed to have such supporting
parents. They are the treasure hunt of knowledge. I personally consider
them as the best teachers.
Right from childhood, they teach us in each and every phase of life. When
we are kids, they train us in all kinds of activities crawling, walking and
talking. During schooling they educate us on the difficult subjects. When we
grow up a bit, they assist us in choosing the right path. They support our
career aspirations. They teach us what is good and what is bad.
In addition to the above, parents enlighten us by teaching moral values.

They explain us their past experiences in life from which we can extract
some of the do’s and don’ts. We learnt a lot from them on the culture and
traditions of our region. They advise us in many tough situations.
In my opinion, teacher is not someone who merely teaches us how to read,
write and to gain an academic degree. Rather this person teaches us the
morality, value of life and inspires us to live a positive life. In this regards
parents put more emphasize and effort that a teacher we find in our school.
In our life we learn about life from our parents more than from anyone else.
On the other hand, some of the students deny this fact as they may not
consider the abilities of their children and force them to take subjects of
their choice. They feel that parents should take into account their opinions
and discuss with them the pros and cons of their choice.
To conclude, I strongly affirm that no teacher in this world can be as best as

our parents. We should respect their opinions and abide by their valuable
suggestions.

time job.


time job.

Some people think that national sports teams and individual men
and women who
represent their country should be financially supported by the
government.
However, others argue that they should be funded by non-
government sources (e.g. Business, scholarships, etc.).
Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that sports holds fascination for almost everyone and

winning a game
in international sports events such as the World Cup or the Olympic Games
is a matter
of national honour. It is a highly debatable issue whether the sports team or
sportsmen who represent their country should be funded by governments or
NGOs. In
the following paragraphs I intend to delve into the advantages and
disadvantages of
both approaches.
The reason why national teams and individual athletes representing a

country should
be funded by the government is that, first of all, they compete against
opponents
from all over the globe in international sports events for the whole nation.
When they
break a record or set up a new record in a world-class tournament, they
inspire
national pride and arouse patriotism among its citizens. Moreover, they
also play a
diplomatic function in competitions. They act as brand ambassadors for
their country
and behaviour helps strengthen the relations between countries and also
improve
their nation’s image.
Those in favour of NGOs funding the national sports teams argue that this
would ease
some burden off the government’s shoulders. Moreover, these businesses are
profit
driven so they would provide the best coaching and facilities to their teams.
The
reason why they support a team or player is that they want to make use of
their
market influence to promote their products or services. So, they also get
something
back by doing so.
I believe that it would be better for government to support the teams

because the less
popular teams and athletes, who are equally important, are ignored by the
businesses
and organisations. Without stable financial support available, they would
not be able
to concentrate on training, and they would not remain dedicated to their
sports.
Besides, it is still controversial for some industries such as tobacco industry
to sponsor
sporting events.
To sum up, national sports teams and individual players standing for a
nation should
be financially supported by the government to achieve the desired
performance.
Model Answer 2:
As a result of constant mass media attention, athletes have become the
center topic of the general in recent years. This leads to the phenomenon of
heated debates on the issue of who should support them financially. Some
people are of the opinion that government has the responsibilities, while
others are opposed to this argument, insisting on the donation from non-
government organizations. Personally, I agree with the latter.
Admittedly, as part of the national affairs, sports and sports professionals

are the responsibilities of the government. To be specific, government has
the duties, apart from protecting national security and boosting domestic
economy, to advocate the development of sports. Moreover, so much money
is required in order to promote sports nationwide that only the government
has the ability to achieve this goal. For instance, to cultivate world-class
athletes, basic infrastructures and facilities need to be constructed along
with qualified and skilled trainers needed to be hired. This involves a great
amount of both money and time. Therefore, without the aid of government,
it would be unlikely for sports men and women to be fostered.
However, reaching the conclusion that government plays a vital role dose
necessarily indicate that government is the only one in supporting sports
professionals. Instead, non-government organizations such as private
owned enterprises and sports institutions are also essential. In fact, this
would be a win-win situation if private businesses support athletes. That is
to say, whenever a company donates money to those athletes representing
their own county, the athletes earn money obviously, and this company
receives public attention that acts as advertisement and increases its
company image and reputation as a patriotic enterprise. This in turn will
boom the business and profit of this company.
In addition, sports should not be considered as the top concern of the
government. Although it is part of the government’s duty, it could never
overweigh the importance of solving poverty as well as well as fighting
crime. That having been said, the government should always put these two
issues in priority. Thus, spending taxpayers’ money on sports would be
recognized as a huge waste of domestic resources and personnel.
In conclusion, as far as I am concerned, money from private sectors should

be used to boost sports, whereas government has more important issue to
tackle.
Model Answer 3:
While some people believe that governments should bear the responsibility
to financially support their national sport teams and individual athletes,
this essay is written to argue that the involvement of entrepreneurs is also
extremely beneficial.
On one hand, national sport teams have traditionally perceived as the pride
of a country and therefore should only be controlled by its government. The
involvement of private sectors could result in the commercialization of
national sport teams, which will damage the image of a country. For this
reason, there has been a general consensus that national athletes should
only be managed by their government, who is not motivated by the pursuit
of profit.
On the second hand, it is very difficult for the government to afford the
astronomical expenditure of sport teams alone. The majority of the
government’s annual budget is often allocated to other priorities, such as
education, military and infrastructure, leaving little funding left for sports.
On the contrary, non-government groups with their huge capital base can
financially support athletes to a larger extent. Also, as sports became
increasingly competitive, the need for better equipment, facilities, nutrition
and training methods have grown urgent. Private sectors, with their
expertise in different areas, ranging from medical to technology, can
provide tremendous support to sportspersons. With the help of these
entities, the performance of sport teams is believed to be markedly boosted.
In conclusion, the sole support from the government to sport teams and
athletes, though necessary, is not sufficient. Only with the aid from private
organisations, who are capable of providing finance and other necessities,
do sportsmen can attain their full potential.
Model Answer 4:
In recent years, one of the clearest trends in sports is that more and more
corporations have come into play. It is a subject of discussion whether
private financing should be accepted by the government to a larger extent
and even the state can concede its control over national sports teams to
private ownership. In my opinion, the involvement of entrepreneurs is
essential and can be deemed as a complement to government
administration.
There are many reasons why the private sector should play a more active
role in sports. First, the government alone cannot afford the expenditure
involved in the sports industry, such as salaries of athletes, administrative
costs, and so forth. By organising competitions efficiently and economically,
enhancing athletes” market values, seeking out sponsors or patrons, the
private sector not only raises necessary financing but also maximises the
return of the sports industry. A business’s willingness to take part in this
industry is attributable to many incentives. For example, it would help
create an image which is associated with enthusiasm, energy and passion
and can be turned into enormous income. Meanwhile it contributes a lot to
its solid position in society, as well as good reputation.
Meanwhile, as sports have grown more competitive, the need for better
equipment, facilities, nutrition, and training methods has become urgent.
Athletes should have well-developed physiques, which can be obtained only
through extensive physical training and strict exercise. Private sponsors
have expertise in different areas of technology, ranging from nutrition to
the treatment of injuries. They are able to train athletes scientifically and
effectively, reduce the risk of injuries and extend their career lives. Besides,
as private sponsors are more financially capable of providing awards,
bonus and other financial incentives to motivate athletes, their involvement
is crucial to athletes’ performance on the playing field.
The rule of the private sector is therefore indispensable, but it is not to say
that the government should divest itself of intervening in the sports
industry. Although the private sector is surely committed to seeking
sponsorship and performing many fund-raising jobs, it is profit-oriented
and therefore, very likely to make a decision ignorant of the interests of
athletes. National teams are branded, marketed and sold as entertainment
products, while the value of national pride and ethnical dignity is
overlooked. It is also very likely that private investors are only interested in
those sports with high media exposure, resulting in the unbalanced
development of sports. For this reason, the government should retain the
major ownership of the sports.
In conclusion, the sports world is in need of financial support and the

assistance of the private sector. While providing financial resources, goods
and services, business investors can obtain communicative and commercial
benefits. By giving the green light to private financing, the government is
more likely to advance the overall development of sports.
Model Answer 5:
Some people hold the opinion that it is the certain task for government to
offer financial assistance to these athletes who act as representative for
their country whether they are individual or collective.While some argue
that it is none of government business.Those people could also be provided
by some institutions like enterprise,welfare organization and so on.From my
point of view,I am in favour of the latter opinion.
The first step I want to show here is that government should make effective
and efficient use of money,supporting for sports may be a costly thing and
bring a burden.Government should pay more attention on how to improve
the quality of common people,like invests on repair or replace old
facilities.If government put emphasis on sports,even the national team get
good rank in competition,it really have little impact on people’s daily lives.
Another reason of providing financially supported by other organizations I

think is important is that it will promote them development.For example,as
the company has gave aid to the sport,the company could put its logo on
athlete’s clothes for free or hold a competition in it’s company name.It is not
only a good chance to help athletes receive satisfied supports but also a
useful way to publicity,which I think full better than invest much money on
advertisement.
For the above analysis of the two proposals,it could be noted that the
former tend to bring less benefits.To put it in a more specific way,the fund of
sport by the non-government organizations reduce a economic burden on
the government and increase the exposure rate of them.
Some people prefer to provide help and support directly to those in

the local community who need it. Others, however, prefer to give
money to national and international charitable organisations.
similar Topic – Many people prefer to do charity or help straight to

the local community. But others would like to support the national or
international charitable organizations. This essay will discuss about
the two ways people are tend to do when they come to charity.
Similar Topic – Nowadays some people like to give help to the local
community or provide people with direct help. Other people prefer to
give money to national and international organizations. Discuss both
of two ways and present your own opinion.
Idea for the Essay
Para 1: Advantages of direct help

1. A person remains directly in touch with the needy
2. You can see how your money is being used – no mediators and so no
chances of corruption
3. Moreover, charity begins at home
Para 2: Advantages of joining national and international organisation

1. Can work on a larger platform – for global issues – larger platform is a
must
2. Help activities can be better spread through a larger network. You feel
part of a global village.
Conclusion: Help in any form is good. Depends on the condition of the

country.
Sample Answer 1:
“To have enough to share; to know the joy of giving; to thrill with all the
sweets of life – is
living”. Helping others is a very virtuous thing. There are basically two ways
to help. One is
by offering support to those around you who need your help and the second
is through
national and international charitable organisations. In this essay I intend to
delve into the
benefits of both approaches.
There are many advantages of direct help. Firstly, a person remains directly
in touch with
the needy. You can see how your money is being used. There are no
mediators and so there
are no chances of corruption. It has been well said that charity begins at
home. Naturally, if
you help those around you, the people in your locality love and respect you
and you enjoy a
better status in life.
There are also many advantages of helping through national and

international
organisations. You can work on a larger platform and provide help for
global issues. A larger
platform is a must if you have a lot to offer in charity. Help activities can be
better spread
through a larger network. You feel part of a global village. Help need not be
always in the
form of money. It can be in the form of services also. For example, if you are
a doctor, you
can provide medical aid and if you are a teacher, you can volunteer to teach
in the under-
developed nations.
Help in any form is good. The condition of one’s country could influence
your way of
helping. If you belong to a developed country, where even the poorest of the
poor has the
basic amenities of life, it would be better to help through national and
international
charitable organisations but if you belong to a developing or
underdeveloped country and
have the resources to help, then it would be better to help those around you.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that it is human nature to help

those who need it.
Providing direct help and making donations through charitable
organisations are just two
different ways of achieving the same goal.
Sample Answer 2:
Helping poor and needy is a duty in many religions. However, people are
split when it comes the point that how they support them who are in need.
In the developing countries, people likely support the poor people directly.
On the other hand, people in the western world like give money to the
national and international charity organizations. Both the approaches have
their own merits.
To commence with, despite the economic boom, hundreds of thousands

people are living in pandemic poverty. Many affluent individuals cannot
bother the poverty next door. They do not depend on national or
international charity organizations, rather they try to support the pauper
community so that they can lead a better life. In addition, direct donation to
those in need, provides a sense of warm. Besides, they also do not rely on
charity organizations due to corruptions. Some corrupt officials try to
pocket the donator’s kindness. Consequently, contributors’ charity cannot
reach the misfortunes. It is another prime cause of why people donate
directly.
However, donators in the wealthy nations very often contribute to the

national and international aid organizations. These organizations usually
invite electronic and print media’s journalists to highlight their campaign,
and eventually the donators are known widely. Therefore, some people like
to donate needy through aid organizations. Another key point to remember
is that many people want to deal with global issues. That is to say that
many African countries are suffering for stark poverty. People of these
countries have no shelter, cloths, food, and even pure drinking water.
Therefore, citizens from the rich countries donate to the organization in
order to calm the unbearable poverty of African nations.
In fine, help in any approach is good whether it is directly or indirectly. It

depends on individuals and on the condition of the country.
Model Answer 3:
It is considered by some that participating some local charities is a sound

choice while there are others who deem that rendering money to internal
and external aid organizations can tackle more problems. Included in this
essay are some factual analysis and my own opinion.
On the one hand, the preponderance of direct support is that benefactors

can assist the needy who live in their own community. In other words, that
the repercussion of donating money directly can be easily seen indubitably
bolsters donors’ belief. However, there are some problems that might not be
tackled by local charitable organizations. Take the environmental issue for
example. Due to water contamination, in many urban areas, citizens are
facing acute water shortage, which needs government’s involvement.
On the other hand, the predominant reason why national and international
aid organizations are becoming prevalent is related to their large-scale
purposes. It is alleged that through these charity foundations, benefactors
can help those who live in disease-ridden slums with their pittance, and
simultaneously contribute to erasing illiteracy. One of the most renowned
universal seat of charity is World Literacy Foundation. Nevertheless, the
biggest problem of indirect monetary support is that donors can be suffered
from charity scams. Rationally, there are many illegal charity foundations
established with the purpose of pocketing people’s money or other valuable
items.
By way of conclusion, with above listed things, I would contend that both
two kinds of charitable organizations have merits and demerits. Therefore,
I strongly believe that if donors scrutinize aid organizations before
supporting the needy, they will avoid charity fraud.
Model Answer 4:
Presently, it is undeniably true that, international organization has found in

everywhere to give a hand to local people that need a help by better-well
community. Others have opposed that give a help directly is worth rather
than through national or international organization that has focused on
several fields only. While give an aid for local community has merits and
demerits, I would argue that give a support directly for local community is
the best way to help them.
On one hand, without giving money, community is more likely to give a real
help for who have a right to get it. In several areas in the world people tend
to give money as a sign that they have same feeling as people who directly
attend in that condition. To illustrates, in the conflict zone such as several
areas in middle-east, people need more specialist of medication instead of
money which is one of evidence that money is not worth in the conflict
places such as Afghanistan, Palestine and so on. They need volunteers that
can bring out them from the horrible situation. Consequences, people have
a prolonging life even though money is not the pivotal aspect.
On the other hand, the aid taken by people who live below poverty line does
not spread-out properly as the authority who gives the money is unable to
manage the funding as better as organization that has the data completely
in terms of the people who will obtain the aid. Result shows that the United
Nation as the international organization provides many programs such as
UNICEF, as one program for children in Africa and refugee has the excellent
result for people and children who need a help, go hand in hand with that
program WHO, the health program for people around the world especially
for war-zone countries, collects the funding from people worldwide to
detect the drugs that can prevent the spread of Ebola virus that attack
people in the Africa continent. This program from the aid of people around
the world can help a thousand of human races in Africa especially. As a
consequence, the funding transferred by wealthy people can be used for
improving health and nutrition of human being. The aid is becoming more
and more popular for inhabitants showing the awareness to other people.
The aforementioned evidence reveals that it seems giving money directly

getting equal for merits and demerits. I concede that, the money from the
wealth people should be able to support for the people in the places, where
has a catastrophic problems. Where possible, I fear that the aid can be a
novel issue in the future such as rampant corruption.
Model Answer 5:
More and more people have participated in doing charity in many countries
around the world. Some people would like to help the local community or
people directly. Some others prefer to give money to non-governmental
organizations to charity done by themselves. In this essay, these two
methods will be discussed and my viewpoint will be presented.
First of all, people who argue that it is absolutely essential to give donation
directly towards people and local communities. With a large amount of
money, these people have the right to help anyone who is under harsh life.
What is more, these donators think believe that via face to face
conversation with suffered people, donators have better understanding
about the demands of victims to help what material s or other daily
necessities. As a result, this method has improved much more material and
culture life of the local community and has been considered as one of the
most effective ways of the donation.
However, other people like offering money to national or international

organizations. These organizations have worldwide networks and money
would be delivered more effectively to the regions where people live in a
poor life or are suffered from natural disasters such earthquake and
Tsunami. On the other hand, with the strict criteria, these organizations
always give help with different victims to be donated the most
appropriately. Moreover, thanks to a great deal of money receiving from
many donators around the world, charity organizations will make a
significant contribution to lifting people out of poverty as well as having a
better life for the local communities.
As far as I am concerned, donators should give money to people directly. It

cannot be denied that not all charity organizations have done the best
obligation of the donation. Furthermore, corruption or bribery absolutely
might occur to leaders of these organizations. Therefore, money is not spent
the most effectively to the poor and victims in many countries and the most
suitable way is that charity should be done directly by donators.
It seems to me that it is necessary to give help directly to the poor or
victims. This has been regarded as the most effective ways of doing charity
of the rich. This also limits the risk of corruption and bribery happening to
doing charity via these organizations.
Model Answer 6:
Donating money to the poor is a humanitarian activity that has drawn the
public ‘s attention in recent years. While many donors provide money and
other support directly to the needy, others choose national aid
organizations. In this essays, I will discuss both sides of this issue before my
own opinion is stated.
On the one hand, there are two major reasons as to why many people give
financial support or other non-monetary contributions to charities. Firstly,
these organizations may make donor’s names known more widely because
they often invite reporters and journalists to write about their campaigns.
Accordingly, donors’ names would be mentioned in TV channels or online
newspapers, which is beneficial for their personal development. Secondly,
members of charities are often trained to make a donation. As a result, they
would be better at holding community events than a single person who
might lack the experience to be a skilled fund-raiser.
On the other hand, others decide to donate directly because not every
charity group is believable. Many national charitable organizations made
use of donators’ kindness to pocket their money and even non-cash items
such as books, clothes, furniture, etc. Their donations, therefore, might not
reach victims of outbreaks or natural disasters. Thus, to ensure that the
needy receive money fully, many individuals choose to make a direct
donation, instead of giving funds to aid groups.
In conclusion, in my opinion, national charitable organizations are still well
worth a bridge for the whole society to help disadvantaged people due to
the above reasons.
Model Answer 7:
Today, there is a vast number of charities collecting for an equally vast

number of causes. In addition to choosing a worthy cause, philanthropists
must also take into account the integrity of the organization collecting
charitable funds. Opinions are often divided on whether it is better to give
to local organizations or larger internationally-run charities. Both sides of
this debate will be analyzed before a reasoned conclusion is found.
On the one hand, many people feel local charities are the better
organizations to donate to. In a sense, these sorts of charities tend to
produce more measurable results, and thus the person making the donation
is more able to see exactly what their donation is going towards. A good
example of this can be seen in my hometown, Ottawa. In Ottawa, every
Christmas marks a time when used toys are collected and redistributed to
underprivileged children around the city. The transparency of this
exchange makes it understandable why may feel more confident when
donating to a local charity.
On the other hand, larger international charities do a lot to stabilize global

inequalities. For example, vaccinations in many countries would not be
possible were it not for the support of the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation. Although the results of a person’s donation may not be as easy
to detect as with local charities, international groups such as this radically
alter lives and living standards around the world. The drastic differences
created by larger international groups make it obvious why they have won
the support of many.
Following this look at local and international charities, it is felt both give
tremendously to the human family, and thus to declare one better than the
other is simply impossible. It is hoped in the years to come that global
generosity increases and that extreme poverty is eradicated.
Model Answer 8:
It is considered by some that participating some local charities is a sound
choice while there are others who deem that rendering money to internal
and external aid organizations can tackle more problems. Included in this
essay are some factual analysis and my own opinion.
On the one hand, the preponderance of direct support is that benefactors

can assist the needy who live in their own community. In other words, that
the repercussion of donating money directly can be easily seen indubitably
bolsters donors’ belief. However, there are some problems that might not be
tackled by local charitable organizations. Take the environmental issue for
example. Due to water contamination, in many urban areas, citizens are
facing acute water shortage, which needs government’s involvement.
On the other hand, the predominant reason why national and international
aid organizations are becoming prevalent is related to their large-scale
purposes. It is alleged that through these charity foundations, benefactors
can help those who live in disease-ridden slums with their pittance, and
simultaneously contribute to erasing illiteracy. One of the most renowned
universal seat of charity is World Literacy Foundation. Nevertheless, the
biggest problem of indirect monetary support is that donors can be suffered
from charity scams. Rationally, there are many illegal charity foundations
established with the purpose of pocketing people’s money or other valuable
items.
By way of conclusion, with above listed things, I would contend that both
two kinds of charitable organizations have merits and demerits. Therefore,
I strongly believe that if donors scrutinize aid organizations before
supporting the needy, they will avoid charity fraud.
Model Answer 9:
Humans are all gold hearted, but they tend to express it in different ways. It
is not strange that some prefer being volunteers, others send money to
charitable organizations. Both have benefits as below.
On one hand, many people like doing charitable activities such as: “race for
the autism” ” bring supplies for foster homes” or “festive time for poor
children” because they give them a good pleasure of having done the right
job. A lot of people find actions more meaningful than donating money only.
They believe that doing such gives them joy of being helpful annd bring
good luck to the unfortunates. Therefore, many associations have created
annual charitable activities and have received thousatnds of voluntary. A
great benefit is that anyone, either wealthy or not could participate freely.
This is why many people, knowing they aren’t rich enough, would devote
themselves to lend a hand. Some donate old clothes and toys, others enter
races to raise money.
On the other hand, some other people prefer giving money to international
charitable organizations. These people are often the rich and famous. Rich
bussinessmen tend to create their own foundations and provide millions of
dollars each year, while famous people try to encourage others by handing
out charity-purpose products. Katy Perry, a famous singer has been making
many charity tours, while Mark Zuckerberg – who created the popular
social network Facebook donates a hundred million dollar each year to save
schools. This also give them reputations, but mainly an image for others to
follow.
To my opinion, I would prefer being a volunteer. One of the obvious reason

is that my economical state is low. Another point which leds me to the first
choice is about trust. Recently, world news announced that a member of
FIFA embezzled money that was sent for the Haiti Foundation. I realized the
risk of sending money to any associations, even the international ones
which sounds prestige.
To conclude, I believe that people have many ways to show their care for
each other, but it is highly reccomended to choose which way wisely.
Some people think museums should be enjoyable places to attract

and entertain
young people, while others think the purpose of museums should be
to educate, not entertain.
Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.
Sample Answer 1:
Museums are places where important objects of cultural, historical and

scientific value
are preserved and shown to the public. This function makes them play an
extremely
important role in disseminating human civilization. It is a topic of debate
whether the
main purpose of museums is to only educate or do both educate as well as
entertain.
Museums such as the British Museum, the Louver, and the National Palace
Museum
are regarded as a vital educational resource because they highlight the
achievements
that have been accomplished by all mankind throughout history. Visiting
them is an
eye-opening experience. One will definitely be shocked by what is on display
and learn
something that they did not know previously. Actually, the majority of those
who visit
museums expect to know more about museum pieces of art and antiquities
or those
reflecting the development of science and technology. Therefore, museums
should
focus on providing more authentic information to meet their expectations.
On the other hand, it is certainly right for museums to improve their

management,
service and environment to attract young people who obviously need to be
encouraged to learn more about human cultural history. If museums focus
only on
education and do not make things interesting, then they will not be visited
much and
even their function of education will not be fulfilled.
Today’s interactive museums are always crowded. This is because, people

enjoy and
learn at the same time. In the planetarium, one feels one is actually in
space. This
arouses curiosity to know more about the planets and satellites. However,
museums
should not overdo the entertainment and go astray—by which I mean
museums
should make it clear that they are not purely a source of entertainment, like
a disco
bar, cinema or amusement park.
To sum up, museums should try their best to educate people and this can be
better
done if they make learning fun especially for today’s youth.
Model Answer 2:
People have different views about the role and function of museums. In my
opinion, museums can and should be both entertaining and educational.
On the one hand, it can be argued that the main role of a museum is to
entertain. Museums are tourist attractions, and their aim is to exhibit a
collection of interesting objects that many people will want to see. The
average visitor may become bored if he or she has to read or listen to too
much educational content, so museums often put more of an emphasis on
enjoyment rather than learning. This type of museum is designed to be
visually spectacular, and may have interactive activities or even games as
part of its exhibitions.
On the other hand, some people argue that museums should focus on
education. The aim of any exhibition should be to teach visitors something
that they did not previously know. Usually this means that the history
behind the museum’s exhibits needs to be explained, and this can be done in
various ways. Some museums employ professional guides to talk to their
visitors, while other museums offer headsets so that visitors can listen to
detailed commentary about the exhibition. In this way, museums can play
an important role in teaching people about history, culture, science and
many other aspects of life.
In conclusion, it seems to me that a good museum should be able to offer an

interesting, enjoyable and educational experience so that people can have
fun and learn something at the same time.
Model Answer 3:
Admittedly, the dramatic decrease in the number of visitors has seriously

threatened the survival of museums, especially the scientific ones, because
they have become musty old tombs for objects that too often lack a human
connection. Therefore, there is always a justification of adding amusement
elements into the museum, for the purpose of recovering its vitality among
the public. For example, instead of staidly presenting those boring theories
and data, an astronomy museum can use technologies like 3D movies and
video games to show the universe, planets and the earth. This is a so active,
exciting and inspiring experience of an interaction between science and
human that more youngsters will be attracted to visit and play in this
museum. As a result, the high popularity of museums among young
generations can keep them from closing down in the future.
However, I still believe the educational function of museums should be given
priority over the
entertainment, because main contents in a museum, such as history, culture
and arts, have a nature purpose of teaching. For example, by visiting Pearl
Harbor museum, a site in World War 2, American tourists can be educated
to honor soldiers who sacrificed their lives for the country, thus forming the
patriotism. Similarly, a museum specializing in displaying cultural items
like traditional food, clothes, antiques, paintings and handicrafts plays a
role of teaching and spreading local-culture identities, which is a main
means by which young generations can learn to respect, protect and inherit
their own culture. Obviously, the influences of museums mentioned above
are more educationally meaningful, with nothing to do with entertainment.
Another reason why a museum should be exclusive from the entertainment

is a concern about the atmosphere. Generally speaking, a museum should
be a quiet and peaceful room where visitors can fully focus on watching,
appreciating and learning historic things and artistic works in deployment.
However, as long as it turns into an enjoyable place, we can expect that it
will be occupied with pop music, restaurants, groceries and even arcades,
and all of these entertaining facilities would make the museum noisy,
overcrowded and upsetting.
In conclusion, my opinion is that museums should lay more emphasis on the

aim of educating the public. Although catering to the youth by providing
entertainment can help to restore the popularity of museums, the
fundamental goal of these facilities should still focus on teaching historic
and cultural knowledge to visitors.
Model Answer 4:
In the contemporary world, a variety of museums are sprouting up all over

the world, of course which appear in China, for the reason of the museums’
development and increase, the goal for visiting museums are different from
before we went there. Some people regard that museums should be
enjoyable places to entertain people such as the sea museum or others
which tend to attract children, however, others believe, the purpose of
museums is still to educate rather than entertain people. What’s more, in
fact, basically, there are museums built for public citizens to inspire
patriotism instead of a recreational place. Frankly speaking, I am more in
favor of the latter viewpoint, building museums plays a key role in
inspiration and education to public citizens.
Generally speaking, museums is the symbol of national gorgeous history,

which represent the nation’s promising future, to some extent, visiting
museums could cultivate our enthusiasm, for our country dramatically,
especially during the children’s education period, we can see that teachers
constantly lead the pupils to these museums to learn from the nation’s past
experience. In this day and age, different types of museums are established
in different fields such as aviation airplane musems, famous historians
museums, art works museums, which exhibit different processional fields
and knowledge to public, through visiting these museums, people especially
the students could get better hang of different areas, which is beneficial for
them to know the society status in order that they could find a suitable field
to work hard. Finally, museums is distinguished form other office buildings
and recreational places, because that not only museum is a form of
architecture, but is regarded as educational resources.
Admittedly, among present museums, there are simply a couple of museums
built for amusing children such as the sea museum as I referred to, although
this kind of museum could be regarded as a entertaining place for children,
to a large extent, parents prefer to educating their child and enabling them
to know much more about the sea through visiting these museums.
Therefore, as for me, even though there are some museums where people
could be relax as a leisure place, but essentially, I still believe the founder
just tend to provide more significant information through the way of
recreation.
All in all, I f all the museums not only educate visitors as a learning
resource, but could they attract people as a amusing activity, these
museums could play more vital role in promoting national development.
Model Answer 5:
Talked about the position of the museum, there are two separate
viewpoints. Some people treat it as a place to relief themselves while the
others consist that we should emphasis the education function of the
museums. With views of both sides considerate, I think it is time to break
the routine and give museum an opportunity to function its recreation.
Here are my arguments. First of all, with the rapid development of the
modern society, people especially the juvenile are so stressful that they need
a place to release the pressure. As a result of this demands, museums which
function like a entertainment place emerges one by one. And this
phenomenon in return demonstrates my opinion that museums should be
enjoyable places.
In the second place, in my opinion it is time to reposition the role of the
museum. For a long time, museum is always classified as a serious place.
However, compared to old days, culture nowadays are much more diverse,
at the same time popular arts need a more inclusive stage to express their
contents. In this situation, the old style museum can not fulfill its needs.
Also, there are some opponents who disagree with my opinion. They argue
that the educational feature of museum should not be discarded. For
example, people may benefit from the traditional drama which tells the
story of courage and decision.
All in all, although the educational meaning of the museum can not be
estimated, the needs of the modern human beings can not be ignored, too.
Model Answer 6:
Normally, museums are considered to have a vital function in serving their
public for educational purpose, yet many museum goers also aim to seek an
entertainment experience, which, I believe, is nearly impossible to ending up
with a ‘purely entertaining’ experience.
There is no doubt that a primary role of museums is to educate the public.

They provide tangible objects and collections that can be genuinely seen
and touched by students. This provides excellent field trips for extensions of
classroom as well as enhancing their curriculum. If they were changed to be
entertaining-oriented to attract more visitors, then the quality of art or a
history would probably be degraded or distorted, hence weakening the
function of educating. Eventually, museums would be nothing less like
theme parks, aiming to profits generating rather than benefiting the public.
However, there is also another voice claiming that museums should be

interesting and playful, providing a relaxing place for people to have fun in
their leisure time. Once they are solely built for learning without even a
little of enjoyment, they would lose popularity and even financial support
due to failing to attracting enough visitors.
My view is that education and entertainment don’t necessarily have to be
mutually exclusive motivations for coming to the museum, but they can be
integrated to achieve both aims. In fact, from our own school experience, we
are more likely to be motivated to explore if content is truly entertaining,
and meanwhile if we can gain something meaningful through recreation,
then it’s a win-win situation.
Nevertheless, at their core, museums are educational institutions, though by

a unique interesting way which differs from a traditional one in schools.
Some people think that the government should decide which

subjects students
should study at the university, while others think that students
should be allowed to apply for the subject they prefer.
Discuss the two views and give your opinion.
Sample Answer 1:
University education is very much needed nowadays to compete in the

global village
of today. Some people are of the opinion that government should choose the
disciplines that students have to study at university. Others opine that the
choice of
subjects should be given to the students. Both situations have their merits
and
demerits which I shall discuss in this essay followed by my opinion.
If the government chooses the subjects it would naturally be taking into
account the
job sector. There would be lesser unemployment as the government knows
which
sector has job vacancies and would suggest only those subjects. It has been
seen that
there are many job vacancies without qualified people and many qualified
people
without jobs. Therefore, the number of people working in various job
sectors will be
balanced and it would be more efficient for students to find jobs after
graduating from
the university. Secondly, it would help those students who find it difficult to
decide
what career to pursue.
On the other hand, if students choose the subject then they do well in it
because it is
of their interest. They excel in their field and when they enter the job market
they do
well in their field. Moreover, there are lesser drop-outs of universities which
is
common if students are forced to study what they don’t like. This also instils
a sense of
responsibility in the students when they make a decision about their subject
because
they know that their whole future rests on that decision.
Taking everything into account, I believe that it is more preferable for
pupils to select
their subjects in the university themselves. The government can play a role
in
promoting some subjects by providing funding to those who take up those
subjects.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that there are merits of both
situations but
on the whole it would be better to leave the choice to students to select their
subjects
as there would be lesser drop-outs and they would excel in their field.
Model Answer 2:
It is crucial for university students to choose what major they are going to
study in the future. Personally I think students should go for the majors
decided by government.
Students who choose the courses selected or encouraged by the authorities
may get employ easily in some industries where labors are needed.
Government collected data of the labor market regularly in order to tackle
the problem of labor shortage, so they know what labors are exactly the
labor market looking for. For instant, students may be required to major in
environmental technology, because the government wants to pay more
attention to reduce the pollution, so these students can acquire a job easily
compared to students who follow their interests and major in courses like
music and art.
What’s more, choosing the courses decided by government may probably let
those students gain some fiscal allowance given by the government to
support their expensive university annual fee. Because some majors are
really hard to learn and students rarely choose them, but are in a high
demand.
On the other hand, some folks hold a view that students who study their
favorite subjects can be excellent at job-seeking and find employment
facilely. Because their studies are driven by their interests, so they may
possibly devote more time in acquiring more knowledge. For example, an
art student who loves art may spend plenty of time on a single painting so
she may potentially become a virtuoso of art. On the contrary, students who
have picked the government suggested programs may be unsuccessful
because they cannot motivate by their majors and difficult to concentrate
on their education which lead them to a dilemma of employing.
In my opinion, I agree that students should take courses suggested by the

government because it will help graduates get a job less hardly. Take
Internet technology as an example, policymakers knew this industry is so
thirst in getting more engineers that students who followed government’s
guidance studied IT will be sought-after at the labor market. Besides,
taking government suggested courses not only benefit your own career but
also accelerate the development of our own economy as well as the society.
In conclusion, before students choosing majors by interests, they should try
to analysis what the society needs and which field is worth devoting.
Model Answer 3:
People have different views about how much choice students should have
with regard to what they can study at university. While some argue that it
would be better for students to be forced into certain key subject areas, I
believe that everyone should be able to study the course of their choice.
There are various reasons why people believe that universities should only
offer subjects that will be useful in the future. They may assert that
university courses like medicine, engineering and information technology
are more likely to be beneficial than certain art degrees. From a personal
perspective, it can be argued that these courses provide more job
opportunities, career progression, better salaries, and therefore an
improved quality of life for students who take them. On the societal level, by
forcing people to choose particular university subjects, governments can
ensure that any knowledge and skill gaps in the economy are covered.
Finally, a focus on technology in higher education could lead to new
inventions, economic growth, and greater future prosperity.
In spite of these arguments, I believe that university students should be free

to choose their preferred areas of study. In my opinion, society will benefit
more if our students are passionate about what they are learning. Besides,
nobody can really predict which areas of knowledge will be most useful to
society in the future, and it may be that employers begin to value creative
thinking skills above practical or technical skills. If this were the case,
perhaps we would need more students of art, history and philosophy than of
science or technology.
In conclusion, although it might seem sensible for universities to focus only
on the most useful subjects, I personally prefer the current system in which
people have the right to study whatever they like.
Model Answer 4:
Some people think that students should take the subjects which are decided
by the government in the university.Others think that students can apply for
the subjects they prefer.Discuss both views and give your opinion?
There has been much debate revolving around the issue of whom determine
the courses taken by the students at schools.Some people assert that
students can select courses on their interests while other individuals argue
that the government in the university should decide the subjects.In this
essay,I will compare and contrast two typical opinions regarding this issue.
Convincing arguments can be made that it is significant for students to

choose courses by themselves.To start with,not all the students have the
same capability to learn average level courses in the
university.Therefore,intelligent students may apply for high-level courses
depending on their own ability without wasting time in classes.Moreover,it
is impossible that every student is interested in the same subject in
university.Specifically,due to character and environment,different students
are equal to different interests.If every student in university learn the same
subjects,the ultimate character of students will be harmed sooner or
later.Lastly,it is without saying that interest is the best teacher for a
student.In other words,interests will cultivate students to think
independently and critically in their study.
Admittedly,students can benefit from the subjects which are decided by the
government in the university.The reason for is that the government has the
experiences to decide subjects for their students.Obviously,the government
decides the subjects because of the requirement of the
society.Nevertheless,the government only designs the courses which only
include theoretical knowledge without practical skills for students.For
instance,in Nanjing university of Chinese Medicine,students who are in the
psychology department only learn theoretical knowledge on consulting
psychology without practical skills.Consequently ,it is useless for students to
learn outdated knowledge on subjects.
On the basis of the above factors,my conclusion is that subjects should not
be decided by one side.More importantly,I am convinced that subjects
decided by the government in the university should combine with students’
suggestions.It is better that every student has their own individual schedule
in one term in the following years.
Model Answer 5:
The past few decades have witnessed the significant development of our
education system. Students, especially teenagers go to school to acquire
knowledge through all designed subjects. Some would argue that instead of
studying all the courses, teenagers should have the right to choose what to
learn based on their preferences or specialties. In my opinion, young
students should learn all the subjects.
All the subjects provided at high school are crucial for students in terms of
their future development. To be specific, subjects designed in high school
are usually fundamental knowledge and basic principles. These basic
knowledge is the cornerstone which can be applied by teenagers in the
future when they pursue their education in university. For instances, an
individual who took a class of physics will build his or her knowledge on top
of that and further conduct new research in the field of physics. Moreover,
since high school education offers a variety of classes, ranging from social
art to science and engineering, it allows young students to cultivate more
personal interests. The youth who are young and naive, have little
understanding of the world, which will in turn set a limited scope of their
interests. However, by learning all subjects in high school, students are able
to enrich their knowledge so that they will have interests in more
disciplines. Besides, a wide range of courses helps students to prepare for
the job market. Despite the fact that they only know what they like to do,
students have no idea what is required by the job market. Schools, on the
other hand, have the ability to conduct surveys and research of the demand
of job market. Therefore, schools designed subjects will more likely to
ensure the youth going to the job market well prepared.
Those who oppose my statement may claim that students will be more
motivated if they have the right to choose which subjects they study. This
argument seems true at the first glance; nevertheless, it is unreasonable.
Students can also be efficient when schools can provide a well designed
curriculum. In addition, without the proper guidance of the teacher,
students are likely to select those subjects which are easy to pass. As a
result, teenagers are getting more and more lazy and may even develop a
negative attitude toward those difficult subjects.
In summary, students should not be given the power of selecting courses

according to their own preferences.
Some people think that personal happiness is directly related to

economic success. Others argue that happiness depends on different
factors.
Sample Answer 1:
Some people think that personal happiness is directly related to economic

success.
Others argue that happiness depends on different factors. Discuss both
views and
give your own opinion.
Happiness is a state of mind. Obviously, different people understand it in

different
ways. I believe that economic success is an essential element to happiness,
but it is
just one factor and that too not the most important one. Other factors like a
stable
family life, secure source of income and good heath are more important in
achieving
happiness.
Undoubtedly, to achieve personal happiness, economic success is necessary

but its
importance shouldn’t be exaggerated. Apparently, it’s sensible to say that
one needs
sufficient money to live in a spacious apartment, to have a private car,
fashionable
clothes and latest household electrical appliances, which are all
indispensable for
happy life.
However, we have to admit that material success alone can’t ensure that
one can lead
a happy life. One may have a lot of money but if there are not cordial
relations among
family members, one can never be happy. In fact, too much wealth can lead
to stress
in life if children go astray because of too much wealth. A person who has
the barest
minimum but a very understanding life partner and obedient children can
be very
happy.
Good health is another factor needed for happiness. Can you imagine a
multimillionaire suffering from cancer to be happy? Another big factor is a
stable
source of income. One can never be happy if one is not sure whether his
business will
pick up or his job is secure.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, economic success is

important but
those who cooperate well with co-workers and those who get along well
with families,
friends and neighbours are more likely to be happy, and it’s the same case
with those
who pursue a variety of interests and hobbies at leisure and those who are
in good
health.
Model Answer 2:
The meaning of happiness is different to everyone, some people argue that

economic prosperity, increased wages and reduced commodity prices are
few factors that have direct influence on happiness, while others claim that
good interpersonal relationships, family bonding, healthiness and
socialising contribute a lot in attaining happiness.
Firstly, there is no doubt that people with good jobs and businesses have
more prosperous lives then others ordinary citizen of the society, one of the
reasons is that they have financial capacity to fulfill their desires and buy
things that give them pleasure. They are not confined to any boundaries
while purchasing items of their interest such as mobile, laptop, cars etc.
However, perpetual efforts are required to sustain this wealthy lifestyle that
could have dire consequence on their personal life in long run due to lack of
attention and care towards family members.
However, health is a pivotal constituent of happy life. This is not surprising

that a healthy person enjoys lucrative lifestyle and has more tendencies to
participate in diverse activities that could be a source of joy for him.
Additionally, healthy relations among family members and immediate
social circle make people happier and relax, for example, children feel more
happiness while playing with their friends or when they received toys that
not even worth a lot of money.
Family relationship, personal aim & desire and peaceful mind are other
important aspects for being happy in our life. While money can ensure
materialistic happiness, a poor can be happier than a rich in many cases. An
honest and contented person can be a happy person regardless of his
economic status.
To sum up, I would like to say that role of economic success is indispensable
for achieving happiness but others factors have also great consideration in
this regard. Even rich people with physical or psychological defectiveness
are unable to enjoy the true color of life.
Sample Answer 3:
It is true that people accept about personal happiness which is directly

related to economic achievement. However, I believe same with others say
that there are other factors which could be influencing happiness are past
life experience and personal value.
Now days, individual happiness is often correlated with economical aspect

and it illustrates human in terms either rich or poor. Rich men are assumed
as people who can produce a lot of money although they are just sitting in
their own homes. Good economic status is an ability to fulfil the
complementary necessities after getting the basic needs which people can
afford for new model cars, branded outfits and branded gadgets. On
contrast, poor people are correlated with suffering for house, food and job.
This explanation indicates people will be happy if they are facilitated in
their life. Other fact shows there are some different factors in making happy
such as past life experience and personal value that dramatically people
never concern about it.
The first, past life experience means the memorable activity which people
did in the previous period. The beautiful memory can stimulates people for
doing repetition action when they faced the same condition and they
expected the same result as successful as before. They always keep in mind
the impressive experience for healing hurt in the present life. Sometimes, it
becomes a simple way for people who try to synthesize happiness.
Another reason is personal value which is determined as the way people

assess themselves and occur rarely implementation in people’s life. The
result from comparing between expectation and real condition influences
the personal value. People who identified as happy person force their real
life as their expectation even can be better with getting suitable expectation
of others because in reality people need proof from other which indicates
their respect.
In conclusion, it is clear to me about mostly people say that personal

happiness is about economic success, while I believe that there are other
factors which can influence the happiness and commonly it is unrealized by
people.
Model Answer 4:
The topic of whether economic success is the key element to determine one’s
happiness is of concern for many people. Some people believe that being
rich can definitely make people happy, while others disagree. As for me, I do
not agree the former.
Those who assert economic status hold the following reasons. Firstly, the
wealthy ones can be considered as a successful entrepreneur. It is generally
accepted that the rich have run an outstanding business or had a superior
career performance. They have a sense of achievement by being granted a
salary raise or annual bonus. Secondly, some people enjoy the material
possessions and physical comfort. Holding a large amount of money, people
are able to afford a spacious apartment or a luxurious bag, which means
they can pursue a life with many expensive items.
However, there are opposing voices. Some others believe that one’s
happiness cannot be achieved by financial condition alone. To start with, a
harmonious family can satisfy people’s sense of happiness. Without the
emotional support from their family member, people will feel insecure and
unaccepted, although they can be extremely rich. Secondly, the lifestyle
determines people’s wellbeing. For example, one will feel joyful if he involves
in activities such as fishing and rock climbing. In the other words, people
get satisfied when they have the chance to maintain a healthy or activate
lifestyle.
I personally believe that family and personal lifestyle are more important to
one’s happiness. Although economic achievement seems to be a long term
goal for many people, it cannot fulfil one’s emotional satisfaction. In order
to live in a happy mode, people should pay more attention to the ones they
love and the passion of their hobbies. In this way, they will gain the spiritual
happiness instead of simply owning lots of money.
Model Answer 5:
Different people have different perspectives. Each person has different

perspective about what the happiness is. For personal perspective, some
people believe that happiness is able to reach by the economic success.
Others, nevertheless, has opposed that blissful feeling is not only relying on
money or success in economic but also a wider spectrum aspect. Therefore, I
would argue that many factors can bring human being getting happiness in
their daily life.
Admittedly, it can be argued that money as the standard of better economic

for some inhabitants. With having much money, people have a chance to get
their happiness with buying everything as it fulfills their fundamental
needs. That is one of form of self-actualization where individuals have
capabilities to get happiness fully. Thereby, it can be said that money has
power to bring happiness for some people. For example, homeless gets their
happiness while they have a house that share with family members, and
they are able to buy meals. There are the happiness for several people.
Therefore, happiness is not vogue if they have much more money to buy the
goods that they are needed.
On the other hand, a person who successful in economic field becomes

popular in the community is unlikely to achieve happiness because they
happiness depend on money and people around them have two faced
toward that is not honest to give an attention and an affection for them. For
instance, Zack Malik as the well-known singer, ex-member of one direction,
has many fan-bases and save numerous treasures. However, he is not being
satisfy, According to BBC news he said that he is unable to feel like usual
adult, he is not happy event thought he is the rich younger person that is
the evidence that the popularity with having much money is not
guaranteed people has a happy life. Happy life as young person and he can
gather with his family that is the happiness. Therefore, money and
economic success is not a measurement in happiness life, and perhaps, our
life becomes worse owing to successful in economic.
The aforementioned evidence reveals that it seems successful in economic

can bring happiness beside that emotional feeling is one of the happiness
for each person. Where possible, I hope that human race attempts to reach
their happiness even without money.
Model Answer 6:
All people ever feel happiness in their life because we have feeling which
show our emotion. Furthermore, a question has been grown regarding to
whether happiness can directly affect people to be success in their business.
However, others object this argument and believe that there are other
factors which give more contribution to economic success. While, I believe
that there are many factors that can give significant contribution to
economic success including happiness.
Happiness is an emotion which belong in every human and give spirit to

people whom feel it. People can be exiting and powerful when they are
happy. It also can affect the result of what people do because it gives more
passion, so people can feel more diligent and passionate to do their
business. Morever, happiness affects people’s mood and it can affect the way
of people’s work. Therefore, happiness always gives contribution to
economic success.
On the other hand, there are other factors which can affect economic
success beside happiness. Firstly, the successful of economic depends on
hard work and diligent of people. When people eager to reach something
and fight for it then it can directly give influence to economic condition. In
other words, it is depends on people’s effort. Secondly, people can become
success in their business when they receive help from other people. It has
related with link or connection. People who have many link have more
oppurtunities to be success in their business because it can make them
easier to gain what they want.
In conclusion, happiness gives contribution to economic success indeed, but

it does not give direct contribution. However, there are other factors such as
people’s effort and link which can affect successful of economic directly.
Model Answer 7:
Most people argue that economic success is the most important factor in
getting personal happiness. While I accept that argument, I believe that
many factors which make someone happy.
Many people say that direct factor of personal happiness is financial success
because of many reasons. Firstly, people can buy everything they need and
they want when they success in gaining their own money. For example, they
want to buy a lot of gadgets, they can buy them because they get what they
want by money they have. Secondly, people experience that people who
reach success in economy have high social status. Other people give more
respect to rich people. Being respected by societies makes successful people
happier than poor people. Therefore, some people say that economic
success has direct effect to happiness because of reasons mentioned above.
On the contrary, other people believe that there are other factors which
influence people to be happy. First factor is physical condition. People feel
happy when they are healthy. They say that nothing is useful when they get
sick because unwell body is the worst condition. For example, they can not
eat the most delicious meals in the world when they get so many ulcers in
their mouth. Second factor is psychological condition. For instance, people
can not feel the happiness of getting lottery when they are in mental
sickness, such as delusion or hallucination. They will feel suffered because
voice in the hallucination says that they will be murdered.
To sum up, mostly people feel happy when they success in economy.
However, people will be happier than others when they succeed not only
financially but also physically and mentally.
Model Answer 8:
There is no denying fact in saying that we are dwelling the advanced &
modern era, where people finds the happiness from different sources. But, it
is really a debatable issue whether happiness relates to economic success or
depends on other factors. Today, I am going to discuss both perspectives of
people & end up this piece of writing with my own opinion in conclusion.
To begin with, the first perspective of those who are in the favour of this
believes that personal happiness relates to economic success. Undoubtedly,
we are living in the era where the survival of the human being is not
possible without money. People with enough money leads to happiness &
avail the luxurious life with big house, car & other facilities. Apart from this,
money brings the standard of living, creates your goodwill in the society as
well as helpful in your trouble time. Thus, some people relate personal
happiness to economic success. For instance, individual with less money not
leads efficient life.
The another school of thought is holding an opinion that happiness depends

upon different factors. No doubt, money plays a vital role in life of persons
but the happiness not comes only with the money factor .An individual
tastes the dose of happiness with having good relationships with the family
& relatives without money. Not even this, sometimes people are confronting
stress under this situation people needs mental support from their near &
dear to stay happy instead of money only.
To conclude, I restate that it is dilemma to be with one particular side,

which leads me to have partial about this statement but I firmly believes
that money over weighs the other factors considering the current era.
Some people think that schools should select pupils according to

their academic
abilities, while others believe that it is better to have pupils with
different abilities
study together.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Sample Answer 1:
Children are put in a particular grade according to age in our education

system. It is
obvious that all children are not of the same intelligence level and
sometimes it
becomes difficult for educators to teach them in the same class. Therefore,
some
people feel that there should be separate teaching for intelligent students
and weak
students.
If we look at the benefits, then yes, intelligent students can be taught at

their pace
and the sessions can be made more interesting for them and the same thing
applies to
the weak students. Thus, both the categories of students would enjoy
learning.
Moreover, different teaching tactics can be adopted in each group to give
students
maximum benefits. In a mixed group, many times weak students cannot
cope up with
the pace of studies and so come under high pressure and get de-motivated.
When
they are separated, teachers can handle them tactfully and bring them back
the lost
confidence.
Furthermore, it has been seen that sometimes the more intelligent students
show
disruptive behaviour. They can grasp things very soon and then disturb the
others. It
can become very difficult for the teacher to maintain discipline in the class.
On the other hand, weak students would automatically develop an

inferiority complex
if they are made to realise that they are weak in studies by separating them.
In
addition to that, the other group might not treat them well, which can have
a direct
effect on their psyche. On the contrary, when the students study in a mixed
group, a
sense of competition develops and weak students are motivated to study.
Even
intelligent students can help weak students in studies and the bond can be
strengthened. This way, even weak students would not feel belittled.
In my opinion, children should not be separated as only academic abilities

are not
enough to judge the intelligence of the students. I would rather suggest
what I had in
my school, and that is extra coaching to weak students. It serves the
purpose best as
teachers save their time and energy and yet maintain the effectiveness.
Model Answer 2:
Some people contend that mixed ability classes are more beneficial for
children’s development than streaming them on the basis of judgement
about their academic abilities. However, from my perspective, I disagree
with this contention.
Admittedly, mixed ability classes provide a better environment for children’s

all-round development. In such classes, children with different abilities
study together and in turn they can learn from one another. From example,
a student, who is good at academic study but weak in dancing or painting,
can learn how to dance or paint form his peers. In this sense, mixed ability
classes allow students to develop their abilities in different subjects instead
of only academic abilities.
Despite the argument above, I believe streaming students brings more

benefits to teachers and students. As for teachers, separating children with
better academic abilities from others facilitates effective teaching. This
practice helps teachers to control their students more conveniently and
easily. Compared with mixed ability in which teacher should consider
students’ differences when they are using teaching methodologies,
streaming makes this situation simpler. To be more specific, students are at
the same level of academic ability in a class, and in turn teachers can use
the same methodologies for them all. In this way, the narrower the spread
of ability in the class, the more convenient the teaching can be.
On top of this, steaming enables students to learn in an effective way.

According to students’ different abilities, they are taught in different ways
that are more suitable for them. In the top streams, students use more
difficult materials, therefore, they can learn more. In sharp contrast,
teachers can explain the material more slowly to those in bottom streams.
Under this circumstance, students with different academic abilities can
study effectively and efficiently.
In the final analysis, mixed ability classes are beneficial for students’
versatile development, but in my opinion, segregating students based on
different academic ability is better for both teachers and students.
Sample Answer 3:
A number of people think that primary schools should select young students
based on their abilities, while others have different opinions. In my
perspective, I think both of the parties are reasonable which I will elaborate
below.
There are certainly some benefits of selecting pupils according to their

abilities. One of the benefits is that it helps development of young talented
students. By simply putting some elite students in the same class in school,
they may feel pressure from their peers who also have the same talents in
studying. As a result, they will put more effort on their learning and to
achieve better academic results. Apart from this, teachers are able to teach
more faster in class. As top students have better understanding on their
study, teachers may use only one teaching method. Consequently, teachers
can significantly reduce the workloads in class.
However, there are opposing voices. To begin with, top students can set a
good example to average students. Participating in class discussion and
submit assignments on time, top students can become the role model to
average students. This could influence the behaviors of average students
which may also cultivate good habits for themselves. Moreover, it is a good
opportunity to top students to develop their communication skills. In most
cases, average students generally enjoy interacting with their peers while
top students like to read books. Given the chances to mingle with average
students, top students definitely can get exchange ideas with others.
In conclusion, although selecting pupils based on their abilities have some

benefits, I still think that schools should have pupils with different abilities
to study together because it will help both top and average students
development of their learning.
Model Answer 4:
The classmates a student interacts with on a day-to-day basis make up an

important part of their academic experience. Many believe that a pupil’s
learning is enhanced when students of varying academic skill surround
them. However, I argue that a student benefits most through regular
interaction with students of similar intellectual potential. This will be
shown by looking at how such an arrangement both poses healthy
challenges to students and refrains from holding students back in their
academic pursuits.
Firstly, by grouping students based intellectual strength, a classroom can

provide an environment that engages young people at a level equal to their
ability. Take language learning as an example. If a highly skilled language
student is placed in the same classroom as a beginner, the class atmosphere
is beneficial to neither. Further, it would be impossible for the teacher of
this class to provide challenging material that caters to both student levels.
Thus, the merits of classroom groupings based on skill level can be seen.
Secondly, intellectually superior students placed with less capable students

may be held back in their studies. For example, Canadian public school
systems do not categorize students based on their strengths, instead
favouring to amalgamate all pupils into one collective class. Under such an
arrangement it unfortunately becomes all too common for gifted students
to be held back in their studies as their classmates struggle to understand
basic concepts. As this example shows, arranging students by intelligence
should be supported.
Following this look at class structure, it can be concluded that education

systems that discriminate between strong and weak students are beneficial
to pupils as a whole. I hope these sorts of classroom arrangements return
to popularity in the years to come.
Model Answer 5:
It is certainly true that, mixed ability classes have some of benefits those are
highly appreciable but many people contend that, streaming education
system is well effective and provide more facilities to obtain a successful
carrier in future. However, admittedly I would prefer a segregating school
education rather than mixing up, because streaming curriculum is well
standard and bit easier for teachers and students to act according to their
respective lessons.
Firstly, viewing the positive aspects of mixed ability classes are that, by
following this methodology students would able to furnish their hidden
creativity. For example, if a non-singer brilliant student is put in a class
where many singers and other creative students study together, then that
boy can spontaneously generate singing ability inside him. Additionally,
vice-versa may occur deliberately when some weak non attentive students
are kept in a class with talented scholars.
On the other part of given statement, I assume that, it would be more

convenient for the instructors and students, if the followers are belong to
equal stream. Teachers can bring up their lectures according to the
student’s need and understanding. For instance, if a classroom holds half of
top stream and half of bottom stream students, then it may plausible that
the whole class will not acquire the prepared lecture spontaneously, in turn
some of them may need special assistances which may illustrate the
duration of school curriculum.
To recapitulate, confessedly, mixed up ability classes may provide chances of

versatile developments but in sharp contrast, streaming education would
be more convenient and relaxing approach of studying and preparing
lessons.
Model Answer 6:
There are mixed opinion in regards to whether streaming students
according to their academic ability into separate schools is utilizable to the
education system. Some assert it is more beneficial to students’
development if students attend in the mixed abilities schools. However, I
believe that it would be more effective and efficient in terms of both
teaching and learning when streaming students is implemented.
It is evident that students with various abilities studying together are more
likely to achieve positive outcomes in all-round ability development. Mixed
abilities classes offer students opportunities to learn from each other, thus,
to develop the abilities that were absent from them previously. For example,
a student with an excellent academic ability can learn how to dance or
paint from peers who are less academic but rather artistic. In this sense,
mixed classes encourage students to develop their multi-dimensional
abilities rather than single academic ability.
Despite the argument above, I believe streaming students generates more

benefits to teachers and students. As to teachers, it is more convenient to
discover suitable teaching methodologies to accommodate a group of
students with similar academic abilities. Compared with mixed ability class,
in which teachers need to acknowledge the ability differences among each
student, streaming students makes it much simpler to teachers. As to
students, this system enables them to learn in an effective way, as specific
teaching methods, timeframe and teaching materials distributed to
different schools in order to accommodate more specific learning. In this
way, the narrower the spread, the more convenient the teaching can be and
the more effective the learning can be.
To conclude, mixed ability classes encourage students developing all-round

abilities; however, it is the streaming students that facilitates the more
specific teaching and learning, which is proved to be more effective and
efficient.
Some people think that schools should select pupils according to their
academic
abilities, while others believe that it is better to have pupils with different
abilities
study together.
Sample Answer 1:
Children are put in a particular grade according to age in our education

system. It is
obvious that all children are not of the same intelligence level and
sometimes it
becomes difficult for educators to teach them in the same class. Therefore,
some
people feel that there should be separate teaching for intelligent students
and weak
students.
If we look at the benefits, then yes, intelligent students can be taught at

their pace
and the sessions can be made more interesting for them and the same thing
applies to
the weak students. Thus, both the categories of students would enjoy
learning.
Moreover, different teaching tactics can be adopted in each group to give
students
maximum benefits. In a mixed group, many times weak students cannot
cope up with
the pace of studies and so come under high pressure and get de-motivated.
When
they are separated, teachers can handle them tactfully and bring them back
the lost
confidence.
Furthermore, it has been seen that sometimes the more intelligent students
show
disruptive behaviour. They can grasp things very soon and then disturb the
others. It
can become very difficult for the teacher to maintain discipline in the class.
On the other hand, weak students would automatically develop an

inferiority complex
if they are made to realise that they are weak in studies by separating them.
In
addition to that, the other group might not treat them well, which can have
a direct
effect on their psyche. On the contrary, when the students study in a mixed
group, a
sense of competition develops and weak students are motivated to study.
Even
intelligent students can help weak students in studies and the bond can be
strengthened. This way, even weak students would not feel belittled.
In my opinion, children should not be separated as only academic abilities

are not
enough to judge the intelligence of the students. I would rather suggest
what I had in
my school, and that is extra coaching to weak students. It serves the
purpose best as
teachers save their time and energy and yet maintain the effectiveness.
Model Answer 2:
Some people contend that mixed ability classes are more beneficial for
children’s development than streaming them on the basis of judgement
about their academic abilities. However, from my perspective, I disagree
with this contention.
Admittedly, mixed ability classes provide a better environment for children’s

all-round development. In such classes, children with different abilities
study together and in turn they can learn from one another. From example,
a student, who is good at academic study but weak in dancing or painting,
can learn how to dance or paint form his peers. In this sense, mixed ability
classes allow students to develop their abilities in different subjects instead
of only academic abilities.
Despite the argument above, I believe streaming students brings more

benefits to teachers and students. As for teachers, separating children with
better academic abilities from others facilitates effective teaching. This
practice helps teachers to control their students more conveniently and
easily. Compared with mixed ability in which teacher should consider
students’ differences when they are using teaching methodologies,
streaming makes this situation simpler. To be more specific, students are at
the same level of academic ability in a class, and in turn teachers can use
the same methodologies for them all. In this way, the narrower the spread
of ability in the class, the more convenient the teaching can be.
On top of this, steaming enables students to learn in an effective way.

According to students’ different abilities, they are taught in different ways
that are more suitable for them. In the top streams, students use more
difficult materials, therefore, they can learn more. In sharp contrast,
teachers can explain the material more slowly to those in bottom streams.
Under this circumstance, students with different academic abilities can
study effectively and efficiently.
In the final analysis, mixed ability classes are beneficial for students’
versatile development, but in my opinion, segregating students based on
different academic ability is better for both teachers and students.
Sample Answer 3:
A number of people think that primary schools should select young students
based on their abilities, while others have different opinions. In my
perspective, I think both of the parties are reasonable which I will elaborate
below.
There are certainly some benefits of selecting pupils according to their

abilities. One of the benefits is that it helps development of young talented
students. By simply putting some elite students in the same class in school,
they may feel pressure from their peers who also have the same talents in
studying. As a result, they will put more effort on their learning and to
achieve better academic results. Apart from this, teachers are able to teach
more faster in class. As top students have better understanding on their
study, teachers may use only one teaching method. Consequently, teachers
can significantly reduce the workloads in class.
However, there are opposing voices. To begin with, top students can set a
good example to average students. Participating in class discussion and
submit assignments on time, top students can become the role model to
average students. This could influence the behaviors of average students
which may also cultivate good habits for themselves. Moreover, it is a good
opportunity to top students to develop their communication skills. In most
cases, average students generally enjoy interacting with their peers while
top students like to read books. Given the chances to mingle with average
students, top students definitely can get exchange ideas with others.
In conclusion, although selecting pupils based on their abilities have some

benefits, I still think that schools should have pupils with different abilities
to study together because it will help both top and average students
development of their learning.
Model Answer 4:
The classmates a student interacts with on a day-to-day basis make up an

important part of their academic experience. Many believe that a pupil’s
learning is enhanced when students of varying academic skill surround
them. However, I argue that a student benefits most through regular
interaction with students of similar intellectual potential. This will be
shown by looking at how such an arrangement both poses healthy
challenges to students and refrains from holding students back in their
academic pursuits.
Firstly, by grouping students based intellectual strength, a classroom can

provide an environment that engages young people at a level equal to their
ability. Take language learning as an example. If a highly skilled language
student is placed in the same classroom as a beginner, the class atmosphere
is beneficial to neither. Further, it would be impossible for the teacher of
this class to provide challenging material that caters to both student levels.
Thus, the merits of classroom groupings based on skill level can be seen.
Secondly, intellectually superior students placed with less capable students

may be held back in their studies. For example, Canadian public school
systems do not categorize students based on their strengths, instead
favouring to amalgamate all pupils into one collective class. Under such an
arrangement it unfortunately becomes all too common for gifted students
to be held back in their studies as their classmates struggle to understand
basic concepts. As this example shows, arranging students by intelligence
should be supported.
Following this look at class structure, it can be concluded that education

systems that discriminate between strong and weak students are beneficial
to pupils as a whole. I hope these sorts of classroom arrangements return
to popularity in the years to come.
Model Answer 5:
It is certainly true that, mixed ability classes have some of benefits those are
highly appreciable but many people contend that, streaming education
system is well effective and provide more facilities to obtain a successful
carrier in future. However, admittedly I would prefer a segregating school
education rather than mixing up, because streaming curriculum is well
standard and bit easier for teachers and students to act according to their
respective lessons.
Firstly, viewing the positive aspects of mixed ability classes are that, by
following this methodology students would able to furnish their hidden
creativity. For example, if a non-singer brilliant student is put in a class
where many singers and other creative students study together, then that
boy can spontaneously generate singing ability inside him. Additionally,
vice-versa may occur deliberately when some weak non attentive students
are kept in a class with talented scholars.
On the other part of given statement, I assume that, it would be more

convenient for the instructors and students, if the followers are belong to
equal stream. Teachers can bring up their lectures according to the
student’s need and understanding. For instance, if a classroom holds half of
top stream and half of bottom stream students, then it may plausible that
the whole class will not acquire the prepared lecture spontaneously, in turn
some of them may need special assistances which may illustrate the
duration of school curriculum.
To recapitulate, confessedly, mixed up ability classes may provide chances of

versatile developments but in sharp contrast, streaming education would
be more convenient and relaxing approach of studying and preparing
lessons.
Model Answer 6:
There are mixed opinion in regards to whether streaming students
according to their academic ability into separate schools is utilizable to the
education system. Some assert it is more beneficial to students’
development if students attend in the mixed abilities schools. However, I
believe that it would be more effective and efficient in terms of both
teaching and learning when streaming students is implemented.
It is evident that students with various abilities studying together are more
likely to achieve positive outcomes in all-round ability development. Mixed
abilities classes offer students opportunities to learn from each other, thus,
to develop the abilities that were absent from them previously. For example,
a student with an excellent academic ability can learn how to dance or
paint from peers who are less academic but rather artistic. In this sense,
mixed classes encourage students to develop their multi-dimensional
abilities rather than single academic ability.
Despite the argument above, I believe streaming students generates more

benefits to teachers and students. As to teachers, it is more convenient to
discover suitable teaching methodologies to accommodate a group of
students with similar academic abilities. Compared with mixed ability class,
in which teachers need to acknowledge the ability differences among each
student, streaming students makes it much simpler to teachers. As to
students, this system enables them to learn in an effective way, as specific
teaching methods, timeframe and teaching materials distributed to
different schools in order to accommodate more specific learning. In this
way, the narrower the spread, the more convenient the teaching can be and
the more effective the learning can be.
To conclude, mixed ability classes encourage students developing all-round

abilities; however, it is the streaming students that facilitates the more
specific teaching and learning, which is proved to be more effective and
efficient.
Some people think that the government should provide assistance

to all kinds of
artists including painters, musicians and poets, etc. However, other
people think
that is a waste of money.
Sample Answer 1:
Many people’s lives are richer because of art – music, paintings, calligraphy,
pictures,
sculpture, poems and dance. There are some who claim that it is important
to support
the artists, and others who are opposed to government funding. In the
following
paragraphs, I shall discuss both sides of the argument and finally give my
opinion.
There are many reasons why government should fund artists. The
contributions of
artists to the society are very essential. Art can bring out people’s creativity,
views and
personalities. For example, we learn about our history, traditions and
culture through
movies, songs and paintings made by artists. Artists are the media of
diffusing
tradition. All kinds of tradition are the basis of a country without which the
country
can’t be civilised. So artists are the ambassadors of culture and play a vital
role in
elevating the level of civilization of the country. It is a major form of
cultural
abundance.
Another important aspect of this is that art is an ancient means of

communication.
Our language is a result of people’s need to communicate. Art is what
differentiates us
from animals. Art is our soul and it is a source of courage. Artists also
entertain us.
Finally, government should fund artists because earning a livelihood from
art is
difficult especially in the budding stages.
Opponents of government funding on artists say that money spent on the

arts could
have been used for considerably more vital purposes. They have strong
reasons as a
nation’s health and wellbeing should be paramount. The idea that elderly
people are
forced to wait for essential operations whilst the money required to
increase available
medical provision is spent on opera and ballet is plainly immoral. There are
also more
deserving social causes for the money that should be considered before the
arts.
Homelessness, unemployment, illiteracy – all of these deserve to be
addressed before
money is spent on what is essentially little more than entertainment.
To summarise, I would like to say that as both sides have strong arguments,
it depends
on the condition of the country. In developed countries where even the
poorest of the
poor have all the basic amenities of life, government should spend on art
and artists
but in countries where people are dying of starvation and diseases, other
matters
should be given priority.
Model Answer 2:
Concerning the fact whether artists should obtain subsidies there are two
opinions. One side thinks that it is a total waist of government money, whilst
others say that all art forms should receive financial support including
painters, musicians and poets.
Regarding the first point of view, I can agree to a certain kind of level. It is a
fact that artists who perform in popular kinds of art, like pop singers or
international circus artists, do not really need financial assistance. There
will be enough people who come and watch their concerts or go to their
shows. In contradiction, artists that perform in more alternitive forms of
art, like poetry, new kinds of music forms or painters who have an
experimental style, might need financial support in the early stage of their
career.
Other people state that all kinds of art forms should receive financial
government support without making a difference regarding to the
popularity of the art or artist. One can certainly state that it is not proper to
give all artists the same form of subsidies. One could financialy assist the
artist in the beginning of his career, but once he or she has gained some
fame, it is no longer necessary to support that artist and the money can
better be spend on a new artist.
In conclusion, it can be said that there are arguments for both opinions.
Artists should not be allowed to get government financial assistance
througout their career. Nevertheless, for some forms of art it can be granted
in the beginning, so they have the possibility to get their art form known to
the public.
Sample Answer 3:
People have different views about the funding of creative artists. While
some people disagree with the idea of government support for artists, I
believe that money for art projects should come from both governments and
other sources.
Some art projects definitely require help from the state. In the UK, there are
many works of art in public spaces, such as streets or squares in city centres.
In Liverpool, for example, there are several new statues and sculptures in
the docks area of the city, which has been redeveloped recently. These
artworks represent culture, heritage and history. They serve to educate
people about the city, and act as landmarks or talking points for visitors
and tourists. Governments and local councils should pay creative artists to
produce this kind of art, because without their funding our cities would be
much less interesting and attractive.
On the other hand, I can understand the arguments against government

funding for art. The main reason for this view is that governments have
more important concerns. For example, state budgets need to be spent on
education, healthcare, infrastructure and security, among other areas.
These public services are vital for a country to function properly, whereas
the work of creative artists, even in public places, is a luxury. Another
reason for this opinion is that artists do a job like any other professional,
and they should therefore earn their own money by selling their work.
In conclusion, there are good reasons why artists should rely on alternative
sources of financial support, but in my opinion government help is
sometimes necessary.
Model Answer 4:
Whether the government should provide financial assistance to the

country’s artists is an often debated topic. Some people believe that the
government should help artists; others think that spending money on artists
is akin to wasting the nation’s wealth. In this essay, we will take a look at
both sides of the argument before arriving at a conclusion.
Art forms are an integral part of the nation’s cultural heritage. Some people
believe that by helping artists the government can help protect the cultural
legacy of the country. This argument is true to a certain extent. The advent
of films and television has considerably affected the popularity of other art
forms. It is a known fact that many ethnic art forms are now dying because
of the lack of support. A little financial assistance is all that it takes to
protect these art forms from total extinction.
Some people, on the other hand, argue that spending money on arts and
artists is wasteful because there are several other sectors that desperately
require government funding. For example, in many undeveloped and
developing countries millions of people don’t have access to safe drinking
water or electricity. Meeting these requirements is far more important than
protecting the nation’s art forms from extinction.
After analyzing both sides of the argument, it is felt that government

assistance to artists is justifiable only in countries that have successfully
met all basic requirements of its people. In the case of undeveloped nations
it makes better sense to spend public money on other pressing needs of the
people.
Model Answer 5:
Unemployment is becoming a major problem all over the world. Even in
some developed nations, the rate of unemployment is high. This is
sometimes attributed to the financial recession that gripped the world
during the first decade of this century. While the situation improved
considerably over the last few years, a lot of people who had been laid off by
their previous employers are still out of work. Some people feel that the
government should give them weekly financial allowances. I don’t think
that this is a viable solution.
To start with, if governments were to provide financial assistance to every
unemployed person, they would have little money to run the country. Most
nations already have several welfare schemes for the jobless and the
governments certainly offer some financial assistance through these
schemes. Of course, these nominal financial aids are unlikely to solve the
financial woes of the jobless. I won’t blame the governments for these
because there is a limit to the amount of money they can spend.
In most cases unemployment is the result of the lack of skills. People who
possess skills that the industry demands will have no difficulty finding jobs.
Yes, the recession wiped away many jobs. However, there are still several
sectors that need skilled manpower. Instead of doling out financial
assistance to jobless people, the government should run free training
programs and camps where the jobless can pick up skills. This will provide a
lasting solution to this problem.
The government should also create awareness about the dignity of labour.
The unemployment rates in India are high. This is not really caused by the
dearth of job. Rather it is a result of misplaced notions of dignity. The
educated middle class Indians will only accept white collar jobs. If the
jobless take up manual jobs, the nation will become much more prosperous.
To conclude, giving weekly financial assistance to the jobless will not

increase the GDP of a nation. It is never a solution. Instead of giving people
money, the government should provide free training that will increase their
employ-ability.
Model answer 6:
Although Proficient creators like musicians and painters are the assets of
our society, whether they should be given sufficient fiscal support by their
own authorities has triggered spirited debates. Some assert that
government is obliged to generate money for their skilfulness, whereas
others contend that alternative ways are to be taken into account. In my
perspective, the latter should be considered highly, for they provide clear
cut advantages.
The idea is that government must lend a helping hand to its artists does
have a handful benefits. One reason why people propose this is that artists
could easily collect reasonable income to bring forth remarkable creations.
The perceived general idea is that this readily available fund would
encourage the talents to bring out the best in them, which, in turn, enhances
remarkable achievements not only to the artists but also to the government.
Nevertheless, it is highly likely that, if they get necessary resources as easily
as ABC, they would develop laziness and this draw back retard the overall
cultural promotion and improvement of their nation.
However, the counter arguments of supporting talents financially seem

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

is supportive, I believe, other options such as private funds are to be chosen,
in addition government budget, it would be argued, could be allocated for
other necessary purposes.
Model answer 7:
It is unquestionable that one very complex issue in today’s world is the
funding support to creative artist. While there is a controversy that should
be support and funded by government. I do believe that there is also a case
for saying that they should funded by alternative sources.
It is fairly easy to understand the reason why government support is vital to

artists and their projects. Perhaps by considering that proportion of artists
are living in poverty. In fact, only few artists, who has achieved success in
their fields, are able to support themselves, whereas others are still
struggling for life and some of them even living below the poverty line.
Likewise, the construction of a non-profitable art gallery, which helps the
public to develop a sense of art, requires vast sums of money. Therefore,
without financial funding by government, our cities would be much less
interesting and attractive.
However, we can fairly understand that artists should no emphasis on the

state to fund their work. While most musicians and the majority of painters
make a living by performing or selling their artistic creations to fans or
collectors. Besides, as to painters or musicians, they can expect to gain their
income as tutors giving individuals lessons. In short, these artists are
capable of gaining financial support in a number of ways.
In conclusion, I believe that there are good reasons why artists should not
only rely on the government for supporting them, but the alternative
sources of financial support should be suggested.
Model answer 8:
More and more artists are naturally born since the dawn of time. As a
result, it has been the subject of discussion on whether the state or a non-
government institution should support them financially. These points of
view will be discussed in this order.
It is believed by some that the country’s administration should finance the

creative artists. For instance, under President Ferdinand E. Marcos regime,
all of our skilfully Filipino creating arts were provided all they need. Like
Fernando Amorsolo, one of the most famous painters in the Philippines was
funded by late President Marcos and even his first exhibition held in the
National Museum of the country. Thus, he was known by visitors who came
and saw his creations internationally, and this led him to exhibit his
paintings in different countries. He made our country known around the
world and he is indeed a Filipino pride.
On the other hand, many argue that NGOs (Non-government Organisations)

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

institution making of profit when financing arts creators is supported and
refuted by many. However, after analyzing these two points of view, it is
clear that the Philippine government should finance them. Thus, the
argument that the state should financially support creative artists can be
supported and expected to be realized.
Model answer 9:
A group of people believe that governments should provide subsidy for
unpopular or amateur artists, while other people think that artistic people
should be subsidized from another resource. The following essay will discuss
about both opinions, but in my personal opinion I believe that governments
should fund them before they are sponsored by alternative sources.
Several people believe that creative artist such as street painters and
musicians should not be subsidized by the governments. They think that art
activities are not the basic need of human beings, and governments should
focus on more important matters. For example, rather than spending some
budget for these street artists, the fund could be allocated for improving the
public education sectors, public transportations or public facilities. They
think that creative artist should seek sponsorship from private institutions
or private companies.
For several reasons, some people believe that creative artist should be
funded by governments. Firstly, many amateur painters have painted some
of the public areas, and they have changed the look and the atmosphere of
these places from a negative aura into a positive one. Secondly, some
talented artists have made artistic sculptures and placed them on public
areas such as in parks, and they have made the parks become more
beautiful and attractive. Thirdly, many amateur musicians who are
performing in public areas, such as in subways or in bus terminals have
entertained the public with their music. Therefore, it is undeniable that the
existence of these artists brings benefits for the society and governments
should subsidize them.
In conclusion, people have different opinion about funding creative artists.

Some people think that they should be funded by governments, while others
believe that they should be subsidized by other resources. In my point of
view, I think governments should allocate some budget for amateur artists
as they bring benefits for individuals and communities, but once they have
become professional, they should seek sponsorship from other resources,
and government should stop the subsidy.
Air transport is increasingly used to export types of fruits and

vegetables to
countries where they cannot be grown or are out of season. Some
people say it is a good thing, but other people think it can’t be
justified.
Sample Answer 1:
Globalisation has revolutionized our world in many aspects. Now, we don’t

belong to a
big planet Earth. We belong to a small global village. Everything is
available
everywhere. There are many advantages and disadvantages of transporting
fruits and
vegetables over a long distance by air. In my opinion, the advantages
outweigh the
disadvantages.
On the positive side, transporting goods over a long distance gives us a lot
of choices.
We can taste a variety of fruits and vegetables from all parts of the world.
For
example, about ten years ago, we hardly saw kiwi fruit which is from New
Zealand.
But, now it has a place on every fruit stand. Moreover, delivery by air is
quick.
Seasonal fruits and vegetables that are grown in far away countries can be
delivered
as soon as possible by keeping the quality and taste unchanged. Only air
transport can
cover so long a distance in such a short time to achieve this goal. The United
States,
Canada and Western Europe all import tropical agricultural products that
grow in
tropical climates by air.
Secondly, many people get employment in this field. Small farmers have a
chance to
expand globally and it increases the overall economy of the country. Finally,
it helps in
developing good relations between countries which helps in international
cooperation
and peace. If countries are dependent upon one another’s economic success
then
armed conflict would be less likely.
On the downside, importing foods can have a negative effect on local

culture. This can
be seen in countries such as Japan where imported food has become more
popular
than traditional, local produce, eroding people’s understanding of their own
food
traditions. A second major disadvantage is pollution. When goods are
transported
thousands of miles by road, sea and air, it increases pollution from exhaust
fumes.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, importing foods by air has
both merits
and demerits but the pros outweigh the cons.
Model Answer 2:
People have different views with regard to the use of aeroplanes to

transport fruit and vegetables. While some people argue that it would be
unreasonable to carry them, I believe that air transport generally has more
benefits on several levels.
On the one hand, air transport plays an irreplaceable role in our daily lives
and world economy. The most obvious merit of conveying by air is its speed,
which means geographical limitations are not a problem anymore.
European inhabitants can buy easily any products from Asia by doing
shopping in food stores. As a result, consumers may get benefit from the
variety of food choice instead only local products. In addition, thanks to
aeroplane’s speed, the product could be served for consumers quickly in a
fresh state.
On the other hand, I can understand the arguments against air transport
for fruit and vegetables. The first reason for this view is that the price of
food will increase because of its freight charges. Actually, if we use larger
planes, the costs are not expensive. Another reason for this opinion is that
aeronautical technology produces pollution; nevertheless, the main source
of the world’s emission is private car rather than aeroplanes, and food is
also vital part of life so it should be carried by air and we need to put
restriction on non-essential items and encourage essential ones like food.
In conclusion, it seems to me that it would be good to invest in and develop

even more the airfreight of food for vital daily resident’s demand.
Model Answer 3:
Some people believe that using air transport to support exporting fruit and
vegetables to countries where they cannot be grown or are out of season is
a positive development. However, other people argue that this reason is not
justified for achieving this purpose.
One the positive side, supporters of this development say that exporting
fruit and vegetables with air has opened up markets which encourage
positive development for countries. For example, for local farmers in many
poor countries, this will be able to improve their income and standard of life
qualities if they have opportunity to sell their goods to faraway foreign
markets with high prices instead of producing staple crops for local market
with low prices or their own consumption. As a result, farmers become more
independent and do not depend on government’s aid.
However, a negative view to this development is the impact on the

environment. As we know that in this day and age one of the biggest
problems around world about earth is global warming and burning of fossil
fuels in the form oil of plane is one of main factors contributing global
warming. To illustrate, over transporting million tonnes of food every day
by air transport can make this problem to be more complex. This is because
from one flight, air transport can release large amount of Carbon Dioxide
and other gases into environment. Consequently, climate change in our
earth cannot be avoid if this trend continuous.
To sum up, I would argue that there is no justifications for method of

exporting fruit and vegetables with air. Even though many benefits can be
taken from this method especially for local farmers in poor countries,
saving earth from further environmental damages is more essential.
Therefore, for overcoming this problem United Nations should release
international trade regulation so that it can control and protect over using
air transport.
Sample Answer 4:
Transport vegetables and fruits by air makes it possible that people enjoy
foreign food. This technology is being increasingly used now. Some people
believe this increase is beneficial to humanity, while others think it is
unjustified.
Those who are for this increase see the fact that it has remarkably
improved food quality. Due to this increase, people now have a wider range
of affordable options in food. This further leads to foreign dishes being
adopted because of the availability of ingredients they need. Furthermore,
some of the foreign dishes are adapted to cater to local people’s tastes and
traditions, giving rise to hybrid cuisine with all merits in one. Additionally,
because air transport is faster than traditional ways of transport, foreign
fruits and vegetables are fresher than before.
On the other hand, some people are against this trend for various reasons.
First they worry that transferring foreign plants in a large quantity might
cause a variety of problems to local biological environment. Seeds of foreign
plants once accidently release into the environment might alter the genes of
local wild plants, resulting in nasty weed that is stronger than indigenous
plants. Similarly, foreign insects can bring about catastrophes to the
environment too. Also, the transport might help to spread transmittable
diseases. The other concern is that some people think it too luxurious to use
aeroplanes to transport vegetables and fruits. They argue while millions of
people cannot afford air travelling and have to bear the pain of traffic jam,
it is a waste to use this precious resource only for the unessential
improvement of food.
To sum up, transport vegetables and fruits by air is considered by some

people as beneficial to humankind, but is judged unjustified by others.
Model Answer 4:
These days, with the low-cost carrier, more and more fruits and vegetables
are imported by airplane from one country to another, where cannot
produce these species. Some people assert that fruits and vegetables should
not be transported to local because people can consume local fruits and
vegetables, while others maintain it is more beneficial. The reasons will be
discussed in this essay, and in my opinion, imported too much food is not
necessary.
It is true that most people like to eat fresh fruits and vegetables especially
imported because they are surely good for people’s health and immune
system. Because of the convenient and fast air transport, an increasing
number of food which cannot planted or produced in local have showed in
supermarkets or high-end food shops. Many people think these fruits and
vegetables from overseas are better than local food because they are
unusual and sold in a high price, so they always want buy imported rather
than the product of local.
But we cannot ignore that the high prices are mainly on account of the
transport fee. That means, nutrition contained in these imported foods are
the same as native ones’ except prices and tastes. And because of the
minimal amount and unaffordable prices for daily live, these imported
foods cannot replace native foods in consumption market. Moreover,
sometimes, imported things are difficult to control the qualities for customs
and may cause some infection diseases such as Mad Cow Disease.
In sum, although imported fruits and vegetables are more delicious and
uncommon in some extent, there are few differences between them and
local foods in nutrition. So I would like to agree that there are more
disadvantages than benefits because few people can afford them in their
everyday life except some regions which are lack of water and cannot plant
fruits and vegetables .
Model Answer 5:
An advanced technology, airplane, has for years been used to transport and
export food. Some confirm that it is a waste of money and this use of
transport should not be encouraged. I don not agree with these critics
because I believe that this type of transport make it very convenient for
food trading.
To begin with, the using of planes for export increases profits for both
consumers and enterprises. Highly developed functions of preservation, as
well as large storage capacity and speedy comprehensive service make it
easy to keep fruits and vegetables fresh and nutritious. Hence, people can
enjoy the fresh food similar to residents who do in the growing pales. As a
result, it stimulates the consumption and boosts purchasing. Obviously,
airplanes are the best choice for businessmen to trade among countries.
Furthermore, air transport promotes trade contacts among countries,

which accelerates the globalization. In fact, trade with airplanes is an
effective and convenient process, by which both individuals and groups can
obtain what they need and want through exchanging products and business
negotiation. By doing this, people can enjoy variety of favorable food from
different countries instead of being confined to a certain period and a fixed
place. Accordingly, it improves the flow of trade, which is of great
importance to the development of global economy.
In conclusion, only by doing this, can enterprises input suit maximization of

profits through trading process with other countries. It also enhances the
trade contacts among countries. It is high time for both politicians and
businessmen paid more attention to the advanced way to transport.
Many developing countries are currently expanding their tourist

industries.
Why is this the case? Is it a positive development?
Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that international tourism has taken mammoth dimensions.

In fact it
has become the backbone of many economies of the world. No wonder many
developing countries are opening their doors to tourists. In my opinion, it is
both, a
positive as well as a negative development.
International tourism can have many benefits for individuals. The most
important
benefit is that tourism provides regular employment for many local people
who might
otherwise be unemployed. They can find work in restaurants or hotels, or
with tourist
agencies as guides or drivers, for example, and earn regular wages. This, in
turn,
means that they may be able to save money and improve their standard of
living. The
second reason is that tourists spend money in the country and this allows
local
businesses such as restaurants, bars and taxi companies to flourish. In turn,
other
businesses, food suppliers or petrol stations, for instance, may be
established in order
to provide services to support the companies which cater for tourists. In
other words,
the whole economy of the region develops.
A third reason is that in order for tourists to be able to visit remote areas,
roads,
airports and hotels have to be built and local people also benefit by being
able to use
these new facilities. Furthermore, when communications improve, it
becomes
possible for other industries to move into the area, bringing with them more
employment opportunities and increased prosperity. A final reason why I
am in favour
of tourism is that visitors from outside bring fresh ideas and different ways
of doing
things to the local community. Consequently, local people may learn from
tourists.
Likewise, visitors learn about the local people and culture, and return home
with a
deeper understanding of the host country.
On the other hand, that there are some problems associated with
international
tourism. Firstly, there is the increasing crime rate. Some locals see tourists
as easy
prey because, not only are they in unfamiliar territory and therefore less
able to take
care of themselves, but also they carry visible items of wealth, such as
cameras and
jewellery which can be disposed of quickly for a profit. Another major
problem is
health. With greater mobility comes greater danger of spreading
contagious diseases
around the world. Also to be considered is the natural environment, which
can be
seriously threatened by too many visitors. Australia’s Great Barrier Reef, for
example,
is in danger of being destroyed by tourists and there are plans to restrict
visitors to
some of the more delicate coral reefs. Air pollution is also caused by too
many air
flights.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that international tourism is both

a positive
as well as a negative development but advantages certainly outweigh the
disadvantages.
Model Answer 2:
There is a trend that numbers of developing countries try to develop their

tourist industries. This essay is to provide the reasons of this situation and
analyse its effects.
There are many factors contributing to this phenomenon. Firstly, the local
government and state want to earn extra incomes. Some of the developing
countries such as Thailand and Indonesia attract more tourists in order to
gain revenue and develop its domestic economic. Furthermore, the local
catering business and souvenir stores will benefit with the big profits from
the tourist trade. Secondly, promoting tourism sectors can significantly
reduce the unemployment rate. Once a country expands its tourist field,
there are many job opportunities generated to meet the marketing demand.
For example, restaurants and hotels offer positions for young people,
thereby minimising the number of unemployed individuals.
It is generally believed that tourist brings tremendous benefits to the

countries and even the globe. To start with, the local residents will
experience a huge difference that occurs in their homeland when a country
takes action to boost its tourist industry, the government has to invest
money to update the basic infrastructure and improve the public services
for people to use. Besides, if provides an ideal platform to present a nation’s
distinct culture and unique landscape to the world. By welcoming foreign
visitors, developing countries have the opportunity to improve their
national images by introducing the beautiful scenery and historical
wonders.
To sum up, many developing countries promote traveling business for
economic growth and minimising unemployment rate. It is certainly a
positive trend because if benefits the local citizens and its national status.
Model Answer 3:
Tourism is already a huge industry and this is expanding even more rapidly
in developing countries. Many developing countries have taken extensive
initiatives to expand their tourism and thus many of them have gained a
considerable amount of popularity in this industry. I believe that the
reasons for developing countries to embark this industry are many folds
and this is quite a positive development for them.
First and foremost popularity around the world is the reason many
developing countries are expanding their tourism. They know quite well
that popularity and exposure to the world is the main key to expand their
presence in the world. For instance, Malaysia is a well known Asian country
and the expansion of their tourism sector has established this popularity.
Second, tourism industry brings a huge amount of foreign money that can
be used for the development of the country. For instance, developing
countries like Thailand, China and Spain are earning a huge amount of
foreign money from their tourism industries. Third, tourism actually
increases the business opportunities of a country and thus many counties
are having better trade relationship with developed countries only because
the tourists of western world came to visit such countries first. Finally,
tourism creates job opportunities for local people and gives the host
country an excellent opportunity to develop their infrastructure.
I firmly believe that despite some negative effects tourism industry offers a
huge benefit to a country. Among the negative effects environmental
pollutions, influence of foreign culture and threat of terrorism are often
mentioned. However, in this era of globalization countries cannot shut their
doors for foreigners. This is the age of technology and we can fly to any
place within few hours. So the tourism industry is rapidly enhancing and a
country should take advantages of it. Earning foreign remittance, creating
more jobs for local people, introducing unique tradition to the world,
improving transportation system, knowing cultural diversity are some of
the quite astonishing advantages that development of tourism can offer.
In short, the main reason developing countries are expanding their tourism
industries is because they understand the huge potential and benefits this
industry offers and without any doubt this is quite a positive development.
Sample answer 4:
Recently, the tourist industries are being dramatically expended in lots of

developing countries. In my opinion, there are two main causes about this
situation, one is the economic income and the other is that those countries
want to let other people understand them more clearly.
Actually, most developing countries need to create more opportunities to

make money, and the tourist industry is a very suitable choice for them. For
example, as some South East Asia countries, they do not own abundant
natural resource, but they have incredible beautiful scenery which can
attract millions of people come there every year. Clearly, the tourist
industry can make their gross domestic product increase dramatically. On
the other hand, I consider that those countries want to use tourist industry
to express their national image and the most important is that they can
make the foreign people understand them more clearly and to clean up
some misunderstanding.
As for the effect of expending tourist industry in developing countries, I

think that was a positive development if the government can protect the
environment and the traditional buildings. You must understand that if too
many people come to a scenery spot just like Forbidden City, they might
destroy the old buildings. For example, some of the tourists throw out their
rubbish or carve some words on the walls. That was so terrible. Therefore, if
the government can introduce laws to stop those conducts, I think that was
a good thing for everyone.
In conclusion, increasing expending tourist industries is beneficial for

developing countries, and I hope that tourists can protect the heritage of
human being.
Sample Answer 5:
Currently, there is a hot discussion about the reasons why there are
developing countries in growing number expanding tourist industries and
whether it is a positive development or not. As far as I am concerned, I am
convinced that it is a positive development. In this essay, I will make an
analysis of the reasons in the following paragraphs.
The first and foremost reason is that, tourism, which becomes the principal
source of financial revenue in many developing countries, is financially
beneficial to the economic development. For instance, China needs an
increasing amount of foreign currencies for its modernization drive.
Tourism is one of the most crucial channels to obtain such currencies.
Furthermore, tourism facilitates the development of the catering business
and transportation service as well. Additionally, tourist industries make
primary contribution to the national income and tax revenue.
In the second place, tourism provides local habitants in tourist attractions

with more opportunities of employment, which has eliminated some social
problems to some extent. In the scenic spots, it is common that even the
uneducated people can make a living simply by selling souvenirs, local
specialties and so on, which relieves the pressure of local government.
Last but not least, it is true that tourism contributes a great deal to the
friendship and mutual understanding between people from different
countries, which will unquestionably enhance the future cooperation in
international affairs. Tourism provides people with a good opportunity to
have a better understanding of the culture, history and customs in foreign
countries.
All in all, it is of great benefit for developing countries to promote the

tourist industry, for it will play a positive role in both the economic and
political development of a country.
It is known to all that the technological and scientific advances have

made great
changes to the range and quality of our food. Some people regard it
as an
improvement while others believe that the change is harmful.

Idea for the topic Essay
Positives of advances in food technology:
• Farmers can produce crops that grow bigger and faster.
• Genetically modified crops may be more resistant to disease or

insects.
• This could be important for food production in developing

countries.
• Faster growing cereals, fruit and vegetables will mean more profit.
• Foods can be modified to look perfect and last longer.
• They may be more attractive to customers.
Negatives of advances in food technology:
• Many people distrust foods that have been modified or processed.
• They prefer organic foods which are produced without chemicals.
• Farming without fertilisers or pesticides is more environmentally

friendly.
• There may be risks involved in the genetic engineering of foods.
• Genetically modified crops might change whole ecosystems.
• Food chains could be broken if crops are resistant to predators.

Sample Answer 1:
Yesterday’s fiction is today’s reality. Such colossal developments have taken

place in range
and quality of food which we could not even think of earlier. It is a highly
debated issue as to
whether these advances are a blessing or a curse. This essay shall delve into
the merits and
demerits of these developments.
The proponents claim that genetic modification of foods has given us such
species which
need little or no insecticides and no fertilizers. GM crops do not require
spraying with toxic
insecticides and as a consequence environmental damage such as the
indiscriminate killing
of insects and the contamination of soils and rivers is avoided. Moreover,
since age old
times, farming methods have always involved selective breeding and
methods of cross-
pollination. In that sense genetic modification is nothing new.
What is more, the quality of food has also improved. For example, fish gene
has been added
to tomato to make it frost resistant. A nut protein has been added to soya
bean to increase
the protein content. Finally, technology has saved people from tedious work
and in the
mean time increased the production markedly. All this is needed to meet the
demands of
the burgeoning population.
The opponents say that GM crops are unnatural and that by creating them
we are altering
the natural world. A more worrying argument raised by objectors to GM
foods is that they
could constitute a health risk, for example by causing allergies or even by
being toxic. The
final objection is strictly environmental. It is argued that crops which are
genetically
modified to kill the pests which attack them may also kill harmless insects.
This, it is claimed
will have a disastrous effect on the wider environment beyond the crop
themselves.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that GM crops offer increased

agricultural
productivity and foods of higher nutritional value, both of which are
essential if the growing
world population of the twenty-first century is to be fed. Indeed, these crops
have the
potential to improve the health of millions throughout the world while
causing less
environmental damage than standard farming methods used today. I think
it essential that
GM foods should be encouraged.
Model Answer 2:
It is true that we are buying food products which have changed both in
quality and variety,with the aid of latest scientific and technological
breakthroughs.Many people consider this as a negative development, but i
think it is a real breakthrough to fulfill the growing demands for food.
Many people think that using the technological methods for increasing food
output is a bad practice.It is harmful to human beings and animals in a
number of ways.For example,use of pesticides and fertilizers although help
to control insects and produce more amount of crops,those chemicals get
absorbed by crops.When such food,containing harmful chemicals,is
consumed by human beings,it affects their health in a bad
way.Furthermore,in order to get more amount of milk and meat from
animals,certain drugs are used. they are harmful not only to animals but
also to humans. For example, scientists have found significant levels of a
harmful drug,used for producing more milk, in animal milk which we
consume on daily basis.
Many people advocates the role of scientific research and development

programmes in achieving greater output of food and variety of crops.I
totally agree with this school of thought.To meet with the growing demands
of food,more food production is required.It can only be achieved by using
scientific techniques like genetic modification and genetic
engineering.Genetically modified crops can result in high output of
food,which can feed hungry people around the world.Otherwise people will
die out of hunger due to shortage of food.For example, many children are
dying in Africa because of shortage of food.By producing more and more
food using modern methods, we can save thier life.
In conclusion,technology development in the field of food production can

play a very important role in order to avoid disasterous impacts of hunger
on people living in impoverished regions.
Model Answer 3:
In today modern world, the revolutions of technology and science have an

impact on many aspects of life including the standard and different kinds of
food we consume. However, there is some controversy about the effect of
those changes. While it is possible to claim that these effects are
improvement, my view is that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.
There are several reasons why these innovations in food production can be
considered as positive. One is that farmers can produce crops that grow
bigger and faster so it leads to the reduction of food shortage in many
developing countries. It also should not be forgotten that genetically
modified crops are more resistant to diseases or pests so the costs of
production can be reduced and limit the danger of agricultural wastes.
Those who argue for the drawbacks of technology and science’s

development in agriculture base their argument on the impact of those
changes on environment and human health. Firstly, there might be risk
involved in the genetically modified crops because the effect of these crops
to the ecosystem is unknown. In addition to this, there are concerns about
man-made chemicals used in modern methods of food production could be
harmful to human health. An example illustrates this is that fertilized foods
are assumed to causes cancer or long-terms consequences to human kind
health.
While there are strong arguments on both sides of the problem, I think that
the long-term dangers of these developments should be cautious. Although
technology and science used in agriculture has improved the variety and
quality of foods, some measures should be regulated to ensure that these
developments would be used in a safe way for both environment and
humans.
Some people think that studying in a college or university is the best

way for
students to prepare for their future career. But others think they
should leave school as soon as possible to develop their career
through work experience.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Sample Answer 1:
Some people think that studying in a college or university is the best way
for
students to prepare for their future career. But others think they should
leave school
as soon as possible to develop their career through work experience. Discuss
both
these views and give your own opinion.
It is irrefutable that most people believe that a university degree is the only
way to get a
good job. I believe this is true in certain areas whereas in other areas, it is
not as useful.
To begin with many people have ambitions to become a qualified

professional, and there
is no doubt that becoming a doctor or a lawyer is only possible with a
degree. Another
advantage of graduating from a university is that it gives you more choices
when it comes
to choosing a job. Most employers will be more impressed by a candidate
who has a
degree than they would be by one who only has high school qualifications
because it
shows a certain level of intelligence and education, as well as the
commitment and self-
discipline that is needed in order to study a degree course for three or four
years.
On the other hand there might be some benefit of starting your career early,
especially if
your chosen field is one which does not typically require a university
education. This
would apply to somebody who wants to become a car mechanic, or a
fashion designer,
for instance, who would not gain anything from going to university. The
hands on
experience you gain from your job while others are studying for a degree
can give you a
distinct advantage. My uncle left school at sixteen and became a wealthy
and successful
automobile dealer. He claims that he had learnt all he needed to know by
working in his
chosen field and that he could not have done any better by getting a degree.
So to conclude, it is possible to get a good job without going to university.

Having said
that, some professions such as the law require you to have a degree and as
stated above
a university degree could open more doors when looking for a job.
Model Answer 2:
Graduating from high school, the young often wonder whether they ought
to keep on studying further or not. Many people suppose that continuing to
study at university or college can be the best way to guarantee their
successful career, whereas others believe working right after school is much
better.
Working straight after graduation is beneficial in some ways. Firstly, young

people are able to earn money as soon as possible. If they finish high school,
they will be mature enough to live independently on their own income. It is
common sense that having a job can prove one’s maturity. Secondly, a
person who chooses to get a job instead of studying higher is likely to
progress rapidly in their career. This may bring about a good chance to
obtain a lot of real experience and skills for their chosen profession.
On the other hand, there are a variety of reasons why people have a
tendency of choosing to continue education after high school. First, a
college education will provide young people with more qualifications, which
is what most employers expect these days. University graduates will
probably get a much higher salary than those without university education.
Furthermore, the job market is becoming more and more competitive. In
fact, people would be well-advised to get a degree, as hundreds of
applicants often chase the top jobs. It is an obvious advantage for university
graduates. For example, graduate engineers in Vietnam are highly paid and
find it easy to get a top job.
In conclusion, it seems evident that both working right after school and
choosing to continue higher study are advantageous in their own ways.
Model Answer 3:
Graduates of high school often face a dilemma of whether to seek a job or to

enroll in universities or colleges to pursue higher education. This essay will
analyze both views and will provide an opinion at the end of the essay.
The option to start work right after high school is appealing for several
reasons. Many young people want to become independent and prefer their
own source of income rather than relying on parents or guardian to meet
their living expenses. They believe that learning skills while at work is far
better than attending a college. For instance, Memon Community in Karachi
prefers their children to help them in expanding their family business after
school; seeking higher education for them is a waste of money and time.
Often youth of middle class families opt for jobs straight after school to
share the burden of family expenses due to ever growing inflation.
On the other hand, many teenagers prefer to seek admission in higher
academic institutes like engineering, medical and business schools. They
believe that bachelor’s degree or diploma will help then attain a perfect job
leading to a promising career. They argue that due to rising competition in
the job market, seeking higher education is mandatory. Universities help
them in enlightening their vision, expand their domain, polish their skills
and prepare them to face real world challenges. For instance, Financial
Industry in Pakistan favor commerce graduates over high school graduates
because of their knowledge and skills which they acquired by studying at
business schools and colleges. Moreover, a degree makes you more
competitive and helps you earn at a better rate.
To conclude, the above provides solid evidences on both views. However, in

my opinion, every teenager should opt for higher education rather than
working after school right away. Skills and knowledge which students
acquire at university is un-matched and unparalleled.
Model Answer 4:
There are many ways to gain a successful career. People are in debating to
choose which one is the better between taking a job straight after school
and getting higher education. I believe that studying at university or
collage is the best route to have a successful career.
On the one hand, when young people complete school, they get confused to
get a job straight or continue study at university or college to gain more
knowledge. Some people believe that getting a work straight after school is
much better. Many reasons they choose to get a job after finishing from
school which is always about money. They want to work to obtain money
for their life. In terms their career, people working after school give a great
deal of practice skills related to their current job. Thus, this may lead
opportunities to get promotion and a successful career.
On the other hand, I believe that studying at university or collage gives

people a good opportunity to have successful career. Firstly, high level
education is required in many professions. Doctor as an example, it is
impossible to become a doctor without having the relevant degree. Also, she
or he has to have very deep knowledge about disease, medicine and others
which are related medical problems. As a result, they have a high position
on their job, so they can get ultimate high. Secondly, the job fair is becoming
increasingly competitive. When it is opened, there are hundreds of job
seeker to register.
For the reason mentioned it, I assume that the best route to get a successful
career is to finish the university or college education.
Model Answer 5:
Education means imparting knowledge to a person. Better education is the

first step to enter into best career. Some people are on the view that
studying at college or university is the best way to a successful career, while
others are on another opinion that getting a job after school is better. This
essay analyses both these arguments.
On the one hand, there are some benefits of getting a job straight after
school. Firstly, work means steady earning, so it helps to earn money and
thus reduces the financial burden of the family especially among low class
communities. Another important benefit is that, doing a particular job
creates a feeling of responsibility. As a result, the person becomes more
independent and self reliant at younger age itself.
On the other hand, it is fairly easy to understand the advantages of studying
at university or college. Firstly, learning always increases our knowledge
and widens our educational horizons as well. This helps in the molding of
overall personality and to be succeed in his career. Secondly, professional
education or higher education at university level is the backbone of one
person’s career. To make it more clear, basic education from schools helps
to identify our talents and interests of various subjects and courses and
college level education is the field where we sows the seeds for better career
opportunities. More over it helps to get better job opportunities. This is
because proper higher level education improves the qualification and the
door to better job places. Also helps to get good remuneration. In addition,
proper and good education always acts as a better deposit for successful
career and it is an asset.
To conclude, when we weigh both the view points, it is crystal clear that
studying at university or college is the best route to success in career.
Getting job after school has more demerits than merits. Government should
take proper steps to give better education at a higher level to all
irrespective of financial status, religion, casts etc.
Sample Answer 6:
One of highly controversial debates today relates to whether it is beneficial

for young people to continue their studies at university or get a job straight
after high school. In this essay, I am going to delve into the question from
both points of views and then give my own perspective on the matter.
The option to start earning money right after graduating from high school
is attractive for several reasons. Many young people would like to make
money as soon as possible these days. In this way, they can become
economically independent, and they will be able to afford to purchase
expensive things that ordinary university students cannot buy. Also, they
will be able to start a family with adequate savings. In terms of their career,
they can progress more quickly. They will have the chance to gain real
experience and learn practical skills in their profession. This may result in
quicker promotions and a successful career.
On the other hand, there are several benefits of studying at university.

Firstly, academic qualifications are required in many professions nowadays.
For example, if you want to become a doctor or lawyer, you must have the
relevant degrees. Consequently, young people, who have obtained relevant
qualifications from university or any other education institution, have
better chance to get access to more and better job opportunities than those
with relatively few qualifications. Moreover, people who have more
qualifications tend to earn higher amount of money. Secondly, the job
market is increasing becoming competitive these days. Hence, those with
fewer qualifications will not be able to compete.
In conclusion, university provides such qualifications which lead to better

employment, while working straight after high school enables us to earn
money and gain such experience quicker. However, I tend to believe that
taking further studies is beneficial for students for a successful career in
later life.
Model Answer 7:
When they finish school, teenagers face the dilemma of whether to get a job
or continue their education. While there are some benefits to getting a job
straight after school, I would argue that it is better to go to college or
university.
The option to start work straight after school is attractive for several
reasons. Many young people want to start earning money as soon as
possible. In this way, they can become independent, and they will be able to
afford their own house or start a family. In terms of their career, young
people who decide to find work, rather than continue their studies, may
progress more quickly. They will have the chance to gain real experience
and learn practical skills related to their chosen profession. This may lead
to promotions and a successful career.
On the other hand, I believe that it is more beneficial for students to

continue their studies. Firstly, academic qualifications are required in many
professions. For example, it is impossible to become a doctor, teacher or
lawyer without having the relevant degree. As a result, university graduates
have access to more and better job opportunities, and they tend to earn
higher salaries than those with fewer qualifications. Secondly, the job
market is becoming increasingly competitive, and sometimes there are
hundreds of applicants for one position in a company. Young people who do
not have qualifications from a university or college will not be able to
compete.
For the reasons mentioned above, it seems to me that students are more
likely to be successful in their careers if they continue their studies beyond
school level.
Sample Answer 8:
The high education courses like University and college are doubtful to give
profits to common people because most knowledges from high schools are
enough to live in the world. So some people think that studying in the
colleges is wastful in your life and money. Although many parts in education
of universtiy are criticized by some people. people with bechelor degree
may have good chance than others when they get job. In this essay, whether
going to colleges or university, or skip them is more helpful to common
people. Being employed right after school is beneficial.
It is manifest that earing and saving money from an early age can
contribute to a sucess because by working, people can achieve a certain
level of financial stability and independence that lead them to afford more
than basic needs. Additionally, in terms of career, young people who decide
to work rather than to continue further studies may enhance self-
development since they would have more chances to gain hands-on
experinces and learn pracfical skills and knowledge related to their chosen
professions. In this sense, getting a job can be ragarded as a way to a
successful carreer. Nevertheless, It is inevitable that studying tertiary
education is a must route to being successful.
Proponents of this argument suggest that academic qualifications are

required in many professions. For example, it is impossible to become a
doctor, a teacher or a lawyer without having the relevant university
degrees. besides, condisering the fact that people in morern days live in
fiercely competitive society, applying ajob with high salary without
university qualifications is fairly limited because most of employers demand
employees to be equpped with university level of education. Fot this reason,
university graduates have avess to more an better job opportunities and
tent to earn higher salaries than those with low educational background.
In a nutshell. early getting job has high possibility to earn money without
BA degree whilist it is true that employees having college background get
good job as its enviornment and welfare as well as salary than others. I
think it depends on people’s mind which design their life. Some people
would quickly want to work or slowly study more, then they are able to look
around jobs. Thus, We do not evaluate which selection on sturdy or work is
better.
Many countries spend a lot of money in art. Some people think

investment in art is
necessary, but others say money is better spent on improving health
and education.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
(Similar Topic – In many countries, government sponsorship of the

arts costs millions in taxpayers’ money. There are many more
important things to spend money on. Do you agree?)
Sample Answer 1:
There are some who claim that it is important to maintain the arts, and an
equal
number of people who are opposed to continued government funding. I will
argue in
favour of this latter point for a number of reasons.
The strongest point is that money spent on the arts could have been used
for
considerably more vital purposes. While I admit that the arts are important
to a
country’s identity, it must also be given that a nation’s health and wellbeing
should be
paramount. The idea that elderly people are forced to wait for essential
operations
whilst the money required to increase available medical provision is spent
on opera
and ballet is plainly immoral.
In addition to health concerns, there are also more deserving social causes
for the
money that should be considered before the arts. Homelessness,
unemployment,
single mothers, the crime rate – all of these deserve to be addressed before
money is
spent on what is essentially little more than entertainment.
A third factor is that some people have no interest in preserving or funding

the art,
feeling that they have little practical value. If the arts are so much in need
of
sponsorship, then perhaps this is a reflection of their lack of popularity, in
which case
they should not be supported. The money should go to more popular events
instead.
For each of these reasons, it can be concluded that there is little reason to
continue
funding the arts. Yet perhaps a compromise could be reached by which
those keen to
maintain the arts could raise a percentage of their own funds and the
government
could reduce its level of sponsorship
Model Answer 2:
It is necessary for governments to spend sufficient amount of money for the

improvement and maintenance of public health and education, but
allocating a certain amount for arts is also important for the
comprehensive development of a nation. Hence, the money set apart by
government for arts should not be diverted and separate funds should be
allocated for improving the social conditions in the country.
On the one hand, huge investments are required for providing basic health
services and primary education for all sections of people. Some people fear
that large investments in establishing art galleries and preserving
traditional art forms can shift government’s focus from more serious social
issues. For example, governments in many poor nations are not able to
spend the required amount of money for the developing the educational
and health sectors, which is said to be the major reason for their
underdevelopment. These governments, according to some, wastes large
amounts of money for the development of arts.
On the other hand, downplaying the importance of arts in a country is like

neglecting the aesthetic, creative and emotional needs of the people. For
example, dance, music, drama, painting and similar arts have great
importance in the cultural development of the people. Allocation of funds in
these areas by governments can also boost the economic development of the
country. Many people make a living by becoming the exponents of these art
forms. Moreover, preserving and maintaining the cultural traditions of the
country through arts can attract tourists from all over the world. Apart
from their economic and educational pursuits, man finds great fulfillment
in life by spending time for arts, which can satisfy his emotional needs.
In conclusion, spending money for both arts, and educational and health
needs are equally important and therefore ignoring either of the sectors is
not desirable.
Model Answer 3:
These days, the government spends a large part of its budget not only on
public services, but also the arts. Although I agree that it is important to
spend money on public services, I do not think spending on the arts is a
waste of money.
There are several reasons for spending a significant amount of the

government budget on public services. First and foremost, public services
are the things such as hospitals, roads and schools, and these things
determine the quality of life that most of us will have. For example, if the
government does not spend enough money on hospitals, the health of our
society may decline. Similarly, if not enough money is spent on schools, our
children may not be properly educated. Also, it will be the poor in our
society that will be affected more if we do not spend enough on these things
because they are the ones more dependent on such services.
However, this does not mean that the arts should be completely neglected.
To begin, it is difficult for many arts institutions to generate much profit, so
without some help from the government, many theaters and other such
places may have to close. Moreover, the arts also have an important impact
on our quality of life. Many people get great pleasure in going to see music
and theatre performances so it is important that the government assists
such institutions so that they can continue to provide entertainment to the
public.
To sum up, there are clear benefits of ensuring a large amount of

investment goes into public services as this influences the quality of life for
nearly all of us. That said, I do not believe spending money on the arts is a
waste of money as this too provides important benefits.
Model Answer 4:
While art, history, tradition and culture represent a country, proper

healthcare and education facilities are the two most important pillars of a
nation. Thus people are often divided on their opinion whether spending
money on art or in education and health system is more effective.
Personally I believe that education and healthcare sectors should get more
priority while a large portion of budget should also be dedicated for the
development of art.
People who advocate art often opine that a government should always
invest a large amount of money for art and they have their own reasons.
They believe that art is also a part of our education, tradition and heritage.
It is an important sector and thus should always get priority. They often
speak about the renaissance and try to focus how art has contributed to the
revolution. They feel that a great portion of budget should always be
reserved for the development of art.
On the contrary another group of people feel that, when a government fails
to ensure proper education and healthcare facilities, it actually will have
little contribution towards the development of art. For instance, if a person
has got only few dollars and he is hungry or ill, he won’t purchase an
artwork. It is quite natural that we should first make sure that we have
foods to eat or medicine to treat us when we are ill and only then we will
purchase art works to decorate our home. If we do not have a place to live
in or food to eat, purchasing and owning a great artwork is not realistic.
Similarly a government should first focus on education and healthcare
sectors and then develop the art.
Again, there are very little value of art and similar creative works for a
nation that has few literate people. Thus if a country already has a quite
strong education and healthcare facility, it can then allocate a large budget
for the development of art. For countries that do not have many medical
colleges, should not spend more on establishing art colleges.
In summary, I personally believe that allocating money in different sectors

in a country should be done based on the economic, social and political
conditions of a country. However, with the limited amount of budget
healthcare and education should always be the priority while a portion of
budget for art is also important.
Model Answer 5:
People have different views about the funding of creative artists. While
some people disagree with the idea of government support for artists, I
believe that money for art projects should come from both governments and
other sources.
Some art projects definitely require help from the state. In the UK, there are
many works of art in public spaces, such as streets or squares in city centres.
In Liverpool, for example, there are several new statues and sculptures in
the docks area of the city, which has been redeveloped recently. These
artworks represent culture, heritage and history. They serve to educate
people about the city, and act as landmarks or talking points for visitors
and tourists. Governments and local councils should pay creative artists to
produce this kind of art, because without their funding our cities would be
much less interesting and attractive.
On the other hand, I can understand the arguments against government

funding for art. The main reason for this view is that governments have
more important concerns. For example, state budgets need to be spent on
education, healthcare, infrastructure and security, among other areas.
These public services are vital for a country to function properly, whereas
the work of creative artists, even in public places, is a luxury. Another
reason for this opinion is that artists do a job like any other professional,
and they should therefore earn their own money by selling their work.
In conclusion, there are good reasons why artists should rely on alternative
sources of financial support, but in my opinion government help is
sometimes necessary.
Some people think children’s spending time on TV, video and PC

games is good, while others think it is bad.
Sample Answer 1:
While it may be disliked by many, the modern game industry is a part of our
world. From its
humble beginnings in the 80s, the video game industry has exploded into a
10-billion dollar
empire. It is a debatable issue whether these games are good or bad. In this
essay, I intend
to delve into the pros and cons of these games and finally give my opinion.
There are many advantages of video, PC and TV games. To begin with, video
game playing
introduces children to computer technology. Secondly, some games provide
practice in
problem solving and logic e.g. Age Of Empires. Video games have proved to
improve visual
skills. They also improve motor and spatial skills. Children who play video
games have better
reflexes.
What is more, these modern games make learning fun. The cost of failure is
lower. This
encourages risk taking and exploration. If the kid gets the answer wrong or
their character
dies, they just start the game over and try again. Finally, some games have
therapeutic
applications. Watching TV also is very educative for children.
On the other hand, there are some disadvantages of these technological

inventions. Firstly,
overdependence on these games leads to social isolation as these are
usually played alone.
Secondly, some games have violent characters and seeing their violent acts
leads to
aggressive behaviour in children. Moreover, these games can confuse reality
and fantasy.
For example, when children play car racing games then they may race their
own vehicles in
real life which can lead to accidents. Finally, many games do not require
action that requires
independence and creativity.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that on the whole these games are
very good and
certainly their advantages outweigh their disadvantages but these should
be played in
moderation. Parents should limit the game playing time and see to it that
home work and
chores are done before playing
Model Answer 2:
Nowadays, parents have to make a tough decision about how much time
their children can spend with the electronic devices such as television, video
and computer games. With good reasons, some people question that
children are now too addictive to these devices. Others, however, make a
convincing argument that modern technologies can help improve
development of children. I feel that the best approach is moderation.
Firstly, it is obvious that too much TV and games will have an opposing
influence. As children are at impressionable age, the questionable contents
on TV and computers are definitely not suitable for their age group.
Therefore, parents should commit their guardianship to help their kids
distinguish right from wrong.
Moreover, staying in front of screen will also reduce the time that should be
spent outside with family members and friends. This will cause children lack
of physical exercises on one hand, and indulge them in the virtual world and
become isolated from the real world on the other hand. So parental
guidance is critically indispensable to control and limit these ubiquitous
devices.
That is not to say that children are not allowed to access to these items at
all. Watching TV, for example, can help broaden the horizon of children
dramatically; surfing on the Internet will help expand the knowledge and
keep in touch with teachers and classmates with social media tools. But to
be honest, parents should shoulder the responsibilities to set the boundaries
and make sure that the contents are appropriate.
In sum, it is not reasonable for parents to refuse the modern technology into
the family completely; meanwhile, parents should also remember to guide
their kids. Only by doing so can we ensure that children can fully harness
the great power of the state-of-art facilities to help them grow up in a
reliable environment.
Model Answer 3:
In this modern world, technology is used by peoples in every ages, included

children. Moving pictures, colorful, and a great sound effect are something
that really interesting for children. As the result, today’s children spend
much time on TV, video, and PC games. Some people believe it is good for
them while others believe that is bad. Both of view has their own analysis
for this case.
First of all, TV, video, and PC games are one of modern education tools.
Nowadays, many software developers work together with education
institutes to make a game, video, or computer program for children. For
instance, Edu games, this application is targeted for three until fourteen
years old children. The children can play a lot of games that challenged
their curiosity by given them many cases. Another example is “Seriously
funny kids” TV program. In this program, the presenter, Heidi Klum, is
interacting with the children, such as dancing together, making a little talk
show, or cooking together. These kind of shows can build children’s
character and give them a knowledge from the professional hands.
Secondly, the children who spend much time with TV, video, and PC games
are losing their time to socialization with others. If there is no control from
parents, they will addicted to play with their game, and does not want to
play outside with their friends anymore. If these happen for a long time,
these children will became a passive person and have a lack of health. They
will easier to get sick because they seldom do body exercise. Another
consequence is children with this habit usually have to take a sunglasses
from an early ages because the screen radiation is not good for eyes. From
these it, we can not full agree to let our children spend much time on these
technology.
In my opinion, that is fine if the children spend much time on audio visual
technologies because those technologies has many benefits but still,
children should play outside more than spending time in front of screen
everyday. It depend on each family, if their parents does not have a time to
control their children watch, than it is must be a rules that have to make to
border the children’s play time.
In summary, Let the children spend much time on good show or games
technologies will add their knowledge and build their behavior.
Nevertheless, it is can make the children addicted and impair their health.
Children has their right to know the expansion of technology, but in their
ages, they do not know the importance of they do, so this is our job to direct
them. It is always be a parents ways to control their children.
Model Answer 4:
Entering into the age of information technology, individuals discover that

their lives are predominated by electronic devices. Therefore, nothing has
been so much debated as the impact of such devices on children. Some are
of the opinion that spending time on TV, video and PC games is good for
children, whereas other are opposed to this. Personally, I agree with the
former.
Admittedly, these technological innovations impose negative influence on

the younger generation to some extent. To be specific, they may cause
physical damages. For instance, suggested by medical professionals that a
long time exposure in front of the TV screens will possibly hurt the eyes of
children, leading to problems which may affect their choice of future
careers. Moreover, so attracted by the colorful and moving images, such as
cartoons and games that kids will be encountered with difficulties to
concentrate in their studies, work and even lives.
Nevertheless, reaching the conclusion that such technologies do harm to the

youngsters does not necessarily mean that they have no positive impacts. In
fact, children can benefit from the technologies listed above. It is not
uncommon to witness the phenomenon that kids before going into
preschools learn how to speak, sing and act because of their imitation from
TV, video and PC games. Without these devices, it would be hard for parents
to teach their children at such early ages. Thus, it is the development of
science and technology that support families in terms of rising the next
generation.
In addition, not only can TVs and other electronic equipment support
exploiting kids’ potentialities at an early age, but also disseminate
information and knowledge when they grow up. That is to say, these
equipment are both informative as well as educational. For example,
through watching the domestic and international news on TV, youths can
acquire basic understanding of current affair which broadens their horizon
and shapes their world views. Furthermore, some PC games involve solving
mathematical questions that encourage and promote the interests of
learning. Hence, if there were no such modern technologies, younger
students would not be so sophisticated and knowledgeable as they were
today.
In conclusion, equipment, such as TVs, videos and PC games are double-

edged, fostering learning interest while threatening physical and mental
well-being. However, as far as I am concerned, under direct supervision of
their parents, children can benefit from such devices.
Model Answer 5:
It is true that the technological devices like TV, video and PC ( i dont think
these are devices) games are more and more popular to children and
becoming an controversial issue. While I accept that these kinds
of entertainment have some benefits to for children, I believe that there are
also many negative effects to them.
On the one hand, it is undeniable that modern entertainment have a variety

of good usages to children. First of all, they provide many images in
different fields which children couldn’t see in person. A typical example is
that the channels about wild animals and the nature such as discovery
channel. They also learn a lot from the creative shows to make toys, gifts…
which are very interesting and suitable for their creation. Futhermore,
playing games helps children improve the quick skills and imagination.
Secondly, watching TV, or playing video, PC games are good ways to relax
after a hard-working day at school. This action also keeps them safe from
the danger circumstances, especially when their parents are not beside.
On the other hand, there are many disadvantages of TV and computer

games as well. Admittedly, spending too much time on TV or video, PC
games will take children out of the real society and also be harmful to their
health. According to a recent research, the fattigue in children usually
comes from the children who sit in front of televisions and computer too
much so that (so much that, is that what you menan?) they don’t go out to
play sports and do excercise. This research also presented that these games
will affect the ability of eyes, and reduce the focus skill of children.
Neverthless, children can be addicted by games, especially the violent
games. In China, a sixteen boy killed his grandfather because he had been
thought that he was the character of a gunning game.
In conclusion, there are convincing argumens both for and against the
children who spend time on TV, video and PC games, but I believe that we
can get more advantages than disadvantages if we ensure that our children
use these devices properly.
Comments: overall, your essay have answered the questions and presented
a clear opinion on the issue. there is some inappropriate use of a less formal
style at times (contractions for example). i think the range of vocabulary is
satisfactory, although it is quite restricted. there is attempt to use a wide
range of complex sentences, however i think the structure should be more
various. grammatical errors do occur, but these are not frequent.
Model Answer 6:
It is true that watching TV and playing computer or video games have

become main leisure activities for children. While I accept that these
activities can sometimes have a positive effect on kids, I believe that they
are more likely to have a harmful impact.
On the one hand, TV shows and video games can be both entertaining and
educational. Children are enabled to have fun in the learning process and
facilitate their intellectual development. From an educational perspective,
these programmes and games encourage imagination and creativity, as
well as concentration, logical thinking and problem solving, all of which are
useful skills in the future real life. Furthermore, it has been shown that
computer simulation games can improve players’ motor skills and help
them prepare for real-world tasks, such as driving a car.
However, I would argue that TV and gaming can have a negative influence
on children. TV shows and video games are designed so vivid and attractive
that not only kids but even adults are much easier to get addicted to them.
Physically,hours spent in front of a monitor are harmful on the eyes and in
turn kids do not have enough time to engage in outdoor activities which are
crucial for their physical growth.Also,mentally this type of addiction islikely
to make children isolated from the real world, they may lose the ability to
make friends and socialise in a normal way. Moreover, the violence and
questionable content coming on the screen could influence young people’s
behavior, as they are impressionable.
In conclusion, it seems to me that the potential dangers of watching TV and

gaming are more significant than the possible benefits
Old generations often hold some traditional ideas on the correct way of life,
thinking and behavior. However, some people think that it is not helpful for
the young generations to prepare for modern life in the future.
Same Topic –
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
You should write at least 250 words.

Sample Answer 1:
Generation gap has been a debated issue since the dawn of civilization. I
partially agree with
this statement. Modern life has changed beyond recognition in many ways
and so many
ideas of the old generation are not suitable for today’s life, but still there
are some
traditional ideas which are evergreen and hold true even today.
The elderly had a very disciplined life. For instance, they believed in sticking
to one job for
life. They also believed in fixed-hours job. They had a stress-free work life.
Moreover, they
believed that marriage was for life. Divorces were rare. They had a stable
family life. These
values, if followed, are good for today’s generation also.
However, in many ways the ideas of the elderly are obsolete in the times of
modernity. The
elderly live like a frog in the well. They forget that change is progress. They
also want their
children to follow the same profession. They do not give importance to
aptitude. Youngsters
are more intellectually evolved. They want to explore the un-trodden path
to face the cut-
throat competition of today.
Furthermore, the young differ in dress, food and habits. These things were
not available to
the elderly. The elderly had lesser opportunities to come in contact with the
western world.
The earth was a big planet. Now it is a global village. The young speak a
universal language,
eat Italian pizza and Chinese food and wear a universal dress. The leisurely
ways of the old
are gone. The young have the speed of bikes, cars and planes. What can link
them to the old
bullock cart? The young today have to change to survive.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, there are some traditional
ideas of the elderly
that are evergreen and will hold true for times to come. But, in many ways,
they are
obsolete in today’s time.
Model Answer 2:
As the world is rapidly developing in this era of ever evolving technology,

mindsets of old generations struggle to adapt to the current changes.
People from these generations hold firmly to long-established lifestyle and
expect the youth to follow it without considering thoroughly how it might
trouble them. Personally, I am convinced that although the youngsters
should preserve the traditional values, most of the conventional ideas are
inappropriate to apply in the modern time.
To begin with, some traditional ways of thinking can go as far as to negate

recent revolutionary conceptions. The most obvious example to look at is
the violation of gender equity. In some countries, especially the Asian ones,
women are normally considered to be inferior to men in several aspects.
Not only are sons preferably given the educational opportunity, but
daughters are also considered as misfortune in some rural areas. Such norm
has but great negative impacts on young generations, since they are
brought up with wrong ideas how life works.
Another, equally important, aspect is that prejudice might intervene in

one’s individual private life. The choice of educational field, career and life
partner are quite different than the past centuries and the old generation
will have contradicting ideas about those important issues. Thus new
generations should be allowed to choose those important aspects of their
life as long as they are capable of taking decisions. The older generations
have many false prejudices and superstitions which should not be passed to
the new generations.
To sum up, it is undeniable that some traditional ideas have timeless

validity, as they come from long-life practice and experiences and these
should be embraced and followed. Nevertheless, from my perspective, many
conventional concepts are out-of-date and they should be discarded to keep
our society cohesive.
Model Answer 3:
It is true that many older people believe in traditional values that often
seem incompatible with the needs of younger people. While I agree that
some traditional ideas are outdated, I believe that others are still useful and
should not be forgotten.
On the one hand, many of the ideas that elderly people have about life are
becoming less relevant for younger people. In the past, for example, people
were advised to learn a profession and find a secure job for life, but today’s
workers expect much more variety and diversity from their careers. At the
same time, the ‘rules’ around relationships are being eroded as young
adults make their own choices about who and when to marry. But perhaps
the greatest disparity between the generations can be seen in their
attitudes towards gender roles. The traditional roles of men and women, as
breadwinners and housewives, are no longer accepted as necessary or
appropriate by most younger people.
On the other hand, some traditional views and values are certainly
applicable to the modern world. For example, older generations attach
great importance to working hard, doing one’s best, and taking pride in
one’s work, and these behaviours can surely benefit young people as they
enter today’s competitive job market. Other characteristics that are
perhaps seen as traditional are politeness and good manners. In our
globalised world, young adults can expect to come into contact with people
from a huge variety of backgrounds, and it is more important than ever to
treat others with respect. Finally, I believe that young people would lead
happier lives if they had a more ‘old-fashioned’ sense of community and
neighbourliness.
In conclusion, although the views of older people may sometimes seem

unhelpful in today’s world, we should not dismiss all traditional ideas as
irrelevant.
Sample answer 4:
It is true that older generations believe in traditional values that often seem
incompatible with the need of younger people. This is the reason some
people hold the opinion that traditional ideas are not helping new
generations especially youngsters; whereas, others have the conflicting
views. While, in the below essay, I will try to enunciate on this fact with my
own perception.
To begin with, there are multifarious ideas that old people have that are
becoming less relevant for younger generations. Firstly, in the olden days
people were advised to learn a profession and find a secure job for life;
whereas, nowadays, workers need variety and diversity in their career and
this is the reason they change their jobs more frequently. Secondly, older
generations used to give importance to relations, thus they used to believe
in arrange marriage and marry a man or woman that they never met in life
before. However, now youngsters take their own decision for getting
married to a girl or a boy of their choice. Finally, roles of breadwinner and
housewives are no longer valid or accepted by most of the younger people.
By the contrast, others have the conflicting views.
As per them, some traditional values are certainly applicable to modern

world. For example, older generations used to work very hard by doing
their best and take pride’s in one work. Undeniably, this behavior will teach
today’s generations to face the competitive world with positive attitude.
Moreover, other characteristics that are shown and can be accepted by
adolescents are of good manners and politeness. Definitely, because of work
younger adults can meet many people from huge backgrounds; therefore it
is better for them to meet all of them with respect. Finally, youngsters can
live happier lives if they follow the same old fashioned sense of community.
To recapitulate, by looking at the above facts even though there are some
ideas that are sometimes seem unhelpful in today’s world, we should not
dismiss all traditional ideas as irrelevant
Unemployment is getting increasingly serious in many countries. Some
people think students only need to get primary education, while others
think secondary education is necessary.
Same Topic –
Sample Answer 1:
Nowadays, an increasing number of people cannot find jobs in many

countries. Some
people argue that students only need to receive primary education, while
others believe
secondary education is necessary. Before presenting my opinion, it is
necessary for me to
probe into both sides of the issue.
Those who say that only primary education should be there, feel that
education has little
influence on finding a job. To begin with, the competition for jobs is
increasingly tough since
there are more and more job seekers. Definitely, no matter what level
education a person
receives, he or she has to go to find a job finally, facing some competition.
Therefore, the
earlier one goes to find a position, the better for a person. Furthermore,
they think people
can acquire the technique through work instead of school. In other words,
school education
does not provide practical technique for factories. It is unnecessary for
people to receive
more education than primary courses.
On the other hand, those who believe that secondary education is necessary
think that
secondary education will offer more knowledge for people who plan to
work, which can get
them better paid jobs. However, both the two issues neglect the great
impacts of education
on the development of individuals.
In my opinion, it is necessary for individuals to receive as much education as

possible before
they go to work. Firstly, college or university education plays a key role in
the development
of individuals. Secondly, education will definitely enhance the competition
for work. The
more education one receives, the more opportunities for jobs he will have.
For instance,
more companies are recruiting new employees with a bachelor or master
degree recently
since the employment is very hard-to-get, with today’s financial crisis. Last
but not least,
receiving more education will widen one’s horizons. Some of them, maybe,
set up their own
business, creating a new approach to unemployment.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, although primary education

is sufficient for
some kinds of work, I firmly believe that people should receive higher
education before they
go to work.
Model Answer 2:
It is true that rising unemployment is one of the most pressing issues in the
industrial world. A high school certificate no longer guarantees a decent
job. Some are of opinion that education beyond the primary school level is
not needed, while the opponents of this proposition hold the view that it is
necessary to offer secondary education. In my opinion, I completely agree
with the idea that secondary level schooling is essential and should be
provided.
The main reason why I believe secondary schooling should be offered is that
academic qualifications are required in many professions worldwide. Most
jobs today require at least a high school diploma or equivalent. For
example, it is impossible to become a sales promoter, technician or clerk
without having a high school qualification. As a result, high school
graduates have access to more or better job opportunities both locally and
internationally, and they can at least move out to another country to make
a living if there are no career opportunities in their own country. Besides,
the global job market is becoming increasingly competitive, and sometimes
there are hundreds of applicants for one position in a multinational
company. Young people who do not have qualifications from a secondary
school will not be able to compete.
In addition, secondary schools are the institutions where the fundamental

formation of a young adult occurs. There they are in company of other
teenagers of the same age. Years of learning in groups teach them the
important lessons of living in a society. He or she learns the basic civic
duties as well as independent living skills to survive in a competitive society.
What is more, much core academic, technical and other job-related
knowledge needed for future employment, further education or even self-
employment is imparted at this stage. The most dreaded vices of the
adolescence such as drug-addiction and alcoholism that lead to youth
unemployment are also curbed in high schools. Consequently, access to and
completion of secondary education will eventually lead more people to
employment. To illustrate, some recent studies in the media highlighted
that students who finish high school are less likely to be unemployed, and
more likely to earn higher salaries than those with fewer qualifications.
In conclusion, I believe that it is vitally important for governments to offer

secondary education because a high school diploma is indispensable in
today’s highly competitive job market and secondary schools teach people
the necessary skills that will better prepare them for the world beyond
school.
Model Answer 3:
Nowadays many highly qualified people find it difficult to get a good

employment. In this context, whether students complete their studies by
primary education or they continue their education to higher levels is a
topic of frequent discussion. In this essay, I will discuss both views before
reaching my personal opinion.
Many people hold the view that primary education is sufficient to get a
handsome job. The primary reason for them to support their point is that
children learn basic arithmetic and general knowledge by elementary
education which is enough to get a job and further he has to improve his
practical skills by repeatedly doing it. For example, an automobile
mechanic in hometown studied up to second class, after that he left school
due to financial burden. However, by developing his practical experience, he
could even repair international cars such as Ford, Nissan and Hyundai. Now
he is an efficient mechanic than one who completed mechanical
engineering. He could even support his family and dependents. In addition
to this many famous people like Sachin Tendulkar, Steve Jobs are school
drop- outs; and even then they reached great heights in life due to hard
work, passion and luck not because of a university degree.
In contrast, secondary education is mandatory to survive in this fast-paced

life. Many employers seek multiple degree holders as they think that people
maintain certain discipline to achieve these degrees. For example, a nurse
spends four years of disciplined and dedicated life to get her degree. Apart
from this, some professionals like doctors, lawyers need sound theoretical
and practical knowledge to survive in their profession since they are
interrelated. For instance, a doctor should have thorough knowledge
regarding the human anatomy, physiology and knowledge about the
reaction of medicine on human body in general, which he can learn from
theoretical studies. At the same time, individual difference in the drug
reaction can be learned from practical experience. Therefore, detailed and
in-depth studies are required in some profession.
Having discussed both views, I agree that skill is essential in some work. But
it is difficult for everyone to find their interest at initial stage of education
even though some may find it because of luck or passion .I inclined to the
statement that secondary education is mandatory for everyone. Thus it
makes people fit for highly paid jobs.
Sample answer 4:
It is unquestionable that rising unemployment is one of the most pressing

issues in the industrial world. One solution that has been put forward is to
cut the working week to a maximum of 35 hours. However, in my view this
solution is rather controversial and other solutions need to be found.
It is fairly easy to understand the reasons why this proposal has been made.
The reasoning is that if workers are not allowed to work for more than 35
hours weekly, then employers will be forced to engage more staff. There
would be at least two advantages to this. Not only would unemployment be
reduced, but the working conditions of employees on very long shifts would
also be significantly improved. For example, a factory employing 300
manual workers doing 10 hours a day might employ 450 workers.
There is also, however, a strong argument not to implement this proposal.

This argument is based on economic competitiveness. If a company was
forced to employ more workers to produce the same amount of goods, then
its wage bill would rise and its products might become more expensive and
less competitive compared to companies with longer working weeks. In this
case, it is possible that the company either might become insolvent or it
would have to make some employees redundant. As a result, the intended
benefit to the personnel would not happen.
In summary, we can see that this is clearly a complex issue as there are
significant advantages and disadvantages to the proposal. My own personal
view is that it would be better not to introduce the shortened working week
because it works only in theory and not in practice.
Model Answer 5:
Today unemployment rates are increasing in most countries and this leads t
o poverty andother significant social problems. Many commentators are of t
he view that if people workedonly 35 hours a week, there would be less une
mployment because more people could get ajob.
Reducing the working week will force employers to have more workers in or
der not todecrease productivity. The more workers there are, the more a co
untry is rich becausepeople can buy much more things and pay more taxes.
The government could reduce exitsfor helping people who are poor and can’
t afford to pay a rent or haven’t got their own house.
One may argue that if workers work less they are pay less and they might fa
ce economicproblems due to high cost of living and the cost of living is beco
ming higher and higher inmost of developed nations nowadays. Additionall
y, employers would be forced to pay muchmore taxes because they have mo
re workers that could result in moving their business inother countries wher
e workers are cheapier.
In my view noone can force someone to work less than he wants to. One coul
d say that thelabour market should be more flexible. It can be argue that Go
vernment should facilitatepart
time so people could work according to their needs. This could help many w
omen withchildren since they can look after them and continue to work.
To summarise, it has now been shown that reducing the working week hour
s might not solveunemployment. There are other solutions Government can
find like part-time or moreflexibility in the labour market.
Some people think people can exploit animals for any purpose they need,
while others do not think so.
What is your opinion?
Same Topic – A growing number of people feel that animals should not be
exploited by people and that they should have the same rights as humans,
while others argue that humans must employ animals to satisfy their
various needs, including uses for food and research.

Sample Answer 1:
The discussion about whether or not animals should be used for the benefit
of humans is a
very debatable one. Some individuals are of the opinion that we can exploit
animals for our
benefit. Others hold the opposite view. It is necessary to look at both sides of
the argument
before forming an opinion.
Animals have always been used by humans in many different ways, for
example, as food, for
work, and in research. Using animals for food reflects what happens
throughout the animal
kingdom where carnivorous, or meat-eating, animals kill other animals for
food. Humans
have achieved dominance over animals and are able to use them to work,
for example in
the fields or to pull carts and other transport. Animals undoubtedly suffer
during medical
research, but this research may prevent humans from suffering in the
future.
Many people, however, argue that it is wrong to cause suffering to animals

for the benefit
of humans. Meat is not a necessary part of our diet, and there are many
healthy vegetarians
around the world who prove this. Technology has largely replaced the use of
animals in the
fields and for transport. Research carried out on animals is often not valid
for human cases
as an animal’s reactions may be very different from those of a human.
There are useful
alternative forms of research available now, such as the use of tissue cell
cultures. More and
more people are unhappy to cause suffering to animals if there is an
alternative.
(Conclusion 1) In my opinion, though, it is necessary to use animals for the

benefit of
humans. Through their use, the quality of life for humans can be improved,
and this is more
important than the quality of life for animals.
(Conclusion 2) In conclusion, I believe that animals should not be used for

human gain. It is
time to concentrate resources on developing alternative sources of food and
methods of
research, and allow animals a pain-free existence.
Model Answer 2:
I agree that people can exploit animals for some proper purpose rather
than any purpose. I firmly against some kind of purpose, for example, It’s
reported some people maltreated and slaughtered animals just for fun.
In spite of the fact every animals have it’s right, for the survival purpose
human have to sacrifice animals’ rights. It is undoubtedly human is at the
top of the food chains, that means people need consume enormous medium
or low level animals as their food. After all, pure vegetarians in this planet
are minority of the society. Moreover, In some scientifically
research sectors, people use animals to make experiments. It’s also account
to the purpose of human survive activity. For example, research for the
medicine to cure dealy contagious disease. These medicine usually were
dangerous before the animal test. Think about it, several animals for
experiments can save millions of people’s lives. The turth in the real world is
that the rules of nature are cruelt, for the sake of living people had to
exploit animals.
However, some of the exploitation of animals must be forbidden. Firstly,

slaughtering animals for some luxury goods business purpose must stop, for
instance, the elephants’ teeth, shark fin, meats of whales… These kinds of
exploitations unveil the greedy and hideous
soul of human.
From the above discussion, I think it is unpractical to forbidden people

exploit animals, yet people have no right to do this for any purpose. It seems
to me that I would take a more neutral position.
Model Answer 3:
Undoubtedly nature is one of the most wonderful creations of god. All living
being which dwell in this are associated with each other for some or the
other reason. This is termed as life cycle. Indeed it is a nature’s law that
everything is in connection for smooth functioning and survival. Certainly
human being on earth is superior to all other species. Therefore, there are
set of people who tend to think that human being can exploit animals for
their necessity, while others refutes to this view point. I would agree to
large extent with the former view and would like to present my inclination
further.
Firstly, exploitation of animals for mankind is the practice followed since

ages. For instance, in early days people use to plough land for farming with
the help of cows and buffalo. In addition to this even these days there are
many consumer oriented products produces with the help of animals
ingredients after extraction. Such as, Milk , Butter , Cheese from cow, edible
oil from fishes, red and white meat products are also prescribed by doctors
for healthy living. Moreover, with the use of animals we human being are
inhabiting since inception, history states that human beings used to wear
cloths made of animals skins , so overall it is the fact that mankind is
depending on animals for their routine life.
On the other hand, there are people who oppose to this view with some
understanding. Although it is true that human beings are benefited from
the animals, the dominating nature of human tries to exploit animals for
any purpose they need. Therefore to my understanding exploiting animals is
fair but certainly not on the cost of animal blood. For instance, people who
like to keep pets in their house keep them and when these pets are affected
by some ill health they leave them to die on the streets. Adding up to this
even hunting of animals is practiced for fun sake by teenagers in some part
of nation. Thus I strongly feel that exploitation of animals in this manner is
crime as per constitutional law of animal rights. Whereas, everyone should
understand that alike all this animals do have feelings and emotions.
However, to sum up I would state that exploit animals so as to maintain

smooth and proper life cycle. It is all about give and take relationship with
humans and animals. We all are linked with each other, so it is obvious that
to keep a well balanced equilibrium human being should follow the chain
life cycle. If not the planet will be in a vicious circle and would be difficult
cope up this situation.
Sample answer 4:
It has become a debatable topic about the exploitation of animals by

mankind. Some people believed that animals should not be exploited and
should be treated fairly by human beings. In contrast, others think animals
should be utilized to assist humans in various kinds of ways, such as the
source of food or for medical testing. The following essay will discuss about
both views in details, but in my personal opinion, I believe that animals can
be used as the source of food or to assists human beings in the
proportionate way and human should treat them properly.
On the one hand, a group of people believe that mankind does not have the
rights to exploit animals, as they are also living creatures. It is true that
animals live by following their instinct, but they have the same feeling as
human beings, therefore it would not be fair for mankind to exploit them. In
several cases, it has been reported that some of the cows had cried before
they were slaughtered in the slaughter house, which means that they also
had the same feeling as human beings. In another reported cases, some of
the animals was treated poorly by their masters, though they had been
exploited heavily and made them sick or injured.
On the other hand, it is undeniable that mankind need the assistant of

animals in various kinds of ways. Firstly, some animals are needed by
humans to assist them in producing and providing foods. In many countries,
cows, buffalos or horses are used by farmers to cultivate their farming
areas, and some dairy farms animals such as chicken and sheep are
slaughtered for their meats. Without the existence of these animals, there
would be a humanity issue about the lack of food supplies and starvation
for mankind. Secondly, some animals are used in certain scientific
experiments or medical testing for the sake of humanity. Several new drugs
are being tested in some mice or monkeys before they are being tested on
human beings. Although it might seem as an inhuman act, but these
experiments have save thousands of human lives.
In conclusion, people have different opinions about the exploitation of

animals. Some people agree with the statement but others disagree with it.
In my opinion, I think the employment or the usage of animals to help
human beings is not a problem, as long as we exploit them in the
proportionate way. For example, as many farmers use dogs as their
assistant in their field and the dogs should be treated and fed properly.
Model Answer 5:
Some people believe that animals should be treated in the same way
humans are and have similar rights, whereas others think that it is more
important to use them as we desire for food and medical research. This
essay will discuss both points of view.
With regard to the exploitation of animals, people believe it is acceptable

for several reasons. Firstly, they think that humans are the most important
beings on the planet, and everything must be done to ensure human
survival. If this means experimenting on animals so that we can fight and
find cures for diseases, then this takes priority over animal suffering.
Furthermore, it is believed by some that animals do not feel pain or loss as
humans do, so if we have to kill animals for food or other uses, then this is
morally acceptable.
However, I do not believe these arguments stand up to scrutiny. To begin, it

has been shown on numerous occasions by secret filming in laboratories via
animal rights groups that animals feel as much pain as humans do, and
they suffer when they are kept in cages for long periods. In addition, a
substantial amount of animal research is done for cosmetics, not to find
cures for diseases, so this is unnecessary. Finally, it has also been proven
that humans can get all the nutrients and vitamins that they need from
green vegetables and fruit. Therefore, again, having to kill animals for food
is not an adequate argument.
To sum up, although some people argue killing animals for research and
food is ethical, I would argue there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate
that this is not the case, and, therefore, steps must be taken to improve the
rights of animals.
Sample Answer 6:
There have been lots of debates about animal rights in different societies
over last decade and sometimes we watch or hear from media that a group
of people are protesting in each corner of the world to protect animal
rights. However, this group believes that animals should not be in danger by
human, while some others point that human needs are more important and
people should be allowed to use animals for their different purposes.
Therefore, this essay has tried to cover both of mentioned views and would
suggest a good way to solve the issue.
According to most of history documents, human has employed animals to
have a better life from the time that civilization has come to existence. In
fact, the skin of animals has been considered as the first material for
clothing industry and human has used the meat of them as a delicious food.
These days, people spend money for these purposes and in addition
scientists conduct most of their biology experiments on animals to find
cures for illnesses.
Some people worry about the mentioned trend as many animals’ species
have been extinct because of exploiting them by human. Actually, they
believe that the God has created animals to live and human shouldn’t kill
them or destroys their life places for his needs. So, if no steps would be taken
for this situation, our planet has no place for animals and we just can see
animals in zoos which is another way of employing animals by human.
By contrast, some other argues that the God has created animals for human
better life and it is inevitable that people use animals for their targets. In
other words, it is such a life law that always the stronger kill the weaker for
continuing the life and in the forest, wild animals kill other for food as
human do it for his purposes. Therefore, human should exploit animals for
food, cloth and developing science and no other way can be taken.
I think, therefore, this occasion is such a sophisticated issue and both of

views are concerning one aspect of human and animal rights. But perhaps,
the realistic solution is balancing human behavior about animals. Put
another way, human should try to replace other ways instead of exploiting
animals, however; it is not possible to eliminate the role of employing
animals in human life.
Sample Answer 7:
The issue of whether people should use animals for human purposes or not
is certainly a contentious one. In the following essay, I intend to discuss both
these aspects and give my own opinion.
First of all, using animals for benefits has been a long story in human
history. In the dawn of human civilization, people hunted animals for fur
and food. Not long before that, they began to rear livestock, which provided
them extra benefits like eggs and milk. Since then, of course, starvation
seemed to be not as huge as a problem compared with before. Now people
are using animal experiments for finding vaccines which can help humans
overcome epidemics. Clearly, there could be a lot more benefits we would
gain from animals in the future. However, this is only one matter at hand.
However, today’s people exploiting animals too excess has seriously

undermines the biological diversity.One particularly good example of this is
the hunt for shark fin, in some eastern countries, people’s huge demand for
shark fin soups has prompted fishermen to empty the oceans of sharks.
Similarly, in Africa thousands and thousands of elephants have been killed
for ivory, which has left some species of elephants extinct forever in this
world. In order to get rid of these problems, therefore I believe greater
regulations about exploiting animals are required.
In conclusion, although the benefits of using animals are significant, given

the risks of the destruction of biological diversity. I believe the process of
using animal resources must be carefully supervised.
Sample Answer 8:
Animal is one of the living things, like human. Some people believe that
animals should be kept and treated well because they have the same rights
as human. Other people think that animal should be used for food, clothes,
education, and research purposes. From my point of view, animals bring
many advantages for human’s life. But it does not mean human can treat
them badly and even do exploitation.
As God creature, animals live and they have the same feelings like humans
do, like pain, suffering, frustration, happiness, etc. People who advocate
about animal rights think that animals are equal as human so they deserve
the same treatment. People must not use animals for their necessity. For
instance, using animal on experiment, using for entertainment business,
killing them for foods or making clothes and many others is inhuman. These
activities not only hurt the animals, but also may destroy the balance of
nature. In this case, people with this point of view believe that exploitation
and violence in animals are cruel behavior.
In contrast, some people argue that animals are created to fulfill human
needs. They have a lot benefits for human life. Firstly, animals can be used
for education. Many scientists utilize animals for their research, like biology
or medical study. It can really help people to enrich their knowledge about
the earth phenomena and also to find new medications for helping the
humans. Secondly, animals are really important as food sources. They can
provide human nutrition. For example, fishes, crabs, lobsters, and meats are
containing protein which is needed for human health.
In conclusion, I believe that animals give many benefits for humans. They
can help improving human life, especially provide food. However, people
should treat them in good ways. I agree that animals deserve to be treated
well but is does not mean that they must be treated as equal as humans.
Sample Answer 9:
Since prehistoric eras animals have been widely used by humans and in
different ways to fulfill several needs. They have provided main sources of
food, cloths, transportation and other tools largely used for the well-being
of human kind. Yet in the modern world, animals still offer an efficient and
indispensable mean for scientists to develop killing edge vaccinations.
Whether to ban the exploitation of animals in general or to continue
profiting from them for the betterment of people’s lives still a matter of
dispute. I personally believe that animals’ use in our lives should be strictly
controlled.
In favor of securing the same rights as humans, some claim that animals
should be treated in a moral and ethical way. They consequently require to
stop slaughtering sheep and cows for instance, simply to provision eatable
meat. They additionally argue that though animals are driven by instinct
rather by brain like humans, they still are living creatures and should enjoy
their lives in peace.
On the other side, supporters of exploiting animals for the good of mankind
evaluate their use in our lives as essential in different aspects. Firstly it is
suspicious that humans may survive by merely rely on vegetable sources of
food even though this is not impossible.
Secondly, it would be quite impossible to keep the pace of development in

medicine, especially to counter epidemic diseases, if we deprive scientists
from experiencing on animals. However, testing each and every new drug
on humans is unethical and inhuman.
To conclude, despite the unstoppable voices against the exploitation of
animals in general, it would not be easy for humans to evolve without
utilizing animals; however humans should control this utilization and
regulate it firmly. Misusing animals like in circuses, zoos or illegal
competitions should be completely prohibited since those activities are
solely aiming fun and mere financial benefits and disregarding animals’
suffering.
The number of cars keeps increasing, so road systems should be expanded.

Some people think the government should pay for it, while others think the
car owners should pay for it.
Sample Answer 1:
With growing incomes, it is not surprising that everyone wants to live a

lavish lifestyle. Every
other individual owns a car these days. That is why road systems have to be
expanded. All
this requires money. That is why the debate has arisen as to who should pay
for this
expansion. Some opine that the government should pay while others
contend that the car
owners should pay. I tend to agree with the latter.
To begin with, higher cost for car owners would encourage public transport
use. This would
definitely be better for the environment as there would be less pollution and
less usage of
natural resources like petrol and diesel. People would also be encouraged to
do car pooling
so that the added expenses are shared. Moreover, shorter journeys may be
made on foot or
bicycle which would lead to a healthier nation.
In addition, it would be unfair if government pays all the money out of the
taxes. In this way
even those people who are not using the roads for their private vehicles
would also be
taxed. Moreover, government has so much else on its shoulders such as basic
healthcare
and education which would be advantageous for all.
Admittedly, better roads means lesser congestion, lesser traffic jams and
therefore lesser
pollution and faster mobility which would be better for the big businesses.
Therefore, this
cost should be met by the big companies and not the average taxpayer.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that expanding the road system is
the need of the
hour and most of the cost should be met with by the car owners and big
companies and
some paid by the government.
Model Answer 2:
Roads are inevitable part of our daily life.Unless it is developed to

accommodate increasing number of car,it will aggravate the traffic
problems in cities,however it is unfair,government is expecting the car
owners to pay for new development.
Firstly,car owners are already burdened by various type of faxes,on

purchase of car and on periodic basic.It will boost the tax revenue of
the government.this money should be used for the construction of new
roads,flyovers,bridges. In India ideally, government funds are used for new
development, but it is quite unacceptable to charge care owners to toll fee
for there developments. Further more, It is the responsibility of the welfare
state to provide basic infrastructure to the people, state should use the
available international funds such as world bank,with very low interest
rate.
On the other hand,some people are argue that, it is the responsibility of the
car owners to pay for the expenses rather than the government,
which decline the attitude of the policymakers towards the matter.
To conclude,It is clear from the above statement,which is the absolute

responsibility of government to keep well established loads other facilities.
Model Answer 3:
Unless roads are developed to accommodate the increasing number of cars,

it would aggravate the rising traffic problems in our cities. However, it is
unfair for the government to expect car owners to bear the cost of
expanding roads due to a number of reasons.
In the first place, car owners are already burdened by various types of taxes
levied on them by the government at the time of purchase of the car and on
a periodic basic. Increasing number of cars would naturally boost the tax
revenue of the government. This money should be used for widening
existing roads, building new highways and constructing bridges and
flyovers. For example, in many cities of India, ideally a large number of
flyovers are built by government funding. It is quite unreasonable to charge
car owners to pay toll for these new developments.
Furthermore, it is the responsibility of a responsible government to provide

the basic infrastructure like efficient roads to the people. If tax revenue is
not sufficient for this purpose, Governments usually perform these
responsibilities by availing loans. For instance, international financial
institutions like World Bank and International Monitory Fund lend huge
amounts of money to governments at lower interest rates for such purposes.
This would mean that there is hardly any need for governments to require
car owners to pay for such expenses.
On the other hand, there are people who believe that since it is the car
owners who need better roads, they should pay for its construction. This
argument would, in fact, seriously downplay the basic responsibility of the
government to provide people with infrastructural facilities.
In conclusion, from the above arguments it is clear that government should
bear the cost of improving the road system, in order to handle the growing
traffic problems associated with large number of cars.
Some people think government should ensure the healthy lifestyle of people,
but others argue that it should be decided by individuals.
Same Topic –
Sample Answer 1:
As people are moving towards modernization, they are becoming more and
more
aware about the benefits of a healthy lifestyle. I believe that the government
should
hold the responsibility to encourage people to enjoy healthy lifestyle. I shall
put forth
my arguments to support my views in the following paragraphs.
My first argument is that everyone does not have enough knowledge about
health
and some gullible people may just follow some advertisements or unreliable
consultants who may give them inappropriate guidance. This increase the
risk of
unhealthy lifestyle and therefore government should formulate policies to
guide
citizens to establish healthy lifestyles.
Secondly, if government guides about healthy lifestyles, then more and more
people
would be healthy and this would indirectly make the economy flourish. With
healthy
body conditions, labourers work more efficiently, elderly suffer lesser
diseases and
children have better development. As a result, manufactures can produce
more, the
budget of social insurance can be cut down and healthy young generations
will
provide stability to the growth of economy.
Last but not least, if the onus of having a healthy lifestyle is left to the
individuals,
they may not follow it because of lack of time and money. So, the
government should
provide free gyms, parks and other infrastructure to support a healthy
lifestyle, so
that people are encouraged to adopt such a lifestyle.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, governments should promote
healthy
lifestyles both for the benefits of individuals and overall economy.
Model Answer 2:
Whether healthy lifestyle should be a personal choice or should be ensured

by a government is a debated issue. According to some, healthy lifestyle is a
preference and this is determined by individuals while others believe that
the government of a country should take care of the healthcare facilities of
all citizens. Personally I believe that healthy lifestyle is a choice that should
be made by each individual while the government of a country should
guarantee proper treatment and healthy lifestyle facilities.
On one hand, if an individual has the determination of leading a healthy life,

he would need very little help from the state. Healthy lifestyle is a habit and
this is a choice made by an individual. Government can make sure better
healthcare, exercise and entertainment facilities throughout the country
but if someone does not have the habit to lead a healthy life, government
has nothing to do about it. Interestingly, this is a choice we can make
regardless of our social and economic status. For instance, a man with a lot
of money might live an unhealthy lifestyle while someone with a very little
earning can decide to live a good and healthy lifestyle. Thus healthy lifestyle
is a choice that should be decided by individuals rather than the
government of a country. It is evident that family can contribute a lot to
teach a child to choose a good and healthy lifestyle.
On the other hand, there is no denying to the fact that, a government also
has an important role to play to make sure better lifestyle of its citizens.
For instance in countries where the government fails to ensure proper
education, healthcare facilities, recreation and economic development,
people usually lead unhealthy life there. Some important laws and policies
like drug controlling can determine the extent of people’s healthy lifestyle.
Thus it is true that government policy and initiatives help citizens to have
better lifestyle.
Considering both view points, I would like to conclude that healthy lifestyle
of citizens in a country is a combination of individual choice and
government initiatives and policy. Thus personally I feel that each person
should choose a healthy lifestyle while the government of a country should
ensure proper facilities to make it easier.
Model Answer 3:
Some people think government should ensure the healthy lifestyle. of

people, but others argue that it should be decided by individuals. Discuss
both views and give your opinion.
As people are moving towards modernization, they are becoming more and
more aware about the benefits of a healthy lifestyle. I believe that the
government should hold the responsibility to encourage people to enjoy
healthy lifestyle. I shall put forth my arguments to support my views in the
following paragraphs.
My first argument is that everyone does not have enough knowledge about
health and some gullible people may just follow some advertisements or
unreliable consultants who may give them inappropriate guidance. This
increase the risk of unhealthy lifestyle and therefore government should
formulate policies to guide citizens to establish healthy lifestyles.
Secondly, if government guides about healthy lifestyles, then more and more
people would be healthy and this would indirectly make the economy
flourish. With healthy body conditions, labourers work more efficiently,
elderly suffer lesser diseases and children have better development. As a
result, manufactures can produce more, the budget of social insurance can
be cut down and healthy young generations will provide stability to the
growth of economy.
Last but not least, if the onus of having a healthy lifestyle is left to the
individuals, they may not follow it because of lack of time and money. So,
the government should provide free gyms, parks and other infrastructure to
support a healthy lifestyle, so that people are encouraged to adopt such a
lifestyle.
To conclude, governments should promote healthy lifestyles both for the

benefits of individuals and overall economy.
Model Answer 4:
Undoubtedly, healthy and educated society is the backbone of a successful

country. There is general dispute these days about whether it is
government’s responsibility to provide health care and education for free or
not. I think this situation calls for the concerted effect of government,
individual and private organization as well.
On one side of the argument, there are people who believe that it is one of
the fundamental duties of the government to ensure health care and
education for it’s citizen. The principal reason for having such belief is
perhaps as people in all categories are required to pay taxes to the
government, they should definitely receive service from that money. In
addition, if tax revenue is not sufficient, government can perform this
responsibility by availing loan from international organization. At least,
government should provide basic health care and education up to
secondary school free of cost. For example, in Canada it is the government
who pay for it’s citizen’s health care and education up to a certain level.
On the other hand, there are people who believe that individual public and
private organization should run school and hospital and help to release the
economic burden on government. If citizen become dependent upon
government for health care and education then they ultimately become
dependent on the government for everything in their lives. This would lead
to a disastrous outcome in any nation because the government cannot
support all of its citizen. For example, In a overpopulated country like
Bangladesh, it is quite impossible for a government to meet the demand of
free health care and education of it’s citizen.
To sum up, education and health care are basic rights of every citizen. I
think, government should not be solely responsible for ensuring health care
and education free of cost. Individual public and private corporations
should come along to make government enable to provide free health care
and education.
Model Answer 5:
Some argue that governments should regulate citizen’s behaviour to make

them adopt healthy lifestyles. Although I agree that guidance and
intervention from authorities can benefit people’s well-being, I am
convinced that one’s freedom to decide how to live should be protected,
provided that it does not interfere with other people.
It is true that government should take some actions to make sure that
citizens are protected from some unhealthy behaviours. It cannot be denied
that it is difficult for some to discipline themselves from yielding up to
unhealthy indulgences, which not only damage their own health but also
others. Therefore it is important that governments impose restrictions on
these behaviours. For example, no smoking should be allowed in public
places.
On the other hand, it is absolutely against the respect for basic human
rights if people’s freedom of choice of their own lifestyles is completely
deprived. They will live under tremendous pressure if they have to worry
about toeing the line because of strict government regulations, which, for
instance, specify the exact proportion of vegetables in a meal. Therefore, the
government should not enforce such laws on citizens.
In my opinion, governments’ priority in terms of public health is to launch

awareness campaigns to guide people to choose a healthy lifestyle
according to their own situations. It is difficult to define what qualifies a
healthy lifestyle, because every individual has different physical condition.
As a result, different lifestyles should be chosen on an individual basis, and
the government’s role is to guide people to make their own choices by
providing sufficient information about health.
In conclusion, governments should set some guidelines to encourage

citizens to choose a healthy lifestyle instead of imposing laws on them
Model Answer 6:
Healthy lifestyle is one of the most popular topics among urbanites. In this
circumstance, government should hold the responsibility to encourage
people to enjoy healthy lifestyle, not only because individuals could be
gullible to confront healthy issues, but also as a high quality of physical
conditions of citizens can stimulate economy.
Firstly, there are some arguments that governments may not be involved in
personal healthy issues .However, as not everyone has enough knowledge
and qualification on the aspect of health, they may just follow advertisings
or unreliable consultants, which, inversely, could increase the potential risk
of unhealthy lifestyle, since the inappropriate guidance from advertisings or
consultants. Therefore, government should formulate policies to guide
citizens to establish healthy lifestyles.
Secondly, with widespread healthy lifestyles, economy has more

opportunities to achieve prosperity. With healthy body conditions, labors
work more efficiently, elders suffer less diseases and children are promised
better development, hence manufactures can produce more, the budget of
social insurance and superannuation can be cut and healthy young
generations will provide stability to the growth of economy.
Last but not least, as individuals may have different body conditions which
mean that governments should be less effective to consider every situation.
Whereas, government should enhance infrastructure and use legislation to
support the construction of healthy lifestyles instead of covering all the
details.
To conclude, governments should support healthy lifestyles both for the
benefits of individuals and overall economy.
Model Answer 7:
An increasing concern for many governments around the world is the

declining health of their citizens due to a poor diet. While some people
believe governments should be responsible for improving the health of their
nation, others believe it is up to the individual. This essay will examine both
There is no doubt that individuals must take some responsibility for their
diet and health. The argument to support this is the fact that adults have
free will and make their own choices about what they eat and the exercise
that they do. Children are also becoming less healthy. However, their
parents are the ones who provide their evening meals so it is their
responsibility to ensure these meals are nutritious and encourage them to
avoid junk food and sugary snacks during the day.
Despite these arguments, there is also a case for advocating the

intervention of the state. People these days often have little choice but to
depend on fast food or ready meals that are high in sugar, salt and fat due
to the pressures of work. Governments could regulate the ingredients of
such food. Some governments also spend huge amounts of tax money on
treating health problems of their citizens in hospitals. It would be logical to
spend this on preventative measures such as campaigns to encourage
exercise and a good diet.
individuals must take ultimate responsibility for what they eat,
governments also have a role to play as only they can regulate the food
supply, which openly encourages a poor diet. It is only through this
combination that we can improve people’s health.
Some people think that university students should specialize in one subject,
while others think universities should encourage students to learn a range
of subjects. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Same Topic – Some universities require students to take classes in

many subjects. Other universities require students to specialize in one
subject. Which is better?
Sample Answer 1:
It is a highly debated issue as to whether students at university should

concentrate on one
subject or study a multitude of subjects. In this essay I intend to discuss the
benefits of both
approaches. However, I personally feel that studying a range of subjects is
better for
university students.
There are many advantages, for students, of studying a number of subjects.
The first and
foremost advantage is that if they don’t get a job in their field they will be
able to get any
job related to their other subjects. They will not suffer unemployment and
they will not be
stuck to menial jobs despite being highly qualified.
Moreover, a well rounded education is very important in today’s time.

Without a diverse
background, a graduate will not be competent in any job. For example,
excellent
communication skills are very important while looking for a job. For that
you need a basic
English class. Most jobs require problem solving skills which you get from
basic knowledge
of math and science. For instance, a doctor specializing in MRI scan, needs
to have a good
knowledge of physics – magnetism etcetera.
Another advantage is that, learning a range of subjects can add spice to the
students’
studies. Students may be fed up with study when they concentrate on one
subject
constantly. Finally, it is well known that most of the subjects are linked to
each other, to
some extent. With a range of knowledge, students can find different
solutions to approach
the problems they encounter either at work or in life, which will definitely
make them more
creative and innovative in the field they specialize in. Clearly, the students
with all-round
knowledge have an apparent advantage over those specializing in only one
subject.
On the other hand, the only advantage of studying only one subject at
university would be
that it would make you a master in that field and you stand a chance of
getting a high-paid
job in that field.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, studying a variety of subjects

is beneficial to
the university students. In this case, not only can the students better
themselves, but also
become adaptable and flexible in the increasingly challenging and
competitive world. It is
advisable that students spend time learning more subjects instead of
focusing on one
specific subject, so that they can prepare themselves for the global society.
Model Answer 2:
Tertiary education is seen as the foundation of one’s career

prospect.However, people display different views regard whethers students
should attend one particular subject or vice versa. In my opinion, acquiring
knowledge of different fields carries more benefits
On one hand, there is a widely accepted notion that studying one subject
enables students to devote themselves to that area and seek to become
professionals. This is particularly true in the case of learning subjects such
as law, medical and engineering, which require years of theoretical
knowledge and training. Since the time constraints, students have to throw
themselves into the area of interest rather than taking other subjects.
However,such students are more likely to have less career path. For
example, psychology students may end up working as a psychologist or a
consultant.
On the other hand, common sense tells us that one can acquire more
practical skills and knowledge if he/she enrolls a variety of courses, which
potentially enhance student’s employability. This is especially true in this
day and age. Companies opt to recruit employees with multi-skills and a
wide range of academic knowledge. For instance, if an accounting student is
familiar with marketing and human resource management, perhaps he/she
would be able to present more strategically advices in terms of company
operation. In addition, students who exposed to different subjects are easier
to find where their passion is located. Especially for first year students,
attending other subjects allows them to reconsider their goals and choose
the correct pathway towards their future studies.
In conclusion, although the advantage of focusing on one field of studying is

evident, I am of the opinion that students benefit more from learning
broadly.
Model Answer 3:
I think the issue about what is better to specialize in many subjects or

choose the one is a controversial one. Each option has its own advantages
and disadvantages. Some people prefer to specialize in one subject and
know it very well. However, others prefer to extend their range of interests
and specialize in many subjects but not in detail. Bellow I will give reasons
to support my position.
From the one side, learning something in detail brings many benefits. First
of all, people gain more knowledge and experience in this area. So, after
graduation they are well prepared for their further career in this field.
Second of all, they do not spend their precious time on other subjects. This
gives them the opportunity to focus on one subject.
From the other side, people who specialize in many subjects have more
options to choose from. For example, if a person does not make a decision
about what he is going to do after graduation it is a very good chance for
him to try many fields of study and make the right decision. In addition to
this practical benefit a person have the opportunity to extend his range of
interests, his communication skills and have better conceptions of things
around. Also, a person has a better chance to choose what he really likes to
do and make self-realization.
To sum up, I think that every person should have a chance to choose. Does
he want to specialize in one subject or he wants to take classes in many
subjects.
Model Answer 4:
Whether to require their students to take classes in many subjects or

require them to specialize in one specific subject has long been a
controversy among universities. In my eyes, learning different subjects
would enrich the students’ knowledge, would help them expand their social
circles and horizons and benefit their resumes. This is why I believe it is
better to be required to learn many different subjects.
To begin, the main advantage of studying different subjects is that the

students would be exposed to varied information they wouldn’t be exposed
to by specializing in one subject. Students would extend their knowledge in
Mathematics, Science, History and many others. When students are
required to specialize in just one subject they may be well educated over
that specific subject, but would be clueless regarding any others.
Furthermore, students would be able to meet more students with different

perspectives and points of view. For example, I think that the type of
students that studies Arts is not like the one studies Mathematics, while the
former would be more creative and spiritual the later would be calculated
and logical. The students that would learn in several different classes are
more likely to meet different people and learn from their experience than
students specializing in one subject.
In addition, knowledge equals power. By knowing varied information,

students would become more appealing in the eyes of a future employer. For
example, a company manager would want to hire people with as much
knowledge as possible; this would put students with one specialty at a
disadvantage. Having a wide range of knowledge would contribute the
students’ professional status.
In conclusion, I believe it is obvious that universities that require their

students to know different subjects would benefit their students the most.
Wide range of knowledge would drastically improve different aspects of the
students’ lives; work, school and their social lives, as mentioned above.
Model Answer 5:
I think students should be encouraged to take classes in many subjects and I

have three reasons to support my idea.
First of all, students can be specialized after university. Now a lot of people
go to graduation school. Graduation schools are more specialized and
people can focus on one subject that they want to learn deeply. Therefore,
students do not have to specialize in one subjects when they go to
university. Some people insist that it is better if you start earlier. I can
understand but now our school history is getting long, therefore I think we
do not have to concentrate on one subject. Just 50 years ago, there were not
many people who went to college. But now many people go to college and it
is not unusual to go to graduation school. Some of them get PhD and it
means they spend around 4 years at school after university. This is a reason
why I believe that students do not have to specialize in a one subject while
they go to college.
Second, vast knowledge is good for specialization, too. Knowing many

things is very beneficial if you want to specialize in a subject. Many things
are very related in this world, therefore we have to learn many different
things to broaden horizons. For example, my major was economics. We have
to learn English to catch up latest theory since economic has been
developing by English speaking countries, especially the UK and the USA. It
is clear that most of Nobel Prize winners are from those two countries. Also,
economic needs knowledge of mathematics, since we use a lot of numbers.
Also, some economic focus on why people buy an item and they can
approach psychologically. My friend is a researcher, he is an bio engineering
therefore he has to know about biology and engineering. Now we need vast
knowledge. Therefore, we have to study many things.
Last of all, students can associate many type of people. If you take many
variant courses, you get to know many different types of people. But if you
specialize in one subject, you get to know the same type of people. People
should get along with many people. To know a lot of different types, people
can reduce discrimination or prejudice. This is the reason why I don’t think
it is a good idea to specialize in a subject.
Considering these facts, I think university should encourage students to take

many different courses.
Some people think the cheap air flight gives ordinary people more freedom.
However, others think the cheap air flight should be banned because it
pollutes the air and brings many other problems.
Same Topic – Cheap air travel is welcomed because some people think it
will give ordinary people more freedom to travel by air. However, others
suggest that the air travel should be more expensive in order to discourage
people from traveling by air as it will cause environmental problem. Discuss
both views and give your opinion.

Sample Answer 1:
In today’s world, we are now in a position to enjoy cheaper air flights than
in the past.
However, there is an argument that they should be banned due to the levels
of pollution
they generate. Those in favour of cheap air flight say it is advantageous in
terms of freedom
and the opportunities to learn from other countries. In this essay I shall
examine both sides
of this issue and finally give my opinion.
Cheap air flight can be beneficial in many ways. One of them is the
opportunities to go
overseas. Earlier, only the affluent could afford it, but now it is within the
pocket of the
ordinary man. Some of the discounted tickets are fairly cheap and flying
abroad is no longer
a dream for many. Moreover, small businesses have prospered because of
the ease of travel
because of these flights.
In addition to this, cheap air flight enables intercultural exchanges between

countries. The
advent of cheap air fare makes it possible for people the world over to
travel regularly,
regardless of the purpose of the trip. Therefore, people have the
opportunities to learn from
different cultures and have a better understanding of countries they used to
be unfamiliar
with. This, in turn, enhances cultural communications between countries.
The argument that cheap flight should be banned is also justified to some
extent. It is
generally known that aeroplanes consume a vast amount of oil and the gas
emission
generated by an airplane is enormous. If cheap air tickets are not
controlled, the
environmental impacts would only get worse in the long run. Besides, cheap
air tickets at
times are extremely disturbing in terms of certain conditions that go along
with them. One
problem is that the date and time cannot be changed once purchased. As a
result, many
people find it inconvenient if they are to reschedule due to emergency.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, the issue of cheap air fares is
complex and
there is no easy solution as both sides have merits. However, I am convinced
that giving
people the freedom to travel is essential, but at the same time people should
be made
aware of avoiding un-necessary travel. Banning such flights is not the
answer.
Model Answer 2:
Over the past twenty to twenty five years, airline becomes popular to travel
across realms or continental. Here in Asia, people can trip by airplane for
business. Air transports present to assist businessmen task. Moreover, their
company will be economical to spend budget from account without anxiety
about high cost for traveling. However other suggests that air trip should be
more expensive due to airplane produce Carbon dioxide (Co2) and reduce
natural equilibrium. This essay illustrates existences of air-transportation
on global era.
Businessmen activity is usually working with clients or investors who stay

at different area for supporting necessity of jobs, their choice to rapid
transportation because that is the greatest ways to travel around the world
for meeting. Direct meeting is important for them. In addition, face to face
meeting can help to make deal with costumes, founder or project
arrangements. For example, a chief executive for meeting with founder
should create presentation to ensure project and explains what the benefit
for funding if the project is successful. Therefore, there decided to journey
by via air-transportation for creating efficiencies and effectiveness.
On the other hand, drawback of low-budget flight is that it may reduce

quality of air and disequilibrium of natural life. Some scientist claims that
emission of jet machine had killed amount of plants around airport such as,
Rhizomes and Clovers. Moreover, there is no law which management
airplane emission, only car and fabric waste regulated in Kyoto Protocol
about emission controlling. Therefore, many people argue for lead
drawback of airplanes impact should be produced most expensive ticket.
Finally, airways, which had produced and promoted inexpensive ticket trip,
are big company. All stakeholders should be involved for preventing the
earth such as active participants for developing “green flight”- airplane
with minimum emission -. In addition, air transport industry have to
respect with spend their profit for corporate social responsibility.
As illustrated, although affordable cost takes for flying, company should
prevent damage of environments. Definitely, corporate limits face to face
meeting for businessmen. This is essential, conventional manner of
communication change to teleconference meeting. It is a moderate
approach to save this planet
Model Answer 3:
The most recent decades of the rapid development of aviation industry, air
travel has gaining popularity around the world. A greater number of people
tend to travel abroad for vacation in order to know another country’s
culture and customs and this activity should be encouraged. Meanwhile,
environmentalists indicate that this civil activity should be limited due to
the airplanes can cause a series of problem to environment. This essay will
address both affirmative and opponent of using air- transportation.
Firstly, cheaper air-fares boost the development of tourism in one country

which is not only contributes its country’s economic, but also to preserve it
historic assets. To be precise, the higher consumption demand, such as
accommodation and food, by a greater number of tourists driving the
country’s economic leap. At the meantime, the perception of a local
government and citizens for preservation of convention buildings and spot
will be increased. Macau, one of a good example, was a Portuguese colony.
The territory’s economy is heavily dependent on tourism, therefore, many of
the convention buildings with European styles has been well preserved.
However, it is undoubtedly that too much air travel can cause grievous air
pollution and exhaustion of natural resources. Specifically, the demand of
fuel by airplanes, in comparison to, those used by cars or ferries is much
higher. As a result, air travel produces higher emission of carbon dioxide to
the earth and it accelerates the primary resources consumption. In fact,
while many efforts are being made to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide
from land- use transportation, nothing is being done to rein the airplanes.
Eventually, it will be influence on the ecosystem and speed up the danger
of global warming.
In conclusion, air travel, indeed, brings a lot benefits to human being.

However, environmental problems should be alert in people mind. That
pollution can be alleviated not by lifting up the costs of air travel but by
improving the relevant technology.
Model Answer 4:
In today’s world, we are now in a position to enjoy cheaper air flights than
in the past. However, there is an argument that they should be banned due
to the levels of pollution they generate. Those in favour of cheap air flight
say it is advantageous in terms of freedom and the opportunities to learn
from other countries. In this essay I shall examine both sides of this issue
and finally give my opinion.
Cheap air flight can be beneficial in many ways. One of them is the
opportunities to go overseas. Earlier, only the affluent could afford it, but
now it is within the pocket of the ordinary man. Some of the discounted
tickets are fairly cheap and flying abroad is no longer a dream for many.
Moreover, small businesses have prospered because of the ease of travel
because of these flights.
In addition to this, cheap air flight enables intercultural exchanges between

countries. The advent of cheap air fare makes it possible for people the
world over to travel regularly, regardless of the purpose of the trip.
Therefore, people have the opportunities to learn from different cultures
and have a better understanding of countries they used to be unfamiliar
with. This, in turn, enhances cultural communications between countries.
The argument that cheap flight should be banned is also justified to some
extent. It is generally known that airplanes consume a vast amount of oil
and the gas emission generated by an airplane is enormous. If cheap air
tickets are not controlled, the environmental impacts would only get worse
in the long run. Besides, cheap air tickets at times are extremely disturbing
in terms of certain conditions that go along with them. One problem is that
the date and time cannot be changed once purchased. As a result, many
people find it inconvenient if they are to reschedule due to emergency.
In conclusion, I believe that, the issue of cheap air fares is complex and there
is no easy solution as both sides have merits. However, I am convinced that
giving people the freedom to travel is essential, but at the same time people
should be made aware of avoiding un-necessary travel. Banning such flights
is not the answer.
Model Answer 5:
The airplane plays an increasing role in traveling in recent years. There is a

view that the government should encourage people to travel by air by
reducing the air ticket fares, while some individuals hold the opposite point.
I would like to discuss this issue from both perspectives.
It is true that cheap air travel brings populace numerous benefits. To begin
with, we are able to take a trip to further places, even other countries,
because it is extremely rapid. Thus, we will have more choices when we
intend to travel. In addition, it is helpful to develop the economy and society.
By this way, many industries, in particular transportation, are improving
noticeably. Another important point is that it can effectively decline the
passengers who have no choice but to travel by train. As a result, there are
more trains to transport heavy things like coal.
Conversely, there are also some weaknesses so that a lot of people believe
that air travel should be more expensive. The main reason is that the
airplane leads to many environmental problems. Air pollution is a case in
point. Obviously, it is harmful to humanity in the near future. Moreover, it
wastes a mass of natural resources. Fossil fuels, for instance, are non-
renewable resource. We must save energy for future generations.
In summary, although cheap air travel will cause environmental problems,

we obtain more conveniences, which are crucial to our daily lives and
evolution of human civilization. I support to reducing the cost of air travel
because its benefits overweight downsides.
Some people think that children should obey rules or do what their parents
and teachers want them to do, but others think that children controlled too
much cannot deal with problems well by themselves.
Same Topic –

Sample Answer 1:
Young children are beginners. They have lots to learn and one of the biggest
lessons they
must learn is how to behave or act in an acceptable manner. So, they need
rules. When
young children have rules, they know what is expected of them. However,
the extent to
which children have to follow rules is a very sensitive issue. In this essay I
shall discuss the
benefits of imposing rules on children and the negative consequences of
having too much
restriction.
Firstly, rules of behaviour create responsible and respectful children who in

turn mature
into respectful adults. They know the value of respect for elders. They know
the importance
of relationships. They know about their cultural values as well. This forms a
stable society
which is virtually free from vices such as prostitution and drug abuse. It
would be wrong to
say that having rules mars the problem solving ability of children. They, in
fact, face
difficulties in a more mature and disciplined way. They are not lured by
peer pressure and
refrain from acting on impulse.
However, if too strict rules are imposed on children then they may become
rebels. They may
start doing just the opposite of what is told them to do. What is more, they
may show
abnormal behaviour. They may fall into bad company or resort to drugs
because of
frustration. Finally, imposing too strict rules destroys the individuality of
children. They may
withdraw into a shell. This may suppress their creativity and as a
consequence, they may not
be able to deal with problems well by themselves.
What is important is that parents and teachers should learn where rules
are needed and
where it is necessary to give room to the children. Having absolutely no
rules and letting
children do whatever they wish to do would also be wrong. They are not
mature enough to
solve all problems and they have to be taught their limits.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that parents and teachers should
impose rules on
children but they should know where to draw the line. They should be
flexible and modify
the rules according to the circumstances.
Model Answer 2:
With the development of modern society, education is playing an

indispensable role in people’s life, which is why education issues can always
attract public attention. The issue whether children should follow the way
their parents and teachers designed for them or children should be allowed
to have more freedom to do what they want has raise hot debate. In my
opinion, children can benefit from facing problems by themselves with the
help of their parents’ and teachers’ advises.
Child who addresses problems by himself instead of under parents’ control

are more likely to grow up as a individual with responsibility. As when they
in front of problems, not only should they consider the way to tackle
problems, which makes them thing independently and creatively, but the
consequences of their conduction would also be in their consideration.
Besides dealing issues on their own, sometimes could give the enthusiasm to
study more. Hence, they may have the chance to realize their aptitudes.
Also, the challenge can help them explore their potential and offer them
inspiration to address problems creatively.
On the other hand, there might be some merits for children who follow their
parents’ and teachers’ rules. It is obvious that most of problems children
have today are the same ones their parents had, so children would save
plenty of time, if they just take parents’ order, which also makes them safer
in some respects. However, since the modern world is changing in a
incredible speed, it is most likely that a vast number new problems will
appear in front of today’s children.
To sum up, in order to make our children a creative, responsible individuals,

they should be given the chance to deal with problems alone, parents and
teachers should not be their controller, but their advisers.
Model Answer 3:
Many parents want their children have a discipline and obey to their say.
They want their children become a success man in the future as like as their
need. Others think that give the children a freedom make them more
creative and brave. This problem always happened in our family.
The parents will be happy if they have obedient children who always say yes
for their commands. There is no protest to their parents order. That’s all
parents need today. They hope, with their education method will make their
children become discipline and obey to the rules. This is will be stocked until
they adult and getting married. So that way, with this characteristic, not
breaking the rule, they become successful in their career and society. This
method is sounds like strong to our children., but this goals is good. Do not
imagine that the children always got angry and hit from their parents.
Educating the children with high discipline, it is not mean educating them
with violence. There are many parents give more rewards when their
children did what they say. Sometimes the parents give all what their
children needs, because their discipline.
Other side, many parents think that children should be controlled too much.
They say it can give bad effect to the children in the future. The children
who got too much controlling from their parents and teachers, do not have
freedom to expression. They usually doing anything very carefully because
afraid of mistakes. They also always obey their parents or teachers say,
usually accept it without more questions. Many facts, the children are what
their parents and teachers need. They do not have more creativity, because
depended to their parents and teachers. So that way, they usually only copy
their parents or teacher life not come from their passion.
In conclusion, I believe that children who obey rules and do everything as

their parents and teachers say is best choice, because I realize that parents
or teachers give the best things from them to the children for their best
future. Anything that parents and teachers give to the children are based on
their mistakes in the past time and have goals to avoid the children will get
it in the future.
Model Answer 4:
Children are considered the builders of a nation. So, our future depends on
true parenting of the children. But when it comes to the issue people are
split in their opinions. Some people contend that children should obey the
voice of their parents and teachers. While others refute the notion that
children are controlled strictly, and argue that children deserve freedom so
that they can learn how to deal with problems. As both the arguments have
their merits, I believe the combination of the two approaches can bring
better result in raising children.
To start with, children should follow steps as suggested by parents and

mentors. The proponents of the argument want the children to learn to
respect authority. They argue that it is utterly important, because this is
how children can understand their proper role in life. Everybody has some
kinds of authorities, and teaching youngsters to submit to those authorities
from the tender age will be conducive in the whole span of their lives.
On the flip side of coin, the champions of children freedom plead that
children are not supposed to be robots blindly following either parents or
teachers. Children should learn for themselves what is wrong and right, and
need to demonstrate their personalities. They contend that if children do
not know how to deal with problems for themselves, they, then, indeed will
not able to solve a unique problem any may always depend on others. They
cannot stand alone. So, they must be critical at what they are to be said. A
healthy dollop of critical thought is utterly important in children’s moral
parenting.
All things considered, it seems reasonable to assume that both the

approaches are handy, but what we need to do is to mix the ways in a
proper proportion. A perfect match of freedom and control is extremely
critical in children upbringing, I believe.
Model Answer 5:
Parenting and guiding children for their better future are quite complex
tasks and people have different opinions on parenting styles. Some opine
that children should always obey the rules imposed by the parents and
should follow teachers’ instructions. On the contrary another group of
thought says that children should be given some freedom and too much
stringency from parents and teachers could actually ruin their life. This
essay delves with the both view points and finally express my own opinion.
On one hand, parents and teachers usually set some rules for the children
and they expect the children to follow these rules. In most of the cases
parents and teachers set rules that are helpful and beneficial for the
children. For instance, I can recall that my mother always expected us to
wash our hands before eating any food. Sometimes we felt quite bored to
follow this instruction. However we now know that it was quite a good
habit that our mother instilled among us. Similarly there are many other
rules that our parents wanted us to obey only because they were good rules
and we, as children, had little idea about the negative consequences of
disobeying them. Another example is the time when I wanted to watch
carton on TV in the evening but my parents wanted me to go out and play
some sorts of sports with other kids. At that time it was quite an abhorrent
activity for me but now I can realize how this rule has actually helped me to
have a sound health. Thus not all rules set by parents and teachers are
meant to dominate the children but to actually help them grow properly.
On the contrary, it is quite hard to believe but actually true that many
parents ruin their children’s life by being over protective and being abusive.
If a father beat a child for silly reasons and a mother constantly follows and
investigates what her teenage child is doing, that will surely have a
negative consequence. Children who are always pressurized by rules and
regulations from their family members often end up being timid and
hesitant. They lack many important characteristics in their adult life and
psychologists often attribute criminal activities due to abusing parents and
teachers in childhood. Furthermore, if some sorts of freedom are not given
to the children they often cannot expose their true potential in life. Again,
severe punishment from parents and teachers can harm children’s
ingenuity and can turn them into immoral person.
Considering both of the views I personally think that parenting is a complex

task and it determines the future of a child. Thus parents and teachers
should not be too much rigid about rules and regulations as it would
diminish children’s creativity, respect and potential. On the other hand
some beneficial rules should be there as children often fail to understand
the importance of discipline, value of time and hygiene. Wise parents and
teachers know the type of rules they should impose to the children and what
they should be flexible about. Teachers and parents should be friendly to a
child in most of the time and in some cases should be strict for the
betterment of the child.
Some people think students should learn more practical courses like
computer, but others think they should learn more about theoretical
courses like geography and mathematics.
Same Topic – Some people think kids should learn more practical skills
from classes for their future career. However, others believe that in primary
level, they should learn something theoretical for a good foundation for
their future development. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.
Sample Answer 1:
The debate on whether theoretical subjects are more important or practical

are more
important has been raging for ages. Some individuals are of the opinion
that pupils should
be taught more practical courses like computers but others hold the view
that theoretical
subjects are more important. In this essay I intend to discuss both views and
finally give my
opinion.
Those in favour of theoretical courses say that to be practically successful
we need to have
a strong and solid theoretical foundation. Though practicality counts but it
is like half
knowledge if no theoretical knowledge is gained. Moreover, theory provides
powerful
tools to deal with the world around us and the body within ourselves. For
example,
medical theories help us combat diseases, economic theories explain
inflation and
unemployment, gravity theory explains the presence of planets. Even
marketing which was
once thought to be purely practical is based on statistical data which
require maths
knowledge.
Those who advocate practical courses say so because today is the era of
computers and
technology. They feel that such subjects have more job opportunities. What
they don’t
take into consideration is that as far as the basic knowledge of such subjects
is there it is all
practical, but if you have to go into computer programming, you need to
have your
mathematical concepts clear.
In my opinion, both practical and theoretical subjects go hand in hand and

each has their
own significance. Theory and practical are interrelated. Theory is the basis
of all practical
knowledge. For example a person becomes a doctor in five and a half years,
which has four
and a half theory plus one year practical. So, for the overall development of
the students a
mix of all subjects should be there.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, both theory and practical
subjects have their
own importance. Both should be incorporated in the school curricula.
Model Answer 2:
Today,what type of courses should students learn become a hot-debated

topic.Some people believe that students only need to learn practical courses
while others hold the opinion that they also need to learn theoretical
courses,for example,geography and math. The idea that learning practical
courses is sufficient for today’s students is probably owing to the fast speed
of development.Those people think that students’ only task is to handle
practical knowledge so that it will be easy for them to do their jobs when
they graduate.Therefore,they can do better work and have higher pay.
However, someone say that students need to learn theoretical courses such
as geography and math. They may think that,in this way,students can have
expanded horizons. Also, if they learn those subjects well,they tend to solve
practical problem easily.
For me, I support the idea that students have the need to learn theoretical
courses .for one reason; those subjects are the foundation of other courses.
Take math for example,many pupils who are doing well in computer always
good at math. For another reason,learning more courses can expand
children’s horizons; their brains contain variety knowledge which will
benefit their future life.People,who learn geography well, not only have the
knowledge of the earth but also can recognize the roads accurately in
unfamiliar places.Finally,having theoretical courses contribute to the
development of science. It is interesting to find that some children who are
interested in learning math or geography finally become famous
scientists.So having theoretical courses provide students the opportunity to
find their hobbies.
In conclusion, no matter practical courses or theoretical courses are of the

same importance. I suggest students should learn theoretical ones in high
school as well as some easy practical courses, and deeply study their majors
when they come to universities or colleges.
Model Answer 3:
With the development of human society, there is an increasing number of

individuals paying attention to our educational system. One issue has been
constantly discussed is whether primary school students should learn more
practical skills or they should learn something theoretical. Personally, I
believe that younger students should learn theoretical knowledge.
Compared with practical skills, theoretical knowledge is easy for primary

students to understand and for them to actually acquire. To be specific,
students may not have the opportunity to practice the skill they acquired in
their normal school lifetime. However, they can easily obtain theoretical
knowledge through the daily lectures or through their textbooks. For
example, students could learn the theory of why the plane can fly through
the teacher’s explanation, but they could never be able to fly a real plane in
their primary school. Besides, understanding the theoretical knowledge is
the foundation of learning practical skills. Without the acknowledgement of
basic theory, one can not practice the relevant skills. Take learning English
as an example. In order to learn how to speak English, learners from non-
English speaking countries have to know and understand the grammar
behind the language. Grammar is the cornerstone of speaking English. No
matter how much one practice, he or she would fail to obtain the language,
unless he or she learns the English grammar first. In addition, some careers
require theoretical knowledge. If, for instance, a student wants to be an
university professor when he or she grow up. Then the student must learn a
lot of theoretical knowledge. Thus, in order to find a job in a particular
area, like the academic world, individual has to be equipped with
theoretical knowledge.
Others may support the statement that primary level students should learn
more practical skills on the ground that it is practical skills that can solve
our daily life problems. They may argue that theory only exists in the book,
yet in real life situation practical skill is the one that can help people to
address their problems. Nevertheless, I still prefer theory than practical
skills, because practical skill can only stop the problem, it cannot forever
prevent or get rid of the problem. On the other hand; however, theoretical
knowledge cannot only solve the problem but also stop it from happening
again. People can acquire the skill so that they can protect themselves from
deadly air pollution. Yet if they understand the theory of why these air
pollution exists and how can geographic factors influence the movement of
air pollution, individuals cannot only protect themselves from the pollution
but also find a way to get rid of the pollution by using more eco-friendly
fuel.
To sum up, although some one may argue that practical skills are more
useful, I think theory is more important in terms of primary education.
Model Answer 4:
While it may seem like a reasonable idea to teach more practical skills to
some school students, it is not as easy as it may seem. Not all students will
need skills such as repairing a car in future life, just as not all students will
go on to study at university. Personally, I do not believe it is necessary for all
students to learn such non-academic skills while at school; however, it may
be beneficial for some students who are maybe not academically inclined.
It may be possible to introduce any additional new subjects at the expense

of some of the other traditional academic subjects for certain students. This
would clearly require some rethinking regarding the concept of what
exactly the school education system should deliver. One of the main
problems is that such skill-based classes present a whole new range of
challenges which education authorities may not be able to meet. For
example, a class or course based on car repair would have to take into
account various brands and models not to mention the increasing
technology incorporated within modern vehicles which in many cases limits
the amount of work or repairs which an owner can carry out on their
vehicle without the necessary equipment available at an authorized dealer
for the brand. The need for such technology resources in order to deliver the
course may be a limiting factor in certain cases.
Schools also need to consider that there are many practical skills which
young people acquire or learn without the need for any formal training,
such as in the case of social media or driving a car. Schools do not educate
children how to navigate or use features of social media nor how to drive a
car or even play computer or console games; however, it is clear that
children learn how to do these things either though their parents, their own
powers of discovery or with their own friends.
Overall, it is more important for schools to ensure that traditional academic

subjects are still relevant and that course and class content is current,
pertinent and engaging for students in today’s world. Arming students with
essential thinking and deductive skills prepares young people for learning
about a whole host of other subjects throughout their life. It is therefore
unnecessary to include such subjects as car repair and managing a bank
account into the standard educational curriculum.
Some people think that in the modern society individuals are becoming
more dependent on each other while others say that individuals are
becoming more independent of each other.
Same Topic –
Sample Answer 1:
Whether we are dependent or independent of each other is difficult to say.

In some cases,
we heavily rely on others but in others, we are quite self-sufficient. In this
essay I intend to
delve into both views and finally give my opinion.
There are times when we are dependent on others. When we are little, we
are cared by
our parents otherwise we would have no access to food, shelter, and
clothing. At the same
time, we are emotionally important to them, so they always remember they
are
responsible for raising us up. When we are grown up, we start to learn at
schools, and then
it is the teachers on whom we rely heavily. When we are employed, we need
to work
closely with our colleagues and our employers also depend on our
productivity.
We are also independent of each other in many ways. We don’t need to go to

the banks.
We can do net-banking sitting at home. We can do online shopping. We
don’t need to go
and depend on salesmen. We can entertain ourselves alone by computer
games and
internet. We can even study at home through online education and distant
education. We
are not dependent on teachers for imparting education. We can book
railway and air
tickets online and are not dependent on booking clerks. We can eat ready to
eat food
available in the market. We are not dependent on somebody in our home to
cook for us.
Whatever arguments we put forth in support of both views, the fact cannot
be denied that
man is a social animal and will always be dependent on others. This
dependence may be
direct or indirect. When we are seemingly independent, we are still
dependent on people
behind the technology. For example, when we do net banking we depend on
all those
software developers who have made it possible for us. When we eat ready to
eat food we
depend on those who cook and pack that food.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that we are all part of a society
and it is not
possible for us not to depend on others. This dependence, however, may be
visible or
invisible.
Model Answer 2:
People have argued about how human live is in the modern days. A group of
people believe that human beings have become more independent these
days, but others think that human are more dependent on their kinds. The
following essay will discuss about both opinions, but in my personal view, I
believe that people have become more independent nowadays.
Several people believe that mankind have become more dependent on each
other these days. Due to the globalization, the cost of living in many
countries has increased significantly in the past recent years which enforce
both husband and wife to work hard, to fulfil their family’s expenditures. As
a result, many families are relying on their parents or baby sitter in taking
care of their children.
On the other hand, some people think that human are more independent
these days. Firstly, due to the rapid development of the medical world, the
average life expectancy of human being has positively improved. As the
senior people are healthier these days, it means that they are less
dependent on their sibling or their children. Secondly, with the existence of
electronic household devices, such as washing and drying machine and
microwave oven, mankind are less dependent on housekeepers. They could
just easily place their dirty clothes on the washing machine or just place the
frozen food on the oven, and it will be ready in instant.
In conclusion, many people think that human beings are more independent
these days, but others disagree with the statement. In my point of view,
mankind are less reliable to others nowadays, since the world has improved
in many ways, such as in the medical field and in information technology.
Model Answer 3:
People have different views about whether we are more or less dependent
on others nowadays. In my view, modern life forces us to be more
independent than people were in the past.
There are two main reasons why it could be argued that we are more
dependent on each other now. Firstly, life is more complex and difficult,
especially because the cost of living has increased so dramatically. For
example, young adults tend to rely on their parents for help when buying a
house. Property prices are higher than ever, and without help it would be
impossible for many people to pay a deposit and a mortgage. Secondly,
people seem to be more ambitious nowadays, and they want a better
quality of life for their families. This means that both parents usually need
to work full-time, and they depend on support from grandparents and
babysitters for child care.
However, I would agree with those who believe that people are more
independent these days. In most countries, families are becoming smaller
and more dispersed, which means that people cannot count on relatives as
much as they used to. We also have more freedom to travel and live far
away from our home towns. For example, many students choose to study
abroad instead of going to their local university, and this experience makes
them more independent as they learn to live alone. Another factor in this
growing independence is technology, which allows us to work alone and
from any part of the world.
In conclusion, while there are some reasons to believe that people now
depend on each other more, my own view is that we are more independent
than ever.
Model Answer 4:
It is true that human beings’ lives have witnessed dramatic changes in this
day and age. Whereas many people believe that dependence is a new trend
in the modern world, others reject this notion, holding a totally opposite
opinion. Presented below are several factors that account for the stark
contrast between these two perspectives.
On the one hand, there are a number of reasons associated with the reliance
on each other in recent years. Firstly, co-operation is a must since our jobs
are becoming more complicated and specialised. For instance, in a typical
marketing team, there must be a leader, who supervises and delegates the
tasks, a plan writer, a researching specialist and so on. No doubt this
specialisation brings about various benefits, ranging from time-saving to
cost-efficiency, and therefore the ability to work in teams is a common
requirement at the workplace.. Secondly, the unemployed rely on state
budget. Apparently, recent economic crises have resulted in an increase in
the number of the jobless. As a consequence, the gorvernments must provide
them with financial support to prevent social instability.
On the other hand, many may argue that people are more independent for
certain reasons. The prevalence of the Internet could be one of the primary
causes leading to this situation. Thanks to enormous virtual database,
people can easily find solutions for their problems without any help.
Additionally, the fact that modern citizens tend to live in nuclear families or
in small units is another justification. As young adults are encouraged to
live individually, they have to make the own decisions. This newborn trend
definitely promotes the independence among people.
All in all, whether people are becoming more autonomous or not should be
seen in different aspects before reaching a conclusion. However, I think that
our independence on each other is far more prevalent and it may retain its
popularity in the future.
Model Answer 5:
The world is considered to change a lot day by day. People around the world
become more educated than previous days and they are learning how to
live on their own to avoid dependency on others.
Firstly, while considering the older generation, they were not educated
people on an average, mostly they did not know how to read and write.
They needed to take help from others to write letters, legal documents and
read letters, newspapers, documents etc. Secondly, older people believed
that children should take care of them while they become old. And children
also took responsibility to look after old people. So parents were more
dependent on children. Thirdly, parents used to pampered children in older
generation, for example, mother took care of homes as father worked
outside to bring up family financially, so children were more dependent
until they graduated from university, even children did not think about
doing a part-time job to earn money, since the father took care of financial
matters.
On the other hand looking into the modern world or generation, almost all
of the people are educated and they do not depend on others to write or
read. Older people in the modern world are not dependent on their children.
They are planning what to do after their retirement to avoid dependency on
their children. However they are considering going to nursing home if they
are not well. Parents in the modern world are teaching the children from
childhood onwards how to take care of themselves, since both parents
working as full time, so that children can learn how to live on their won.
Most of the children from 15years onwards are doing part-time jobs to earn
and support their expenses.
To sum up, in my point of view, in modern world people are not at all
dependent on each other; everybody knows how to live on their own.
Some people think the main benefit of international cooperation is in

protection of the environment, while others think that the main benefit is in
the world business.
Same Topic –
Sample Answer 1:
Today we do not belong to a big planet Earth. We are part of a global

village. This has lead
to a greater need for international cooperation in many crucial issues such
as poverty,
starvation, environmental protection, terrorism and global warming. Some
individuals are
of the opinion that the main benefit of global cooperation has been in
protection of the
environment, but others hold the view that the main benefit is in
international trade. In
this essay I intend to delve into both views and finally give my opinion.
International cooperation does contribute a lot in environmental
protection. First of all
many governments have realized that it is a grave issue and have taken
steps to aware the
masses of the simple steps they can take to save the environment. Then, the
Kyoto
agreement was signed by many countries in the United Nations Charter
that they would
not set up any industry which would emit more than 5.2% carbon dioxide.
The role international cooperation in world business is self evident. Today,

we can buy any
foreign brand like Reebok and Nike in our country and our Indian brands
like Videocon
have touched the international market. This has brought the economy of
developing
countries quite close to the developed ones.
In my opinion, although a lot has been done in both areas, a lot more needs
to be done in
the field of environment. The steps already taken are not enough and the
governments
need to tackle this issue on a war-footing. The rate at which global
warming is occurring
will transform the whole Earth into a boiling pot one day and leave it un-
inhabitable.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, international co-operation

has benefited the
world business much more than the environment.
Model Answer 2:
Nowadays, countries like to maintain strong and healthy relationship with

each others for several reasons. Many people argue that environment issues
such as global warming, preservation of natural habitat of rare species and
detrimental effect of nuclear energy could only be solved with mutual
efforts. Others claim that nations join hands in order to achieve lucrative
business opportunities around the globe.
There is no denying that global warming is the biggest threat to the

environment. That should be tackle on emergency basis, one of the reason is
that a large numbers of people are exploring and exploiting natural
resources for the sake of their own benefits, which is damaging the
environment on larger extent. Many countries have setup organizations
that are researching on the causes and will proposed solutions to the
problems. They are expecting to form some standards and legislation based
on their research that would help on depletion of such issues.
On the other hand, many international food and hotel chains are expanding
worldwide that are the source of employment for many people in
developing countries. Another big advantage is to get potential labours in
cheap rate, for example, biggest giant of information technology ‘Apple’ has
all its production in China because of low wages of workers and free if cost
electricity provided by the Chinese government, thus tremendously helping
both countries, as apple has low production cost and thus have huge profit
margins, while people of china are getting jobs and their government are
enjoying tax on the development and sales of each item of products,.
To sum up, I would like to say that international cooperation is essential for
the mutual benefits of countries, thus has significant positive effects on their
economy and also create new horizon of opportunities for their people.
Model Answer 3:
Currently, when borders between countries have gradually become blurred

for the purpose ofcultural and economic exchange, international cooperatio
n has been reinforced within variousindustries. There is a fierce debate over
who is the primary beneficiary of such collaboration.While some experts vot
e for world business, protection of environment is supported byothers. View
s on this issue vary greatly.
To start with, one point which I believe to be vitally important is the fact tha
t theestablishment of emission trade scheme hinges on multinational coope
ration. It is generallyaccepted that some major pollutant countries endeavo
r to minimize their waste emission bytrading permits of emission with coun
tries without such needs to emit toxic gas, which notonly effectively curbs th
e proliferation of over-emission, but also strengthen the ties betweenthe ma
in polluters and other countries for the sake of balanced emission strategy.F
urthermore, international collaboration plays a significant role in addressi
ng severeenvironmental problems in the impoverished regions over the wor
ld. There is a wide range ofsource of funds dedicated by the affluent nations
in order to facilitate the environmentcampaign and the construction of esse
ntial infrastructures. Therefore, domestic environmentindeed benefits from
these international aids and donation.
However, cross-
border cooperation in terms of commerce and business has also contributed
to international market boom. One salient example of this is Apple company
, apple, as themost creative and productive manufacturer of smartphones, i
mplements its supply chain byutilizing Chinese labor. Apparently, there is n
o doubt that the labor and manufacturing costwill be reduced substantially.
Thus, it can be clearly seen that multinational business highlyprofits from s
uch collaboration, especially at the labor and intelligence (managerialperso
nnel) level.
By way of conclusion,
I firmly believe that cooperation among different nations is a key tosucceed
for both environment preservation and international business. Since the Int
ernet anddigital devices tend to flourish, an increasing number of people as
well as companies wouldtake advantage of it and make tomorrow better.
Model Answer 4:
We live in a global village where international cooperation is the key for

achieving several global goals, particularly improving environment and
boosting trade and commerce. However, some people believe that global
concurrence contributes chiefly to protecting environment. In contrast,
others oppose that and infer that the collaboration expands business
globally. In my opinion, it benefits to extending business more than
protecting environment.
It goes without saying that international cooperation plays a paramount

role in environmental protection. In fact, environmental issues are
transboundary in nature. So, domestic step alone is not sufficient to fully
address environmental issues. Here, the nations are exchanging improved
sets of climatological, meteorological, and environmental satellite data in
order for quelling the environmental concerns. In addition, the developed
countries share eco-friendly technologies with developing countries. These
sophisticated technologies improve environment substantially.
Similarly, international collaboration has changed the business landscape

radically. It fuels the potentials of trade and investment on a global scale.
Global cooperation entices nations to sign trade pacts through economic
diplomacy is the driving force for expanding trade and commerce
worldwide. Besides, the affluent nations invest on infrastructural
development in developing countries. This also greatly contributes to the
expansion of international business. Apart from that, the wealthy nations
supply technologies that also contribute to the expansion of business. Most
importantly, international cooperation overcomes cultural differences,
language barriers, tension between nations, and so forth, which by
consequence boosts international trade and commerce.
In a nutshell, international cooperation plays a vital role in protecting

environment and expanding international business. While it greatly
contributes to protecting environment, the predominant benefit of it is
worldwide business expansion.
Model Answer 5:
Since the inception of the United Nations the term ‘international co-
operation’ is creating a buzz. This is made clearer with the number of
organizations sprouting-up supporting international alliance. On the one
hand, it is believed that saving the environment is the main advantage of
tie-ups between countries. On the other hand, it is argued that
intercontinental business is the major benefit of world co-operation. Both
arguments will be critiqued before reaching a conclusion.
It is felt by many that international coalition helps to curb environmental
pollution. For example, Kyoto protocol was signed by 191 countries to work
together to halt the progression of climate change. Now, these countries
work harder to reduce the emission of green house gases from industries
and vehicles. Also, they are introducing stricter rules and regulations to
manage the environmental issues. This example clearly shows that
collaborative approach aids in nature preservation. It is easy to see why this
argument has amassed a lot of support.
Others believe that global co-operation contributes to the development of

trade. For instance, American company, Apple markets iPhone all over the
world. Flexible trading regulations have made it possible. Moreover,
business outsourcing has created more jobs for people in developing
countries. This illustration proves the perks of global symbiosis on world
commerce. Thus, this concept is hard to ignore.
After analyzing these ideas, it is believed that international synergism

contributes impartially towards the development of world business and
environmental conservation. Undoubtedly, these collaborations would bring
in changes in other sectors as well.
Some people support development of agriculture, like factory farming and

scientific creation of fruits and vegetables, while others oppose.
Same Topic –

Sample Answer 1:

place in
agriculture which we could not even think of earlier. It is a highly debated
issue as to
whether the growth of this industry is a blessing or a curse. This essay shall
delve into the
merits and demerits of these developments.
On the positive side, farmers now have a wide range of selection, in terms of
seeding,
irrigation and use of pesticides and fertilizers. Secondly, technology has
saved people from
tedious work and in the mean time increased the production markedly. All
this is needed to
meet the demands of the burgeoning population.
Furthermore, genetic modification of foods has given us such species which

need little or no
insecticides and no fertilizers. The quality of food has also improved. For
example, fish gene
has been added to tomato to make it frost resistant. A nut protein has been
added to soya
bean to increase the protein content. Finally, factory farming, in which
animals are fed
nicely so as to increase their meat, is also the need of the hour.
On the downside, such technology has reduced the need for manpower and
many people
are now jobless. Moreover, factory farming is considered inhuman. Animals
are tightly
packed in cramped spaces and this may lead to many diseases. Genetic
modification is also
considered unnatural and as it is relatively new, people are also concerned
about its long
term harmful effects. Last but not least, the rich countries can use this
technology and
further increase the gap between the rich and the poor.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that as every garden has weeds,
such
developments have their pros and cons. We should know where to draw the
line and take
maximum advantage of this technology minimizing its harmful effects.
Model Answer 2:
A group of people believe that scientific approaches and advanced

technology in agriculture activities brings a lot of benefits for societies,
while others still maintain traditional ways. Both views have their own
advantages and disadvantages, and the following essay will discuss in
details, but in my personal opinion, I do believe that the old fashioned ways
is better.
On the one hand, many farmers are using technology and scientific
approaches on managing their farms these days. They believe that by using
technology such as tractors and dozers, or using advanced chemical
fertilizer, it will increase their productivity. However, many people do not
realize that the usage of these advanced technology approaches have side
effects on many things. For example, many fruits and vegetables that use
pesticides have caused allergic diseases for human beings. And then, the
over usage of pesticides in farming has made pests became more immune
and made the ecosystem became imbalance.
On the other hand, some farmers are still using the old fashioned ways.
They manage their plantations using traditional tools such as using cows,
horses and traditional carts. And they prefer to use natural seeds, rather
than using special seeds, which was created by scientists. Although the
productivity of these farms is definitely lower, they generate healthier foods
for mankind. As a result, many people prefer to purchase organic fruits and
vegetables nowadays, as they realize that qualities of these organic foods
are better than the industrialized ones.
In conclusion, it is a fact that some farmers are in favor of using advanced

technology and scientific approaches in handling their farms, while others
still use the traditional ways. Both approaches have their own benefits and
drawbacks, but in my opinion, traditional ways are still better than the
modern one, as organic foods are healthier for consumption.
Model Answer 3:
In the present age, agriculture innovations are playing significant roles in

our daily life.But in the meantime, whether people reform agriculture has
sparked much debate.Some people assert that they can benefit from the
expanding in farming factories while others argue that developing
agriculture has an adverse effect on them. Personally, I am in favor of the
former.
Convincing arguments can made that agricultural innovations can make

people achieve a greater standard of living than before. To start with,there
are amount of vegetables and fruits in the market with factory
farming.Therefore,it is convenient for local residents to buy fresh vegetables
in daily life.Moreover,an increasing number of new types of vegetables and
fruits is coming in the supermarket or market.Specifically,people can
improve their meals in the lunch and supper to digest more nutrition with
new types of vegetables and fruits. Lastly, developing agriculture has a
beneficial effect on farmers.In other words,the measure taken by the related
department to promote the development of farming benefits peanuts.The
farmers can profit from the policy.
On the other hand,colorable arguments can made that the development in

agriculture has side effects on society.The reason for this is that the quality
of new types of vegetables and types which are created by the biologists in
the laboratory cannot be guaranteed at this time.Obviously,adverse effects
about creations of new types of greenstuff had been reported in the media
three years ago.Even so,factory farming has made a contribution to the
living of farmers.For instance,farmers have achieved a higher standard of
living and eating than before without doing heavy work to support their
families.
In summary,I would concede that transformed-gene food,to some

content,has not been guaranteed by scientists.Despite that people can
benefit from the development of farming.Overall,I am convinced that
government should invest more money in the farming area to improve the
life of farmers.
Model Answer 4:
As far as agricultural development is concerned, along with rapidly

scientific development and population increasing and global climate
change. Agricultural produce is now facing a big problem with lack of food,
which is becoming more and more serious and there are many reasons for
it.
My opinion is that those factors have caused some problems of food. Some
people try to scientifically create food and earn benefits. It also can solve
the problem of food shortages. However, these ways may cause some
problems. People consider these ways to be an impact on traditional
agriculture, and also the scientific food may be unfavorable to people’s
health. Traditional agriculture can’t compete with factory farming, because
their skill is behind those factories and it affect their income. Confronted
with these agricultural questions, we should take a serious affective
measures to cope with this serious situation.
Nowadays, more and more people beginning to become aware of the

seriousness of the lacked food. Agricultural creation of food has become a
hot topic among people, and heated debated are on there ways. Some
people hold the opinion that scientific creation of food is superior in many
ways. Others, however, disagree. The most obvious reason for this
phenomenon is that some scientifically create food may hurt human’s
health, such that it may affect people’s DNA, cause diseases and so on.
Everything has twos sides and the scientific food is not exception. It has
both its advantages and its disadvantage. It is an urgent for people to seek
an answer to this serious argument. If people are blind this point, they
could suffer the serious consequence in the future.
Model Answer 5:
In an age of overpopulation, many agriculture methods that have been

unthinkable before can now be adopted, such as factory farming and
inventing new types of fruits and vegetables. Many stand for this, whilst
many others oppose it. Personally, I believe the relevant advantages
override disadvantages, and my reasons would be explored as below.
Proponents argue that traditional agriculture has always been slow and
lack of efficiency in mass production of food, which is already a serious
problem in many countries. In comparison, factory farming can be very
profitable since we can just get rid of the impact from climatic factors and
pest invasion, thus every drop of nutrition can be utilized for every grain of
food. Besides, new varieties of plant created by geneticists, like more high-
yielding crops, can be the root solution for the starvation and malnutrition
worldwide. Besides, with the technology of greenhouse, the production of
green vegetables and fruits is always available in all seasons. By this way,
people can have well-balanced and healthy diets even in so-called “bad
periods”, including winters or springs in which traditional plants grow up
barely.
Opponents list the harm of factory production of agriculture, ranging from

genetic disaster to the overuse of fertilizers. For them, the concern of
natural and organic food is above all other factors, they can even ignore the
high price of fruits and vegetable, only if they are organic and grown in the
field, that may mean safety even to the genetic level.
I personally agree with the former. As we can easily see, human population
has been explosively growing in the last half century, much faster than any
period of history. Traditional modes of agriculture may be just too slow to
monotonous to fulfill the appetite of us. Ergo, the trend from the field to the
workshops just cannot be resisted.
Some people think students should learn more practical courses like
computer, but others think they should learn more about theoretical
courses like geography and mathematics.
Same Topic – Some people think kids should learn more practical skills
from classes for their future career. However, others believe that in primary
level, they should learn something theoretical for a good foundation for
their future development. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.
Sample Answer 1:
The debate on whether theoretical subjects are more important or practical

are more
important has been raging for ages. Some individuals are of the opinion
that pupils should
be taught more practical courses like computers but others hold the view
that theoretical
subjects are more important. In this essay I intend to discuss both views and
finally give my
opinion.
Those in favour of theoretical courses say that to be practically successful

we need to have
a strong and solid theoretical foundation. Though practicality counts but it
is like half
knowledge if no theoretical knowledge is gained. Moreover, theory provides
powerful
tools to deal with the world around us and the body within ourselves. For
example,
medical theories help us combat diseases, economic theories explain
inflation and
unemployment, gravity theory explains the presence of planets. Even
marketing which was
once thought to be purely practical is based on statistical data which
require maths
knowledge.
Those who advocate practical courses say so because today is the era of
computers and
technology. They feel that such subjects have more job opportunities. What
they don’t
take into consideration is that as far as the basic knowledge of such subjects
is there it is all
practical, but if you have to go into computer programming, you need to
have your
mathematical concepts clear.
In my opinion, both practical and theoretical subjects go hand in hand and

each has their
own significance. Theory and practical are interrelated. Theory is the basis
of all practical
knowledge. For example a person becomes a doctor in five and a half years,
which has four
and a half theory plus one year practical. So, for the overall development of
the students a
mix of all subjects should be there.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, both theory and practical
subjects have their
own importance. Both should be incorporated in the school curricula.
Model Answer 2:
Today,what type of courses should students learn become a hot-debated

topic.Some people believe that students only need to learn practical courses
while others hold the opinion that they also need to learn theoretical
courses,for example,geography and math. The idea that learning practical
courses is sufficient for today’s students is probably owing to the fast speed
of development.Those people think that students’ only task is to handle
practical knowledge so that it will be easy for them to do their jobs when
they graduate.Therefore,they can do better work and have higher pay.
However, someone say that students need to learn theoretical courses such
as geography and math. They may think that,in this way,students can have
expanded horizons. Also, if they learn those subjects well,they tend to solve
practical problem easily.
For me, I support the idea that students have the need to learn theoretical
courses .for one reason; those subjects are the foundation of other courses.
Take math for example,many pupils who are doing well in computer always
good at math. For another reason,learning more courses can expand
children’s horizons; their brains contain variety knowledge which will
benefit their future life.People,who learn geography well, not only have the
knowledge of the earth but also can recognize the roads accurately in
unfamiliar places.Finally,having theoretical courses contribute to the
development of science. It is interesting to find that some children who are
interested in learning math or geography finally become famous
scientists.So having theoretical courses provide students the opportunity to
find their hobbies.
In conclusion, no matter practical courses or theoretical courses are of the

same importance. I suggest students should learn theoretical ones in high
school as well as some easy practical courses, and deeply study their majors
when they come to universities or colleges.
Model Answer 3:
With the development of human society, there is an increasing number of

individuals paying attention to our educational system. One issue has been
constantly discussed is whether primary school students should learn more
practical skills or they should learn something theoretical. Personally, I
believe that younger students should learn theoretical knowledge.
Compared with practical skills, theoretical knowledge is easy for primary
students to understand and for them to actually acquire. To be specific,
students may not have the opportunity to practice the skill they acquired in
their normal school lifetime. However, they can easily obtain theoretical
knowledge through the daily lectures or through their textbooks. For
example, students could learn the theory of why the plane can fly through
the teacher’s explanation, but they could never be able to fly a real plane in
their primary school. Besides, understanding the theoretical knowledge is
the foundation of learning practical skills. Without the acknowledgement of
basic theory, one can not practice the relevant skills. Take learning English
as an example. In order to learn how to speak English, learners from non-
English speaking countries have to know and understand the grammar
behind the language. Grammar is the cornerstone of speaking English. No
matter how much one practice, he or she would fail to obtain the language,
unless he or she learns the English grammar first. In addition, some careers
require theoretical knowledge. If, for instance, a student wants to be an
university professor when he or she grow up. Then the student must learn a
lot of theoretical knowledge. Thus, in order to find a job in a particular
area, like the academic world, individual has to be equipped with
theoretical knowledge.
Others may support the statement that primary level students should learn
more practical skills on the ground that it is practical skills that can solve
our daily life problems. They may argue that theory only exists in the book,
yet in real life situation practical skill is the one that can help people to
address their problems. Nevertheless, I still prefer theory than practical
skills, because practical skill can only stop the problem, it cannot forever
prevent or get rid of the problem. On the other hand; however, theoretical
knowledge cannot only solve the problem but also stop it from happening
again. People can acquire the skill so that they can protect themselves from
deadly air pollution. Yet if they understand the theory of why these air
pollution exists and how can geographic factors influence the movement of
air pollution, individuals cannot only protect themselves from the pollution
but also find a way to get rid of the pollution by using more eco-friendly
fuel.
To sum up, although some one may argue that practical skills are more
useful, I think theory is more important in terms of primary education.
Model Answer 4:
While it may seem like a reasonable idea to teach more practical skills to
some school students, it is not as easy as it may seem. Not all students will
need skills such as repairing a car in future life, just as not all students will
go on to study at university. Personally, I do not believe it is necessary for all
students to learn such non-academic skills while at school; however, it may
be beneficial for some students who are maybe not academically inclined.
It may be possible to introduce any additional new subjects at the expense

of some of the other traditional academic subjects for certain students. This
would clearly require some rethinking regarding the concept of what
exactly the school education system should deliver. One of the main
problems is that such skill-based classes present a whole new range of
challenges which education authorities may not be able to meet. For
example, a class or course based on car repair would have to take into
account various brands and models not to mention the increasing
technology incorporated within modern vehicles which in many cases limits
the amount of work or repairs which an owner can carry out on their
vehicle without the necessary equipment available at an authorized dealer
for the brand. The need for such technology resources in order to deliver the
course may be a limiting factor in certain cases.
Schools also need to consider that there are many practical skills which
young people acquire or learn without the need for any formal training,
such as in the case of social media or driving a car. Schools do not educate
children how to navigate or use features of social media nor how to drive a
car or even play computer or console games; however, it is clear that
children learn how to do these things either though their parents, their own
powers of discovery or with their own friends.
Overall, it is more important for schools to ensure that traditional academic

subjects are still relevant and that course and class content is current,
pertinent and engaging for students in today’s world. Arming students with
essential thinking and deductive skills prepares young people for learning
about a whole host of other subjects throughout their life. It is therefore
unnecessary to include such subjects as car repair and managing a bank
account into the standard educational curriculum.
( Similar Topic: Some people think that universities should provide
graduates with the knowledge and skills needed in the work place. Others
think that the true function of a university should be to give access to
knowledge for its own sake, regardless of whether the course is useful to an
employer.
What, in your opinion, should be the main function of a university?)
graduates with the knowledge and skills needed in the work place. Others
think that the true function of a university should be to give access to
knowledge for its own sake, regardless of whether the course is useful to an
employer.
What, in your opinion, should be the main function of a university?)
2. Some people say that parents should control their children’s

behavior
3. Some people say that subjects like arts, music, drama and creative
writing

environmental responsibility
5. The world would be a much poorer place without colour
6. Tobacco is a kind of drug. People have been free ….
7. Wild animals have no place in the 21st century…
8. People try new dangerous sports such as sky-diving ………
9. Some people say that the government should not put money on
building theatres
10. The computers are widely used in education and some people think
that teachers
11. Everyone should stay in school until the age of eighteen…
12. Mothers generally stay home to take care of their children after
pregnancy
13. In companies, promotions to high positions should be given to

employees
14. Animals should be kept in men made cells
15. Students at schools and universities learn far more from lessons
16. Some people think the government should pay for health care and
education
17. Do you agree or that improvements in technology reduce the role
18. Food can be produced much more cheaply today because of

improved fertilisers
19. Leisure is a growing industry, but people no longer entertain

themselves
20. The advantages brought by the spread of English as a global

language
21. The government is responsible for protecting a nations cultural

identity
22. Sending criminals to prison is not the best method of dealing with
them
23. Many employees may work at home with the modern technology
24. Some people think that the news media nowadays have influenced
peoples
25. The detailed description about crime will affect the people and
cause many
26. Some people think that people moving to a new country should
accept new
27. Children who grow up in families which are short of money are
better
28. The only way to improve the safety on our own road is to have
stricter
29. The speeding up of life in many areas such as travel and

communication
30. Advertising encourages consumers to buy in quantity rather than

promoting
31. The main purpose of public libraries is to provide books
32. Many people believe that scientific research should be carried out
33. It is more important for a building to serve a purpose than to look

beautiful
34. Some people believe they should keep all the money they have
earned
35. Some people believe that air travel should be restricted because
36. One long-distance flight consumes fuel which a car uses in several
years
37. In the last century when a human astronaut first arrived on the
Moon
38. Housing shortage in big cities can cause severe social

consequences
39. The best way to solve the world’s environmental problem is to

increase
40. It is better for students at university to live far away from home
41. Earlier technological developments brought more benefits and

changed
42. In order to learn a language well, we should also learn about the
country
43. Multi-cultural societies, in which there is a mixture of different

ethnic peoples
44. Some people think the main purpose of schools is to turn the
children into good
45. A country becomes more interesting and develops more quickly

when its population
46. Throughout the history, male leaders always lead us to violence
and conflict
47. Individuals can do nothing to improve the environment Only

governments
48. Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer

technology
49. With the increase in the use of mobile phones and computers,
fewer people
50. The society would benefit from a ban on all forms of advertising
because
51. Some people claim that public museums and art galleries
52. In many countries traditional foods are being replaced
53. In the past, lectures were used as a way of teaching large numbers
of students
54. As we are facing more and more problems which affect the whole
planet
55. Team activities can teach more skills for life than those activities
56. Some people say that it is the responsibility of individual to save

money
57. Today’s children are living under more pressure from the society
58. The government should pay for the course fees for everyone
59. Nowadays, a large amount of advertising is aimed at children

precious
lives
live
66. Teachers used to convey information, but now with wide resources
of information

classes
the public
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample Answer

Many students have to study subjects which they do not like. Some people
think this is a complete waste of time. Do you agree or disagree with this
statement?Sample Answer 1:
In today’s competitive world, a broad knowledge is needed to succeed in any

field. Therefore, I disagree that it is a waste of time if students study subjects
which are not of their interest.
Let us first examine the reasons why some people hold the opinion that
students should not have to study all the subjects and should be allowed to
choose the subjects they want to study. They opine that in this case the
students will probably be more enthusiastic about their study. In
addition, if students are forced to study all subjects, they can easily lose
interest in education. What is more, if all subjects are compulsory for
studying, students will not have enough time to learn all of them properly
therefore they will be constantly under a lot of pressure.
However, I believe all subjects are of great importance and for the holistic
development of the students they need to study all subjects equally at school
level. Later on, during admission to the colleges, students can select the
subjects of their choice and can explore them further.
At that age they are mature enough to decide their subjects for themselves. At
school level the student may not know what his real interests are.
Furthermore, nowadays, the job market is very demanding and the recruiters
select students who are skilled in various fields. Having the basic knowledge
of varied subjects during school time definitely widens the horizons for the
students. To add to it, it is a well
known fact that most subjects are related to each other in some way or the
other. For example, a basic knowledge of mathematics is needed to excel in
computer languages. Finally, I believe that it is up to the teachers to develop
interest of the students in any subject. For instance, during my school days,
my history teacher was so good that a boring subject like history was the
favourite subject of the whole class.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, students should learn all
subjects at school level as they are not mature enough to know their real
interests at school level and a broad knowledge is also needed for their
holistic development.
2. Some people say that parents should control their children’s behavior
Some people say that parents should control their children’s behavior from
a very young age. What do you think?
I definitely agree with the view. Young children are beginners. They have lots
to learn and one of the biggest lessons they must learn is to behave or act in
an acceptable manner. So parents have the onus of instilling the best values in
their children. They must do so from a
really young age because a little late may be too late.
Firstly, restrictions create responsible and respectful children who, in turn,

mature into respectful adults. They know the value of respect for others. They
know the importance of relationships. They know their cultural values as
well. They know their boundaries.
Moreover, children are like sponges which very easily absorb what is taught
to them. If you teach them good values, they will imbibe them. If parents
don’t realize their role and don’t bother much, children will learn from other
sources like TV and the people around them.
They learn whatever they see and observe and if no one tells them at an early
age what is wrong and what is right, they may learn vulgarity and violence.
Later on parents may find it impossible to make them unlearn those things.
Furthermore, if parents don’t control their children’s behavior from a very

young age, they may fall into bad company. They may start taking drugs
under peer pressure. Once children become drug addicts, it is very difficult to
bring them to normalcy once again.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, parents are responsible for
bringing children into this world and it is their responsibility for instilling
good behavior in them. So, the earlier they do so the better. If they keep
waiting, things may go out of hand.
3. Some people say that subjects like arts, music, drama and creative
writing
Some people say that subjects like arts, music, drama and creative writing
are more
beneficial to children and therefore they need more of these subjects to be
included in the timetable. Do you agree or disagree?
Arts have little or no place in the educational curriculum so far because we

have a feeling that time spent on these things is time wasted. Recent studies,
however, have shown that a good curriculum that includes arts education can
have multiple benefits which I shall highlight in this essay.
The most important benefit of arts in schools is that it contributes to making a

well rounded student. Not only that, certain forms of arts instruction enhance
and complement academic skills such as basic reading skills, language
development and writing skills. So, children do
well in other subjects also.
Another big advantage is that it encourages the pursuit of extra-curricular

activities. Children get a chance to show their creative expression. When such
hidden abilities are exposed in school time then those with exceptional talent
can be encouraged to adopt it as a profession later-on in life. It is a well
known fact that people in such professions are earning telephone figure
salaries nowadays.
Last but not least, such subjects are stress-busters. In the highly competitive
era of today, pressure of academic subjects is too high. Arts like music, drama
and creative writing break the monotony of tough academic studies.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that our educational curriculum
needs a serious revision and more of such subjects need to be added to the
school curriculum. They complement academic study, bring out hidden talent
and break the ennui of tough academic studies.

environmental responsibility while others believe that tourists should
not accept any responsibility at all. To what extent do you agree or
disagree?
It is irrefutable that tourism industry has become the backbone of many

economies of the world. No wonder all countries are opening their doors to
tourists. The negative social and
environmental impacts of tourism have led many to suggest that tourists
should accept responsibility for this. I definitely agree with this notion. Eco-
tourism, sustainable-tourism, responsible-tourism, modern-tourism or
whatever name you may like to give it, is the need
of the hour. In the following paragraphs, I intend to put forth my arguments to
support my view
The most important reason why tourists should be responsible is that many
tourist destinations are endangered now because of the litter and pollution
spread by the tourists. For example, the Sukhna Lake in Chandigarh, which is
a popular tourist spot, once got so
badly damaged by the wrappers and plastic bottles which tourists threw that
no boating could be done there and it smelled so bad that people stopped
going there. It took months
to get it cleaned up and restore tourism there. The local people and the
governments cannot handle such situation effectively unless the tourists
themselves lend a hand by being careful.
Secondly, there is over-consumption of resources by tourists such as of water
and fuel and this is incompatible with sustainable development. Tourist
demand for resources such as water and food may also compete with the
needs of local people and may lead to injustice
with the locals. For example, in Shimla, a popular hill station, tourists stay in
five star accommodations and take two showers a day where as the people
outside are short of drinking water. To add to it many tourism activities such
as skiing, boating, motorised water-
sports, and trekking represent a stress to fragile ecosystems. Who will
welcome the tourists to those places if tourists don’t accept responsibility?
Instead of five star accommodations, they could live with the locals and be
satisfied with one shower a day.
Finally, if tourists do not respect the local people’s culture and environment,
then the natives would be hostile towards them and the whole purpose of
tourism would be lost. For example, in our religious places, it is customary to
cover our head and take off our shoes. If
tourists don’t do so they would not be welcome by our people there. So, the
onus is on the tourist to know beforehand the norms of the place and
fortunately nowadays, everything is available on the net or one can get all
information from the tour operators. Responsible tourism is everyone’s
responsibility. The well being of the destination is not only the responsibility
of the tourism sector – it is also the responsibility of the tourist. That is why it
has rightly been said that – ‘ A good tourist is one who leaves behind nothing,
but footprints; and takes away nothing, but photographs.
Tobacco is a kind of drug. People have been free to use it. Some people
think that it
should be illegal to use it comparing with other drugs. To what extent do
you agree or
disagree? What is your opinion?
Every year, thousands of people worldwide die from both smoking tobacco
and involuntarily breathing it in. Despite this, I do not agree that it should be
made illegal. However, I also believe that there should be a regulation on its
use, considering its harms to health. In the
following paragraphs, I shall put forth my arguments to support my views.
It is irrefutable that tobacco products, especially cigarettes, could cause lung
cancer, heart disease, and other illnesses. Drug abuse also has many
potentially harmful effects not only on individuals but also on family, friends,
work and society. Frequent drug users may turn to
crime to meet the increasing expense for their habit. Continued drug use may
cause personality changes. Some users lose interest in school or work, or have
difficulty meeting the responsibilities of a job or family.
Nonetheless, it costs society far more to prohibit a drug than it does to
regulate it. And I’m not talking about just money. Prohibition creates
organized crime, and with it you get street wars, and police corruption. With
more violence comes more police, and that means more cost. Regulation on
the other hand, works quite well. The government should decide who gets to
make it, who sells it, and who it is sold to. There should be controls on tobacc
regarding potency, packaging, advertising, and a lot of other things. This is
definitely better than banning a drug which leads to organized crime.
Moreover, tobacco has long been a source of money for the governments in
many countries. This income comes from taxes on the manufactured products.
Excise taxes also
come from tobacco that arrives from other countries. Finally, I believe that it
is better to educate people about the harms of tobacco. This approach has
worked better in many countries and there has been a reduction in the sale of
tobacco products.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, banning tobacco is not a good
idea. Drug prohibition has been the most failed social policy and banning
tobacco is a step backwards. However, there should be control on the
manufacturing and sale of tobacco.
Sample Answer 2: (For banning)
Every year, thousands of people worldwide die from both smoking tobacco
and involuntarily breathing it in. Therefore, I agree that it should be made
illegal considering its harms to health. In the following paragraphs, I shall put
forth my arguments to support my views.
It is irrefutable that tobacco products, especially cigarettes, could cause lung

cancer, heart disease, and other illnesses. Smoking tobacco kills more than
alcohol, drug abuse, car crashes, murders, suicides, and fires combined.
World-wide some 3 million people die from smoking each year, 1 every 10
seconds. Smokers are more than 20 times more likely to develop lung cancer
than non-smokers, and smoking can lead to a host of other health problems,
including emphysema and heart disease.
The detrimental effects of cigarette smoke are not just on the active smoker,
but also on the passive smoker. Smoking tobacco not only gives the smoker a
high chance of an early grave it gives those around him/her the same chances
due to second hand smoke. What is more, a child born to a woman who has
actively or passively smoked during pregnancy has chances of developing
congenital defects.
Drug abuse also has many potentially harmful effects not only on individuals
but also on family, friends, work and society. Frequent drug users may turn to
crime to meet the increasing expense for their habit. Continued drug use may
cause personality changes. Some users lose interest in school or work, or have
difficulty meeting the responsibilities of a job or family.
In conclusion, I believe that, one of the main responsibilities of any

government is to ensure the safety of its population, that is why taking
tobacco should be made illegal.
Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, and the protection is a
waste of resources. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Sample Answer 1:
I disagree with the notion that wild animals are redundant in the current
century and therefore we need not waste our precious resources in protecting
them. I believe that the conservation of these species should be our top
priority as they are our most precious resources. In the following paragraphs I
shall put forth my arguments to support my views.
The most important reason for saving wild animals is that they are part of our
ecosystem. Every species of wildlife plays a role to maintain the balance of
life on Earth. Thus, the loss of any species can affect us directly or indirectly.
Let us consider species to be like a brick in the foundation of a building. We
can probably lose one or two or a dozen bricks and still
have a standing house. But by the time we have lost 20 per cent of species, we
are going to destabilize the entire structure. That’s the way ecosystems work.
Secondly, wild animals provide many valuable substances such as medicine
and fur. The horn of the rhinoceros has medicinal value and the fur of the
mink is very valuable. The recreational viewing of animals at zoos is also a
source of revenue. Thus, the financial value of wild species is important to the
economies of many nations.
Finally, wild animals have aesthetic appeal. They are beautiful creatures of
nature and are a part of our bio-diversity. Their beautiful and mysterious life
has enchanted mankind since the dawn of evolution. Scientists have been
awed by observing their behavior. Such study has helped scientists understand
how the human body functions and why people behave as
they do. Scientists have also gained medical knowledge by studying the effect
of many drugs on these animals.
In conclusion, the protection of wild animals in the 21st century is by no

means a waste of resources. In fact it should be the most important global
priority today. I pen down by a quotation – “Scientists know we must protect
species because they are working parts of our life-support system”.
People try new dangerous sports such as sky-diving or rock climbing. Should
such sports be banned?.
In recent years we have seen a considerable rise in dangerous or extreme

sports. Although I do not support an outright ban on such sports, I do feel that
the government should regulate such sports so that they are played under
supervision which will minimize the risks.
It is irrefutable that dangerous or extreme sports can cause injury or even

death to the
individuals. However, banning such sports is not the answer. Instead, the
government should ensure that the companies or centres which provide the
facilities for such sports should meet the required, legal safety standards.
Another argument against banning is that then people would play them in
hiding and then they would be even more risky. After all we
all know that forbidden fruits taste sweeter.
Furthermore, if government bans such sports, it could be viewed as an

infringement of the rights. Those who choose to participate in these sports
know the consequences. They know very well what is good or bad for them.
They argue that if such sports are banned, then all
those other things that are harmful for individuals should be banned like
smoking, drinking and eating fast foods.
What is more, those sportsmen who excel in such sports bring name and fame
to their country. They break records set by others and when they do so, the
name of their country shines in the whole world.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, such sports should be

performed after sufficient training and under supervision of adults. Dangerous
sport companies should require a license for providing such training. To lay a
ban on such sports is not the answer
Some people say that the government should not put money on building
theatres and
sports stadiums. They should spend more money on medical care and
education. Do you agree or disagree?
Sample Answer 1:
It is a highly debatable issue whether the government should spend money on

medicine and education rather than on theatres and sports stadiums. In my
opinion, all these things are important for the people and therefore, the
government should allocate equal resources for both.
Basic medical care is very important for the general public. If people are
healthy, there will be more productivity of work and the country will prosper
as a whole. There are many people who live below the poverty line and it is
the government’s responsibility that they should receive medical aid
whenever needed. There are also the elderly who have paid taxes throughout
their working life and now need good medical care.
Good education facilities are also the duty of the government. Today, there
are a number of children from deprived backgrounds who get substandard
education. They would definitely require a high quality of education if they
are to succeed in later life. What is more, an educated society has less crime
and violence and the country gets good recognition in the whole world if its
people are educated.
On the other hand, theatres and sports stadiums are equally essential for
people. Art and
entertainment is also a basic human need. Theatrical shows provide
entertainment and at the same time preserve our culture and tradition. Our
artists earn name and fame for our country. Sports stadiums, similarly, attract
millions of spectators to watch matches every year. Many more millions
watch games on television, read about them in newspapers, and discuss them
with their friends. Therefore, we cannot say that these are unnecessary
expenditures and therefore the government should ignore them.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, medicine and education are
needs that we recognize, but theatrical or sports events are also basic needs.
Therefore governments should allocate resources for both these things.
The computers are widely used in education and some people think that
teachers do not play an important role in the classroom. To what extent do
you agree?
Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that computers have become an indispensable part of

education but I disagree that teachers do not play a significant role in the
classroom. I believe that no amount of technology can ever replace the
teacher. In the following paragraphs, I intend to support my views with my
arguments.
It is an undeniable fact that teachers can never lose their importance. In

learning and practice of more complex ideas, the computer is not adequate. It
can tell if the answer is right or wrong but it cannot tell where the student
went wrong. Tasks involving reasoning cannot be taught using computers.
Moreover, teachers add their own knowledge gained through experience to
that of books and other resources.
Furthermore, teachers can stimulate interest and it is an undeniable fact that

interested stimulated people tend to learn more. They can keep students
focused on study. A student studying by himself may get bored and stop
studying. Teachers can provide a faster and simpler way to present
information to the students. They can come down to the level of a student and
so are definitely better than computers. What is more, teachers are role
models for students. They are scholars in action. They not only teach
academic subjects, but also many social skills.
On the other hand, it is also true that the use of computers in today’s
classrooms is also the need of the day. Teachers should use computers to add
innovation to their teaching methods. Power point presentations can make
even the dull and boring subjects seem interesting. So computers and teachers
should not be treated as rivals to each other. They should play a
complementary role so that today’s classrooms become very interesting and
our children can compete with other children of this global village.
To put it in a nutshell, I can say that, no doubt computers are being used in the
classrooms but they can never replace the teacher.
Everyone should stay in school until the age of eighteen. To what extent do
you agree or disagree?
Sample Answer 1:
In many countries, school attendance is mandatory for all children up to a

specific age. In
India this is 14 years of age. In the UK and many other countries it is 16,
although the UK government now has plans to raise the school leaving age to
18. I agree that children should be in school till the age of 18. In the following
paragraphs, I intend to put forth my arguments to support my views.
The most important reason for raising the school leaving age to 18 is that, the
age of 14-18
is the most impressionable age of a child’s life. During this period of
adolescence, the children undergo physical and hormonal changes because of
which they are under a lot of pressure. Therefore, lengthening compulsory
schooling helps protect childhood. While at school students will be protected
from some of the pressures in life. They have the rest of adulthood to work,
make budgets balance and make choices. Providing them with space to grow
for as long as possible can make them better prepared for adult life.
Secondly, more education provides the opportunity to acquire more skills and
therefore more options. It has been shown many times that those with more
education find it easier to find work and that they are more likely to find that
work satisfying. What is more, raising
the school-leaving age is a crucial investment in society’s future. Doing so
increases the economic potential of the future workforce, and so will bring
increased tax revenues in the long term.
However, the opponents claim that extending the period of compulsory

education requires a huge investment in teachers, books and new school
buildings which would be very expensive. They also say that many families
need their children to make an economic contribution to the family income
and working early can help these families to survive.
Finally, just being in school does not guarantee that a student is learning.
Unwilling students become disruptive and damage the education of others in
their class.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, as every garden has weeds,
similarly compulsory schooling also has some drawbacks. However, these
drawbacks are nothing as compared to the vast benefits this approach would
bring and the cost needed to implement
would be negligible if compared to the huge economic potential of the future
workforce.
Therefore, I believe that everyone should stay in school until the age of
eighteen.
Mothers generally stay home to take care of their children after pregnancy.
Do you support the opinion that these mothers should be compensated by
the government?
Sample Answer 1:
I definitely agree with the notion that mothers, who stay at home to look after
their children after pregnancy should be compensated by the government. In
the following paragraphs I intend to put forth my arguments to support my
views.
My major argument is that the future of the world rests largely in the hands of
the generation we are rearing. Once a child is born, it becomes national
property. Mothers are the front line child care providers and therefore, if they
are supported by the government they can do their job better. This help can be
in the form of a paid maternity leave. In most Indian homes the mother’s
salary is necessary to support the family. So, if the mother does not get a paid
maternity leave, then she has to go back to job earlier and this affects the
childcare. Nurseries fail to provide the one-to-one interaction children need.
Secondly, a woman has to go with very stressful time physically, emotionally,
and financially during pregnancy period. There is extra financial burden
related to her prenatal care,
preparing for a new baby, and then the care of the baby. Therefore,
government help can ease their burden and they can look after their babies
nicely. Finally, if women are supported by the government, they can look
after their health. Health as such involves several factors. It is not simply
being free from diseases. So, proper education, enough employment
opportunities, food security and affordable medical care are some of the
contributory factors that the government can provide to make women healthy.
Needless to say, there should be enough provision for all these in a society
that expects to be healthy today and tomorrow. It is well known that women
play the most crucial role in managing the health of the family. And healthy
families contribute greatly to social welfare.
The opponents, however, claim that it is a personal choice to have a baby. So,
why should there be government support for women who stay at home to look
after their children? They have a point, but I still feel that women need the aid
considering the physical, emotional, and financial stress they face.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, women should be supported by

the
government after delivery to look after the baby and themselves. This can
contribute a lot to social welfare.
In companies, promotions to high positions should be given to employees

inside the
company and not to somebody outside the company or new hiring. Do you
agree or
disagree?
Sample Answer 1:
It is a highly debatable issue whether promotions should be given to

employees from within or new hiring should be done. The given statement
proposes to in-house hiring. It is necessary to look at the pros and cons of
promoting from within the company before
forming an opinion.
There are many benefits to hiring from within. To begin with, the employee is
familiar with the company. No special training needs to be given. The person
knows about the general working of the business. Moreover, employees feel
that they will be rewarded for their extra effort and hard work. So, an
employee who has been tested and excelled at a lower
level can be shifted to an upper level.
On the other hand, there are some disadvantages of hiring from within.
Sometimes, the established policy of hiring from within makes some
employees feel that they are entitled to
promotion just because they have spent time with the company. Secondly, this
can hurt the feelings of other employees who are not promoted. They may feel
that they deserved the position better.
In my opinion, a manager or business owner needs to remember that all the

hiring decisions need to be made with the idea of strengthening the business.
This means that sometimes a person from within can be moved up and
sometimes a highly qualified person can be hired from outside.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, each promotion needs to be

done on a case to case basis and at all times the HR manager needs to do what
is in the best interest of the company.
Do you agree or disagree that animals should be kept in men made cells.
I disagree that animals should be kept in men made cells. I feel that zoos are
an unsuitable environment for animals and therefore should be abolished.
Firstly, zoo animals are kept in very confined area compared with their vast
natural habitat. Due to this zoo animals develop unnatural habits like pacing
back and forth or swaying from side to side. For example, polar bears are
given about 10 metres of walking space where as
in their arctic home they roam for hundreds of kilometers. Similarly, lions and
tigers are confined in cages where they lack exercise and stimulation. What is
more, it is very common for visitors to tease and provoke caged animals. This
also leads to unnatural behavior in animals.
Secondly, the breeding programmes taken up by zoos are not very successful.
For instance, the ‘Panda Breeding Programme’ has been very costly and
unsuccessful. Also, zoo life does not prepare animals for the challenges of life
in the wild. They are provided good food in the
zoos, but if left in the jungle, they may die of starvation because they cannot
hunt for themselves.
Finally, the zoo is an unnatural environment that exposes animals to many

dangers. Diseases often spread between species that would never live together
naturally. For example, many Asian elephants have died in African zoos after
catching herpes from African elephants.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, zoos are unnatural habitats for
the wild animals and there is no justification in caging these marvelous
creatures of God.
Students at schools and universities learn far more from lessons with teachers
than from others sources (such as the internet, television). To what extent do
you agree or disagree?

Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that students can learn a lot nowadays from internet and
television and these have become an indispensable part of education but I
firmly believe that teachers play a more significant role in the classroom. I
believe that no amount of technology can ever
undermine the importance of the teacher. In the following paragraphs, I intend
to support my views with my arguments.
To begin with, tachers can stimulate interest and it is an undeniable fact that
focused on study. A student studying by himself through internet and TV may
get bored and stop studying. Teachers can provide a faster and simpler way to
present information to the students. They can come
down to the level of a student and so are definitely better than computers. In
addition, teachers are role models for students. They are scholars in action.
They not only teach academic subjects, but also many social skills.
Furthermore, there are many practical subjects which students can learn best
from the teacher. For example, experiments of physics and chemistry are best
learnt by the teacher guiding you at every step. What is more, teachers give
assignments and regularly check
them. This helps the teachers to recognise the weak points of students and
guide them accordingly. All this cannot be done by the internet and TV.
On the other hand, it is also true that the internet is an ocean of knowledge.
You can get information about any topic on Earth from the internet. But there
is no authenticity of this information. What information to get and from where
to get requires a lot of expertise. The television also has a lot of educative
programmes but students still need the guidance of the
teachers at all stages of learning. Teachers can make even the dull and boring
subjects seem interesting. So definitely students learn more from teachers.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, no doubt TV and the Internet
are very educative these days but students definitely learn more from the
teacher.
Some people think the government should pay for health care and education,
but other people claim that it is the individual’s responsibility.
Do you agree or disagree?
Sample Answer 1:
Nowadays, health care and education have become the focus of the people’s
concern. It is a highly debated issue as to who should pay for these services.
There are those who argue that the government should pay for them while
others think the costs should be shouldered by individuals. Personally, I think
that basic health care and primary education should be on
the government but advanced health care and higher education should be
borne by the individual.
It is irrefutable that it is the government’s responsibility to make basic health
care and primary education accessible to everyone. The reason is that a
nation’s prosperity very much depends on the contribution made by its well-
educated citizens who are in good health. After all we all pay taxes and so we
are entitled to get something back in return.
Private schools and private hospitals can be available for those who want and
can afford it but the free schools and free government hospitals should always
be there.
On the other hand, individuals should be responsible for their advanced health
care. Actually, the advanced medical and surgical treatments are very
expensive. So, instead of
depending on government we should take some health insurance or save in
any other way with the tomorrow in mind. Higher education, too benefits the
individual more than the nation. So it is quite reasonable to pay for it from
one’s pocket.
There are, of course, some sections of society who cannot afford their own
healthcare. The government should have some system of knowing their
financial status and provide free
healthcare so that nobody dies for want of treatment. As far as higher
education is concerned, the government can have some system of interest free
loans for the needy and meritorious students.
To sum up, basic education and primary education should be borne by the
government but advanced health care and education should be paid by the
individual from his pocket.
Model Answer 2:
Nowadays most countries in the world have set up public hospitals and
schools for residents’ overall health and improvement. Yet the disagreement
is never stopped, as the opponents insist that it is not the governments’
responsibility to do so.
Public medical care and education is of great importance to individual

physical and mental wellbeing, especially for those from less wealthy
background. To be precise, not everyone can afford the whole family’s
medical consumption and children’s tuition fees. But only people with healthy
body and healthy mind have the capacity to contribute to the country’s
development. Obviously, a nation’s prosperity cannot rely on minor rich
residents, who can pay for their own health care and education, alone. In
addition, governments’ tax revenue comes from all social status. It indicates
that all citizens have equal rights to enjoy operations and schools paid by
governments and governments should support them.
However, it is not realistic that government is responsible for all spending of

residents’ health care and education. Decisions regarding the level of
government’s investments should involve the concern of a country’s
economic situation. In other words, it would be a significant financial burden
if such expenses took up too much of government’s budget. Accordingly, it is
not reasonable to require government to take all responsibilities. For example,
Chinese government can only support children free primary and middle
school education, in regard to the more than 1 billion population.
Personally, I believe that people have the equal rights to accept public health
care and education, and it is sensible and fair to arrange that. By doing so,
citizens’ overall well-being can be guaranteed; hence these educated people
are all able to contribute to the country’s development and society’s peace and
harmony. However, it is not government’s responsibility to pay for a huge
population’s college and all the health care spending, since it is not realistic to
do so. In that case, the charity, or other public organisations can participate in
this project as well.
Model Answer 3:
As people have paid taxes to the government, it is believed that they should
be provided with free healthcare and qualified education. However, others
disagree with the statement, as they think that each individual should be
responsible for his or her own health and education. The following essay will
discuss about both views in details.
On the one hand, many people believe that it is the government’s

responsibility to provide standard healthcare and decent education to their
people. As people have paid income taxes, property taxes, value added taxes
and other kinds of fees to the government, these funds should also be
beneficial for the people as well. Some of the budget should be allocated to
fund medical activities and educational programs. Having a lot of educated
and healthy residents brings many benefits for the government, as there are a
lot of skill and productive labors in the country who would develop the
country’s economic sector.
On the other hand, some people believe that health and education is a personal
matter as it is the responsibility of each individual to maintain own their
health and education. They disagree if education and healthcare should be
funded from the taxes. They think that it is unfair, because some people might
be working hard and paid a large amount of taxes, but others might be
indolent or jobless and get the same benefits from the government. Therefore
they believe that healthcare and education should be standalone institutions,
and each people should pay for getting good education and maintaining their
own health.
In conclusion, to a certain point I would agree that it is the government’s task

to provide education and healthcare for their people, as some poor people
might not be able to get good education and decent healthcare. However,
although these services might be provided by the government for free, each
individual’s must be responsible for their own education and healthcare, as
these services are funded by taxes that are paid by the public.
Model Answer:
The recent issue of whether or not government should be responsible for

citizens medical care and education is aroused considerable controversy.
Some individuals suggest that government should support all the basis needs
of its citizen. While others not welcome this oppinion. As for me, I firmly
agree with the former.
Admitteddly, It is widely accepted that individual themselves should take the

responsible for taking care themselves in any way, no matter in educational or
medical aspects. Due to China own the biggest population in the world, the
government is not has capability to give efficient and effective help in this
respect. Furthermore, especially we should take the limitation of financial
funds and social resources into serious consideration, after that, we will
realize that we cannot count on our government and must work hard for
paying the bills for our personal education and treatment.
However, considering the government is possess in political power and

sufficient sources of education, it should be provide services to meet the
needs of individuals’s education and medical care. Moreover,the government
is established in the tax payer’s money, it is seemed to be reasonable if the
government do its best to trying improve the infrastructure of our society, to
some extent, providing free education and health care are no longer a choice
for government, it is a must. In addition, Governments are has duties for
protecting its citizens profits and providing excellent services to the people
who live in.
All in all, based on the above discussion, I highly comfirmed the idea that
government should play an essential role in give more educational
opportunities and better medical care to the citizen rather than individuals
themselves
Model Answer 4:
In today’s world health care and education are two most important parts of
people’s life. Further, without proper education and sufficient health care
system a country can’t develop. However, the government has the responsible
to create a healthy nation. Personally I believe that the government should
provide basic needs to create healthy life and an educated nation
independently.
Everyone prefer to have a fascinating life, but we cannot do whatever we

want. Therefore, we have sacrificed some, such as, drugs, tobacco, alcohol,
and junk foods etc. for healthy life. In the present days people are busy with
their day to day work. As a result majority of them are not having well
balanced diet and some of them take instant foods or junk foods. They do not
concern health and also it will cause many diseases in future. For example,
obesity, diabetes etc Further, from young age everyone should concern about
their health. Especially people not only should think about physical but also
consider about mental health.
That is why the government should provide better health care and education
for all citizens. The government is created by the taxes form valuable
workforce of their country. Therefore, government has responsibility to offer
them free health care facilities, heath education programme: such as healthy
diet, clinics or hospitals for free medicine, etc. Further, government can use
social media to distribute health and education programme. Because,
nowadays majority of people are connected in social media. For example
facebook, twitter etc. In addition, government should implement such a law
in order to increase well balanced lifestyle. For instance, due to the
overpopulation of China, they have limited only one child for one family.
In conclusion, when I consider all given points it is clear that only the
government cannot make healthy nation. Therefore, individual person should
have concern to prevent future health issues. However, the government should
enforce such a law in order to increase our standard of lifestyle and also
provide basic needs to the people who are expected from the government. In
fact, in my opinion is the government and individuals are both responsible to
make healthy nation.
Model Answer 5:
A healthy and educated society is the backbone of any successful country;

deciding who is to provide this, however, is a sensitive topic. I strongly
believe the government should be held responsible for providing these
services for two reasons. Firstly, the entire society benefits and secondly the
whole population is paying for the services. However, if one prefers extra
services they should be prepared to pay for it themselves.
Firstly, education is largely considered a basic right. A population unable to

calculate, read, write or even learn would be doomed in a competitive global
economy. Globalisation has increased competition and shifted the emphasis to
knowledge, information and science. A state education should, therefore, be
freely available to everybody. However, if people wish to purchase private
education, this should also be allowed or even encouraged. Private education
reduces the strain on public services and provides a source of tax revenue for
the government, in effect, subsidising state education.
Secondly, health services must undoubtedly be available to all because the

entire nation is paying taxes and, therefore, should not be excluded from any
service. Take the NHS in the UK, for example; this organisation caters for the
entire population, and no private medical insurance is needed. Unfortunately
waiting lists can be long and service is occasionally slow; therefore, some
purchase private medical insurance for a faster service. This reduces the
workload of the public sector.
To conclude, I believe both healthcare and education are basic fundamental

rights, necessary for any advanced society and, therefore, the responsibility
should lie with the government. Nevertheless, if individuals require more than
the standard level, then they should be prepared to pay for it.
Model Answer 6:
It is not a secret that one of the most vital responsibilities of a government is

to take good care of its citizens, including their health and education. Public
spending on these two specific domains is, therefore, enormously advocated
by a multitude of taxpayers. On the contrary, some people argue that paying
for medical care and education is not a unilateral duty of the government, but
rather should be shared with the public. Despite the two contrasting views, it
is the author’s belief that there are valid reasons for both parties to jointly
share such financial burden.
On the one hand, it is not an exaggeration to say that there are still a
significant number of impoverished families who cannot afford basic medical
support and a decent education. It is often that these people earn a meagre
income that hardly sufficient to pay for expensive tuition, which prompt their
children to attend tertiary institutions. Meanwhile, the cost of visiting a clinic,
hospitalization or medical drugs is frequently out of the reach of these poor
households. Thus, governmental aid in paying such fees is of utter need and
highly appreciation.
On the second hand, admittedly, there are people who shirk responsibilities
and over-exploit the free money given by their government. For instance,
there are cases where healthy adults of a particular society avoid work, and
thereby forgo their contribution to the government’s tax income. These
fellows rely heavily on government support on medical care and education
and take that assistance for granted. On these scenarios, it is reasonable and
moral to exclude such lazy and irresponsible people from receiving public
helps.
As suggested above, education and healthcare services are of primary

importance to citizens, and the government has the responsibility to ensure
that those services are available and affordable. However, it is not to say that
the government should bear the costs of all health care and educational
services that the citizens currently enjoy.
Model Answer 7:
Despite the development of modern society, the health care and education still
remain the basic rights of citizens. And a much debated issue these days is
whether or not the government should be responsible for citizens’ health care
and education.
Some people argue that it is the government that should be obligated to fund
the health care and education for citizens. This is because citizens enjoy the
right to live in a harmonious and stable environment, which should be enabled
by the government, the leader of the society. If citizens had no access to
health care and education, their physical health and psychological soundness
would be at risk. As a result, such people might fail to get cured in time, thus
influencing their working efficiency, which would destabilize the production
of the industry. Also, without sufficient guidance of teachers, these citizens
might misbehave or even commit crimes, posing a threat to other citizens’
security. Therefore, the government should be accountable for citizens’ health
care and education to keep society safe and stable.
On the other hand, some people oppose the argument, saying it is a waste of
public money for the government to subsidize health care and education of
each citizen in society, since a great number of people, in fact, have had the
capacity to pay for the both privately. Instead, the government should give
priority to more pressing problems related to social members’ wellbeing, such
as soaring crime rate, AIDS epidemic or the shortage of infrastructure, which
are requiring financial resources from the government to address.
Personally, I think the government should fund the deprived for their health
care and education, who are the group in real need for the authority’s help. At
the same time, citizens available for the both should encourage the
government to allocate money to more urgent areas. After all, the harmonious
society calls for the joint efforts of the government and citizens.
Topic – Do you agree or that improvements in technology reduce the role of
Olympic Games. IELTS Writing Task 2 With Sample Answer.
Do you agree or that improvements in technology reduce the role of Olympic

Games.
Sample Answer 1:
Olympic Games are the world’s most important international athletic

competition. They bring together thousands of the finest athletes to compete
against one another in a variety of individual and team sports. Although
technology is having an impact on the Olympics in a profound way I disagree
that it is reducing the role of Olympic Games. I believe that technology allows
us to more fully appreciate everything about the competition and the athletes
who commit their lives to fulfill their dreams.
To begin with, winning an Olympic event is the highest honour people can
achieve even in the modern times. Unknown athletes get the chance to attain
national, and in particular cases, international fame. Secondly, Olympic
Games are the best medium of cultural exchange even today. Different people
of different countries, religions, cultures etc get together at Olympics and the
participants get a chance to know about other cultures. The
Games also constitute a major opportunity for the host city and country to
showcase themselves to the world.
Although the technological realities of the modern times have brought many
changes in the Olympic Games of today, they have not reduced the
importance of the Olympic Games. Technology plays a part in every aspect of
these games, from the first torch relay hand-off
to the closing ceremonies. Athletes and trainers use technology in preparing
for the games to optimize their training. Sports equipment manufacturers use
design technology to build improved apparatus, gear and more that will
enable their clients to deliver a high level performance. Broadcasters use
technology to better inform viewers of all aspects of the
events. As a consequence, more and more people are exposed to these games.
People who opine that technology has reduced the role of Olympic Games say
so because the ugly claws of commercialism have crept into this field also. As
a result, the Olympics has shifted away from pure amateurism to
professionalism. The win-at-all-cost attitude has come up and many use
unethical means to win. They also say that only the rich can afford
technology to boost their performance and this creates a gap between the rich
and poor. I still believe that without inherent ability no amount of technology
can make anybody a winner or loser.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, technology has brought

colossal changes in The Olympic Games of today but in no way have they
decreased the role of Olympic Games.
Food can be produced much more cheaply today because of
improved fertilizers and better machinery. However, some of the methods
used to do this may be dangerous to
human health and may have negative effects on local communities. To
what extent do you agree or disagree?Sample Answer 1:

place in agriculture which we could not even think of earlier. It is a highly
debated issue as to whether these improvements in fertilizers and technology
are a blessing or a curse. In my opinion, there are both pros and cons of this
situation but the advantages are much more than disadvantages.
On the positive side, farmers now have a wide range of selection, in terms of
seeding, irrigation and use of pesticides and fertilizers. Technology has saved
people from tedious
work and in the mean time increased the production markedly. Machines save
the cost of labour and also save time, so productivity has increased
dramatically. All this is needed to meet the demands of the burgeoning
population.
Furthermore, genetic modification of foods has given us such species which

need little or no insecticides and no fertilizers. The quality of food has also
improved. For example, fish gene has been added to tomato to make it frost
resistant. A nut protein has been added to soya bean to increase the protein
content. We have more choices and even the colour and shape can also be
changed. We have sweeter fruits and square watermelons and yellow coloured
ones. Finally, factory farming, in which animals are fed nicely so as to
increase their meat, is also the need of the hour.
On the downside, such technology has reduced the need for manpower and
many people are now jobless. This has a negative effect on communities.
Genetic modification is also considered unnatural and as it is relatively new,
people are also concerned about its long term harmful effects. Some methods
are also dangerous to environment as there is
contamination of the neighbouring crops by the altered gene pool. Last but
not least, the rich countries can use this technology and further increase the
gap between the rich and the poor.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that as every garden has weeds,
such developments have their pros and cons. We should know where to draw
the line and take maximum advantage of this technology minimizing its
harmful effects.
Leisure is a growing industry, but people no longer entertain themselves as
much as they used to because the use of modern technology has made them
less creative. Do you agree or disagree?
I disagree with the statement that people do not entertain themselves as much
as they used to because of modern technology. I believe that modern
technology has not made people
less creative. In fact it has changed the definition of leisure and the lifestyle of
people.
Modern technology has changed our definition of leisure. Earlier, leisure

meant going out and meeting people, playing outdoor games, going to cinema
to watch movies and so on.
However, today, leisure time is full of choices. We have so many things to do
within the four walls of our house. We can watch countless programs on
national and international channels; we can play online games; we can chat
with friends and relatives in any corner of the world; we can do arm-chair
tourism by which we can visit any historical place or museum sitting in our
arm-chair. That is why perhaps it looks as if we people do not entertain
ourselves as much as we used to in yesteryears.
Another reason why people don’t entertain as much as before is also not
because of technology. Technology has, in fact, given us more time to enjoy
but we can’t strike a balance between work and play. We have become
workaholics. Life in the past was simpler.
People worked for basic needs. Now work is not just a way of life. It is for
personal fulfillment. We set goals for ourselves such as a house or a car. We
choose this way of life. Now we have improved standard of living but this has
come at a very high cost.
Finally, I would like to state that the given statement is flawed because
nowadays people specially take out time to entertain themselves. This can be
evident from the mushroom growth of leisure centres such as hotels,
restaurants, fun parks and spas. Tourist places are full of people and train and
air reservations have to be done well in advance.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, technology has not made us
less creative. We entertain ourselves more than earlier times but the ways of
entertainment are different and technology has given us more choices than
before.
The advantages brought by the spread of English as a “global language”

will outweigh the disadvantages.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view?
English has become the lingua franca in many parts of the world. Because of
this, I agree with the given statement that the spread of English as an
international language will have more pros than cons.
Second, English is easier to learn than any other language. Unlike Chinese,
for example, English has only 26 alphabets which are combined to make
words and sentences. It is easy even for non-native speakers to read written
English. In addition, a number of English words have been borrowed from
many other languages, and many English words have been
adopted by many languages and are used as part of their own languages.
Therefore, many people in different countries already know some of the
English. So, it could be the easiest language to learn.
Furthermore, it is the language of global business and also jobs. It is the
language of technology. You can make the best use of internet if you know
English as many websites are written in English. Knowledge of English
makes travel easier. There would also be no need of
expensive translations. Finally, English will be the most promising language.
Since English is used in many fields such as economics, politics, and
academics, more and more people will study English in the future. If you have
an international meeting in any field, it will probably be done in English. The
demand of English will never stop.
As every garden has weeds, there would be some disadvantages also. Many
people fear that local languages would die out and with that, local cultures
would die out because language and culture are inter-related. Moreover, it is
bound to be divided into dialects.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, there are more advantages than
disadvantages of English as a global language. Its popularity and demand will
increase more and more in the future.
Model Answer 2:
Presently, English is called a universal language as half of the world

population is using it. It is the gateway to the world, the ability to speak in
English is considered as one of the hallmarks of a cultured person. It is
undeniable to say that, global language has resulted in both positive and
negative effects which must be addressed accordingly.
To begin with, there are many benefits of extending a universal language.
Through global language, a particular country can develop its business
relations and increase its economic growth. Professionally, in today’s
globalized world, those who are fluent in English have a competitive
advantage over other candidates.
From the social perspective, English language allows people to enter a wider
cultural world, which help in developing healthy relations among them. This
critical ability is building a foundation for good business and social relations.
The wide spread use of the English language is narrowing the gap of
communication and people all over the world have accepted English as
language to use for communications. The books, history and research papers
written in this language are really great in number and the spread of this
language has made it possible to let people around the world learn the same
technology and resources.
However, one can not deny the drawbacks which are derived from global
language. Adopting universal language is leading to westernization of culture.
Nowadays, people speak global language instead of their own language. As a
result, they are forgetting their indigenous dialects and culture and their
children are following the same. For example, Bangladesh is well-known for
its culture and traditions all over the world, but, presently, many people have
forgotten their culture and language.
In conclusion, I would argue that, benefits created by English language far

outweigh the disadvantages.
Model Answer 3:
It goes without saying that English has become international language in this
technology era and it is spreading day by bay to communicate with each other
. However , in this incredible world English language is destroying some
other language . To hit the mind that a language has not a vehicle of thoughts.
It is a blood of a culture. An argument has been put forward that the
advantages of the spread of english as a global language outweigh its
disadvantages. According to me. It is a debatable issue.
There are a plethora of reasons why some people think english has become a
global language and it has a lot of advantages. First and foremost point is that
English language has become an international language nowadays and a lot of
countries’s people also are learning language to communication and for
traveling due to this they can easily communicate with other people.
Secondly, in modern world technology is playing indispensable role in life
and all gadgets and other electronic goods are using english language to
operate that things. However , mobiles have become an amazing gadget and it
reaches in every human’s pocket to communicate. Mobiles companies also
use english language in mobile phone and people also are learning easy to use
it with english language. Thirdly , in global world english language has
become important part to make in every field and nowadays people who know
English , they are easily getting career opportunity in home country and
overseas due to English language
On the other hand , some people say that english has become global language
and it has a lot of adverse effect on other culture and countries. Because a lot
of language are destroying due to spread of English language . To understand
the universe that a disappear language means disappear a culture. Furthermore
, english language is a difficult language and to learn it, not possible for
everyone .
In conclusion , I firmly believe that english language has a lot of benefit in all
walk of life . But we can not ignore it disadvantages , because english
language are controlling society these day due to this a lot people are
following western culture and it can be dangerous for our culture . We should
save our culture and we can learn english language as a second language
Model Answer 4:
English is become a lingua franca in every nook and corner of the world. So
without understanding of english the life of a human being is like a ‘ship
without sailor’. Presently,it is argued that the spreading of English has a huge
previledge for everyone and its pros is weightier than its negatives which is
very beneficial. Here,i would like to accord with this statement.
To start with,multifarious points to set up my point of view. First and

foremost,the widespread of english is lucrative for attaining maximum
knowledge about different culture. For example,nowadays many people are
visiting to different countries and gossiping with other people and learn about
their culture through english. As a result, they upgrade their knowledge and it
is indeed true that “knowledge is the wisdom of father”. Moreover,nowadays
many people migrate to that nations in which english is the first language of
country and therefore they learn english for their survival. Consequently,they
live luxurious lifestyle.
Next, english plays a phenomenal role in study. To illustrate,nowadays all the

subjects are converted into english and hence the better understanding of
english could be fruitful to learn these subjects easily and compete other
students. Whats more; due to advancement of technology, english plays a
vital role in internet by make their friends online from other nation easily. By
contrast ,other have conflicting views.
They think that,due to widespread of english people are far away from their
native language. For example, people are more conscious about learning
english and do not care about mother tongue. Eventually,their is a low
integration between culture and history.
To recapitulate, it has both pros and cons.Although the advantages of english

is fruitful for the development of nation but the understanding of native
language and culture is important to develop good human being.
Model Answer 5:
English, the worldwide spoken language, has been considered as one of

essential skills with which global citizens need to be equipped in Twenty-First
Century. The advantages of learning English have been made clear during the
era of globalisation. However, there are also concerns rising up against the
spread of English, urging that the negative impact also need to be taken into
consideration. In this essay, both of pros and cons will be analysed.
First of all, learning English has become critical for individuals to acquire
skills and knowledge. For instance, along with a great step-forward of
advanced technology, people from all over the world are able to access
information from the Internet. English, most of this information is written
with, is the fundamental skill that facilitates individuals to read and thereafter
to comprehend. This is also the main reason of why many countries have
imposed their young children with English as a mandatory subject in school.
Furthermore, English is also a key element that plays a vital role in

international relations. As many have acknowledged English is the official
global language, which enables effective communications among countries.
For example, international trading, collaboration, and major events generally
use English as primary language in a bid to exchange ideas. Thus, the English
expansion has brought our world tremendous benefits and it is irreplaceable at
this stage.
Nevertheless, negative effects brought by English blossom are also notable,

and have triggered a controversial debate of whether it is detrimental to native
languages. As many have noticed, more and more information we access
today are written in English. TV shows, movies, pop music and commercials
are all made of English and have significant influences on young generation.
Hence, it increases anxieties among traditional communities, rising
concerning of neglecting the native languages.
In conclusion, despite the English expansion may lead to a decline in other

native languages, the positive effects brought by it are conspicuous and will
continue benefiting both individuals and countries. Therefore, I believe the
pros outweigh its cons.
Model Answer: 6
There is no doubt that English has become a global language in business,

diplomacy, education and politics. Due to THEIR UNWILLINGNESS TO
BE enthusiastic about absorbing new skills, some people reluctantly assume
admitting the values and facts of English being a universal LANGUAGE
throughout the world. On the contrary, they denounce the trend as a hinder to
further existence of unique cultures.
Languages are the carriers of culture. Culture would disappear as soon as the
language spoken in it was out of use. Young people thus forfeit their parents’
customs and living habits as they adapt themselves to speaking ENGLISH.
Their cultural heritage then would be pinned, and this can be proved BY
many tribes of Europe and America. Moreover, the diversity of languages
turns to be the pools of great ideas and thoughts. If they were extinguished in
ordinary people, our society would lose the power of advancing. Furthermore,
there are many valuable treasures in various cultures, like medical treatments
and scientific records in history. They would all be thrown into AN
unnoticeable corner with their mother languages going out WITH THEM.
However, despite the drawbacks of the thriving of English use, I believe that
it is A formidable trend driven by the globalization process. First, the
translating cost would plummet if all the people around the world
manipulated the same language. People WOULD have more chances to meet
and negotiate with each other for boosting their business projects and
diplomatic conferences. The obstacles of misunderstanding would suffocate
further cooperation without efficient communication. Moreover, speaking the
same language could draw people closer and it even could homogenize
various beliefs. Consequently, the conflicts would be eliminated considerably.
Lastly, the widespread use of English makes the education and abroad study
prosper. Students will BE rid OF the chores of learning English and THEY
COULD then focus on the field they endeavor to work in.
To sum up, my opinion resembles those who support the wide use of English.
The rapid manipulation by the people would accelerate to alleviate the
financial crisis obsessing the international companies. To overcome the harms
it brings, THE establishing OF specialized agencies, funded by the
governments to study and preserve the dying ones, would be A good solution.
Model Answer 7:
In all corners of the world, English has become the predominant lingua
franca. In this essay I will weigh up both sides of the debate and argue that
there are more positive aspects correlated with the growth of the English
language than there are negative ones.
Firstly, it is indeed true that the adoption of English worldwide has made
international communication easier. Overseas trade is simpler than it ever
used to be and the efficiency of transactions between countries has been
boosted tremendously. In addition, English language aids the transference of
knowledge and enables talented students to enter prestigious English speaking
universities, such as Oxford and Cambridge. Moreover, if everyone has a
modicum of English, cultural beliefs will be homogenized and cooperation
between countries will be enhanced.
There are, however, definite drawbacks. Primarily, a worldwide language will

most certainly lead to the erosion of unique cultures. People will be cut-off
from their heritage, ancestors, traditional songs, festivals and customs.
Further, native speakers are at a great advantage in the job market. For
example, it is easy for any speaker of English to acquire a lucrative overseas
teaching job. Tourists too will be able to compete for positions resulting in
unemployment in the home country. Finally, English is extremely difficult to
learn! Is it really worth it when the majority of other languages are much
more logical?
In summary, the blossoming of English has certainly had negative effects as

previously outlined. From my standpoint, I firmly believe that the expansion
of the English language has many more pros than cons most noticeably in the
fields of commerce, education and leisure time activities. Ultimately, I am of
the opinion that the English language will be a tool in aiding world peace as
better relations can be maintained and cultural barriers broken down.
The government is responsible for protecting a nation’s cultural identity.

Thus, some people believe new buildings should be built in traditional
styles.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Modern buildings change the character and appearance of towns and cities. The
government should insist that new buildings be built in traditional styles

to protect cultural identity. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Sample Answer 1:
Every city has its architectural character, and this architecture represents the
culture of the
place. However, I disagree that modern buildings should be built in traditional
styles. In the
following paragraphs I shall put forth my arguments to support my views.
Firstly, in most large cities, land is scarce and consequently it is very

valuable. This has led to the construction of tall buildings which occupy only
a small area of land while providing lots of floor space where people can live
or work. We also have to meet the needs of the
growing population for which tall buildings are the answer. Moreover, there is
no need for
deforestation to provide more land.
Secondly, modern materials are more practical. Now we use concrete and
steel instead of
stone, timber or brick. Because of these things buildings can be built
comparatively quickly
using prefabricated materials. They do not use local materials, such as stone,
timber or
brick, which used to give character to those buildings. Finally, changes are
taking place in
climate and energy sources are depleting fast. So we need energy efficient
houses. Modern
buildings use double glass front walls and POP( Plaster of Paris) ceilings
which lessen the
energy requirements. Moreover, now we need smaller houses as family
structure is
changing.
However, I believe that every city should preserve the already existing
historic buildings
which give character and identity to the city. The various forts and palaces in
Rajasthan,
India have been preserved and are being used to attract tourism. I agree with
this kind of
initiative taken by the government.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, it is the need of the day that
modern buildings
be built in today’s contemporary styles and to give identity to a place one or
two historic
buildings may be there in every city.
Model Answer 2:
Every country is known by its cultural heritage. Tourists visit various

countries to understand their culture and tradition. It is government’s duty to
maintain the cultural uniqueness of the country. However, I strongly disagree
with the view that government should be accountable for the new building to
be made in vintage model.
To begin with, it is the owner’s choice to decide how his project is going to
look like. For instance, in this technologically advanced society no one would
like to have dome shaped architecture. In addition to that, a few of the
government owned property can be built in traditional style. But, to build all
the buildings in old-fashioned way, even though it may be inconvenient is
mere thoughtlessness.
Moreover, to preserve the ethnic character of a country many factors can

contribute. Government should try to uplift the art form of the country. To
cite an example, almost all countries have one or the other traditional dance
form. The administration of the country should try to give it an international
platform. Worldwide exhibitions can be organized, portraying the talent of the
country.
Last but not least, instead of spending money on new construction,

government should try to preserve those that already exist. Many ancient
monuments of the country lie in ruin and no government aid is provided to
them. Therefore, the nation should try to restore these precious heritages and
this will in turn improve country’s cultural identity.
To sum up, culture originates with the beginning of the country. One should
adapt to the changing times and move forward but should take the past with
them. Instead of going for new traditional buildings, one should try to
improve those that are already present.
Model Answer 3:
With the rapid development of architectural advancements and the dramatic

increase in modernization, many countries have allowed constructing more
and more modern buildings that have created significant changes in character
and appearance of the living areas. In my opinion, this is unlikely to
deteriorate culture and the suggestion that new high-rise buildings should
follow the traditional styles in order to maintain culture identity is not
persuasive.
There is no denying the fact that buildings erected in modern and unique
designs and equipped with more advanced amenities will partly make a
professional and active look for a city or town, which both facilitates higher
living standards of the locals and draws attention to wealthy tourists or
potential investors who are seeking for lucrative markets to develop their
business. When the government implement open polices for its cities and
towns to construct modern buildings, many companies are more likely to rent
more rooms, offices or apartments so as to place their branches, stores or even
head offices. This will promisingly accelerate the local economy.
With the intention to protect cultural identity, the government can take
consideration into more practical ways rather than insist the traditional styles
for new buildings. Regular repairs or refurbishment for historical and old
buildings, for instance, may be a good idea to keep the country’s cultural
values alive longer. It is those sites that reflect more actual traditions of towns
and cities than new ones built in the so-called traditional styles which people
cannot ensure if they have been inherited properly from the previous to
present builder generation.
In conclusion, modern buildings are obvious results of the constant progress

in construction techniques and the economic development of residential
regions. The government should encourage building more high-rise buildings
to satisfy its inhabitants’ higher demands on hi-tech facilities as well as invest
effectively in repairing old buildings to conserve traditional values.
Model Answer 4:
Whether modern buildings should be replaced by traditional buildings is a

frequent topic of discussion when people talk about the government action on
protecting a nation’s cultural identity. However, in my opinion, a developed
city need both traditional and modern buildings and therefore they play
complementary roles in adding value to a city. I wish to reinforce my opinion
in the following paragraphs.
The supporters of modern style claim that it is the sign of development which
cannot be reversed. First of all, modern buildings provide functions which the
traditional buildings are unable to facilitate. For instance, emergency exit and
digital subscriber loop inner wall are basic and necessary parts of new
buildings, whereas traditional ones cannot have these functions which are the
necessities of people in modern life.
Secondly, modern buildings are more economical than traditional ones in

terms of space. New buildings are designed to utilize every inch of land for a
purpose because land is a scare resource. In contrast, old buildings are not
designed to use floor area very efficiently. Further, modern style keeps the
pace with the world. In other words, new buildings represent that local people
are open minded and ready to accept new cultures.
The supporters of traditional style suggest that it is the only to keep cultural
identity. For one thing, those buildings play a vital role in handing down
historic heritage and traditions, for children and young people can learn their
past and traditions from traditional buildings which are the evidence of
history. For another, traditional buildings could be a symptom of cultural
identity which attracts the world and further provides opportunities to locals.
General speaking, I personally consider that “traditional versus modern” is
not a debate because they are not mutually exclusive. It would be a better
choice that both of them work co-operatively in order to embellish cities, and
it tends to develop into virtuous circle in where traditional buildings are based
on modern ones and vice versa.
Model Answer 5:
With the globalization developed in the worldwide, the identity of nation’s

culture was be braked. In some country, government support keep nation’s
culture identity. There are some people trust government should support
traditional culture. At the same time some people give the opposite opinion,
they think we should crate new modern style. These ideas are both
reasonable, I think when we protect traditional culture, the modern culture
should be developed at same time.
There have some people believe government should protect traditional

culture. Traditional culture for these people is means origin. This origin is not
only for a group of people, but also for the whole nations. Thus, protect
traditional culture can improve the cohesion between different ethic group.
Government keep culture identity also defense culture imperialism from other
country. That is way these people trust government should keep unique
culture in the nation.
In some multicultural countries, government welcome foreign nation’s

culture. In these country people like exotic cultures, because they live with
these people who come from abroad and in someway domestic people just be
impacted. These impaction was from education, music, fashion and also diet.
The influence from these facts are change people’s life slightly, finally this
exotic culture will be one part of origin culture.
All in all, due to the globalization, our nation’s unique culture is be

challenged by other foreign culture. I believe government should realize that
how important we should protect our own culture. Traditional culture is the
core treasure for a nation. It include values and opinion about the world.
However we have understand that global development bring in new exotic
culture to our nation. so my opinion is we need protect our identity culture, at
same time absorb the advantage of foreign as well.
Sending criminals to prison is not the best method of dealing with them.
Education and job training are better ways to help them.

Sample Answer 1:
There are many different opinions on the best way to reduce crime. The
traditional
solution is to punish the criminals by putting them in prison. Some hold the
view that
education and job training are the long term solutions to cut crime. In my
opinion,
prison is the only answer in a few situations, but in most cases education,
vocational
training and rehabilitation are better.
Prison is the only answer in case of criminals who are a risk to the society,
such as
murderers. They cannot be made to mix with society. Some people also say
that people
would not be afraid of doing crime if fear of imprisonment is not there. But I
still feel
that in majority of cases, we can do without prisons.
In traditional prisons, people learn a lot about crime and so when they leave
prison they
will commit even more crime. In other words prisons act as universities of
crime. So
petty offenders like shop-lifters and pick-pockets should be given some
vocational
training and education. It is a well not fact that the basic causes of crime are
poverty,
illiteracy and unemployment. So, if we provide education and job training
then we
would be removing the causes of crime. If criminals are rehabilitated by some
form of
employment then they would certainly not re-offend.
Furthermore, the prisons are expensive to maintain. The government can

spend that
money on other important matters such as education and healthcare. This
would ease
some burden from the government’s shoulders. The petty and minor criminals
can also
be employed in some community service projects after providing education
and
vocational training.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that we should hate the crime and
not the
criminal. To fight crime we should focus on the causes of crime. Education
and job
training help to rehabilitate the criminals. So, people who commit less serious
crimes
should not be sent to prison. Focus should be on reforming them.
Model Answer 2:
One of the brewing discourses, which create a public stir, is the talk on the
methods of dealing with criminals. In relation to this, while some people
argue that imprisonment is necessary to punish offenders, other people claim
that implementing rehabilitating methods is more effective for both the
offenders and the society. Prior to rendering my opinion, let us look into all
the related arguments.
The primary factor we should consider is that the purpose of prison is to

punish offenders so that make sure the safety of law-abiding citizens. There
are many culprits who neglect other people’s lives and property and these
criminals are threatening public order and innocents citizens. Therefore, it is
agreeable to imposing imprisonment and depriving them of liberty so that
they are no longer able to commit crimes. Moreover, we should consider the
emotion of the victims and their families. They hope the criminals should be
punished to pay the price for their guilt, instead of having education or
vocational training for preparing their future lives, because it is a justice of the
society.
On the contrary, human rights activist claim that implementing locking up is

not effective way to deter crime rates and recidivism. There are several
reasons we should provide vocational training and education for malefactors.
Firstly, education may change their thought on life and the society; hence,
they have second change to recognize and reflect on their guilt, which leads
them to re-integrate in the community. Furthermore, it is via vocational
training that ex-convicts have proper job and support themselves and their
family. Therefore, they may be no longer induced by committing crime with
financial motives.
In a nutshell, I have finally come to realization that imprisoning may be a

good device to punish culprits; however, education and job training may help
criminals to rehabilitate and integrate in the community. Moreover, it
contributes to reduce crime motives among re-convicts.
Model Answer 3:
People hold different views as to whether or not criminals should be sent to

serve a prison sentence. Although there are some advantages of imprisoning
offenders, I would argue that it is better to equip them with occupational skills
that allow them to lead an improved life through education.
Admittedly, punishing law breakers by incarceration can produce a deterring

effect which forces people to give a second thought to committing a crime.
This in turn could restrict the urge of anyone to offend and hence lower the
crime rates. In addition, by confining those who are serial killers or frequent
offenders in a cage, they could be prevented from harming other individuals
and causing more problems to the society. Therefore, it is reasonable for us to
claim that imprisonment is an effective way to deal with criminals.
On the other hand, educating criminals to be capable of securing a job and

living a satisfactory life may be a better method to help them. For example, a
burglar who is forced to rob a residence because he has a daughter waiting for
an urgent surgery, which demands considerable amount of money, could be
offered financial supports and opportunities to acquire advanced job skills
allowing him to compensate for the loss of the victims. This could also be
done for those who are already in prison. By equipping them with the ability
to earn a living and blend in the society as competent social members, not
only would they be thankful, but also they can bring a positive impact,
benefiting both their families and the society.
In conclusion, penalizing criminals with long time confinement may have

limited capacity in terms of preparing them for their after jail life. Educating
them to be able to sustain their lives and make contributions to the society, on
the other hand, is a more effective means to help them.
Sample Answer 4:
It is a common issue to cope with wrongdoers in society and how to redesign

the existing prison system is argued by several groups of people. Some people
suggest that we may provide training and works for them to adjust their
behaviour and I partially agree with it.
First of all, it is a positive method to encourage wrongdoers and train them to

live in normal life. Also, it will stimulate their ability and mind to rehabilitate
and even adjust their attitude. In this case, a friendly environment is well set
and it may wholly affect their lives for a long time. Second, society may take
advantage of the period of training and studying which may result in reducing
the rate of crime committing. Education is the root cause of such problems
and that will be a wonderful chance to deal with it.
However, this policy may not have benefits on the convicts who had
committed a serious and unforgivable crime. The convicts who are in jail and
taken away of their basic human right deserve their sin. And they are not
capable of any treatment and scheme like these which are seen as enjoyment
to taxpayers or even a victim. With such concern, I suggest that it should be
planned with a clear level of crime system to evaluate their crime. Thus,
different levels will give degrees of tasks and works and also eliminate
citizens’ doubt and worry.
In conclusion, it is a controversial issue to consider a new and simple change

of existing prison system. In my opinion, given the level crime of the system
and apply to the scheme, it will be better and has positive and certain
influence in both society and wrongdoers.
Model Answer 5:
Crime is triggered by different motivation and divided to different levels.

Sending criminal into the jail is the most common method accepted by public
but it is too narrow an approach. For some offenders, knowledge studying and
job skill training is better than detention
Some criminals who stealing money or robbing passengers just because they
suffered from poverty. Most of them few received good education or accepted
vocation training, which is less allowed to find a job to feed themselves or
their family. Equipping them with employment skills is an essential approach
to solve this problem, meanwhile improving their social identity.
Apart from the criminal link to poverty, juvenile offenders are fit for
educated. Youngsters who are not capable of distinguish legal or illegal
behaviors are easily swayed by adult criminal. Some of them chose commit a
crime to release their emotion because neglected by family or abused by
parent. It is necessary to help them to rebuild notions of morality and acquire
adequate education to accept by society.
Furthermore, spending time in prison may have negative effect to the

impressionable minds of youngsters and repentance of adults. They may make
friend with repeat offenders who abet them offend again and losing chance to
back to the right way. The experience of prison may lead to people treat them
unfairly, which will stand in the way of their life in the future.
Based on above argument, it is easily to conclusion that education and
training can address the root causes of crime, not only reduce first crime rates
but also decrease re-offender rates. This is a perhaps long term solution, but it
is more realistic solution that maintains society stability.
Many employees may work at home with the modern technology. Some
people claim that it can benefit only the workers, not the employers.
Working from home with the help of telephone lines, or, in other words,
telecommuting has
become very popular especially where internet connections are fast and
reliable. I, disagree
with the given statement that it can benefit only the employees and not the
employers.
Telecommuting is a win-win situation for both employers and employees.
There are many advantages of telecommuting to employees. To begin with, it

saves time as
no time is wasted commuting to and from the office. It also saves money as
no spending on
private or public transport has to be done. Furthermore the worker can look
after family
commitments like dropping the child to school etc. Although most of the
work done by tele-
workers is monitored, still a few minutes can be snatched at times. Finally,
the tele-worker
can do some side business side by side.
On the other hand there are many advantages to employers. Firstly, less office
space is
needed as the workers are working from home. It is a fact that land prices are
exorbitant
and it is very expensive to build large offices. Not only building but
maintaining offices is
also very costly. Then, it has been seen that employees take less sick leave
and other leaves.
This is also beneficial for employers.
It would be worthwhile to consider why some people opine that

telecommuting is not
beneficial for employers. They argue that supervising tele-workers is difficult.
Statistics have
proved that telecommuters take pains to work well from home as they realise
the benefits it
has for them.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, telecommuting benefits both

workers as well
as employers.
Model Answer 2:
Telecommuting is becoming increasingly popular in modern days for its

undeniable convenience. However, there have been opinions against this
practice claiming that it may negatively affect the employers. Personally, I
believe that not only does telework benefit workers but it also brings many
advantages to their companies.
Firstly, teleworking helps companies reduce costs substantially. Because
telecommuters do not go to a central workplace, the employers will not have
to pay for renting offices, equipping furniture and stationery, and hiring
cleaners. This amount of money might be better spent on advertising,
upgrading products and human resources which are essential for the
company’s long-term development.
Secondly, working from home increases the company’s profitability. At

home, workers are more focused on their work because they work under a
comfortable condition and on a flexible schedule, thus reducing stress level.
In addition, in offices there are a lot of distractions such as colleagues’
chatting or worries about family responsibilities. Telework can have all those
problems solved and boost staffs’ productivity. What I want to emphasize
here is the correlation between productivity and lucrativeness. The more
efficiently employees work, the higher profit their company will obtain.
Finally, telecommuting allows the company to maintain its operation in case

of emergency. For instance, when a flood, heavy rain or a epidemic strikes
and people are not recommended to go out or meet others, working from
home proves to be one of the best solutions to preventing loss in productivity
and revenue to the organization. This is also the reason why it is highly
suggested that companies consider teleworking as part of their preparation for
severe weather events and contagious diseases.
On the whole, although there are convincing arguments against the practice of
telecommuting, I believe the mutual benefits that it brings to both workers
and employers are much greater than the loss it may cause.
Model Answer 3:
With the development of science and technology, there is an increasing trend
of working at home other than going to work place. This phenomenon leads
to a serious of discussion of whether can employers and benefit from this. In
my opinion, working at home instead of going to work place is in the best
interest employers.
Convincing argument can be made that it can generate more profit for
employers. To start with, working at home can save employers many working
related experiences. For instance, since employees are working at home,
employers have no need to provide them with parking place for their car,
stationary for their daily use and some other necessities, such as lighting,
water and toilet. Therefore, employers can safe a lot of expenditure.
Moreover, working at home can improve employees’ productivity as well as
efficiency. Specifically speaking, people whose job is to design website
usually require a comfort and creative working environment. It maybe
difficult for the company to provide such an environment due to the fact that
every individual has its unique requirement. Thus, it is more rational for
employees to work at their own home so that they can work in their ideal
environment. Only in this way, can they provide more extraordinary idea and
create fantastic website. In addition, it has been long proved that individual
would spend more time on their job if they work at home. That is to say,
employees could apparently avoid wasting time on waiting for the bus, as
well as, they could avoid traffic congestion, which would be likely to happen
in the rush hour. Hence, it would, in fact benefit for the employers.
Admittedly, working at home may sometimes bring problems for senior

managers to control the company’s business. The reason for this is that,
working in an office, employees should report basically everything they do to
their supervisor. And then their supervisor will report their performance to the
the senior managers so that they can evaluate how is their business and
whether is the organization functioning. However, with everyone working at
home, it would be impossible for senior managers to do such an evaluation.
This in turn will largely discourage employees’ motivation since their boss
does not have an idea of their performance. This seems to be an crucial issue
at the first sight; however, this issue can be easily addressed through
computer science and technology. Also, people should not overlook the fact
that the more supervision in the office the less freedom employees would get.
The lack of freedom during work would discourage employees as well.
To sum up, personally I believe that employers can get more benefit if they
allow employees to work at their own home. It can provide employees a
comfort working environment, reduce the time workers wasted on the road
and also improve their work productivity in a general sense.
Sample Answer 4:
Equipped with the modern technology of the 21st century, employers are now
increasingly adopting a new form of employment which is home working.
This means allowing their employees to work conveniently at their houses
without having to visit the office. Some people are concerned that this new
trend was created only to benefit employees but not employers. On the
contrary, the author is convinced by valid reasons that employers can take full
advantage of home working as well.
First of all, permitting employees to work from their place is often motivated
by staff motivation. More specifically, by working at home, an individual can
better manage their own time and balance between work and rest, which, in
turn, improves their performance. Additionally, working people would be
very happy if they could skip their daily tiring commute and save time and
fresh energy for work. The absence of their supervisor who controls and
monitors their everyday tasks also contributes to a less stressful workday and
higher job satisfaction.
Moreover, home working allows employers to attract a wider range of

talented people who otherwise could not be employed for various reasons. For
instance, single parents or people with disabilities who often find it difficult to
travel to work can now enjoy the privilege of working at home. As one can
see, home working can offer employers more options in enriching their
human capital.
As outlined above, the consensus that believes employers cannot reap the
benefits of home working is not well-grounded. In fact, this type of
employment not only boosts staff productivity and satisfaction but also gets
the company more skilled employees.
Model Answer 5:
It is true that workers these days can do their jobs at home due to advanced
technologies. Personally, I believe that this trend has positive effects on both
employees and their company’s owners.
On the one hand, people who stay at home for work can be beneficial from
the development of technology. Firstly, choosing to work at home might help
employees from wasting their time. It will not be necessary to commute to
workplace any more if people can accomplish their tasks right in their houses.
This means they have more relaxing time out of work instead of traveling.
Secondly, it is obvious that the internet, fax and mobile phone technologies
have revolutionized work life. Workers can communicate via emails, online
networks and video conferencing regardless of distance. Therefore, the loads
of work can be handled productively among colleagues without face-to-face
meetings.
Besides the advantages mentioned above for individual workers, owners

easily gain profit from adapting this new pattern of working. Companies can
save huge amounts of money that otherwise is used investing in facilities and
capital investment. Thanks to the-state-of-the-art technologies, employers
could take advantage of some new forms of virtual online business that cost
much less construction fee, leading to higher income if successful. For
example, online trading and e-marketing have recently been increasingly
popular and taken into account by many businessmen because those are
inexpensive to set up and run.
In conclusion, technology allows people to work at their homes. This benefits

not only employees but also their employers.
Some people think that the news media nowadays have influenced people’s
lives in negative ways.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Sample Answer 1:
I disagree with the given statement that media has a negative influence on our
lives. In the
following paragraphs, I intend to put forth my arguments in support of my
views.
There are many positive effects of media. To begin with, the usefulness of the
media in
almost instantly providing information about events around the world is
undeniable. It is
because of the media that today we don’t belong to a big planet Earth; we
belong to a small
global village. Furthermore, media also shapes our opinions. It is a link
between the
government and the people. Our conceptions of our elected officials spring
from television
images and newspaper stories. Most of us will never meet prime ministers or
presidents,
but anyone who is regularly exposed to the media will know about them.
When it is time to
cast our vote, we will make our decision based on the media coverage of
candidates.
The media are also influential in the way they facilitate the spread of culture
and lifestyle.
Today, the popularity of Indian culture is an example of the media’s
enormous impact. It is
the media which highlights the good points of our own culture through
programmes such as
‘India’s got Talent’. What is more, the reality shows of today have given
exposure and fame
to the common man with talent today. Indeed, with technological
advancements such as
the Internet bringing even more forms of electronic media to our homes and
workplaces, it
is likely the media’s influence will grow even stronger. Finally, the media
also helps in
providing justice to the common man. Who has not heard of the Jessica
murder case and
the case of Nithari killings? Were it not for the media, Jessica’s parents would
have never
got justice.
As every rose is accompanied by thorns, the media too has its downside. The
paparazzi can
invade the privacy of famous people. Sometimes violence and vulgarity is
shown and at
times it can shape our opinion in negative ways. For that my counter
argument is that once
the person becomes famous then his private life becomes public and he has no
right to crib
about the paparazzi. People can choose what they want to see and technology
has provided
them the tools to block those channels which they don’t want their children to
see. Finally,
God has given us brains to judge what is right or wrong. The media is just
doing its job by
providing us with the latest information.
In conclusion, I would like to reiterate by saying that the influence of media

on our lives is
largely positive.
Model Answer 2:
It is true that our lives have changed significantly due to popularity of news
media. However, I do not agree with the idea that the development of news
media is negative.
To begin with, modern media sources have made great inroads in the
spreading of knowledge. For example, the Internet allowed (and continues to
allow) the world to witness the uprisings of the Arab Spring. Had these
images not been made available to a scrutinizing global audience, it is
possible the entire phenomenon could have cost many more lives than it did.
As this example shows, modern news media allows the human family to keep
watch of each other and provide aid if it is needed.
In addition to this, news media sources have developed simplicity and

accountability the world over, which has done a lot to tackle corruption. Take
the tragic high-speed train crash in China as an example. Despite trying to
quickly bury the carriages involved, the Chinese government was forced to
admit that serious corruption problems had plagued the project from the
beginning. The healthy dialogues that the media coverage of this unfortunate
event sparked will hopefully continue to encourage integrity within the
Chinese government. It is for reasons such as this that news media should be
thought of as a positive entity in the world.
In conclusion, it seems to me that news media have a positive phenomena and

it is hoped that free press will continue to grow with the help of technology
and modern tools.
Model Answer 3:
Thanks to news media which connects us throughout the world. Today we are
not living on big planet earth. We are part of global village. Some people
think that news media have influenced people’s lives in negative ways. I
strongly disagree with the given statement and I shall put my arguments forth
to support my views.
It is irrefutable that media has a lots of advantages. Firstly, it provides us all

the latest information. It also keeps us in touch with technology and those
who are techno savvy come to know about different gadgets. It is a great
source of entertainment. It provides us jokes, games like Sudoku and some
interesting and funny stories. Also it tells us about our celebrities’ lifestyles.
Furthermore, it shapes our views. If anyone has misconception about any

popular personality, he can easily sort out it with the help of news media.
Also pen of editor has great power. One can heard his voice to the higher
authorities by writing letters to the editors. It is a link between government
and common man. Mostly not every person ever get chance to meet famous
Politian, celebrities and sportsmen but they all know about them through
media.
Moreover, it helps in providing justice to the people. For example, everyone

knows about Jessica murder case and it is only the media who helps to
provide justice to Jessica’s parents. What is more it is the media which makes
our culture popular through television programmes such as ‘Just dance’,
‘India’s got Talent’ and many more.
To put it in a nutshell , I pen down saying that media is ubiquitous and

indispensable part of our life. The onus lies on people to take every news with
a pinch of salt and decide what is wrong or right. As every rose has thorns, it
also has some cons which are negligible.
Sample Answer 4:
It is not an exaggeration to say that news, which is brought by media

channels, has become an integral part of modern society, especially when
communication technologies have advanced rapidly. Nonetheless, there is a
growing consensus that believes the media is to adversely impact people’s
lives. Despite such notion, the author is convinced that the media is both a
boon and a bane.
First all of, there is no denying that the role of the media in delivering news is
important, if not vital, to human activities, especially in business
environment. By disseminating information on a timely basis, the media
allows individuals, particularly businesspeople, to make appropriate reaction
on time. For instance, in securities exchange markets, an ideal trader is
expected to follow current affairs, at all levels, around the world and thereby,
able to make suitable buying and selling decisions. Undeniably, it is the
function of the media to broadcast news that help people avoid significant
losses due to inadequacy of information.
Despite their considerable and ongoing contribution, the news media might
sometimes be harmful to society. In return for higher audience ratings, some
newsmakers are willing to sacrifice the validity of the messages which they
convey to the public. It is often seen that news reporters in the newspapers
and on television exaggerate or dramatize some issues or events in order to
draw attention of the desired audiences. This trend is to bring unnecessary
panic among the population.
In summary, the role of news media as information provider should be
acknowledged. However, it is not to say that the news media can always give
people a true and fair view of the problems in society.
Model Answer 5:
For many people, news is a regular pan of life. An issue in dispute is whether
the massive influence of the news media on people’s daily lives denotes a
negative development. It is my view that news media does more good than
harm to the society.
The news media provides people with much of the information they need on a
timely basis, although there are claims that it reports on issues and events
purposely (only selecting those events that interest the audience). Anecdotal
evidence shows that people from all walks of life have the habit of collecting
information regularly from the news media, including print, broadcast and
Internet-based media. Information assists people in decision making. For
example, the Free Trade Agreement reached by the Chinese government and
its New Zealand counterpart might open up many opportunities to both
countries. For any business person, either in New Zealand or in China, failing
to recognise and capitalise on thisimpending change would cause a costly
loss.
Meanwhile it should be recognised that the news media can sometimes save
lives and reduce casualties. There is a lot of uncertainty about
the surroundings, and people are susceptible to the damage caused by
accidents, crimes and natural calamity. The news media conveys
the firsthand information to concerned audiences and enable them to
takecorresponding actions right away. The authority can declare a state of
emergency when it is necessary, organise evacuation and distribute aid to the
needy areas. All these efforts count on the news media as the messenger.
Despite their significant and ongoing contribution to the society, the news
media might sometimes be harmful to society. It is a convention that the news
media exaggerates themagnitude of the real threat (for example, the potential
of a terrorism attack), in order to draw the attention of the desired audiences
and in pursuit of high audience ratings. It ends up with causing panic among
the population. Meanwhile, the news media tends to emphasise some issues or
events, which virtually have little relevance to people’s daily lives, such as an
occasional multiple vehicle accident, an affair that a celebrity is involved
with, and the like. It distracts the audience from something that is much more
noteworthy, for instance, poverty, environmental problems, to name but a
few.
In summary, the role of news media as an information provider should be

acknowledged. In case of emergency, it acts as a lifesaver. However, it is not
to say that the news media can give people an overall view of the problems in
society all the time.
The detailed description about crime will affect the people and cause many
social
problems. Some people say that the media should be strictly controlled.
Do you agree or disagree?ample Answer 1:
Nowadays, we are surrounded by a variety of media like the Internet,

newspaper and TV, which are very informative, and in doing so give a
detailed description of crime. This causes many problems in society and
therefore some people opine that there should be censorship of media. I feel
that the media should be very judicious in selecting what to report and how
much to report. So, I agree with the statement. In this essay, I intend to
support my views with my arguments.
As I see it, the news outlets should pay more attention to the affairs
themselves, rather than the details of the crimes. To start with, the details of
crimes make a misleading statement to the children and adolescents who are
curious about the process of committing crimes, and are likely to copy the
criminal actions blindly. Moreover, the excessive violence and pornographic
contents can also raise the adults’ criminal tendencies. In the other words,
detailed crime news can generate individuals’ potential desire to commit a
crime, thus induce many social problems. So, there should be some control on
the media.
Moreover, the detailed report of a crime does not show enough respects to the
victims and their family. For example, if any murder or robbery has taken
place in someone’s house then if it is shown in detail on TV, the whole
privacy of those people is lost. Another very strong argument in favour of
censorship of media is that sometimes this detailed description can help the
criminals also. For instance, when terrorists attacked Hotel Taj in Mumbai,
the media reported details of the commandos’ position on TV. This was also
viewed by the terrorists hiding in the hotel. They changed their positions
accordingly. Had there been some regulating authority the terrorists could
have been caught much earlier.
However, the opponents claim that we have a right to know every detail and
so media should report every detail. I still feel that it would lead to more
problems. I think the media has an obligation to show the right direction to
the public. It should report news in a balanced manner rather than high-
lighting the details of the crime.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that although it is the duty of the
media to keep us informed, the details of crime should not be shown and for
that censorship of the media is a must.
Some people think that people moving to a new country should accept
new culture in the foreign country rather than living as a separate
minority group with different lifestyle.
Sample Answer 1:
Today, with the passage of time each and every country is on the path of
development, and
with this development there is a growing trend of visiting different places in
different
countries. It is a highly debated issue whether immigrants should do and
behave as the
people of the host country or should they stick to their traditional lifestyle and
live as a
separate minority. It is necessary to look into pros and cons of both situations
before
forming an opinion.
There are many benefits of adopting host countries customs. Firstly, it

decreases chances of
misunderstanding and embarrassment. For e.g. in the UK it is offensive to ask
about pay to
anyone, which is common in India. Secondly, a nation’s customs and
traditions are
fascinating and offer a deep insight into that country. People move to other
countries to
broaden their horizon. So, if immigrants copy the customs of host country,
they learn more
about them and that too in an interesting way. Finally, visitors establish a
rapport with local
people because people feel respected when their customs are understood and
imitated.
They become a member of the host country and so they don’t suffer any
culture shock.
On the other hand there are many advantages of making a minority group. If a
person is
from a country with strong and old traditions, it will be difficult for him to
adapt to the new
customs. He can’t break the old customs such as food habits and wearing
certain types of
clothes. In such cases if he retains his old customs and lives with his own
community as a
separate minority, he won’t suffer from homesickness.
On balance, I feel that someone who is moving to another country should

respect the
customs, culture, traditions etc. of that country. This is necessary because a
newcomer is
like a guest in someone else’s home. So he is expected to follow the rules of
that country.
However, it should not be obligatory for him to follow those customs and
change himself
altogether. As time passes and he gets to know the hosts better then he can
decide if he
wants to adopt any custom or stick to his own. After all being a cosmopolitan
is the need of
the hour.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, mutual understanding between

both the
visitor and the host is necessary to maintain harmony. A cosmopolitan society
in which
everyone is tolerant of each other’s customs and traditions is the need of the
day. After all,
today, we are part of a small global village and not a big planet Earth.
Model Answer 2:
Model Answer:
People may choose to keep their old traditions from their native country or to
accept new ones. Keeping the old customs will help one to overcome the
cultural shock and the change of the environment. From the other side,
accepting the new traditions will help one to adapt and make new friends with
residents. In this essay I will give different reasons why people decide to
follow the customs of the new country or to keep their own customs.
If one is from the country with strong and old traditions, I think it will be
rather difficult for him to adapt to the new customs and moreover to reject his
own. That is why some people from the same country try to live together and
to create their own community where the old traditions are kept. They can not
break the customs that were created by their ancestors. For example, some
nations are restricted in certain kinds of food by their traditions. So, they do
not go to the restaurants unless their traditional food is served there. Some
nations according to their customs have to wear certain types of cloth because
their religion tells them to do so.
From the other side, if one is from the country with traditions similar to ones
of the new country it will be easy for him to adopt and to follow the customs
of the new place. He will not feel much difference. Probably, the most
difficult part of his relocation will be to accustom to the new climate.
I think that people of the new country are friendlier when they see that
foreigner follows their customs. I belief that traditions of every country
deserve respect, especially, when one lives there. In summary, I think that
every country has its own beauty and if one wants to find out more about it he
will love it.
Children who grow up in families which are short of money are better
prepared with the problems of adult life than children who are brought
up by wealthy parents.
Sample Answer 1:
Role of family atmosphere in a child’s development is a cause of concern.

However, I
disagree with the notion that children of poor families are better equipped in
dealing with
the challenges of adult life than those of rich families. No doubt, adversity is a
good teacher
of life, but rich parents can also prepare their children to face the problems of
adult life by
good education and good nurturing.
A child of poor family has more situations to solve a problem or make a

decision as both
parents are working to make both ends meet and children have to look after
themselves.
They realise the value of money as they have to live with the barest minimum
and as a
result they find it less difficult later on in life when they face financial
challenges. In contrast,
the children of wealthy families are born with a silver spoon in their mouth.
They are
completely ignorant of the value of money as everything is provided for them
in their youth
and expect the same situation in adulthood.
On the other hand, children of rich families study in the best schools and get
the best higher
education. They can learn problem solving in such academic institutes. What
is more, a
wealthy child may be well trained by a parent who himself has a lot of
knowledge of money.
Such parents themselves know money management better and can pass on
those skills to
their children.
Life experiences also play a role. Children can have innate ability to face
problems of life.
They may have personality traits such as being optimistic, outgoing, confident
and open-
minded. Due to these abilities they can solve problems in a better way.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, a poor child may learn to get
along without
wealth and a wealthy child may be well trained by a parent to face hurdles of
life by
effective education. Therefore, I disagree that the economic situation of the
family has a
role in problem solving skills.
Model Answer 2:
Today in the competitive world, money plays very important role in the
development of the children. But in the meantime whether it is blessing or
curse has sparked a heated debate. Some people believe that children brought
up by poor parents are better prepared to face the problem. However, other
argues that rich parents brought their children better and they can live
successful life. This essay will discuss both aspects before making any
definitive conclusion.
On one hand side, some people believe that some children from the less
wealthy families might be in the good position. Children from the poor
parents learn how to deal with the difficult situation, and learn to fight,
struggle and solve the problem of daily basis. As a result, poor children are
becoming more hard work and have more patience. For instance, poorer
children may have to wait until the birthday for favorite toy or game that they
have asked for, and this encourage them to learn the patience. Those children
also learn the importance of money which will help them in later life.
On the other hand, some people argue that money is very important for the
better future of the children. Wealthy parents have opportunity to send their
children in better schools and university. As a result, graduation from the
better school and university will secure their future. They will learn social
interaction and deal globally. Rich children have less chance of suffering from
stress and depression because they have all the facilities and incentives.
Furthermore, wealthy parents spent time with their children because they
don’t need to work day and night to support their children.
To sum up, I believe that children from the poorer families can better deals
with the stress and problems of the adult life than richer parent’s children.
Poorer children are more confidence and successful in their life.
Model Answer 3:
Over the past few decades, along with growing interest in child education,
people’s attention to the family environment where a child is brought up has
also significantly increased. Some people have begun to feel that a child who
has grown up in a poor family tend to be better prepared to deal with
problems. In my opinion, however, family environment alone does not much
influence a child’s ability to solve problems.
A child who was born into a poor family would have had more situations
where they had to solve a problem or make a decision on their own. This is
because in most unfortunate families, both parents are usually working and
children are put into situations where they have to take care of themselves. By
contrast, due to their wealth, rich children can experience and learn things that
unfortunate children cannot. For example, they usually go to the best schools
and receive a higher education there, which prepares them better for solving
problems in their life.
However, few would disagree with the fact that each individual is different.
That is, problem solving skills come more from life experience. That is, the
more a person experiences in life, the more they can use these experiences to
adjust, to adapt and to solve problems they encounter. Personality also can be
a factor in dealing with problems. A person who is optimistic, outgoing,
confident and open-minded can look at and solve problems more effectively.
As discussed above, nature and nurture have an equal influence on a child’s

ability to face challenges. Parents should spare no effort to figure out how
they can help their children to be independent. I hope that in the future the
next generation will grow up as mature citizens.
Model Answer 4:
It cannot be denied that financial background has a profound impact on

children’s upbringing. It is suggested that children of poor families are more
efficient at tackling problems in adulthood than those from affluent families. I
am convinced that this is a precise notion.
Poor children are able to make wise decisions when they reach adulthood
because they have got accustomed to hardship from an early age. Poverty
means material difficulties. Impoverished parents can never spend enough
time on taking care of their children because they are preoccupied with
earning a modest income everyday. As a result, those children have to learn to
be independent by taking care of themselves and working to support their
families. The living environment for poor children is quite challenging.
However, it teaches them helpful lessons about material values and human
behavior. Children may make mistakes and suffer failure repeatedly, which
makes them mature rapidly. When they grow up, those children will
appreciate money and assess people’s personalities sensibly.
Conversely, those who are surrounded by extreme care from rich parents have
a propensity to be ignorant of the outside world. Since they live satisfactorily
with abundant support provided by parents, there seems to be no need for
these children to worry about money-related problems. Affluent parents are
often overprotective of their children, so they help them to flee from
difficulties to the maximum. Consequently, rich children will have trouble
deciding by themselves later. More seriously, rich children are often made to
study and distance themselves from the society. What they learn about the
world is reflected mainly in textbooks and through the mass media, which
tend to exaggerate the truth. It is understandable that many rich young adults,
without sufficient knowledge of the social life, have an inaccurate view about
a number of social issues. Nowadays, summer camps and courses about living
skills are organized to help rich children grasp rudimentary know-how about
adult life, but learning indirectly is nowhere near as effective as tackling
problems head-on and gaining experience afterwards. In short, rich children
are likely to have a clumsy approach towards various problems in adulthood
due to their lack of practical knowledge.
As discussed above, with regard to problem solving , children from a poor

background outdo those from prosperous families. This supports the
affirmation that the family background has undisputed influences on
children’s problem solving skills.
The only way to improve the safety on our own road is to have stricter
punishment for driving offenders.
Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that careless driving and violation of traffic rules certainly

result in a large
number of accidents and stricter punishments are necessary to reduce them.
However,
there are also certain other measures that have equal or more effectiveness in
ensuring
road safety.
In the first place, there are certain accidents that occur not because of traffic
violations. To
explain it further, poor road condition is considered a major reason for road
casualties. For
example, narrow roads and sharp curves often force even law-abiding drivers
makes
mistakes. Therefore, it should be noted that drivers alone cannot be blamed
for such
mishaps and giving them stricter punishments in these cases is no solution. A
more
effective strategy by the government would be to straighten accident prone
curves and
widen narrow roads. Larger number of road signs and proper traffic signals
can also be
effective in reducing accidents on roads.
Furthermore, poor climate condition can be a major cause of accidents. For

instance, poor
visibility due to dense mist and rain, slippery roads on account of snowfall
cause make
driving difficult and cause serious accidents in many countries. Stricter
punishment for
drivers is a futile exercise in handling such problems. Modern technological
innovations
should be used to deal with such emergency situations.
On the other hand, reckless driving, speeding and breach of traffic rules by
careless drivers
have caused many accidents. Moreover, drunken and drowsy driving have
also resulted
serious traffic mishaps. While we admit that more stringent punishment for
drivers would
be an effective measure to an extent, it should not be considered the only way
towards road
safety.
In summary, there are certain situations where drivers are not responsible for
a particular
accident. Hence apart from punishing drivers with heavier penalties other
effective
measures should also be taken.
Sample Answer 2:
In my opinion one of the major causes of road accidents is the violation of

traffic rules. The best way to keep the drivers law obedient is to give them
punishment for offensive driving and for breaking the traffic rules. According
to me the punishment must be very proportional to the mistake made.
Life is very precious and many people die annually in traffic accidents and
many more get severely injured. To avoid traffic accidents, law must be very
strict and vibrant. There are many scenarios of unlawfully driving. Young
drivers seek pleasure with very high speed driving. Some bike riders get
enjoyment while driving on one wheel. Some drivers think that wearing seat
belt is putting a burden on their body. Few people even drive while they are
drunk and they lose the good control on wheel and pedals. The only way to
stop this lawlessness is to award the punishment. Punishment may be in the
form of money, imprisonment, confiscation of licence, making the insurance
high.
There are wide varieties of offenders; some do it for the sake of thrills and
others due to human error and negligence. I believe that when there is element
of human error, warning is enough. If we impose heavy fine for minor human
errors then people will drive with anxiety and ultimately will lose confidence
on wheels. My personal opinion is to educate the people before issuance of
licence. In temporary licensure period drivers will learn about rules and
regulation of roads, negative effect of alcohol in driving, maintenance of
vehicle, own health, road safety etc. When someone will know about every bit
of law and keeping in mind the consequences of violation then there will be
least chances of offending the law and jeopardizing of life.
Life is very precious and state should frame every rule possible for provision
of ultimate security to road users. Firstly drivers should be educated then
given warning for minor human errors and lastly strict punishment for
violation of rules.
Sample Answer 3:
Many people think that the best way to improve road safety is by giving
stricter punishment to careless drivers. To a certain point, I would agree with
the statement, but there are other methods that could also be used to improve
it as imposing stricter penalty in my opinion is not the only way to ensure
safety on roads.
On the one hand, it is true that having a stricter punishment and increasing the
penalties for irresponsible drivers would reduce traffic accidents and improve
road safety. For example, it is a fact that using a mobile phone while driving a
car is a dangerous act. However, due to the light punishment, many people
still use the phone while driving. Should the authority change the punishment
into a heavier one, then people will consider twice before they use the phone
while driving. Besides, violation of any traffic rule can lead to severe accident
and if the punishment is made stern, people would likely obey them.
On the other hand, there is another method that the government could use in
improving road safety besides having a stricter punishment. The government
could make a campaign about safety driving through various media which
would show the effect of careless driving. For instance, the government could
make a safety video about road safety and upload it in social media since the
message will be effectively spread in this kind of media. As more people are
watching these videos, it is hoped that drivers will have a clearer view about
safety driving.
In conclusion, to a certain extent, I agree that having a stricter punishment

would improve road safety. But I also believe that it should also be supported
with other ways, and one of them is by giving audio visual shows about safety
driving.
Model Answer 4:
People have differing views with regard to the question of how to make our
roads safer. In my view, both punishments and a range of other measures can
be used together to promote better driving habits.
On the one hand, strict punishments can certainly help to encourage people to
drive more safely. Penalties for dangerous drivers can act as a deterrent,
meaning that people avoid repeating the same offence. There are various
types of driving penalty, such as small fines, licence suspension, driver
awareness courses, and even prison sentences. The aim of these punishments
is to show dangerous drivers that their actions have negative consequences.
As a result, we would hope that drivers become more disciplined and alert,
and that they follow the rules more carefully.
On the other hand, I believe that safe driving can be promoted in several
different ways that do not punish drivers. Firstly, it is vitally important to
educate people properly before they start to drive, and this could be done in
schools or even as part of an extended or more difficult driving test. Secondly,
more attention could be paid to safe road design. For example, signs can be
used to warn people, speed bumps and road bends can be added to calm
traffic, and speed cameras can help to deter people from driving too quickly.
Finally, governments or local councils could reduce road accidents by
investing in better public transport, which would mean that fewer people
would need to travel by car.
In conclusion, while punishments can help to prevent bad driving, I believe

that other road safety measures should also be introduced
Model Answer 5:
As the number of traffic accidents has increased dramatically recently, the

responsibility of the government for road safety has never been heavier. It is
argued the only way the authority can fulfill this responsibility is to repress
traffic offenders by means of stiff punishment. However, from my point of
view, road safety cannot be ensured with this sole method but the
combination of various actions.
The advantages of punishing traffic law-breakers are undeniable in many

aspects. First of all, once a fearful punishment is imposed and, it suppresses
people’s attempt to make the offence a second time. Moreover, an
individual’s penalty can be considered a mirror at which other people can
look and try not to do the same thing. However, this method sometimes
causes unwanted danger on the road as people who have made the offence
will attempt to avoid being arrested by, for example, speeding up or turning
round when they see the police.
It is obvious the driving offences is not the only reason that leads to road
accidents. One crucial thing that the government can accomplish to ensure
road safety is to increase the quality of traffic facilities. In many developing
countries, traffic system in rural areas is not fully built with roads being too
narrow or inadequate number of road signs, which can easily lead to vehicles’
collision. Another important thing that can be done is to educate people with
traffic law and safety. This is especially necessary to the young generation
because they account for a large proportion of traffic offences. In addition,
various methods to reduce the number of vehicles on the road can be taken.
Many countries invest in public transport system while some increase traffic
fees.
Based on the reasons above, it can be concluded the severe punishment
cannot be the only way to achieve road safety. Other methods should be
carefully considered in order to reach accident-free traffic.
The speeding up of life in many areas such as travel and communication

has negative effects on society at all levels—individual, national and
global.
Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that the IT revolution and faster means of travel have affected
society at all
levels. However, I disagree that all these effects are negative. The society has
also
benefitted enormously from this speeding up of life which in other words we
can say
globalization.
At the individual level, we have more choices, more opportunities to travel,

better job
prospects and more awareness and tolerance of other cultures. Due to better
communication, people are connected with their near and dear ones and
distances are no
longer a barrier. There has been a fall in face-to-face communication but the
social network
of friends that the young generation of today has is far more than ever before
in the history
of mankind.
At the national level, countries are getting closer and the boundaries are
disappearing.
Because of this fast era of today, nations are developing strong bonds doing
successful trade
with each other. The rich nations are opening Multi National Companies in
developing
countries and thus providing job opportunities to millions. This is narrowing
the gap
between the rich and the poor. No doubt the people working in such
companies are
underpaid but it is definitely better than being unemployed. Because of this
the economies
of the poor countries are improving.
At the global level, nations are joining hands to fight evils such as poverty,
disease, terrorism
and global warming. Who has not heard of the Kyoto Protocol. The major
feature of the
Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries
and the European
community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions .
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, the accelerating pace of life has
both negative
as well as positive effects. However, the positive effects are much more than
negative
effects.
Model Answer 2:
Nowadays, people can travel and communicate more efficiently than before
due to the advancements in science and technology. Although some people
claim that it has a detrimental influence on individuals, nations and
international societies, I personally believe its advantages far outweigh its
disadvantages.
One problem opponents of such speeding up often propose is that individuals

bearing fast-pace of life today could lead to psychological diseases. For
instance, business people are supposed to reply emails or telephones in a short
time compared to dealing snail mails in the past. Time pressure could cause
tension, hurting psychological conditions in the long term. However, tension
is not as much as people might think because advanced technology allows
people to do things in a short time rather than having them work overtime.
Besides, the other side is that business people can also expect quick reply
from others, which is conducive to their own business, too.
Another hazard at the national and international level often being criticized is
the environmental pollution. This means airplanes and cars today(which help
speed up travelling) emit more CO2, which could destroy Ozone layer and is
responsible for greenhouse effect. However, this assertion has some
problems. It should not be neglected that visual conference on the internet—a
result of speeding up in communication area—has considerably reduced the
number of international meetings face to face, that means, less travelling.
Such speeding up has some benefits. To begin with, it improves individuals’

efficiency and help to increase a country’s GDP. It is because people could do
more work in less time today, producing more revenues for businesses,
thereby enhancing a country’s economic power. Moreover, it helps to
improve international exchange and communication. People can easily get the
latest information worldwide including those from faraway regions, which is
beneficial for international understanding.
To conclude, the speeding up of life in travel and communication areas brings

more benefits than drawbacks to individuals, nations and international
societies.
Model Answer 3:
It is irrefutable that the IT revolution and faster means of travel have affected
society at all levels. However, I disagree that all these effects are negative.
The society has also benefited enormously from this speeding up of life which
in other words we can say globalization.
At the individual level, we have more choices, more opportunities to travel,

better job prospects and more awareness and tolerance of other cultures. Due
to better communication, people are connected with their near and dear ones
and distances are no longer a barrier. There has been a fall in face-to-face
communication but the social network of friends that the young generation of
today has is far more than ever before in the history of mankind.
At the national level, countries are getting closer and the boundaries are
disappearing. Because of this fast era of today, nations are developing strong
bonds doing successful trade with each other. The rich nations are opening
Multi National Companies in developing countries and thus providing job
opportunities to millions. This is narrowing the gap between the rich and the
poor. No doubt the people working in such companies are underpaid but it is
definitely better than being unemployed. Because of this the economies of the
poor countries are improving.
At the global level, nations are joining hands to fight evils such as poverty,
disease, terrorism and global warming. Who has not heard of the Kyoto
Protocol? The major feature of the Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding
targets for 37 industrialized countries and the European community for
reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, the accelerating pace of life has
both negative as well as positive effects. However, the positive effects are
much more than negative effects.
Model Answer 4:
There is no denying the fact that our life is speeding up in many aspects such
as travel and communication.Many people worried that it has negative effects
on society at all levels – individual, national and global. As far as I am
concerned, it has distinct effects on these 3 levels, for the following reasons.
Firstly, accelerating our life is harmful to individuals.This is mainly because

that it is intolerant for people living under huge pressure on both mentally and
physically. A recent survey illustrates that three more times number of people
suicide for bankrupt or unemployment than that of 10 years ago. Furthermore,
to get used to fast lifestyle,people have to give up the traditional cooking,and
grab the Mc Donal’s instead. In fact,junk food saves our time while shorten
our lives.
Secondly, nations will benefit from the speeding up of life. Fast travelling and
communication make the society operate effectively and efficiently. Thereby
nations become richer.For example, it took about 6 days by ship to export 5
tons of apples from China to Singapore,but all we need is 4 hours by air
transport.As result,government will try harder to quicken out life,for time is
money.
Finally, the speeding of lige is a double edged sword regarding the global.In
the one hand,the faster people spin, the more global economy is stimulated.
Thus it speeds up globalization. In another hand, globalization is badly
threatening the environment. We have to keep the fast development under
surveillance and regulated by authorities. Unless we are returned by some
more natural disasters such as tsunami and earthquakes.
All in all, from what mentioned above,we can draw a conclusion that
althrough speeding up of lige has lots of negtive effects on society, I tend to
think that we can still take some advantages from that.
Advertising encourages consumers to buy in quantity rather than

promoting quality.
Sample Answer 1:
Whether it is on TV, radio or hoardings at the side of the road, advertisements

have become
a part of our lives. Advertising is a powerful and persuasive medium. I agree
with the former
half of the given statement that adverts encourage people to buy in quantity.
However, I
disagree that adverts do not promote quality. I shall put forth my arguments to
support my
views in the following paragraphs.
On the one hand, advertisements make us pile up things in the home which
we may never
ever use. For example, we get lured by the one-on-one scheme that companies
promote
just to sell their old stock in bulk. For example, recently, I bought three pairs
of jeans of Levis
brand because there was a two-on-one offer. What I did not realise then was
that the
designs were outdated and defective. Now those jeans are just occupying
space in my
almirah.
Because of advertisements, sometimes we buy what tempts us without the

insight of what
we need actually. Impressive images, videos, or captions are bound to leave
an imprint on
us. For example, media is flooded with the advertisements of beauty products
and they all
claim to make you fair in a few days. Women, and these days, even men are
crazy about
these things and buy these things even without consulting their dermatologist.
On the other hand, advertisements are very crucial given the fast pace of life
today. The
advertisements open our eyes to all the latest facilities and trends and with
that give us the
chance and opportunity of choosing from the wide range of products available
for we have
little time to make discoveries about what is required. Advertising links
producers and
consumers by providing relevant information of the latest products and
services. Thanks to
advertising, we know that there are so many nice things available. Moreover,
an
overwhelming majority of consumers are sensible enough to consider their
options before
they decide on a particular item.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that adverts promote quantity but
they tell us
about quality too. The onus lies on us to look into our real needs and not be
swayed by
adverts.
Model Answer 2:
Advertisements play an important role in informing individuals about the

availability of products. Thus, they are the primary source of information and
motivating people for shopping. However, I believe that adverts encourage
individuals to purchase items in bulk. In this essay, we will analyse how
adverts make use of offers for persuading people in buying products in
wholesale.
To begin with, most of the companies provide some deals on buying more
number of objects. A good illustration for this is the lux company which
agrees to give soap free on purchase of two soaps. By advertising such
proposals, people are induced for buying extra soaps than actually required.
Thus, it is apparent that the aim of such proposition is to invoke people for
acquiring objects in large number rather than quality products.
In addition, some companies provide some perk on buying their product. For
instance, they announce a free abroad trip for those who are able to find a
hidden code on the cover of item. With the hope of getting an opportunity to
travel abroad, individuals keep on buying the product either until the offer is
expired or until they win a trip. Therefore, the theory of adverts focusing on
selling products in large number is difficult to debunk.
After analysing the purpose of adverts, it is obvious that by offering gifts they
provoke society in buying excess things rather than quality. As it is seen that
people prefer shopping those goods which provide some gifts rather than the
goods of good quality. It is hoped that government will enforce some
regulations on the adverts for the product for declaring unnecessary gifts.
Sample Answer 3:
Nowadays, advertising has become increasingly popular. This raises

questions about its function. Although some people claim that it helps
improve product quality, I personally believe it more encourages sales
volume.
Advertising boosts sales volume in several ways. For one thing, advertising
informs potential customers of their products, including product features,
advantages and effects. When deciding which product to buy among many
similar alternatives such as wash powders, most people tend to choose the
brand they know. As a result, products advertised frequently are more likely
to be customers’ choice. For another, advertising campaigns could include
marketing strategy such as “the second one free”, which means customers can
have two items together in a cheaper price than purchasing each item
separately. This obviously encourages customers to buy more.
Some people claim that advertising could help improve quality because in the
long term only those good-quality products can win market share. However,
they are oversimplifying the situation. To begin with, the assumption that
consumer has the ability to judge product quality s arguable. For example, it
would be difficult for customers to feel and decide whether or not a nutrition
product has effects. Moreover, advertising needs money, which doubtlessly
forms the cost of the product. In order to compete with other products,
producers tend to cut budget of research and development or other product
cost to keep the product price within a specific range. In other words,
advertising might lead to the reduction of funds for improving quality,
To conclude, advertising is more conducive to increasing quantity rather than

enhancing quality.
Model Answer 4:
With the fierce competition, these days, most companies may not be able to
promote their products and increase their sales without marketing campaigns.
Therefore, it has been argued that advertising lure people to purchase
impulsively rather than focusing on the quality of the product. From my
perspective, I am in favour of this statement.
Firstly, there is a widely-accepted fact that advertising is recognized as the

most effective way to boost the sales of the company. This is particularly true
in this commercial world, where those fancy and well-designed advertisings
are more likely to attract customers’ attention so as to encourage them to
purchase products. For example, the Apple Company has successfully
dominated the smart-phone industry because of their advertising that showing
on TV or other media.
Secondly, it is more important to remember that many purchases are not made
rationally. Our choices of products are mainly based on emotions and
personal preference, and advertisers are expert at manipulating these. Our
concerns over our appearance and social status are used by advertisers to sell
products regardless of the actual quality or our need.
Lastly, advertising does provide information regarding the product quality.

Tough regulation that imposed on the advertisement industry means
exaggerated and misleading information of the product will not exist. This is
particularly true in the food industry, where all food products are required to
list the nutrition and expiry date to ensure the health of consumers. In some
cases, potential customers can compare different products before they
purchase, or provide feedback to the advertiser to improve the quality.
In conclusion, the role of advertising is to sell the product effectively for the
companies rather than focusing on the quality of products. As consumers,
people should check the quality by themselves.
Model Answer 5:
Advertising plays an increasingly significant role in the competitive business

world. Practically all sectors of the modern economy utilize the power of adve
rtising in order to attract, to win or even to preserve the pool of their customer
s, and at the same time keep them away from their competitors. The impact of
advertising is so significant that leads too many people to go and buy things t
hat they do not really want or need. Many people do not realize that, although
advertising encourages everybody to purchase things they may or may not wa
nt or need, by conveying ideas that sometimes are misleading and lead them t
o take wrong decisions. Still, advertising provides people with a means to assi
st them during the selection between numerous products and services.
Firstly, the purpose of advertising is to differentiate products that may practic
ally be the same. This may lead people to buy products or services they don’t
actually want or need, using images or ideas that may be attractive but mislea
ding. Advertising has proved to be a very powerful and relatively cheap tool u
sed to highlight the qualities and features of the specific product, even in pote
ntially dangerous cases like cigarettes, alcohol and other products considered
by modern societies as undesirable or even dangerous, such as drugs, and so o
n. For example, various cigarette companies sponsor many sport events, and u
se this to be promote their products. They more sponsorship they undertake, t
he more they advertise their products. This results to more people smoking no
wadays, because they are influenced by the successful advertising, even thoug
h smoking is known to be bad for their health.
Advertising is especially important and useful when a new product is launche

d at the market. This needs extensive and constant advertising to penetrate int
o a market that is already full of similar products. Another example, which ap
plies particularly in the case of young children, is that of fast food. When a fas
t food brand launches a new type of potatoes it immediately starts advertising
them using TV and all means available, because it knows that young children
will want to go and taste them. As a result, this will force the other brands to a
dvertise their own potatoes, because they will worry that this new one will tak
e customers from them. Of course, the fact that fast food is bad for health is n
ot mentioned at all, instead, it became appealing to the public through success
ful tactics in advertising.
However, when advertising is used properly, it gives the opportunity to peopl

e to choose correctly, especially for things that are essential in their daily lives
. When I say “used properly” I mean when giving details like price, quality, a
nd reliability. This kind of advertising gives the ability to consumers to judge
whether a specific product fits them or not.
In conclusion, advertising has both a good and a bad aspect. The good one is t
hat it can help people save time and money by giving all required information
which will help them to decide if they need a specific product or not. The bad
aspect is that when it is used on a wrong way, it influences people to buy thin
gs that they don’t need, by providing misleading ideas or images, thus making
people to make the wrong decisions. Unfortunately, my experience is that adv
ertising is used mainly the wrong way, because there’re too many products th
at nobody needs, but still they must sale them.
Model Answer 6:
Advertisements are everywhere: on TV, radio or at large electronic boards at t

he side of the road. This is so because advertising is a very powerful medium
that guides peoples’ decisions. I think that it is true, advertising ‘forces’ peopl
e to buy in quantities, not taking into real consideration of the quality of the pr
oducts they buy.
One of the most devious purposes the advertisements are used for is when co
mpanies are trying to sell their old stock. They say, for example that when yo
u get two items they give you another one for free. What they hide is that mos
t times the things they sell are outdated – when referring to clothes – or even
weathered, when referring to electronics, etc.
The real goal of advertisements is to buy things that impress us, not examinin
g whether we need them or not. And this is achieved using videos of beautiful
people using the specific item. The message is that you’ll be like them if you
use that thing which, of course, is not true. I think one of the most tell-tale exa
mples is the one of beauty products. They say that if you use them you’ll stay
young and beautiful forever, when everybody knows that this is a lie. The res
ult of these lies is that women – and men in an increasing number – spent ver
y much money to get things that most probably have no use whatsoever, and c
ompanies get really rich.
However, there’s a positive aspect in advertising. As we all know, life has spe
ed up in such a way that people have very little time for themselves. Advertise
ments help people select products fast and relatively cheap. And, if they’re rea
lly careful with what they select, on a way that won’t harm their health. This c
an help consumers become a bit more aware of their needs.
Despite the relatively positive note of the last paragraph, I still believe that the
way advertisement is used is harmful to the consumers in more than one ways
(health, money, time, etc).
Model Answer 7:
Manufacturers around the world nowadays utilize advertisement as the most

effective way to introduce and bring their products to their consumers.
Therefore, there is an increasing trend of advertising in quantity in which
many forms of advertisement are presented through mass media. However, it
appears that the quality is neglected and advertising should put the emphasis
on its core value.
The ultimate goal of many brands or manufacturers is to boost sales and make
a great deal of profit. They may make use of all forms of advertisement such
as TV commercial, ad in newspaper, billboard on the street, popup ads for
those surfing Internet or endorsement from famous people. All are for the
main purpose of non-stop arousing interest of people and drawing their
attention to the products. In addition, the act of advertising also highlights
some special offers such as promotion, discount or customer service, which
entices customers to purchase more. However, all of this doesn’t mean lots of
advertising can do the trick to encourage people to buy things and, more
seriously, this leaves the bad impression to the public because they are
overwhelmed by lots of advertisement.
Quality versus quantity is always the most debated issue in any aspect of life
and advertising is not the exception. Advertising, on the other hand, should
make quality superior to quantity. The brand awareness should be expanded,
on the other word the increase of brand’s reputation, which can take the
opportunities of attracting potential customers, retaining current consumers at
the same time or even being able to draw more attention of customers from
the other rival brands. Advertising, additionally, must create a good piece of
public mind. Specifically, favorable impression should be made in every piece
of advertisement. That is, instead of making lots of advertisement and
sacrificing the quality in order to attract customers with the content which
may be silly or make no sense, putting lots of effort in creating a good
advertisement with the aim to convey the meanings and meet the exact need
of consumers can actually make a tremendous profit from introducing the
products to the public.
To sum up, highly promoting the quality of advertising should be considered

the vital choice for any brand to meet their expectation in boosting sales
rather focusing on bombarding public with lots of advertisement.
Model Answer 9:
These days, advertising holds an important role in the economic development.

Many people believe that advertisement’s aim is the amount of consumption
and quality of products are not improved. In my opinion, I partly agree with
this idea.
On the one hand, advertising can promote the advancement of manufacturing
process. Firstly, advertisements inform customers about the choices that they
have. It provides some details about products like nutrition index, components
and features which help consumer select suitable items. Secondly,
advertisements create competitions among companies. Currently, customers
often tent to healthy products and give their feedback about advantages and
disadvantages of goods on selling website after they utilize. As a result,
companies must enhance quality of products and reduce prizes in order to
meet customer’s demand.
On the other hand, advertising mainly focus on selling products. First,

advertisements often exaggerate quality of products which lead to buying of
consumers. False information which is not endorsed can mislead customers
about their quality of goods. For example, on Facebook many girls often buy
cosmetics which are unknown origin through exaggeration of uses. These
products can cause allergies, skin infection and other diseases which impact
seriously on their health. Furthermore, now we live in a consumer culture
with continuous changes of technology and modern products and fashion
clothing. And advertisements persuade us to follow the latest trend or stick
certain brands with a higher status. If we do not have a careful and wise
selection, we will waste time, money and lose our satisfaction of life.
In conclusion, I agree that advertising is a key part of business and have

positive effect on their consumer culture if it conveys real information to
customers.
Model Answer 10:
Advertisements have become indispensable part in ordinaries’life. Although

advertisers have helped manufacturers promote large quantity of products or
services to consumers, they can’t promise stable quality to consumers. I think
increasing sales volume is the primary role of advertisement. This essay will
analyze some supportive explanations for this opinion.
Advertisements act as a bridge connecting consumers with manufactures.

Their roles are to help principals, manufacturers or wholesalers, sell products
as much as possible. On the other side hundreds of millions consumers get
commercial information they wanted from variety of advertisements. This is a
normal economic phenomenon in business world. In other word,
advertisers’basic role is not responsible for helping or supervising
manufacturers improving quality of products being advertised. Another
reason is that either manufacturing or advertisement is a specialized industry.
Operators in one industry may not have capabilities or qualifications to
interfere other industries’internal quality control and improvement. This is a
result of industrial division in commercial society.
However, we can’t ignore some advertisements’ positive affections on

products’quality when millions of consumers buy various goods after
watching or reading commercials. Consumers know certain products just by
commercials. Therefore, advertisers have a duty to ensure that products or
services being promoted should be compliance with some legal requirements
at least. This can be seen as external quality control. Further, if advertisers can
actively offer consumers’feedbacks about products to their principals, they
have played a role of improving quality in the whole marketing process. From
this point advertisers can facilitate quality promotion to some extent.
In conclusion, although quality improvement is not advertisers’ fundamental

role, an excellent advertiser can help manufacturers improve their products
while they are assisting their principals in volume marketing. This can
increase advertisers’and manufacturers’ marketing achievement together.
The main purpose of public libraries is to provide books and they
shouldn’t waste their limited resources and space on providing expensive
hi-tech media such as computer software, videos and DVDs.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Sample Answer 1:
Since centuries libraries are in the service of man. These libraries are the
repositories of
never ending knowledge known as books. Some people opine that libraries
should only
provide books and not other hi-tech media such as computer software, videos
and DVDs. I,
however, believe that such hi-tech media should not be treated as a rival to
books. Rather, it
should serve as a complementary role.
Because of technology, books are now being converted into disc forms such
as CDs and
DVDs. Even the availability of books in the form of electronic media on NET
is putting in
danger the importance of the libraries. Moreover, a person can sit comfortably
in his study
as the availability of reference books in the form of CDs and DVDs makes
him reluctant to
leave his study for library.
However, one should keep in mind that a person goes to a library not only to
search and get
information from books but also to sit and study there. The ambience and the
peaceful and
scholarly atmosphere of the library help one to concentrate more on one’s
work and study.
Thus, libraries will never become redundant. They will always be there to
indicate the
presence of a well-read and educated society.
Another important point is that it is very difficult to always read books from
the computer
monitor. Traditional books can be issued from the library and read in the
comfort of your
bed. Hi-tech media can be accessed only by those who are computer literate.
The access to
such media can be affected by power cuts and network failures. Moreover, in
a traditional
library you are guided by the librarians if you need any help in searching for
the book.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that advancement should be

welcomed in every
field but the importance of the libraries for their fundamental role cannot be
put aside. This
tendency will add more crowns of success to the importance of libraries.
Sample Answer 2:
It is a fact that public libraries are present in almost all cities across the globe,
due to its emerging needs. In addition to rending and selling books, most of
the libraries have digital media like software, videos and DVDs. I refute that
on top of providing books, libraries should not provide latest media to the
users. This can be proven by analyzing how libraries can attract youths as
well as have advanced effect, by having the option of lending latest
technological media.
Firstly, by providing latest media in libraries, a lot of youngsters will be

interested in coming to library, as they are very comfortable with using the
latest technology. For example, consider the software which helps in learning
a language. For the young people who are comfortable in using computers can
learn the language within very less time, as the software acts as a very good
guide. If the same task has to be accomplished by a book, people would find it
very difficult as there is no feedback. Thus, it is obvious that by lending latest
technology in libraries, can be advantageous.
Secondly, high technological media can give advance effect as it can be

played on the appropriate gadget. For instance, a DVD player has an option to
stream the video and it can have the appropriate sound effect. Moreover, it
has an option to start, stop and move forward or backward at any time. Books
cannot have any additional effect. Hence, it is clear why lending latest
technological media in library is worth.
The present era is the blessing of technology and these technological
advancements should be embraced as many ways as possible. We are not
talking about replacing books by using technological advancement, rather we
are talking about adding the benefits that the technology can offer in a library
where more people would come and get better facility and learning
environment. Hence, spending money for technological benefits in a library is
never a waste of money.By analyzing how lending latest technological media
in libraries can help more youngsters attracted as well as can have special
effects, it is considered that libraries must provide updated media. It is
predicted that the government will give financial support to the libraries to
have latest media.
Model Answer 3:
The main purpose of public libraries were to give access of books to

communities and should not look into having technological items such as
computer softwares, videos or DVDs in libraries due to limited support.
However, I disagree with the public libraries focusing on only providing
hardcopy books as technological items can also provide useful information to
the community.
There are manifold points to shore up my views. First and foremost, the
advancement of technology today has been a norm and necessity for our
society. The use of computer and other gadgets has highly been promoted to
ease our daily routine especially for students and teenagers. For examples,
study by Acer International showed that 95% of college students owns a
computer and uses it for basic research for their assignment and thesis. It
simplify the search of information and resources for the students rather than
going thru hardcopy books which in turn utilizes a huge amount of time. The
search can be done with a click of a button and access thru the world wide
web.
Besides that, the establishment of libraries are to provide knowledge and

resources for local communities. Having easier access can encourage and help
train people on the use of technology for some that is unable to afford this
luxury. By doing this, equal basic knowledge of use is easily accessible by all
levels. For instances, public libraries in Australia provide access to computer,
music album and DVDs for public to have proof to be a great success to train
elderly in computer knowledge such as basic access to news and journals
online. Furthermore, multifarious original music albums and DVDs available
for loan indirectly also benefits the local music and filming industry to reduce
piracy videos and illegal downloads.
In conclusion, public libraries need to work to provide accessibility to
communities as technological gadgets has now become a norm which we
cannot live without.
Sample Answer 4:
Over the past few years the advances in high-tech media have started to
change many aspects of our lives. Some people think that the public libraries
should offer the unlimited access to software, videos and DVDs; while others
hold that it is only a waste of money. I tend to agree that public libraries need
to be equipped with special high-tech media devices.
The first point to note is that people are more interested in using technical
equipment rather than old-fashioned methods of searching certain
information. As the 21 century continues to unfold, people give preference to
using new innovations. A telling example is a student preferring utilizing
database search engine instead of ordinary library catalogue. For many
people, including students, which are always in rush with this option is very
advantageous. They find book catalogues useless and time-consuming.
Despite what has been discussed, the benefits of books ca not be denied. It is
an individual choice whether to select books in spite of software. It is
undoubtedly all users have different personal characteristics; one might
express willingness to read a book in a cozy arm-chair in the library hall. It is
a better way of preventing eyesight deterioration as well. Moreover some
people are not confident computer users. They might be able to work on
computers only under librarian’s assistance.
One could draw the conclusion that high-tech media has certainly affected our
lives. Public libraries should give access to both: books and the software. It is
up to person whatever her or she finds more practical and comfortable to
utilize.
Model Answer 5:
In a traditional sense, libraries are places with a large collection of books.

However, the digital age has given today’s libraries new means of storing and
retrieving information on media other than the printed pages. CD – ROMs,
videos and DVDs are widely used in public libraries, and they serve both the
libraries and the readers.
Opponents of high – tech library would argue that multimedia facilities are
expensive. This may be true to some extent because a DVD player is often
more expensive than a bookshelf. However, with immense storage capacity,
these new high – tech media can actually save the most valuable resource –
space. A computer disc 12 cm in diameter can store a whole encyclopedia
Britannica which, in printed volumes, would occupy a complete shelf section.
Furthermore, magnetic and digital media can store information much longer
than traditional means. It takes great care to protect books from moisture, fire
or human damage, and a book in a library serves readers for only a few
hundred years. However, digital files, easily duplicated and restored, can
perhaps last forever.
Finally, visiting a library with multiple media access is much more

interesting. Multi – media resources offer readers a dynamic combination of
images, sounds and videos. A reader can actually hear Martin Luther King
crying out “I have a dream”, or roam about the world with an interactive atlas.
Model Answer 6:
With the proliferation of high-tech media, some people hold that the public
libraries would be rendered obsolete if they do not offer software, videos or
DVDs to their users while other assert it’s only a waste of limited resources
and the libraries should offer books only.
High-tech media is, in many ways, indeed superior to the books in terms of
entertainment, attraction, and functionality. For instance, videos and DVDs
function as a visual means to assist people to have a first-hand experience
even though those people have not physically visited or seen the objects
which are introduced in the books. Also, despite the audio-visual equipment
would be prohibitive to install, the capital cost would be lowered by appealing
to a sizable number of users.
More importantly, software could assist the library goers to access the
Internet to update their knowledge on a daily basis; in contrast, books
typically take multiple months to be published, which in turn render their
contents outdated to some extent. In addition, upon learning that the computer
literacy has become an essential skill recently, public libraries should take on
the responsibility to educate its users how to operate a computer.
Furthermore, it is a common practice for most public libraries to share their

resources via the Internet. In this way, even if one book of interest cannot be
found in one library, the borrower still could locate the book from other
libraries and then request the librarians to transfer the book to that particular
library.
In conclusion, public libraries would benefit in multiple ways if they are
equipped with the high-tech media.
Many people believe that scientific research should be carried out and
controlled by the governments rather than private companies.
Sample Answer 1:
There is no doubt that scientific research can provide a lot of wealth to a

country. However,
it is a matter of debate whether these researches should be carried out by
governments or
private companies. From my point of view, both the governments and private
companies
should be actively involved in scientific researches.
There is a strong argument why scientific researches should not be done only
by the
government. Government has so much else on its shoulders. It has to provide
infrastructure
such as transportation, hospitals and education institutes to the citizens. Then
it has to
support the defence services and even maintain law and order in the country.
There are some areas, however, where only the government should carry out
and control
scientific research. Firstly, researches into nuclear technology and national
defence are very
crucial. They cannot be left into the hands of private companies. Secondly,
some researches
are only for the advancement of knowledge. In such research the private
companies have
no incentive. So the government should take the leading role.
There are many areas in which private companies should participate in

scientific researches.
To begin with, researches are done more efficiently by private companies
because they are
profit driven. Every dollar is spent wisely to ensure maximum benefits and
every resource is
used effectively to avoid waste. Also, researches by private companies are
closely associated
with market needs. Private companies are market oriented so they always
come up with
inventions that have practical values that can increase productivity and
improve life. For
example, researches in cosmetics and cough medicines.
Both, governments and private companies should be active in scientific

research. Some
researches should be done only by the government, some by private
companies and in
some the resources can be shared.
Model Answer 2:
It is common that many private companies in many countries carry out

scientific researches and programs. However, because of the advantages of
sufficient funding, reinforced security, and supporting for non-profit
programs, in my opinion, scientific researches should be carried out and
controlled by the governments.
First of all, some huge scientific researches such as outer space programs
require the participation of thousands of researchers and the corporation of
various institutions, and all these requirements are needed the sufficient
financial support. As an administrator of society, the government is obliged to
allocate a high proportion funding to scientific research. The government is in
a good position to mobilize and coordinate the resource of funding all over
the country to accomplish scientific projects.
In addition, as the results of scientific research sometimes contain confidential

information that is vital to national security. Some high technological results,
for example: the nuclear generating station and the cloning; should be
controlled by the government. The government can contribute their power to
prevent bad effects such as nuclear leaking and protect the public’s security.
Lastly, some of researches are long-term non-profit programs, for example,

preserving and protecting the ecosystem of our planet from natural or man-
made disturbances; these researches would not be carried out in the private
companies because they are profit driven. The government would control
these researches to protect the ecosystem and the society.
In conclusion, since the government can contribute its financial support,

security issues, and non-profit researches, it should take the leading role in the
scientific research.
Sample Answer 3:
Instead of being conducted by private companies, some people think that
scientific research must be managed and monitored by the governments. I
personally believe that private companies should be given their own freedom
in doing research, but with sufficient and proper monitoring from the
governments.
On the one hand, it is true that scientific research should not be only
conducted by the governments. The main reason is that the scope of scientific
research is varies and wide, and private companies could cover up some
researches which are not carried out by the governments. Many private
institutions or individuals discoveries’ are useful for humanity, as we can
learn from the past. For example, Thomas Alva Edison was an individual
inventor who found some many valuable tools for human beings, such as the
bulb light. We should notice that the invention was not the main focus of the
government’s research during that time, and thanks to Edison we have electric
light today.
On the other hand, although private companies are given the right to do
scientific research, they must be strictly monitored by the governments. They
must be controlled, as some of them might be doing illegal researches. For
example, some companies might focus on developing biochemical weapons,
and it could threat the world peace. It is the governments’ task to prevent and
block these kinds of researches.
In conclusion, I do not agree if scientific research should only be conducted

by the governments. It is a fact that the scope of scientific research is wide,
therefore private companies should be allowed in doing research. However, I
do agree if researches that are done by private companies must be reviewed,
and monitored by the governments, in order to avoid any misappropriation.
Model Answer 4:
With the fast-pacing development of world economy, scientific research has
become more and more significant part in most countries. There are those
who argue that scientific research should be only performed by government. It
is unacceptable to agree to this viewpoint for concrete arguments.
First of all, government is considered as an executive power, so it plays a

crucial role in calling for investment as well as human resources to meet
demands of doing research science. If government follows this strategy, it will
make a huge contribution to developing scientific research. As a result, there
will be varieties of breakthroughs in the field of medicines, advanced
technology and chemistry. With the role of being executive, government
should have national policies to encourage private companies to invest much
more money in doing research, for example reduction of tax or supporting
working offices.
Another important reason is that scientific research cannot be done by

government because government has a mountain of social urgency to fulfill
such as improving infrastructure to deal with overpopulation, traffic
congestion and contaminated environment. It is clear that these things would
consume a large amount of money of the state budget. Therefore, these
problems have become overwhelming burden on national purse and
government is impossible to concentrate on doing scientific research.
It seems to me that government should not perform scientific research due to

shrinking state budget. Government has encourages policies for private
enterprises to do this because government has a wide range of urgent
possibilities to complete.
Model Answer 5:
A country active in scientific research is often one that has a strong power for
innovation and wealth creation. Nevertheless, the optimal structure for such
kind of research is still source of debate. Should it be the sole responsibility of
the government?
Some people argue that it’s better for the government to control scientific
research. They believe that research into nuclear technology, national defense
or military intelligence is in the national interest or involves high levels of
secrecy and should be carried out only by the government. Also, in basic
scientific research which is directed purely towards the advancement of
knowledge, or where results cannot be guaranteed, there is little incentive for
the private sector to invest in these areas and therefore the governments take
the leading role.
There are, however, reasons for private companies to participate in scientific

research. Research is done more efficiently by private companies because
they are profit driven; their products are also more closely associated with
market needs. Research into simple articles such as cosmetics or cough
medicine is not what the government is interested in, so it’s necessary for the
private sector to invest in these areas because they are important for our daily
lives.
From my point of view, both the governments and private companies should
be actively involved in scientific research. We should encourage the
cooperation between different research institutes including state-owned
research centers, universities and corporate labs to accelerate the transfer of
technology and research into products and services that can benefit human
life.
Model Answer 6:
A country active in scientific research is often one that has a strong power for
innovation and wealth creation. Nevertheless, the optimal structure for such
kind of research is still source of debate. Should it be the sole responsibility of
the government?
Some people argue that it’s better for the government to control scientific
research. They believe that research into nuclear technology, national defense
or military intelligence is in the national interest or involves high levels of
secrecy and should be carried out only by the government. Also, in basic
scientific research which is directed purely towards the advancement of
knowledge, or where results cannot be guaranteed, there is little incentive for
the private sector to invest in these areas and therefore the governments take
the leading role.
There are, however, reasons for private companies to participate in scientific

research. Research is done more efficiently by private companies because
they are profit driven; their products are also more closely associated with
market needs. Research into simple articles such as cosmetics or cough
medicine is not what the government is interested in, so it’s necessary for the
private sector to invest in these areas because they are important for our daily
lives.
From my point of view, both the governments and private companies should
be actively involved in scientific research. We should encourage the
cooperation between different research institutes including state-owned
research centers, universities and corporate labs to accelerate the transfer of
technology and research into products and services that can benefit human
life.
Model Answer 7:
Should the government take the place of private companies in scientific
research, as many people assert? Personally, I partially agree with this
assertion, and my reasons be explored as below.
The first reason why the government should manage scientific research is
about a concern of its safety. In an age of money worship, there is a high
possibility that the desire of making money would drive private companies to
carry out some evil scientific projects that violate moral taboos, for example,
human cloning. In contrast, this risk can be eradicated by the management of
the government, which plays a role of a powerful supervisor, thus keeping
scientific experiments and purposes from challenging ethical boundaries and
laws of modern civilization.
Besides, the replacement of private companies by the government can

substantially reduce the costs of scientific achievements. In fact, prices of new
technologies, devices and medicines developed by private companies and
institutes are maxed, in terms of their initial goal of pursuing profits. For
example, the consumer price of one single pill for HIV/Aids is hundreds of
dollars, while its factory cost is only few dollars. Oppositely, if biomedical
research is supported by the tax revenue, instead of by private funds, patents
and secrets of advanced medical technology do not belong to one private
company anymore, and all social medical manufactures can be allowed to
produce new medicines massively, without paying for high patent fees. As a
result, new medications and cures will be affordable for all individuals,
especially for poor groups.
However, the main worrying aspect of this policy is about the fact that the
scientific budget from the government is always limited, failing to cover all
scientific projects nationally. In other words, with no funding sources of
private companies, many highly-costly research that might bring great
benefits and values to fully solve the lasting and pressing social problems like
famine, in-born and infectious diseases, , environmental pollution and
depletion of energy, will have to be hampered and even cut off. Therefore, the
involvement of private companies is a must for all kinds of research, because
they can keep large and stable investments into the development of new
science and technologies.
In conclusion, the advantages of the government controlling all scientific

research overweight the disadvantages. Although this policy might lead to the
shortage of scientific funding, its positive effects on keeping scientific
experiments in an ethic way and decreasing the costs of new technologies and
substances should never be underestimated.
It is more important for a building to serve a purpose than to look

beautiful. Architects shouldn’t worry about producing building as a
work of art.
It is true that buildings should be more utilitarian than beautiful. However, I

disagree that
architects should not make efforts about making artistic buildings. I believe
that today’s
architects have the expertise and the resources to design buildings which are
both –
beautiful and useful.
A good building should satisfy the three principles of durability, utility and
beauty. It should
stand up robustly and remain in good condition. It should be useful and
function well for the
people using it. It should delight people and raise their spirits. A good
architect should strive
to fulfil each of these three attributes as well as possible.
To begin with, the burgeoning population and the scarcity of land today have
raised the
debate whether the buildings of today should only be useful and not beautiful.
However,
the skyscrapers of today are the answers to both these problems. They
accommodate a lot
of people in the least amount of space and these skyscrapers are architectural
marvels in
terms of beauty.
Secondly, the natural resources are limited and it is the need of the hour to
make energy
efficient buildings. For example, using solar panels and other energy saving
measures are
the need of the day. Today’s architects have been successful in designing
aesthetically
appealing solar panels which need less space. The climate changes that are
taking place
because of global warming need buildings that need less air conditioning and
yet remain
cool.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, it is commendable for

architects to
understand function, and aesthetics both. It is a big responsibility to have
buildings which
are both useful and beautiful and architects of today have the capability to do
so.
Model Answer 2:
The buildings have both the structure and function, but here the question arise
that which one is more important, the structure or the function. The structure
consist of the outlook of the building, all kind of embellishment comes under
it. The more attention were given to the structure blocking area or renovation
of any building according to modernization, whether it is Home, Hotel,
Mosque, Church, Restaurants, School, College, Universities or Office.
Architecture were more curious and apprehensive regarding designed and
outlook. But the fact is that functions are more important like a building is
more valuable if it is full filling all the criteria of serving well, full filling all
the needs of people.
Currently in the developed countries buildings are compared in the long run
of adornment, the more beautiful buildings attracts more visitors to rush for
live in or earn more compared to others. It’s a universal phenomenon that
beauty attracts the brain, many study were conducted in USA on the structure
or function of the building, which revealed that majority of people were found
to be associated with the stunning structure of building, one more fact was
discovered that curvy buildings attract more people than straight line building.
In the developing countries more focus was given to the functions like serving
quality, comfort, and cheap rates etc, as more focus was education rather than
expensive school or college building, hotel stay with cheap rates rather than
classy hotel with full luxuries room, shopping from a store rather than a
branded stuff from a big well decorated shopping mall. The developing
country also began to follow the developed country in the long run of outer
beauty of a building which is alarming sign for creating a sense of comparison
or complex among people.
Instead of creating a structure wise comparison, functional comparison should

be encouraged, as those building should be appreciated who are full filling
their functions well with cheap rates with the major focus on productive
goals.
Model Answer 3:
Buildings, not very different from other commodities, perform various

functions and serve varying needs of their users. A multitude of people
advocate that functional values should be the only factors worthy of concern
when constructing new buildings, rather than aesthetics aspects. Despite the
general consensus, the author believes that a building contribute best when
both visual appeals and functionality are well incorporated in its blueprint.
Nowadays, it is believed that people demand much more in architects in

designing new buildings. Equipped with modern technologies and redundancy
of resources, there is a general expectation for new constructions to be not
only safe, accessible and practical but also pleasing to the eye. Fully
developed cities find it unacceptable for them to accommodate buildings of
poor aesthetic values which could blemish the whole cityscape. Additionally,
there are cases where aesthetic appeals are an integral part of the involved
building, such as theaters, churches and museums.
Besides being able to contribute to the ornamentation of its surroundings, a
building needs the capability to perform its intended purposes decently.
Especially in societies where resources are of shortage, functionality should
always be a priority in new constructions. For instance, the Vietnamese
government once faced heavy criticism by the public for building an
extravagant museum with luxury furnishings and expensive material but
barely fulfills its planned functions. In such scenario, it is better to construct
practical buildings before aiming for those with visual appeals.
Based on the arguments outlined above, adding aesthetic values to a building

is consistent with the needs of a modern society. However, it does not mean
that the concern on visual appeals should be at the expense of a building’s
practical functions; on the contrary, a building should be the result of the
delicate balance between the two ideals.
Model Answer 4:
There are many unique and outstanding buildings round the world that we can
easily remember or recall their images. It is because we treated them not just
as buildings but pieces of art. However, some argue that architects should not
put too much consideration on art design but the usage only. I do think that
building should be built as a work of art.
A building is not only standing for a short time. Some may exist much longer
that their expected usage time, like the Pyramid, ancient temples and
churches. We want people to treat the buildings with respect and grace.
People can find pride, effort and inspiring stories from the buildings. Every
building is unique and has its own personality like a person. We found
heroism in the Chinese Great Wall; We found strong religious sense in the
building of St. Peter Square’s; and We found beautiful scientific patterns in
the Golden Gate Bridge. People like to enjoy the practical use and architect
design of a building.
However, it is undisputable that a building should meets to fit the purpose of

the building first. For instance, a hospital must be suitable for the medical use;
a university should be convenient to students and professionals; a factory
should be convenient to the production line and the transportation. Of course,
a building must first meets its purposes but they should also meets with the
design. There is no contradiction in the two areas. For example, the Sydney
Opera House is a famous landmark in the world as well as a functional opera
house for the local residents.
In conclusion, a building should be built to serve its purpose first. But the
architect should also design the building with good artistic sense to finalize it
as a work of art.
Model Answer 5:
When it comes to the issue that what is the most important factors of a
building. People’s view differs from person to person and culture to culture.
Some individuals hold the view that good looking is more crucial to a
building. Others believe that it is more important for a building to serve its
purposes. In my opinion, we should pay more attention to the building’s
function.
It is true that a beautiful building looks like more cosy and make citizens
more comfortable. People who see the building might be improving their
aesthetic standards. Moreover, as tourists, they might love this city due to the
remarkable building. Thus, many persons can not help attracted by this and
than they might go back to there twice or more. That would be booming local
economy. However, is it possible? Is it really attractive? Many travelers might
not be surprising at the building owing to lack of devices and not useful. So I
still agree that more useful and convenient equipment is more important than
good looking.
For one thing, the essence of a building is that it should be used friendly and
include technology tools to assist in applying. That means more helpful and
functional. A host of updating facilities could more convenient to people. You
can image that when a tired person who just want to look for a place where he
or she can take a break and drink something. And then he or she find a
beautiful building, meanwhile, he believe that there will suit him or her. But
the person is disappoint due to no complete devices. Thus, good look is not
practical for people.
In addition, more focus on serving its purpose could guarantee the safe of the
building. We all know the catastrophe of Yaan. That is a disaster to every
people who live there. According to a recent survey, those buildings in Yaan
were more cared about appearance and were ignored its purpose result in this
consequence. From this event, we can know that without ignoring the purpose
of establishing buildings, this tragedy would not be inevitable.
In sumerize, I take an attitude that it is more important for a building to serve
its purposes.
Model Answer 6:
Architects often find themselves in a dilemma when they have to determine
the building’s style as two options sound justified-functionality or exterior
design. Some architects claim that the function arrangement is more valuable
by comparison to the good looking exterior. Personally, I coincide myself
with this viewpoint.
Admittedly, the outside image is one of the essential elements of a building,

regardless of the commercial buildings or historical ones. It is because most
people who appeal mainly to visit for the building because of the first sight.
Thus, the entrepreneurs may invest a company for being attracted by its
exterior, becoming one of the bond holders and risk takers. In terms of
international tourism, foreigners tend to visit some places with special looking
due to the fact that many people have a curiosity to take an adventure.
However, the society as well as the individual would benefit more if a

building serves a particular purpose. An example aptly illustrate this point of
view is the boom of tourism. There is no getting around that people spend
their money and time on travelling for the fundamental reason that to
experience different culture and history. Therefore, in order to meet visitors’
original demand, the buildings in the local should combine more historical
factors together. When travelers adore their trips and suggest their friends to
travel, the local economy would be spurred in a rapid growth.
Furthermore, building buildings for certain purposes will greatly drive up the
space utilization rate, which suits for the fast-developing countries. It is well
known that the first thing that the business men choose a site for their
companies or industries is the price. Given the high operational cost, they will
choose a commercial building rather than a building with good looking. So, a
functional building is more suit for the fast pace society.
To conclude, a building with function arrangement is more superior to the one
with good exterior for individual and society. However, if the buildings could
be built with functionality and good-looking exterior, I believe, it will bring
more benefits.
Model Answer 7:
Buildings, not very different from other commodities, perform various

functions and serve varying needs of their users. At the centre of the
controversy is whether the purposes of a building should be placed above its
aesthetical values. As far as I am concerned, these two qualities are not
conflicting, but mutually beneficial.
In a modern society, aesthetical considerations are no longer considered as

insignificant or luxury but have been integrated as a core function of a
building. People have comprehensive requirements or a building. No longer
limited to such ordinary functions, such as safety, durability, space, access to
facilities, their interests involve decorative details and visual qualities,
including ornamentation and furnishings. In simple terms, a pedestrian-
looking building is bound to mismatch the trend of the market.
Meanwhile, it is worth mentioning that some types of buildings are broadly

expected by the public to possess aesthetical values. Standard examples
include restaurants, theatres, churches and so forth. A building falling in these
categories desires a design of originality andrarity, aiming to distinguish itself
from other constructions of its kind or those in its surroundings. Architects’
inspirations add values to the building and increase itsmarketability. Many
buildings have become symbolic in the city or region where they are located.
When being concerned with the aesthetic aspect of architecture, people should
consider economic feasibility. The focus on the exterior of a building alone
will lead to the increase in construction cost, making such an
endeavour unjustified. In those cities where overpopulation continues to be a
problem and many people cannot afford housing, whether a building looks
beautiful would not be taken seriously. In that situation, the rationaleis to
accommodate a huge population, rather than simply please the eye.
Based on the arguments outlined above, adding visual appeals to a building is

consistent with the needs of a modern society. However, it does not mean that
the concern on aesthetics should be at the expense of a building’s practical
functions; on the contrary, a building should be the result of
the delicate balance between the two ideals.
Some people believe they should keep all the money they have earned and
should not pay tax to the state.
Sample Answer 1:
I disagree with the statement that individuals should not pay taxes to the state.
The
government runs the country from the taxes it collects. Taxes are collected
only from those
who earn above a certain minimum limit. It is our moral duty to pay taxes.
Tax money collected by government is used to fund basic amenities, provide

various
services to citizens and for government administration and projects, running
of jails and
defense system, and many other operations. It is not wrong to say that “taxes
run a
country.” Thus, it is very important for a government to make people pay
taxes.
Let us analyze why people do not want to pay taxes. The main reason is their
dissatisfaction
with government in serving them. They blame government for things like lack
of
infrastructure, poverty and unemployment, but they are not completely wrong
as tax
revenue is misused in some or the other way in every country. In developed
countries,
however, because of higher satisfaction from government’s functioning,
citizens may be
more willing to pay taxes. Another factor generating dissatisfaction is the tax
structure itself.
Often the tax system is complex and it drives people away from paying taxes.
It is also felt
that the tax rates are high and tax slabs are unequal. So they feel it is not
unethical if one
goes for tax avoidance or tax evasion.
Not paying taxes can drastically affect a country’s revenue generation, my

own country,
India, for that matter. But then, it is equally desired that government come up
with a fair tax
structure and also make people aware where the taxes are being diverted.
Even lowering
the tax rates can help a country increase its tax collection as it would increase
compliance
among the taxpayers. Tax reform should also be fast so that no public
grievance or non-
compliance remains for long. A proper tax system backed up with strict tax
laws can
produce the best results.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that it is the duty of every citizen to
pay tax and the
duty of every government to use it appropriately in public interest.
Model Answer 2:
A group of people think that residents should keep all their earnings and
should not have an obligation in paying taxes to the government. I personally
disagree with the statement as taxes are useful for the residents and the nation
themselves, and the following essay will discuss about it in details.
To begin with, it is a fact that taxes are used by the government for
developing its nations. Taxes are allocated for various kinds of essential
matters. Firstly, they are used for expanding and maintaining public
transportation facilities, such expanding roads and highways, and replacing
old public transportation units. Secondly, taxes are utilized for providing
decent medical services and basic educations for their residents. And last but
not least, taxes are also used for funding military services, which is important
for maintaining the political stability of a nation.
And then, people should also notice that taxes that they have paid, will also be
beneficial for themselves sooner or later. Some of the funds that have been
collected by tax authorities are used for retirement funds. It means that in the
end people will enjoy and benefit some personal facilities from the
government, which are funded from taxes. Therefore people should not keep
their earning by themselves and they should comply in paying their tax duties
and obligations.
In conclusion, I do not agree if we should keep all our income and not pay
any taxes to the government, as taxes are beneficial for the development of
the people and the nation themselves.
Model Answer 3:
In most countries around the world, while paying taxes is required by the law
and considered a civic duty, it also brings about downsides that lead to certain
individuals or corporations trying to evade or deduct the tax they need to pay.
Some people claim that levying taxes is unfair and they deserve to keep all
their legitimate income to themselves because they fight every single minute
for it. High taxes can not only stifle the motivation of individual workers but
also exert a negative effect of penalizing hard work. More concerning
situation, however, is that with all taxpayers’ money accumulated, the
government, albeit even an elected one, could misuse or even become
corrupted, not to mention those authoritarian ones. In this case, it is better to
keep the money to their own instead of anyone else.
However, other people argue that taxes revenue provides a vital source for the
government who shoulder the responsibility to build a strong country and
provide important public services such as police, healthcare, education and
many other vital ones which are closely tied to every single citizen’s well-
being. Without this revenue, there would be no money to pay for government
workers, resulting in no organization to run the country and probably
jeopardizing national security. Therefore, paying taxes should be every single
taxpayer’s responsibility.
My view is that it is every capable citizen’s duty to pay taxes to support and
provide our government necessary sources to protect our entire country as
well as improve our personal life quality, only in the condition that they must
be well used and absolutely cannot be abused by incompetent officials.
Model Answer 4:
Whether people should pay tax to the government or not is an argument of
great debate. Some people think that it is government’s responsibility to raise
money from other sectors and should not take the portion of a person’s hard
earning cash while others stand just opposite of this opinion. I believe if the
government spend the money for the benefit of the citizen, as it meant to be
for every country, and value the mass people’s opinions and suggestions how
to best use the money, then there is nothing wrong with the tax paying method
and rather had many positive reasons to do so.
Those who are against the tax paying system often opine that, government
should never take their hard earning money for the sake of country’s
development scheme. This is especially true for those who earn an amount
that barely supports his/her family and who are not satisfied with the public
service provided by the government. In many countries, people have to pay a
tax of more than a quarter of the total earning of a year and yet don’t get basic
facilities like: treatment, education and they have to spend their own pocket
money for those purposes. This is very natural that they become angry about
the tax paying.
But tax , collected from the people of a country can be a great fund to use for
their betterment by the government. There are lots of poor people who can be
benefited from the tax paid by the others. Government can make more roads,
public services, and can introduce other useful scheme using the money.
Almost in most of the countries, people who earn more than a predefined
amount have to pay tax and not for those who earn less than that amount. So
Government is not forcing poor people to pay tax but those who are able to
pay tax.
Model Answer 5:
When asked about whether citizens should pay taxes to the state, some people
support the idea that they should keep all their money due to nothing the state
contributes to these money. However, I totally disagree with this idea and I do
believe we should pay taxes to the state just because we cannot earn these
money without the help from the state.
First of all, wherever we are working at, the state provides us a room for
working. It may be our inadvertent to see there are street cleaners working
diligently before we get up every morning and they are paid by the states,
there are scientists doing airy or aqueous research in the working area for our
health and they are paid by the states, to name but a few. We cannot deny we
need perfect work places to make money and the state truly offers us.
Additionally, we need police force to fight with rob or other crimes. It is so

pathetic to imagine a labor gets robbered after the day he got his salary.
Without safety, how can we earn money intently for banks being robbered
everyday and stealers being everywhere. Police are indispensable to us and
they are operated by the state.
Finally, I learn this creed since I was young, living for the society not oneself.
I insist everyone should be a contributor to the world. From television we can
see that there are famine, flood or earthquake occurred somewhere in this
planet, not only human-beings are jeopardized but also animals and plants,
and our government demonstrates concern and sorrow with sending food or
money. Hence we should pay taxes for every creatures on the Earth.
In summary, I hold the opinion firmly that citizens should pay taxes to the
state instead of keeping money all by themselves.
Model Answer 6:
It goes without saying that money also plays an indispensable role in our life .
It is controlling our minds . We should give tax from our income. Because
government is giving a lot of facilities and it is also a big source of
government’ income. An argument has been put forward that some people
believe they should not give tax of state from their income. According to me.
This statement does not hold a valid ground.
There are a plethora of reasons why I think we should pay tax from our
earning. First and foremost point which comes to my mind that wealth has
become important aspect of society and when we pay tax. Government also
spend that money on public property providing good facilities. Government is
spending money on education and life saving facilities . For example ,
government has provided free ambulance service . In emergency people can
take it advantage . Secondly, government is spending money on our security
and health care. For example, government pay of police. Police is giving
protraction of people. Government health cares have become aspect of society
. Hospitals are giving us life saving treatment .
On the other hand , some short sighted people say we should not pay tax .
Because , political leaders do scam and they rob the innocent public.
In conclusion , after pondering over a great deal of thoughts and deliberation

with my self . I come to this conclusion that we must pay tax . It is our duty
for our society and ownself . We can contribute in our country’s progress.
Model Answer 8:
Every government levies several types of taxes in the form of service charge,
income tax, federal tax, etc. A large amount of sum has to be paid by tax-
payers which augments hostility towards the government. It’s true that a
fraction of hardly earned money is collected by government, however,
medical facilities, schools and universities establishment, and infrastructure
maintenance are various supports provided by the government which require
contribution from the residents to collect enough of fiscal amounts.
First of all, medical facilities provided by the government cannot be ignored.

A government ensures the proper medical facilities from the taxes paid by the
people. These medical facilities require a huge amount of money which gets
reduced because of the government’s support. Consider the people suffering
from cancer, where treatment of cancer is costly and a person of bourgeois
class can’t afford the medical cost. The aid given by the government reduces
this expenditure.
Second, government builds the infrastructure, which accounts for the

development of the country as well as the residents. An enormous amount of
money is required for the infrastructure establishment and government needs
a hand for it. Tax payer money is invested which not only benefits them in
terms of electricity facility, better water supply and education facility but also
facilitates better transportation, industries development etc which accounts
directly or indirectly in the advancement of the country. Development brings
employment which causes increased salary compensation.
To conclude, tax payer’s money is indirectly gets invested in the betterment

of the people and residents of the country. Considering the facilities being
provided and developed infrastructure which accounts for advancement of a
country, I favor the taxes levied on the people.
Some people believe that air travel should be restricted because it causes
serious
pollution and uses up the world’s fuel resources.
Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that air travel causes pollution and uses a lot of fuel, bit I
disagree that air
travel should be restricted. Restricting air travel would solve some problems
but would lead
to many other problems.
At a time when people all over the world worry about the decreasing level of
fossil fuels and
global warming, it is right to take action to save the planet earth. However, to
simply
discourage flights is not the answer. International tourism has become the
backbone of
many economies of the world. Many countries are earning from tourism.
Many people are
employed in this industry. Many businesses like hotels and leisure centres are
dependent on
tourists. So, if we discourage international tourism, it would create new and
even worse
problems. Many businesses would go broke and many people would be
without jobs.
Air flight also enables intercultural exchanges between countries. The advent
of cheap air
fare makes it possible for people the world over to travel regularly, regardless
of the
purpose of the trip. Therefore, people have the opportunities to learn from
different
cultures and have a better understanding of countries they used to be
unfamiliar with. This,
in turn, enhances cultural communications between countries.
It is true that air travel consumes oil, but other modes of transportation are
also causing
pollution and using fuel. Discouraging private cars and encouraging people to
use public
transport could help save the environmental resources in a big way. Therefore
it would be a
very unpractical decision to restrict air travel at the cost of people’s mobility,
or worse, at
the cost of the development of the economy. Technology could also be used
to produce
more environmentally friendly and fuel efficient engines.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, instead of restricting air travel,
we should
develop more efficient engine that produces more energy output with less fuel
and fewer
major air pollutants. We should also focus on limiting private vehicles and
encouraging
public transport.
Model Answer 2:
The issue of the impact of air travel on the environment has heated up in
recent years, following the concern that more and more people turn toit as a
means of travel. Restrictions have been preferably imposed on air travel,
according to some people. There are some points in their argument.
The first is that aircrafts have been responsible for a large proportion of air
pollution. Planes, either fillingor taxiing, contribute a large proportion of local
emission annually. Some might suggest that air is the only suitable mode of
transport for long distance trips. This viewpoint is fallacious. Trains, for
instance, serve as an optimalalternative, consuming less energy and causing
less pollution.
As well as air pollution, aircrafts can cause noise pollution. Although it is

difficult to measure the actual impact of noise on people’s everyday lives, its
ability to increase the anxiety and levels of annoyance has been confirmed.
Especially to those living in the neighbourhood of an airport and around the
flight paths, noise created by aircrafts is indeed a headache.
Although travelling by air is likely to cause problems, it is not to say that air
navel should be significantly restricted. Alternatively, air travel can be
operated in a manner that its strengths can be fully taken advantage of. For
example, by replacing old engines with cleaner ones, people can mitigatethe
environmental impact caused by flying. Meanwhile, aircrafts have a higher
capacity, allowing greater numbers of passengers for each flight and thereby
giving the best possible values to the fuel used.
In the light of the facts outlined above, substantial thought should be given to
the problem of pollution caused by aircrafts. However, it does not
automatically mean that air travel should be curtailed. Instead, people should
make adjustments and improvements wherever appropriate to ensure the
optimal use of this form of travel.
Sample Answer 3:
With the growth in aviation, the majority of people are more likely to travel
abroad to spend their leisure time in the special occasions. One of the most
tangible influences of this phenomenon is the exponential increase of
thousand airlines which provide low-cost carrier, and it is argued as the
trigger of environmental catastrophes on a global scale such as air pollution
and lack of fossil fuel. As a result, critics claim that air travel should be
controlled to preserve the natural ecology. While it is believed that air travel
provides more benefits in terms of time consuming and reasonable prices,
people also have to consider the negative side of this transportation.
Supporters of the aircraft deliberate that air planes are by far the fastest mode
of transport which connects all of parts in the world by hours. Before the
invention of aviation, people used ships to travel for trading and travelling in
other countries, but it took more than a month to reach a destination. In 20th
century, when air planes have been invented, many counties choose this mean
of transport to export food such as vegetables and fruits to places where they
are not in season or cannot be grown. For pragmatic instance, New Zealand
exports fresh milk and apples to developing countries, Africa and India, using
air planes only around 12 hours. Consequently, some food could be exported
faster and would not deteriorate in the worldwide distribution.
In addition, the availability of cheap air travels allows many holidaymakers to
visit abroad for vacations over last decades. According to a survey published
in the Times magazine the proportion of travellers who prefer travelling other
countries increases to around 70% in 2014, and it goes hand in hand with an
increase of annual income of low-cost airlines which is more than 35%
compared to previous year. Air travel leads people to get novelty of other
challenged vacations.
On the other hand, the detrimental effects of this development are the impact
on the environment. Firstly, a study records that there are more than hundred
international and domestic flights which require more than thousand litters of
fuel every day. As the time passed by, the natural environment is absorbed to
produce more fuel while there is prevention to limit this activity. In the linear
relationship of this condition, burning of fossil fuel in terms of oil will add
significantly to this problem as just one flight releases large amounts of
carbon dioxide and other gases into the environment and damages the layers
of ozone. It can be concluded that the development of aviation contributes the
biggest contribution of climate change as the global problem.
In conclusion, the development of air travel in the recent years has its own
merits and demerits for environment. In the glance, air travel benefits people
to commute between different regions sooner whereas people are blame for
environmental influences which are more important issues so that the
restriction should be implemented to reduce damages. From my perspective,
using air travel for travelling should be controlled, and green taxes should be
increased to control low-cost airline companies as a novel solution.
Model Answer 4:
In present days, one of the most difficult and knotty problems that we are
facing is that the fast-exhausting natural resources and constant worsening
human habitat. Due to this, some argue that air travel should be curbed
because it is one of the major forces to not only pollute the natural
environment but also consume huge amount of fuel. From my perspective, I
am rather doubt of this viewpoint.
First of all, it is true that the fuel oil which spends on aviation is keep
increasing as the improving living standard of human life. Apparently,
nowadays, to most of us, travel by air is convenient and becoming more and
more affordable. And because of this, it will result in more airlines will be
added and then engender extra burden on the deteriorating natural resources.
Nevertheless, it is well-known that air travel has become a indispensable part

in our daily life. It links the major cities and communities of the world 24
hours a day with advanced aircraft. Moreover, from economical point of view,
it has been reported that aviation provides millions of jobs world wide and
accounts for trillions dollars of global GDP.
Beyond this, travel by air is widely accepted by people in the modern age, as
it, to some extent, make many things which are considered impossible in the
past become available and true in the present. For instance, it allows people to
have fascinating adventures in foreign countries, to relax on tropical beaches,
to build up business relationship and to visit friends and family. In addition,
as the global economy grows more linked, aviation is the main factor that
brings people together.
To sum up, although air travel creates some negative impacts on the natural
resources and surroundings, I am still firmly stand with the point that air
travel plays a key role in our day-to-day’s life.
Sample Answer 5:
Air travel is one of the greatest human invention because it help many people
movements from one place to another place. On the other hand, it gives a few
problems about fuel resources in the world. I believe that both of them have
good reasons.
For more than 100 years ago, air transportation was making easy people
activities. By air transportation,a society could go to another far area faster
than other transportations such as bus and train because there is no traffic jam
in sky. Besides, air travel such helicopter give many job vacancies from
workers in dugout to workers in airplane such as pilot, co-pilot, and
mechanic. As a result, it possible to decrease jobless in an area.
However, air vehicle such airplane could give bad impacts for Earth’s living
thing. If people always rely on airplane, automatically they need avtur, and it
create by fossil fuel which it almost finish from this world. Every plane
certainly produce gas pollution that is one of many factors of global warming.
Then, the resources always try to find new places that have fuel resources.
While they search new fuel resources, they should destroy an area that is
probably habitat of animals. So, if people always search new place, day-by-
day all of world’s nature place would lose and many animals do not have
place to stay. There are to probability if animals lose their home, the first,
they move to humans’ city and destroy it, and the second, they wiped out
from this world because they could not survive from wide world.
In short, air mount possible to always used by people, but world’s scietists
should invent alternative fuel that save for the Earth and the inhabitants.
Model Answer 7:
As the accelerating pace of lifestyle, traveling by air has become a favorable

option for people to move from one place to another. However, some people
blame the exhaustion of some natural resources and air pollution on this kind
of transportation. This essay aims to outline evidence that support the
opposing position.
Apparently, there is little doubt about the constructive benefits that

humankind derives from air travel. Firstly, traveling by plane would be more
affordable and time-saving when it comes to long-haul distance trips. It means
that in some cases, traveling by other transportation may cost people a higher
expenditure of time as well as money. From another perspective, the
possibility remains that other means would consume greater amount of
natural resources and release more pollutants into the environment. Therefore,
it probably merits one’s attention that whenever humanity still rely on natural
resources, the emergence of environmental degradation is inevitable
regardless of any transportation that is in vogue.
Moreover, the advent of modern technology has promised a distant future that
could make air travel more environmentally friendly. For instance, alternative
resources may release air travel from the reliance on natural reserves, which is
a contributing factor of imminent demise of some resources. Besides,
technological advances in aircraft industry have brought profound impacts
that lead to the saving in fuel. It is therefore reasonable to look forward for
more contemporary inventions that would allow people to make an optimal
use of air travel as well as prevent destructive outcomes of this mean.
By way of conclusion, I would reaffirm the position that air travel contributes
an integral role in modern lifestyles. Therefore, there are compelling reasons
to direct spending on improving air travel to be more eco-friendly rather than
impose constraints on this transportation.
One long-distance flight consumes fuel which a car uses in several years’
time, but they cause the same amount of pollution. So some people think
that we should discourage non-essential flights, such as tourist travel,
rather than to limit the use of cars.
In the last century when a human astronaut first arrived on the Moon he
said: “It is a big step for mankind”. But some people think it makes little
difference to our daily life.
Sample Answer 1:
In the last century when a human astronaut first arrived on the Moon he said:
“It is a
big step for mankind”. But some people think it makes little difference to our
daily
life. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Almost every day we read something in the papers about the latest exciting
developments in the space race. Many people are of the view that all the
money and
energy spent on space exploration and research is a complete waste because it
has no
effect on our daily life. I, however disagree. In the following paragraphs I
shall discuss
how space research has touched our lives in more ways than one.
The technology that put men on the moon, launched space shuttles and will
build a
space station has found its way into everyday life on earth. Common
secondary uses
of space research are called spin-offs. The common smoke detector used in
homes
was first prepared for spacecrafts as a warning system. Computer bar codes in
retail
stores, shock absorbing shoes used by tennis players and athletes, lightweight
materials used for helmets and sporting materials and non stick coating used
in pans
were all first developed as part of space research.
Space technology has provided many benefits to the medical field as well.
Pace
makers used to treat cardiac as well as remote monitoring devices for
intensive care
patients and portable medical equipment carried aboard ambulances are but a
few
applications of space technology providing daily benefits in hospitals, offices
and
homes. Artificial limbs of lesser weight are also a by-product of space
research and
these are a blessing for the physically challenged.
Not only that, it is well known that global warming will soon transform our
Earth into a
boiling pot. Then it would be very essential to find alternative places to live.
If we are
able to find signs of life elsewhere in space it would be a jackpot for mankind.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that space exploration and research
has
touched our everyday lives in numerous ways. So, it definitely is a big step
for
mankind.
Model Answer 2:
One of the most prominent achievements that human made last century is the
scientific breakthrough in the domain of aerospace, including the first time
that an astronaut Armstrong set foot on the Moon. Nobody could forget his
famous words “One small step for a man, a giant leap for mankind.”However,
opponents claim that this magnificent event hardly benefit our life.
Understandably, citizens would question it because they fulfill their

obligation to pay tax Numerous revenue are used to develop manned
spacecraft engineering. Despite many achieved success, the devastating fact is
that people are confronted with many problems demanding prompt solutions,
such as unemployment, widened wealth gap, juvenile discipline, resource
shortages etc. People assert that priorities should be given to tackle these
imperative problems which are closely related to their daily life and their
living standards could be subsequently improved. Therefore, it is not
surprising that people regard Armstrong’s grand move as a meaningless
symbol.
However, I believe this view to be shortsighted. The exploration of outer
space means that the super powers prefer a peaceful way to collaborate for all
human being’s future rather than competing with defensive forces. It is
beneficial to safeguard political and social stability and global cohesion
because living in outer space to ease the heavy burden of earth is the dream of
whole mankind. In addition, concentrating on the technology of aerospace
could be followed by scientific breakthroughs in all fields, one of which is the
application of material. With the immense progress in field of aerospace, the
new material can also be put in manufacturing high-quality daily necessaries.
In a word, the arrival of the astronaut on the Moon had profound meaning that
we should not ignore.
Sample Answer 3:
Some people may argue that our ability to explore the moon was a significant
achievement of the twentieth century while others argue that this has not
impacted our lives at all. Both points of view have their merits as will now be
explained.
On the one hand, it can be argued that the arrival of the Appollo crew on the
moon has changed our points of view about many aspets of our lives.Some
people, mainly scientists, had high hopes for changes that could enhance
human’s existence on Earth. Others had been inspired by this achievement; it
showed us that we can achieve anything if we put our minds to it.Inevitably,
we concluded that since men has set his foot on the moon, other places in
space will be explored in a matter of time and that there will be very little
unknown left to possess the knowledge of the universe.
On the other hand, it can be said that the money spent on research, space ships
and training of astronauts has been wasted because we have not benefited in
terms of our standard of living.Many people argue that the money could have
been spent on public services such as healthcare, education or
infrastructure.We would be better off if we made progress in areas directly
related to our daily lives.For instance, by subsidizing healthcare sector, many
more people could get medical coverage.
To conclude,although the benefits of exploring the moon cannot be said to be

significant when considering the standard of our lives, it seems that the idea
inspired a lot of people and brought hope for a better life for all.
Model Answer 4:
Almost every day we read something in the papers about the latest exciting
developments in the space race. Many people are of the view that all the
money and energy spent on space exploration and research is a complete
waste because it has no effect on our daily life. I, however disagree. In the
following paragraphs I shall discuss how space research has touched our lives
in more ways than one.
The technology that put men on the moon, launched space shuttles and will
build a space station has found its way into everyday life on earth. Common
secondary uses of space research are called spin-offs. The common smoke
detector used in homes was first prepared for spacecrafts as a warning system.
Computer bar codes in retail stores, shock absorbing shoes used by tennis
players and athletes, lightweight materials used for helmets and sporting
materials and non stick coating used in pans were all first developed as part of
space research.
Space technology has provided many benefits to the medical field as well.
Pace makers used to treat cardiac as well as remote monitoring devices for
intensive care patients and portable medical equipment carried aboard
ambulances are but a few applications of space technology providing daily
benefits in hospitals, offices and homes. Artificial limbs of lesser weight are
also a by-product of space research and these are a blessing for the physically
challenged.
Not only that, it is well known that global warming will soon transform our
Earth into a boiling pot. Then it would be very essential to find alternative
places to live. If we are able to find signs of life elsewhere in space it would
be a jackpot for mankind.
To sum up, space exploration and research has touched our everyday lives in
numerous ways. So, it definitely is a big step for mankind.
Housing shortage in big cities can cause severe social consequences. Some
people
think only government action can solve this problem.
To what extent do you agree or disagree？
Sample Answer 1:
Big cities act as magnets for everyone. Therefore it is increasingly difficult

for ordinary
people to have somewhere to call home in big cities due to housing shortage,
especially the lack of affordable housing. Some people think only government
has the
power to solve this problem. I completely agree with this statement.
The main reason for housing shortage in large cities is the burgeoning urban
population. The situation goes from bad to worse as each year millions of job
seekers
rush into the city to try their lucky break and the majority of them eventually
get
settled down, which makes housing shortage even more serious. Careful
planning of
cities is required to address the issue and obviously, only the government has
the
power to address this problem.
Even if the population were indeed under control, we still need more
apartment
buildings to house people who have already worked and lived in the city
without
decent housing. Again, only the government can decide which old buildings
should be
demolished to make way for new ones and which area could be designated for
residential housing development. Of course, individuals can have their voice
heard,
but the final decision has to be made by the government.
Another reason that causes housing shortage is those in the real estate
business raise
the cost of housing exorbitantly. To stop those profit-making housing
developers and
real estate brokers from pushing up the prices of housing, effective rules and
regulations are needed, which can be done by the government. As for the
housing
projects for low-income families, we can only depend on the government, too.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that only the government action can
solve
the problem of housing shortage in big cities.
Sample Answer 2:
It is not uncommon across the world that people flood into metropolis seeking
for better working opportunities. One inescapable consequence of such
massive migration is the house shortage, which again brought about a series
of chain effect: soaring house prices, unbearable burden on the working class,
lower living quality, to name but a few. Therefore, governments are burdened
with the task to provide effective and proper solution. However, individuals
as well as corporations all have a role to play.
Certainly, government, with all the resources at its disposal, plays an essential
part in tackling the problem. This is decided by the nature of government. In
the primitive age, there was no such thing as government. As activities of
human beings became more complex, a middler is need to coordinate and
manage the tribe. Consequently, people give out some of their rights to form
this mediator, which is now understand us government. So government is
such a body empowered by its people to organize and take responsibility for
the social affairs. Solving social problems, such as house shortage is a
required function and a crucial responsibility of government.
However, that is not to say that government should fight alone in the battle
against the “hose shortage”. After all, citizens themselves are the direct
victims and beneficiaries in this battle. Actually, there is much can be done by
us to alleviate the house pressure. For one thing, in it lie in our hand to choose
where to live. We can choose to live in other less crowed yet equally
developed cities. For example, in China, the medium cities like Tsing Dao,
Chong Qing, or Xia Men are ones that in need of intelligent and skilled
people. The environment there is more suitable to live and more jobs are
available. As a matter of fact, as more and more people crowed in big cities,
the job market there has already saturated.
Also, The corporation can make a different regarding the house shortage. One
possible approach is to build infrastructures like market or retails stores in the
satellite cities around. Another practical strategy is to build branch companies
in small cities where land price is cheap. In that way, companies can save a
sum of money buying the land, and more job vacancies are created in small
city, thus attracting more job hunters.
To conclude, it is government’s essential role to solve the social problem

since government can pool resources of all sorts. But, bearing in minds that
we are living in a “one for all, all for one” society. If each one make a small
sacrifice, the problem will be solved soon. In addition, corporation can also be
counted on.
Sample Answer 3:
The population in cities is constantly increasing, and thus housing crisis is a
most common problem big cities are facing today. This is a major concern for
governments as it not only increase the cost of living but also affects the
quality of life for its residents. I do agree that, only governments can solve
this problem by taking various measures, such as, restricting landed houses to
save the space, encouraging vertical residential buildings and gradually
expanding the city.
In the olden days, people lived in landed independent houses as there were
lots of spaces in the city. However, this is not possible in the modern cities as
the city population is increasing rapidly, and resulting in a space shortage
situation for accommodating housing for all. One of the action governments
can take is to discourage building new landed houses and encourage people to
live in apartment flats. For instance, Singapore government has built
thousands of high-floor residential flats through housing development board
to accommodate its ever-growing residents in an affordable way. It also
stopped permission for building new landed houses to deal with space crunch.
Some governments are also looking at options for expanding the city to create
more residential properties. For example, Bangalore, one of the fast growing
cities in India is continuously expanding by incorporating more residential
properties and other infrastructure at the outskirts of the city, which gradually
becomes part of the growing city. However, this option is viable only when
there are enough spaces surrounding the city. For cities like Hong-Kong and
Singapore, which are islands, the only option is to grow vertically within the
city. Solving housing shortage is an issue that requires proper planning and
big investment and residence of a big city has very little to do and the
government seems like the appropriate authority to solve this problem.
In conclusion, the cities are growing rapidly and so the residents of the city
also grow. Thus, it is the responsibility of governments to take appropriate
measures to create better living place at an affordable price for its city
residents.
Model Answer 4:
Nowadays, as the population bulge in big cities, individuals are facing the
severe problem of housing shortage consequently. However, whether it is the
authority’s obligation to address the difficulty remains a controversial issue. I
agree with the view that as housing is a kind of basic human need, authority
should shoulder the responsibility to make a difference.
First, it is obvious that housing is the essential part of the human well-being.
If people are always struggling to find the ideal place to live, how could they
expect to settle up and realise their other accomplishments? Besides, what is
worse is that the frequent movement of population will probably lead to the
social disruption.
Moreover, we should not forget that only the government has the ability to
tackle the issue because it can pool all the social resources, like manpower,
facilities, financial aid to make plans, lay down regulation and carry out the
policy. Some countries, like Germany, did the great job to stabilise the price
of the housing by means of tax leverage in order to make the housing
affordable in recent years. Therefore, we should learn the experience to
enhance our social welfare system.
That is not to say that the house can be got for free. As the most expensive
commodity for most ordinary people, citizens still need to take efforts to earn
enough money to choose what quality of houses they can afford. But
basically, this dream should be feasible with the help of various national
policies, such as bank loan.
In sum, government should play their roles to maintain a healthy housing

market for ordinary people; meanwhile, citizens should be industrial to earn
their livings. Only by doing so can we ensure that we can live in the
guaranteed and energetic society.
Model Answer 5:
In this 21 century, more and more people migrate into cities in order to find
jobs, based on this situation,the amount of housing shortage in big cities are
getting increases. While the majority of people think that only government
can solve this problem, I partly agree with this statement. This essay
endeavors to promptly give the ideas from both sides of the controversy.
There are several reasons why only government action can solve this problem.
Firstly, only government can limit the number of migrations. Most of the
migrants think that they could find some jobs in cities, but eventually they
could not find any job, so they continue to stay in cities in order to search for
other opportunities. While more and more people doing the same thing, they
did not contribute anything to the society, but only stay at home, it makes
others who have a job but hardly ever to find a house.
However, companies of real estate could also play an important role in this
case. They could build some practical and economical houses instead of
building those attractive and high price houses. Also, individuals can solve
this problem by themselves. For instance, they can rent a room from landlord
to live in there in a short- term period. As we know, renting a small room is
cheaper than buying a house, you do not have to afford and pay for your
house debt every month.
In conclusion, even though the housing – shortage is not a problem that we

can solve immediately, but I believe that if government and individuals work
together, this problem will be solved very soon.
The best way to solve the world’s environmental problem is to increase

the price of fuel.
Excessive traffic and increasing pollution are affecting every major city in the
globe. To
lessen such problems, some people say that governments should raise the
price of
fuel such as petrol and diesel. It may help to some extent but I disagree that it
is the
best solution to solve the problem of environment.
To begin with, the number of cars in a country directly depends on the

proportion of
the population affluent enough to own cars. As a result, raises in gas price
could
invoke hard feelings among this segment of people but would not drastically
change
their behaviour in using cars. Even if the number of cars on road is reduced
due to
higher gas cost, this is not the best way to solve traffic problems. Such policy
would
hurt the auto industry, place higher costs on current and prospective car
owners, and
be detrimental to the economy of a nation. In the long run, the final way out
could be
the construction of better roads and more effective use of available transport
facilities.
Secondly, there is evidence that waste gas from cars is not the leading cause
of air
pollution. The culprit may be the discharge of polluting substances into the
atmosphere due to the rapidly growing manufacturing industry. As a result,
reduction
of the number of cars would not return us a blue sky and fresh air. We could
better
handle this problem if we could increase control over industrial waste-
discharge and
adopt more environmental friendly materials and production equipment.
Finally, other measures like the application of cheaper and cleaner energy
resources
could also be a better solution. For example, we now have the ability to make
cell-
powered or even solar-powered cars. Such energy is completely clean and
plentiful.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, it is not the best way to control
traffic
and pollution by increasing gas price because such action will hurt consumers
and
economy without achieving what it is aimed for. Measures such as
construction of
better transport facilities and development of new energy resources could be
more
effective solutions.
Sample Answer 2:
Most people would accept that one of the highest priorities today is to find a
solution to the various environmental problems facing mankind. It has been
suggested that best way to achieve this is for governments to raise the price of
fuel. I am, however, not sure that this is necessarily the case.
One reason why this approach may not work is that there is not just one
environmental problem the world faces today. If governments did make fuel
more expensive, it might well help reduce the amount of carbon dioxide we
produce and so slow down the rate of global warming and air pollution.
However, it would not help with other major problems such as intensive
farming, overpopulation, the hole in the ozone layer or water pollution. For
these problems we need to find other solutions.
A second reason why this policy may not be the most appropriate is that it
places the emphasis on governmental policy and not individual responsibility.
Ultimately, most environmental problems are the result of the way we as
individuals live our lives. If we wish to find a long-term and lasting solution
to them, we need to learn to live in a way that it is greener or kinder to the
environment. What governments need to do to make this happen is to ensure
there is a global programme to educate people of all ages about the
environmental consequences to their actions.
In summary, I believe that increasing the level of taxation on fuel is at best a

short-term solution to only one environmental problem. If we wish to provide
a home for our children’s children, education is likely to be the key to making
this happen.
Model Answer 3: (Agreement)

Environmental or natural hazards are the result of physical processes that
affect humans and environment every day and harmful for both in short and
long run. As the use of fuel increases to keep up with modern demands and
increased population, the world is becoming more vulnerable to
environmental hazards and disasters. Floods, earthquakes, severe
thunderstorms, toxic or oil spills immediately come to mind when
comprehending this issue, implying that all these things are inherently
hazardous.
One of the most effective solutions to these environmental hazards is to raise

the price of fuel. The use of petroleum and gasoline can release toxic
chemicals into our atmosphere. These chemicals escape into the air during
refilling, from the gasoline tank and carburetor during normal operation, and
from engine exhaust. Transportation sources account for about 30-50% of all
harmful emissions into the atmosphere. The industrialization is another reason
for the omission of harmful chemicals too.
“Smog” is another environmental hazard. It causes human respiratory stress,

and damages many plants, significantly reducing farm crop yields and the
“health” of trees and other vegetation. Burning gasoline emits significant
quantities of a wide range of harmful gases into the atmosphere. For example,
carbon monoxide is a poisonous gas produced by incomplete combustion.
Carbon dioxide, a normal product of burning fuel, is non-toxic, but
contributes to the greenhouse effect, which is also known as global warming
and it is probably the most dangerous threat for the human existence.
Raising the price of fuel would mean that people would use less petroleum
and gasoline. They would find other alternative means of transport to save
money, which would mean using less high-priced fuel for everyday purposes.
For example, cycling is a healthy activity and it saves the earth too. Also, for
a long journey, people could try to find friends together for car-pooling. Car-
pooling saves a lot of fuel and would save a lot of money too. But other things
should be considered to reduce the use of these dangerous fuels. Government
should implement strict rules of using car, for instance no less than 4 persons
should be allowed to drive a single car. The price should be increased in a
thoughtful way because if the price is so high it will hamper the average
people’s life leading. There are so many people yet use public transportation
for movement and the increased price will make their life miserable. The
prices of many necessary daily ingredients also increase with the price of fuel.
Many environmental hazards like “smog” and global warming are increasing
around the world due to the excessive use of petroleum and gasoline in our
daily lives. Raising the price of fuel could make all the difference to the
environment. It would force people to use petrol in a more responsible way
and use it less, and therefore be the most effective solution to the problem of
ever-increasing environmental hazards though it might have some side effects
but those can be controlled by the proper initiatives by the Government.
There are several reasons that are causing the environmental harms and this
has become an urgent issue to discuss and bring a solution about. The number
of ever increasing cars is one of the reasons that leads to affect the
environment negatively and there are some assumptions that increasing the
fuel price would solve this problem. But the reality would be different, and
increased fuel price will cause lots of other problems while it would
contribute very little to reduce the environmental pollutions and hazards. So
this can’t be the best solution in any way.
First of all, the maximum numbers of cars are owned by the rich people and
fuel price would not restrain them from using the cars. The price of fuel in
fact increased significantly over the past 12 years and that has done nothing to
reduce the car usages. On the contrary the number of cars running in the roads
has increased more than expected. Besides, the fuel price determines the
market prices of other daily necessary products and increasing the price
would only bring misery to the low and medium earning class population.
Electronic wastages, industries, household electrical devices, deforestation,
chemical wastages, unthoughtful activity of people are causing more damage
to the mother earth than the gas omission by the cars. We should focus on
those aspects as well before increasing the price of fuel just based on an
assumption.
The main idea of increasing the fuel price is to reduce the number of cars
running in the street and to restrain the car owners from using the cars less.
But that would prove to be a ridiculous solution specially when car owners
are mostly high earning class and they would not bother about the fuel price.
The best solution to address this utmost concerning issue is to introduce an

environment friendly energy source like solar energy system, to improve the
public transportation system & train system so that people mostly use these
systems instead of always using their own cars, increasing the awareness of
the people so that they do not directly contribute to harm the environment,
and making strict rules so that deforestation, chemical wastages and other
harmful ways of environmental pollutions get reduced.
Model Answer 5:(Disagreement)
Increasing the price of oil is one of the main strategies elaborated in order to
act against the worsening of habitat condition. Nonetheless, such a solution
could be not enough to stop the phenomenon.
The idea of raising prices of environmentally risky goods is not a recent

hypothesis. It is a namen (named) Pigovian tax, and it aims to reduce the use
of such goods. It really affects consumption, balancing the advantage of using
a certain product with the disadvantage of a growing cost to obtain it.
Consequently, consumers tent to move toward less expensive goods. This
tendency is advantageous because the State doesn’t need to deal with
enterprises: the loss of clients means a consequent interest in enterprises
toward green energy. Market works as a stabilyzer, more than an element
damaging the environment. Therefore, this policy can be advantageous.
On the other hand, disadvantages are more influential than positive effects.
Firstly, the effectiveness of the Pigovian tax lies on the ability of actors in
finding a good to be used as a substitute. What if a country invested many
resources in road transport? What if a State can rely on massive oil reserves?
In short, such a choice must consider both the existence of alternative sources
and the historical industrial evolution of the country. Moreover, the
importance of such an asset as the one of energy makes the use of incentives
and changing in prices an unreliable and dangerous tool. It could create too
many damages for an excessively unpredictable policy.
All this considered, many doubts remain about the hypothesis of using prices
as a lever to modify the way how people behave when dealing with energy
and petrol. Some positive consequences are certainly undeniable, but risks are
still higher than expected benefits. Consequently, betting on alternative
solution would be desirable.

It is an irrefutable fact that to diagnose the ways for saving the environment is
one the serious matters among the countries. Many nations are finding the
solutions to this ugly growth. As it has been heard that to increase the price of
fuel can be proved effective solution. However, I do not endorse this
observation.
While spotlighting to the above aspect, I can explicitly say that this prediction
can have adverse impact on society. Being price of fuel at the peak, the fairs
get heavily increased. With that the peoples’ life would probably get more
miserable. This practice will contribute to worsen the situation of poor people.
For verification, it is illustrated that there are millions of people in the world,
who go to their work by public transportation. It has been proved both in
developing and developed countries, whenever the price of oil increases; the
fairs of public transportation do not take enough time to reach at climax.
Furthermore, there is no full proof surety that after raising the price of fuel,
the car owners would abandon driving their vehicles. The dramatic increase in
the folks’ income has witnessed that the societies are richer than past. If they
can afford to buy a car then expenditures of oils are not beyond their
approach. For instance, in both developing and developed countries, the total
number of car holder has increased markedly.
Fuel is not used to run cars only. It is also used to run industries and
machines. So increasing prices of it would hurt the industrial productions as
well. By increasing fuel price Government would be in a great dilemma and
would not be able to control the price of the daily commodity. The increased
price of the fuel would only make problem to the poor people while rich
people who mostly own cars would find a way to buy it. The main concern is
the pollution prevention not the fuel price. There are other ways of doing so
rather than increasing the fuel price. Increasing fuel price would create some
international crisis and nations who produce fuel would get benefits from that
while the poor nations would struggle.
All things are considered, the obvious conclusion to be drawn is that

increment in costing of fuel is not an exceptional measure to reduce the
environment hazards rather it is a reactionary work. There are many other
solutions that can be applied. Like government should prompt eco-friendly
vehicles and public transport by hand-overing them with extraordinary
facilities. It should also make the people aware of menace of pollutions.
The requirement and consumption of fuel have increased manifolds to meet

the demands of world population for industrial growth, power needs and
transportation purposes etc. The demand for fuel is only going to increase in
the coming years as projected and forecasted by the energy experts. Many
governments are taking various measures to curb the demand of this
commodity due to heavy cost involved in import etc.
While some people believe that increasing the cost of the fuel would save the
environment from more damages, others opine that that would only create
more misery to the poor people.
Besides the financial constraints for many governments a general but very
important issue that needs to be addressed on war footing basis is the
environmental hazards associated with massive use of this commodity that are
not only harmful to the mother earth but also pose great dangers to the human
health. This dangers include toxic affluent dumped into sea which can destroy
sea-life, pollutants released in air causing air pollution which can effect
agriculture, ozone layer etc. Human beings can suffer problems from
breathing to some life threatening diseases as cancer etc.
So what option do we have? Perhaps one of the options but not the best one is
to increase the cost of fuel which will have its own negative effects in the
countries where poverty level and inflation is already high and the public
miseries will increase. A better option might be to conserve the consumption
of fuel by promoting energy conservation and creating a national policy
suggesting various measures.
I would like to end my subject on the note that each country has to prepare a
line of action by keeping the interest of its people and economy in mind.
Model Answer 8:
this happen.
Model Answer 9:
In the day and age, human civilization is developing at utterly fast speed,
requiring an enormous amount of energy which is primarily sourced from the
burning of fossil fuels. Undoubtedly, this traditional source of energy is
condemned as the culprit for the emissions of greenhouse gases, causing
global warming and venting anger from environmentalists. In response to this,
some people has suggested the increase of fuel’s price to demotivate users and
ameliorate the situation. Convinced by well-grounded reasons, the author
believes that while such an idea is feasible and may yield immediate benefits,
it is long from a complete adequate solution.
First of all, while lifting the price of fuel can impede its consumption to some
extent, the great demand for such a substance, being strongly inelastic, will
not varnish, at least in the short term. Undeniably, fuel is one of the most vital
sources of energy in society, inextricably intertwining with the progression of
mankind. In the near future, it is elusive to see the advent of any economical
replacement for fuel, especially in agricultural and industrial activities. It is
thus not an exaggeration to say that fuel will continue to be an integral part of
modern life.
Secondly, it is fallacious to accuse fuel as the sole cause of environmental

problems. Other factors such as deforestation, natural disasters and toxic
pollutants being released from industries all jointly contributes to the
degradation of environment. Focusing on fuel usage alone in tackling
environmental deterioration will therefore be a vain effort. Instead, a
sustainable solution to effectively preserving nature requires a combination of
actions being carried in different areas with a mutual aim in protecting the
environment.
In the light of the aforementioned facts, imposing higher price of fuel is

neither the main nor the only solution to environmental problems that people
are struggling to solve, although the utilization of fossil fuels, particularly
petrol, is the largest source of emissions. Some other methods should be taken
into consideration as well.
The best way to solve the world’s environmental problem is to increase

the price of fuel.
Sample Answer 1:
Excessive traffic and increasing pollution are affecting every major city in the
globe. To
lessen such problems, some people say that governments should raise the
price of
fuel such as petrol and diesel. It may help to some extent but I disagree that it
is the
best solution to solve the problem of environment.
To begin with, the number of cars in a country directly depends on the

proportion of
the population affluent enough to own cars. As a result, raises in gas price
could
invoke hard feelings among this segment of people but would not drastically
change
their behaviour in using cars. Even if the number of cars on road is reduced
due to
higher gas cost, this is not the best way to solve traffic problems. Such policy
would
hurt the auto industry, place higher costs on current and prospective car
owners, and
be detrimental to the economy of a nation. In the long run, the final way out
could be
the construction of better roads and more effective use of available transport
facilities.
Secondly, there is evidence that waste gas from cars is not the leading cause
of air
pollution. The culprit may be the discharge of polluting substances into the
atmosphere due to the rapidly growing manufacturing industry. As a result,
reduction
of the number of cars would not return us a blue sky and fresh air. We could
better
handle this problem if we could increase control over industrial waste-
discharge and
adopt more environmental friendly materials and production equipment.
Finally, other measures like the application of cheaper and cleaner energy
resources
could also be a better solution. For example, we now have the ability to make
cell-
powered or even solar-powered cars. Such energy is completely clean and
plentiful.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, it is not the best way to control
traffic
and pollution by increasing gas price because such action will hurt consumers
and
economy without achieving what it is aimed for. Measures such as
construction of
better transport facilities and development of new energy resources could be
more
effective solutions.
Sample Answer 2:

this happen.
Model Answer 3: (Agreement)

Environmental or natural hazards are the result of physical processes that
affect humans and environment every day and harmful for both in short and
long run. As the use of fuel increases to keep up with modern demands and
increased population, the world is becoming more vulnerable to
environmental hazards and disasters. Floods, earthquakes, severe
thunderstorms, toxic or oil spills immediately come to mind when
comprehending this issue, implying that all these things are inherently
hazardous.
One of the most effective solutions to these environmental hazards is to raise

the price of fuel. The use of petroleum and gasoline can release toxic
chemicals into our atmosphere. These chemicals escape into the air during
refilling, from the gasoline tank and carburetor during normal operation, and
from engine exhaust. Transportation sources account for about 30-50% of all
harmful emissions into the atmosphere. The industrialization is another reason
for the omission of harmful chemicals too.
“Smog” is another environmental hazard. It causes human respiratory stress,

and damages many plants, significantly reducing farm crop yields and the
“health” of trees and other vegetation. Burning gasoline emits significant
quantities of a wide range of harmful gases into the atmosphere. For example,
carbon monoxide is a poisonous gas produced by incomplete combustion.
Carbon dioxide, a normal product of burning fuel, is non-toxic, but
contributes to the greenhouse effect, which is also known as global warming
and it is probably the most dangerous threat for the human existence.
Raising the price of fuel would mean that people would use less petroleum
and gasoline. They would find other alternative means of transport to save
money, which would mean using less high-priced fuel for everyday purposes.
For example, cycling is a healthy activity and it saves the earth too. Also, for
a long journey, people could try to find friends together for car-pooling. Car-
pooling saves a lot of fuel and would save a lot of money too. But other things
should be considered to reduce the use of these dangerous fuels. Government
should implement strict rules of using car, for instance no less than 4 persons
should be allowed to drive a single car. The price should be increased in a
thoughtful way because if the price is so high it will hamper the average
people’s life leading. There are so many people yet use public transportation
for movement and the increased price will make their life miserable. The
prices of many necessary daily ingredients also increase with the price of fuel.
Many environmental hazards like “smog” and global warming are increasing
around the world due to the excessive use of petroleum and gasoline in our
daily lives. Raising the price of fuel could make all the difference to the
environment. It would force people to use petrol in a more responsible way
and use it less, and therefore be the most effective solution to the problem of
ever-increasing environmental hazards though it might have some side effects
but those can be controlled by the proper initiatives by the Government.
There are several reasons that are causing the environmental harms and this
has become an urgent issue to discuss and bring a solution about. The number
of ever increasing cars is one of the reasons that leads to affect the
environment negatively and there are some assumptions that increasing the
fuel price would solve this problem. But the reality would be different, and
increased fuel price will cause lots of other problems while it would
contribute very little to reduce the environmental pollutions and hazards. So
this can’t be the best solution in any way.
First of all, the maximum numbers of cars are owned by the rich people and
fuel price would not restrain them from using the cars. The price of fuel in
fact increased significantly over the past 12 years and that has done nothing to
reduce the car usages. On the contrary the number of cars running in the roads
has increased more than expected. Besides, the fuel price determines the
market prices of other daily necessary products and increasing the price
would only bring misery to the low and medium earning class population.
Electronic wastages, industries, household electrical devices, deforestation,
chemical wastages, unthoughtful activity of people are causing more damage
to the mother earth than the gas omission by the cars. We should focus on
those aspects as well before increasing the price of fuel just based on an
assumption.
The main idea of increasing the fuel price is to reduce the number of cars
running in the street and to restrain the car owners from using the cars less.
But that would prove to be a ridiculous solution specially when car owners
are mostly high earning class and they would not bother about the fuel price.
The best solution to address this utmost concerning issue is to introduce an

environment friendly energy source like solar energy system, to improve the
public transportation system & train system so that people mostly use these
systems instead of always using their own cars, increasing the awareness of
the people so that they do not directly contribute to harm the environment,
and making strict rules so that deforestation, chemical wastages and other
harmful ways of environmental pollutions get reduced.
Model Answer 5:(Disagreement)
Increasing the price of oil is one of the main strategies elaborated in order to
act against the worsening of habitat condition. Nonetheless, such a solution
could be not enough to stop the phenomenon.
The idea of raising prices of environmentally risky goods is not a recent

hypothesis. It is a namen (named) Pigovian tax, and it aims to reduce the use
of such goods. It really affects consumption, balancing the advantage of using
a certain product with the disadvantage of a growing cost to obtain it.
Consequently, consumers tent to move toward less expensive goods. This
tendency is advantageous because the State doesn’t need to deal with
enterprises: the loss of clients means a consequent interest in enterprises
toward green energy. Market works as a stabilyzer, more than an element
damaging the environment. Therefore, this policy can be advantageous.
On the other hand, disadvantages are more influential than positive effects.
Firstly, the effectiveness of the Pigovian tax lies on the ability of actors in
finding a good to be used as a substitute. What if a country invested many
resources in road transport? What if a State can rely on massive oil reserves?
In short, such a choice must consider both the existence of alternative sources
and the historical industrial evolution of the country. Moreover, the
importance of such an asset as the one of energy makes the use of incentives
and changing in prices an unreliable and dangerous tool. It could create too
many damages for an excessively unpredictable policy.
All this considered, many doubts remain about the hypothesis of using prices
as a lever to modify the way how people behave when dealing with energy
and petrol. Some positive consequences are certainly undeniable, but risks are
still higher than expected benefits. Consequently, betting on alternative
solution would be desirable.
It is an irrefutable fact that to diagnose the ways for saving the environment is
one the serious matters among the countries. Many nations are finding the
solutions to this ugly growth. As it has been heard that to increase the price of
fuel can be proved effective solution. However, I do not endorse this
observation.
While spotlighting to the above aspect, I can explicitly say that this prediction
can have adverse impact on society. Being price of fuel at the peak, the fairs
get heavily increased. With that the peoples’ life would probably get more
miserable. This practice will contribute to worsen the situation of poor people.
For verification, it is illustrated that there are millions of people in the world,
who go to their work by public transportation. It has been proved both in
developing and developed countries, whenever the price of oil increases; the
fairs of public transportation do not take enough time to reach at climax.
Furthermore, there is no full proof surety that after raising the price of fuel,
the car owners would abandon driving their vehicles. The dramatic increase in
the folks’ income has witnessed that the societies are richer than past. If they
can afford to buy a car then expenditures of oils are not beyond their
approach. For instance, in both developing and developed countries, the total
number of car holder has increased markedly.
Fuel is not used to run cars only. It is also used to run industries and
machines. So increasing prices of it would hurt the industrial productions as
well. By increasing fuel price Government would be in a great dilemma and
would not be able to control the price of the daily commodity. The increased
price of the fuel would only make problem to the poor people while rich
people who mostly own cars would find a way to buy it. The main concern is
the pollution prevention not the fuel price. There are other ways of doing so
rather than increasing the fuel price. Increasing fuel price would create some
international crisis and nations who produce fuel would get benefits from that
while the poor nations would struggle.
All things are considered, the obvious conclusion to be drawn is that

increment in costing of fuel is not an exceptional measure to reduce the
environment hazards rather it is a reactionary work. There are many other
solutions that can be applied. Like government should prompt eco-friendly
vehicles and public transport by hand-overing them with extraordinary
facilities. It should also make the people aware of menace of pollutions.
The requirement and consumption of fuel have increased manifolds to meet

the demands of world population for industrial growth, power needs and
transportation purposes etc. The demand for fuel is only going to increase in
the coming years as projected and forecasted by the energy experts. Many
governments are taking various measures to curb the demand of this
commodity due to heavy cost involved in import etc.
While some people believe that increasing the cost of the fuel would save the
environment from more damages, others opine that that would only create
more misery to the poor people.
Besides the financial constraints for many governments a general but very
important issue that needs to be addressed on war footing basis is the
environmental hazards associated with massive use of this commodity that are
not only harmful to the mother earth but also pose great dangers to the human
health. This dangers include toxic affluent dumped into sea which can destroy
sea-life, pollutants released in air causing air pollution which can effect
agriculture, ozone layer etc. Human beings can suffer problems from
breathing to some life threatening diseases as cancer etc.
So what option do we have? Perhaps one of the options but not the best one is
to increase the cost of fuel which will have its own negative effects in the
countries where poverty level and inflation is already high and the public
miseries will increase. A better option might be to conserve the consumption
of fuel by promoting energy conservation and creating a national policy
suggesting various measures.
I would like to end my subject on the note that each country has to prepare a
line of action by keeping the interest of its people and economy in mind.
Model Answer 8:

this happen.
Model Answer 9:
In the day and age, human civilization is developing at utterly fast speed,
requiring an enormous amount of energy which is primarily sourced from the
burning of fossil fuels. Undoubtedly, this traditional source of energy is
condemned as the culprit for the emissions of greenhouse gases, causing
global warming and venting anger from environmentalists. In response to this,
some people has suggested the increase of fuel’s price to demotivate users and
ameliorate the situation. Convinced by well-grounded reasons, the author
believes that while such an idea is feasible and may yield immediate benefits,
it is long from a complete adequate solution.
First of all, while lifting the price of fuel can impede its consumption to some
extent, the great demand for such a substance, being strongly inelastic, will
not varnish, at least in the short term. Undeniably, fuel is one of the most vital
sources of energy in society, inextricably intertwining with the progression of
mankind. In the near future, it is elusive to see the advent of any economical
replacement for fuel, especially in agricultural and industrial activities. It is
thus not an exaggeration to say that fuel will continue to be an integral part of
modern life.
Secondly, it is fallacious to accuse fuel as the sole cause of environmental

problems. Other factors such as deforestation, natural disasters and toxic
pollutants being released from industries all jointly contributes to the
degradation of environment. Focusing on fuel usage alone in tackling
environmental deterioration will therefore be a vain effort. Instead, a
sustainable solution to effectively preserving nature requires a combination of
actions being carried in different areas with a mutual aim in protecting the
environment.
In the light of the aforementioned facts, imposing higher price of fuel is

neither the main nor the only solution to environmental problems that people
are struggling to solve, although the utilization of fossil fuels, particularly
petrol, is the largest source of emissions. Some other methods should be taken
into consideration as well.
It is better for students at university to live far away from home than to
live at home with their parents.
Sample Answer 1:
It is a highly debated issue whether it is better for university students to live

far away
from home than to live at home with their parents. There are pros and cons of
both
approaches. It is necessary to look at both sides of the argument before
forming an
opinion.
There are definite benefits of staying at home. To begin with it is much more
economical to stay at home than to stay near the university. If you choose to
stay at
the university then you either stay at the university dormitory or rent your
own
apartment. Both university options are more expensive as compared to home.
Then
you have to do your own cooking and cleaning which is not the case if you
stay at
home where your mother looks after all these things. You do spend some time
commuting to and from the university but then you save your time on cooking
and
cleaning. The disadvantage of staying at home is that you may be disturbed
by siblings
and you have to help in household chores.
There are many advantages of staying near the university. University

education is a
time for you to mix with people of different backgrounds and cultures. This
cultural
exchange usually occurs after class hours. If you have to return home then
you miss
out on this golden opportunity. Secondly, there are good study facilities such
as
library, computer lab etc. if you are on or near the campus. You also get to
experience
some independence. The downside is that it is expensive and to cut the cost
you may
have to share your apartment with someone you don’t like.
In my opinion, it is definitely worthwhile to live at the university than with

your
parents even if you have to shell out some extra money for that because it is a
golden
opportunity to interact with people of different parts of the world and you get
to
enjoy the benefits of facilities like the library and sports stadiums and gyms.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that there are benefits and
drawbacks of
both approaches and the decision is purely subjective. However, in my
opinion staying
near the university is better.
Model Answer 2:
It is a hard decision making that parents send their children to boarding school
or day school. Both ways have their own disadvantages and disadvantages. In
my view, I prefer to choose boarding school to benefit the young generation
more.
It is of benefit to children if they are sent to boarding school. Living away

from home can cultivate children’s independence abilities. Children will face
many detail problems, such as laundries and cleaning the dormitories, when
they are in boarding school. And that is good to their future life. For example,
some Chinese students are really hard to adapt themselves to a new
environment in their future life due to the over-protection by their parents.
Besides, there are many strict rules that students have to obey in boarding
school. Usually, they are forced to go to bed in a regular time and get up early
to keep them healthy. It is worth mentioning that a great many extra curricula
activities such as sports and volunteers can enrich their knowledge and
broaden their horizons.
Some people hold the alternative view that living with parents will be easier
for parents to monitor their children’s developments. Students are vulnerable
to everything that might have a negative effect on them. Some students use
drugs in the absence of parents’ monitor. However, parents cannot control
their children’s thoughts and it is inculcating children moral values in their
early age that can lead children towards the right paths in their life. What’s
more, it is undeniable that those who live with parents are less strong in their
hearts when they are confront with difficulties. They used to seek the help
from others rather than trying to solve the problem by themselves. Many
students choose to suicide because of the short ability of bearing the pressure.
In my view, sending teenage students to boarding school is a practical method
to nurture their all-around developments. And those young children in
primary school need to be with parents as they are still naïve and need the
monitors from their parents.
Sample Answer 3:
Living environment has a great influence on students life,especially in

academic achievements.Some of have an opinion that students at university
level better not to stay in their home . I feel that this view is correct,and will
explain reasons why in this essay.
There are several reason to suggest that students to stay away from their
home. First and foremost, there are a lot of opportunity for students to learn
personal qualities such as punctuality,cleanliness,self care and so on.To be
more precise, students organize their work without their parents’
instructions,and at the same time they can find out time for their recreational
activities. Another reason that since they interact with students from different
family background,they learn how to maintain relationship with different
kinds of people. They learn importance of co-operation in social life.
Apart from this,students can concentrated more on their studies. Even lazy
students may persuade to do their home work when others are engaged with
the studies.Combine studies are the another positive aspect of hostel life. At
the time of examinations students gathered together to study their lessons.This
is because they do not feel any boredom with their study and they can also
clarify their doubts instantly with their companions.So,when students stay
together they can improve their academic skills.
However , some would argue that hostel life offer an uncontrolled
environment for students where they can do whatever they want.So there may
be a greater chances to do some mischievous activities. If students stay in
their home, they under the strict supervision of their parents. In addition,some
students start to do smoking and drink alcohol witrh their hostel life.But one
should not ignore the fact that there are some responsible authorities ii well
established institutions to make control over the students.
To conclude, students life at university level is very important because it is

the time to refine the personality for an adult of tomorrow. Though there are
some problems in hostel life,I believe that if there is an authority to make
appropriate control over the students,many of these problem can be solved
Model Answer 4:
In the modern and competitive society acquisition of the knowledge is very

crucial to gain success in life. Some people tend to stay with their families
while they study in universities to receive comfort of family. In contrast,
some students like to study in universities or colleges that are far away from
their home for social and personal purposes. This essay will discuss both
aspects before making any definitive conclusion.
There are indeed numerous benefits and advantages of studying in home town
universities. Student can enjoy home comfort and support from their families
in daily household chores such as preparing meals, sanitation and other
aspects. Student who are living with the parents have tremendous amount of
support in order to succeed in university. For instance, first year university is
very crucial period in term of the adjusting in university atmosphere, during
this period students require help and support of their elders. Furthermore,
presence of the family members and old friends allow us to get proper
guidance, healthy food and emotional support. In addition, some students are
overprotective when they go far away from their home; they feel very isolated
and depressed. Thus, it can be seen that this trend has some positive impacts
on individual as well as on our society.
On the other hand, there are enormous benefits of studying outside. First of
all, student will gain confidence and they will become more responsible. For
example, one learns to deal with domestic daily chores like making food,
cleaning and paying rent and bills. Secondly, student learns how to tackle
different kind of people and learns how to make their own decisions in
difficult time. Thus they develop various types of qualities and skills to make
their own life happier and enjoyable. Last but not least, independence of
living away from home is a benefit because it helps the students develop
social skills and improve as a person. As a result, their maturity and
confidence will grow enabling them to live a successful life.
In conclusion, in my perspective both aspects have advantages and

disadvantages, one should make their own choice because every person is
different. Some people like to live in freedom while other believe that family
support is very important in the life.
It is better for students at university to live far away from home than to
live at home with their parents.
Sample Answer 1:
It is a highly debated issue whether it is better for university students to live

far away
from home than to live at home with their parents. There are pros and cons of
both
approaches. It is necessary to look at both sides of the argument before
forming an
opinion.
There are definite benefits of staying at home. To begin with it is much more
economical to stay at home than to stay near the university. If you choose to
stay at
the university then you either stay at the university dormitory or rent your
own
apartment. Both university options are more expensive as compared to home.
Then
you have to do your own cooking and cleaning which is not the case if you
stay at
home where your mother looks after all these things. You do spend some time
commuting to and from the university but then you save your time on cooking
and
cleaning. The disadvantage of staying at home is that you may be disturbed
by siblings
and you have to help in household chores.
There are many advantages of staying near the university. University

education is a
time for you to mix with people of different backgrounds and cultures. This
cultural
exchange usually occurs after class hours. If you have to return home then
you miss
out on this golden opportunity. Secondly, there are good study facilities such
as
library, computer lab etc. if you are on or near the campus. You also get to
experience
some independence. The downside is that it is expensive and to cut the cost
you may
have to share your apartment with someone you don’t like.
In my opinion, it is definitely worthwhile to live at the university than with

your
parents even if you have to shell out some extra money for that because it is a
golden
opportunity to interact with people of different parts of the world and you get
to
enjoy the benefits of facilities like the library and sports stadiums and gyms.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that there are benefits and
drawbacks of
both approaches and the decision is purely subjective. However, in my
opinion staying
near the university is better.
Model Answer 2:
It is a hard decision making that parents send their children to boarding school
or day school. Both ways have their own disadvantages and disadvantages. In
my view, I prefer to choose boarding school to benefit the young generation
more.
It is of benefit to children if they are sent to boarding school. Living away

from home can cultivate children’s independence abilities. Children will face
many detail problems, such as laundries and cleaning the dormitories, when
they are in boarding school. And that is good to their future life. For example,
some Chinese students are really hard to adapt themselves to a new
environment in their future life due to the over-protection by their parents.
Besides, there are many strict rules that students have to obey in boarding
school. Usually, they are forced to go to bed in a regular time and get up early
to keep them healthy. It is worth mentioning that a great many extra curricula
activities such as sports and volunteers can enrich their knowledge and
broaden their horizons.
Some people hold the alternative view that living with parents will be easier
for parents to monitor their children’s developments. Students are vulnerable
to everything that might have a negative effect on them. Some students use
drugs in the absence of parents’ monitor. However, parents cannot control
their children’s thoughts and it is inculcating children moral values in their
early age that can lead children towards the right paths in their life. What’s
more, it is undeniable that those who live with parents are less strong in their
hearts when they are confront with difficulties. They used to seek the help
from others rather than trying to solve the problem by themselves. Many
students choose to suicide because of the short ability of bearing the pressure.
In my view, sending teenage students to boarding school is a practical method

to nurture their all-around developments. And those young children in
primary school need to be with parents as they are still naïve and need the
monitors from their parents.
Sample Answer 3:
Living environment has a great influence on students life,especially in

academic achievements.Some of have an opinion that students at university
level better not to stay in their home . I feel that this view is correct,and will
explain reasons why in this essay.
There are several reason to suggest that students to stay away from their
home. First and foremost, there are a lot of opportunity for students to learn
personal qualities such as punctuality,cleanliness,self care and so on.To be
more precise, students organize their work without their parents’
instructions,and at the same time they can find out time for their recreational
activities. Another reason that since they interact with students from different
family background,they learn how to maintain relationship with different
kinds of people. They learn importance of co-operation in social life.
Apart from this,students can concentrated more on their studies. Even lazy
students may persuade to do their home work when others are engaged with
the studies.Combine studies are the another positive aspect of hostel life. At
the time of examinations students gathered together to study their lessons.This
is because they do not feel any boredom with their study and they can also
clarify their doubts instantly with their companions.So,when students stay
together they can improve their academic skills.
However , some would argue that hostel life offer an uncontrolled

environment for students where they can do whatever they want.So there may
be a greater chances to do some mischievous activities. If students stay in
their home, they under the strict supervision of their parents. In addition,some
students start to do smoking and drink alcohol witrh their hostel life.But one
should not ignore the fact that there are some responsible authorities ii well
established institutions to make control over the students.
To conclude, students life at university level is very important because it is

the time to refine the personality for an adult of tomorrow. Though there are
some problems in hostel life,I believe that if there is an authority to make
appropriate control over the students,many of these problem can be solved
Model Answer 4:
In the modern and competitive society acquisition of the knowledge is very

crucial to gain success in life. Some people tend to stay with their families
while they study in universities to receive comfort of family. In contrast,
some students like to study in universities or colleges that are far away from
their home for social and personal purposes. This essay will discuss both
aspects before making any definitive conclusion.
There are indeed numerous benefits and advantages of studying in home town
universities. Student can enjoy home comfort and support from their families
in daily household chores such as preparing meals, sanitation and other
aspects. Student who are living with the parents have tremendous amount of
support in order to succeed in university. For instance, first year university is
very crucial period in term of the adjusting in university atmosphere, during
this period students require help and support of their elders. Furthermore,
presence of the family members and old friends allow us to get proper
guidance, healthy food and emotional support. In addition, some students are
overprotective when they go far away from their home; they feel very isolated
and depressed. Thus, it can be seen that this trend has some positive impacts
on individual as well as on our society.
On the other hand, there are enormous benefits of studying outside. First of
all, student will gain confidence and they will become more responsible. For
example, one learns to deal with domestic daily chores like making food,
cleaning and paying rent and bills. Secondly, student learns how to tackle
different kind of people and learns how to make their own decisions in
difficult time. Thus they develop various types of qualities and skills to make
their own life happier and enjoyable. Last but not least, independence of
living away from home is a benefit because it helps the students develop
social skills and improve as a person. As a result, their maturity and
confidence will grow enabling them to live a successful life.
In conclusion, in my perspective both aspects have advantages and

disadvantages, one should make their own choice because every person is
different. Some people like to live in freedom while other believe that family
support is very important in the life.
Earlier technological developments brought more benefits and changed

the lives of
ordinary people more than recent technological developments.
Sample Answer 1:
Earlier technological progress had been great with many far-reaching

breakthroughs, offer. Today, we can breakfast in Japan, lunch in Singapore
and dine at New Delhi. This is all because of the faster means of travel. The
Internet has revolutionised communication. Today we send and receive e-
mails at the click of a mouse. We chat and do video conferencing with our
kith and kin in any part of the world. These are just two examples of how
dramatically recent technological developments have benefited and changed
our life.
Furthermore, in the field of medicine, we have gadgets to diagnose cancers

and many other diseases at such early stages that almost complete cures are
possible. Also, if we look at the means we use to go to work, the electrical
appliances we use at home, the devices we use in offices, the facilities and
equipments we use in factories, we can say with certainty that recent
technology has transformed our lives beyond imagination.
Admittedly, earlier technological developments did benefit and change the

lives of ordinary people from the time when they were achieved, especially
after the Industrial Revolution. However, it is self-evident as to what
benefited and changed people’s life more, telegraph or mobile phone,
Phonograph or Mp4, Steam train or the monorail?
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that recent developments of

technology have certainly benefited and changed our lives more than the
earlier ones did.
Sample Answer 2:
It is unarguable that technologies are making humans life more and more
convenient and modern. However, there are many debates in all over the
world about early technological developments take people a bigger move to
the future than the recent technologies do. From my point of view, I disagree
with this argument because the recent or early technologies have an equal
impact on ours lives.
There are a variety of ways that can explain why the early technologies help
people more than recent technologies. The principal reason is that with the
inventions such as electricity, phone, etc it makes our lives become more
modern. For example, people can contact easily to each other when they have
a phone or they can light up their room in the evening without candles by an
electrical lamp. In addition, the early technologies help human discovery new
things in the world such as new energy like gas, fuel etc or new chemical
elements.
On the other hand, besides the benefit of the early technologies, the modern
technologies also bring many advantages. Here the principal argument is that
the present technologies not only base on early technologies but also take
humans a fantastic move. An example here is that in 10 years ago, people
could not call anyone if they did not have a telephone. Now people can call
anyone whenever they want by a small mobile phone or they can share many
things easily by the internet. A second positive effect is that the modern
technologies can prevent many diseases that are impossible in the past such as
cold, cancer, plague etc
It is difficult to escape the conclusion that the early and recent technologies
have an equal effect on humans. However, some technologies have negative
impact such as nuclear technology or process of manufacturing steel in the
past etc but without them, people cannot take a big move to the modern life
like present.
Model Answer 3:
Many people argue that the technological invention and development in

earlier ages were more beneficial to ordinary people while others believe that
the technological development in recent years are more important and helpful
for mass people. In my opinion, recent advancements in technology fields are
more important and helpful that they used to be in the early ages.
First of all, technology is still progressing and the development of technology

will continue. Earlier technology is being constantly upgraded to bring more
values to the people and from this point of view recent development is more
accessible for mass people. Secondly, the earlier technology was very
expensive and mass population could not afford it. Only a few percentages of
rich people could access the technology in earlier ages. But nowadays to own
useful technological devices like cell phone, computer, communication
devices and household appliance has become much cheaper than it used to be.
Thirdly, recent technological developments are far more impressive though
they are often not highlighted as the earlier technology. The invention and
development of cell phones is well-known information among people while
very few people understand the implication of the advancement we have
made in genetic engineering and medical science. People in earlier ages had
little control over the epidemic disease though the invention of TV at this time
is highlighter in greater details. But the advancement of medical science to
eradicate those diseases is a tremendous development in medical science that
few of us understand.
Finally, people in today’s world have more opportunity to develop a

technology that the people in earlier ages had and thus we are improving and
introducing more complex and accommodating development in technological
fields that would be greatly revered in coming days.
So, I opine that the development in technology in earlier ages were very
important but it would be unwise to say that they were more beneficial for
mas people that the technologies that we have introduced or introducing in
current days.
Model Answer 4:
It can be easily seen that people today are reaping the benefits of
technological development more than any previous generations. The ubiquity
of technological interventions in our society has proven its vital role which
arguably considered as the driving force of humankind. Nevertheless, some
believe that recent achievements in technology are not as helpful as they were
in the past. This stance is flawed and contradicts with the author’s belief.
Admittedly, many products of the technological advancement in the past have

rapidly changed the way human works and lives. For instance, inventions of
the Industrial Revolution such as steam and diesel engines have liberated
people from laborious jobs and significantly improve our productivity.
Nonetheless, these feats of engineering would be undermined if they were to
be compared with the advent of computers and the Internet – successful
stories of modern technology. It is not an exaggeration to say that the old
technology should only be considered as a platform for modern technology to
blossom.
Additionally, one cannot deny the fact that our life is being reshaped by
technology as a higher extent compared to the life of our ancestors, in terms
of both social and cultural perspective. Mobile phones, computers and the
Internet have created an information-based society where people
communicate, work and live faster. While such changes of our lifestyle
caused by recent technology have been witnessed within a very short period,
the influence of technology on previous generations was of a much slower
pace.
In conclusion, whether one likes it or not, technology will continue to evolve,

with the resulting changes impacting the lifestyles and cultural norms
continuously. While the earlier technology had enhanced the quality of life
and generated revenue for people, the recent technology has made them lead a
different lifestyle from previous generations.
Model Answer 5:
Technological development has maintained yawning gap from it’s early form
to these days latest form. It is quite obvious that every new inventions are
guided by their earlier form and people have never been isolated from
skyrocketing speed of technological advancement. Earlier technological
inventions not only has helped people in living new way of life but also has
led to latest inventions throughout the period of time. Nevertheless, there is
nothing new but rather all is just change caused by lapse of time. Some people
might argue that way of living life is changed because of earlier inventions
rather than recent one but personally my words are with former view.
As we all know that there is nothing new in this Earth all is just change and
modification in function or structure in its own previous form. So,
Unquestionably, earlier inventions has lead to these days new era of
inventions and so do our way of living healthy, safe, secure and luxurious life.
For example, the invention of telephone in early days by Grahm Bell has
helped so many people on those days and helped a lot in communication
problem. Additionally, people on past days used to live their life safely,
socially and more especially comfortably but these days with recent
technologies people are fighting for power status, exhibition of ones’s
greatness over another, weapon show off etc. Therefore, I believe that there is
no sense of arguing that recent development helped people in living good and
happy life. Admittedly, since the development on weapons has surged up
people are being more cannibal and killing one another everyday causing
much threat to their own generation. It seems like technology has taken over
way of our living style and making them to commit rampant crime,
pugnacious, rapacious, voracious and libertine everyday. Antagonistically,
earlier form of technology had just helped people in assisting their everyday
life in more convenient and efficient way.
Conclusively, whether it is earlier or recent form technology it always been

part of our life and could not be wrong. Perhaps, it solely depends upon we
people how to adopt it in our everyday life. If we defy canons of morality
than nothing is good in this world and technology is no exception to this.
Model Answer 6:
Undoubtedly, people are now enjoying one of the greatest technological boom
times in human history. Although there is a consensus that social changes
coincide normally with technological advances, it is a contentious issue
whether the earlier technology (e.g., machines, cars, airplanes) impacts on
people’s lives to a larger extent than does the recent technology (e.g., Internet,
computers). In my opinion, the recent improvements in technology have more
far-reaching consequences.
While the invention of automobiles was a landmark in the technological

evolution ofhumankind, the widespread use of computers and
telecommunications technology has dramatically reshapedthe nature of the
society. One might have benefited a lot from one’s improved ability to move
rapidly from one place to another because of the availability of automobiles,
yet this benefit has been discountedbecause of the advent of the Internet. With
Internet access, the world has become accessible to people and one can
perform many tasks at home (e.g., grocery shopping) and let their fingers do
the walking.
Lifestyles are changed by recent technologies in equal measure. Before

computers and the Internet were created, most working people struggled with
a lack of leisure time and the balance between family life and work life. They
were fully occupied by employment and various chores, such as shopping.
With Internet, they are now able to spend much less time on those
routine, dullactivities and lead active leisure lives.
Modern technologies also account for the evolution of people’s perception of

society. People tend to develop, modify and repurpose technology for their
own use. Interdependent, previously a core virtue of many societies, is now
undermined. Cell phones allow people to insulate their private interactions
from the culture around them and to create their own micro-cultures. The
mobility given by modern transport meanwhile, allures them to leave their
place of birth and work and live elsewhere. Cultural norms are subject to
modification and the communallifestyle is going out of fashion.
In conclusion, whether one likes it or not, technology will continue to evolve,

with the resulting changes impacting the lifestyles and cultural norms
continuously. While the earlier technology had enhanced the quality of life
and generated revenue for people, the recent technology has made them lead a
different lifestyle from previous generations.
Model Answer 7:
People have different views about the more facilities and amenities of recent
and past technology. Although both technological developments have helped
ordinary people and changed their lives in different ways, nevertheless, I do
admit that recent technological developments have helped normal people
more than past.
On the one hand, most of the experts- educationalists and researchers-

profoundly believe that recent technological developments have certainly
included many modern facilities and amenities in human lives than past. They
have got a lot of conspicuous stance in their support. In the first place,
anyone, in this modern age, can communicate with his families and friends
easily via this technology. For example, one of my Uncles, Robart who lives
in America does communicate anytime through the cell phone. It is true that
we can also share our feelings and emotion using Facebook, Twitter and
Skype over the internet. So, recent technologies make distances very short
and flexible. Besides, recent invention has certainly made large scope of job
opportunities globally. For instance, my friend, Likhon, earns foreign
currency doing outsourcing job through the internet that mikes him happy.
Another important point is that we can buy anything through online and
attend in job interview from home. We cannot, without doubt, ignore the
more benefits of recent technology than past.
However, there are some drawbacks and problems of recent technological

invention. One problem is crime rate is being increased in our society. For
example, our banks are robbed by miscreants in different ways. Huge money
is being transferred from one account to another by online hackers, hacking
online banking systems. It is certainly the negative uses of technology. In
addition, this technology has made our life robotic and machine as well. So,
our emotion and feelings are decreasing day by day with each other in our
society.
In conclusion, it seems to me that recent technological developments have

more facilities and amenities for general people than past technological
developments although it has some drawbacks. Eventually, I think inventors
make sure upcoming technology should be more secure and flexible for
people.
Multi-cultural societies, in which there is a mixture of different ethnic

peoples, bring more benefits than drawbacks to a country.
I definitely agree with the statement that cosmopolitan societies are better for
the
overall progress of a country. That is perhaps why nations such as the U.S.A.,
Canada
and Australia, which are primarily multi-cultural societies, enjoy great
prosperity,
stability and harmony. In the following paragraphs I shall provide arguments
to
support my views.
Apparently, a multi-cultural society can bring a wide variety of benefits to a

nation in
terms of economic, cultural and social development. To begin with, the
majority of
immigrants from different cultural backgrounds are high achievers, including
experts,
scholars, engineers, business people and other well-trained people. Their
arrival
means an inflow of expertise, experience, investments as well as a dynamic
labour
force, which are all key factors to the increase of competitiveness, efficiency
and
productivity of a nation’s economy.
What is more, the new arrivals know very well the importance of respecting
the local
traditions and customs. Therefore, they co-operate and collaborate well with
the
natives. They work very harmoniously side by side in offices, factories and
schools. In
addition, with a rich blend of peoples, cultures and lifestyles, people in multi-
cultural
societies tend to be more open-minded and tolerant of other people’s customs
and
religions.
However, multi-societies also have some problems. Sometimes, people from

overseas
will try to maintain their unique ethnic cultures with their own distinctive
characteristics. These differences many seem trivial, but they can cause some
conflicts
that make it difficult for immigrants to become assimilated into the
mainstream of the
local social life. But multi-cultural societies are usually based on equality and
diversity,
so these problems can eventually be dealt with successfully.
To sum up, after what I have discussed, the advantages of multi-cultural
societies far
outweigh the disadvantages. That is the reason so many countries make great
efforts
to attract more immigrants from abroad
Model Answer 2:
Thanks to more widely open policies in economy and immigration of many

countries, the 21st century has witnessed the surprisingly increasing
formation of multicultural societies where a varying number of ethnic people
stay together. Although it has two-side effects to a country, it seems to me
that we are more likely to obtain more benefits than disadvantages from this
kind of society.
The more originally different residents, the more cultural values they can
share to enhance their awareness and knowledge of culture and tradition.
People will get more directly engaged in understanding unique customs or
rituals, life and work attitudes from their foreign neighbors, colleagues and
friends. As a consequence, they enable to adapt the cultural diversity in order
to develop their interpersonal skills and live closer to other cultures without
having to live in person in another country.
Additionally, once people can know more about each other through everyday
interactions at work or schools, the severe conflicts or even wars will be
remarkably alleviated. It is undeniable that there might have some drawbacks
that multicultural communities bring to a country. Racial disparity
accelerated, the wealth-poverty gap deteriorated, different culture tensions are
specific cases for what are the so-called drawbacks, but the inhabitants can
overcome these when the government implement friendly-ethnic peoples’
policies as well as the dwellers have positive thoughts and behaviours to live
compatibly with others.
Stimulating multiculturalism in a society will offer numerous advantages to a

country rather than undesirable effects. Therefore, each individual should
savour every rewarding moments of living in their multicultural community
and proudly spread their unique traditions to international friends so as to
increase the diversity.
Model Answer 3:
Nowadays, as an inevitable and irreversible trend, the multi-culture has

brought large impact on the societies around the globe. However, whether it
benefits the whole society in a country remains a controversial issue. I agree
with view that despite several existing issues, the advantages definitely
outweigh the disadvantages.
Firstly, it is obvious that people from different regions bring particular and
unique traditions with them which will contribute to the diversity of cultures
and races. Think of the spectacular creativity and attractiveness in America
which is known as the melting pots for immigrants in all walks of life.
Therefore, various ethnic groups in the country enrich the social life, broaden
people’s horizon and boost the economy.
Moreover, most of the people who immigrate from their own countries are
industrious, especially the first generation. They leave their motherland
mainly because of the war and poverty. So when they make a new start, they
are more likely to work hard and create a new home for their families.
That is not to say that we can neglect the detriments of multiculturalism.
Many new comers will always encounter the language barrier and cultural
shock which will even lead to the discrimination and religious conflict with
the existing inhabitants. But generally speaking these issues are relatively
few.
In sum, the multiculturalism is a global positive trend; meanwhile,

governments and the whole society should make effort to eliminate the biases
among different cultures. Only by doing so can we ensure that we could live
in a harmonious environment and enjoy the benefits of social development.
Model Answer 4:
It is believed that multicultural environments bring many advantages for

many people, since the variety of races, cultures and traditions will make the
country become unique and attractive. Although, multicultural societies have
some negative issues, but I do believe that the positive sides are greater than
the negative ones.
On the one hand, countries that have multicultural communities have some
similar problems. Firstly, it is common that discrimination would have been
the main issue. Some groups of people feel that their races are the most
superior one; therefore they would underestimate certain kinds of races.
Secondly, there is always a debate about religious activities, as some groups
might have extreme faith in their religions and would annoyed other believes.
One of the classic examples would be about the debate of religion in Israel
between the Jewish and the Palestinian, which have caused so many
casualties.
Despite of all the drawbacks, multiculturalisms will bring many advantages
for the government and the people, if they are well managed. Multicultural
societies makes the city become alive and fascinating, as some sides of city
shown Asiatic cultures, while on the other side it show Western civilizations.
This situation makes the city become unique, and would attract tourists from
many parts of the world. As a result, it will boost the tourism industry, create
a lot of employments and generate income tax for the governments. There are
many multicultural cities that are well known, such as Sydney, Toronto and
Singapore and they are considered as advanced cities, due to the proper
management of its local government.
In conclusion, it is undeniable that multicultural environment has its own

advantages and disadvantages. In my point of view, I do believe that
multicultural societies have more benefits than its drawbacks, if they are
managed properly by the government.
Model Answer 5:
Today, the assimilation of culture and custom in different ethnics grows

smoothly. Some minority ethnic groups are not support and impede this
tendency because they afraid the extinction of their characteristics. This essay
will explain why the combination of the ethnics could improve the living
standard of the underprivileged ethnics. Another point is that this trend is
irreversible.
The inheritance of the culture and custom is jeopardized by the mixture of the
ethnics. Children are compelled to learn and speak the language which is
popular and useful in daily life. Fewer and fewer individuals can speak their
own language; therefore, the language has to go extinct eventually. Not only
is the language, but also living environment is changing as well. Some
residents are forced to leave their home. For instance, most Mongolian in my
country live on grassland in the past, while they relocate to modern city now.
The religious belief is also influenced result in cultural homogenization.
Despite the respect in appearance, education in school changes the mind of
students gradually.
However, the assimilation of different ethnic groups never stops over the
several thousands of years. Developing the technology and culture is the
irresistible trend. Each ethnic should get rid of the shortcomings in their
traditional behavior and accept the merits from other groups. Communication
without barriers is another advantage. The bonding of the language increases
the possibility of comprehension and achievement of the cutting-edge
theories. This is the reason why English becomes the compulsory curriculum
all over the world. Improving the living standard of impoverished groups who
live in overdue and outdate dwellings is also essential.
Although cultural homogenization would undermine the traditional culture

and custom, it enhances the living standard and facilitates the communication.
The world is changing constantly. We do not know the standard quo of our
society if our ancestors did not allow the cooperation and assimilation with
other ethnic groups. I believe that the combination of ethnics benefits our life.
Some people think the main purpose of schools is to turn the children
into good
citizens and workers, rather than to benefit them as individuals.

Idea for the Essay
Schools merely turn children into good citizens or workers:
• schools teach discipline which turns children into effective workers.

children learn what is right and wrong in school.
• schools instill the cultural values that are shared by society.
• skills that enable children to succeed in the job market can first
learned in school.
Schools benefit children as individuals:
• schools help children discover their potential.
• children are able to choose the subjects that best suit them.
• teachers are trained to help children understand their strengths and

improve their weaknesses.
• children can develop confidence as a person either through lessons

or extra curricular activities.
• through school education, children are able to develop an

understanding about the world in which they live.

Sample Answer 1:
I definitely agree with the statement that the primary aim of schools is to turn
the
pupils into good citizens and workers rather than benefit them as individuals.
I feel
that schools have to fulfil both things but the primary aim is towards the
welfare of
the society and the benefit to the individual automatically ensues.
Schooling can do a lot for shaping children. Firstly, school is a system with so
many
possibilities for a child to grow into what he or she actually is. For example,
teachers
are able to mould children by identifying their hidden strengths, and the same
strength may later make the child what he actually is in this world for.
Secondly, since children spend a sizeable amount of their time with teachers
and a
community of boys and girls from different faiths, statuses and family values
– there is
great possibility for a child to undergo a transformation into a good human
being.
Teachers are a great force to influence children.
Of course, learning academic subjects is the main aim for what students go to
schools.
Definitely, the job market requires professional knowledge the most. But it is
also true
that if students become good citizens and workers, they are themselves
equally
benefited too.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, raising children into real
human beings
involves several factors. Among them, the prominent one is good schooling.
Schools’
main function is to make students good and responsible workers and the
personal
benefit to students also takes place simultaneously.
Model Answer 2:
It is an obvious fact that education is playing an increasingly important role in

our lives. But the issue of ‘what is the purpose of school’ has sparked massive
debates. All of these debates fall on one side of school should place more
emphasis on turning children into a community friendly person, rather than
solely focus on personal qualities that serve best to their self-interest. From
my perspective, the main purpose of education more likely to be turning
children into good citizens that benefit children as a whole.
Firstly, good citizen makes the world a better place. As they focus more on
community, society or nation with the respect of others and their property,
helping people who are not in a position to benefit themselves. Most
importantly, they respect the environment and do not damage it in anyway.
All of these add value to create a harmonious community. However, many
people argue that the purpose of school to benefit children as individuals
could also benefit others in the same community. These people’s lack of
responsibility to the society at large because they are after the best for their
own rights regardless others’ interest which could cause grave consequences
and create burden to society. For example, alcohol abuses, adult who is over
the age of 18 is allowed to consume alcohol in some countries, but some
people abuse the right that is given. Most of child harm is from either a parent
or guardian because the person has been drinking. And there is also a huge
impact on young women, who bear a great deal of the burden for other
people’s drinking.
Secondly, good citizen not only deliver benefits the community but also
benefits to people as individuals. The characteristics of good citizen are of
most virtual qualities that a human being is likely to possess, as well as
significant to individuals’ wellbeing. For example, tolerance enables
individuals to make friends easily. Considerate and patience make individuals
good listeners as they listen to the views of others and think about what they
have to say. Willingness to learn guarantees the success in their future career.
Such qualities could help children to gain credit in every aspect in their lives.
In conclusion, the purpose of school to turn children into good citizen and
worker should outweigh the element of benefiting them as individuals. As
good citizen possess all the good qualities that an individual should have, in
the meanwhile, these qualities consists the fundamentals of creating a
harmonious society.
Model Answer 3:
Schools and other educational institutes are considered to be the lighthouse of

a nation as they perform the great job of educating students and help build an
ideal nation. If education is the backbone of a nation, schools are the places
where this is shaped and polished. However, it is a never ending debate
whether a school’s main objective is to help children becoming successful
professionals or to turn them in to ideal citizens and devoted workers for the
betterment of the nation. I agree that schools main purpose should be to turn
students into honest and good citizens instead of turning them in to selfish
money makers.
First, the main purpose of education is to build up an enlightened nation

where morality, honesty and integrity would be the key characteristics of the
citizens. They would keep aside their personal ambition and would work
together for the betterment of the society and the country. Since schools are
the place where education is planted and taken care of, its main objective
should to focus on nurturing morality and good human characteristics among
the students. What good it will bring to the society if a talented and
experience doctor treats patients only for the money he earns? Should not we
have more doctors and other professionals whose main purpose is to help
others? If we want to have more professionals who would actually help others
instead of turning in to money-making machines, we should focus on our
education system, especially what we teach our children.
Second, states spend a lot of money to keep the schools and its education
system running. A major portion of this spending comes from the tax ordinary
citizens pay. From this regards, if schools plan to adopt an education system
where teachers’ sole purpose would be to teach children how to be personally
benefitted, the whole education system would lose its main purpose. We have
to be very careful while educating children. What we teach them in their early
stage would become their permanent characteristics and if the schools fail to
teach them to become ideal citizens, it would be a great concern in the future.
Finally, personal benefits, memorizing some lessons and getting good grades
should not be the main reasons children attend schools. They should be taught
the moral lessons as well as importance of education so that they become the
citizens we need for a better society. The true personal benefits do not lie on
the amount of money we earn rather it is defined by the happiness and
morality we gain in our life.
In conclusion, making ideal citizens and dedicated workers should be the true
objective of our schools. The greater good of the society, bright and
prosperous future of a nation and personal achievements of individuals are
connected with the way we teach our children in schools and that is why our
education should be focused on morality and quality.
Model Answer 4:
Nowadays, many people realize that education gives beneficial effect for
people’s life. Some of them think that primary aim of educational institution
creates young people have excellent personality as inhabitants and employers.
However some others believe that education simply accord young generation
become individualist.
Some parents send their children to school because they think that school
could teach kids many lessons through some academic methods which have
by appropriate teachers. Moreover, school makes young learners to be good
citizens and workers due to they are educated by right person such as educator
or tutors who has good competency in particular field. For instance, in
Indonesia, several formal educations are given a responsibility to teach their
students about vocational and citizenship. Hopefully, young generations have
sense of belonging to build and to develop toward nation and country. It
appears when the activity of learning and teaching is held by school on
Monday, usually students must follow the flag ceremony as manifestation of
loveliness. In addition, students might learn how to develop their ability
through life skill subjects, so they are ready to face the real life in society.
Some other people argue that school encourages students to compete with
their friends to achieve best scores. It might be trigger of them become
individualists. Moreover, students might learn independently to face some
assignments such as homework and task. As a result, they do not really know
how to solve problem appropriately. Then, some students prefer invite tutor or
come to course institution to assist them than study together with their friends.
It might be positive result for best achievement in academic but this condition
could make some students simply focus on some compulsory subjects. So,
young learners ignore the value of togetherness among them and they also do
not participate in social relationship. This characteristic could influence
society become individualists. They simply overwhelm toward own business
without really care what happened around them.
In my point of view, the main purpose of school is to turn people become

good individual as citizen who is able to compete with the real world is
claimed very important to build and to develop for improvement of their
states because this could become foundation for particular country. The main
key to reach the goal of country needs best education to produce better society
that have ability to work and to take part in national developing. Their skills
are drilled through excellent education system, so they could be good citizens
and workers. If each person has good ability in particular field and
governments could empower this potential resource, their country would
struggle to reach goal become developed nation.
To conclude, some people claim that school takes an important role to make
the youngster to be good citizens and employer. It is true that their skills are
trained through some subjects that give benefit for them. I really agree that
school change people become good societies and competitive workers rather
than benefit them as individuals due to basically developed country begin
with good citizens and employers.
Model Answer 5:
People have different views on whether a school’s primary responsibility is to

prepare a well behaved citizen or to focus on preparing them as individuals. In
my opinion, up to a certain extent, teachers should give more consideration on
developing students learning capabilities rather than emphasising too much on
moral values.
It is true that, school is the place where the future generations start developing
their learning abilities. Only a well-designed and time tested curriculum can
import essential information to their receptive mind. At the same time, many
parents do not have enough time and ability to teach their child all the
necessary subjects, so for them school is the only place where these students
can grasp hold on the basic subjects. In future, these students will progress in
to the different professions like doctors, nurses and teachers. They will also
contribute to economy by making money for themselves and paying taxes.
On the other hand, teachers should work as a role model not a tool of
learning. They should encourage children to perform, praise them for their
hard work and teach them that failures make us try harder. In addition, school
is a place where a child gets exposed to a wider community .So they can also
be benefited by learning many life skills like obeying rules, sharing with each
other, be patience and tolerant .These qualities will help them to grow up as
better individuals and self-confident adults.
In conclusion, I strongly believe that schools should mainly focus on the

academics because the education process itself will have a positive influence
on students.
Model Answer 6:
Education and the schooling experience have evolved in the wake of new
technologies such as the Internet. This in turn has had a profound effect on
the training students receive and the ultimate people they become upon
graduating. It is disagreed that schools today are producing mechanically-
thinking workers and refraining from developing students as individuals.
This will be shown by looking at the current changes underway in both
modern and traditional school systems.
Firstly, many modern school curriculums are becoming computerized and this
is doing a lot to encourage student development as individuals. Take South
Korea, for example. Traditionally, Korean classrooms were packed with forty
students and this provided very little face time between instructor and pupil.
However, under a new government policy, all students are to receive tablet
computers to allow them greater opportunity for interaction with their
teachers and each other. In addition to this, these tablet computers also
provide access to other learning resources that may cater to the particular
needs of gifted or challenged young people. As this shows, the argument that
today’s schools do not benefit pupils as individuals holds little merit.
In addition to this, trends within the developing world are also gravitating
towards providing students with individualized school curriculums. In China,
for example, middle and high school youths today are free to select a number
of elective courses that allow them to demonstrate their skills in areas they are
particularly strong in as well as develop their unique identities. As schooling
continues to become more tailored to the needs of young people, it is difficult
to see how the argument that schools do not produce dynamically thinking
individuals holds much water.
After looking at how the world’s schools are increasingly making efforts to
meet the needs of individual students, it is hard to see the plausibility of any
counter argument. Thus, it is hoped the educational experience of young
people will continue to evolve in a manner that meets their needs.
Sample Answer 7:
It is true that the modern education system places too much emphasis on
improving the job-worthiness of children and that is hardly surprising. Jobs
are important. If they weren’t, job-oriented courses wouldn’t have been so
popular among students. As you can probably see, professional courses like
medicine, engineering and MBA attract more students than courses like arts
or pure science. That means both want schools and colleges to turn them into
employable adults.
While it is true that there is an emphasis on making children good citizens and
workers, it is wrong to assume that schools don’t benefit children as
individuals. In fact, children learn a lot of life-skills from school. Schools
teach children to interact one another. It teaches them to respect authority; it
nourishes their leadership skills and teaches them how to work as part of a
team. Schools also teach children the need to be disciplined. All of these skills
are essential to grow into good adults.
I even think that children who receive formal schooling have an advantage
over those who are home schooled. That is because the school is a microcosm
of the world outside. It teaches kids all the skills necessary to survive in the
world outside. What’s more, the advancements in modern technology now
allow schools to offer individualized curriculums. Many schools now give
students the freedom to choose the courses they want to study. It allows them
to demonstrate their skills. Modern technology, which most schools have
embraced in a big way, also gives children more opportunity to interact with
their teachers and peers.
As schooling tend to become more and more tailored to suit the individual
needs of young people, it is hard to see how the argument that schools don’t
benefit children individually holds water.
A country becomes more interesting and develops more quickly when its
population includes a mixture of nationalities and cultures.
I definitely agree with the statement that cosmopolitan societies are better for
the
overall progress of a country. That is perhaps why nations such as the U.S.A.,
Canada
and Australia, which are primarily multi-cultural societies, enjoy great
prosperity,
stability and harmony. In the following paragraphs I shall provide arguments
to
support my views.
A culturally and ethnically diverse country is so fascinating because there are
many
different lifestyles reflecting different ethnic origins in it. In a multi-cultural
society
one can enjoy a variety of unique traditions and customs which is very
exciting and
adds spice to life. One has more options when it comes to leisure activities.
For
example, when you want to get together with families, friends or co-workers,
you can
visit a Chinese restaurant serving cheese chilly and Manchurian or an Italian
one
serving pizza and pasta. Of course, there are more ethnic foods with exotic
flavours
available, all depending on your personal preferences. It is the same case with
other
kinds of entertainment. Even if you just walk on the street, you can see people
wearing their traditional outfits of different ethnic styles.
A multi-cultural society can also bring a wide variety of benefits to a nation in

terms of
economic development. To begin with, the majority of immigrants from
different
cultural backgrounds are high achievers, including experts, scholars,
engineers,
business people and other well-trained people. Their arrival means an inflow
of
expertise, experience, investments as well as a dynamic labour force, which
are all key
factors to the increase of competitiveness, efficiency and productivity of a
nation’s
economy.
What is more, the new arrivals know very well the importance of respecting
the local
traditions and customs. Therefore, they co-operate and collaborate well with
the
natives. They work very harmoniously side by side in offices, factories and
schools. In
addition, with a rich blend of peoples, cultures and lifestyles, people in multi-
cultural
societies tend to be more open-minded and tolerant of other people’s customs
and
religions.
To sum up, when a nation has a population consisting of different

nationalities and
cultures, it has many unique advantages which make life there more
interesting and
society develops quickly. So, it has a magical attraction for so many people
all over the
world.
Model Answer 2:
It goes without saying that we are living in global culture society and it has
become important part in every country to progress in social and economical
that provide us a lots of benefits in all walk of life. An argument has been put
forward that country become interesting and develops faster when its
population includes a mixture of different nationalities and cultures.
According to me. This statement holds a valid ground.
There are a plethora of reasons why I think nation become better than before
when its population belongs to different nationalities . First and foremost
point which comes to my mind that when we live in multi cultural society and
to interact with people then we learn a lot of things about their cultural,
festivals, Ritual, , food and fashion and it gives us a new thing to do . Because
all culture are different from one another when we understand the cultural
then we enjoy a new life. It rocks solid believe that cultural develops our
mind and soul.
Secondly, it is very beneficial when a country develops with different cultural

and nationalities . Because it gives us a lot of opportunity in business and to
earn money from other countries then it helps in a country’s progess to leaps
and bounds. Thirdly, it has become a simple matter this day to travel overseas
for different purposes when we adjust ourselves with that cultural and
atmosphere then we learn tolerance and other important things from culture .
Some people enjoy all cultural activities and ritual to get happiness in life .
Because some time we become our friends who belongs other culture then we
celebrate a lot of things with them for their happiness and it also becomes our
part of life.
In conclusion , after ponder over a great deal of thoughts and deliberation

with my self . I come to this conclusion that cultural plays indispensable role
in our life and in incredible world to progress , it has become crucial part and
a lot of people are enjoying this invaluable thing free of cost.
Model Answer 3:
here is a trend that the globalization has played an increasing role in the
evolution of society. Some people hold a view that when the population of a
country, like the USA, includes a mixture of different nationalities and
cultures, it will be more interesting and develop more quickly. As far as I am
concerned, I support this idea.
To begin with, it is true that various people create more interest. Individuals,
generally speaking, are willing to contact different persons and cultures.
Meanwhile, this is the main reason why so many people enjoy travelling.
Citizens will feel fresh when they have a foreign neighbor. Besides, the living
habits of foreigners are absorbing to local residents.
In addition, a good many kinds of nationalities are helpful to improve the

economy. Different folks own their different concepts because of different
living backgrounds, and these concepts are essential in searching the best
approach of development. The USA, for instance, has various human species,
and everyone can voice his/her suggestions to the government. Thus, the
government has more choices, which are crucial to make the society better.
Last but not least, cultural diversity brings many benefits to the improvement
of society. First of all, people will enjoy more entertainments when foreign
cultures are brought by foreigners. Kongfu is a case in point. Another
important point is that a great number of cultures can increase the number of
industries, which is also important to the economic progress.
In summary, various nationalities and cultural diversity cannot only make our
daily lives more interesting, but also develop the society more quickly.
Model Answer 4:
The sweeping trend of globalization leads to the mixture population and

culture in a particular country. Whether this mixture’s advantages outweigh
the disadvantages has been a topic of discussion.
Some people are convinced that a country can boosts its economy and become
more stimulating by accepting diverse nationalities and cultures. To start
with, the transaction between immigrants and local residents would quicken
the currency circulation and increase the demand of consumption that are the
two essential elements of economic development. Furthermore, some
immigrants, who are equipped with technique and knowledge, can make a
great contribution to the progress of technology and education. In addition,
the diverse culture they brought can broaden the citizens’ horizons as well as
enrich their life experience, thereby pushing the society to be a more
enlightened one.
Some others argue that the mixture population and culture may weaken their
cultural identity. Take Guangzhou as an example, Guangzhou is a city that
has many time-honored traditions and cultural heritages. But these identities
are fading because of the proliferation of western cultures and some teenagers
even forget some traditional customs and festivals. Moreover, a country that
has different nationalities and cultures may be suffered from more conflicts
due to the different beliefs and habitats between local residents and
foreigners.
In conclusion, I tend to stand by the side that the mixture of nationalities and
cultures is indeed very important to the wellbeing of a particular country. On
the other hand, the government should pay attention to preserve local cultural
identity while accepting the different cultures.
Model Answer 5:
Multiculturalism has become a trend in many countries worldwide. It is

believed that multiculturalism will make countries more interesting and
develop more faster. In my perspective, I tend to agree with this statement and
will elaborate below.
There are certainly some reasons why countries will become more interesting.
To start with, more recreational activities can be introduced. Chinese Chess,
which originated from china, has gained its popularity in western countries.
Active participation of such activities allows local people to experiences the
fascination of Chinese culture. Apart from this, traditions in foreign countries
also diversify local culture. Australians, for example, realize that there is
another way to Chinese New Year by making Chinese dishes such rice cakes
and coke chicken, during celebrating Spring Festival. As a result, local people
may learn more about the culture of different nationalities and cuisine.
However, there are opposing voices saying that mixture of different

nationalities in countries not always positive development. On the one hand,
foreign experts may help the current country boost the productivity. As most
experts come from developed countries with advanced technology
knowledge, they would possible create more sophisticated machines for
Australia, which may vastly increase the output of the manufacturing
industry. On the other hand, language barrier is a headache to many
employers. In most cases, immigrants speak limited English because they
have never learned that language before they migrate to Australia. Due to
poor communication in workplace, it results low efficiency.
In conclusion, multiculturalism has both positives and negatives. However, I

still think this should be adopted because its advantages outweigh
disadvantages.
Model Answer 6:
In modern world,countries are becoming more and more simulating and

advance since they have varied citizens from different nationalities.Personally
speaking,multiple and diversity culture is beneficial for many countries.
First of all,a country with a mixture culture background makes its tourism
industry more attracted,which enhance tourism profits for the counties. A
recent survey shows that travellers are more willing to spend their money to
visit a country which has a diverse culture backgrounds.For the reason that
most of the visitors are interest in a place where they are capable of
experience varied cultures from around the world. Moreover, Many countries
develop in a striggered rate link to their mixture population. To illustrate this
further, people immigrate to other countries not only with their previous
cultures, but also personal skills and talents.Those elements have numerous
contributions to developing cities and makes them become more civilized.
On the other hand, however,there are some drawbacks related diverse cultures
and nationalities people live in the same place.Racsim is prevent worldwide,
people who have different belief can cause conflicts much more easer.For
instance,the racial combats between the black and the white in Unite State
have been a issue that never ceased, which also causes a vast number of chaos
and unrests to the community. Hence, discrimination that associated with the
people who do not have the same cultural background is an obvious problem
in the cities where have diverse nationalistic populations.
In conclusion, despite of there some demerits on this statement,I still firmly

convinced that the counties with different cultural background and
nationalities are much more intriguing, and it also develop faster
Individuals can do nothing to improve the environment. Only

governments and large companies can make a difference.
Idea for the Topic
Global warming
Gases such as carbon dioxide trap heat from the sun
This causes global temperatures to rise
This process is known as the greenhouse effect
Human activity is a major factor in the rise of the greenhouse gases
Factories and vehicles produce emissions and exhaust fumes
Many developing countries are becoming industrialized
The number of cars on our streets is growing
Cheap air travel is allowing more people to fly

Effects of Global Warming
Global warming will have a significant impact on our planet
Rising temperature will cause melting of the polar ice caps
Sea levels will rise
We can expect more extreme weather conditions
Flooding and droughts may become more common
Impacts of humans on the environment
The increasing world population is putting pressure on natural resources
Fossil fuels like oil and gas are running out
We are destroying wildlife habitats
We have cut down enormous areas of rainforest
This has led to the extinction of many species of animals and plants
Solutions to environment problems
Governments could introduce laws to limit emissions from factories
They should invest in renewable energy from solar, wind or water power
They could impose “green taxes” on drivers and airlines companies

Government campaigns should promote recycling
Natural areas and wild animals should be protected
Individuals should also try to be greener
We should take fewer flights abroad for holidays
We should take public transport rather than driving
We should choose products with less packaging
We should recycle as much as possible
Sample Answer 1:
Everyone is becoming aware that the environment is a serious issue. There is

bad air
and water pollution everywhere and we also know that the greenhouse effect
is
changing our weather and that the hole in the ozone layer is causing skin
cancer.
However, not enough is being done to solve these problems, because most
people
seem to think that they can do nothing. They think that only governments and
large
companies can combat this massive problem. I feel that the responsibility for
protecting the environment must be shared by everyone. Individuals can and
should
do many things to help to solve the problem.
First of all people can make sure that they are responsible in the way that they
dispose
of waste. If people throw rubbish like plastic into rivers and oceans, it always
stays
there, and causes fish and sea-birds to die. It is also important to make sure
that we
do not buy goods that have too much wrapping on them, especially plastic
wrapping,
because if we do we are adding to the huge amounts of waste.
People also need to be responsible in the way that they use water. In some
countries,
like Australia, an enormous amount of water is wasted for swimming pools,
washing
cars and so on. Most countries are running out of fresh water. If people used
their cars
less this would help to prevent the greenhouse effect. Everyone can try to use
public
transport more, or use bicycles, or even walk, instead of using their cars for
even short
trips.
Finally, the most important thing that individuals can do is to let their
governments
know that they want something to be done about the environment. It is
obvious that
the governments will not do anything unless the people force them to.
It is therefore clear that individuals must take responsibility for the
environment,
otherwise it will soon be too late, and we and the next generation will suffer
serious
consequences.
WRITING IELTS TASK 2 THEO DẠNG ĐỀ
Topic – Reason and Solution Essay
1. Young people these days tend to be less polite and respectful
2. In many countries, children are getting fatter and less fit day by
day
3. In recent years, the number of crimes committed by young people
4. Consumers are faced with increasing numbers of advertisements

from competing
Topic – Cause and Effect
1. People can perform everyday tasks, such as shopping and banking
2. There are social, medical and technical problems associated with

the use of mobile
3. In many countries, the proportion of older people is steadily

increasing
4. In many countries today there is insufficient respect to old people

5. Nowadays, we are living in a throw-away society
6. We can see more disasters and violence shown on TV
7. Figures show that some countries have an ever-increasing

proportion

precious

lives
live

of information

classes
the public
Young people these days tend to be less polite and respectful than in
the past. Causes and solutions. .
Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that the modern generation nowadays has become less

considerate and civil than in the earlier times. In this essay, I intend to
explore the possible causes of this situation and suggest some ways forward.
The most important reason is the disintegration of the traditional joint
family system. In today’s nuclear families, there are no grandparents to
teach moral values to children.
Parents are busy working and do not spend quality time with children.
Consequently, children become self-centred and uncaring for the world
around them.
Secondly, we are part of a consumerist society. We desire to have the latest
things and to get those things we are becoming workaholics. We set goals
for ourselves and work hard to achieve them. As a result politeness and
respect have taken a back seat. Finally, we have the influence of the western
culture. There, it is considered quite normal to argue and question the
elders.
The solutions are not simple. To begin with, it is necessary to instil moral
values in children at a young age. So, joint family system should be
encouraged. Secondly, community welfare programmes should be part of
high school curriculum. We can also take the help of media to show
programmes which highlight the good points of earlier times and
discourage consumerism. But, the final onus is on the people themselves.
They should be willing to change.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, in the fast-paced world of
today, people have changed and become selfish and self centred, but steps
can be taken to re-imbibe some virtues of the olden times.
In many countries, children are getting fatter and less fit day by day.
Why is it so and
suggest solutions.Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that childhood obesity is a burgeoning problem these days

in many parts of the world. In this essay I intend into the causes of this
problem and suggest some ways forward.
The most important reason is unhealthy diet. Children are attracted to fast
food which is rich in sugar and fat. They are ignorant of what constitutes a
healthy diet. Parents nowadays are busy in their work and are not present
to guide their children. To add to it, children are bombarded with
advertisements from fast food companies.
Another important factor is that children are much less active than they
used to be. In the past young people took part in activities that burned a lot
of energy. However, today they spend a lot of their time indoors, sitting in
front of the computers or playing video games.
This sedentary life style is playing havoc with the health of young people.
There are a number of steps that need to be taken to solve this problem. The
first is to educate children about nutrition. Schools should organize
compulsory lessons to explain the main elements of a healthy diet and teach
pupils how to prepare healthy meals. Parents should also cook healthy
delicious meals at home so that children are deterred from eating fast food.
Furthermore, governments should have some restrictions on the type of
adverts shown in children’s programmes. Finally, children should be
encouraged to take part in sports. Schools have a great role to play in this.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, childhood obesity is a serious

problem and it should be tackled on a war footing otherwise the young
people of today will have a very unhealthy middle and old age.
In recent years, the number of crimes committed by young people in major

cities
throughout the world is increasing. Discuss this issue. Give reasons and
suggest some solutions.
It is a very shocking situation that the number of youngsters involved in

crime is increasing day by day. In this essay, I intend to discuss the reasons
for this phenomenon and suggest some solutions.
A number of factors are responsible for juvenile delinquency. Media is one

powerful influence. Many times, vulgarity and violence is shown on TV.
Children are vulnerable and accept it as natural and try to copy what is
shown. For example, in Virginia USA, a student killed 30 students just after
watching a TV program. Another cause of crime among youth is the
changing family structure. Nuclear families are the norm of the day. Earlier,
there were joint families in which grandparents used to teach moral values
to children. They kept an eye on the friend circle of their grandchildren.
Nowadays, both parents are working and children are left unattended at
home. They may fall into bad company and resort to drugs under peer
pressure. For drugs they desperately need money which turns them towards
crime.
Furthermore, increasing poverty, unemployment and competition is causing

hopelessness and frustration among the youth. They are over ambitious and
want to earn quick money. They have a lot of energy and if that energy is
not harnessed in the right direction, they can go astray. Consumerist society
is also a big factor to put them on the path of crime. When they see new
things in the market, they want them by hook or by crook. Parents cannot
satisfy all their whims and so they start doing petty crime which turns to
major crime very soon.
The solutions are not simple. The issue has to be dealt with on a war
footing. Some censorship of TV channels is needed. Parents should ration
the TV viewing hours of children.
Parents should watch TV with children so that they know what their
children are being exposed to. We should also encourage joint families.
Parents should be good role models
Good family atmosphere should be provided to children. Friend circle of the
children should be monitored. We should also educate children about the
harms of consumerism. Schools should also provide good education. Finally,
government should try and reduce unemployment and poverty which are
the root causes.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, crime among youth is a big
problem and youth alone cannot be blamed for that. We should look into
the causes and take relevant steps to fight this problem.
Consumers are faced with increasing numbers of advertisements
from competing companies. To what extent do you think are
consumers influenced by advertisements?
What measures can be taken to protect them?
Whether it is on TV, radio or hoardings at the side of the road,

advertisements have become a part of our lives. Advertising is a powerful
and persuasive medium. Consumers are influenced by advertisements in
both positive and negative ways. This essay shall delve into the ways
adverts affect the common man and suggest ways to protect people from
the negative effects of adverts.
On the positive side ads tell us about the new products that are launched in
the market. They also tell us about the working of these products. After
seeing the ads, consumers can go to the market and select things of their
choice.
On the other hand, advertisements can cause people to be dissatisfied with

what they already gave and make them want more. Being exposed again
and again to products which one cannot afford leads to dissatisfaction.
Furthermore, not all parents are in the position to
afford the goods which the children see advertised and want to possess. This
often leads to feelings of inadequacy among them. In addition to this
advertisements lead to materialism and people lay too much emphasis on
material goods. People are prepared to work long
hours or even turn to crime to get these goods.
The solution is not simple as advertising has become a very pervasive
medium. To begin with, advertisements which make false claims should be
banned. Then there should be consumer awareness programmes.
Consumers should be warned against too much consumerism. Finally,
advertisements for liquor and those ads which show stunts should also be
banned.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that today we are influenced a lot
by adverts, both in positive and negative ways, without adverts we would
lose a valuable source of revenue which is used for the benefit of majority.
Our lives would be dull without these ads and there is not much that can be
done against the consumerism they promote.
Model Answer 2:
In today’s material world, we are inundated with various forms of

advertising. In my view, this can be dangerous as it encourages us to spend
without thinking and young people, in particular, need some protection
from it.
The first point to make is that advertising does make us spend money we do
not need to. There are nowadays so many different ways companies
promote their products and services, ranging from television commercials
to simple flyers that we cannot escape it. If, for example, you watch a
football match on television, you will see the logos of the tournament
sponsors. Likewise, if you watch the latest blockbuster movie, very
probably you will see a product placed in the film by some advertising
agency. The volume of this advertising means that we, as consumers, tend
to be profoundly influenced by it and buy without thinking.
It is not easy to decide how to regulate advertising. Clearly, governments
ought to restrict advertisements for harmful products such as alcohol and
tobacco. They do not have the power, however, to control other forms of
advertising. This means we need to use our common sense when we go to
the shops, and ask ourselves whether we really need to make that purchase.
Parents should, however, ensure that young people are protected from too
much exposure to advertising. This can mean simply explaining that it is not
in fact necessary to buy the newest Xbox, or simply turning the television
off.
My conclusion is that while we cannot escape advertising or its effects in the

modern world, children should be encouraged not to pay too much
attention to it.
Sample Answer 3:
It is undoubtable that the majority of the brands around the world will
advertise their products in the television as well as billboards. Whilst it is
possible to claim that consumers are influenced by a plethora of
advertisements in the market by different companies, I personally believe
that such issue should be handled with care in order to protect the
consumers. Therefore, in this essay, I shall further elaborate my point of
view by analysing this particular issue.
Generally speaking, we are surrounded by advertisements in our daily life.

Perhaps, one of the greatest sources of such promotion is from the mass
media, for instance, newspaper, television as well as the internet. One
important point to be made is superstars are hired by the branding
company as an ambassador to promote their products. If one idolise this
superstar, they will purchase the product endorsed by them. Another
related matter is cigarette is often used as a prop in movies and drama.
Whilst smoking is regarded as deleterious o one’s health, youngsters will
however smoke for the purpose of imitating their idol. In short,
advertisement is considered as a strong method to attract buyers.
Despite many advertisements are aired and printed freely, measures should
be taken to avoid consumers being exploited. First and foremost, legislation
about the contents of advertisement should be created. This is clearly
important as many companies tend to promote products which are
disadvantages to consumers, such as cigarette. Another point to note is the
law should state the advertisers must be honest in terms of the quality of
the product or brand which they sell.
In a nutshell, it is evident that advertisements have made a great impact on

consumers, not least because people would purchase the items advertised
on the television and endorsed by superstar. This is however, must be
control through legislation in order to protect the consumer’s right and
safety.
Model Answer 4:
Nowadays the consumers are exposed to increasing numbers of
advertisement due to the fierce competition in the business world and they
are heavily influenced by them.This essay will suggest several solutions to
this problem.
The consumers are not as strong-minded as they think they are.Firstly, the
advertisement keep the consumers well-informed about the product they
manufacture and the service they offer.There would hardly be any
customers actually to make purchases if this product was never known by
its clientele in modern life.Secondly,the advertisers use celebrities or
attractive people in advertisements to associate their products or brand
with positive impression,such as beauty,high social status and wealth.It will
have a significant influence the consumers,especially impulsive
teenagers,when they are making decisions on which product to
buy.Additionally,the advertisements are trying to persuade costumers to
believe that their happiness is closely connected to how many products they
can buy and how much money they can spend on things they desire,which is
highly harmful for the traditional value of the costumers,especially children
in their formative years.
There are several measures can be taken to decrease the influence on the
vulnerable consumers.To begin with,the government should impose strict
censorship on advertisements.Companies,therefore,cannot advertise low-
quality products or target potential clients with unsound judgment,such as
children.Also,schools and other educational institutions should inculcate
traditional values into their students to prevent the negative effect of
materialism.Besides,consumers should be more conscious and discreet
while making purchase decisions,which can decline the impulsive purchase
rate.
In conclusion,as consumers,we live in an era of fierce business
competition,meaning we are bombarded with numerous ads every single
day.Hence, the government ,educational institutions and consumer
themselves should make joint effort to curb the manipulation of the
advertisements.
Model Answer 5:
When we are talking about an advertisement it cut across all facet of
human lives as it serves as the only medium many companies used to
showcase their products to their customers.this has had great influence on
the end users.in this narrative essay, I shall prove my meetle as a good.
To illustrate, advertisement has been the only tool used by the product
companies to sell their new or improved products to there customers, which
gives details information about the product, guidelines on usuage, product
amount, all these information provided may convinced the consumer to buy
their products. They used many channels to achieved this, for instance,
mediums like the television channels, radio stations, the new papers,
billboard, and media, even lately most product companies have started
using prominent superstars in there advertisements, some have signed long
term endorsement with them, theses aforementioned above, are the
renovative ways product companies have been reaching their products to
their customers, it has contributed greatly to the growth and progress of
the product companies. Studies has also supported that advertisement has
improved and enhanced sales.
Advertisement has also contributed considerably to the capital growth of

the economy, as these products companies are taxed heavily for their
advertisements, it has also generated jobs to lot of people, for instance the
superstars they use are been paid pretty good money for an endorsement
sometimes for a long term, this is a job, the media people are paid for their
publications about there products, the television and radio stations are also
paid for their services, all of these are enough reasons to prove my claims
right.
However, some of the advertisements executed has inflenced endusers

negatively, some of the products advertised lacks good valued details
product information and usuage guidelines, which has been detrimental to
ones health. For example the consumption of alcohol and cigarette has
poses serious health threat, in there adverts the product companies would
never advised on the maximum quantity of consumption allowable or the
side effects of there products. Consequently, this have caused lot of people to
suffer health problems like heart failure, cancer of the heart, kidney failure,
diabetes and lots of other ailments resulting from too much consumption of
alcohol and cigarette as they contains harmful substances to our health.
Furthermore, some advertisements contains high level of immorality, for

example some adverts on the internet contains some pornography pictures
or video, a good number of children have been corrupted through is
medium, some of these kids tends to practice what they have seen or learn
from some of these advert sometimes they copy the lifestyle of these
superstars which they see as role models from the advertisement in turn it
has negatively affected the morality of these kids.
Nevertheless, some advertisements as it is presented has lured great

number of people to buy what they really don’t planned for which has
removed saving culture in people, this has a detrimental effect on the
economy, perhaps, it makes us to have a selfish society that has the
potential to cause or increase social vices in the society.
In conclusion, there should be a regulation on food and beverages to all

products companies that will ensure all products should contain concrete
details information of the nutritional values and procduct ingredients, side
effects and health benefits of what they are advertising to the products and
lastly there should also be a regularatory body to check and monitor
contents of every adverts to ensure it is free of immoral content before it’s
allowed to be advertised. Moreso, people should cultivate the habit of
financial discipline, save, plan and budget for everything, shouldn’t just buy
anything we see on the advert.
Model Answer 2:
In today’s material world, we are inundated with various forms of

advertising. In my opinion, this can be dangerous as people are encouraged
to spend without thinking and young people, in particular, need some
protection from it.
Advertising does make people to spend money they do not need to. There
are nowadays so many different ways companies can promote their
products or services, ranging from television commercials to simple flyers,
which people cannot easily escape from it. For example, anyone cannot miss
to notice the logos and slogans of tournament sponsors while watching the
football. Furthermore, consumers are not aware that they are manipulated
when the products are placed in films by the advertising agencies. As a
result, this amount of advertising profoundly influences the customers and
persuades them to buy without thinking.
It is not easy to decide on how to regulate the advertisements. First and
foremost, Government ought to ban the advertisements on harmful
products like alcohol and tobacco and mandate statutory warnings to be
printed on their displays. In some countries, cigarettes cannot be advertised
in televisions. Secondly, advertisements aimed at children must be
controlled or censored. For instance, advertisements on products that are
unhealthy like fast food should not be aired in cartoon channels or during
kids entertainment programs. In addition, parents should also encourage
their kids not to pay too much attention to those advertisements.
In conclusion, while advertising is needed in free market economies, false

information or advertisements on unhealthy or harmful products should be
regulated.
People can perform everyday tasks, such as shopping and banking as

well as business transactions, without meeting other people face-to-
face. What are the effects of this on individual and society as a whole?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples
from your own knowledge or experience.
The availability and application of modern devices and tools of

communications like Fax
machines, telephone, interactive TV and computer have brought
tremendous convenience
and efficiency to both life and work. Thanks to telecommunications, daily
tasks and business
transactions can be performed without meeting other people in person.
This practice
certainly has positive effects on the individual and the society as a whole.
Undoubtedly, e-shopping and e-banking make life more convenient than

ever before.
People can stay home comfortably, looking on the Internet where a vast sea
of information
is available to find what they need. They Log on to the relevant websites
and look for
detailed information on the products and services that they are interested
in. They read the
descriptions, examine the pictures, and check the prices. Eventually, they
make a decision
and send an e-mail to order and pay for it by e-banking. All can be done at
home, without
scanning newspaper advertisements, reading reference print materials,
going around
downtown as they did before. As a result, they have more time to take part
in social
activities, pursue hobbies and interests and communicate with families,
which are all
indispensable parts of quality life.
The trend of doing business by telecommunications equally benefits the

whole society
because business can be done more efficiently and effectively at a much
lower cost. An
extra benefit is that more natural resources can be saved. Moreover, small
businesses have
almost the same opportunities to advertise and promote their products and
services on line
to compete with those large ones, which makes the whole society fairer.
To sum up, performing everyday tasks and business transactions by means

of
telecommunications benefits the individual and the society enormously.
There is simply no
going back.
Sample Answer 2:
Nowadays, with the advancement of modern technology people can

complete their various daily needs through the Internet and mobile phones
without direct interaction with people. This phenomenon has both positive
as well as negative impacts on individual and the society and this essay is
going to discuss these effects.
Obviously, technology ensures a productive life and has made tasks quicker
and easier than ever before. We live in a hectic world and the ever growing
competition in work places and academic institutes bound us to find out
shortcuts and easier ways to complete our daily tasks. Technological
advancements in our life save our valuable time and energy. For instance
people these days can pay the bills and purchase items through Internet at
their own residence without commuting to anywhere. They can do banking
from home, can get advice of a doctor through phone, can book a ticket
online, get professional advice via internet and the list goes on and on. Thus
the need to go out and talking with people face-to-face has greatly reduced.
This has a tremendous positive effect in personal life as it allows us to have
more time to spend with our family and friends.
In addition, society also benefit from modern technology. To illustrate,

people can do their tasks from home and that in turn reduce the number of
private cars on the streets. Less traffic jams and less pollution will make the
cities better places to live in.
In contrast, there are some negative impacts of this trend as well.

Interaction between human being has been reduced and this lead to a
materialist life. Consequently, family relationship is deteriorating in some
cases as people are becoming more dependent on technologies. Sedentary
lifestyles lead us to have various diseases and the society will need to take
the burden of more obese people. In addition, it is a burden to the society
that technology is many places is increasing the unemployment rates as
computers and other technologies are reducing the need of workforce. As a
result crime rate will shoot up. All in all, easiness in daily life has some
disadvantages to the society and the individual.
In conclusion, performing the routine tasks easily and quickly from home
with the help of technology brings lot of benefits and people can save their
important time and energy. However this trend has some negative impacts
on both the society and the people that we should be aware of.
There are social, medical and technical problems associated with

the use of mobile phones. What forms do they take?
Do you agree that the problems outweigh the benefits of mobile

phones?
Mobile phone is one of the most important inventions that have brought
people
tremendous convenience and efficiency. Admittedly, if misused or overused,
it may cause
some social, medical and technical problems. However, its pros far
outnumber its cons.
Mobiles have helped people remain connected with the world from
wherever they are.
Distance is not a barrier any more there is a sense of security if you know
you have a
gadget with which you can be in touch with your near and dear ones. At the
time of
emergencies and calamities, they are one of the most used tools for
supplying immediate
help.
Mobile phones also provide us with facilities like messaging, camera,

recording and
internet. As a matter of fact, now they can serve as a good replacement of
laptop.
Business transactions can also take place at any time of the day and family
commitments
can also be fulfilled while at work. Cell phones also serve as entertainment
tools as many
games can now be played and some phones have FM radio connection too.
On the downside, mobile phones emit infrared rays which directly affect the
body part
exposed to. According to Australian Health Research Institute, use of mobile
phones can
lead to ear, eye and brain cancer besides some other disorders like heart
ailments.
Overuse of mobiles takes away the privacy and sometimes even the peace of
mind.
Wherever we are, at work, at home or in a social gathering, we are
hammered with
unwanted calls or messages. It is a boon to roadside paparazzi for whom
taking snaps is
just too easy with more advanced mobiles.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, the advantages of the mobile
phone far
outweigh its disadvantages. Mobile technology definitely has brought a
revolution and
changed the way to work, to socialize and to entertain, but we must be
more wise and
responsible in using it.
Model Answer 2:
It is believed that the existence of cellular phone technology has created
social, medical and technical problems for individuals and societies. I
personally disagree with the thought, if people think that there are more
disadvantages than the advantages of cellular phone, and the following
essay will discuss in details regarding to the issue.
To begin with, it is true that the development of mobile phone technology
has created some problems for human kinds. Firstly, many people believe
that the wireless phone technology has made people become more
individualistic. In the most common case, many families are having
communication problems these days, due to each member of the family are
busy with their devices.
Secondly, it has been reported that the wireless technology has negative
effect on human’s health. Many scientists believe that the technology has
become one of the contributors to human’s brain damage and trigger brain
cancer as well. Thirdly, it has been reported that some people have been
injured due the technical problems of the phone itself. There have been
cases where the battery of the phone had explode when it was used to make
phone calls, and it caused serious injuries to the user.
Despite of all the social, medical and technical problems of mobile phones, I
do believe that the existence of the device bring a lot of benefits for human
beings. Mobile phones can be used to connect to a specific person, though
the person might be travelling to other places. And then, with the various
function of mobile phone technology nowadays, it can be used to send and
received important emails. Besides that, with the chatting application that
could be installed on the phones, it has made distance communication
become cheaper. And last but not least, the phone can also be used a
navigation system to find new area or new address.
In conclusion, it is true that hand phone technology has caused some

problems for mankind, but I disagree with the opinion that the problem of
the phone outweighed the benefits. I do believe that mobile phone has
assisted human being in various ways and it is the irresponsible act of
humans themselves that has caused the problem.
Model Answer 3:
There is no doubt that the advance of technology has contributed

significantly to mankind. When it comes to mobile phones, however, there
are some who argue that these devices have resulted in many social,
medical, technical dilemmas. In my view, while mobile phones might lead to
some undesirable effects, which i will explore in this essay, the benefits are
still significant and outweigh the problems.
It can not deny that social problems is directly or indirectly attributed to

technology. Nevertheless, mobile phones just is one cause of a massive
number of sources: computers, the internet, automatic devices, robots and
other social networking websites… In fact, mobile phones just make people
become less active in some extent owning to meeting face-to-face less
frequently. In addition, some mobile phones often have addicted games and
applications installed which make many people stick to them and also lead
a sedentary lifestyles which in turn contribute to social divides.
There may be some medical problems associated with mobile phones. Take
for example wages, which is used to transmit calls and messages. There are
some who fear that these wages could deteriorated people’s brain and
memory. However, it has not been proved by any scientific studies.
The main technical links to mobile phones may be that people can not
receive signals everywhere. Remote areas, for example, is likely to lose
mobile signals more often. Nonetheless, with the advance of technology, this
problem could be insignificant by the time.
However, these problems are undoubtedly outweighed by its benefits.
Indeed, mobile phones have changed significantly people life and
contributed substantially to economies. they help people, for instance,
communicate with others at any where and at any time, make the people’s
life become more convenient and entertaining. As well as this, the business
and works also enhance with this fast-communicated devices.
Overall, the utility of mobile phones has some certain drawbacks; however,
there are easily outweighed by benefits they bring, in my opinion.
Model Answer 4:
Mobile phone using has become a very common phenomenon and people
mostly depend on this cell phone for communication. Cell phone is probably
the most accepted and widely used communication devices than any other
communication device of the past time. Though cell phone causes many
healths related problem as well as social and other problems but I can’t
agree with the idea that it outweighs the benefits.
I believe people, from all levels of the society, never accept a technology that
is not hugely beneficial. There are many communication Medias but none is
as efficient and as live as a mobile phone. Moreover, the recent
technological advancement has made the cell phone something more than a
talking device. With a cell phone we can use internet, can play games, can
store our memory by taking pictures and videos and can instantly share
those memories with friends and relatives. And using those technologies
cost us a very little in term of cell phone and network providers cost. We can
talk to our friends and family members as much as we want because of the
low cost of these cell phones and I guess that has increased our social
affairs. Finally the cell phone communications have helped to raise many
small and medium level businesses in all over the world and have engaged a
large portion of population to be employed.
Though I agree that, there are lots of adverse effects of using the cell
phones. Drivers using cell phone while driving is a common cause of
accident and over use of cell phone can cause many diseased from severe
headache to incurable cancer. The easy access of cell phone has violated our
privacy and helped the criminals to be more organized.
But I believe that those negative effects can be overcome if all of we become
a little more cautious and be aware of the negative issues of overuse of cell
phone using. Since we can’t stop using the cell phone and find and
alternative and it is easily possible to reduce the negative effects of cell
phone using , I strongly opine that, Cell phone is a very useful device to all of
us in spite of it’s some remediable problems.
Model Answer 5:
It is true that the usage of mobile phones relate to problems in different
areas such as social, medical and technical. From my point of view, the
disadvantages of mobile phone are on top of its advantages.
On the one hand, it is no doubt that the mobile phone plays an important
role in our daily life. In fact, in today’s world,the mobile phone is considered
as the fastest means of exchanging information from anywhere. To
illustrate this point, take the text messages as an example. With the mobile
phone in your hands, it is possible to send special text messages quickly to a
lover on the Valentine’s Day irrespective of the place we live. Additionally,
listening to music and taking photographs is also necessary applications for
any customers who use modern cell phones because these applications help
them to enjoy their life and relax after a busy day
On the other hand, the disadvantages of the mobile phones cannot be
overlooked. It is reasonable to say that using mobile phones frequently can
cause some health problems. It is because nowadays with the blooming can
disease bloom of some diseases such as short-sight and deaf which seems to
result from the electronic waves of mobile phone. The more cell phones are
manufactured, the more people get medical problems. Furthermore, coming
to social problems, there is no restrictions to capture photos through mobile
cameras, edit them to the worst and publish them in the social networking
sites. It is thus arguable that saving the pictures in mobile phones is very
dangerous for people
On balance, the disadvantages such as social and health problems created

by mobile phones definitely outweigh the advantages. However, we must
know when and how much to use the mobile phones so that we can
minimize the demerits to some extent.
Model Answer 6:
It is unquestionable that the advance of technology contributes significantly
to people’s daily life, and cell phones must be one of them. However, mobile
phones lead widespread problems in relation to social medical and
technical are increasingly serious nowadays. This essay will explore both
the positive and negative points of using mobile phone.
As mobile phones gain more popularity now, several related social issues
occurred. Mobile phones enable people keep in contact to each other
anytime anywhere as a portable communicate tool which makes their work
and life more convenient. However, misusing mobile phones, for example,
people speaking loudly on phone in public areas such as cinemas, libraries
and hospitals where people are supposed to be quiet, which is considered as
socially impolite and offensive. Besides, the overly reliant of cell phones may
reduce people’s face-to-face communication and feel a sense of isolation
since people spend more time to deal with their phones rather than talk
with people around them, especially the younger generation.
It is also worth mentioning that utilize of mobile phones would cause some
lethal health effects. Although, phones not only use for communication but
also function as internet browser, music player, personal organizers etc,
and almost everyone are using a cell phone now regardless of their age and
occupation. Yet it has been proven that overuse of electronic devices,
including mobile phones could lead to a greater possibility of suffering
hearing loss and even cancer as strongly irradiation, though the further
investigation is needed.
Apart from social and health issue, concerns of technical problems related
to mobile phone is rising as well, because people always exchanging
information or sending emails via phones and their conversation could
probably be intercepted by a third party. Nevertheless, these sort of electrics
security problems could be restrict as long as some reliable regulate system
operated effectively.
Overall, despite of various problems happened because of utility of cell

phones, they still regarded as prominent multifunctional tools in most
people’s daily life. Personally, I hold the view that the advantages of use of
phones overtaking its disadvantages as long as people using it reasonable
as loads of people in this modern society may feel inconvenient without
mobile phones.
Model Answer 7:
Cutting-edge technology is part of daily life. One of the most important
technologies which engage with people’s activity is mobile phones. Some
people argue that using cell-phones has dire consequences that result in
some social, medical and technical dilemmas. While mobile phones become
worse distractions, the benefits of these advanced devices are important to
provide convenient lives for users.
There is no doubt that mobile phones change the way people maintain
effective communication with colleagues. In this modern era, people are
more likely to use mobile phones as the mean of communication rather than
doing face-to-face communication. Recent research indicates that the
majority of people in cosmopolitan cities are completely isolation because
they are bordered in the virtual communication.
In addition, the newly invented technologies, mobile phones, resort people

to adopt sedentary lifestyles because they spend the rest of the time to surf
internet and play online games. A result shows that in Indonesia, most
inhabitants use internet more than 10 hours a day in terms of
entertainment as a source of amusement. Obviously, this activity causes
some illness such as myopia and obesity.
The innovation of some sophisticated technologies forces the

reconstruction of technological infrastructure to support the availability of
networking. In some developing countries, signal is the common problem
that happens in some remote areas. In fact, the active users who live in
radius 10 km from the cell-phone tower are difficult to gain strong signal.
Consequently, the telecommunication service providers must concern to
solve this problem.
On the other hand, mobile phones are the useful devices to communicate
and do some tasks. Many students who study abroad rely on cell-phones to
keep in touch with their family and friends in their home countries. In
addition, utilizing of mobile phones makes life much more convenient as
businessmen can send email anywhere and anytime that only requires
internet connection. Moreover, some applications can spoil users in the
terrible situation. For instance, in traffic congestion, music is the best
companion to release stress so that people will need mobile phone to play
some songs which are stored in the internal memory.
In conclusion, there are negative effects of mobile phones that can interrupt
humans’ lives in social, medical and technical problems. Despite its
drawbacks, mobile phones provide the flexibility in term of communication.
Where possible, to avoid those problems, people should pay more attention
to their circumstances to mitigate problems.
Model Answer 8:
One of the most popular technological inventions in recent decades is the
mobile phone, which has quickly proliferated every household among the
developed countries. It is not an exaggeration to say that the item has
become irreplaceable and vital for many people’s daily activities. This
prominent trend, thereby, has created concerns over its impact on our life,
in terms of social, medical and technical problems. Nevertheless, it is the
author’s view that such gadget will continue to be rife in our society due to
its overwhelming benefits.
First of all, despite the lack of conclusive evidence, some health scientists
and medical organizations has warned the public of the harms involved in
using mobile phone over a long period. For instance, the likelihood of
getting cancer in later age seems to be proportionally related to the
individual usage of his or her mobile phone. Additionally, it is not a secret
that such item is frequently cited as the reason for many road accidents.
Undeniably, to a particular extent, the gadget should bear some
responsibility its user’s illness and casualty.
Nevertheless, it is not a surprise that device is, and will continue to be,
pervasive in our community, owing to its redeeming features. Years of
technical advances and production improvements have transformed the
mobile phone into a low-cost personal item that are considered vital for our
society’s communication. Due to their high mobility, small size and feature-
rich characteristic, people are prompted to transfer information smoothly
and cheaply with one another.
As suggested above, the contribution of mobile phone to the society is

enormous and people’s dependence on it for communication is an
irreversible trend, albeit it has a number of problems that should be well
handled.
Model Answer 9:
It is quite common to see that almost everyone owns one mobile phone
these days. It has becomes the most popular communication method,
using a cell phone. Yet as time goes on, a range of problems led by mobile
phones appear gradually.
The frequent use of mobile phones may cause negative effects on our health.
First of all, obviously the radio of cell phones harms us. Although many cell
phone producers announce that the radio of their cell phones is light and
safe, we should still pay much attention to it for we use it too frequently,
especially for someone like a businessman. As well as this, using cell phones
too much may make people lazy. People can complete almost everything
they want to do by using mobile phones. For instance, they can have an
enjoyable time talking with their friends who live in another part of the
world, and they can also hold a meeting, finish a trade or even go shopping
using only one mobile phone. However, this convenient way usually make
people lazy. They may stay home everyday, which has a very bad influence
on their health. Furthermore, it is less fun that we could have using cell
phones than the normal method. Specifically, it seems impossible to enjoy a
phone meeting or a phone shopping trip just listening to the sound.
Communications may become boring and even unpleasant with this single
way.
On the other hand, we benefit so much from mobile phones indeed. Using
cell phones boosts the studying and working efficiency dramatically. Also,
we can exchange the newest information really fast. Admittedly, mobile
phones play an increasing important role in our daily life.
In conclusion, there are various merits of using a cell phone. However, we

cannot deny or ignore the harm of it. Therefore, we should limit the
frequency of use in daily life, and make mobile phones become an effective
and green assistant
In many countries, the proportion of older people is steadily increasing.

Does this trend have more positive or negative effects on the society?
Thanks to improvements in standards of living and medical advances,

people’s life
expectancy has increased to an unprecedented level. This has brought many
demographic
changes. Today’s society can be called a graying society. This trend has both
merits and
demerits which I shall highlight in this essay. Overall, the negative effects
are much more.
There would be many pros of living longer. In a way, it would be good for
people who want
to see their grand-grandchildren. Old generation would be able to share
more experiences
with young generations, so the youth would benefit. The families would get
good support of
elders and would be able to keep their culture and traditions alive for a
longer time. One
would get a chance to see frequent changes in technology and lifestyle and
enjoy a life full
of comforts for more years.
On the other hand, as the people would grow old, they would go on
becoming weaker and
weaker and would have to depend on their families to fulfill their needs. The
families may
get tired of their responsibilities in the long run. There would be a wider
generation gap,
and the old generation would get a culture shock. If people live long, then
retirement would
be at an older age and it would surely lead to unemployment problems.
Moreover, they
might get bored of living such a long life as there would be no goals for
them.
What we have to accept is that increased life expectancy is something we
have to face more
and more in the future. If proper steps are not taken then it would be a big
burden on
government as it has to provide social security. The elderly are not working
and so are not
paying taxes. They are totally dependent on their families and the
governments.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, even though the aging trend
can bring some
benefits to the society, the cons far outweigh the pros. Therefore, effective
solutions should
be found to reduce its adverse effects, especially on the productivity of the
society.
Model Answer 2:
With the advancement of modern science and medical science, people are
enjoying a longer life than before and in many countries people are well
aware of the population growth and as a result having only one kid or two.
These reasons lead the fact that in many countries, the proportion of older
people is growing faster. This has both the positive and negative effects.
At first, older people are more experienced and can contribute largely by
counseling the young generation. There are some professions like teaching
where a experienced teacher can be more benevolent than a young teacher.
Again, older people are the witness of the history and they can reviles the
past to us more practically than others. Finally, since young members of a
family are busy at outside and can’t manage time to share with kids, so the
older people can be very good companion to those kids and can help them
to raise in a family environment rather than in a day-care- centre.
On the contrary, in some society older people are considered to be burden

especially in those areas where people suffer from extreme poverty. Older
people require more attention and extra care and the touch of relatives. But
because of generation gap and poverty, they are often ignored and that’s a
horrible experience for them. Again, naturally aged people can’t do physical
labor and that’s why they have very practical contribution to the society
compared to their young counterparts.
Considering all the issues , though it might seem little harsh but I think that
a considerable portion of older people can be helpful for all of us but if it’s
reach to an extreme proportion then it’s a bad omen both for the new
generation and the old people themselves.
Model Answer 3:
The elderly constitute in many countries of the world and in most of the
western countries a big part of the entire population, because the birth rate
is in these areas close to zero. People live healthier and as a consequence
longer and there is not the so called “generation renewing”.
On the one hand, we could state that such a trend influences negatively the
society, as far as pension system and labour market are concerned. People
work normally for 30 years and pay the due taxes over this length of time
and as soon as they retire they get their monthly pension that is supposed to
be proportionate to the paid taxes. If these same people who retire live for,
as an example, 30 years more, how is the system supposed to cope with
that? A question that is hard to answer. Furthermore, most of the elderly
keep their jobs for as long as they are able to manage and by doing so they
prevent other younger people from occupying the same posts or working
with the same, when not better, qualifications.
On the other hand, though the scenario seems to show no positive aspects in
this trend, we can not fail to say how important older people are for our
society. They support families in many ways. Firstly, single parents or
parents who are occupied with their works could not manage to take care
at the same time of their children without the help of their old parents.
Secondly, some elderly volunteer full time and by doing so they give a lot to
others and to the society as well. As we can see, these are very important
roles that mainly old people decide to take on and we can not but consider
them necessary.
In conclusion, we can without any doubt state that elderly remain a

necessary part of the society, even though in many cases they are not
considered useful, but rather an obstacle to the economical growth and to
the career of younger people.
Model Answer 4:
Thanks to the technological and scientific advancements, people’s lives have
become significantly progressed, particularly in improving human health
with the most modern applications and effective treatments. It is inevitable
that the remarkable increase in life expectancy has been a phenomenon in
many countries as well as impacted both positively and negatively on their
societies.
Older adults have been appreciated as the valuable and essential resource
to their communities with material and immaterial contributions which
benefit the younger. The increased longevity might create many time
opportunities for those who still eager to pursue their working or
researching passion for societal development, encouraging the young
generations to inherit and attempt more for further success. The retirement
age has been adjusted in most of working fields in order that the elderly can
work longer with their contributing expectation, particularly the working
year maximum of 60 for men and that of 55 for women.
In spite of significant values that the elderly can bring to the society, there
are some negative implications which might put the government and the
whole community under financial and healthcare pressure. The more
people retire, the heavier pension burden the state has to carry. After a
certain period of time for working, whether their living standards are
better, they still have right to receive social welfare from their government.
Therefore, many countries consequently take more consideration into
budget distribution for this section. Additionally, the increasing amount of
older adults is more likely to exacerbate overpopulation worldwide, which
will lead to many overloaded facilities as hospitals, retirement homes and
housing provision.
The constant proliferation in aging population has been obviously creating

both benefits and burdens to their societies. Therefore, the government in
every country should implement aging-friendly policies and efficient
programs so as to mitigate this issue’s negative influences and still progress
people’s standards of living.
Model Answer 5:
The demographic shifts will have a huge impact on almost every aspect of
public life. And this has become a serious concern to many countries.
Personally, i believe the detrimental effect of the challenge outweighs the
positive effect.
Advocates in favour of this phenomenon indicate that older people can

provide more valuable experiences and skills to the communities. For
example, people find elders are good at teaching and consulting because of
their highly skilled communication skills and sound academic knowledge.
Thus, it is often the case that most of the primary schools tend to recruit
aged employees for a better teaching quality. Apart from that, the ageing
population leads to the extension of working life, thereby reducing the
demand for pensions
On the other hand, however, it is the negative influence of this social

phenomenon that worries people the most. Firstly, the demographic shift is
believed to have a strong correlation with the rising unemployment figures.
With the number of elders grows, which promotes the country to raise the
statutory retirement age. Thus, an increasing number of young graduates
are less likely to seek unemployment. Secondly, another problem associated
with an ageing society is that health care costs will escalate, imposing a
burden on tax payers. For instance, the government is required to allocate
more budgets for age-care centre facilities, and qualified workers.
In brief, the considerable extension of life expectancy has been regarded as

the major contributing factor to unemployment and ever-increased health
care expenses. Nevertheless, elders can make efforts to the society through
their skills and experiences.
Model Answer 6:
It is undeniably believed that the developed technology and sufficient
welfare have magnificently provided a great chance for having mankind life
extended. Combining with the fact that young couples tend not to breed,
elderly individuals are now occupying an increasing percentage of the
world population. Supported by a number of sociologists and economists,
ageing population issue will generate negative impacts on the world such
as enlarging the government expenditure and reducing the workforce
efficiency.
First of all, subsidizing senior citizens costs governments and tax-payers

massive amount of money. For instance, it was stated by The Economist that
pension is now the largest expense of social welfare budget of European
governments. Despite the advantages it brings, this amount of expenditure
is an insurmountable burden to the government deficit and can therefore,
slow down the growth of national economy. Hence, a high proportion of
ageing population can do harm to already harsh national economy,
especially during the recent economic recession in Europe. Additionally,
ageing population can also reduce the efficiency of labour force.
Going into details, according to The Economist, one senior citizen needs two
or more juniors to be taken care of, particularly the sick. As a result, looking
after ageing people expends a great amount of labour forces which could
otherwise profit companies and governments. Therefore, provided that
labour force could be emancipated from caring the elderly, a more efficient
and productive society could thereby created.
To sum up, it is evident that the positive effects of high aged ratio are more
in comparison of its negative impacts.
Model Answer 7:
In my opinion, the increasing number of older people has more negative

impacts on the society. Such trend slows down the development of economy
and put heavy burdens on the society.
Admittedly, the increasing number of the elderly contributes to the

stabilization of the society. It is generally believed that, the more elderly
there are, the lower crime rate in that region will be. In addition, with
abundant hands-on experiences, the elderly can pass on their experiences to
the next generation.They can help youngers to avoid unnecessary mistakes
the youth would otherwise make in the workplace and daily life.
However, an aging society posts a threat to the economy in the society. With
more elderly people, the proportion of workforce in the population is
decreasing, thereby, decreasing the productivity and social efficiency of the
society as a whole. Moreover, the development of innovative industry and
Information Technology secure a good future of the economic well-being.
However, the elderly are usually too conservative to handle these jobs.
Furthermore, excessive elderly people put medical and financial burdens on

the society too. With less workforce and taxpayers, the demand of medical
care is increasing. The elderly need to go to visit hospitals more frequent
than the young do. Therefore, the demand for doctors, nurses and medical
facilities will eventually outweigh that of supply, due to less workforce and
taxpayers. Meanwhile, same theory applies to the individual families that
each family need to shoulder more responsibilities of taking care of the
elderly.
In conclusion, the drawbacks of the aging problem outweigh its merits, as it
slows down the development of economy and put medical and financial
burden on the society.
Model Answer 8:
It is true that in some countries the number of senior people is growing
steadily. It is undeniable that the issue has some benefits and drawbacks,
but I personally believe that it has more drawbacks and the following essay
will discuss about them in details.
On the one hand, the increasing number of older people in a country shows
some positive aspects. Firstly, it means that the healthcare system in the
country is quite high, economic condition of the people is better and citizens
have better lifestyle than those in other countries. Senior people with better
economic conditions are able to purchase healthier foods and consume
enough vitamins, which are essential for maintaining their health level.
Secondly, it also shows that the government has successfully provided a
better medication for the senior people. As the quality of the public health
services improves, it means that more and more old people are being fairly
treated. Consequently, they could maintain their health level and have a
longer life expectancy. Some sectors like teaching, research and politics
require extensive experience and the older people in such countries can
contribute to these sectors.
On the other hand, the growing number of senior citizens also has some
negative consequences. As the number of the old people increases, the
government has to provide a higher budget for retirement houses and
medical services. These funds are collected from taxes from other citizens. If
the ratio of older people increases in a country, then the percentage of
working class people decreases and that has a direct impact on economic
progress of the country. Lastly, the country will also face population density
problem. As the medication and health facilities improve, mortality rate of
the country also increase, and it would cause a serious population problem
for the country.
In conclusion, despite of all the advantages, increasing number of senior

people in a country has some disadvantages as well. I personally believe
that a country should focus on maintaining a balanced ratio for the
population of different age groups.
Model Answer 9:
With advances in technology and medicine people today tend to live much
longer lives. As the proportion of older people steadily increased, there has
been an ongoing debate about whether this has resulted in more positive or
negative effects for society. Both arguments will be discussed in this essay
alongside appropriate examples and a conclusion.
When a person reaches an age where they are no longer able to support
their own living, the government intervenes to provide financial assistance.
This assistance comes in the form of welfare payments, which are collected
from tax payers. An increasing number of older people will mean more tax
must be collected in order to support . For example, if the number of elderly
people doubles in a year, a tax payer who currently pays $10,000 per year
might have to pay $20,000 in the following year to support the welfare of
this older population. This is a negative trend as more young people will
thus become liable for the living expenses of an increasingly aging
population.
At the same time, however, it must also be acknowledged that elders are
valuable assets to society, capable of imparting important values such as
wisdom and knowledge. The younger generations are often lacking these
values as they usually come as a result of many years of experience. An
example of this can be commonly found when a troubled youth seeks advice
from someone much older than them. Therefore, older people can have
significant positive effects on the society and individuals.
In conclusion, the benefits the elderly population provide far outweigh the
drawbacks. Moreover, it must be remembered that eventually everyone
becomes older and will get the same compensation under the existing
system. Therefore, this trend should be viewed as more positive to society.
Model Answer 10:
In present-day society, there is an increase in the proportion of elderly due

to the improved healthcare.Well equipped medical facility extends a
person’s live, however, the rising number of senior citizens have more
negative effects on the society.
It is universally acknowledged that the growth in the proportion of senior

citizens brings burden on the governments. In many countries, governments
need to spend more money on healthcare system due to the rising needs.
Sometimes, this may causes the governments put in less efforts on education
or other areas as dozens of money is required on the infrastructure and “old
homes”. Furthermore, elderly tend to receive pensions every month in many
countries. This will causes the young workers feel dissatisfied and strike
which lead further financial problems to the governments.
An upward trend of the proportion of elderly brings burden on families too.

When there is less youth in a family, the stress level will be increased as he
or she have heavy responsibility. In addition, while families have more
elderly to care for, less resources will be given to their children. Besides this,
countries’s work force will be decreased, thus many countries face financial
crisis and working adults need to pay more and more taxes until they have
enough trouble paying their own basic needs. Further, the age of retirement
will extend a few years more.
To sum up, ageing population is an unchangeable trend in contemporary

society, thus it is essential for the governments to pinpoint the effective
remedies.
Model Answer 11:
It has been a contentious issue, with people arguing that whether

population aging affects the society positively or negatively. In my opinion,
the aging exerts great stress on our society.
The increase of percentage of elderly would lead to economic slump.

Initially, employers would complain that they could not find sufficient
young workers, not to mention qualified ones. Thus factories and
companies, especially those labour demanding industries, may find it
difficult to expand their business and also their local markets may shrink.
What’s worse, factories tend to move to places with sufficient labour force.
Due to aging problem, the payment for local young workers would be much
higher than that for abundant young people who are eager for jobs in other
regions. Consequently, the remaining local young people might stay
unemployed due to less opportunities.
The phenomenon would pose a heavy financial burden on government.

Firstly, the pension system would endure serious challenge from the
old.Usually old people retired from work do not have any source of money
income to cover their daily living expenditure, so the authorities have to
take the responsibilities to ensure them decent lives. Secondly, medical
system would suffer from treating enormous old people, for the reason that
old people are more vulnerable to changing of ambient environments and
diseases. As a result much more budget are required to promote the
infrastructure, facilities and nursing in hospitals. And lastly, besides the
physical problems they might also undergo mental illness, because old
people who do not have any offspring may feel lonely and helpless. Thus
government need to invest extra money in curing psychological problems.
All in all, a dysfunctional society would appear if aging problems become

apparent.
Nowadays, we are living in a throw-away society. What are its causes

and what are its problems?
(Same Topic – Many people say that we have developed into a

“throw-away society”, because we are filling up our environment
with so many plastic bags and rubbish that we cannot fully dispose
of. To want degree do you agree with this opinion?)
Environmentalists today are campaigning for “reduce, recycle and re-use”

in a bid to
save the world, but we as a nation, have adopted “replace” as our mantra.
This and
many other factors are leading to a throwaway society, and there are many
problems
being caused by this which I shall discuss in this essay.
The reasons for our becoming a throwaway society are manifold. Firstly, in
a quest for
better living standards, we wish to own the latest equipments and gadgets.
Once new
things are acquired, we dispose-off these “unwanted” things to second hand
shops or
just in the trash cans.
Secondly, the markets today are flooded with cheap, single-use-only things
that are
more in demand than high priced quality items. Our houses and closets
seem to be
overflowing with goods that are more in quantity and less in value. Finally,
there is too
much packaging done by the companies in a bid to make their things more
attractive.
The effects of this trend are also manifold. Pollution and filling up of the
landfill sites
by non biodegradable material is a great cause of concern. Global warming
is taking up
mammoth dimensions and unless we do something about it, our earth will
become
uninhabitable very soon.
To add to it, there is intense competition and rivalry among the affluent for
becoming
society’s trend setters. This tendency has played havoc on the middle-class
strata.
People are working long arduous hours to earn more and more money so
that they
can keep up with Joneses and Smiths or else lose face. This is creating stress
among
people and people are losing social and moral values.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, the current abundance of

choice
coupled with the ease with which things are discarded as soon as they lose
their
newness has given rise to a throwaway society which is having a
detrimental effect on
the individuals and society.
Model Answer 2:
Nowadays, we have adopted the throw-away lifestyle and over-

consumption and excessive production of short-lived or disposable items is a
global phenomenon which is making the condition even worse.
Consumerism, rapid advancement of technology, changing lifestyle and
globalisation are some of the main reasons which are contributing to this
phenomenon even more. The effects of this trend is so extraordinary and
deep that it will someday challenge our own existence and implementation
of effective measures should be immediately taken.
Consumerism is a social and economic ideology that encourages people to

acquire more products and services in an ever-increasing amount. Our
materialistic lifestyle fuels this habit and we change our cell phones, cars
and other household equipments more frequently than ever. Advertising
plays a major role in creating a consumerist society and we are never
contended with the things we have and want to acquire more than we need.
Shopping is no longer a necessity and has turned out to be an activity for
many. Thus we are producing an overwhelming amount of wastages and
little efforts has been in place to recycle many of our used items. Rapid
advancement of technology often forces us to buy latest products as new
products have better features than the one we own. The rise of middle
income people globally and their desire to mimic rich people and adopt a
technology centric lifestyle also the reasons for the increasing waste
productions as a result of our throw-away lifestyle. Our traditional lifestyle
and skills are almost gone and we want to buy everything rather than
creating them. For instance the number of people who rely on canned and
packet food rather than cooking at home is a great example that shows the
paradigm shift towards a busy and ready-made social lifestyle. Finally the
globalisation has immensely contributed towards our inclination to a
throw-away society we are living in.
The problems that the throw-away society and consumerism tendency

create are overwhelming. This is a degradation of human moral as a
massive number of poor people are starving on one hand, million tons of
foods are being wasted in few countries on the other hand. The toxic waste
and chemical garbage are polluting our environment while we are
remaining busy to buy more electronic products. The global warming,
temperature rise, extinction of many species are just the beginning and if
we fail to take effective measures to stop this heinous trend, we will be
destroying our future.
There are many steps that should be immediately in place to address this
issue. Non-recyclable packets, bags and goods should be restricted as much
as possible. Environment friendly goods should be manufactured and used
by people and elements like plastic bags should be totally banned. Every
household wastes should be classified as recyclable and non-recyclable and
recyclable waste should be used to produce new products rather than
throwing them away. Government as well as individuals’ cumulative efforts
to reduce the wastage production and to save the environment should be in
place.
To conclude, no doubt our ignorance and desire to have more have

contributed towards the creation of a throwaway society. Advancement of
technology, globalisation, social and economic structure have all fueled this
trend even faster. But the time has come for us to step forward and think for
the future of the mother planet and take steps to revert the damage.
Model Answer 3:
Due to rapid technology revolution many latest technology equipments

products are delivered in the market. This motivates people to buy new
equipments and throw away their old ones or replace old with new one. Let
us see briefly about both merits and demerits of this situation.
Scientific research help to find new discoveries and advancement of

technology result in easily operated and additional featured equipments
and other goods are increased in the market. For example, due to
advancement in washing machine it washes the clothes and automatically
delivered to heater kit and switch off after heater is completed. This saves
people time and removes extra burden to monitor the washing machine.
On the other hand, due to attraction of the latest equipment people are
spending more money to buy latest equipment and finding reason to place
their old machines in garbage. For example, people are avoiding using
slight scratch in their refrigerator and buy new fridge and old ones are
thrown out from their home. It is wastage of money. Due to this
environment is affected by garbage which contains old equipments and
machines. People are affected by technology related diseases. For example,
people addicted to mobile phones and computers. Due to radiation from
mobile phones may cause blurring vision, headaches and even cancer too.
To conclude, buying latest equipment and replace old goods is the latest
trend and most people are following this trend. It has both advantages and
disadvantages. I feel that if until necessary they must not buy latest goods
and it is waste of money.
Model Answer 4:
Waste disposal problems are increasing at an alarming rate today. Even

though people are more educated than before, they act like ignorant in
many circumstances in term of throwaway culture. This essay examines the
several reasons behind the creation of these throwaway societies and the
results of this in the future.
On the one hand, there are some facts which lead to the formation of
chocked societies with waste products. Firstly, the attitude and cultural
practice of the public; that is, they throw away unwanted things wherever
they want pretending that it is their right and something they got from
their ancestors. Hence, they do not have the feeling of ‘ourselves’ about the
surroundings. Secondly, scarcity of places for proper waste disposal: since
population explosion exists and people accommodates in flats in cities
where there are not enough places or surroundings compared to village
areas and they discard things here and there. In addition, lack of proper
waste segregation system by the authorities is the important reason for this
menace. Moreover, absence of strict legislation increases its severity.
On the other hand, these danger practices lead to severe impacts on several
aspects of the community. First and foremost problem caused by this act is
environmental pollution. With these waste products like food waste,
plastics, metals, chemicals etc, environment get chocked and polluted and
ends up in water pollution, air pollution etc. and as a result, it has
pernicious influence on health of human as well as other creations on the
earth. For instance, these pollutants cause lung problems, respiratory
problems, cancers etc. Another fact is that it leads to communicable
diseases. That is, these accumulated wastages are the best breeding places
for bacteria, viruses and pathogens and spread various diseases. Finally,
this throwaway culture discards the beauty of our nature and also affects
the ecosystem of the environment.
In conclusion, change in the attitude of people is the panacea for this

menace. It is not instantly aroused issue so that it cannot be solved
immediately. Government and people should work hand in hand to wipe off
this bane from our society.
Model Answer 5:
I think it is undeniable that in almost every country was filled by vast

qualities of disposable goods, such as razor, tableware, packaging from
things and so forth,and the culprit of this situation would probably be the
modern lifestyles.
With the pace of life is accelerating,the main reason would be that we all be
addicted to the benefits the disposable lifestyles brought to us. For
instance,in order to make our everyday life more productive,we often eat
out or call some take out food from a fast food shop, instead of cooking and
washing dishes for ourselves.so we can put more time into our career and
make more contribution to the community. Meanwhile,in some deluxe
restaurants,the one-time tableware may established a splendid impression
with high standard hygiene so that it could attracting more customers and
making a great fortune.
Although,we all gained a lot of benefits from the throw-away world.Yet,the

irreparable impact of this living habits are made to us is escalating.The first
and foremost,the great demands of disposable wooden products led to the
deteriorated situations of the rampant over deforestation.At the same
time,the knock-on effects of the worldwide diminution of the forest result in
a worse circumstance of global warming.On the other hand, as a result of
that lifestyle people generally turned into sluggish and sluttish. becouse
people do not clean or repair something which will be threw away after one
time use.
Finally,we should not neglect the changes that we made to the world when
we enjoying a comfortable and convenient life,the disposable world has its
positive side and we should be aware of.
Model Answer 6:
It is true that the ever increasing waste produced from human activities is
taking a heavy toll on the environment. In my opinion, the increasingly high
consumption of goods and the contaminative industrial productions are
two main factors contributing to this trend.
Nowadays, the rate at which daily necessities such as food, clothes and
papers are consumed is dramatically rising due to the population boom.
With people eating and using more, the amount of rubbish coming from the
packaging of various commodities is exceeding the degrading capacity of
our environment. What makes the situation worse is our tendency to use
something once and throw it away. A typical example would be the one-off
plastic bags with which consumers convey groceries from market to their
home. The unrestricted use of these has resulted in the prevalence of plastic
rubbish that cannot be thoroughly degraded.
Moreover, the intense industrial activities around the world are introducing
more refuse to the environment. For instance, the poisonous metals such as
lead and rotted steels deriving from the mass production of electrical
devices and automobiles contribute largely to this problem. Additionally,
most manufacturing methods utilised in production lines are not economic
and clean. The poor availability of advanced recycling technology in
industries leads to that recyclable materials such as plastic, concrete and
ceramic are being randomly dumped all over the world. As it takes
considerable long time for these to be digested by bacteria, the trend that
industrial wastes are accumulating at an accelerating rate is difficult to
stop.
In conclusion, a throw-away society is the result of the soaring amount of

goods we need every day and the insufficiently regulated industrial
activities. If proper measures are not taken promptly, this trend is likely to
cause more serious problems to the environment and people’s lives.
We can see more disasters and violence shown on TV. What are its
causes and what effects will they exert on the individual and the
society?
(Same Topic – Television news shows many scenes of disasters and
violence. What effect can this have on individuals and society?)
It is irrefutable that television news is filled with violence and suffering.

Crime and violent
world events are among the most frequently covered topics on TV. In the
following
paragraphs I shall discuss the reasons of this phenomenon and suggest
some ways forward.
The most important reason for this is obviously that television channels
want to increase
their TRP (television rating point). If any channel has high TRP, it gets more
adverts and
hence more revenue. Therefore the channels have to show such sensational
news.
Secondly, the news channels have to show what is happening around and
disasters and
violence have become very common in our surroundings. Finally, people
demand that they
should be well informed about all things which are prevalent in society. So,
media has to
show all that to its viewers.
There are many harmful effects on the individuals and society. The most
disturbing effect is
on the children and youth. Media violence can stimulate fear in some
children as it frightens
them, making the effects long lasting. This can become traumatic in our
children as they see
it more and more. Children are starting to grow and are shaping their
personality, values
and beliefs. They can become aggressive or they can lose a sense of reality
and fiction of
what they are seeing.
Young people imitate what they see and it is logical that they see glamour
in what they do
when they commit violence. Consequently, the society suffers as the streets
are full of
violence. Too much portrayal of these also leads to immunity among the
people and they
are not affected by the disasters any more. Disasters like Tsunami and
earthquakes don’t
make people shed a tear any more.
How can we lessen violence? Reducing the amount of violence on TV and in

the cinema
would certainly be a good start. It is a well known fact that the media
possesses a lot of
power to influence people. So, those in the media must be judicious about
delivering news
in a balanced manner that brings the story to the consumer without
showing too much
violence. Journalism is a profession like any other and certain standards of
quality and
professionalism need to be maintained. Moreover, parents should be more
vigilant about
what children see on TV.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that there are many reasons why
media shows too
much violence on TV and some steps should be taken to reduce this as it has
a lot of
detrimental effects on the individuals and society.
Model Answer 2:
Television news is vital source of information in all over the world. It is

debatable that the television news shows various disaster and violence
videos. There are many side effects on watching these videos by the
individuals and society.
Teenagers are affected by the violent scenes which results in aggressiveness,

violent behaviors, mischievous and indulge in anti-social activities. They
want to depict the violent scenes in real time and motivate them to involve
in violent activities as they considered it as heroism to become future
criminals. Moreover, teenagers are affected by mental illness by watching
violent news.
In addition, by watching disasters news on television exasperate on old

people, women and children. They are provoked by stress and anxiety. For
example, old people who are suffering from heart disease by watching
disasters result in heart attacks even in death in some case.
Moreover, children watching violent scenes result in psychological problem.

This make them adamant, rude behavior, fight with other children and
disobedient to elders. Their future is spoiled because of the violent scenes.
They will be violent citizen in the future.
To conclude, by watching news of disaster and violence whole society is

affected. The news agent should avoid showing these scenes as it as adverse
effects o common man. The government should regulate restriction on
disaster and violent videos to the public.
Model Answer 3:
Television news is vital source of information in all over the world. It is

debatable that the television news shows various disaster and violence
videos. There are many side effects on watching these videos by the
individuals and society.
Teenagers are affected by the violent scenes which results in aggressiveness,

violent behaviors, mischievous and indulge in anti-social activities. They
want to depict the violent scenes in real time and motivate them to involve
in violent activities as they considered it as heroism to become future
criminals. Moreover, teenagers are affected by mental illness by watching
violent news.
In addition, by watching disasters news on television exasperate on old

people, women and children. They are provoked by stress and anxiety. For
example, old people who are suffering from heart disease by watching
disasters result in heart attacks even in death in some case.
Moreover, children watching violent scenes result in psychological problem.

This make them adamant, rude behavior, fight with other children and
disobedient to elders. Their future is spoiled because of the violent scenes.
They will be violent citizen in the future.
To conclude, by watching news of disaster and violence whole society is
affected. The news agent should avoid showing these scenes as it as adverse
effects o common man. The government should regulate restriction on
disaster and violent videos to the public.
Model Answer 4:
It’s almost impossible to avoid seeing images of famine, war, natural

disasters, and violence on our screens. These graphic images can encourage
us to act, or leave us cold. In this essayI will discuss the effects of these
constant powerful pictures.
It’s natural to respond to other people’s suffering. When we see hungry

children or frightened refugees on our televisions, we want to send
money or support. Huge relief efforts such as Live Aid or Action for Haiti
have resulted from ordinary people’s reactions. Another naturalresponse is
anger. We ask our leaders to act to change the political or economic
situation that causes the pain. Some people also take action themselves.
They volunteer time in their home communities to raise funds, or even work
or fight in the affected region.
However, the frequency of these painful and violent scenes can also have
opposite effects. First of all, it doesn’t seem right to watch tsunamis or
other disasters while we are eating breakfast. Some people become
obsessed with bad news on the television or internet. Second, it’s also
natural to protect yourself and those around you. To reduce the impact on
ourselves or our families, we change the television channel or make a joke
about the conflict or continent affected. Finally, because the images seem
never-ending, we get fed up sending money which does not seem to have
any effect. Many people feel powerless and therefore do nothing, until an
even more powerful image is forced on them.
In conclusion, these scenes can motivate us to act and help others, or they
can discourage and depress us. It’s probably better to think carefully about
what we watch and our reasons for watching.
Model Answer 5:
There is a lot of controversy on the topic whether TV can play a role of a

teacher. Some people hold a viewpoint that it can never be educational at
all. Others, although, disagree, referring to TV’s high potential of teaching
through amusement.
As a matter of fact, television nowadays can hardly be called educational.

All those talk shows and soap operas we can see every day are completely
waste of time and can even have negative effects by distracting young and
undisciplined people from their studies. Moreover, the most of so called
educational programs like National Geographic can not replace books and
academic lectures because they tend to entertain people and have not an
aim to give deep and concentrated knowledge.
However, TV can be a powerful mean of delivering information and a nice

part of learning process. Educational Methodists have proved that the more
senses are involved at the time of studying; the more effective result can be
achieved. Television produces both picture and sound, so its usefulness is
obvious. Many teachers already use this advantage actively by showing
students videocassettes which go as supplementary material to many
language courses. So why not to broadcast such movies through television?
The problem of ineffectiveness of television as educational tool is in fact not

a problem of television itself, but of people who decide the content of
particular channel. It is hardly unlikely that content directors would
abandon their high profits and change talk shows to lectures and video-
lessons. Therefore, those, who insist on the uselessness of TV, maybe right,
but let us not forget that as technology improves new cheap ways of
broadcasting appear, for instance video broad casts. They can prove
exclusive power of such learning tool as television.
Model Answer 6:
When turn on the television, we always see the pictures are telling the
typhoon happened in Philippines, the earthquake of Japanand the war in
Iran. Crying faces, threatened faces, angered faces, are deeply engraved in
our minds, which makes us really feel sorry for these poor people. But
sometimes we just question ourselves: is it really necessary to put such a
great deal miserable pictures on the media.
The source of this phenomenon is that there are so many disasters and
violence are happening everyday in current society. The media report these
sorrow to get the public’s attentions. And then the issues could to some
extent be solved. For example, when the earthquake happened
inSichuanprovince in 2008. Through the rapid reported by the interior and
other international media, all the people around our country take action to
help the refugees of this area, by donating money, offering health care and
helping this area rebuilding. Another reason is that the caring and law-
abiding citizens have the right to be informed the violence or the power
policies which might probably endanger their lives.
However, not all the media is that responsible and conscientious, some of
them just repeat this type of news again and again to catch people’s focus,
for the aim of chasing profit. The news sometimes are exaggerate and
disordered. The media companies compete to inform the individuals with
the saddest disasters and cruelest violence, which lifting the people’s
sympathies and fanning their angers. And that is a abnormal, easily causes
the unstability of society.
I know it is almost impossible to fighting with the nature, and prevent the
typhoon and other disaster. But at least the weather station and scientists
could improve their methods and technologies to forecast more precisely.
Otherwise, the government need to publish the stricter laws to reduce the
crime rates, meanwhile, they should notice that themselves’ behaviors do
not injure people’s legitimate freedom. Last but not least, it is the right time
a media censorship to be established, which restrict the media from
reporting indiscriminately.
Model Answer 7:
People are divided in opinion if television is a great source of education and

knowledge or not. Both of these two groups have their reasoning and logics.
In this essay I will discuss both the viewpoint to represent the effectiveness
and drawbacks of TV as the source of education.
To mention the disadvantages, television channels are too much

commercial nowadays and they would produce any program to attract
people no matter if they are authentic or not. There are plenty of choices for
channels and people tend to use their TV as an entertainment media than
an educational source. The biased news, politically influenced talk show etc.
often mislead people and that has a very negative impact on the society.
Programs that contain violence, negative impression often distracts young
people and the addiction on TV programs often restrain people from doing
other important activities. TV is a great source of knowledge sharing but
the programs choice must be prudent to learn something from it and most
of the people fail to do so.
On the other hand, there are lots of advantages of TV according to a group

and these advantages supersede the disadvantages as they opine. There are
always options for a TV viewer and if s/he takes it as a medium of
educational sources, the can always do so. It is an effective medium for
updating people about the current news, different viewpoints and current
affairs. People no longer need to travel a great deal to learn about other
countries and it is TV that actually made it possible. Channels like
Discovery, National Geography have been successfully broadcasting
education channels and they are hugely popular around the globe. This is a
strong tool for a government to communicate with mass people to deliver a
massage. After a stressful day at work people often find it refreshing to
watch music, movies, soap opera, reality shows, travel shows at their homes
and there is no argument that those things have their educational
references well rooted into.
In conclusion, TV can be a great source for education if properly and

prudently watched and also can be a negative factor for some people if
their program choice is somehow negative.
Figures show that some countries have an ever-increasing

proportion of the population who are aged 15 or younger.
What do you think are the current and future effects of this trend for
those countries?
Some demographic surveys have shown that the proportions of young

people are rising
rapidly. This may be because of any reasons such as illiteracy and poverty
or wars or any
other reasons. This essay shall delve into the immediate and long term
effects of this trend
on those countries.
The most important current impact of such a trend would be on the

national economy. For
instance, goods and services would need to be imported which would lead
to an unstable
economy. However, the future effect would be different as there would be
more people
within the country needing employment. Then there might arise the
problem of
unemployment.
In addition to the effects on economy, there would be social implications

also. The
government will have to invest a lot on educational institutes as more
children need more
schools and colleges. In addition more spending on health would also be
needed. The long
term result would be that the education and health infrastructure would be
well developed.
If careful management of such a situation is done by the government, for
instance, by
providing good education and health facilities, then the future outcomes
could be quite
positive. The society would be younger and more vibrant. The culture of
those countries
would be more fast-paced than the traditional culture.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that the culture and lifestyle of
these countries
would be transformed if the population would be younger. Fresh
opportunities and
challenges would both be on the way. The trend would cause multiple
possible effects and
these countries should strengthen the education and health infrastructure
to overcome its
negative influence.
Model Answer 2:
Right proportion of population of all age groups is an important aspect for

the social, economical and overall growth of a country. However, in many
countries the number of younger population who are less than 15 years old
has increased significantly and to a certain extent this has a detrimental
effect on the society, workforce and the country. This essay delves with the
current and future effects of this trend in countries where younger
generation predominates the bigger portion of their population.
With regards to the current effect, an increasing competition in schools is

obvious. Since younger generations are mostly school goers, parents would
have to suffer to get their children admitted in a good school due to
excessive competition. Many poor parents would be forced to send their
children to work and earn and this will increase the child labour in many
developing and underdeveloped countries. Finally the disproportion of
population age distribution in such countries will lead them to the scarcity
of skilled labours and other professionals. Finally, since those children are
not earning members, that would negatively affect the overall economy of
the country. Increasing younger population, though are mainly thought to
bring negative effects to the society and country, are not always a burden.
They can support their community, become better members of the society
through positive competition and can contribute to the family by sharing
the workload.
Considering the future effects of this trend, I believe that it would mostly
depend on the economic factors and job facilities of a country. If the country
has a great economic stability and can create plenty of job opportunities in
the future, the under-aged population now would become the de facto to
the economy in the future and that would enable the country to develop
rapidly. The country will have a huge workers and professionals in the
future and they would be able to increase the GDP of such a country. On the
contrary, if the country fails to ensure jobs and business opportunity when
those children will become adults, the outcome would be catastrophic. The
unemployment and crime rate would surely increase and that would
negatively affect the society.
To conclude, although a right proportion of population age distribution is

necessary, this is not the case in many countries. Based on a countries
economic condition, education, training, and job facilities, the increasing
younger generation can be a great asses or burden.
Model Answer 3:
Population explosion has got on the nerves of people. Presently, in some

part of the world, the number of people between 15 and 30 age group are
upsurging rapidly due to distinct reasons including lack of awareness,
orthodox mentality of having a boy child and so on. Here, I would like to
account for both short term as well as long term consequences increasing
population.
There are manifold points that enlighten the effects of above situation. First
and foremost, the massive population is promoting deforestation at an
alarming rate. To be specific, the growth in number of people will emerge
the greater demand of timber, land for constructing houses and buildings,
natural resources and so on. Consequently, forests are being vanished to
meet human requirements. Thus, mankind is likely to suffer due to the lack
of resources.
Further emphasizing on my view, there are some short term advantages,

too, of this development. Initially, young people are more energetic, talented
and hard worker as compared to elders. As a result, plethora of such
individuals could contribute to the economy. Hence, it will be lucrative to
ensure development of their country. Moreover, these days, technology is
touching the sky of success, which contributes to modify new skills in youth.
Therefore, such people can provide quality services as an engineer, doctor,
teacher and so on. Thence, it will uplift the standard of living ultimately.
From my notion, undoubtedly, more young people can make earth a better
place to live in. however, the cons of this development can never be
neglected. People could be made aware of sustainable use of resources to
safeguard the negatives of this concern.
To recapitulate, having a large number of young people is both boon and

bane for a country. It is essential to remove its cons to prevent shortfalls.
After all, ‘prevention is better than cure’.
Model Answer 4:
Lifestyle has undergone dramatic changes over a couple of decades.

Presently, the population of teenagers is on the rise in some countries which
might have both positive and negative effects on the progress of a nation.
Here, I would like to account for current and upcoming consequences of this
phenomenon.
Multifarious positive effects can be put down behind this happening. First
and foremost, youthful generation plays a phenomenal role to flourish the
progress of a nation. For example, majority of young people are expected to
learn professional skills related to science, engineering, medical, technology,
sports and so on. As a result, a country will be enriched with a massive
number of prodigious talented people who could contribute remarkably at
jobs to ensure the development of their nation. Besides this, advancement
strides only in the presence of youngsters. To be specific, young blood is
energetic, agile, creative and adaptive who welcome new changes, adjust
nicely and can introduce innovative ideas for betterment of living standard.
Hence, a nation is supposed to be more advanced than others.
Moreover, youngsters are well educated, advanced and conscious about

healthy living standard. Thence, they could be made willing to participate
in social welfare activities such as planting more trees, promoting
cleanliness, saving wild life, using biodegradable materials so on to evolve
pleasant ecological conditions and superior lifestyle. On the contrary, it has
thorny side too.
To begin with, in many thriving regions, employment sources are less due to
deprivation of industries and other commercial sectors. Therefore,
increasingly number of young people is leading to lack of job opportunities
in such areas. Furthermore, the cultural heritage of a nation may lose its
significance. To be specific, unlike other age groups, youthful generation has
tendency to develop their own ways of living and attitudes rather than
following traditional values. Thus, individuality of a culture will be at the
low ebb. All of above, generation gap will spread its roots on account of
imbalanced ratio of different age groups. Hence, misunderstandings and
disputes might be the order of the day between young and late adulthood.
To recapitulate, elevation in the number youngsters may lead to some

hardships. However, I still believe positive outcomes will exceed negative
results.

precious

lives
live

of information

classes
the public
Some people think that giving aids to the poor countries has more
negative impacts than positive ones.
I disagree that giving aid to poor countries has more negative effects. There
are negative
effects, no doubt, but positive effects are certainly more
Talking about the negative effects, the major one is that poor countries
could become over
dependant and stop making efforts of their own. This would halt the long
term progress of
the poor countries. Secondly, the aid given by rich countries could go into
corrupt hands and
not reach those for whom it was meant for. Then, the aid may not be that
useful. For
example, the people’s need may be clothes and food but the aid may be in
the form of
making a bridge or something like that which people may not need. Finally,
the rich
countries may have their own selfish motives behind giving aid. For
instance, they may
provide employment but they may be underpaying and exploiting the poor.
The advantages of the rich countries helping the poor are manifold. To
begin with,
nowadays we belong to a global village and all countries are so
interconnected that all
problems that arise because of poverty – crime, terrorism and diseases will
directly or
indirectly affect the rich countries. It is a well known fact that terrorists can
infiltrate the rich
countries and cause violence and crime there. Moreover, if poor countries
suffer diseases
then these diseases can spread to the neighbouring rich countries. So, it can
be said that it is
a necessity for the rich to save the poor in order to save themselves. It has
been well said by
John F Kennedy that “if a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it
cannot save
the few who are rich”.
Furthermore, there are many problems which the world is facing today,
such as global
warming, which can be solved by joint efforts of all countries. Such joint
efforts can only be
possible if the gap between the rich and poor is narrowed. This can only be
achieved if the
haves help the have-nots. Finally, the rich countries also have a moral duty
to help the poor.
They should help them on humanitarian grounds.
To conclude, I reiterate by saying that the rich must help the poor. However,
it must be well
researched first as to what sort of help is most needed. Help can be provided
in the form of
food, medicine and education.
Model Answer 2:
It is true that an enormous amount of money has been poured into

impoverished nations to help them escape from poverty. While this solution
is sometimes effective, I personally believe that financial aid does not fully
tackle the problem, and other types of aid need to be implemented.
Firstly, money given to destitute nations does not always reach people in
need. In developing countries, lack of transparency and an ineffective
management system has enabled prevalent corruption in government. It is
therefore likely that monetary support from other countries would bring
about benefits to only governmental officials instead of the poor. Another
problem with giving out money is that in most cases recipient countries do
not have necessary resources such as manpower, technology, infrastructure
or management system in place to make the best use of financial aid. For
instance, in my country, a large amount of money from foreign governments
was spent on building health care centers in rural areas, but those centers
were soon abandoned or operated at less than one tenth capacity due to
lack of health care professionals, lack of electricity and clean water, etc.
Another illustration would be in agricultural field. We received monetary
support from international funds to increase productivity of crops, but we
had no experience in conducting researches before implementing a project,
in project management and evaluation. As a consequence, a large amount
of money was wasted on ineffective programs proposed by incompetent
leaders.
Furthermore, it is undeniable that financial aid can sometimes do more

harm than good, and worsen the situation in poor countries. Some
developed countries gave out monetary support to ruling oligarchy in
Africa under the name of economic development, but for hindered political
reasons as well. They might want to gain international preference, to win
support from their citizens before election, or to enhance their political
influence in recipient countries, etc. In such cases how the money would be
spent was not their concern. Leaders in recipient countries therefore used
the money to strengthen their position, by enriching themselves or
purchasing weapons to suppress opponents. Had it not been for the
financial aid, people in these poor countries might have been able to
overthrown their incompetent, greedy authority. Financial aid in this case
became an obstacle for revolutions against dictatorship, social progress and
poverty eradication.
In conclusion, monetary support alone could not eliminate poverty. Other

types of help such as technological support, staff training, infrastructure
development and management system improvement is required to handle
the problem.
Model Answer 3:
Over recent decades, many international institutes have been established all
around the world, by the objective of supporting low income communities.
However, there are some various points of view about positive or negative
results of the philosophy of such helps. In this essay, it is going to be assessed
the merits and demerits of conducting poor countries internationally.
As the outstanding effect on low level nations thanks to being sported by

other countries, is that the rate of death resulting from malnutrition
decrease. In addition, the health of the countries could improve because of
supporting drugs and medical facilities. For instance, it is heard on the news
that in some African countries, many people do not have even anything to
eat and/or any initial health facilities.
On the other hand, some individuals take issue with the idea that these
helps contribute to some side effects. By the way of illustration, it could
weaken the countries receiving aids and causes those to not to attempt for
improving their situation. Moreover, it might transform them to consumer
communities which always need other countries supports to being alive.
Additionally, receiving external aids could lead those countries to the level
that they pay no heed to their own natural resources.
In conclusion, even though we could not disregard the fact that some poor
countries widely need to be supported, the advanced societies could adopt
the decisions that help those countries to positively change their
environment by utilizing their own existing abilities and resources.
Model Answer 4:
Nowadays the popular practice is that developed countries make financial

and other types of assistance to developing ones. But some believe that this
help contains more losses than profits.
It is hard to argue that a poor country has to pay back after obtaining aid
from a rich government. Furthermore, it is possible that this country cannot
rectify the debt as it is consisted of large sums of money. As a result, the
state is becoming poorer and has to ask new help.
Another point against financing developing societies is that there is a big

risk to encounter with corruptions is the highest levels of authority.
Moreover, after getting assistance citizens do not feel and see positive
changes, infrastructure is not improved. I mean that funds extracting for
development are lost in someone’s pockets. For example, after a storm in
Pakistan, there appeared a food and house crisis nevertheless the EU sent
humanitarian help.
The most important point of this phenomenon is that after getting a

significant loan a country might lose their political freedom and be
dependent upon a lender. The tough situation in Greece is a great example.
Greek government has to accept terms of European Union such as tax rates
increasing and salaries reducing. As a consequence, these measures lead to
people’s riot.
On the other hand, financial assistance is an excellent chance for a poor

country to improve infrastructure and the environment.
Furthermore, after realizing the help, developing country might become

developed and start to bring profit for the world’s society. For instance,
Japan was fully destroyed after World War II. However, it is high-
technologies leader on any world market nowadays.
Last but not least, the aid is not constituted only from money. It can be some
educational programs, medicine and scientific researches.
To summarize, I consider aid for needed countries brings more profit than
negative impacts.
Model Answer 5:
There are many poor countries in this world and they are mostly located in
the African and Asian region, such as Liberia, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh,
Myanmar and Sudan. It is a fact most of these countries are depending on
the supports of the developed countries. These international aids have their
own benefits and drawbacks, and the following essay will discuss about
them in details.
To begin with, giving supports to third world countries bring some

advantages for both the giver and the recipient countries. It gives benefits
for countries that could give international aids, as they have the
opportunity show their kindness to other countries. Showing these positive
attitudes could change the world into a better place and improve the world
peace. As for the recipient countries, these helps would positively affect to
the social economic conditions of their people. For instance, these financial
supports could be used to purchase some foods for the starving residents.
On the other hand, despite of the positive things of international supports,
there are some negative things that arose as well. Firstly, these supports
have made the recipient countries people become lazy and spoil. As they
realize that they will be supported from developed and developing
countries, they do not want to have changes and improvements in their
lives. Secondly, many of the support funds are not strictly and properly
monitored. As a result, most of the funds are being corrupted by local
authorities.
In conclusion, providing international aids to third world countries has its

own advantages and disadvantages. In my opinion, as a social creature,
people should help each others, though we might came from different races,
ethnics or languages. Therefore, it is essential for advanced countries to
help poor nations, but the support should be strictly monitored to ensure
that the funds are allocated properly.
Model Answer 6:
A sense of solidarity among countries throughout the world has increased

considerably in the last decade. The developed countries compete actively
for providing assistance to the unprosperous countries. Consequently, it
causes unfavourable circumstance between those countries. Although the
cause is reasonable, I believe that the awareness of the nations gives a
commendable impact either for developed countries or developing
countries.
United States, a superpower nation, give aid consistently to poor countries

such as Zimbabwe, Burundi, and Liberia. CNN News report that USA spend
one billion dollars to give assistance to poor countries. As a response, some
of world’s citizen criticizes the valuable act because they assume it would
be a bad hedge for a given state aid. For instance, Zimbabwe cannot stand
alone to run his administration without aid. Country’s reliance cannot make
it develop quickly. This example is proves that giving aid to poor countries
has more negative impact.
On the other hand, several developmental states can develop their nations
quickly after receiving aid from developed countries. Moreover, the
developed countries that give aid also get some advantages from giving aid.
For example, Indonesia, in 2004, was given economic assistance from
Germany and then in the next four years, Indonesia could develop their
country by increasing gross domestic product tremendously. In any case, Sri
Lanka had given humanitarian assistance from some developed countries
to recover the economic condition from the tsunami disaster. It works well
and can improve the state given assistance. What more, Germany, a country
which gave aid, got humanitarian noble from United Nation in 2008. This
phenomenon is evidence that giving aid to poor countries is giving more
advantages than disadvantages.
In conclusion, country’s reliance is giving a negative effect if the country

cannot use the aid appropriately. In otherwise, it affects more advantages
both of the developed and poor countries. Therefore, contributor countries
should monitor the poor countries when they give aid.
Some people think that criminals should be given longer terms in

prison, so as to reduce the crime rate.
There are many different opinions on the best way to reduce crime. In my
opinion, long
term prison is the only answer in a very few situations, but in most cases
education,
vocational training and rehabilitation are better.
Long terms in prison are the only answer in case of criminals who are a risk
to the society,
such as murderers. They cannot be made to mix with society. There are also
mentally insane
people such as serial killers who should be kept away from the people. In all
other cases we
can do without long terms in prisons.
My first argument against longer terms in prisons is that in traditional

prisons, people learn
a lot about crime and so when they leave prison they will commit even more
crime. In other
words prisons act as universities of crime. So for petty offenders like shop-
lifters and pick-
pockets should be given some vocational training and education. It is a well
not fact that the
basic causes of crime are poverty, illiteracy and unemployment. So, if we
provide education
and job training then we would be removing the causes of crime. If
criminals are
rehabilitated by some form of employment then they would certainly not re-
offend.
Furthermore, the prisons are expensive to maintain. The government can

spend that money
on other important matters such as education and healthcare. This would
ease some
burden from the government’s shoulders. The petty and minor criminals
can also be
employed in some community service projects after providing education
and vocational
training.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that we should hate the crime and
not the criminal.
To fight crime we should focus on the causes of crime. Education and job
training help to
rehabilitate the criminals. Longer terms in prison are not the answer to
fight crime. Focus
should be on reforming the criminals.
Model Answer 2:
Crime is a serious and growing problem in most societies. Although many

people believe that the best way to tackle this is to place people in prison for
longer periods, others are of the opinion that other measures will be more
effective.
There are benefits of giving offenders longer prison sentences. Firstly,

spending a long time in prison provides an opportunity for the prison
services to rehabilitate a prisoner. For example, someone who has
committed a serious offence such as assault will need a long time in prison
in order to be sure they can be re-educated not to re-offend. In addition to
this, longer prison sentences will act as a deterrent for someone who is
thinking of committing a crime.
However, some people argue that leaving people in prison for a long time
means that they will mix with other criminals and so their character will
not improve. One alternative is community service. This gives an offender
the opportunity to give something positive back to society, and so it may
improve their character. Also, the government could focus its resources on
the causes of crime, which would lead to less crime in the future.
In my opinion, it is important to look at alternative methods. Many

countries have lengthy prison sentences, but crime has continued to
increase throughout the world, so it is clear that this is not completely
effective. That said, long prison sentences should remain for those who
commit serious crimes such as assault or murder, as justice for the victim
and their family should take priority.
To conclude, there are good arguments for and against long sentences, so
governments must continue to research the various methods of crime
reduction to ensure effective policies are in place.
Model Answer 3:
The rising crime rate, one of the most sensitive issues, needs to be
thoroughly dealt with by the government. In recent years, a voice is raised
up among the general public, suggesting giving longer imprisonment to
convicts in order to play an alarming role in reducing the crime rate.
However, it is believed that there are a variety of other measures that can
also effectively alleviate this situation.
It has been proven that a stricter punishment toward outlaws exerts a
significant influence over lessoning law-breakings and maintaining a
harmony in society. For instance, the government of Singapore has been
always using strict regulations to prevent people from committing crimes.
Individuals, no matter citizens or foreigners, will face very serious
punishment if they break the law. Therefore, it helps the government with
providing a safe and stable environment for its residents.
However, along with giving criminals longer sentence, it might come with
an issue of prison overcrowding. It costs the government an enormous
amount of money to manage inmates and maintain a good living-condition
based on their rudimentary rights inside jail. In addition, criminals who
spend more time in prison left their family without taking care of, creating
a range of social welfare issues, which would also bring society some
negative effects.
In order to maintain a lower crime rate in a more sustainable way, there

are other measures worth to adopt. First of all, lawbreakers who have
committed a minor degree of crime can be punished to engage in
community labour or service. It is not a wise idea of sending all of them to
jail without reconsidering how serious do the crimes that have been
committed damage our society. If the result of crime is minor and the
intention was not essentially so evil, it is unnecessary to give prison
sentences. Furthermore, education or psychological counselling also plays a
vital role in rehabilitating inmates and preventing individuals from re-
committing crime. Educating Criminals the abilities to make a living
through rehabilitation program will effectively help them re-establish self-
esteem, thus they are able to recover and function better in society.
In conclusion, to give criminals longer term of imprisonment is a potential
crime deterrent that individuals will think twice about the serious
consequence before committing crime. However, the negative effects of
longer imprisonment need to be taken into account, thus other alternatives,
such as community service and rehabilitation program will also help lower
down the crime rate.
Sample answer 4:
In the modern century, the world suffers from the increase of crime rate
throughout many nations. This eventually breeds the fear of innocent
civilians and forces them to demand for stronger punishment on those who
committed a crime. Some insist giving prisoners longer prison sentence, and
others insist alternative ways will be more effective and I lay my thoughts
alongside of the alternative ways as well.
There are many benefits of sentencing offenders longer prison period. The
longer the criminals who committed serious damage to others such as steal,
violence, arson and murder are separated from the society, the higher the
chances of the innocence being safe increases dramatically. During the time
in prison the offenders will have an opportunity to get them rehabilitated
through many services available inside. For instance, they could reflect their
own behaviour and educate themselves the way not to re-offend once they
are released. Moreover this long period of prison sentence will work as a
deterrent to future criminals.
On the other hand, others argue that there are more effective ways to
reduce crime rate. They insist that sparing their life after committing
serious crimes involving one’s life will be only wasting the tax that citizens
paid. Hence to sentence to death will show a powerful warning to other,
which result in a stiff drop in crime rate. In my opinion, these people can be
of the service to the whole community during their imprisonment. The
labour force from these criminals will be a great contribution to the
societies. It does not imply that these violent and dangerous people will be
released and walk around the inner city freely. They will be under heavy
supervision. For example, they will be tied to the heavy chains and placed in
construction sites to assist the building companies or they could be working
as farmers when harvesting season comes.
To summarise, there are clear grounds both for and against long
imprisonment. Thus the government must protect innocent lives from
brutal and reckless criminals by researching the best method out of all
these fine arguments.
Model Answer 5:
Nowadays, crime is serious and growing problem in our country. Some

people think every criminal deserve strict punishment because they need to
pay for what they did.The other people thinks they should in better way as
not all criminal are bad. I will discuss on both aspects .
There are benefits of giving offenders longer prison punishment. Firstly ,

spending long time in prison provides an opportunity to rethink what they
did .For example, if some one did the crime than he or she should provide re-
education in prison so that he/she realize his/her guilty. I saw one culprit
who done some crime. But when he came back from prison it totally
change .Now he is doing job and living with his parents. He look like a
gentle no one say after seen him that he did that serious crime . Secondly, If
offenders are in prison which is far from society there might be possibility of
reduction of crime in society.
However , some people are against that leaving people in prison for long
time means they will mix with other criminals so their character will not
improve. If they mix with other criminal than they get bad information and
the higher possibility it is for them to imitate of criminals. As a consequence
they become serious criminals and will cause damage to society. Sometime
culprit do some minor crime such as stolen some minor thing.Those people
should not provide long time in prison sentence.To exemplify ,I have one
experience in my life during winter session that I boy stolen T-shirt from
shop because he don’t have much money to buy cloths. So I think those type
of people should not be put on prisons they should put NGO.
In a nutshell , I concede Government should make one community which

check the crime of culprit .Long prison sentences should remain for those
who commit heinous crime such as murder and rape.
Model Answer 6:
Crime levels have been increasing at an exorbitant rate in the recent

decades. The methods with which to curb the rising levels of crime are often
a debated topic. Some argue that the best way to reduce delinquency is to
give longer prison sentences, while others contend that there are better
alternatives to tackle this epidemic. Both sides of this debate will be
analyzed in this essay before a reasoned conclusion is drawn.
On the one hand, many believe that handing out longer jail sentences is the
right measure to be employed, this makes sense as the main purpose of such
punishments is to deter individuals from committing crimes in the first
place. For instance, Saudi Arabia, where ramifications for committing a
crime are much harsher than the rest of the world, has much lower crime
rates than even the most developed nations. This example illustrates the
fear that harsher sentences can instill in the hearts of potential criminals.
Hence, it is obvious why this point of view has garnered support.
On contrary, some argue that there are better alternatives than longer
prison sentences such as educational programs and community services.
Take a study conducted by a non-profit organization in my area, for
example, which found out that people become more empathetic after
spending time with people from disadvantaged backgrounds. As a result of
this increased sympathy, people are less likely to commit heinous crimes.
Therefore, it is comprehensible why this is a popular opinion among many.
After musing upon both sides of this argument, it is felt that a balance
should be struck between handing out longer prison sentences and other
measures. It is hoped that felony rates will be decreased in the coming years
and world will become a safer place to live in.
Model Answer 7:
Some people argue that a prison is a place in which serious criminals

should be served out their sentence . And also they do not believe in
educational programs running in prison. I think this is partly true due to
the following reasons.
Prison has been established to maintain offenders to receive sentence. Even

in the past, there were categorized among offenders to keep them in a
proper place. Today we encounter various crimes from assassinate to
kidnapping to computer crimes. It does seem that we cannot keep an
assassin with a hacker or a serious criminal with a petty criminal.
Meanwhie,it would be better for some crimes such as computer hacking,
offenders serve out some social programs rather than to be hold in prison.
However, I think training course assists offenders as well as a society. They

learn some skills that bring a sense of fulfillment to a prisoner, opening up a
greater chance for criminals to find a job when released. This helps
offenders to return a normal life and reduce the risk of recommitting. And
also it is likely that taking control of those prisoners, who their time already
have been filled by education programs, is much easier than those who are
deprived of such courses.
To sum up, I agree with this point that prisons should be deal with serious
crimes. They also need to run some courses such vocational courses to be to
the benefit of prisoners. This opens up opportunities for offenders in their
future lives as well as helps wardens to have a better control on them.
Model Answer 8:
Some people is in the opinion that longer imprisonment is the most effective
way to cut down crime rate, while others think that several measures can
be taken which would motivate a person to act legally and refrain him or
her from doing any crime. In this essay I will examine both points of view
and state my opinion.
With regard to the longer sentence in jail, people believe that it is the best
way to combat crime for various reasons. Firstly, if there is strict legislation
about every crime happens in the society then people would be scared to be
involved in any kind of wrong deeds. It means that a person would think few
times before committing any crime and eventually back up from doing that
crime. Furthermore, when people are aware of receiving long
imprisonment, they merely would do anything which goes against the rules
and regulations of the country.
However, I do not believe these arguments stand up to scrutiny. To begin,

government can implement several alternate practices to ensure its citizens
are safe and there is less crime in the society. Imposing a heavy fine on
criminal act rather than punishing a person for long time in jail sentence
would be an acceptable alternative. Because of the intimidation of this fine
People would try their best to abide by laws as they know that they can
even go bankrupt. In addition, if government could reduce poverty and
unemployment then it would in turn decrease the crime rate as most people
commit crime out of hunger and joblessness.
To sum up, although some people argue that longtime punishment in jail is
the most appropriate way of lowering the crime rate, I would argue that
there is sufficient evidence to prove that this is not the case. Therefore,
several steps should be taken by government to improve the condition of the
society by limiting crime to a large extent.
An American film actor once said, “Tomorrow is important and

precious.”Some people think individuals and society should pay
more attention to the future than to the present.
I certainly support the view. One should most definitely keep the future in
mind and not
fritter away everything to enjoy the present. One should always remember
that the
present would one day transform into the future, and when it eventually
does, it should
be safe and secure. The same holds true for societies. Let us consider why it
is so
important to be prepared for the coming time.
The mortality rate has come down and the span of life is generally longer,
but the
period of earning is comparatively limited. Nobody knows how long he
would live, but
the age of retirement is generally fixed. One cannot work indefinitely.
Therefore, during
his earning span, he has to make sure that he puts aside enough money that
will hold
him in good stead in his later years, when he will be able to work no more.
Further, the
requirements in old age are sometimes more than a person’s needs during
the period of
his youth. Deteriorating health translates into higher medical bills and
hospital charges.
Being weak and infirm, one needs to spend more on commuting. He will
need to hire
assistants to help in the house.
Next come the needs of the family. One has to provide for the education and
marriage
expenses of the dependent members of the family, like children and even
grandchildren. One has to pay one’s insurance premiums, and even for the
day-to-day
needs of the younger members of the family, till such time as they are
employed and
earning. Moreover, one may incur extra expenditure on leisure activities.
People
generally travel more after retirement to meet their relatives and friends
who may be
settled and staying far away from them. There would also be the usual
expenses on
house maintenance and repair, and the payment of personal and property
taxes.
The societies should also think about tomorrow. Neighbourhoods should be

planned
nicely. Everyone should participate in community projects. Good
educational institutes
and health centres should be there in all areas. If only today is looked into
and no
planning is done for tomorrow then crime and violence would increase in
society and
everyone would suffer.
Therefore, it is imperative that people and societies plan wisely for the
future. If one
has saved enough, one can sit back and enjoy peace and comfort in ones
later years and
even witness the smile of joy on the faces of ones children. If he has saved
not, then the
journey ahead would be dreary and dismal indeed.
Model Answer 2:
Some people believe that our personalities are determining mainly by

genetics and habits. People also know that making habit is not a simple
thing to do. Habit needs practice in every single day up to become a mindset
on someone’s activity. Why making habit is necessary to do, is the question
which often appears in the society or individual life.
The main of functions for making a good habit is preparing tomorrow

which can bring satisfy and happiness that everyone dreams in personal
life. Human believes that richness and successful in life are the most
important thing to reach on short-term planning or long-term planning.
This is the reason that people learn and prepare their tomorrow by doing
anything to bring the wealthy and comfortable in life. In addition,
individuals and countries pursue happiness to prove a person’s self-made of
ability and talent.
On the other hand, some people believe that tomorrow has own its destiny.
They do not have to force doing something different, or practice an attitude
which makes them busy. This kind of people believes that a success on
human life is a God’s creation which does not need to force. In my view, this
is the wrong statement of thinking. I think, preparing tomorrow is one
important thing to do in individual and country life, so people have to learn
and try all the possibility which could bring successful.
My personal conclusion is that preparing by doing and learning something
becomes the main important thing to make habit which successful
tomorrow.
Model Answer 3:
While the rhythm of people’s living is speeding up,there’re rapid changes in

all aspects of our everyday lives.However,whether tomorrow is more
important and precious than today has become a complex and sensitive
topic issue .Personally ,I adhere to the opinion that the two consideration
are intrinsically interdependent and indispensable.
On the one hand ,the present play a vital role in the future .I nitially ,it is
generally accepted that today is the foundation of tomorrow .Given the
significance of the present,at that moment we should try our best to lay a
solid foundation for the way we live ,learn ,work and play .Additionally ,if
we just focus on what we will have ,and ignore what we should do now ,we
will surely receive a heavy blow and fatally fail to reach our goal in the
future.Moreover,what ground is to building is what today is to
tomorrow.The fact ,that scientists will invent more advanced technologies
in the basis of modern technologies,serve as a good example.
On the other hand,the future exerts a profound influence on the society.To

begin with,with the advent of new era,people are soon to find themselves
living in an altered world which calls for new judgements,new ideas,a new
habits of thoughts and a new order of values.Therefore ,the future is the
guidance of our living standards and social development.Secondly,paying
more attention to the future can provide more energy for people to solve
current problems and avoid abandoning themselves on the failure
happened at the present and the past.Last but not least,with right attitude
of the future,people will not go astray,which is favorable to family and
society.
In conclusion,the future and the present play an equally important role in

our lives.Not only should we do our best now,but actively have a long sight
of the future.
Sample answer 4:
Some people believe that thinking about the future is more important than
focusing on the present, I agree entirely with the word that tomorrow is the
most important thing in life.
Thinking about the future can help individuals hold positive attitude
toward their life. People, especially adults who are pay more attention on
the present, usually surrounding with high pressure like unfinished work
and variety bills, under these pressure day and night may lose their temper
easily and eventually leads to mental diseases someday. If someone can
ignore these problems and make blue plans for the light future, they are
encouraged, and thus they will work enthusiastically and energetically. This
is because once people planed their future and clearly know what they
really want to do, they will not feel confused anymore and it easier to find
the main goal of live and work. This means that they are likely to do work in
a more effective way.
Planning plays a significant role in governments’ administration, it is

necessary for leaders to think with a long term sight. This is likely to help
authorities on predicting problems they may meet in someday and taking
actions to handle these risks in advance. For instance, many governments
are investing in the exploring of environmental-friendly resources and
preserving the stock of flues, in order to ensure the development when fossil
flues are use up in decades. When the crisis of energies come true, these
governments with future sight are unlikely to be shocked compare with
others who are indicated in temporary benefits.
In conclusion, thinking about the future is more important than focusing on

present, it not only can help individuals developing positive attitude but can
also help governments escaping from crisis.
Some people think imported food exerts positive impacts on our

lives.
Nowadays, supermarkets are stocked with food products from around the
world. Some individuals are of the opinion that this imported food has
beneficial effect on us. I beg to differ. I feel that the local and regional
produce is better for us and will discuss why in this essay.
It is certainly the case that importing food can have a negative effect on
local culture. This can be seen in countries such as Japan where imported
food has become more popular than traditional, local produce, eroding
people’s understanding of their own food traditions. Although some would
claim that this is a natural part of economic development, in an
increasingly global world. I feel strongly that any loss of regional culture
would be detrimental.
A second major reason to reduce imports is the environmental cost.
Currently, many food imports such as fruit, are transported thousands of
miles by road, sea and air, making the produce more expensive to buy and
increasing pollution from exhaust fumes. Despite the fact that trade in food
exports has existed for many years, I am convinced that a reduction would
bring significant financial and environmental gains.
However, many jobs depend on food exports and some less developed
countries may even depend on this trade for economic survival. In spite of
this, the importance of developing local trade should not be undervalued.
In conclusion, I am certain that reducing food imports would have cultural

and environmental benefits. What is more, the local economy should, in
time, prosper commercially as the demand for local and regional produce
remains high resisting the competition from overseas.
People should look after their health as a duty to the society they
live in rather than personal benefits.
Same Topic – Staying healthy through playing sports and eating well
should be an individual’s duty towards society rather than a habit
for personal benefits. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Sample Answer 1:
Good health is a basic human need. The statement says that people should
look after their
health as an obligation to the society and not think about their own
benefits. I however feel
that compliance would be much more if we were to look after our health for
our own
interest and the benefits to the society would automatically ensue.
There are many benefits to the individual if he/she looks after his/her
health. Good health
means a person leads a quality life. He does not have to spend on expensive
medical
treatment and he has more productive life. He can work better and enjoy all
the good things
that life has to offer. Moreover, if a person suffers from any infectious
disease and takes
timely treatment then he does not spread it to others. Later on he does not
stand the
chance of getting re-infected by other people.
On the other hand, it cannot be denied that as a part of society, we all have
an obligation to
the society. If all people are healthy then the society is also healthy. A
healthy society means
that the government does not have to spend a lot on health. All those saved
resources could
be used to improve the lives of people further. Government could spend on
latest
diagnostic machines and on gyms and on educating people as to how they
could look after
themselves even better.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that we should all look after our
health. It does not
matter whether it is for ourselves or the society. We are all inextricably
linked to the society.
If we do something good for ourselves, the society is benefited and if we do
something for
society then we are benefited.
Model Answer 2:
The past 50 years have witnessed considerable concern for public

healthcare. Regarding this, it is claimed that people should take care of
their health as social benefits rather than personal ones. Personally, I am
better convinced with the former viewpoint.
To start with, in a narrow term, when a single man stays healthy, the whole
family will definitely benefit from him. To this regard, a man with a stable
health will be employed, so, undoubtedly, he will support his family better
both emotionally and financially. For example, when the family is in trouble,
he encourages other members and, more importantly, provides them with
money which seems to be always so much of value in these rainy days.
Moreover, in a broader term, when every single family is strong thanks to

contributions by every healthy member, the family, an important unit of
every community, will support the society better. This can be reflected quite
virtually. For instance, a family with every members employed will partially
mitigate unemployment problem, the most concerning issue nowadays.
Additionally, because of being employed, they contribute better to national
budget by paying higher tax than those who are out of job due to their poor
health.
Of course, there is no denial the fact that people should also take care of
their health as personal benefits. This is because of the fact that besides
office hours, people spend time for themselves. For instance, people enjoy
such recreational activities as swimming, sightseeing and so forth. If they
do not try to stay healthy and treat this duty as personal benefits, they are
definitely suffering, so all these activities become, more than ever,
impossible.
In conclusion, the responsibility of maintaining a good health, as it benefits

every single family in a narrow term and the whole society in a broader
term, should be taken as social benefits rather than personal ones.
Model Answer 3:
The proliferation of sedentary life style in the modern society produces

many detrimental effects on both individuals and the society level. Some
people assert that it should be one’s duty towards the society to stay
healthy, while the others contend that staying healthy through playing
sports and eating well is completely for personal benefits, having nothing to
do with the community. Personally, I am in favor of the latter opinion.
People would be better motivated by personal interests than by social

welfare. The perspective of possible athletic scholarship promotes many
teenagers to play sports which they are not interested in. The fame and
money is their solitary goal in the beginning, but they finally get the fun and
exercise of playing sports as well. Moreover, making friends is also one
popular incentive for people to play sports. Sports creates goodwill between
the players. “Sportsmanship” means that we play with the most savage
competitive instincts while in the arena, but shake hands and wish our
opponents good luck when the game is over. Lastly, “I need to keep healthy”,
is what most people think when they decide to do exercises or to be on a
diet. Obviously, we can be sure that personal benefits is the major concern
for people to stay healthy.
It is undeniable that society benefits from healthy population. Burgeoning

healthcare expenditure is a dead burden on our government budget. A
research conducted by the National Academy of Social Science revealed that
nearly 75% percent of the healthcare spending of the Chinese citizens
happens in the last year of our life. Could any situation be more grimly
whimsical than that? It is imperative for us to improve our life style. But
there should not be a national legislation forcing people to keep healthy
through playing sports and eating well. That is not only impractical but
also a violation of the civil rights of our citizens.
There is no doubt that eligible citizens should always keep the social
welfare in mind, but staying healthy should be personal concern rather than
social obligation.
Model Answer 4:
Nowadays, in our ever-changing society, people pay more attention on the

public health. It is first argued that the care about health should be
considered as a public responsibility instead of human’s own one. As for me,
I entirely agree with this view because of the following reasons.
Firstly, It is undeniable that the good health of all people will maintain the
stable and improve the society in a variety of fields. This can be explained
easily by the rise of working productivity, the older age and the better
quality of life. In constant, if taking care of yourself is not a social
awareness, the consequence is unexpected. The Ebola disease in Africa is a
typical example. This disease did not only steal countless human lives, but
also drag the whole Africa in economy because of the lack of employees and
the huge expense for treating, or in travel industry such as the decrease of
visitors travel to this continent due to the fear of illness.
Secondly, people should consider theirselves as the social responsibility will

share the help hand with the governments to minimize the national
problems in health. In detail, if everyone has the awareness of protecting
theirselves and others, the headached situation such as diseases spreading
will be solved. Back to the Africa, the Ebola was more and more popular
partly due to the carelessness in isolating the patient and the lack of
knowledge about is illness. However, in a positive way, many countries have
the encouragement of public responsibility in health. Most nations now
have the policy of compulsory vaccination, which can limit the threat for
children and also for the society in the future.
In conclusion, each people should consider theirselves as a part of the

society so that they can protect their health better, not only for their own
benefits but also for the whole society.
Model Answer 5:
Living healthy has been the wish of many people. For being healthy, people
emphasize on balanced diet and enough physical activities by playing
sports. In my opinion, staying healthy is solely personal interest which also
has some indirect social implications. In the paragraphs that follow, I
explain the reasons why being healthy is more for personal benefit,
nevertheless I also include its indirect social implications.
Healthy life is directly related to someone personal benefits it encompasses.

Healthier people are expected to be fit mentally and physically which is
directly related to the higher work productivity. In the course of being ‘fit’,
people play different games that help them to increase the friend circle and
increase the interaction with different people. It is generally agreed that the
public connection is always an asset. At last, playing in team instill in them
team work capacity and understanding, helping and respecting others.
Moreover, people will be motivated to be healthy by playing or by proper
diet for personal benefits rather collective benefit. For someone who joins
gyms, starts jogging, plays football or pays attention on diet, personal
benefits are often the motivational factor.
Looking at global perspective, it is unanimously agreed fact that group of

healthy persons makes the healthy society and healthy nation. Healthier
society means there is reduced number of avoidable but otherwise common
health problems like high blood pressure, diabetes and some forms cancer.
Reduction is such problems leads to the saving of large share of government
spending which can be spent well in other social welfare activities. Poor
health is not only problem to the patients but also to the relatives and close
members of the respective society. Someone needs to find time for nursing
and taking care of patient which could be reduced to some level if every
individual is motivated on being healthy.
In conclusion, no one can argue that group of healthy individuals is

beneficial to the society and the nation in macroscopic level. But staying
healthy is personal preferences. People can only be motivated to being
healthy only on the terms personal benefits.
Model Answer 6:
It has long been believed that an individual’s health is a private matter.

However, in contemporary society, where human interaction is frequent
and medical costs are high, the health of any individual concerns the whole
community.
Society as a whole suffers when an individual falls ill. Nowadays, a disease

can spread very quickly between people in the same community and even
across national borders. If a single patient is not diagnosed and treated in
time, many more people will be affected. In addition, the high cost of
medical treatment a patient requires is usually paid by the government and
society. A smoker who suffers from lung cancer, for example, is making
other taxpayers pay for his habit. For these reasons, health is more than just
a personal matter.
In the same way, good health benefits society as well as the individual. By
keeping fit, a person is not only investing in his/her future, but also
contributing to the overall productivity of society. That is the reason why
many governments encourage their people to participate in sports as a way
of boosting their health. Some people might argue that their freedom will
be limited if their health is regarded as a public matter. However, I would
like to point out that personal enjoyment should never be placed above
public interests. Drug users, for example, are punished in any civilized
society.
In conclusion, health is not an issue like seatbelts which affect only the
individual. In an era when everybody is involved with everybody else, people
should look after their health for the sake of society as well as themselves.
Aircraft uses more fuel than cars and produces more pollution.
Some people suggest the non-essential use of aircraft like
international travel should be discouraged.
It is irrefutable that the fuel consumed by one long-distance flight is

consumed by a car in
several years’ time, and the amount of pollution it produces is also more.
Therefore, some
people suggest that non-essential flights, including international travel,
should be
discouraged. I totally disagree whit this statement. I feel that even though
cars produce less
pollution and use less fuel, still we should focus on limiting the number of
cars. Discouraging
flights would lead to many other problems.
At a time when people all over the world worry about the decreasing level
of fossil fuels and
global warming, it is right to take action to save the planet earth. However,
to simply
backbone of
Many people are
employed in this industry. Many businesses like hotels and leisure centres
are dependent on
even worse
without jobs.
Air flight also enables intercultural exchanges between countries. The

advent of cheap air
fare makes it possible for people the world over to travel regularly,
regardless of the
different
What we should do is to limit the use of cars. The number of cars is

increasing at a very fast
pace. This is creating too many problems. Cars are using too much of fossil
fuels; they are
creating a lot of pollution; they are leading to traffic congestion on the
roads and they are
also causing accidents.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, traveling by air should not be
discouraged.
Instead, the use of cars should be limited.
Model Answer 2:
Although some people behave and argue that discourage the use of
international aircraft will not effect the nature. I disagree to large extent
that to use of international aircraft will effect more to nature and uses
more fuel than the cars uses.
Other believe that, the aircraft less time to reach the destination for the
passengers. It is almost right that it uses high speed and make the all
transportation very quickly. Furthermore that aircrafts too huge to
transport the people more than 300 at the time to destination.
In addition to make transportation at the huge platform. It is very easy for

the transportation companies to import and export the materials up to in
the tones. Moreover during the journey, in the bad weather it uses the
technology that makes the aircraft steady at any conditions and keep
passengers safe. Also make to reach them safe at their destination. So it is
not wrong to say by others that it is very useful in today’s hectic life to make
easy and make the world too short.
The formost argument to support my view is using aircraft technology in

today’s world is too dangerous for coming future life. The most important
reason is, it uses more fuel than any other vehicles and produces more
pollution. The first argument is that it makes more noise in the atmosphere
and it is too dangerous for nature. The people who lives near the
airport,they are very frustrate because of the noise created by the aircraft.
It is too costly in the maintenance. Many lives gone because of the plane
crash. The transportation fees are too high than other route transportation.
Apart from this using the magnetic trains is too safe for nature as well as
for the human life too.
Thus, in the light of above discussion it can be summed up that, the uses of
the air crafts is too dangerous for the future life. I believe that make the
transportation easy by using the sea vehicles rather than make it simple by
using the vehicles on the ground level like magnetic trains.
Model Answer 3:
Traveling offers an opportunity broaden people horizons and recognize

about different countries and also cultures. If people are traveling to
foreign countries without aircraft or using other transport, it would be
caused many inconvenience. However, aircraft can be produced more
pollution than other transport and some people suggest tourists are not
essentially using aircraft and should be discouraged. In this essay, I would
like to discuss the influence of taking aircraft in various demands.
In my personal opinion, tourists are imperatived to take aircraft when they

are going to foreign countries, because it waste considerable amount of
time to use other transport and it may take much more expenditure on
their journey, however, I believe there are chemical substances in fuel for
waste gas treatment.
In addition, airplanes offer the tourist a sense of travelling comfort and

satisfaction. They also guarantee passenger arrive destination on time and
report destinations’ weather and news to satisfy their various demands.
However, the influence of pollution over environment should not be ignored.

If we do not confess that our planet is our home, we will never be able to
take adequately care of it.
Model Answer 4:

and education.
Model Answer 5:
The emergence of avian transportation has marked an epoch making for

transporting industry. Behind undeniable prosperities that these fast
distant routes bring back, some environmentalists spark protrusive
concerns about pollution’s issue. however, from my personal perspective the
endeavor to prevent the tourists from traveling to shrink the environmental
impacted level is a inextricable target. in this essay I will elaborate the
radical reasons for this matter.
From the angle of the tourists, the thirty for traveling virtually cover their
consciousness of ambient protection. it is highly rare to find a person who
concerning about environmental consequence due to their transportation
at the point of making decision to get involved in his holiday making by
plane.In fact, the convenience and prompt pleasure that the airline supply
are what they put in priority. With the power to make the passengers
jumping a thousand of kilometers away from their location to remote
destination rendering curious customers a tremendous opportunities to fit
their demand, then constituting a dramatic surge in number of airline
customers annually.
From the angle of the airline industry, it is detrimental to persuade the
capitalists to put down their tremendous benefits from flourish market to
make the compliance of preserving the biosphere. The strongest argument
for this issue would be for the investors who have allocated a huge amount
of money on this fields with highly expectation to yield profits form this
business. Meanwhile, the traveling customers act as core clients who
warrant their consistent operation. The client index plunges are dangerous
signs threatening directly their endeavors an put a million of work force at
risk of being unemployed.
As concerning reasons analyzed above, the initiative of discouraging people

from traveling even though present possible positive effects to environment,
it would encounter with significant obstacles due to reality.
Aircraft uses more fuel than cars and produces more pollution.
Some people suggest the non-essential use of aircraft like
international travel should be discouraged.
Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that the fuel consumed by one long-distance flight is

consumed by a car in
several years’ time, and the amount of pollution it produces is also more.
Therefore, some
people suggest that non-essential flights, including international travel,
should be
discouraged. I totally disagree whit this statement. I feel that even though
cars produce less
pollution and use less fuel, still we should focus on limiting the number of
cars. Discouraging
flights would lead to many other problems.
At a time when people all over the world worry about the decreasing level
of fossil fuels and
global warming, it is right to take action to save the planet earth. However,
to simply
backbone of
Many people are
employed in this industry. Many businesses like hotels and leisure centres
are dependent on
even worse
without jobs.
Air flight also enables intercultural exchanges between countries. The

advent of cheap air
fare makes it possible for people the world over to travel regularly,
regardless of the
different
What we should do is to limit the use of cars. The number of cars is
increasing at a very fast
pace. This is creating too many problems. Cars are using too much of fossil
fuels; they are
creating a lot of pollution; they are leading to traffic congestion on the
roads and they are
also causing accidents.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, traveling by air should not be
discouraged.
Instead, the use of cars should be limited.
Model Answer 2:
Although some people behave and argue that discourage the use of
international aircraft will not effect the nature. I disagree to large extent
that to use of international aircraft will effect more to nature and uses
more fuel than the cars uses.
Other believe that, the aircraft less time to reach the destination for the
passengers. It is almost right that it uses high speed and make the all
transportation very quickly. Furthermore that aircrafts too huge to
transport the people more than 300 at the time to destination.
In addition to make transportation at the huge platform. It is very easy for

the transportation companies to import and export the materials up to in
the tones. Moreover during the journey, in the bad weather it uses the
technology that makes the aircraft steady at any conditions and keep
passengers safe. Also make to reach them safe at their destination. So it is
not wrong to say by others that it is very useful in today’s hectic life to make
easy and make the world too short.
The formost argument to support my view is using aircraft technology in

today’s world is too dangerous for coming future life. The most important
reason is, it uses more fuel than any other vehicles and produces more
pollution. The first argument is that it makes more noise in the atmosphere
and it is too dangerous for nature. The people who lives near the
airport,they are very frustrate because of the noise created by the aircraft.
It is too costly in the maintenance. Many lives gone because of the plane
crash. The transportation fees are too high than other route transportation.
Apart from this using the magnetic trains is too safe for nature as well as
for the human life too.
Thus, in the light of above discussion it can be summed up that, the uses of
the air crafts is too dangerous for the future life. I believe that make the
transportation easy by using the sea vehicles rather than make it simple by
using the vehicles on the ground level like magnetic trains.
Model Answer 3:
Traveling offers an opportunity broaden people horizons and recognize

about different countries and also cultures. If people are traveling to
foreign countries without aircraft or using other transport, it would be
caused many inconvenience. However, aircraft can be produced more
pollution than other transport and some people suggest tourists are not
essentially using aircraft and should be discouraged. In this essay, I would
like to discuss the influence of taking aircraft in various demands.
In my personal opinion, tourists are imperatived to take aircraft when they
are going to foreign countries, because it waste considerable amount of
time to use other transport and it may take much more expenditure on
their journey, however, I believe there are chemical substances in fuel for
waste gas treatment.
In addition, airplanes offer the tourist a sense of travelling comfort and

satisfaction. They also guarantee passenger arrive destination on time and
report destinations’ weather and news to satisfy their various demands.
However, the influence of pollution over environment should not be ignored.

If we do not confess that our planet is our home, we will never be able to
take adequately care of it.
Model Answer 4:

and education.
Model Answer 5:
The emergence of avian transportation has marked an epoch making for

transporting industry. Behind undeniable prosperities that these fast
distant routes bring back, some environmentalists spark protrusive
concerns about pollution’s issue. however, from my personal perspective the
endeavor to prevent the tourists from traveling to shrink the environmental
impacted level is a inextricable target. in this essay I will elaborate the
radical reasons for this matter.
From the angle of the tourists, the thirty for traveling virtually cover their
consciousness of ambient protection. it is highly rare to find a person who
concerning about environmental consequence due to their transportation
at the point of making decision to get involved in his holiday making by
plane.In fact, the convenience and prompt pleasure that the airline supply
are what they put in priority. With the power to make the passengers
jumping a thousand of kilometers away from their location to remote
destination rendering curious customers a tremendous opportunities to fit
their demand, then constituting a dramatic surge in number of airline
customers annually.
From the angle of the airline industry, it is detrimental to persuade the

capitalists to put down their tremendous benefits from flourish market to
make the compliance of preserving the biosphere. The strongest argument
for this issue would be for the investors who have allocated a huge amount
of money on this fields with highly expectation to yield profits form this
business. Meanwhile, the traveling customers act as core clients who
warrant their consistent operation. The client index plunges are dangerous
signs threatening directly their endeavors an put a million of work force at
risk of being unemployed.
As concerning reasons analyzed above, the initiative of discouraging people

from traveling even though present possible positive effects to environment,
it would encounter with significant obstacles due to reality
Teachers used to convey information, but now with wide resources
of information, there is no role for teachers to play in modern
education.
I disagree with the view that teachers have lost their importance in
education because of
the wide resources such as the internet. I firmly believe that teachers are as
important as
before and even more so. In the following paragraphs I shall put forth my
arguments to
support my views.
It is irrefutable that computer and internet have made possible distance

education and on-
line education. In this regard, computers are a boon for the handicapped,
those living in
remote areas and those in job. They can study any time of the day or night
because of the
internet. This has made education approachable for many who cannot for
some reason or
the other attend a college or university.
However, I still feel that teachers can never lose their importance. In
learning and practice
of more complex ideas, the computer is not adequate. It can tell if the
answer is right or
wrong but it cannot tell where the student went wrong. Tasks involving
reasoning cannot be
taught using computers. Moreover, teachers add their own knowledge
gained through
experience to that of books and other resources.
Furthermore, teachers can stimulate interest and it is an undeniable fact

that interested
stimulated people tend to learn more. They can keep students focussed on
study. A student
studying by himself may get bored and stop studying. Teachers can provide
a faster and
simpler way to present information to the students. They can come down to
the level of a
student and so are definitely better than computers. What is more, teachers
are role models
for students. They are scholars in action. They not only teach academic
subjects, but also
many social skills.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that there is no doubt that modern
resources have
changed education from a teacher-oriented one to a student-centred one,
but teachers will
always hold their importance and can never be replaced by any technology.
Model Answer 2:
Having entered an information-explosion era, various information has

jumped into our sight and make it possible for us to aquire more knowledge
than ever possible before. Some people are strongly convinced that there is
no need for teachers in such an information epoch. However, from my
perspective, nothing is more unacceptable than this point of view.
In the first place, some of information shown in the internet or newspapers

is inaccurate and misleading to some extent. Being exposed to those
information, students, due to their immaturity and gullibility, cannot
distinguish which information is truely beneficial for them. Thus, it is
teachers that provide them with a systematic learning, which effectively
prevent them from being led astray.
Another equal point should be taken into consideration is that attending

school and learning from teachers supplies an opportunity to have a face-
to-face communication.Without schooling. students are likely to become
eccentric, isolated and unsociable. In other words, only when teachers play
a role in education can students enhance their capacities of communication,
competition, and cooperation by their teacher’ monitoring and cultivating.
Last but not least, eliminating teachers jeopardizes the equal right. To be
precise, if teachers go extint, unemployment will ensue. In this sense, every
vocation is of demand in society in order to maintain the social balance.
In summary, in spite of a large amount of information available and

accessible to us, it by no means we cannot be inculcated by teachers any
more. Teachers, used to be, are, and are going to be an indispensable role in
our daily life.
Teachers used to convey information, but now with wide resources

of information, there is no role for teachers to play in modern
education.

I disagree with the view that teachers have lost their importance in
education because of
the wide resources such as the internet. I firmly believe that teachers are as
important as
before and even more so. In the following paragraphs I shall put forth my
arguments to
support my views.

education and on-
line education. In this regard, computers are a boon for the handicapped,
those living in
remote areas and those in job. They can study any time of the day or night
because of the
internet. This has made education approachable for many who cannot for
some reason or
the other attend a college or university.
However, I still feel that teachers can never lose their importance. In
learning and practice
of more complex ideas, the computer is not adequate. It can tell if the
answer is right or
reasoning cannot be
taught using computers. Moreover, teachers add their own knowledge
gained through
experience to that of books and other resources.
Furthermore, teachers can stimulate interest and it is an undeniable fact

that interested
stimulated people tend to learn more. They can keep students focussed on
study. A student
studying by himself may get bored and stop studying. Teachers can provide
a faster and
simpler way to present information to the students. They can come down to
the level of a
student and so are definitely better than computers. What is more, teachers
are role models
for students. They are scholars in action. They not only teach academic
subjects, but also
many social skills.
resources have
changed education from a teacher-oriented one to a student-centred one,
but teachers will
always hold their importance and can never be replaced by any technology.
Model Answer 2:
Having entered an information-explosion era, various information has

jumped into our sight and make it possible for us to aquire more knowledge
than ever possible before. Some people are strongly convinced that there is
no need for teachers in such an information epoch. However, from my
perspective, nothing is more unacceptable than this point of view.
In the first place, some of information shown in the internet or newspapers

is inaccurate and misleading to some extent. Being exposed to those
information, students, due to their immaturity and gullibility, cannot
distinguish which information is truely beneficial for them. Thus, it is
teachers that provide them with a systematic learning, which effectively
prevent them from being led astray.
Another equal point should be taken into consideration is that attending

school and learning from teachers supplies an opportunity to have a face-
to-face communication.Without schooling. students are likely to become
eccentric, isolated and unsociable. In other words, only when teachers play
a role in education can students enhance their capacities of communication,
competition, and cooperation by their teacher’ monitoring and cultivating.
Last but not least, eliminating teachers jeopardizes the equal right. To be
precise, if teachers go extint, unemployment will ensue. In this sense, every
vocation is of demand in society in order to maintain the social balance.
In summary, in spite of a large amount of information available and

accessible to us, it by no means we cannot be inculcated by teachers any
more. Teachers, used to be, are, and are going to be an indispensable role in
our daily life.
Some children can learn efficiently by watching TV. Therefore, they

should be encouraged to watch TV both at home and at school.
Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that TV is a very efficient teacher. However, I disagree that

children should
be motivated to watch TV both at home and at school. I shall put forth my
arguments to
support my views in the following paragraphs.
There is no doubt that TV can be a powerful mean of delivering information
and a nice part
of learning process. Being an audiovisual medium more effective result can
be achieved.
What is seen is retained longer in the minds of children. There are some
things which can be
very easily taught by visual illustrations. Even boring subjects like history
can be made
interesting with the help of TV.
However, if TV is to be used as an educational tool then very strict

monitoring would be
needed as to what children watch on TV. All those talk shows and soap
operas we can see
every day are a complete waste of time and can even have negative effects
by distracting
children from their studies. Moreover, the most of so called educational
programmes like
National Geographic cannot replace books and academic lectures because
they tend to
entertain people and have not an aim to give deep and concentrated
knowledge. It is highly
unlikely that TV channel directors would abandon their profits and change
talk shows to
lectures and video lessons.
Furthermore, if children watch TV in school also then their interaction with

the teacher
would be limited. Teachers teach a lot of things apart from academics. They
can come down
to the level of the student and can also stimulate children to learn. What is
more, children
would read less when they learn everything from TV. Reading is an active
activity as
compared to TV which is a passive activity. So, it would be detrimental to
the holistic
development of children.
To put it in a nutshell I pen down saying that, although TV is a very good

educational
medium, it should be used within limits and whatever children learn from
TV should also be
carefully monitored by parents and teachers.
Model Answer 2:
In this high technology era, television as one of sophisticated technology

can provide all information and knowledge that we need. People, especially
children, are able to catch new knowledge without touching a lot of books
and doing something else everywhere that provides television. I totally
support this statement and bring my own reasons.
First of all, television has many beneficial programs, such as BBC and
School TV, for children. So, when children do not have any activities, they
must be better to watch television than go somewhere and do something
useless. For example, half of Indonesian children prefer to stay at home and
watch television after they get their selves at home because few television
programs have useful programs, like Laptop Si Unyil and Dunia Binatang.
When children are staying at home and watching a helpful television
program, they are not wasting their time for nothing.
Then, every year, all of technologies develop to be better than before.

Therefore, the children will be encouraged to increase their knowledge in
order to use their television perfectly because they will not be able to utilize
their televisions if they do not understand how to use it. In illustration, 2
decades ago, people did something hardly when they wanted to change a
channel of television, but now we can change the channel by a controller.
On the other hand, most of television programs show many useless

programs that are not allowed to be watched by children. For illustration,
sometimes we find an appearance which is vulgar and is only intended for
adults. Also, the brightness of television is not pretty good for children’s
eyes, and most of children do not understand how to set it up. So, children
will get damage to their eyes when they spend their time too long in front of
television.
All of all, there are many advantages and disadvantages from television.
Parents only need to pay more attentions for their children whatever the
children do.
Model Answer 3:
There are currently a variety of valuable programmes on television for the

children. The young people are likely to accumulate much more knowledge
through watching television. However, this does not mean that the young
should view television shows at school and home alike will now be
explained.
On the one hand, it is undeniable that a vast number of television channels
are thought to be highly meaningful and knowledgeable for the young to
study. These sitcoms, ranging from the scientific discovery to the social life,
make a remarkable contribution to a treasure of wisdom of a child. By
sitting in front of a screen, not only may the children feel ecstatic and
excited, but they also have the understanding of rewarding lessons that
have not ever been taught at school. For example, my younger brother, a
five grade pupil, once told me that the educational shows on the television
enhance his enlightenment as well as widen his horizon. This enables him to
arouse his curiosity and creativity productively.
Despite the above arguments, I believe that the television should merely be
harnessed for relaxing at home rather than at school. If viewing televisual
programmes is prevalent in the classrooms, the pupils will easily be
distracted as they may conceive the colorful images which they have just
seen at break time. This results in misunderstanding their teacher’s
lectures, and in turn, getting poor grades. Moreover, schools are known as
an area with a range of severely strict discipline, but apparently,it’s
relatively difficult to control every individual students not to cause the
distractions.
In conclusion, I do not argue that the young people should observe what the
television programmes are shown at school although they include an
abundant and precious resource of knowledge.
Model Answer 4:
TV is an immense source of information and pupils can learn and develop

various skills by watching it. But I believe that by allowing students to
watch TV at both school and house can adversely impact on their overall
growth. If children spend too much time in front of TV, it will negatively
impact their health and study.
It is true that TV is one of the prime source of data and information. There
are international and local news channels like BBC, CNBC, Etv Gujarati, Etv
Marathi etc. to keep individuals updated about latest happenings. By
watching TV, children can develop skills in extra-curriculum activities. For
example, Cooking programs teach about how to make new dishes and
similarly, sports events like cricket, football can teach leadership skills,
team building skills, communication skills and many more that can help
students in their future jobs.
But on other hand, watching TV for a continuously long hours can adversely
impact children health. For example, they can get poor eyesight in early
ages of childhood, and also develop back pain. Sometimes, students watch
restrictive programs not allowed for their ages and this can have major
psychological consequences. Many times, students get addictive to their
favorite programs like Cartoon channels, or baseball and easily get
distracted from study during exam period and this can seriously impact
their grades.
In conclusion,I believe demerits of watching TV outweigh its merits and

thus if students were allowed to freely watch TV without any proper
controls by parents or teachers then it would produce more negative effects
on children.
Model Answer 5:
It is said that a lot of children can gain knowledge more effectively by TV.
Thus, It has been suggested that children should spend regular time on TV
in school as well as at home.In my opinion, watching TV indeed can benefit
to the learning of students, however, it has also a variety of negative
impacts on children.
It is undeniable that there are a number of creative and attractive contents

on TV, which are presented by vivid style with audio and colourful images,
these vivid content with interesting display style can stimulate children’s
creativity and imagination, and is more beneficial for children to
understand and absorb the knowledge. Therefore, in comparison with class-
based learning style, this method indeed can promote children learn more
quickly and efficiently to some extent.
Although the advantages of watching TV for children, however, it also

creates a number of negative influences for children not just for this study
but also their health. First of all, children are extremely vulnerable and
immature as the adults do, therefore, they are considerably easily to be
distracted and affected by the content displayed on the TV, so that they are
not able to concentrate on their study, which would generate huge
detrimental impacts on their academic study such as failing to complete the
assignments and so on. Moreover, watching too much TV would affect their
overall health, especially for their eyes, meanwhile, it is considered as one of
main reasons for the sedentary lifestyle for children, which are very harmful
to their health in long term. Furthermore, classroom-based learning is still
regarded as the most efficient and effective approach for children to obtain
knowledge, and plays dominant role during the learning of children. Thus,
children should spend more time on classroom-based learning rather than
watching TV.
In conclusion, although watching TV is beneficial for children to learn

because of the vivid style, however, watching TV can bring about enormous
negative influences on children, so in my opinion, parents and schools
should restrict the time of watching TV for children seriously.
Model Answer 6:
Sitting in front of the screen may not sound educational, however, thanks to
technological development, people can enjoy unlimited range of
informative TV programmes. it is sometimes argued that watching TV on a
regular basis in school and at home can actually stimulate pupils to learn
more. Personally, I strongly agree with this statement.
Firstly, the modern television set can offer a vast number of channels, such
ABC or Discovery, which are designed to actually educate their audience in
the most appropriate way.Thus, such useful channels would be good options
for children education purposes in kindergartens and primary schools. In
addition, watching TV in school can potentially stimulate students’ desire to
attend classes, as this type of activity is less overwhelming than perusing
the textbooks.
Secondly, having TV at home can be even a better substitute to a personal

computer, because it only delivers the material to grasp, while the computer
requires involvement, which can be dangerously addictive. In other words,
the television by itself cannot offer more than the visual information,
therefore, children are not able to play games. In addition, the parental
control system on TV is more developed compared to the one on the
computer. Nowadays parents can actually select the subscribed channels so
that their offspring are not exposed to useless soap operas, for example.
In conclusion, watching TV in school and at home has its clear benefits and
thus would be a new potential measure for children education. By watching
appropriate channels on TV, children could help themselves develop both
emotionally and mentally.
Model Answer 7:
It is said that a lot of children can gain knowledge more effectively by TV.
Thus, It has been suggested that children should spend regular time on TV
in school as well as at home.In my opinion, watching TV indeed can benefit
to the learning of students, however, it has also a variety of negative
impacts on children.
It is undeniable that there are a number of creative and attractive contents

on TV, which are presented by vivid style with audio and colourful images,
these vivid content with interesting display style can stimulate children’s
creativity and imagination, and is more beneficial for children to
understand and absorb the knowledge. Therefore, in comparison with class-
based learning style, this method indeed can promote children learn more
quickly and efficiently to some extent.
Although the advantages of watching TV for children, however, it also

creates a number of negative influences for children not just for this study
but also their health. First of all, children are extremely vulnerable and
immature as the adults do, therefore, they are considerably easily to be
distracted and affected by the content displayed on the TV, so that they are
not able to concentrate on their study, which would generate huge
detrimental impacts on their academic study such as failing to complete the
assignments and so on. Moreover, watching too much TV would affect their
overall health, especially for their eyes, meanwhile, it is considered as one of
main reasons for the sedentary lifestyle for children, which are very harmful
to their health in long term. Furthermore, classroom-based learning is still
regarded as the most efficient and effective approach for children to obtain
knowledge, and plays dominant role during the learning of children. Thus,
children should spend more time on classroom-based learning rather than
watching TV.
In conclusion, although watching TV is beneficial for children to learn

because of the vivid style, however, watching TV can bring about enormous
negative influences on children, so in my opinion, parents and schools
should restrict the time of watching TV for children seriously.
Some people think that schools should concentrate on academic

classes, because they are helpful for future career. And they think
music and sports classes are not useful.
What young people should study at school has long been the subject of
intense debate and
this is a question that certainly does not have one correct answer.
We need to provide young people the best possible chance of doing well at
school. In
traditional curriculum there is a wide variety of subjects with a mix of
academic and non-
academic subjects. In this way a young person is formed with a rounded
education. Non-
academic subjects would include sports, cooking, and music. I believe this is
the best form of
education. A young person should learn things other than academic
subjects. Sport is
particularly important. Young people have to learn to love sport so that
they can be fit and
healthy later in life. If not we will be raising an obese and unfit generation.
I totally understand the point of view that education is so important that

students must be
pushed as hard as possible to achieve their best. It sounds a good idea to
only expose the
students to academic subjects as then they can spend all of their school
hours on studying
areas that will get them into university and good jobs later in life. I just feel
a more rounded
education would produce a better individual. We must remember too that a
lot of people,
maybe even most people, aren‛t academically minded and would benefit
more from a more
vocationally based education. Forcing academic studies onto them would
lead to failure and
the student leaving school too early.
Therefore I agree that although a wholly academic curriculum would suit

and benefit some
young people, I believe that for most students non-academic subjects are
important
inclusions still in today‛s syllabuses.
Model Answer 2:
For long time , Schools main focus have always been more academic in
nature for the greater benefit of children future and have given less
importance to co-curricular activities like sports and music. In my opinion
this should continue as such for coming generation as well because of many
valid reasons, although there are some implications.
First of all, children are sent to school so that they can find good jobs and
settle in life without much struggle. This can happen only when schools
teach them subjects like science, maths, economics and commerce.
Secondly, the world is ever changing because of technological advances and

focus on academic subjects make it easier for children to keep themselves
abreast of those innovations and advances. For example, subjects like
computer science prepares the student to face the modern world of
technology.
thirdly, the children can always acquire skills in music or particular sports
of their interest by taking extra classes or training outside of the school on
their own, unlike academic subjects where you acquire those skills and
formal certification only in schools, so it’s only fair that schools train the
students for what it’s built for in the first place.
However, not all students may be good in academics and may not help them
to secure their future as professionals. Also, the children may not get
dejected or discouraged, if they find out that they are good in some sports
or music and even serve as a seed for them to reflect or channelize this
towards academic areas. So it becomes important for schools to identify
these and concentrate more on non-academic subjects as well.
Nevertheless, for the greater benefit of majority of the children it’s always
better for schools to put more focus on academic subjects to secure their
future, although some children specialty may not be academics.
Model Answer 3:
In modern society, whether children should learn the subjects that have less
link with further career is an issue that arouses controversy. Several
individuals assert that schools should only teach children the subjects which
will benefit them in the future .Personally, Children should learn some so-
called unimportant subjects such as music and sport as well.
It is generally accepted today that music and sports play an essential part
in individual’s daily life so as to the children. When it comes to the
advantages of these kinds of courses, three points should be mentioned. At
the beginning, sports help a child to maintain an active life style and a
healthy body in the future. Meanwhile, according to scientists, listening to
music or playing instruments can develops a higher level of thinking skill
which contributes to children’s capacities of problem solving and
evaluation. More importantly, all these activities can give the children more
opportunities to socialize and build a long-lasting friendship. In other
words, children learn how to communicate and cooperate with others
which will also be beneficial to their career in the future.
However, I admit that learning music and sports may occupy the spare time
of the teenagers. As students have to finish doing all the homework, some
even have to attend after-school classes, they have less time to relax
themselves. Learning other instruments or sports means more tasks and
burdens for them. If the students can not balance these works well, they
may fail to catch up with others in knowledge learning and the school
courses.
In conclusion, personally I think children should learn some courses li
Model Answer 4:
It is undoubtably that today’s world, most promising job offered would

require one to have not only experience but a good academic qualification.
with this almost “mandatory” requirement, children in school are required
to concentrate on academic subjects such as science, economic, geography
etc in order to obtain a good future career and that subject such as sports
and music are not necessary to be learned while some agree on the
necessity to learn those subject, I believe learning sports and music would
enhance one’s performance over academic subjects.
undeniable that in today’s world, no matter of what type of profession that

we choose to dive in, it is rooted from studying academic subjects in school
and that students are bound to study those subjects in order to prepare
them for work life. for instance, if one wish to become a doctor, he/she have
to learn about biology. lets say not an academic profession, but an
entrepreneur, they still need to learn about buying and selling in order to
make a profit, studying human psychology in managing and dealing with
worker which perhaps can be taken from studying economic and human
sciences. in addition, learning varieties of academic subjects allows one to
change career along the way. for example, if a practitioner nurse would
wish to change profession to become an entrepreneur and open up her own
clinic, she might already have the basic understanding of buying and selling
by studying commerce in school. Instead of learning music and sports which
do not allow them to change career unless they want to be a superstar, a
sport star or a music teacher.
however, there is benefit that learning music and sports could bring. Firstly,
student can get bored with stress if they would constantly read and learn
academic subjects. Music and sports allow a student to move, listen and
give them the sense of relaxation. Additionally, when they are relax, their
mind are fresher and this way, they can absorb knowledge better. Not only
that, some research has proven that student who play musical instruments
perform better in academic as when they play their instrument, both side of
the brain is working in which it may help to stimulate creativity.
In conclusion, there are convincing arguments on why students are ought to

study academic subjects. In my opinion, learning academic subject still need
to be kept mandatory but not eliminating music and sports subject as it
would make learning process seems dull.
Some people think that media should not report detail of crimes to
the public.
Sample Answer 1:
Nowadays, we are surrounded by a variety of media like the Internet,

newspaper and TV,
which are very informative, connecting us to the whole world. It is a highly
debatable issue
whether media should report smallest details of crime to the masses or not.
I feel that the
media should be very judicious in selecting what to report and how much to
report. So, I
agree with the statement. In this essay, I intend to support my views with
my arguments.
themselves, rather than
the details of the crimes. To start with, the details of crimes make a
misleading statement to
the children and adolescents who are curious about the process of
committing crimes, and
are likely to copy the criminal actions blindly. Moreover, the excessive
violence and
pornographic contents can also raise the adults’ criminal tendencies. In the
other words,
crime, thus
induce many social problems.
Moreover, the detailed report of a crime does not show enough respects to
the victims and
their family. For example, if any murder or robbery has taken place in
someone’s house
then if it is shown in detail on TV, the whole privacy of those people is lost.
Another very
strong argument in favour of censorship of media is that sometimes this
detailed
description can help the criminals also. For instance, when terrorists
attacked Hotel Taj in
Mumbai, the media reported details of the commandos’ position on TV. This
was also
viewed by the terrorists hiding in the hotel. They changed their positions
accordingly.
However, the opponents claim that we have a right to know every detail
and so media
should report every detail. I still feel that it would lead to more problems. I
think the media
has an obligation to show the right direction to the public. It should report
news in a
balanced manner rather than high-lighting the details of the crime.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that although it is the duty of the
media to keep us
informed, the details of crime should not be shown.
Model Answer 2:
In contemporary society, we are surrounded by varieties of media like

Internet, newspaper and TV program, which are current and informative,
connecting us to the worldwide area. In the meanwhile, the medias also
spark much debate because of negative influences. For instance, the news
about criminal acts which are reported in graphic details, misleading
people to commit crimes.
themselves rather than the details of the crimes. To start with, the details of
crimes make a misleading statement to the children and adolescents who
are curious about the process of commit crimes, are likely to copy the
criminal actions blindly. Moreover, the excessive violent and pornographic
contents can also raise the adults’ criminal rates. In the other words,
crime, thus induce many social problems. Last but not least, the detailed
report of a crime does not show enough respects to the victims and their
family.
Even so, the reports with criminal details maybe bring a well-looking
audience rating, because of the individuals’ curiosity. However, the press
should play a key role as the justicial direction of public opinion. Regarding
of responsibility, the code of ethics is the basis of the whole press, including
journalism and electronic media.
Overall, i think the media have obligation to show a right direction for the
public. It should report news objective and balance, rather than highlight
the details of the crime.
Model Answer 3:
The media has long reported crime. The right of the media to do this is
rarely disputed, but the way in which it does this often comes under
criticism. One issue that has been discussed a lot recently is the amount of
detail that should be publicised.
Those who believe that as many details as possible should be published

point out the demand for such information of the public and the freedom of
information. Many members of the public believe that the more information
they have, the better they can protect themselves from criminals. Those who
believe in the maximum possible freedom of information think that it is
people’s right to be told as much as possible.
I believe that the first assertion may be correct, but that the second one is
not. There are two main reasons why the media should not be given many
details of crimes. The first is that it may alert the criminal to what the
police know and do not know. This could allow the criminal to adjust
his/her behaviour and avoid detection or capture. The second reason is that
giving the media certain details could cause difficulties for the victim,
his/her friends and family, and any witnesses. If you were a witness against
a particularly violent gang, you certainly wouldn’t want your name and
address publicised.
To conclude, I believe that the police should control the amount of

information given to the media and that victims of, and witnesses to, crimes
should think carefully when talking to the media. This is not to say that
crimes should not be reported, only that there is insufficient reason for
many details to be reported.
Model Answer 4:
It is true that many governments have persuaded industries and businesses

to relocate to the suburban areas. While this trend may have several
drawbacks, I personally believe that its benefits are greater.
Admittedly, moving industries and businesses to regional areas is

problematic up to a point. Firstly, not all the workers are willing to leave
their family to resettle in rural areas. Besides, local workers are often
unqualified and thus, in need of training courses. Consequently, companies
are likely to find themselves lacking in skilled workforce in the short term.
Secondly, poor infrastructure in remote areas can make the idea of moving
industries’ location less attractive.
However, the relocation of factories and companies, without a doubt, may

partially help solve many urban problems and improve general living
standards. These movements definitely lead to the flow of workers to less
dense areas which subsequently lessens the burden on public infrastructure
in major cities. As a result, traffic congestion, hospital and school overload
are alleviated and people can enjoy a better life.
Another significant advantage is the decrease in production cost. More

specifically, factory owners can make use of abundant raw materials in the
countryside which often require little or no transportation costs. In addition
to that, rental costs in less populous places are considerably lower than that
in densely populated cities. Eventually, the cost of production becomes
lower, making the final products more competitive.
In conclusion, despite a number of shortcomings, it seems to me that the

change in the location of industries and businesses from large cities to rural
areas is more beneficial.
Model Answer 5:
Recently, there has been a growing concern over the trend of mass media
reporting crimes with too much detail. Some people have made criminal
documentaries in the newspapers and on television a scapegoat for the
increased rate of illegal activities. Because of that, there have been calls for
the government to impose restrictions on descriptions of crimes which
could adversely impact the society. The author supports this stance because
of the following reasons.
First of all, there is empirical evidence and academic research which proves
that newspapers and television can greatly affect their viewers’ behaviors.
Equipped with massive exposure to the public, these media channels are
capable of shaping the attitude of the audiences toward certain topics,
including crimes. Unfortunately, in the pursuit of profit, the mass media
often dramatize criminal incidents to attract more popularity, which, in
turn, desensitizes the public to the horrors of serious crimes, such as
homicide. In the long term, this phenomenon will make people become
indifferent in curbing crimes as well as heartless to its victims.
Furthermore, the ubiquity of criminal stories in the newspapers and on

television has contributed to a conducive environment for prospective
lawbreakers to emulate serious offenses of previous wrongdoers. By
broadcasting such detailed description of illegal acts, the media has served
as a source of training for soon-to-be criminals. Because of that, overly-
specific disclosure of crime acts by the media regularly comes under fire for
arguably being culprit for the prevalence of unlawful activities, in terms of
quantity, complexity and seriousness.
As suggested above, media violence, including the detailed picturing of

violent acts, contributes at least partly to social violence and the audience’s
insensitive behavior. Therefore, the government should limit the ability of
media channels in reporting crimes, by censorship, for example.
Model Answer 2:
Environmental problems such as ice-melting and greenhouse effect have

become severe increasingly in the last decades. Some people argue that only
governments and large companies can address problems while people are too
limited to make a difference on this issue. From my own perspective, not only
authorities and big enterprises have capacities to modify this condition but
also every person can beautify our surroundings neat and tidy.
To begin with, we should shoulder the obligation to take care of our unique
and single earth. If rubbish were thrown here and there, the globe would
become a horrible garbage yard, an irreversible disaster towards the whole
eco-system, which is hardly imagined. By contrast, the entire world would be
altered more harmonious and cleaner atmosphere due to environmental
protection in mind and practical actions.
Furthermore, it’s widely acceptable that citizens’ notions have a positive

impact on governments’ environmental strategy and companies’ decisions.
For instance, the suggestion of saving industrial water consumption aroused
by a region or a union might be applied by governments through enacting
laws to conduct the measure, however, which eventually will be carried out
by single individuals.
The authorities and large firms have the possession to contribute to our
environmental improvement as well. It is companies’ sufficient resources like
wealth, brand influence that facilitates the protection more effectively. They
could raise public awareness easily through some approaches, e. g., Public
service advertising, which people cannot accomplish by one’s aspiration.
Nonetheless, the entire environmental career still relies on individual’s
devotion.
In summary, both parts of powers need to be taken seriously. People acting as

participants bring about the change reflected by the accumulated small efforts
of every citizen. Meanwhile, the government and companies also play a
leading role in environmental challenges. Only by a combination of all sides
of contributions, the world can be ecological, balanced, and peaceful.
Sample Answer 3:
People have long been interested in identifying the forces that contribute to
enhance the surrounding quality. However,whether only governments and
huge size companies can transform the environment.As far as I know, its
benefits are far more overt than its downsides.
Firstly, It is obvious that government have a majority of authorities. Like for

instance,they can take a video that free advertisements about environmental
protection and environment problems to make up citizen. In
addition,government can use tax from civil to employ some worker and
gardener to return back the beauty environment.Such as worker clan out
pollutant from river; gardener cut trees on the road two sides.Therefore,It is
crucial for government build a green surrounding.
Moreover,huge size companies have large fund,and then they invest some
items about improve the environment.There is a good method to support
governments’ items about environmental protection. Besides,big corporations
also support some enormous technical experiments.Let scientists and experts
to improve our environment.
That is not to say that individual can not reduce pollution.Environment

problems as a result in a long time for human activities.So whoever created
the problem should solve it.Of course,no effort is too small when we are
protecting the environment.
In conclusion,human focus on improve the environment plays an essential

role in society, not only governments have authorities to change the
surrounding,but also big corporations invest government and scientist to
enhance the environment.However, people also transform surrounding on
their own.
Model Answer 4:
It is undeniable that governments and companies have their social

responsible.Also,they have more money and facilities,which make the
problem solving more easier.
However,I believe this view to be shortsighted.It is clear that human activities

have had the greatest impact on the environment throughout history.In
summer,we need air conditioner to cool our room.In winter,we need heating
to warm ourselves.We drive to work ,go traveling by train and plane.We use a
lot of papers which are made by trees. Industrial Revolution which bring us
convenient and comfortable life also destroy our environment.Environment
protection is a long-term process that nobody can solve it by themselves.It
need all of us to continuously participate in.
In contrast,the public`s decisions and behaviors have a far-reaching influence

on governments polices and company strategies.For example,if everyone says
“no” to plastic shopping bags and paper cups ,companies who product them
will switch to environmentally-friendly substitutes to survive in the market.
In conclusion,although governments and companies should shoulder their

responsibility to develop a good environment,everyone in this planet have
obligated to try their best protecting their homeland.
Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer

technology can
replace their functions.
Sample Answer 1:
Since centuries libraries are in the service of man. These libraries are the
repositories
of never ending knowledge known as books. Some people opine that we can
do away
with traditional libraries because technology has given us the facility of
virtual or
online libraries. I, however, believe that even though technology has reduced
our
need to go to the libraries, our traditional libraries can never become
redundant.
With the advent of new technologies in the field of computers and

telecommunications, revolutionary changes have taken place in the field of
Library
and Information Science. The shape of traditional libraries containing a large
number
of printed documents is in the process of being transformed to paper less
libraries
containing a large number of digitized documents. The facilities offered by
networking
have not left libraries untouched. Modern libraries are not only digitized but
networked also. This has led to the creation of virtual libraries i.e. libraries
without
walls through which the user has access to information at anytime, anywhere
in the
world by using the modern tools of communications, such as computers and
Internet
facilities.
However, one should keep in mind that a person goes to a library not only to
search
and get information from books but also to sit and study there. The ambience
and the
peaceful and scholarly atmosphere of the library help one to concentrate more
on
one’s work and study. Thus, libraries will never become redundant. They will
always
be there to indicate the presence of a well-read and educated society.
Another important point is that it is very difficult to always read books from
the
computer monitor. Traditional books can be issued from the library and read
in the
comfort of your bed. Virtual libraries can be accessed only by those who are
computer
literate. The access to virtual libraries can be affected by power cuts and
network
failures. Moreover, in a traditional library you are guided by the librarians if
you need
any help in searching for the book.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that advancement should be

welcomed in
every field but the importance of the libraries for their fundamental role
cannot be
put aside. This tendency will add more crowns of success to the importance of
libraries.
Model Answer 2:
Nowadays, a popular issue in our society is whether or not public libraries

should be shut down and replaced by the advanced computer science. Some
people think run a lot of public libraries is a money-couming thing, as far as I
concern, I firmly believed that library should never be imposed fade out from
our society.
There is no denying that the brakethough of computer science bring about

millions adorable effects to our lives. It makes our life more convient ,cozy
and comfy , you don’t really need waste a great amount of time on the road to
a library just for a book, individuals could obtain whatever they want from the
Internet. There has no time and geographical limitation in this new study
resource. Moreover, you may never worry about the send the book back
before the deadline or pay for fines, Internet recources always be free to
download and you could save the materials forever in your hard drives.
However, public library still has large number of merits to some extent. First
of all, a livrary always play a dual role in our society. One is contain the most
reliable learning resources, the other one is it provide a perfect place for
student to finish their assignments or doing some reseachs. By that I mean,
individual could easier access to wonderful academic atmosphere and
sufficient data. Secondly,individual could have chances to make new friends
which may helpful for their current study by exchang learning experience.
This kind of opportunity are rarely can be find if you study alone in front of
the PC. Compaired with only study via the Internet, library not only can make
a contribution to provide a public area for citizen doing self-promotion but
also give a ferfect get away for citizens to enjoy their leisure time.
All in all, just like TV didn’t killed the radio, telephone didn’t killed the letter,
library will never disappear or substitute by computer science in the future.
Finally, I suppose more money should be spend on develop public library
service
Sample Answer 3:
It is sometimes argued that public libraries should not be conserved as they

are money-consuming and no longer serve practical purposes due to the
advances of computer technology. While I accept that computer technology
does help readers in various ways, I suppose that that maintaining libraries is
worthwhile.
On the one hand, I believe that technology advances bring various benefits to
readers. One reason is that as not everyone can have a chance to go to public
libraries and they can find the electronic versions of books on the Internet, so
electronic books seem to be far more accessible than real books. Furthermore,
thanks to a variety of applications supporting reading books on smartphones
and computers, now people can read books whenever they want in a much
more convenient way. Wattpad, for instance, is an useful application on
mobile phones, which allows users to find nearly all kinds of book.
On the other hand, I was convinced that there are various advantages when
keeping public libraries in good condition. Firstly, as written book have long
been a tool for our ancestors to convey knowledge and experience for the next
generations, there should be a place to store these priceless books. For
example, the Bodleian library in the University of Oxford, which is a home to
thousands of ancient books, has become a symbol of internal learning and
inspired many students across the globe. Secondly, since libraries have a quiet
atmosphere, so these are favourable places for researchers and students to
come and study. Therefore, they should be provided with good maintenance
despite the fairly high cost.
In conclusion, it seems to me that maintaining public libraries are necessary

although technology advances have positively revolutionized the way we read
books.
Model Answer 4:
Library is considered as temple of knowledge and it comprises of numerous

books and journals from which one can replete his/her hunger of knowledge.
Nowadays,technology plays a pivotal role in the library but in relation to this
some assert that public libraries should only provide books and should not
waste their money on expensive hi-tech media, such as software, DVDs or
videos. In my perception,the technology within the premises are very
important.
To begin with,over the years,the dynamics of the libraries has been changed
drastically and becomes part and parcel of an individual life.One can fetch
enormous information from one place.Libraries consist of abundant
books,journals,newspapers of different kinds and in addition to this an ample
sitting area to sit and read or study comfortably. In current scenario,the central
libraries become hub for students for studying. In the past,only limited
number of members were allowed to use the facilities of the libraries but
today anyone can use the facilities.Moreover,the involvement of the
technology is a added charm.Internet change the definition of learning
methods and are essential for quick learning. There are many expensive Hi-
Tech media available in the libraries for an illustration,the provision of
personal computers with internet facility,so that one can solve his/her query
by just clicking few keywords. Secondly,the availability of portable media
such as CDs and DVDs,these system helps when any point of time there is a
shortage of books and demand is very high. One could borrow the DVDs or
CDs for a particular interval of time
Moving further,technology attributed to number of factors for an

example.Firstly,fast learning methods through the soft copies. Secondly,
availability of substantial data, Thirdly,the help through internet connectivity
and lastly, personal study cells provided with air conditioned facilities. These
parameters have changed the definition of library rampantly. However the
today’s youth rub shoulders with the fast moving world and development of
technology is one of them. One can not shun the fact that if one has to be
updated, the technology plays a vital role. The libraries in the past were fail to
attract the youth’s because of old methods but with the passage of time
situation changes. The construction and establishment of new technological
friendly libraries attracts not even the youths but also the elderly people. It
can be seen that government is putting their effort by spending lots of money
in the development of libraries and taking initiatives in the welfare of native
universities, by granting immense amount for the construction of libraries
within the premises of the campus. These steps helping the young developing
minds a lot and the expenditure anyhow does not seems wasted.
To recapitulate,I would like to say that government must spend on the welfare
of the libraries, so that the country’s youths could fetch maximum from the
temple of learning and leads the country towards better tomorrow.
With the increase in the use of mobile phones and computers, fewer
people are
writing letters. Some people think that the traditional skill of writing
letters will
disappear completely.
To what extent do you agree or disagree? How important do you think is

letter-writing?
Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that in today’s era of modern technology, many people

struggle to
produce letters and often avoid writing letter altogether. Nevertheless, I don’t
agree
that this skill is gradually disappearing. In this essay I shall put forth
arguments to
support my view and also talk about the importance of letter writing.
Firstly, let us consider the reasons why writing letters is less frequent
nowadays. This
is because of modern technology. These days we are much more likely to
email
someone than write a letter. In addition our business communications have
become
more informal than in the past. As a result a less formal style of writing is
more
acceptable. Other forms of communication such as text messaging have
reduced our
need to write letters even more.
However, in my opinion, there are times when there is no alternative to

writing a
letter. Letters are generally more formal and carefully composed than emails.
This
makes them more suitable for occasions when they are likely to be kept and
re-read,
perhaps several times, by the recipient, as with formal letters of thanks or
sympathy.
In letters provide a written record, unlike telephone calls, so they are also a
better
way of setting out an important or complex argument, as in the official
complaints or
legal matters. Moreover, that time is still very far when everyone will have a
computer
and internet connection. Till that time letter writing can never disappear.
So, it can be seen that letter writing is a very important skill to learn because
there are
many parts of the world where it is very important to be formal. This is
particularly
true if you are involved in international business. Because of globalisation the
business
world is becoming more and more international and it is not always possible
to pick up
the telephone to talk to people. Consequently I believe that letter writing will
never
die out completely. And even though these letters may be written on
computers
rather than by hand we still need to learn and practise this skill.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that there are fewer times when we
need to
write letters than in the past. On the other hand, I feel there are still some
important
occasions when a letter is the most appropriate form of communication.
Model Answer 2:
In today’s world, the technology has improved significantly. Since the

innovative advices such mobile phones or computers has invented, it has
many impacts to human lives in many ways. These gadgets can extend to
human beings, while other agree that it has some drawbacks and can lead to
disappear of traditional literacy skills such as writing letter. From my
perspective, I do agree with this statement for several reasons.
Firstly, sending text via mobile phones or computers is much easier and very
convenient than writing letters. Typing short messages on a handy phone,
sending them and delivering to recipients are spending only a few minutes.
Using technological devices transfer messages can do whenever writers feel
like which are very convenient unlike sending text by tradition ways. With
writing a letter, writers have to actually write down on a piece of paper with a
pen or pencil, enclose with an envelope and attach with a stamp which are
required some time to finish all the process.
Secondly, there are many alternative options from using e-mails and text
mobile phone which are very interesting. These days, writers can be able to
send a large file or attach with some photos or music along with messages
which make a better way for communication. Many happy birthday cards or
some special event invitations can be easily taken by sending e-cards online.
However, with the tradition way of communication, people will not be able to
send messages in other selective options.
Lastly, the use of mobile phones and computers can save a lot of time than
sending letters. If people send urgent messages via letters, It will take at least
a week for recipient receiving messages. However, using mobile phones for
texting consumes only a few seconds and all urgent information can delivery
to a reader quickly. Without the innovative communicating methods, it would
be very difficult to send message in traditional ways.
In conclusion, even though writing letters has sentimental value to recipients,

with the high- tech of devices it has many merits to all communications in the
modern world. Preserving traditional writing letters is very inevitable these
days and it is replaced by all technological methods such as e-mail,
eventually.
Sample Answer 3:
i agree with that due to increase use of mobile phones and computers, one of
the sublime tradition and means of communication no longer recognized in
this technology world. the letter writing skills become extinct from this
modern world. these skills describe as old fashioned.
I personally beleive that the advancement of technology is good for this
modern world by this the distance of kilometers become few seconds.we can
communicate with our loved ones as soon as possible which are not possible
with letter writing.this advancement in communication industry is good for
individual level as well as nation well. by this electronic communications
means nations development increases and they progress economically as well
as socially.
As opinion of other people may be i am wrong because many people dont

satisfied with this fastest world and they want to follow their old traditions.
the latter writing skills is one of tradition of old times .And in schools letter
writing is must in papers. they also said that you cant feel the emotions of
others , who want to communicate in emails, using phones and when you
write for someone in your own language they feel the emotions of writers.
well i dont know how they would proceed.
Actually new generations have to remember these traditions of ancestors as

we also wants our children to follow or atleast know our traditions.letter
writing is important as sometimes we have to communicate in our trade
industry withthese types of formal writing skills and as i say traditions are
meant to remember.
In conclusion of all above discussion advancement in every field should be

accepted as it is requirement of developing countries but we should not forget
our traditions which are the basics as it became obsolete.
Model Answer 4:
Nowadays, the use of mobile phones and computer has become an integral
part of individuals’ lives. However, whether the letter writing would vanish as
a consequence has recently caused a heated debate. My view is that despite
the decline of popularity, letter writing will not be replaced completely.
It is clear that we live in a world where not everyone can afford the luxury of
purchasing and utilizing electronic devices. Some of the underprivileged even
lack access to basic human needs such as food and running water in their
households. Hand-written letter might be their only possible means of long-
distance communication regardless of how technologically advance society is.
Moreover, the formal nature of correspondence ensure the long-lasting

existence of mail writing. For instance, when it comes to rendering legal
documents, were it not for paper-form letter, it would not be likely to get
judgments, awards, indictments and subpoenas served to all parties concerned
every time. Furthermore, the purpose of letter writing has evolved from
delivering message into expressing emotions, which makes letter writing
indispensable especially in the case of love-letter drafting.
That is not to say that cellphones and computers does not have what it takes to
transform letter writing. Indeed, the timeliness and swiftness of instant
message and email is not only evidently conducive to efficiency and
productivity in the workplace, but also helpful for family members to keep in
touch with one another. And on top of that, a considerable amount of delivery
cost would be saved. But still, none of the above provide sufficient ground for
disappearance of letters.
In summary, while modern communication seems to be a perfect alternative,

letter writing is still used in some fields for its formality and courtesy and
carries more intimate emotions when applied in personal life. Such unique
features make it irreplaceable in the foreseeable future.
Model Answer 5:
Text messages, emails and letters are everyday communication tools,
although nowadays, text messages and emails appear to gain popularity while
letters are used less frequently. The fears that writing skills will be attached
with less importance are rooted mainly in the concern that the growing
popularity of mobile phones and computers is about to make emails and text
messaging much more popular. Such worries are unsupported.
A majority of daily communications involve written correspondence, whether

it takes the form of emails or letters. As different from communicating in
speech, communicating in writing requires a large number of techniques. The
prevalence of emails and text messages will not change the purposes, contents
and conventions of communication, but merely medium, font or sentence
length. For example, successful written communications are normally
measured by clarity and accuracy, two elements that remain unchanged
despite the upsurge in the use of text messages and emails. An email or text
message sender should pay the same attention to such elements as vocabulary,
grammar, punctuation, wording and tone as a letter writer does in order to
make sure that the reader understands and interprets the message as intended.
Any misunderstanding or misinterpretation will cause dire consequences.
Another fact to note is that all communication is interpersonal and interactive,

thereby requiring information senders to use language properly and convey
messages clearly and precisely. In order to become a successful
communicator, one should plan, tailor, and devise his or her writing
according to the characteristics of the reader. Writing a message without
considering the intended reader will increase the possibility of poor
understanding or even misunderstanding. For example, choosing the right
tone in communication is of great importance. Readers
make assumptions about people’s mood and intentions and speculate on the
implied meaning of the messages, according to the tone suggested by words.
Getting the right tone is therefore an important writing skill that is likely to
influence the success of communication. It is particularly true in cases where
the messages people send contain emotional components. Failure to
manipulate these components properly will cause discomfort or hard
feelings of the reader.
The examples that are outlined above have apparently overturned the
prevailing notion that writing skills will vanish sooner or later as a result of
the increased use of text messaging and emails. Written communication
requires a good understanding of the rules of language, such as grammar,
vocabulary and tone. Without a good command of those writing skills, a
communicator will encounter many awkward situations in daily
communication.
The society would benefit from a ban on all forms of advertising because
it serves no useful purpose, and can even be damaging.
Sample Answer 1:
Advertising in modern society is ubiquitous – on the radio, TV, the internet

and in our
letterboxes. While advertising has many disadvantages, the positive influence
of
advertising outweighs the negative. So, I disagree that there should be a ban
on all
advertisements.
It is true that advertising provides us with information on new products. If it

were not
for electronic and print advertising, many products would not be bought. In
this way,
advertising provides an important service to manufacturers and some
consumers.
Additionally, it fuels the advertising industry, creating jobs for thousands of
people. In
this respect it has the backbone of many economies of the world.
Furthermore, advertisements touch social issues. For example, when Amitabh

Bachhan tells people to bring their children for pulse polio immunization,
people
listen. Then there are ads against female foeticide which are very informative.
Advertisements also teach a lot about the country from where the ads come.
This is
because through satellite TV we can see ads from all over the world. When
we see a
Japanese advert of a lady in a kimono, we come to know about the clothes of
Japan.
However, Adverts also have a downside. Television commercials are a great

example
of this. Just as we are enjoying a TV program, a commercial break occurs,
forcing us to
listen. Advertising can also promote consumerism. People can become greedy
for a
new product and they can become discontent with what they already have. In
the
end, the consumer is never really satisfied, always wanting ‘newer and better’
products. Then, ads show dangerous stunts which may be copied by children
and they
may get hurt. Finally, some ads target children and so children pester parents
to buy
things which can upset the family budget.
On balance, I believe that as every rose is accompanied by thorns, ads too

have their
disadvantages. Overall, the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages. So we
should
not ban ads. The government can, however, ban some ads which show stunts
or which
make false claims.
Model Answer 2:
It is a fact that advertisements are now widespread on mass media. Some

people believe that these do not serve any beneficial purposes and even spoil
the society. There should be an advertising restriction to hinder their negative
impacts on customers. So everything has its own pros and cons that’s why
someone rightly said that all that glitters is not gold.
It is understandable that people want to remove advertisement from our lives

because advertisements can be disturbing, therefore the pumping out of
advertisement on the internet is distractive when doing research online and
insertion of ads during TV dramas and movies is obnoxious. Moreover,
advertisements are sometime misleading and cause impulsive purchase thus
the exaggeration and eye-binding techniques employed in the advertisement
overshadow the true function of product and the consumer, especially the
young people, would fall victims to this intensive commercial completion.
On the other side, it is irrefutable that the proponents of advertisement argue

that it is unfair to ban advertisement because it is the only efficient and viable
way to shoe their products. If advertisement is eradicated then link between
products and consumers would be cut off. Without advertisement, companies
would find it hard to reach out to their customers. Consequently, the gaint
companies would manipulate the market and small companies would never be
known by the public. Furthermore, advertisement provides more options to
consumers.
To put the sea into vessel, I pen down by stating that advertisement is
disturbing now and then, there is realistic need of it. Government should
make them more trustworthy. Nowadays, advertisement is an inescapable and
necessary existence.
Sample Answer 3:
There is no denying the fact that advertisement plays a vital role in human
life. Advertisement is the backbone of commerce and industry. It is a source
of information as well as the source of entertainment. It is important for us.
These days are the days of marketing. We cannot think of life without
advertisement. Without advertisement life is like a fish without water. No
businessman or industrialist can ever hope of tapping the market without
proper advertisement. Advertisement is all around us on television, radio and
newspaper.
Apropos to above parable about conversation, many people hold the opinion
that advertisement is important part of our life because advertisement are the
best way to educate the people. For instance, they inform the people about
new products, their uses, merits and other similar products available in the
market. Moreover, many advertisements are issued by the government
agencies, NGOs, and social welfare organization which have great value in
education the people. What is more, advertisements raise the standard of
living of the people.
On the flip side, those who disagree to this point of view mention that those
advertisements have their disadvantages because they distort and exaggerate
reality. In addition to it, they aim at profits. Furthermore, another objection is
that many advertisements are bad for that they provide the wrong information
to the people. Besides this, the producers have become profit hungry. They
throw the moral values to the winds.
To put the sea into vessel, I pen down by stating that advertisements put deep
influence on the people’s mind. Some advertisements advise to the people to
direction on the right path. Good advertisements help the people to choose
right or wrong products.
Model Answer 4:
In the present age, we cannot watch television programs, go shopping and
browse the Internet without being flooded by various advertisements. So,
some people fell worried about this trend, and express a strong desire to
inhibit all forms of advertising because they firmly believe that
advertisements are nothing but useless and even damaging. Personally, I think
this view is over generalized.
Admittedly, one of the main purposes of advertisements is encouraging

potential customers to buy products or services. It is true that quite a few
people are persuaded by some commercials, which may consist of stunning
pictures, special effects and strong messages, and then impulsively buy the
product that they may not really need. In this respect, money and time is
wasted because of the existence of advertising.
However, the obvious benefits from advertisements cannot be denied. We

search the price of products before shopping and generally try to find the
cheapest one with same quality. At this point, commercials help us save
money by providing information on markets and properties of products. In
addition, excellent advertisements do boost the sales of commodities, and thus
increase the business profit, and even employment. The overall effect of this
is the progress for a nation, or more broadly for the world.
Away from these serious concerns, not all advertisements are posted for
commercial purpose. Some advertisements, also called public service
announcements, help inform the general populations of social issues, such as
blood donation, immunization program and environmental protection. Charity
advertisements play a significant role in getting more funds for helping those
unfortunate people, who still have to face the danger of starvation and
homelessness.
In conclusion, we do get benefits from both business as well as non-business
advertisements. So, it is unwise to ban all forms of advertising just due to
some disadvantages.
Model Answer 5:
Advertisements have dominated our lives as a result of the development of
media. Seeing the effects of advertising on people’s behaviors, some claim
that advertising of all forms should be prohibited completely. This suggestion,
however, need to be examined carefully and rationally.
It is true that the invading of advertisements to people’s lives causes some

serious problems. Body image phenomenon in female young children and
teenagers, in developed countries, is rooted from tons of cosmetic
advertisements appeared everywhere, leading to eating disorders or deviant
behaviors such as focusing on making-up at school rather than on studying.
Hence, they usually fail in the academic performance and have some
chronically physical issues. These impacts on children and teenagers are
warning.
However, advertising is also beneficial our society due to its effectiveness. It

is considered the quickest method of raising donations for natural tremendous
destructions as well as other charity campaigns, in which companies can show
their responsibility for their community and still have the opportunity to
promote their products. A television program with sponsorship from
companies, which use their logo or slogan to advertise, is the most effective
way to gain money for misery victims of floods or typhoons.
Also, advertising ensures the operation of all media. Although it is intrusive,

distracting and pervasive, advertising is the main financial source to support
media. News, sports programs, entertainments of all means, and free websites
would be not available without subsidies from advertisements.
In short, advertisements are evil, but necessary. We cannot simply ban all
advertisements, but need to strictly regulate potential harmful advertisements.
Some people claim that public museums and art galleries will not be
needed
because people can see historical objects and works of art by using a
computer.
Do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Sample Answer 1:
It is irrefutable that nowadays, because of technology, arm-chair tourism

through
which we can see historical objects and works of art on a computer, has
gained
popularity. However, I disagree, that public museums and art galleries will no
longer
be needed. In fact, I believe that their popularity will grow even further.
First of all, computers can never replace real public museums and art
galleries. No
matter how real and vivid computer images are, they are only images and can
never
be likened to the historical objects and works of art that we see in real or even
might
be allowed to touch with our fingertips. The difference can be compared to
seeing the
picture of a mango rather than actually eating it.
Secondly, visiting real museums and art galleries is a rewarding experience in

many
respects. For one thing, it is a good exercise. While we are making the trip to
a
museum or art gallery and then strolling about on site, we get some exercise
which
does a lot of good to our health. We generally go with family and friends and
enjoy a
lot. We also learn about the culture and tradition of the place. All this
broadens our
horizons which can never be done by the passive activity of seeing something
on the
computer screen.
Finally, I believe that after seeing these objects and museums, our craving to
actually
see these increases even more and so we make efforts to go and see these
places. This
can be proved by the overwhelming number of tourists to these places that has
been
increasing year after year. At certain times, especially when it is temporarily
impossible for us to visit museums and art galleries in person, we can get a
rough
picture of what are on display on site. However, what we see from a computer
screen
is, after all, not exactly the same as what we see and feel with our own eyes
on site.
In conclusion, arm-chair tourism is there today but museums and art galleries
will still
be needed
Model Answer 2:
The view of shutting down of Public art galleries and museums in wake of
advances in Information technology seems to be an absurd idea to me. These
places play a great role in sensitizing the masses about history, civilization
and other aspects to which they are devoted. From my perspective, the
technology can only supplement them and not replace them.
Admittedly, the advances in the computer and internet have revolutionised the
way people work and access various things. Using this wonder, man can
access any information electronically from the remote location and even view
the exhibits displayed in the art galleries and museums from his bedroom.
Nevertheless, viewing them on screen is certainly different from seeing them
in person from the convenience of one’s home. On screen, one can feel the
exhibit through only one sense that is vision, however, at the actual place he
can employ his other senses, like touch, too to make it more rewarding and
memorable experience; which is very hard to get on screen. Learning about a
mummy electronically is not the same as knowing about them by paying visit
to Pyramids of Egypt or British National Museum.
Besides, archives and Art galleries help the visitors to get the feel by
organizing various activities requiring their participation. Some times the skill
sessions are organised to help the visitors learn the art. As it is said that ‘A
picture is worth thousand words’, In the similar fashion it can be concluded
that actual object is no match to the image/video on screen.
It can be summarised that computers may offer the convenient way of getting
the information on rare objects or art forms but the can never be a substitute
of exhibition halls and art galleries.
Model Answer 3:
It is sometimes argued whether the powerful computer science and internet

could replace public museums and art galleries. I believe new technologies
could only work as supplements as appose to replacements.
I believe people who would like to appreciate historical objects and art works
online usually find it is convenient to do so. Firstly, one can search for an
object by just typing a few characters, and the result would come out
automatically. Secondly, unlike museums and art galleries whose opening
hours are fixed, people can access the information online at anytime they
want. Thirdly, with the scanning technology developing, now we can see
more details of a historical object or an art work. For instance, people can
zoom in or zoom out a picture to see the texture of a piece of painting which
sometimes is even hard for naked eyes to see.
However, I also believe that all the benefits of the computer and the internet
cannot diminish the necessity of public museums and art galleries. In order to
help visitors learn more about their exhibits, museums and galleries would
hold various activities, such as hiring musicians to play music with the
instruments which are in display. In addition, since the computer screen size
is limited, seeing an item in its original size in person is a totally different
experience from seeing it on screen. Also, sometimes the museums and
galleries would allow visitors to touch a certain exhibit or a replica so that
people could not only see the texture but also feel it by themselves.
In conclusion, my view is that new computer technologies are not substitutive

for public museum and art galleries.
Sample answer 4:
I tend be at variance with the opinion of doing away with the Museums and
art galleries and to acquire the information online. As I opine the advocates of
this view seems to have exaggerated the abilities of computers and
undermined that of archives and exhibition halls.
The museums preserve objects of historical, scientific or artistic importance

and act as repository for the people to learn about them. Most of the times,
the exhibits are rare and hard to find in the day to day life and to learn about
them people often pay visit to such places. Besides offering them with the
relevant information such visits not only break their monotony of life and
rejuvenates them but promote the place, where it is situated, as tourist
destination thereby benefiting both the locals and authorities. These benefits
would fade away if these are done away with.
Though using tools of information technology all the information can be

remotely obtained from the convenience of home. Nevertheless, viewing
onscreen can never match the feel that one can have by visiting such places in
person. On screen one can only use his sense of vision, but in the exhibition
hall other senses can also be employed to get the better insight into other
aspects of the exhibit.
As it is well said that ‘Walking a mile is worth reading thousand books’, in

the same way museums and art galleries provide the rich and rewarding
experience that can not be secured by passive activity of surfing the internet.
Eventually, it can be concluded that computers can certainly be used to

know about rare objects or various art forms but it is going to be hard nut to
crack for computers to replace these place. Indeed, they can only compliment
the museums and art galleries and not take their place.
Sample Answer 5:
We live in the age of computer and Information Technology and with the tap
of our fingers we can get virtually any information we need. The recent 3D
presentations and 360 degree views of museums, art galleries, streets, oceans,
hills and virtually any place of the world are quite fascinating. This fire up the
debate whether we really need to have public places like museum, art
galleries or establishments like these as people can easily view and know
about historic objects and art works using a computer. Personally I quite
disagree with the given notion and believe that online information can never
replace the needs of having real museums and art galleries.
First of all, only when we have museums, at galleries, exhibitions, or

collection of historic objects and art works, we can present them online.
Without the existence of museums and galleries, online collection of historic
objects or works would never have existed. Second, museums and art
galleries preserve the real objects while online presentation has nothing to do
about preserving those invaluable works and objects. Moreover, museums and
galleries are maintained by a group of experts who knows which objects or
works are historically important and decide to preserve them. On the contrary,
websites and online resources are often run by ordinary people and
maintaining online authenticity is not always possible.
Again, museums and art galleries offer first-hand experience to the audiences
and viewers and represent the history, tradition and important art works of a
country. The computer based information of an important historic work or
object can never do the same. Online information about any particular art
work or historic object is a great way to learn about it but it can never be
compared with human experience of observing them personally.
Finally, museums and art galleries have great attractions among tourists and
their online version can never actually generate a huge revenue that a real
museums or art gallery would do. Children of schools might enjoy learning
about arts, history etc online but unless they personally witness those, they
will never become enthusiastic about history and art.
In conclusion, online presentation of historic and art work is a good way of

letting people learn more about them but it is quite unrealistic that they would
replace the real establishment of museums or art galleries around the world.
Model Answer 6:
Undoubtedly, museums and art galleries have great role to play to connect the
masses to their past or know about their culture, tradition or other aspects to
which the place is dedicated and hence are indispensable. The view of using
the computer in place of them sound like ludicrous/ preposterous thought to
me.
I have reasons to believe so. Firstly, such places offer tremendous features
that passive activity of computing can not offer. Museums and art galleries,
offer a rich and gratifying experience to the person that is hard nut to crack
for electronic forms. The feel that a person can have by interacting with the
curator of the museums/gallery, touching sculpture, observing the intrinsic
details of the exhibit can not be secured electronically. Such visits often put
an indelible impression on one’s mind and the information so acquired tend to
be more detailed and long lasting.
In addition to providing details about the exhibits, such places help the
individual to come out of his hectic schedule and have some time for himself,
family and friends thus serving as social and recreational activity too.
Further, such places develop as tourist destinations; that promote the local
business and thereby benefiting both locals and authorities.
Finally, it can be summarised that though computers can provide the required
information without stepping out of your study(room) but still they can not
replicate the physical museum and art galleries rather can supplement them.
Model Answer 7:
There is a view that because of the rising of computer technology, it is not

necessary for public museums and art galleries to afford objects and works to
citizens. Personally, I can hardly agree with this opinion.
It is understandable that establishing a museum or an art gallery needs costly

expenditure, such as spending on constructions, employees and facilities.
Excessive consumption of social resources leads to the increase in the
pressure of country and government. Obviously, being able to use the
computer science to show up the exhibitions and art works makes government
throw into other areas to develop.
However, admitting the possible effects of this policy is not the same as
supporting the entire argument. In fact, inside the modern society, museums
and galleries take center stage. They provide a unique interactive experience
for people to close to the things only see in the books, on the websites or
televisions. Undoubtedly, the perception you get of something from a second-
hand source is completely different from the one you get when you see
something with your own eyes. In addition, museums and galleries play a
significant role in attracting tourists and therefore are instrumental in helping
the local economy in terms of tourism revenue and offering local people
employments. What’s more, visiting to the museum and gallery is more
reasonable than their computer counterparts because of the reliability. There
has been an increase in the number of web-based information that will feed
misleading things. By contrast, looking round in a real place will bring you
authority and realness.
By way conclusion, with the importance of the museum and galleries,

computers cannot totally instead of their role and function.
In many countries traditional foods are being replaced by international

fast foods.
This is having a negative effect on both families and societies.

Sample Answer 1:
In this era of technology and globalization, all spheres of life have changed
dramatically and
food is also no exception. I agree that international fast foods and restaurants
have eaten
up traditional foods and cuisines and this has had a detrimental effect on
families and
societies. A number of arguments surround my opinion.
There are a lot of detrimental effects on families. Firstly in this torrid pace of
life, people are
working till their death. They have no time to prepare and enjoy traditional
home cooked
food. Ultimately, they switch to an easy option of restaurants. McDonalds
have become a
ubiquitous term in every home. Secondly, there is the influence of occidental
culture over
the oriental one. People are forgetting their roots. For example, in earlier
times all family
members used to sit together and eat, and over the dining table they shared
their
happenings of the day. These fast foods are eaten alone mostly because they
don’t appeal
to the palate of the older members. As a result, family bonds and relationships
are getting
vague. Moreover, the art of home cooking is suffering a lot.
Admittedly, this trend has harmful effects on individuals. Undoubtedly,

people are affected
by health hazards like obesity and other diseases. Obesity is the root cause of
many other
diseases. Fast foods are rich in fats and salts which are not good for health.
An obese person
is more likely to suffer from diseases like hypertension and diabetes.
There are tangible consequences on society too. Broadly speaking, as people

get inclined
towards fast food and restaurants, local culture dies out. It is because
traditional food is
inextricably linked with culture. Undoubtedly, the identity of the society and
nation will
disappear. It will be monopolized by western societies. Also, if people are not
healthy, the
productivity of the nation will come to a standstill. Last but not least, fast
foods promote
use-and-throw culture which adds to the problem of garbage dumps,
contamination,
pollution and eventually many diseases.
To put into nutshell, I pen down saying that international fast foods have
carved their niche
and traditional food has taken the backseat. Certainly, this has adverse effects
on
individuals, families and societies.
Model Answer 2:
Eating fast food has become a commonplace for the general public in this day
and age. People are enjoying the fast service and delicious food products,
such as KFC and pizza-hut. However, I am of the opinion that this
phenomenon has negative impact on domestic lives as well as communities.
Firstly, the proliferation of fast food satisfies the needs of working families
who are characterized by irregular working hours, allowing them to eat at
anytime and anywhere. Despite the convenience of international franchised
food industry, the consumption of this type of food would undermine the
family bond. People are less likely to spend on time family meal. Since
cooking at home allows family members to gather frequently and exchange
their opinions on the table, and most likely, to resolve the conflicts among the
different family members. In the contrast, if people choose not to eat at home
habitually, this would probably weaken their emotional ties between each
other.
Secondly, in spite of the economic benefits that stems from fast food chain,
such as the increasing demand for meat products, it has inevitably posed a
threat to the society. For one, the consumption of fast food is believed to have
a strong correlation with healthy issue. For example, compared to traditional
cooking method which emphasize a balanced diet, fast food such as fried
chicken are regarded as one of the key contributing factors to obesity and
overweight. For another, the cultural erosion can be partially attributed to fast
food. Since young people are less likely to be exposed to authentic family
meal. As a result, traditional cooking skills and culture may be on the brink of
extinction with the passage of the time.
In conclusion, fast food does not only pose threats to family relationship, but
also to people’s health and cultural aspects, although it has changed our living
patterns and stimulated the local economy.
Model Answer 3:
With the globalization and international trade facilities, international fast food
brands are present in almost all major cities around the world. Fast food
chains like Domino’s Pizza, Pizza Hut, Burger King, Starbucks, KFC and
McDonald’s are quite popular among the people in all continents. It is true
that the international fast foods are gaining more popularity while they are
replacing the intake of traditional foods in many countries. In my opinion this
trend has severe negative consequences both on our family and society.
First of all, people love to eat fast foods. Thus Pizza, Burger, Pepsi, Sandwich
etc. are more popular among teens, office employees and other people than
the traditional foods they have. The number of fast food shops is growing
everyday and this is quite alarming. With the busy lifestyle people are solely
relying on fast food items than preparing traditional foods at home. In a busy
city someone scarcely wants to spend time preparing foods for the family
while s/he prefers to order fast foods from home. Thus we have fast food
shops in every corner of our city-streets while many city dwellers do not have
time to prepare traditional yet hygienic and organic foods at home. As a
consequence we already have a society where overweight is a common
problem. For instance, according to the recent statistics published by the
healthcare ministry, every child out of 15 in our country is suffering from
some kind of weight related problems and fast food is the only reasons for
that.
Second, fast food is the reason we see increasing number of obese people in
our community. They diet habit is directly related to our physical and mental
health and reliance of fast food is destroying the overall health of our new
generation. Thirdly, the fast food items have little hygiene and lots of fats and
this is one of the reasons people suffer from so many diseases these days. An
ill or overweight child is sometimes a burden for a family. Food preparation
and having meals together in a family is a tradition that not only brings family
members together but also ensures their sound health and relationship.
However, the international fast foods are decreasing our family bonding on
one hand and they are severely deteriorating our health on the other hand.
Finally, society and country have to allocate more budgets to treat the ill
population while our reliance on fast food will only increase the number of ill
people in a society. From this regards, international fast food chains is a great
headache for any country. Traditional foods not only represent the tradition
and value of a society, but also offer the best nutrition and healthy ingredients
to us. On the contrary, international fast foods destroy our well-being by
decaying our health slowly and also generate a fast food loving new
generation that will suffer from numerous diseases and will have little respect
on their own culture and tradition.
In conclusion it is a very pressing issue that we are relying more on fast foods
than preparing traditional foods at home. This has so many negative
consequences that individuals as well as government should take quick and
effective steps to revert the dreadful trends of eating fast foods.
Sample answer 4:
Over the last years, the local food in several countries around the world is
supplanted by fast food. Presently, a proportional of people believe that this
phenomenon is dangerous to the families, individuals and the whole society.
While others ponder that, this trend is beneficial and could be lucrative to the
country. Here, I would like to account for both the views with my own
perception.
Multifarious points shore up the formal view. First and foremost,

consumption of fast and junk food is related to the health problems. In fact
there are several medical studies that prove the strong connection between
fast food and certain diseases, such as high cholesterol, obesity and so on.
What is more, the relations within the families are affected by this trend. In
other words, for long time ago, the families are enjoyed to gather around the
food table, so these gatherings are lost nowadays as many people prefer to eat
outside their homes. Moreover, traditional cuisine is considered as a cultural
heritage of a country. thence, replacing the local food by international fast
food is harmful to the cultural identity of the nation.
On the other hand, some people are supporting the latter view. Firstly, in
these days, as many people are need to work round the clock. The fast food is
becoming a good choice for a large number of the families, as both parents
are working for long hours in the day. Thus, these fast food preserve time and
effort for many families. In addition to that, the fast food restaurants are
creating more jobs in a cities, thus, it will help the economy of the whole
country. Lastly, people in large cities are exposed to the stress and tension of
the noisy fast paced life, so it is worthwhile for them to enjoy the different
types of fast food in a restaurant during the weekends.
In conclusion, undoubtedly, both the views have their own significance. We

can neither support nor go against either of the sides. But, still, I believe that,
the traditional food is an integral part of a society and should be supported
and preserved.
Sample Answer 5:
Nowadays, there are many fast food restaurants on the streets and they are
always full of people from children to adults. It has posed a terrible threat to
traditional foods’ place and some argue that it has a negative effect on family
life and the society. As for me, I agree with the opinion above.
It is undoubtedly true that fast foods bring much convenience to people’s life.
In today fast-paced life, time is measured by money which is cruel but
realistic. It is common for freshmen in the company work overtime or stay up
late at home to complete the mission. They often choose fast foods during the
break, easy and quick, where the traditional foods can not compare to.
However, there seems to be more drawbacks than benefits.
To begin with, fast foods are gradually shaking the base of the society.
Traditional food is one of important parts of social culture, marrow of
Chinese history. It is carried on from generation to generation which hold
people’s connections together, deepening emotion among people. But it is
replacing by fast food and disappearing in people’ life. This will definitely
influence cultural inheritance and national cohesion.
In addition to damage to culture, fast food will probably affect negatively

family’s harmony. Previously, it was an enjoyed time for a whole family to
eat food made by them, sitting around a table. Such food may be simple but
full of love. While now, fast food is not unusual on board and people lose the
opportunity to cook together to communicate with each other and lose the
interest to talking about the food. Food is rarely a method of transporting love
in a family but something to est.
Personally, fast food has appeared along with the development of the society.
We could not ignore its benefits. But it is much urgent and important for us to
save traditional food and emphasize its significance to us. What we should put
in the first place to choose is will traditional foods.
Model Answer 6:
More and more families now subsist on fast foods supplied by international
restaurant chains such as KFC and McDonalds. In fact, many families have
forgotten the art of traditional cooking. In my opinion, this is a negative trend
with far reaching consequences.
The food that we eat plays an important role in keeping us healthy. Home-
cooked traditional food is healthier than restaurant food for many reasons.
Traditional cooking methods are developed by communities over a long
period of time. There are several benefits to sticking to this style of cooking.
To start with, foods prepared in traditional ways keep us healthier. Also,
traditional cooking uses locally grown ingredients. This eliminates the need to
import fruits or vegetables from far-away places.
The fast food culture has not only caused health problems but also killed the
family bonding over meals. When families sit around a table enjoying a meal,
it strengthens relationships. Nowadays in many families children and adults
just sit in front of the TV and eat from fast food packets held in their hands.
This does not help their health or their equation with others in the family.
Fast food consumption has several implications on the society as well. The
prosperity of a society depends upon the health and well-being of its people.
When people develop health problems because of their bad eating habits, the
government and medical insurance companies will have to cough up huge
amounts of money to cover their medical expenses. The government will pass
that cost on to the public by increasing taxes.
To conclude, societies all over the world are falling prey to the fast food
culture. This has several negative implications. It is high time the government
and the media created awareness about this growing menace.
Model Answer 7:
Nowadays, fast-food is the common solution when people all over the world
are seeking a quick and easy meal. However whether eating fast-food meal on
a regular basis will lead to various problems remains a controversial issue. I
agree with the view that despite its convenience, eating too much these junk
food will definitely put negative impact on the families and societies.
First, it is obvious that fast-food is low in nutrition, but high in sugar and
calories. Eating these food regularly can cause severe health problems such as
heart disease, diabetes and even cancers. Therefore families should be aware
of these effects when determining whether fast-food is safe to be included in
the diet, especially when some members are suffering diseases already.
Moreover, fast-food will indeed pose a threat to the traditional food culture in
many countries. As fast-food is easy to cook, and can be seen everywhere,
people would like to eat outside instead of doing home cooking. As a result,
after generations, citizens in the countries will become much unfamiliar with
the traditional food recipes, which is a great loss.
That is not to say that these restaurants should be banned completely. As they
are internationally standardized, foods are under strictly quality control and
thus relatively safer than most of other food. But honestly, compared with the
shortcomings, these merits are unfortunately meaningless.
In sum, eating too much these popular junk food will be harmful both to
consumers’ health and holistic society; meanwhile, these restaurant do not
needed to be closed but to limit to a small scale. Only by doing so can we
ensure that we will have convenient and diversified food.
In the past, lectures were used as a way of teaching large numbers of

students, but now with the development of technology for education,
many people think there is no justification for attending lectures.
Sample Answer 1:
I disagree with the view that technology has reduced the need to attend
lectures. I
firmly believe that going to college or university and attending lectures is as
important
as before and even more so. In the following paragraphs I shall put forth my
arguments to support my views.

education
and on-line education. In this regard, computers are a boon for the
handicapped,
those living in remote areas and those in job. They can study any time of the
day or
night because of the internet. This has made education approachable for many
who
cannot for some reason or the other attend a college or university.
However, I still feel that technology can replace the need for going to the
classroom.
When students attend lectures, they learn from teachers. In learning and
practice of
more complex ideas, the computer is not adequate. It can tell if the answer is
right or
reasoning
cannot be taught using computers. Moreover, teachers add their own
knowledge
gained through experience to that of books and other resources.
Furthermore, teachers can stimulate interest and it is an undeniable fact that

focussed on
study. A student studying by himself may get bored and stop studying.
Teachers can
provide a faster and simpler way to present information to the students. They
can
come down to the level of a student and so are definitely better than
computers.
What is more, teachers are role models for students. They are scholars in
action. They
not only teach academic subjects, but also many social skills. Finally, when
students
attend lectures, they have interaction with other students which gives them a
sense of
competition to study more.
technology has added many new ways to reach education to students, but
attending
lectures will always hold its importance.
Model Answer 2:
Nowadays, the strong development of technology affects to the large numbers

of people, including teachers who use technology in teaching. There are both
benefits and drawbacks, but in my opinion, the benefits outweigh the
drawbacks.
On the one hand, using technology in teaching causes along many

disadvantages. The most negative impact is that the school might invest
heavily in classroom facilities. To illustrate, they must spend a lot of money
on buying computers, projectors, attractive whiteboards with high cost, and
they might construct some new building to contain those devices. An
additional problem is that older lecturers who always use traditional methods
of teaching often lack technological skills because of the difficulty of using
new devices. Another minus can be seen that if teachers only use technology
for teaching, the interactions between teachers and students will be reduction.
This can be explained by the fact that the face-to-face lessons might disappear
of the face of the Earth.
Despite these cons, however, I think that the pros are more important. The
most crucial positive effect is that online lessons enable students to study
anywhere and anytime. Specifically, they can join a class to study via a
smartphone or a computer connecting the Internet. Another good point is that
teachers could use some fantastic software to prepare their lessons with vivid
image and sound effects such as using PowerPoint, Virtual screening of
Chemical Library… Last but not least, students can do the tests or exams via
computers without written by hand.
To sum up, in spite of its many minuses, the pros of using technology in
teaching are more significant. The schools should invest modern technologies
into teaching and learning to improve the quality of education.
Model Answer 3:
Although lectures are normally used to teach students knowledge, there has
been an argument that students no longer need to attend lectures, due to the
development of technology. Personally, I think that lectures deserve a place in
the education system.
Instead of attending lectures, people can depend on computers and the internet
to improve learning outcomes. One benefit of using social networking
websites is that they can keep the pace of learning by themselves and manage
to make the most of time and resources. This educational model is important
especially for those people who have work commitments. They are likely to
outperform in the related area easier.
Another approach to replace lectures is to register for online courses, and this
can help people pursue a higher educational qualifications. Online courses
provide people with opportunities to gain access to knowledge without paying
educational expenses. In this way, they are more likely to pursue a university
degree, especially for those from disadvantaged backgrounds.
On the other hand, attending lectures plays an inevitably role in preparing

people for their future career. It offers an environment where students are
encouraged to communicate with each other and build up a network of
contacts, which is beneficial to improving their interpersonal skills. This can
help them make a transition to the workplace.
To summarise, I believe that attending lectures remains the most important

way for students to acquire new knowledge and achieve good performance,
although technology and the internet are likely to make learning more easily.
Model Answer 4:
Consistent with the continuous popularization and extensive application of

modern science and technology, education tends to be increasingly reliant on
technology. As more and more subjects can be taught via computer, there
would seem to be less and less need for traditional lectures to be present.
However, modern technology will never replace lectures because it is only a
tool which can help schooling.
It is no doubt that new technology such as computers or even mobile phones

have their own benefits on education. It makes possible study at any
convenient time and location at a personal speed and intensity. Take families
from the remote areas for example, rather than breaking up families by
sending their children to the city center, education authorities have been able
to use the Internet to delivery schooling online. The mass usage of new
technology also provides possible universal access to information, which
contributes to the convenience of study.
On the other hand, however, such new technology can never take the place of
lectures because it lacks interaction. Machines not only lack the ability to
answer all the questions in terms of different individuals but also lack the
flexibility to cope with very specific problems.
Different from those new technologies, lecture, being one of the traditional
ways of educating, has its advantages too. Large numbers of students sitting
in the same classroom provides good opportunities for the teacher and
students to communicate. Students can ask questions at the end of the lecture
and they have the possibility to discuss with each other when problems arise.
In conclusion, without suggesting that new technology is definitely good, I

think it is by no means ‘unjustifiable’, in any way, to maintain the lectures
alive in the present day.
Model Answer 5:
Technology has played an important role in bringing innovations in every

field of life. It has also changed methods of teaching. Although, use of
technology in teaching has many advantages, yet it has some disadvantages
too. Both sides of the use of technolgy in teaching are discussed in the
following paragraphs.
The first and foremost advantage of using technology in teaching is that it has
made teaching very easy. In this modern era, teachers spend less time on
writing on black board as compared to the traditional methods of teaching.
For example, in old methods of teaching, the teachers used to spend majority
of their time on writing on blackboard and then explaining the concepts.
Computer presentations, projectors and lectures through videos has made the
task of lecturers very easy. For instant, a teacher only explains the difficult
concepts while using a recorded video lecture.
Another advantage of the use of new technology in teaching is that it saves

time. As a result, a teacher can teach a large number of topics in a very small
time. This is due to that fact that time is not wasted on writing, rather the
teacher focuses on explaining the concepts. This takes far less time than the
traditional approach of teaching.
The use of technology in teaching is not free from disadvantages. In order to

use the technology more effectively in educational institutions, we would
require teachers and lecturers who have up-to-date knowledge to use the
technology as well as competencies in their own subjects. Due to this
requirement, universities and colleges may face difficulties in hiring excellent
faculty. For example, many excellent teachers may not have awareness or
adequate knowledge of using technology in teaching.
To summarize, technology has made the task of teachers and lecturers very
easy. However, to use the technology effectively , the teachers must have
considerable knowledge of using modern tools in educational institutions.
Model Answer 6:
As we move into the twenty-first century, technology is affecting many

different areas of life and education is no exception. Indeed, in some
institutions traditional forms of education have been revolutionised by new
technology to the extent that the lecture is no longer the main method of
delivery. While there are a variety of benefits to this new approach, there are
also significant drawbacks.
Perhaps the greatest bonus of the introduction of technology is the flexibility

it offers. This is evident in two different ways. Firstly, it is now no longer
essential for students to be present in the lecture theatre for their courses. This
means that part-time courses for adults who are in employment and distance
learning courses for people in other countries are now much more practical.
Another area of flexibility is of course that the lecturer and tutor are able to
use Moodles, interactive whiteboards and other tools to deliver their courses
in a more stimulating way to large numbers of students.
Not everything, however, about the introduction of this new technology into
education is positive. One major problem is that not all students are
comfortable with using technology, even if they are part of the digital
native generation. This is a serious issue as they may suffer from their lack
of technological skills. Another related issue is that education is a human
activity and it works best with as much human interaction as possible.
Impersonal technology cannot replace the human contact found in
traditional face-to-face tutorials and seminars.
As we have seen, there are major benefits to the introduction of technology

into education, not least because it enables modern forms of education such
as distance learning courses. This is balanced, however, by the fact that it can
be too impersonal for some and disadvantages others for their lack of
technological skills.
Model Answer 7:
Traditionally, lectures were given in large rooms to accommodate equally

large audiences. With the advent of modern technology, this arrangement is
being challenged by the option for students to attend class online. However, it
is felt traditional lecture hall talks are beneficial to students and will never
completely be replaced by the Internet. This will be shown by looking at how
both the theatrical nature and possibility for face-to-face debate during an in-
person lesson cater to the learning experience of an individual in a way that
technology simply cannot.
Firstly, lectures provide students with an element of theatre, which can be

positive for their education. For example, while studying at university in
Canada, I was once involved in a course that was televised in my city. During
the first semester, I engaged in the classes solely by watching this broadcast
from home and found myself to become quite lethargic and unenthusiastic
regarding the content. However, during the second semester I was informed
that as a registered student I could attend the classroom sessions of the same
course and discovered this change revitalized my interest in the topics being
discussed. As my experience shows, being present for a lecture physically can
have positive effects on students.
In addition to this, classroom lectures allow students to strengthen their wit

and abilities as orators and this is not possible on the Internet. For example,
although university classes usually have an online forum to provide a context
for debate, this medium does not completely replicate the challenge faced
when presenting and defending ideas in front of a live audience. Thus, the
idea that traditional lecture-styled learning is less effective for students than
more modern methods can be debunked.
After analyzing how traditional in-class lessons benefit the academic process,
it is felt that this style of learning will never be replaced entirely by
technology.
(Same Topic: When people move to another country, some of them decide to
follow the customs of the new country. Others prefer to keep their own
customs. Compare these two choices. Which one do you prefer?)

Writing Ielts Task 2 Tong Hop Theo Dang de

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Writing Ielts Task 2 Tong Hop Theo Dang de

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Writing Ielts Task 2 Tong Hop Theo Dang de

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TỔNG HỢP WRITING IELTS TASK 2

TỔNG HỢP PHẦN ĐỀ

1. The 21st century has begun. What changes do you think …

2. Some sports are extremely dangerous but……….

3. History tells that people have often thought about creating an

4. Some languages are increasingly spoken in different countries

5. For some people shopping is not just about buying what is

6. Nowadays for many people the Internet is replacing regular books

7. Today, majority of children are raised by their grandparents

8. Small shops in towns and villages are closing and replaced

9. Competitive sports like football are considered to add a lot of value

10. Films can have effect on the children’s education

13. Some people think visitors to others countries should imitate

14. Some people think that cultural traditions may be destroyed

15. Nowadays, some universities offer graduate students skills that

16. Some scientists believe that studying the behaviour of 3-year-old

18. In many countries, good schools and medical facilities are

20. Some people think history has nothing or little to tell us

24. Some people think museums should be enjoyable places to attract

26. Some people think that personal happiness is directly related to

29. Air transport is increasingly used to export types of fruits and

30. Many developing countries are currently expanding their tourist

31. It is known to all that the technological and scientific advances

32. Some people think that studying in a college or university is the

33. Many countries spend a lot of money in art

34. Some people think children’s spending time on TV, video

36. Unemployment is getting increasingly serious in many countries

38. The number of cars keeps increasing, so road systems should be

44. Some people support development of agriculture, like factory

46. Some people think the main benefit of international cooperation is

2. Some people say that parents should control their children’s

4. Some people believe that tourists should accept social and

5. The world would be a much poorer place without colour

6. Tobacco is a kind of drug. People have been free ….

7. Wild animals have no place in the 21st century…

8. People try new dangerous sports such as sky-diving ………

11. Everyone should stay in school until the age of eighteen…

13. In companies, promotions to high positions should be given to

14. Animals should be kept in men made cells

17. Do you agree or that improvements in technology reduce the role

18. Food can be produced much more cheaply today because of

19. Leisure is a growing industry, but people no longer entertain

20. The advantages brought by the spread of English as a global

21. The government is responsible for protecting a nations cultural

29. The speeding up of life in many areas such as travel and

31. The main purpose of public libraries is to provide books

33. It is more important for a building to serve a purpose than to look

38. Housing shortage in big cities can cause severe social

39. The best way to solve the world’s environmental problem is to

41. Earlier technological developments brought more benefits and

43. Multi-cultural societies, in which there is a mixture of different

45. A country becomes more interesting and develops more quickly

46. Throughout the history, male leaders always lead us to violence

47. Individuals can do nothing to improve the environment Only

48. Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer

52. In many countries traditional foods are being replaced

53. In the past, lectures were used as a way of teaching large