IELTS Writing Samples

Response: It is argued by many that music can gather various people from different backgrounds together. Whether they are old or young. There are numerous factors that contribute to this matter. In this essay I will examine some of its reasons and explain why I agree with this claim. To begin with, I believe one of the major reasons that music can bring people together is that it is the common language between not only the elderly and the youth, but also individuals from different cultures and attitudes. For example, in the welcome party of universities although students who come from different backgrounds might not understand each others' languages, they can have fun, dance with each other and enjoy the party because of music without saying even one word. Furthermore, I assume obsession with music is a part of humans' nature. To illustrate, if a sad arbic music is played for an english person, he might bearst into tears without understanding its meaning. What I also consider another significant reason for this is that music plays an noticeable role in making a party or gathering much more pleasant. Despite the huge gap between generations, for instance, whenever music is played in a wedding party, grandparents and children start dancing and cheering up regardless of thier ages, since music provides a vibrant and lively atmosphere. Moreover, in opening of Olympics people from all around the world and nations sing along with music and dance regardless of understanding its meaning. In conclusion, while different people might have various interests or thoughts, music can bring them together and lead to bonding among people as it is a fun shared experience. So, I agree that music can close people together.

Response: Some people believe that professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should be required to work in the country where they received their training. Others, however, think they should have the freedom to work wherever they wish. Both views have their merits, and this essay will discuss them before presenting my own opinion. On the one hand, requiring professionals to work in their home country can prevent critical shortages of skilled workers. For example, in many developing countries, there is already a lack of doctors and engineers, and allowing these experts to migrate abroad could worsen the situation. Furthermore, governments often invest heavily in training these individuals, providing them with subsidies or free education. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect them to contribute to the development of their home country. Some may even consider it unfair or unethical for professionals to use the resources of one country and then work elsewhere, as this can be seen as a betrayal of national trust. On the other hand, individuals have the right to choose where they work. In today’s globalized world, opportunities are not limited by borders, and professionals often move to other countries to seek better salaries, working conditions, or career advancement. Forcing them to stay could demotivate them or even lead to a loss of talent. Instead of imposing restrictions, governments should focus on creating attractive environments for skilled workers. For instance, countries like Canada and the UK provide substantial funding and support to professionals, ensuring they can work without financial or administrative worries. In my opinion, while it is important to address the issue of "brain drain," restricting professionals from emigrating is neither ethical nor practical. Governments should focus on retaining talent by improving infrastructure, offering competitive salaries, and ensuring job satisfaction. Ultimately, professionals will be more likely to stay in their home country if they feel supported and valued. In conclusion, although requiring professionals to remain in their home country may solve immediate challenges, respecting their freedom to choose is essential. By addressing the root causes of migration, countries can encourage skilled individuals to stay and contribute to national progress.

Response: Discussing about professionals, who educating in their country has two different sides. Some people believe that, experts have to be required to help indiviuals in their country, whilest, others think that restricting experts is falls approach. On one hand, due to the lack of professionals immigration of them, can make problems for countries. So, some people believe that, they should stay and work for their countries to prevent these issues. Moreover, providing educating facilities for them has significant cost for countries. Governments make investment in their experts to work for their country and help to develop that. So if they learn essential skill in their own country and working with that in another country may be considered as betrayal by individuals. On the other hand, everyone is free to choose their way. Therefore, no one do not have to decide for other to what they have to do. With the word being globalize, people are faced by numerous opportunities. So, assuming that restricting experts from immigration is true approach, may lead to take inappropriate measures. Insted of that, authorities should provide sutiable infrastructure for professionals to help them work without no worry about side issues. For example , in modern countries such as Canada or UK, many funding are allocated to professionals, which means that, they dont have any worry about money problems. In my opinion, judging expert for immirating from one country, when they do not have any support from authorities is an unfair judgement; despite that, government should try to convince them to stay and work in their own country by providing facilities for them. In conclusion, thought immigrating experts may produce long term issues for country, we have to respect for everyone's freedom. professional can work in another country and we can just try to providing appropriate situation for them to stay.

Response: In many developed countries, life expectancy is rapidly growing. It is important to consider the negative and positive effects of increasing elderly population on both society and policy makers. This essay will explain why I believe the drawbacks of having elder citizens are outweighed by its benefits. On the one hand, senior citizens are usually equipped with a lot of wisdoms and experiences that can pass them than to the younger generation. This is because their life experiences can help young people to become more self-sufficient and provide more skillful and competent workforce for their countries. For instance, work related to education such as, being a mentor and university professor are perfects for the elderly, and they can take a big step to nurturing and educating youngsters by sharing their life journey. As a result, increasing well-educated workforce in society can lead to countries’ economic growth and development. On the other hand, one of the pressing problems of this trend is the high rate of unemployment. The reason for this is that as more and more people are in work, therefore there would be fewer and fewer jobs to go around. Consequently, young people find it difficult to find to break into their desired professions. Another issue is about the high cost of living. This is because as a greater number of people live out more of their lives in retirement, they may run out of money in their pensions and thus have to depend on their families and government for financial support. In conclusion, I think that the disadvantages of joblessness and financial troubles that a longer life span may present government and society are greater than the advantages of educating younger individuals.

Response: It is widely acclaimed that the more challenging a hobby is, the greater satisfaction one will derive from it. However, I personally do not agree with this view. When it comes to leisure activities, individual characteristics play a pivotal role in determining the type of activity one chooses. Many people indulge in risky and novel hobbies, where the complexity of the task is secondary to the adrenaline rush they experience throughout the activity. The increasing number of young people opting for extreme sports serves as a prime example. Not only do participants engage in such activities to confront their fears, but they also seek the exhilarating surge of energy that courses through their veins, providing them with an unforeseen sense of excitement. Moreover, the social circle with whom one engages in a hobby is of paramount importance. For instance, there are several types of board games that are remarkably popular in my country, which do not require extreme physical or mental abilities and can be enjoyed by children as young as nine. During family gatherings, it is common to see all members of a family, regardless of age, playing card games, creating cherished childhood memories for children and fostering a safe, joyful atmosphere for the elderly. Taking these factors into account, it is abundantly clear that various reasons contribute to how much one can enjoy an activity, regardless of its level of difficulty. I do not believe that the only way to find enjoyment in a hobby is through the challenge it presents.

Response: There is an opposing view on whether the most detrimental environmental issue is the extinction of specific species or other environmental problems such as, nuclear waste disposal or running out of fossil fuel resorces. In this essay, I will examine both perspectives and explain why I strongly agree with the latter viewpoint. To begin with, a vast majority of people believe that loss of particular species of plants and animals has become a concering issue and authorities need to adopt urgent measures in order to address it. They think particular creatures not only demonstrate national pride, but also are crucial for maintaining a sustainable ecosystem. For example, if a specific species in the food chain become extincte, the number of its predators due to the lack of sufficient food could significantly decrease. Subsequently, the number of its prey potentialy will increase. So, in order to avoid these concequences ,we need to put much more efforts into solving it. However, it is argued by many people that although endangered species is a noticable problem, there are much more emergency invornmental issues to tackle with. Issues like running out of fossil fuels resources, considered to be more urgent in this perspective. Since, it can results in lack of enough fuel for crucial damandings such as cooking or heating homes.To illustrate, if individauls do not be cautious about overusing it, these precious resources will have been run out in less than fifty years. Moreover, nuclear waste disposal is also considered as a debated environmental issue as, these wastes could lead to several serious and severe genetic diseases. In conclusion, while dealing with endangered animals and plants issue is vital, I believe it is not an priority and we need to concentrate on solving more important problems.

Response: It has been argued that, increasing the price of the sugary products could result less consumption in order to improve the health rate of society as many manufactured products have sugar which threat individuals’ health. I would stand against this statement and this essay I will outline my perspective. To begin with, almost every existing product contain sugar and not all of them will put people’s lives in danger. Instead of raising sugary product’s prices, the government and the health sectors which are in charged must force food and drinking companies to decrease their artificial sugar usage and consider people’s health as their first priority. For instance, the government could support manufactures financially to produce the healthier products. On the other hand, if the society’s awareness about the damages caused by artificial sugar on body increase, the demand for sugary products will decrease. Hence, the less of demand for unhealthy food and drink will affect the market directly and force manufactures to produce low sugar or zero sugar products. Additionally, healthy life style is todays’ trend and people are more concern about their diets. For example, those who do professional sport exercise such as cycling, running, hiking, or those who go to gym regularly, are very strict about their daily calories and try to stay fit and avoid sugar as much as possible. In conclusion, making sugary products more expensive would not result lower consumption necessarily. There are many beneficial solutions for reducing consumers’ desire for eating or drinking manufactured sugary products.

Response: It is crucial for people to take risks, in the both of professional and their private aspects of their lives. However, I believe none of the advantages or disadvantages of taking risks can’t outweigh each other.in the following paragraphs I will discuss both advantages and disadvantages of taking risks. Firstly, on the one hand, taking risks means you can earn more opportunity in your private and professional life. For example people who takes risks can enhance their positions in their career by taking more risks they can be sure that none of the potential opportunities have been lost and they have tried all of the possibilities to improve their career in both of work and education situations. Furthermore, people who takes risks as regular thing can be more successful in their private lives and their private relations because they have more chances to meet better people and they have an opportunity to meet their soul mate at least more than other. On the other hand, taking too much risks can fire back and makes everything worse. For example, taking risks for enhancing your job career can leads you to lose your current position or can cause a wealth lose when you invest on the risky businesses. Additionally, however, taking risks in private life can lead us to find better people or makes a stronger boundaries with our dear ones, also it could lead us to lose our private relations and ruin our relations. In conclusion, its obvious taking risks have both positive and negative aspects. It can affect us in various ways. So it is more complicated which of advantages or disadvantages can outweigh the other. As a reason I believe none of them cannot outweigh the other one and the benefits and negative sides can be true only in some extents

Response: There is a belief that improving people's lives is the main goal of science. I entirely disagree with this viewpoint, as in my opinion conserving our planet and education should be more important reasons. The first aim of science is educating people to raise their knowledge. There are a wide variety of sciences which can raise people's knowledge about the environment, by which they are surrounded. In other words, each science can enhance people's awareness on specific knowledge. For example, psychological science plays a vital role in educating people to learn about people's interaction as well as their characteristics. Science, also can clearly explain the reasons behind numerous phenomenon occurred in our lives, leading to disaster outcomes, including earthquake and volcano. In addition, this subject can encourage people to further knowledge gathering to overcome some challenges that are available. As a result, this lesson has a huge contribution to people' perceiving. Another reason behind science could be conversation of our planet. Nowadays, planet earth face several challenges, which have roots in people's activities. This subject empower scientist to recognize this concerns, such as desertification, air pollution, global warming, and extinction of species, and discover the way to resolve them. There is a need to gathering scientist in various fields, ranging from archeology and geologist to chemists and physicists, to strive for earth planet's preservation. Science enables them to research and explore and then compare and analyze data, extracted from their investigation. As a result, this can avoid adverse challenges. In conclusion, while some opine that science is presented to boost people's lives, I do not agree. Science's goals might be raise people's knowledge and avoid the destruction of earth planet.

Response: People often claim that one of the good ways of bringing people of different cultures and ages together is music. I strongly agree with the given statement, and this essay will argue that, music provides inreconnection of variety of countries and universal among all generations. Music is one of the most simple ways of connecting people from all around the world together. It is easy to underestand by individuals even if they can not speak that language. For instance, Michel Jacson, sang songs in english about african people who were in bad situation of life, while this song brought same feeling for majority of people from other countries to understand the issue and try to help, so this song could brought an intention towards the people in africa and provides a large amount of investment for them ,by rich people from other side of world . In addition, music has the same language among different ages of people and it is easy to underestand. A child could listen to the same music as an alderly person, which can simpley make a bond among these generations. For example, national music of each country is memorised by all population of that specific country that keeps them all together singing while special occasions like olympics winning or even winning a war, so this can strongly share same feelings between all people on that moment and keeps them together despite their age or education level. In conclusion, people from different cultures and ages could be brought together via music which I believe that it is connecting all regions of world together and it is the easiest language among different generation.