IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample Answers: Agree/ Disagree (Phần 3)
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample Answers: Agree/ Disagree (Phần 3)
VnDoc.com giới thiệu IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample Answers: Agree/ Disagree (Phần 3) để các em tham khảo bài mẫu dạng dạng 'Agree' và 'Disagree'. Hy vọng những bài mẫu này sẽ cung cấp thêm cho các em ý viết bài và từ vựng cũng như những cấu trúc thành văn hay nhé.
Tổng hợp câu hỏi và bài mẫu IELTS Writing Task 2 chủ đề Giáo Dục
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample Answer: Agree/ Disagree (Phần 1)
IELTS Writing Task 2 Sample Answers: Agree/ Disagree (Phần 2)
11. Everyone should stay in school until the age of eighteen. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
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.
12. 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?
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.
13. 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?
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.
14. 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.
15. 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?
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, 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 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.
