agree or disagree

Sample Answer 1: Band 8

Everyone has their own opinion and concerns; I think that art is also an important aspect of life. We human beings are social animals. We need things that inspire us to help each other and live together. There could be many reasons why the government should spend money on arts and also why they should not. In my opinion, art is as important as any other sector and should receive government support.

There are several reasons why the government should spend money on the arts. One of the main reasons is that art reflects the culture of a country and promotes people’s understanding of their culture and architecture. Most of us are oblivious to our ancient cultures and traditions, and we look up to art to learn about our culture and heritage.

Secondly, the government should invest in art as it acts as a revenue factor too. For example, people from outside the country come to see the historical buildings and by maintaining its artistic legacy, a country can encourage tourists to visit again and again. This practice boosts the tourism sector and eventually the economic growth of a country.

Thirdly, the art sector employs many people. For example, artists like singers and dancers have a huge fan following. Their shows are watched by thousands of people. Such events employ hundreds of people. Without government funding, many art forms will die down and that will be a huge loss for the country.

However, spending on arts should not be at the expense of other sectors like education, healthcare, or defense. Those are certainly more important and hence should receive funding too, but I believe that the art sector should not be neglected too.

To conclude, I believe that the government should distribute its funds evenly to all sectors including the arts because every sector has its contribution to the development of a country.

---

Structure of the essay

You were given an opinion essay which means you had to pick a side. So,

• Do you agree that the government should spend less on the arts?

              or

• Do you disagree that the government should spend more on the arts?

Once you pick the side, you can start planning your essay and then writing it.

Don’t forget to state your opinion on it.

Introduction

Question Paraphrased – Everyone has their own opinion and concerns; I think that art is also an important aspect of life. We human beings are social animals. We need things that inspire us to help each other and live together.

A thesis statement – In my opinion, art is as important as any other sector and should receive government support.

Body Paragraph 1:

Topic: Central idea: Art reflects the culture of a country.

Supporting points:

• Most of us are oblivious to our ancient cultures and traditions, and we look up to art to learn about our culture and heritage.

 Body Paragraph 2:

Topic: Central idea: The government should invest in art as it acts as a revenue factor too.

Supporting points:

• As all students are different and have different fields of interest, it should be left to the students to pursue their field of interest whether it is maths, science or arts, and drama.
• Some students love maths and physics, pursue a career in engineering, some love science, and biology, pursue a career in the medical fields, likewise some love music, dance, or drama and tend to pursue a career as a singer, musician, dancer, or actor.

Body Paragraph 3 :

Central idea: The art sector employs many people.

Supporting points:

• This practice boosts the tourism sector and eventually the economic growth of a country.
• Such events employ hundreds of people. Without government funding, many art forms will die down and that will be a huge loss for the country.

Example:  People from outside the country come to see the historical buildings and by maintaining
its artistic legacy, a country can encourage tourists to visit again and again.

Body paragraph 4

The other side of the argument:

• Spending on arts should not be at the expense of other sectors like education, healthcare or defense.

Yet you believe that your side is logical or right.

• Those are certainly more important and hence should receive funding too, but I believe that the art sector should not be neglected too.

Conclusion

I believe that the government should distribute its funds evenly to all sectors including arts
because every sector has its contribution to the development of a country.

---

Some people think that museums should be enjoyable places to entertain people, while others believe that the purpose of museums is to educate.

Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Sample IELTS Essay Evaluation

Although many people believe that the sole purpose of a museum is to educate people about history and culture, while (1. GR issue) others want museums to be a place of entertainment so that young people can be attracted to them. I firmly believe that some educating as well as entertaining games could help people in learning about their ancient history in a joyful fashion. (2) (In learning = learn. Write in fewer words. Also, why restrict your response to ANCIENT history only?)

1. It is incorrect to use “Although” and “While” constructions in the same sentence. The correct sentence, in this context, is: “While many believe that museums are meant to teach history and culture, others prefer them (= museums) as a source of entertainment for youngsters.” Listen to voice notes shared via WhatsApp. Note the use of pronouns as referencing device.
2. Education + Entertainment = Amalgamation/ merger. “I firmly believe that the amalgamation of the two functions will help people learn about history in a joyful fashion.“

On the one hand, there is a group of people who consider museums as a place of learning about cultures and visualizing a glimpse of history. (You’ve already MENTIONED this in the introduction. This sentence is the same as the first sentence of the introduction. This will cost you bands in LR. Just begin with HISTORY.) Clearly, museums are the only source of visualizing the fragments of history that have been carefully preserved for posterity. They are vital for the identity of cultures and traditions (Humans have an identity. Cultures do not. LR issue. Wrong choice of words.) since they are evidence (MUSEUMS are not an EVIDENCE. Artefacts preserved in them are. LR issue.) of what was (Wrong tense. GR issue) happened in the past and how any a civilization evolved. (3) Moreover, students can also get help from museums to validate their study which they acquire (You can acquire knowledge but not study. The correct construction should be “to validate the events they have read in books“) from books so that they can enhance their knowledge and score well in exams. (Coherence issue: How does VALIDATION improve their knowledge and enhance their score? Cohesion issue since the IDEA is not well explained.) Thus, museums help people to know about their history and also aid students in their academics.

3. Note that you have not explained the first point (visualizing history) and moved to the second point (identity). This will cost you bands incoherence as you MUST explain the point you’ve raised earlier to build a strong argument. “Clearly, museums are the only source of visualizing the fragments of history that have been carefully preserved for posterity. While history books can teach about events through text, museums are the only place where we can watch the past events through the lens of artifacts such as clothes, pottery, utensils, and weapons of the people who lived in an era. For example, in the National Museum of Egypt, we can see the pieces of bricks that ancient Egyptians used to build homes and bridges.”

On another the other hand, there is a school of thought who (4) considers (Subject-verb disagreement) museums boring and wants (subject-verb disagreement. GR issue.) them to be a place of entertainment. (How can a SCHOOL of thought find something boring? Humans can. This seems weird.) (5) If they remain uninterested (6) are not interesting to people, then nobody would bother to visit them and will eventually lose a chance to know about their (Wrong pronoun. NOBODY = singular. THEIR = plural. A plural pronoun can’t refer to a singular noun. GR issue. In fact, there is no need of a pronoun here. The sentence is complete even without that.) history. It is borne out by the study conducted by Times magazine that ninety percent of people never visited visit (NEVER = true in the past, present and future. The correct tense in this context is not the past tense but the simple present tense.) museums since they consider them dull. Hence, in order to attract people, some role-playing games can be played (avoid repeating words.) employed there (of course they are employed in museums.) which would increase the footfall. (7)

4. Wrong pronoun. The correct pronoun to refer to a non-living thing *SCHOOL of thought” is “WHICH.” Also, “SCHOOL” is singular. So, you should write “CONSIDERS”

5. Note that there is no CONNECTION (coherence) with the previous paragraph. Also, this sentence is similar to the first sentence of the introduction. Let me show a way of connecting the two paragraphs. “Despite their educational benefits, (link with the previous paragraph) museums needs to be interesting the attract crowds and remain economically viable.”

6. Wrong use of “uninterested”. Uninterested = not interested. Only HUMANS can afford to be NOT INTERESTED in something. Non-living things can’t do that. They do not have emotions to express interest.

7. Your response is too general. Make it more specific. What do you mean by “role-playing games”? Can you give a few examples? The City Museum of Singapore, for instance, engages students every year to act in various war scenes of the country’s independence movement. The scenes of war between the colonial British forces and the Singapore National Army attracts huge crowds.

To recapitulate, I believe the entire purpose of museums ought to be educating (avoid weird constructions. These do not fetch you bands. Rather, they carry the seeds of a possible mistake.) is to educate people which can also be achieved via some entertaining games.

---

Sample IELTS Essay Evaluation

 

Due to globalization, the (You’re not referring to SPECIFIC cultures. The use of the article “the” is incorrect. GR.) different cultures start overlapping and people start begin (word repetition in the same stem. LR.) wearing the same type of clothing (people begin wearing similar clothes). While some people consider this as a progressive development, others believe that this trend is dangerous for the diversity of cultures. I agree with the former view because it brings people from different origins together and made makes (Parallelism issue – GR. “IT” does 2 things – brings and makes.) them easy to gel.

To commence with, (You’ve already commenced with the introduction. Please do not use the standard phrases given in the usual IELTS books. This cramming will reduce your score.) the trend of similar type of attire is more prevalent in the urban cities (cities are urban. These are never rural. LR issue.) due to the employment provided by multinational companies. Since these organizations are international, so (do not use “so” with “since”. The cause and effect statement is structured as: “Since X, Y”.) they expect their employees to wear the same attire such as formal clothing like their foreign clients. (1) With a similar fashion sense, it is easy to develop (You’re not developing a sense of fashion. Just use a pronoun to refer to the developments in the previous sentence.) It ensures proper understanding and trust among the employees and with (2) the clients since they don’t feel alienated. For example, a potential client would be reluctant to do business with those who wear traditional clothing because it will show the cultural gap. (You can write better by being more specific.) For example, a French client visiting a Japanese factory will invariably feel comfortable in discussing business only if everyone follows the same cultural norms in terms of dress, food and language.

1. To score better, you can structure this sentence with a different set of words. “Since these organisations operate in multiple countries, they demand their employees to follow the same dress code.“

2. You can’t develop trust AMONG two things. AMONG is used in context of more than 2 things. EMPLOYEES can be more than 2. Either write: “trust between employees and clients” or “trust umping employees and with clients.”

Moreover, similar clothing could save one from the (You’re not referring to a specific type of racial discrimination. GR.) racial discrimination if he lives in a foreign country. Some people, especially natives, (3) cause harm to others if they find another person of different by race, color, and dressing style. Thus, for safety purpose, it is crucial for an individual to avoid wearing its (wrong pronoun to refer to a human being) his ethnic wear so that he could easy gel in public. For an instance, the (You’re referring to ALL international students and not a specific set. The use of this pronoun is incorrect.) international students easily caught catch attention due to distinguishable ethnic attire and are, (poor connection between clauses. Connect the two using “AND”) thus, more susceptible to racism. (4)

3. “especially natives” is not a part of the main sentence. This is just an example of “some people”. It needs to be separated from the main sentence using two commas. GR issue.

4. This is not a strong example. You need to learn the art of writing specific examples. “For instance, wearing a rural Indian dhoti-kurta or a traditional Japanese Kimono in New York can attract racial slurs due to relatively strange clothing style for the natives.“

To recapitulate, I believe the trend of people carrying same outfits is positive because it facilitates ease of business and provides safety from racial discrimination. 

---

Sample Answer evaluation

Over the span of the last two centuries, the advances in science, especially in medical science, are the most significant in the world. However, (Wrong use of “However” – 1) some people opine that advances in the other critical fields like computer science and technology are outstanding. I disagree with them and believes believe (subject-verb disagreement) that breakthroughs in health science made an enormous impact on human life span and quality of life.

1. “However” is used to express contrast within a context. Example: Eating sugar gives instant energy; however, it causes diabetes in the long run. Here, you are not expressing contrast within the same context. The correct sentence structure should be: “Though some people opine that compeer science has revolutionized the modern world, I believe that medical science has made a greater impact by increasing longevity and quality of life.”

Due to the (This is NOT specific research you’re talking about) continued research in medical science, scientists (2) are able to invent new life-saving drugs and other medicines which prolong human life. These drugs (Tenses mistake. GR.) are were absent in ancient times due to which the mortality rate even at the age of 30 was very low high (Mortality = death; Also, the mortality rate of whom? At what age?). In the 16th century, millions of people were (Tenses mistake. GR.) died due to Egyptian flu since they didn’t have the access to these drugs antibiotics, and antiviral drugs (make your response more specific. This also helps you avoid repetition of the word “drug” and improved LR score.). Whereas, a million lives have been saved by injections such as Remdesivir to fight against from new newly (Emerged = verb. Only an adverb can qualify it.) emerged novel Coronavirus.

2. A subtle but important point. “Scientists” do research in medical science through which they make inventions. Your sentence seems to express those scientists make inventions DUE TO the research of someone else. Correct structure: “With continuous research in medical science, scientists …..” Need to change the modifier’s structure.

Moreover, medical science is doing great in increasing (A more appropriate word in the context of “quality of life” is IMPROVING) the quality of life of patients especially in the field of prosthetics. With the help of artificial limbs, people (Which people? “physically disabled people”) can live a normal life and are, thus, contributing contribute (do not change tense form. This violates the “rules of parallelism”. LIVE is parallel to CONTRIBUTE.) equally to society. They are no longer dependent on others to live their life. For instance, drivers who lost their legs in severe accidents are working normally with the help of motion-sensor operated prosthetics and are driving vehicles despite their disability. Hence, advances in medical science are aiding people like these to improve their lives. (This sentence does not add any value and merely counts as a repetition of the ideas expressed earlier. Leave the conclusion for the last paragraph.)

In conclusion, I firmly believe that breakthroughs in the field of medicine and prosthetics have decreased the mortality rate and have improved quality of life of people by miles and can be considered as the most significant advances in this (“Contemporary” includes the word “this”. Contemporary world = this world.) contemporary world.

---

Sample Answer evaluation

While recruiting for a job, many recruiters employers (avoid repeating the word ‘recruit‘.) ask the applicants for personal information such as personal (unnecessary + repetition) interests, hobbies, and relationship status. Although some people argue that such information is entirely irrelevant to the company as it has no direct relation with the work output, others believe that it can be useful to judge the personality and responsibilities of an individual. I favor the latter view.

Hobbies and interests reveal the true identity of an individual. If a person is involved in sports activities such as football or cricket, it means he is physically active and energetic. Such individuals often have a sharp response to the office work and are able to complete their tasks in time. Moreover, knowing the marital status of the job applicants helps the company to judge the family responsibilities on them, which enables them to predict helps in predicting (pronoun usage. One pronoun can refer to one noun only. Avoid the former pronoun to prevent confusion.) their availability for over-time or work-emergency situations. Many startups hire people who are willing to work extra-time and can attend calls after their work-time. So, they prefer recruiting people who are single.

On the other hand, some people think that this personal information is of no use. Interests and hobbies have no impact on the performance of an individual. If an employee is interested in arts and another employee likes playing cricket, you cannot judge their work-passion on the basic basis of the type of their hobbies hobby. Additionally, applicants with marital status as single do not ensure his extra-time availability as he can have a busy daily routine may not devote extra time to the company as he may be more interested in pursuing his hobbies than spending time with clients. A single individual could may have daily hangout plans with his friends, while a married person can have more time as he stays home most of the time. Thus, relationship status is not a criterion for such judgments.

To recapitulate, I believe while personal information is not an efficient criteria criterion for work performance, it can help an employer help the employer to get some useful insights into the personality traits of an individual.

---

Some people believe that if a police officer carries guns, it can encourage a higher level of violence. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. You should write at least 250 words.

Sample Answer 1: Band 8

Many people believe that a police force armed with guns encourages the level of violence in society. Other people maintain that an armed police force deters the level of violence. I think it really depends on how the guns are used by the police.

The obvious argument for having armed police centers around the idea that the show of guns by police is in itself a deterrent to violence. Citizens who may be contemplating an act of violence will be reminded that their own safety and welfare may be jeopardized if they are caught committing a violent crime by police. Thus, having an armed police force can in fact discourage the committing of crimes and violence within a society.

On the other hand, armed police officers’ use of guns may escalate violence instead of deterring it. If a police officer shoots at a suspected criminal, that violence may breed more violence, as the criminal might shoot back, and then the police officers, the criminals, and even innocent bystanders could be injured or killed with the gunfire. ieltsselfstudy.com

To sum up, most citizens expect the police to protect them by any means necessary, including guns. If citizens are not confident that the police are protecting them, those citizens might then decide to obtain guns to protect themselves against other citizens and the police. So, in those instances guns will lead to more guns and violence will breed more violence. However, if police officers are properly trained as to how and when to use guns, the guns they carry should provide a deterrent to the level of violence in society.

---

Model Essay 2

In some countries, the police force carries guns to fight against lawbreakers and protect the innocent. However, some people hold the view that it would give rise to a higher level of violence. As far as I am concerned, only when guns are used properly under certain supervision, can they serve to protect citizens?

Undoubtedly, guns are one of the most powerful weapons that the police can use to maintain social security and stability as it is the best deterrent to potential lawbreakers and scare off the would-be criminals. If the police force carries guns in the public, there is a possibility that the potential criminals may give up their plans, thus reducing the crime rate. In addition, the police can use guns to protect themselves as police officers are one of the most dangerous jobs in the world. They need to protect themselves when they face criminals who are using weapons.

However, the application of guns can pose potential risks. First of all, it may lead to the abuse of weapons, especially in some western countries where ordinary people have the right to buy guns. Secondly, there is a possibility that the police may hurt innocent citizens accidentally when they pick the wrong targets, which also leads to social chaos. Thirdly, if every police officer carries a gun and walks in the street, people will lack a sense of security and society will have a horrifying atmosphere. ieltsselfstudy.com

To conclude, the police can hold guns, but they should be very careful to avoid the abuse of guns. At the same time, the police must be trained strictly before being allowed to Carry Weapons.

---

Model Essay 3

Police officers carry guns and that is part of their job. They are entrusted with the job of enforcing law and order in society. When criminals carry guns, can we expect our police force to carry out their duty without the help of guns? Police officers do inspire society. Children, especially, have a fascination for the police uniform and the gun. Does this cause an increase in violence in society? Well, that is debatable.

Because police officers carry guns and use them as and when necessary, it might give the impression that carrying guns is fashionable. It might also give the impression that guns are necessary for the maintenance of peace. In that case, it can be said that gun-toting police officers inspire violence.

Now let’s take a look at the other side of the argument. The duty of a police officer is to enforce law and order in society. During the execution of their job, they face a lot of challenges. They have to deal with people of different kinds. How can we expect an unarmed police officer to effectively deal with a situation that might itself be violent? The gun, though it may be a sign of violence, is a necessity in situations like these. It also provides some security to the lives of our police force. When criminals are armed, police officers too need to be armed. That is essential for the effective execution of their job. ieltsselfstudy.com

Looking at both sides of the argument, it is safe to assume that the gun is a necessary evil that the police force can’t do away with. What we need to do to reduce the incidences of violence is to create awareness about their ill effects.

---

Model Essay 4

I disagree with the statement that an armed police force would promote a greater degree of violence. A number of arguments surround my opinion.

My first argument to support my viewpoint is that guns would, to a large extent, deter the potential criminals’ Police officers are those who are responsible for taking care of all the citizens, safety and wearing guns could largely make sure of this. For example, if someone has the intention to commit a crime, he would think twice about doing so if there are police carrying guns on patrol. Therefore, the level of violence would decrease rather than go up.

Secondly, criminals usually have guns and so, police officers need them in order to control crime. Instead of taking guns away from the police, it is more important to make laws against the general public having guns. Countries with weak or ineffective gun laws, or countries bordering such countries, like Mexico which has strong 8un laws, but virtually no way to prevent them from being smuggled over the border from the U.S., need a police force that is not only armed but is armed better than the criminals.

Opponents claim that police in the U.K. are able to go without guns and also have crime in control. They have a point but I believe that crime in the UK is under control because they are able to control the flow of guns to the general populace. Therefore, I reiterate my point that the police force should carry guns.

To sum up, because criminals can easily come into possession of guns, therefore the police force needs to be armed. Armed police in itself could never be a cause of increased violence. Nations around the world should hope to someday reach the point where their police force can afford not to carry guns and still be effective.

---

Model Essay 5

On account of a series of commotions happening recently in a wide range of countries, a significant number of people consider those police officers carrying guns on patrol would promote the grade of violence. However, I am opposed to this perspective.

Police officers carrying guns and walking around are less likely to encourage the level of violent crimes. Police officers are responsible for deterring the latent criminals and taking care of all the citizens’ safety, which could be largely guaranteed by gun-carrying action. For example, some people may intend to commit a crime(=break laws/do something illegal), but there is a higher possibility for them to quit taking action if they are aware of the serious consequence of meeting gun-carrying police. In this regard, the level of violent crimes tends to descend, and thus the standpoint that police officers carrying guns will encourage the level of violence will not hold water.

Conversely, some people insist that police officers taking guns on duty would inevitably raise the level of violent crimes. Robbery is a major case in point. If someone intends to rob a bank for money and they are entirely aware of the situation that police officers are equipped with guns, they are likely to make sufficient preparation for having a gun battle. If they were to fire, there would be significant losses in terms of innocent people’s properties or lives, and this will probably jeopardize（ the stability of society. However, if police officers are constantly on alert for any possible emergency and potential threat, there would be slim chances of committing a crime.

In conclusion, I have the inclination to maintain those police officers carrying guns would substantially decrease the level of violence rather than increase it.

---

Model Essay 6

It is often believed by a few sections of society that the violence rate will rise if police authorities carry a weapon. However, some people, including myself, completely disagree with this view. I feel that to reduce the crime rate and protect themselves; Policemen should carry guns or other safety weapons.

The primary reason behind carrying a gun is to deter criminal acts. Thieves or criminals would think twice or be scared before commencing any crime if they know that police officers around them are armed. As a result, violence and crime will be significantly reduced in society. For example, a robber might stop his criminal thought if he is afraid of police officials carrying guns could shoot him from a long distance. Contrary to this, failure to carry a weapon might give offenders a strong advantage in terms of their ability to commit violence without any corresponding risk. Another reason is that police officers can protect themselves and people from dangerous situations.

Certainly, many criminals keep various harmful and life-threatening weapons, which they can use against not only police persons but also citizens. Therefore, if there were no safety precautions for police officials, there, as well as people’s lives, could have come at risk. For instance, in many terror attacks globally, the terrorist killed innocent citizens and police officers. Hence, in such circumstances, to save innocent lives, carrying a gun is a necessary precaution for police officials.

In conclusion, although some people oppose carrying weapons by police officers in fear of violence, I completely disagree. In my view, to control and reduce the crime rate as well as to save people and their own life, Police officials should carry a gun.

Sample Answer 1: Band 8

It is argued that the arts, music, and drama are more important than the other subjects. Some students flourish when studying music, art or drama but maths and science are also subjects that are essential in life. I strongly disagree with the fact that arts, music and are more important than other subjects.

I agree with the fact that not everyone has a talent for mathematics, physics, or languages and many students only do their best work when they can be creative. Many students simply cannot focus on traditional subjects such as maths, science, or history unless they are expressing themselves creatively through painting, song, or dance. Some people would disagree with this view and say that art stops young children from spending enough time on the more important subjects and passing major exams.

All the subjects have equal importance, and all the subjects like music, arts and drama should have equal weightage as maths, science, and history. No field of interest should be considered more important than the other. As all students are different and have different fields of interest, it should be left to the students to pursue their field of interest whether it is maths, science or arts, and drama. Some students love maths and physics pursue a career in engineering, some love science, and biology pursue a career in the medical fields, likewise some love music, dance, or drama and tend to pursue a career as a singer, musician, dancer, or actor.

In conclusion, all the subjects have equal importance and I completely disagree with the opinion that art, music, and drama are more important than other subjects.

---

Structure of the essay

You were given an opinion essay which means you had to pick the side. So,

• Do you agree that subjects like the arts, music, and drama are more important than other subjects?

(or)

• Do you disagree that subjects like the arts, music, and drama are more important than other subjects?

Once you pick the side, you can start planning your essay and then writing it.

Don’t forget to state your opinion on it.

Introduction

Question Paraphrased – It is argued that the arts, music, and drama are more important than the other subjects.

A thesis statement – I strongly disagree with the fact that arts, music and are more important than other subjects.

Body Paragraph 1:

Topic: Central idea: Subjects like art and music are equally important.

Supporting points:

• I agree with the fact that not everyone has a talent for mathematics, physics, or languages and many students only do their best work when they can be creative.
• Many students simply cannot focus on traditional subjects such as maths, science, or history unless they are expressing themselves creatively through painting, song, or dance.

 Body Paragraph 2:

Topic: Central idea: Students have different fields of interest.

Supporting points:

• As all students are different and have different fields of interest, it should be left to the students to pursue their field of interest whether it is maths, science or arts, and drama.
• Some students love maths and physics pursue a career in engineering, some love science, and biology pursue a career in the medical fields, likewise some love music, dance, or drama and tend to pursue a career as a singer, musician, dancer, or actor.

Conclusion:

All the subjects have equal importance and I completely disagree with the opinion that art, music and drama are more important than other subjects.

---

Sample Answer 1: Band 8

Undoubtedly, technology has revolutionized the way we communicate these days. Some people say that inventions like mobile phones are making people less social. In my opinion, I disagree with this statement.

To start with, the introduction of mobile phones is a blessing in disguise for people. This invention immensely helped people to strengthen their relationships with their loved ones living far away. Now they can easily do a face-to-face call anywhere and anytime. Consequently, they become more socially active. In the olden times, people used to write letters or telegrams which took a long time to reach their family members. However, now they can talk to any person immediately. Moreover, a social messaging application such as WhatsApp in smartphones enables people to become part of many social groups. Thus, they become socially connected and grow a healthy social network with others.

Furthermore, we have begun to interact with people who we don’t know at all. A lot of applications these days help us connect with like-minded people. Thus, adding to our social circle. To introverts, technology has been a boon. It has helped them interact with people without facing social anxiety at any cost.

In conclusion, I assert that the reasonable use of a mobile phone is a boon to mankind and its excessive use can be a curse. So, it is up to people to decide wisely how they want to use this technology.

---

Structure of the essay

You were given an opinion essay which means you had to pick the side. So,

• Do you agree that technology is destroying social interactions?

(or)

• Do you disagree that technology is destroying social interactions?

Once you pick the side, you can start planning your essay and then writing it.

Don’t forget to state your opinion on it.

Introduction

Question Paraphrased – Some people say that inventions like mobile phones are making people less social.

Opinion – I completely disagree with this idea.

A thesis statement – In my opinion, I disagree with this statement.

Body Paragraph 1:

Topic: Central idea: Connecting people who are far away.

Supporting points:

• As this invention immensely helped people to strengthen their relationship with their loved ones living far away. Now they can easily do a face-to-face call anywhere and anytime. Consequently, they become more socially active.
• In the olden times, people used to write letters or telegrams which took a long time to reach their family members. However, now they can talk to any person immediately. Moreover, social messaging applications such as WhatsApp in smartphones enable people to become part of many social groups. Thus, they become socially connected and grow a healthy social network with others.

    Example:

• In earlier days, the population in the country or cities was less and also people used to
stay in individual houses as there was a lot of space available. It is not possible now
because of the increased population.

Body Paragraph 2:

Topic: Central idea: Interaction with like-minded people.

Supporting points:

• We have begun to interact with people who we don’t know at all. A lot of applications these days help us connect with like-minded people.
• To introverts, technology has been a boon. It has helped them interact with people without facing social anxiety at any cost.

Conclusion:

I assert that the reasonable use of a mobile phone is a boon to mankind and its excessive use can be a curse. So, it is up to people to decide wisely how they want to use this technology.

---

Sample Answer 1: Band 8

As overpopulation is the main problem in most of the cities, there are no sufficient houses for shelter and there are a lot of social problems too. Only with the help of the government, we would be able to overcome this problem. I agree that the government can help overcome this issue by taking proper measures.

Firstly, we believe that the government plays an important role in people’s lives. When we as an individual cannot solve a problem on our own, we will have to depend on the government. Overpopulation is one of the biggest problems in our society which makes it difficult to accommodate houses for the people in need. In earlier days, the population in the country or cities was less and also people used to stay in individual houses as there was a lot of space available. It is not possible now because of the increased population.

Furthermore, the government can use its finances in expanding the city so that more people can get accommodation. Even if the population is controlled, there will be a requirement for additional buildings or houses that can be accommodated by the people. In order to do this, there must be proper planning and investments at the same time. Thus, the government can be a perfect authority to solve this problem.

In conclusion, we can say that, as the population increases the cities should also grow accordingly, and this can be only done by the government, by taking suitable measures.

---

Structure of the essay

You were given an opinion essay which means you had to pick the side. So,

• Do you agree that the government can solve the problem?

(or)

• Do you disagree that the government can solve the problem?

Once you pick the side, you can start planning your essay and then writing it.

Don’t forget to state your opinion on it.

Introduction

Question Paraphrased – As overpopulation is the main problem in most of the cities, there are no sufficient houses for shelter and there are a lot of social problems too. Only with the help of the government, we would be able to overcome this problem.

Opinion – I completely agree with this idea.

A thesis statement – I agree that the government can help overcome this issue by taking proper measures.

Body Paragraph 1:

Topic: Central idea: Depend on the government for accommodation.

Supporting points:

• Overpopulation is one of the biggest problems in our society which makes it difficult to accommodate houses for the people in need.

    Example:

• In earlier days, the population in the country or cities was less and also people used to
stay in individual houses as there was a lot of space available. It is not possible now
because of the increased population.

Body Paragraph 2:

Topic: Central idea: The government can use their finances in expanding the city so that more people can get accommodation.

Supporting points:

• Even if the population is controlled, there will be a requirement of additional buildings or houses that can be accommodated by the people. In order to do this, there must be proper planning and investments at the same time.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, we can say that, as the population increases the cities should also grow accordingly, and this can be only done by the government, by taking suitable measures.

---

Sample Answer 1: Band 8

Nowadays, online communication is becoming universally popular, the number of users increases rapidly. People strongly believe that thanks to it, not only will loneliness permanently disappear in their lives but social communication is likely to provide them with an opportunity to make friends with others. I completely agree with this statement for several reasons.

Firstly, online communication centers around the world are helping users to easily connect regardless of geographical distances. Today’s social media platforms have user-friendly interfaces in which online friends are recommended based on the user’s profile information. This facilitates the friend-making process without having to leave one’s comfort zone. Also, such means of communication ensures that one will be constantly provided with friend suggestions as a way to enhance online experiences. For example, Tinder and other online dating apps match users with multiple potential individuals that share common interests.

Secondly, the online world has a vast number of people from different backgrounds. As per the growing popular trend, more and more people feel the need to join the digital world. This creates a sense of collectivity and togetherness amongst users that there are always people they can reach out to. This sense is further enhanced by insights that are given into others’ personal lives and interests. For example, each Facebook user has what is called a ‘newsfeed’ – a news bulletin with updates on what their friends share about their activities.

In conclusion, the large number of online users and ease of connection have made online communication a convenient tool to make friends and avoid loneliness.

Structure of the essay

You were given an opinion essay which means you had to pick a side. So,

• Do you agree that with the development of online communication, people will never be alone and will always be able to make new friends?

or

• Do you disagree that with the development of online communication, people will never be alone and will always be able to make new friends?

Once you pick a side, you can start planning your essay and then writing it.

Introduction

Question Paraphrased – People strongly believe that thanks to it, not only will loneliness permanently disappear in their lives but social communication is likely to provide them with an opportunity to make friends with others.

A thesis statement – I completely agree with this statement for several reasons.

Body Paragraph 1

Central idea: Online users can connect irrespective of geographical differences.

Supporting points:

• Today’s social media platforms have user-friendly interfaces in which online friends are recommended based on the user’s profile information. This facilitates the friend-making process without having to leave one’s comfort zone.
• Such means of communication ensures that one will be constantly provided with friend suggestions as a way to enhance online experiences.

Body Paragraph 2:

Central idea: Many people from different backgrounds.

Supporting points:

• As per the growing popular trend, more and more people feel the need to join the digital world. This creates a sense of collectivity and togetherness amongst users that there are always people they can reach out to.

Conclusion

A large number of online users and ease of connection have made online communication a convenient tool to make friends and avoid loneliness.

---