IELTS Writing Samples

Response: It is often said that music has the power to unite and connect people, regardless of their cultural backgrounds or ages. I completely agree with this view, and will give my reasons below. Music can certainly reach across cultural and national boundaries and bring people together. Perhaps the best example of this would be the Live Aid concerts that took place back in the 1980s, and which were broadcast to a global audience. Two live events were held simultaneously in the UK and the US, and the objective was to raise funds for famine relief in Ethiopia. The concerts were a huge success, both in terms of the number of people around the world who watched them and their impact on international public awareness of the famine. They demonstrated, I believe, that music truly is the planet’s global language. Just as it transcends cultures, music also has the ability to connect people from different generations. Regardless of age, we can all enjoy a memorable melody, a strong rhythm or a beautiful singing voice, and the best songs seem to have the same magical effect on all of us. This would explain why televised music competitions, such as ‘The X Factor’ or ‘The Voice’, are such popular prime-time shows. These programmes attract incredibly broad audiences because singing and popular songs appeal to children, parents and grandparents alike. I would argue that no other form of entertainment can bring families together in this way. In conclusion, I believe that music is unique in its capacity to create shared experiences between people, irrespective of culture and age.

Response: In some countries, individuals prefer to have home for themselves instead of renting home. I think saving money is really significant for some people. So, they believe that with buying home can save more money and this is positive appreciation. Indeed, I have 2 main reasons for my view. first of all, when people rent the house, they should transport after ending of their constant. So they have to pay lots of costs for transforming. Thus, they try to buy the home and save their income. In some countries such as, my country, Iran, almost of people work hard in order to buy the home because of our adverse economy. we have tough financial situation. Also, annual homes become more expensive than last year because of our high inflation. secondly, in some countries, individuals feel more relax in their own home and it is important to them. Actually, they can change inside or yard of their home without any stress. while if you rent the home, you would not have allowed that change the decoration. In addition, some people could not grow the plantes in their garden since, they rent the homes and the homes do not belong them. people who buy the home, feel a sense of stability and security. In conclusion, in some countries that have rising inflation, almost of citizens choose to buy the homes instead of renting them because they tend to have financial investment. Moreover, people feel more comfortable in their own homes than in the rented one.

Response: Many countries are facing the migration of rural dwellers into urban areas, which has resulted in a noticeable reduction in the rural population. I firmly believe that this phenomenon not only raises problems in the countryside but also poses challenges for cities, which this essay will substantiate. Today, thanks to the stimulating facilities that modern cities provide for their residents, more and more people are tending to relocate from their pastoral homes to vibrant urban centers. However, as the number of people living in cities grows, the demand for facilities will rise dramatically. If authorities cannot rise to these upcoming challenges, it may lead to sprawling cities and the emergence of shantytowns on the outskirts. This, in turn, brings related problems, namely poor sanitation and hygiene, which can create a breeding ground for crime. Conversely, as rural inhabitants abandon their hometowns, these idyllic areas may become desolate without any residents. Because they have left these districts behind, advancement and progress in these areas are likely to decline. Nonetheless, some may view this issue as a positive outcome, believing that fewer people living in villages and the countryside will help maintain their rustic charm. However, in my opinion, the local inhabitants of each area are the essence of those places, and they would be better off staying in their hometowns. In conclusion, while the hectic pace of life and the allure of urban living tempt many rural residents to move to cities, preserving the charm of the countryside is a responsibility of its inhabitants and should be a priority for them.

Response: All vehicles including cars, buses, trucks will not need drivers to be controlled in the future. People just as a passengers will be these vehicles during trip. I believe that the advantages of driverless by far outweigh disadvantage. There are several advantages such as reduce traffic congestion, diminish accidents, improve safety and increase mobility.one of the most significant advantages of driverless vehicles is their ability to reduce the number of traffic accidents. By eliminating human error, which is the primary cause of most wccident. As a result, driverless vehicles can detect and respond to their surroundings more quickly and accurately than human drivers, reducing the risk of accidents. Moreover, driverless vehicles can provide transportation for people who are unable to drive themselves, such as elderly or those with disabilities. Despite this, there are several disadvantages, one of the most pressing concerns is the potential for job loss among human drivers, including truck drivers, taxi drivers and delivery drivers. Furthermore, could lead to hacking or syber attacks which could found safety and security.one of the disadvantage is dependence technology could lead to a decline in driving skills and loss of independence for individuals. In sum up, in the future, autonomous vehicles will be replaced with current vehicles.as well as driverless vehicles offer substantial advantage in terms of safety, reduce traffic congestion, my standpoint, the advantage of driverless for by outweigh disadvantage.

Response: While some people argue that they have sufficient potential to study two majors simultaneously in order to enhance their ability and insight, others assert that this approach will only lead to distraction and deficiency. I believe, although both perspectives ultimately, value the spirit of education both of them have their valid claims. On one hand, studying two majors can be really frustrating and exhausting for most; however, there are still many ingenious and innovative students who can study two fields withouth losing any concentration. In this case, when students are able to learn from a broader source, consequently they will be able to have a wider view on subjects in comparision to others. For example, if you tend to pursue attention components of the brain, you will need neuro-cognitive science besides psychology due to the necessity of working with special equipment and computer programs. On the other hand, from the perspective of choosing quality over quantity, many advocate for only one main subject to study. They argue that concentration is the essential key to learning profoundly and to reach this goal, one should discard all the distractions and follow just the pivotal way. Specialising in every single field takes several hours of studying and hard work. Studying multiple subjects might increase your general knowledge efficiently; however, it would not assist you to the highest qualification measures. In conclusion, it depends on one's educational potential whether to study a major or two. While I acknowledge the value of concentrated studying, I firmly believe that with the growth of interdisciplinary studies, the need for knowing other fields becomes more essential every day.

Response: Is it important for people to take risks, both in their professional lives and their personal lives. Do you think the advantages of taking risks outweigh the disadvantages? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. There are two main perspectives when it comes to making decisions. Whether you wish to trust your heart or your mind, in other words, to act by logic or feelings, you are obligated to choose only one way. While some might argue that the only worthy pattern is the one followed by reasons and logic, others believe that taking risks and listening to their hearts have changed their paths of life incredibly. On one hand, when you have to make a life-changing decision, you would rather scrutinize every aspect of that situation in order to not have regrets after the outcomes. In this case, you have enough time to utilize other people's wisdom and experience, and play the odds. The results are most welcomed when you try to diminish the element of surprise. I believe when you are dealing with huge personal or professional problems in your life, it makes more sense to have a comprehensive view that entails multiple factors in order to make the best possible decision. On the other hand, some argue that taking risks has its own benefits and advantages. For example, these people are symbols of courage and free spirit in public belief. Undeniably, there have been times in our lives that only by making prompt decisions, we turned the circumstances in our favor, so in a fair statement, all hasty decisions do not end up catastrophically. Besides, many well-known faces like Steve Jobs and Thomas Edison had to take risks and those decisions led to great success for them. I also believe that some sometimes, when we are not one hundred percent sure of our decision and its results, it is better to take chances and let the universe handle the situation. In conclusion, it depends on you and your personality whether you prefer to take your chances as much as possible, or try to think the whole condition through. I myself, as a person that tends to act by logic, think that the advantages of taking risks do not outweigh the disadvantages.

Response: As a part of society who prefers to read books and magazines online due to the expenses, I believe online reading provides people more time and less expenditures. On the other hand some would argue that printed contexts wont hurt your health condition as much the screens and some people feel more comfortable and pleased just by feeling the texture of books and papers in their hands. In my opinion, as a college student, not every one possesses enough budget to afford all aspects of their livelyhood, and books can be one of the separable part when it comes to reducing costs. There are many approachable ways that enable us to reach that goal such as borroing books, or buying secondhand books, or my priority, reading the online books. When you choose the online books you will recieve the gift of time; instead of squandering time on finding books on the stores you are able to manage your spare time more efficiently. In my experienc, during my final exams, when I read from a book on my laptop and write down the headlines, I find more time to revise and learn the lessons by heart. Although since reading books, news papers, and magazines got widespread, the number of individuals wearing glasses has been constently rising, some people think that reading on the screens has exacerbated the situation. Now many scientific resources claime that the idea of computer systems being more harmfull than printed books is merely a myth and there is not enough evidence to support this idea. Another protest to online matterials is the sensation of papers or leather-covers in your hands that many find it qiute soothing and relaxing. For example, a significant part of our elderlies prefer to read book while they are sitting on a chair and drinking hot beverages. In conclusion, from a conprehensive view, it depedns to users whethere tend to purchase their books and news papers online or from bookstores. Some people try to face the situation logically and some prioritize their feelings and comforts first all the time.

Response: In terms of how people must behave in their work office, at school or , there are two schools of thought. One claims that rivalry would be beneficial. On the other hand, others assert that people should accompany each other instead of competing. However, both of these approaches will be discussed in this essay, in addition to mine. First and foremost, it is an undeniable fact that employers have been putting a considerable amount of both physical and mental pressure on their employees shoulder since the arrival of our tech-driven era. Developed technology gave rise to emerging a toxic atmosphere between companies, especially the boards of directors, in order to prove to each other which one is better in providing services to customers. Based on psychological facts, you will become what your surroundings vibes are. Moreover, pupils are focusing on numerical results, rather than what they have really learned. They are sacrificing quality for quantity. Principals contribute to this situation through arising a sense of unreal proud or making students to compare themselves with each other, which can leak into their souls. In this regard, when these mentioned people come back home after their work hours or school, they tend to behave this way since it has become a core part of their personality as its long-term effects. On the contrary, there are individuals who view this concept from a different angle. Such people that would prefer cooperation, believe that the more they interact with others, the more experienced they would become. For instance, when either a person who you care about or a stranger is in trouble, and you take a step to help them, not only you convey a sense of empathy, but also there is a chance for you to learn something new in this occasion from them. It is worth mentioning that it has a positive effect on boosting your daily mood due to helping a human being. Additionally, imagine a school, office or a family in which its members are constantly turning green with envy, and want to surpass each other. At the end, there is nothing left but a ruined cozy corner, which once was supposed to witness their delighted relationship. Therefore, they consider cooperation a necessity to make progress in every aspects of their lives, not racing. In conclusion, I am a proponent of both the former and the latter, striking a perfect balance. Despite all the drawback lay behind the competition concept, if people should live a happier life, full of success and respect, it is their responsibility to figure out where they should show sympathy or contestation.

Response: Science has played an integral role in shaping the modern world and solving serious problems faced by human beings. There is a notable brief that the most pivotal purpose of science is to enhance individuals' lives. I strongly agree with this view, as scientific discoveries have significantly improved the quality of life and spurred technological progressions that address global issues. One of the key measures of science is to advance the quality of citizens' lives. This means that scientific endeavours can make daily living easier and more comfortable, especially in fields like healthcare, technology, and communication. One primary example is the invention of antibiotics, which has undoubtedly reduced mortality rates and saved millions of lives. Furthermore, people's interactions can be influenced by the progression of technology in communication such as the Internet, which allows access to instant information and enhances societal welfare. In addition to improving the quality of the citizens, the discovery of science is essential in terms of technological progress. Science breakthroughs like renewable energy, have increasingly impacted a better life. For instance, the innovation of solar energy has essentially decreased the use of fossil fuels as well as fulfilled energy demands worldwide. Similarly, the introduction of electric vehicles has contributed to alleviating climate change, benefiting from good air quality and a better environment. In conclusion, I firmly believe that improving people's lives is the most important aim of science. From enhancing the quality of everyday challenges through medical innovations to advancing technological progress that tackles obstacles globally, science has ensured individuals lives. Therefore, scientific advancements should be the priority to address problems all around the world.

Response: These days, numerous individuals tend to employ various kinds of medications but not seeing a skilled doctor. Althogh nowdays, thanks to the easy accessibility to the medical information, as well as people's awareness, it is more convenient for all to treat themselves that way, I strongly disagree with this approach, and will elaborate my opinion in this assey. Today, due to the prevalences of technology, it is common for many people to reach the internet for searching their symptoms, when it comes to health prolems. Moreover, there are lots of inticing advertisements on fake medicines with promise of definite treatment, which fradually tempt patients to follow them. However, I am convinced that these methods not only cannot bring them their health, but also result in even a major health condition. Professional docters served many years in universities to gain adequet knowledge in order to help people with disorders and illnesses. Additionally, paitients should be visited in person, hence only an skilled doctor regarding thier previous experiences can diagnose the definite illness. Therefore, it is recommened to first see a doctor without any hesitation when you face even a minor health problem, as it can be cured with little medicares if it is noticed at its primary stages. In conclusion, while reaching to other medications can be easy and fast enough to take them, skillful doctores are specificly there for this purposes. Moreover, following wrong information can lead to irriversible problems that even professional docters cannot dael with.