SIMON – IELTS ESSAY COLLECTION

è Bản quyền thuộc về thầy Simon – Website: IELTS-SIMON.COM

è Các bạn hãy ghé thăm website thầy, và nếu yêu content của thầy thì đăng kí
xem blog trả tiền của thầy để support những nội dung chất lượng nhé <3

--- Chúc mọi người học tốt <3 ---

1
 These days more fathers stay at home and take care of their children while mothers go
out to work. What could be the reasons for this? Do you think it is a positive or a negative
development?
It is true that men are increasingly likely to take on the role of househusband, while more women
than ever are the breadwinners in their families. There could be several reasons for this, and I
consider it to be a very positive trend.
In recent years, parents have had to adapt to various changes in our societies. Equal rights
movements have made great progress, and it has become normal for women to gain qualifications
and pursue a career. It has also become socially acceptable for men to stay at home and look
after their children. At the same time, the rising cost of living has meant that both marriage
partners usually need to work and save money before starting a family. Therefore, when couples
have children, they may decide who works and who stays at home depending on the personal
preference of each partner, or based on which partner earns the most money.
In my view, the changes described above should be seen as progress. We should be happy to
live in a society in which men and women have equal opportunities, and in which women are not
put under pressure to sacrifice their careers. Equally, it seems only fair that men should be free
to leave their jobs in order to assume childcare responsibilities if this is what they wish to do.
Couples should be left to make their own decisions about which parental role each partner takes,
according to their particular circumstances and needs.
In conclusion, the changing roles of men and women in the family are a result of wider changes
in society, and I believe that these developments are desirable.

2
 Many people prefer to watch foreign films rather than locally produced films. Why could
this be? Should governments give more financial support to local film industries?
It is true that foreign films are more popular in many countries than domestically produced films.
There could be several reasons why this is the case, and I believe that governments should
promote local film-making by subsidising the industry.
There are various reasons why many people find foreign films more enjoyable than the films
produced in their own countries. Firstly, the established film industries in certain countries have
huge budgets for action, special effects and to shoot scenes in spectacular locations. Hollywood
blockbusters like ‘Avatar’ or the James Bond films are examples of such productions, and their
global appeal is undeniable. Another reason why these big-budget films are so successful is that
they often star the most famous actors and actresses, and they are made by the most
accomplished producers and directors. The poor quality, low-budget filmmaking in many countries
suffers in comparison.
In my view, governments should support local film industries financially. In every country, there
may be talented amateur film-makers who just need to be given the opportunity to prove
themselves. To compete with big-budget productions from overseas, these people need money
to pay for film crews, actors and a host of other costs related to producing high-quality films. If
governments did help with these costs, they would see an increase in employment in the film
industry, income from film sales, and perhaps even a rise in tourist numbers. New Zealand, for
example, has seen an increase in tourism related to the 'Lord of the Rings' films, which were partly
funded by government subsidies.
In conclusion, I believe that increased financial support could help to raise the quality of locally
made films and allow them to compete with the foreign productions that currently dominate the
market.

3
 Explain some of the ways in which humans are damaging the environment. What can
governments do to address these problems? What can individual people do?
Humans are responsible for a variety of environmental problems, but we can also take steps to
reduce the damage that we are causing to the planet. This essay will discuss environmental
problems and the measures that governments and individuals can take to address these
problems.
Two of the biggest threats to the environment are air pollution and waste. Gas emissions from
factories and exhaust fumes from vehicles lead to global warming, which may have a devastating
effect on the planet in the future. As the human population increases, we are also producing ever
greater quantities of waste, which contaminates the earth and pollutes rivers and oceans.
Governments could certainly make more effort to reduce air pollution. They could introduce laws
to limit emissions from factories or to force companies to use renewable energy from solar, wind
or water power. They could also impose ‘green taxes’ on drivers and airline companies. In this
way, people would be encouraged to use public transport and to take fewer flights abroad,
therefore reducing emissions.
Individuals should also take responsibility for the impact they have on the environment. They
can take public transport rather than driving, choose products with less packaging, and recycle
as much as possible. Most supermarkets now provide reusable bags for shoppers as well as
‘banks’ for recycling glass, plastic and paper in their car parks. By reusing and recycling, we can
help to reduce waste.
In conclusion, both national governments and individuals must play their part in looking after the
environment.

4
 Nowadays the way many people interact with each other has changed because of
technology.
In what ways has technology affected the types of relationships that people make? Has
this been a positive or negative development?
It is true that new technologies have had an influence on communication between people.
Technology has affected relationships in various ways, and in my opinion there are both positive
and negative effects.
Technology has had an impact on relationships in business, education and social life. Firstly,
telephones and the Internet allow business people in different countries to interact without ever
meeting each other. Secondly, services like Skype create new possibilities for relationships
between students and teachers. For example, a student can now take video lessons with a
teacher in a different city or country. Finally, many people use social networks, like Facebook, to
make new friends and find people who share common interests, and they interact through their
computers rather than face to face.
On the one hand, these developments can be extremely positive. Cooperation between people
in different countries was much more difficult when communication was limited to written letters
or telegrams. Nowadays, interactions by email, phone or video are almost as good as face-to-
face meetings, and many of us benefit from these interactions, either in work or social contexts.
On the other hand, the availability of new communication technologies can also have the result
of isolating people and discouraging real interaction. For example, many young people choose to
make friends online rather than mixing with their peers in the real world, and these ‘virtual’
relationships are a poor substitute for real friendships.
In conclusion, technology has certainly revolutionised communication between people, but not
all of the outcomes of this revolution have been positive.

5
 There are many different types of music in the world today. Why do we need music? Is
the traditional music of a country more important than the international music that is heard
everywhere nowadays?
It is true that a rich variety of musical styles can be found around the world. Music is a vital part
of all human cultures for a range of reasons, and I would argue that traditional music is more
important than modern, international music.
Music is something that accompanies all of us throughout our lives. As children, we are taught
songs by our parents and teachers as a means of learning language, or simply as a form of
enjoyment. Children delight in singing with others, and it would appear that the act of singing in a
group creates a connection between participants, regardless of their age. Later in life, people’s
musical preferences develop, and we come to see our favourite songs as part of our life stories.
Music both expresses and arouses emotions in a way that words alone cannot. In short, it is
difficult to imagine life without it.
In my opinion, traditional music should be valued over the international music that has become
so popular. International pop music is often catchy and fun, but it is essentially a commercial
product that is marketed and sold by business people. Traditional music, by contrast, expresses
the culture, customs and history of a country. Traditional styles, such as ...(example)..., connect
us to the past and form part of our cultural identity. It would be a real pity if pop music became so
predominant that these national styles disappeared.
In conclusion, music is a necessary part of human existence, and I believe that traditional music
should be given more importance than international music.

6
 Happiness is considered very important in life. Why is it difficult to define? What factors
are important in achieving happiness?
It is no doubt true that the majority of people would like to be happy in their lives. While the
personal nature of happiness makes it difficult to describe, there do seem to be some common
needs that we all share with regard to experiencing or achieving happiness.
Happiness is difficult to define because it means something different to each individual person.
Nobody can fully understand or experience another person’s feelings, and we all have our own
particular passions from which we take pleasure. Some people, for example, derive a sense of
satisfaction from earning money or achieving success, whereas for others, health and family are
much more important. At the same time, a range of other feelings, from excitement to
peacefulness, may be associated with the idea of happiness, and the same person may therefore
feel happy in a variety of different ways.
Although it seems almost impossible to give a precise definition of happiness, most people would
agree that there are some basic preconditions to achieving it. Firstly, it is hard for a person to be
happy if he or she does not have a safe place to live and enough food to eat. Our basic survival
needs must surely be met before we can lead a pleasant life. Secondly, the greatest joy in life is
usually found in shared experiences with family and friends, and it is rare to find a person who is
content to live in complete isolation. Other key factors could be individual freedom and a sense
of purpose in life.
In conclusion, happiness is difficult to define because it is particular to each individual, but I
believe that our basic needs for shelter, food and company need to be fulfilled before we can
experience it.

7
 In the developed world, average life expectancy is increasing. What problems will this
cause for individuals and society? Suggest some measures that could be taken to reduce
the impact of ageing populations.
It is true that people in industrialised nations can expect to live longer than ever before. Although
there will undoubtedly be some negative consequences of this trend, societies can take steps to
mitigate these potential problems.
As people live longer and the populations of developed countries grow older, several related
problems can be anticipated. The main issue is that there will obviously be more people of
retirement age who will be eligible to receive a pension. The proportion of younger, working adults
will be smaller, and governments will therefore receive less money in taxes in relation to the size
of the population. In other words, an ageing population will mean a greater tax burden for working
adults. Further pressures will include a rise in the demand for healthcare, and the fact young
adults will increasingly have to look after their elderly relatives.
There are several actions that governments could take to solve the problems described above.
Firstly, a simple solution would be to increase the retirement age for working adults, perhaps from
65 to 70. Nowadays, people of this age tend to be healthy enough to continue a productive
working life. A second measure would be for governments to encourage immigration in order to
increase the number of working adults who pay taxes. Finally, money from national budgets will
need to be taken from other areas and spent on vital healthcare, accommodation and transport
facilities for the rising numbers of older citizens.
In conclusion, various measures can be taken to tackle the problems that are certain to arise as
the populations of countries grow older.

8
 More and more people are migrating to cities in search of a better life, but city life can be
extremely difficult. Explain some of the difficulties of living in a city. How can governments
make urban life better for everyone?
Cities are often seen as places of opportunity, but there are also some major drawbacks of living
in a large metropolis. In my opinion, governments could do much more to improve city life for the
average inhabitant.
The main problem for anyone who hopes to migrate to a large city is that the cost of living is
likely to be much higher than it is in a small town or village. Inhabitants of cities have to pay higher
prices for housing, transport, and even food. Another issue is that urban areas tend to suffer from
social problems such as high crime and poverty rates in comparison with rural areas.
Furthermore, the air quality in cities is often poor, due to pollution from traffic, and the streets and
public transport systems are usually overcrowded. As a result, city life can be unhealthy and
stressful.
However, there are various steps that governments could take to tackle these problems. Firstly,
they could invest money in the building of affordable or social housing to reduce the cost of living.
Secondly, politicians have the power to ban vehicles from city centres and promote the use of
cleaner public transport, which would help to reduce both air pollution and traffic congestion. In
London, for example, the introduction of a congestion charge for drivers has helped to curb the
traffic problem. A third option would be to develop provincial towns and rural areas, by moving
industry and jobs to those regions, in order to reduce the pressure on major cities.
In conclusion, governments could certainly implement a range of measures to enhance the
quality of life for all city residents.

9
 Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very small
numbers of people. Some people say that governments should spend public money on
saving these languages, while others believe that would be a waste of money.
Discuss both these views and give your opinion.
It is true that some minority languages may disappear in the near future. Although it can be
argued that governments could save money by allowing this to happen, I believe that these
languages should be protected and preserved.
There are several reasons why saving minority languages could be seen as a waste of money.
Firstly, if a language is only spoken by a small number of people, expensive education
programmes will be needed to make sure that more people learn it, and the state will have to pay
for facilities, teachers and marketing. This money might be better spent on other public services.
Secondly, it would be much cheaper and more efficient for countries to have just one language.
Governments could cut all kinds of costs related to communicating with each minority group.
Despite the above arguments, I believe that governments should try to preserve languages that
are less widely spoken. A language is much more than simply a means of communication; it has
a vital connection with the cultural identity of the people who speak it. If a language disappears,
a whole way of life will disappear with it, and we will lose the rich cultural diversity that makes
societies more interesting. By spending money to protect minority languages, governments can
also preserve traditions, customs and behaviours that are part of a country’s history.
In conclusion, it may save money in the short term if we allow minority languages to disappear,
but in the long term this would have an extremely negative impact on our cultural heritage.

10
 Some people believe that studying at university or college is the best route to a
successful career, while others believe that it is better to get a job straight after school.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.
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.

11
 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.
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.

12
 Some people regard video games as harmless fun, or even as a useful educational tool.
Others, however, believe that video games are having an adverse effect on the people who
play them. In your opinion, do the drawbacks of video games outweigh the benefits?
Many people, and children in particular, enjoy playing computer games. While I accept that these
games can sometimes have a positive effect on the user, I believe that they are more likely to
have a harmful impact.
On the one hand, video games can be both entertaining and educational. Users, or gamers, are
transported into virtual worlds which are often more exciting and engaging than real-life pastimes.
From an educational perspective, these games encourage imagination and creativity, as well as
concentration, logical thinking and problem solving, all of which are useful skills outside the
gaming context. Furthermore, it has been shown that computer simulation games can improve
users’ motor skills and help to prepare them for real-world tasks, such as flying a plane.
However, I would argue that these benefits are outweighed by the drawbacks. Gaming can be
highly addictive because users are constantly given scores, new targets and frequent rewards to
keep them playing. Many children now spend hours each day trying to progress through the levels
of a game or to get a higher score than their friends. This type of addiction can have effects
ranging from lack of sleep to problems at school, when homework is sacrificed for a few more
hours on the computer or console. The rise in obesity in recent years has also been linked in part
to the sedentary lifestyle and lack of exercise that often accompany gaming addiction.
In conclusion, it seems to me that the potential dangers of video games are more significant
than the possible benefits.

13
 Nowadays animal experiments are widely used to develop new medicines and to test the
safety of other products. Some people argue that these experiments should be banned
because it is morally wrong to cause animals to suffer, while others are in favour of them
because of their benefits to humanity.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
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.

14
 Some people think that governments should give financial support to creative artists
such as painters and musicians. Others believe that creative artists should be funded by
alternative sources. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
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.

15
 Some people think that in the modern world we are more dependent on each other, while
others think that people have become more independent.


Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

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.

16
 Some people think that strict punishments for driving offences are the key to reducing
traffic accidents. Others, however, believe that other measures would be more effective in
improving road safety.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
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.

17
 Some people think that all university students should study whatever they like. Others
believe that they should only be allowed to study subjects that will be useful in the future,
such as those related to science and technology.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
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.

18
 Universities should accept equal numbers of male and female students in every subject.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
In my opinion, men and women should have the same educational opportunities. However, I do
not agree with the idea of accepting equal proportions of each gender in every university subject.
Having the same number of men and women on all degree courses is simply unrealistic. Student
numbers on any course depend on the applications that the institution receives. If a university
decided to fill courses with equal numbers of males and females, it would need enough applicants
of each gender. In reality, many courses are more popular with one gender than the other, and it
would not be practical to aim for equal proportions. For example, nursing courses tend to attract
more female applicants, and it would be difficult to fill these courses if fifty per cent of the places
needed to go to males.
Apart from the practical concerns expressed above, I also believe that it would be unfair to base
admission to university courses on gender. Universities should continue to select the best
candidates for each course according to their qualifications. In this way, both men and women
have the same opportunities, and applicants know that they will be successful if they work hard
to achieve good grades at school. If a female student is the best candidate for a place on a course,
it is surely wrong to reject her in favour of a male student with lower grades or fewer qualifications.
In conclusion, the selection of university students should be based on merit, and it would be
both impractical and unfair to change to a selection procedure based on gender.

19
 We cannot help everyone in the world that needs help, so we should only be concerned
with our own communities and countries.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Some people believe that we should not help people in other countries as long as there are
problems in our own society. I disagree with this view because I believe that we should try to help
as many people as possible.
On the one hand, I accept that it is important to help our neighbours and fellow citizens. In most
communities there are people who are impoverished or disadvantaged in some way. It is possible
to find homeless people, for example, in even the wealthiest of cities, and for those who are
concerned about this problem, there are usually opportunities to volunteer time or give money to
support these people. In the UK, people can help in a variety of ways, from donating clothing to
serving free food in a soup kitchen. As the problems are on our doorstep, and there are obvious
ways to help, I can understand why some people feel that we should prioritise local charity.
At the same time, I believe that we have an obligation to help those who live beyond our national
borders. In some countries the problems that people face are much more serious than those in
our own communities, and it is often even easier to help. For example, when children are dying
from curable diseases in African countries, governments and individuals in richer countries can
save lives simply by paying for vaccines that already exist. A small donation to an international
charity might have a much greater impact than helping in our local area.
In conclusion, it is true that we cannot help everyone, but in my opinion national boundaries
should not stop us from helping those who are in need.

20
 Many people decide on a career path early in their lives and keep to it. This, they argue,
leads to a more satisfying working life.
To what extent do you agree with this view?
What other things can people do in order to have a satisfying working life?
It is true that some people know from an early age what career they want to pursue, and they
are happy to spend the rest of their lives in the same profession. While I accept that this may suit
many people, I believe that others enjoy changing careers or seeking job satisfaction in different
ways.
On the one hand, having a defined career path can certainly lead to a satisfying working life.
Many people decide as young children what they want to do as adults, and it gives them a great
sense of satisfaction to work towards their goals and gradually achieve them. For example, many
children dream of becoming doctors, but to realise this ambition they need to gain the relevant
qualifications and undertake years of training. In my experience, very few people who have
qualified as doctors choose to change career because they find their work so rewarding, and
because they have invested so much time and effort to reach their goal.
On the other hand, people find happiness in their working lives in different ways. Firstly, not
everyone dreams of doing a particular job, and it can be equally rewarding to try a variety of
professions; starting out on a completely new career path can be a reinvigorating experience.
Secondly, some people see their jobs as simply a means of earning money, and they are happy
if their salary is high enough to allow them to enjoy life outside work. Finally, job satisfaction is
often the result of working conditions, rather than the career itself. For example, a positive working
atmosphere, enthusiastic colleagues, and an inspirational boss can make working life much more
satisfying, regardless of the profession.
In conclusion, it can certainly be satisfying to pursue a particular career for the whole of one’s
life, but this is by no means the only route to fulfilment.

21
 Some people believe that hobbies need to be difficult to be enjoyable.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Some hobbies are relatively easy, while others present more of a challenge. Personally, I believe
that both types of hobby can be fun, and I therefore disagree with the statement that hobbies
need to be difficult in order to be enjoyable.
On the one hand, many people enjoy easy hobbies. One example of an activity that is easy for
most people is swimming. This hobby requires very little equipment, it is simple to learn, and it is
inexpensive. I remember learning to swim at my local swimming pool when I was a child, and it
never felt like a demanding or challenging experience. Another hobby that I find easy and fun is
photography. In my opinion, anyone can take interesting pictures without knowing too much about
the technicalities of operating a camera. Despite being straightforward, taking photos is a
satisfying activity.
On the other hand, difficult hobbies can sometimes be more exciting. If an activity is more
challenging, we might feel a greater sense of satisfaction when we manage to do it successfully.
For example, film editing is a hobby that requires a high level of knowledge and expertise. In my
case, it took me around two years before I became competent at this activity, but now I enjoy it
much more than I did when I started. I believe that many hobbies give us more pleasure when we
reach a higher level of performance because the results are better and the feeling of achievement
is greater.
In conclusion, simple hobbies can be fun and relaxing, but difficult hobbies can be equally
pleasurable for different reasons.

22
 Some people think that all teenagers should be required to do unpaid work in their free
time to help the local community. They believe this would benefit both the individual
teenager and society as a whole.
Do you agree or disagree?
Many young people work on a volunteer basis, and this can only be beneficial for both the
individual and society as a whole. However, I do not agree that we should therefore force all
teenagers to do unpaid work.
Most young people are already under enough pressure with their studies, without being given
the added responsibility of working in their spare time. School is just as demanding as a full-time
job, and teachers expect their students to do homework and exam revision on top of attending
lessons every day. When young people do have some free time, we should encourage them to
enjoy it with their friends or to spend it doing sports and other leisure activities. They have many
years of work ahead of them when they finish their studies.
At the same time, I do not believe that society has anything to gain from obliging young people
to do unpaid work. In fact, I would argue that it goes against the values of a free and fair society
to force a group of people to do something against their will. Doing this can only lead to resentment
amongst young people, who would feel that they were being used, and parents, who would not
want to be told how to raise their children. Currently, nobody is forced to volunteer, and this is
surely the best system.
In conclusion, teenagers may choose to work for free and help others, but in my opinion we
should not make this compulsory.

23
 Foreign visitors should pay more than local visitors for cultural and historical attractions.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
It is sometimes argued that tourists from overseas should be charged more than local residents
to visit important sites and monuments. I completely disagree with this idea.
The argument in favour of higher prices for foreign tourists would be that cultural or historical
attractions often depend on state subsidies to keep them going, which means that the resident
population already pays money to these sites through the tax system. However, I believe this to
be a very shortsighted view. Foreign tourists contribute to the economy of the host country with
the money they spend on a wide range of goods and services, including food, souvenirs,
accommodation and travel. The governments and inhabitants of every country should be happy
to subsidise important tourist sites and encourage people from the rest of the world to visit them.
If travellers realised that they would have to pay more to visit historical and cultural attractions
in a particular nation, they would perhaps decide not to go to that country on holiday. To take the
UK as an example, the tourism industry and many related jobs rely on visitors coming to the
country to see places like Windsor Castle or Saint Paul’s Cathedral. These two sites charge the
same price regardless of nationality, and this helps to promote the nation’s cultural heritage. If
overseas tourists stopped coming due to higher prices, there would be a risk of insufficient funding
for the maintenance of these important buildings.
In conclusion, I believe that every effort should be made to attract tourists from overseas, and it
would be counterproductive to make them pay more than local residents.

24
 When choosing a job, the salary is the most important consideration. To what extent do
you agree or disagree?
Many people choose their jobs based on the size of the salary offered. Personally, I disagree
with the idea that money is the key consideration when deciding on a career, because I believe
that other factors are equally important.
On the one hand, I agree that money is necessary in order for people to meet their basic needs.
For example, we all need money to pay for housing, food, bills, health care, and education. Most
people consider it a priority to at least earn a salary that allows them to cover these needs and
have a reasonable quality of life. If people chose their jobs based on enjoyment or other non-
financial factors, they might find it difficult to support themselves. Artists and musicians, for
instance, are known for choosing a career path that they love, but that does not always provide
them with enough money to live comfortably and raise a family.
Nevertheless, I believe that other considerations are just as important as what we earn in our
jobs. Firstly, personal relationships and the atmosphere in a workplace are extremely important
when choosing a job. Having a good manager or friendly colleagues, for example, can make a
huge difference to workers’ levels of happiness and general quality of life. Secondly, many
people’s feelings of job satisfaction come from their professional achievements, the skills they
learn, and the position they reach, rather than the money they earn. Finally, some people choose
a career because they want to help others and contribute something positive to society.
In conclusion, while salaries certainly affect people’s choice of profession, I do not believe that
money outweighs all other motivators.

25
 Nowadays celebrities are more famous for their glamour and wealth than for their
achievements, and this sets a bad example to young people.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
It is true that some celebrities are known for their glamorous lifestyles rather than for the work
they do. While I agree that these celebrities set a bad example for children, I believe that other
famous people act as positive role models.
On the one hand, many people do achieve fame without really working for it. They may have
inherited money from parents, married a famous or wealthy person, or they may have appeared
in gossip magazines or on a reality TV programme. A good example would be Paris Hilton, who
is rich and famous for the wrong reasons. She spends her time attending parties and nightclubs,
and her behaviour promotes the idea that appearance, glamour and media profile are more
important than hard work and good character. The message to young people is that success can
be achieved easily, and that school work is not necessary.
On the other hand, there are at least as many celebrities whose accomplishments make them
excellent role models for young people. Actors, musicians and sports stars become famous idols
because they have worked hard and applied themselves to develop real skills and abilities. They
demonstrate great effort, determination and ambition, which is required for someone who wants
to be truly successful in their chosen field. An example is the actor and martial artist Jackie Chan,
who has become world famous through years of practice and hard work. This kind of self-made
celebrity can inspire children to develop their talents through application and perseverance.

26
 Families who send their children to private schools should not be required to pay taxes
that support the state education system.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Some people believe that parents of children who attend private schools should not need to
contribute to state schools through taxes. Personally, I completely disagree with this view.
For a variety of reasons, it would be wrong to reduce taxes for families who pay for private
education. Firstly, it would be difficult to calculate the correct amount of tax reduction for these
families, and staff would be required to manage this complex process. Secondly, we all pay a
certain amount of tax for public services that we may not use. For example, most people are
fortunate enough not to have to call the police or fire brigade at any time in their lives, but they
would not expect a tax reduction for this. Finally, if wealthy families were given a tax discount for
sending their children to private schools, we might have a situation where poorer people pay
higher taxes than the rich.
In my opinion, we should all be happy to pay our share of the money that supports public schools.
It is beneficial for all members of society to have a high quality education system with equal
opportunities for all young people. This will result in a well-educated workforce, and in turn a more
productive and prosperous nation. Parents of children in private schools may also see the
advantages of this in their own lives. For example, a company owner will need well qualified and
competent staff, and a well-funded education system can provide such employees.
In conclusion, I do not believe that any financial concessions should be made for people who
choose private education.

27
 Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, so protecting them is a waste of
resources. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Some people argue that it is pointless to spend money on the protection of wild animals because
we humans have no need for them. I completely disagree with this point of view.
In my opinion, it is absurd to argue that wild animals have no place in the 21st century. I do not
believe that planet Earth exists only for the benefit of humans, and there is nothing special about
this particular century that means that we suddenly have the right to allow or encourage the
extinction of any species. Furthermore, there is no compelling reason why we should let animals
die out. We do not need to exploit or destroy every last square metre of land in order to feed or
accommodate the world’s population. There is plenty of room for us to exist side by side with wild
animals, and this should be our aim.
I also disagree with the idea that protecting animals is a waste of resources. It is usually the
protection of natural habitats that ensures the survival of wild animals, and most scientists agree
that these habitats are also crucial for human survival. For example, rainforests produce oxygen,
absorb carbon dioxide and stabilise the Earth’s climate. If we destroyed these areas, the costs of
managing the resulting changes to our planet would far outweigh the costs of conservation. By
protecting wild animals and their habitats, we maintain the natural balance of all life on Earth.
In conclusion, we have no right to decide whether or not wild animals should exist, and I believe
that we should do everything we can to protect them.

28
 The older generations tend to have very traditional ideas about how people should live,
think and behave. However, some people believe that these ideas are not helpful in
preparing younger generations for modern life.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view?
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.

29
 Some people who have been in prison become good citizens later, and it is often argued
that these are the best people to talk to teenagers about the dangers of committing a crime.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is true that ex-prisoners can become normal, productive members of society. I completely
agree with the idea that allowing such people to speak to teenagers about their experiences is
the best way to discourage them from breaking the law.
In my opinion, teenagers are more likely to accept advice from someone who can speak from
experience. Reformed offenders can tell young people about how they became involved in crime,
the dangers of a criminal lifestyle, and what life in prison is really like. They can also dispel any
ideas that teenagers may have about criminals leading glamorous lives. While adolescents are
often indifferent to the guidance given by older people, I imagine that most of them would be
extremely keen to hear the stories of an ex-offender. The vivid and perhaps shocking nature of
these stories is likely to have a powerful impact.
The alternatives to using reformed criminals to educate teenagers about crime would be much
less effective. One option would be for police officers to visit schools and talk to young people.
This could be useful in terms of informing teens about what happens to lawbreakers when they
are caught, but young people are often reluctant to take advice from figures of authority. A second
option would be for school teachers to speak to their students about crime, but I doubt that
students would see teachers as credible sources of information about this topic. Finally,
educational films might be informative, but there would be no opportunity for young people to
interact and ask questions.
In conclusion, I fully support the view that people who have turned their lives around after serving
a prison sentence could help to deter teenagers from committing crimes.

30
 In some countries, many more people are choosing to live alone nowadays than in the
past. Do you think this is a positive or negative development?
In recent years it has become far more normal for people to live alone, particularly in large cities
in the developed world. In my opinion, this trend could have both positive and negative
consequences in equal measure.
The rise in one-person households can be seen as positive for both personal and broader
economic reasons. On an individual level, people who choose to live alone may become more
independent and self-reliant than those who live with family members. A young adult who lives
alone, for example, will need to learn to cook, clean, pay bills and manage his or her budget, all
of which are valuable life skills; an increase in the number of such individuals can certainly be
seen as a positive development. From an economic perspective, the trend towards living alone
will result in greater demand for housing. This is likely to benefit the construction industry, estate
agents and a whole host of other companies that rely on homeowners to buy their products or
services.
However, the personal and economic arguments given above can be considered from the
opposite angle. Firstly, rather than the positive feeling of increased independence, people who
live alone may experience feelings of loneliness, isolation and worry. They miss out on the
emotional support and daily conversation that family or flatmates can provide, and they must bear
the weight of all household bills and responsibilities; in this sense, perhaps the trend towards
living alone is a negative one. Secondly, from the financial point of view, a rise in demand for
housing is likely to push up property prices and rents. While this may benefit some businesses,
the general population, including those who live alone, will be faced with rising living costs.
In conclusion, the increase in one-person households will have both beneficial and detrimental
effects on individuals and on the economy.

31
 Although more and more people read news on the Internet, newspapers will remain the
most important source of news. Do you agree or disagree?

The Internet is beginning to rival newspapers as the best place to find information about what is
happening in the world. I believe that this trend will continue, and the Internet will soon be just as
important as the traditional press.
On the one hand, I believe that newspapers will continue to be a vital source of information,
even in the Internet age. Firstly, newspapers are the most traditional means of communicating
the news, and not everyone wants to or is able to use the Internet instead. For example, old
people or those in rural areas might not have the ability or opportunity to get online, while many
of us simply prefer newspapers even if we do have Internet access. Secondly, newspapers can
be trusted as reliable sources of news because they employ professional journalists and editors.
Finally, many people like the experience of holding and reading a paper rather than looking at a
computer screen.
However, the Internet is likely to become just as popular as newspapers for a variety of reasons.
The main reason is that it allows us much faster access to news in real time and wherever we
are, on different gadgets and mobile devices. Another key benefit of online news compared to
newspapers is the ability to share articles, discuss them with other people, give our views, and
even contribute with our own updates on social media. For example, there has been an explosion
in the use of platforms like Twitter and YouTube where anyone can share their news and views.
A final point is that this source of news is less damaging to the environment.
In conclusion, I disagree with the view that newspapers will continue to be the main source of
news, because I believe that the Internet will soon be equally important.

32
 As well as making money, businesses also have social responsibilities. To what extent
do you agree or disagree?

Businesses have always sought to make a profit, but it is becoming increasingly common to
hear people talk about the social obligations that companies have. I completely agree with the
idea that businesses should do more for society than simply make money.
On the one hand, I accept that businesses must make money in order to survive in a competitive
world. It seems logical that the priority of any company should be to cover its running costs, such
as employees’ wages and payments for buildings and utilities. On top of these costs, companies
also need to invest in improvements and innovations if they wish to remain successful. If a
company is unable to pay its bills or meet the changing needs of customers, any concerns about
social responsibilities become irrelevant. In other words, a company can only make a positive
contribution to society if it is in good financial health.
On the other hand, companies should not be run with the sole aim of maximising profit; they
have a wider role to play in society. One social obligation that owners and managers have is to
treat their employees well, rather than exploiting them. For example, they could pay a “living wage”
to ensure that workers have a good quality of life. I also like the idea that businesses could use a
proportion of their profits to support local charities, environmental projects or education initiatives.
Finally, instead of trying to minimise their tax payments by using accounting loopholes, I believe
that company bosses should be happy to contribute to society through the tax system.
In conclusion, I believe that companies should place as much importance on their social
responsibilities as they do on their financial objectives.

33
 Some people say that music is a good way of bringing people of different cultures and
ages together. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
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.

34
 In many countries today, people in cities either live alone or in small family units, rather
than in large, extended family groups. Is this a positive or negative trend?
It is true that cities are seeing a rise in smaller families and one-person households, while the
extended family is becoming a rarity. In my opinion, this is a negative development.
As families become smaller, the traditional family support network is disappearing, and this can
have a negative impact on children as they grow up. In a nuclear family or single-parent
household, childcare becomes an expensive and stressful part of daily life. Without the help of
grandparents or aunts and uncles, busy parents must rely on babysitters, nannies and after-
school clubs to take care of younger children, while older children may be left alone after school
and during holidays. The absence of adult family members can mean that friends, television and
the Internet become the primary influences on children’s behaviour. It is no surprise that the
decline of the extended family has been linked to a rise in psychological and behavioural problems
amongst young people.
The trend towards people living alone is perhaps even more damaging because of the
psychological effects of reduced human interaction. Individuals who live on their own have nobody
to talk to in person, so they cannot share problems or discuss the highs and lows of daily life.
They forgo the constant stimulation and hustle and bustle of a large family, and are left to their
own devices for extended periods of time. The lack of human contact in the home is necessarily
replaced by passive distractions, such as television, video games, online chat rooms or Internet
surfing. This type of existence is associated with boredom, loneliness, and feelings of isolation or
even alienation, all of which are factors that are known to increase the risk of mental illness.
In conclusion, I believe that individuals thrive when they are part of larger family groups, and so
it is worrying that many people are choosing to live alone or in such small family units.

35
 Some people believe that nowadays we have too many choices. To what extent do you
agree or disagree with this statement?
It is often said that modern life presents us with an overwhelming number of choices. I
completely agree with this, and I believe that the Internet and globalisation are the two major
factors involved.
It is undeniable that the Internet has led to a dramatic expansion in the number of choices that
are available to us. The number of online media options, for instance, is now almost endless.
There are countless websites offering entertainment, news, videos, on-demand TV and music
streaming, many of which are free. I would argue that this abundance of media leads to confusion
on the part of the average user, as we have to make so many decisions about the content that
we consume. A personal example of this trend would be the fact that I had a choice of just four
TV channels when I was a child, whereas I now have access to thousands of films and series
through services like Netflix.
Alongside the influence of the Internet, globalisation is making the world smaller and
compounding this problem of too much choice. Cheap international flights have made overseas
travel possible for millions of people, but this also means that we are faced with a world of options
when deciding where to go on holiday or even where to live. We no longer have the limited but
simple travel choices of our grandparents’ generation. The same is true if we look at the increasing
tendency for young people to study abroad. While the opportunity for overseas study seems
appealing, many students are confused about where to go and which path to take.
In conclusion, we are faced with a huge number of options in most areas of life nowadays, and
this is often more bewildering than beneficial.

36
 Popular hobbies and interests change over time and are more a reflection of trends and
fashions than an indication of what individuals really want to do in their spare time. To
what extent do you agree or disagree?
Some leisure activities become fashionable for a short time and then disappear when a new
trend comes along, whereas others seem to be perennially popular. I can therefore only partly
agree with the assertion that hobbies reflect changing fashions rather than our true interests.
On the one hand, it is true that many hobbies are simply passing trends. Children and teenagers,
in particular, are attracted to whatever activity is currently popular among their peers. My 10-year-
old niece, for example, seems to have a new interest every month, as she joins in with the latest
craze that sweeps through her primary school. Over the last year or so, she has been obsessed
with Rubik’s cubes, fidget spinners, squidgies and slime. In a similar way, there have been several
different fitness trends for adults over recent years, from jogging to yoga to circuit training, and I
doubt whether the majority of participants continued to enjoy those activities in the long term.
On the other hand, many people spend their free time doing popular activities that are far from
trendy. One good example would be the game chess. Children and adults who enjoy playing
chess are certainly not following a new fashion or wasting their time on something that they do
not truly like. On the contrary, they are passionate about a game that has existed for hundreds of
years, and they find it inherently fascinating and absorbing. I would say the same about many
other hobbies, from reading to swimming.

37
 Some people believe that developments in the field of artificial intelligence will have a
positive impact on our lives in the near future. Others, by contrast, are worried that we are
not prepared for a world in which computers are more intelligent than humans. Discuss
both of these views and give your own opinion.
People seem to be either excited or worried about the future impact of artificial intelligence.
Personally I can understand the two opposing points of view; I am both fascinated by
developments in artificial intelligence and apprehensive about its possible negative effects.
On the one hand, the increasing intelligence of technology should bring some obvious benefits.
Machines are clearly able to do many jobs better than humans can, especially in areas that require
high levels of accuracy or calculations using large amounts of data. For example, robots are being
developed that can carry out surgical procedures with greater precision than a human doctor, and
we already have cars that use sensors and cameras to drive themselves. Such technologies can
improve safety by reducing the likelihood of human errors. It is easy to imagine how these
developments, and many others, will steadily improve our quality of life.
On the other hand, I share the concerns of people who believe that artificial intelligence may
harm us if we are not careful. In the short term, it is likely that we will see a rise in unemployment
as workers in various industries are replaced by machines or software programs. For example,
self-driving vehicles are expected to cause redundancies in driving jobs, such as lorry drivers, taxi
drivers and bus drivers. In the medium term, if intelligent technologies gradually take jobs away
from humans, we may find that people become deskilled and lose their sense of purpose in life.
A longer term fear is that computers become so intelligent that they begin to make decisions
without human oversight and without regard for our well-being.
In conclusion, while intelligent machines will no doubt improve our lives in many ways, the
potential risks of such technologies should not be ignored.

38
 Today, the high sales of popular consumer goods reflect the power of advertising and
not the real needs of the society in which they are sold. To what extent do you agree or
disagree?
It is true that we are increasingly surrounded by advertising by companies that want to sell us
their products. To some extent I agree that advertising has an impact on sales, but I would also
argue that we do need most of the goods that we buy.
Advertisements can certainly tempt people to buy products that they might not otherwise want.
A good example could be the mobile phone. Every year people can be seen queuing to buy the
latest models, even when they already have a perfectly good phone that does not need replacing.
Perhaps it is the influence of marketing that leads us to make these kinds of decisions; we want
to stay up to date with the latest fashions or own the newest high-status device. The high sales
of the iPhone seem to support this idea.
On the other hand, I believe that most people do not buy products because of the advertising
alone. There are other good reasons why we make these choices, and there must be some kind
of need before a person makes a purchase. New versions of products almost always have
improved features that buyers may want. A new car, for example, may have greatly improved
safety features, or it may be more economical to run, or it may pollute less. A new phone may
allow the user to communicate more quickly or effectively, thus enhancing their quality of life.
In conclusion, while advertising obviously influences our buying behaviour, I do not agree that
people make decisions that go against their real needs.

39
 Some people believe that it is more important to teach children the literature and history
of their own country, rather than the literature and history of other countries. To what
extent do you agree or disagree?
People have different views about the teaching of national versus global literature and history in
schools. Personally, I support the idea that children should study first and foremost the great
books and historical events of their own countries.
There are several reasons why I believe that schools should focus on teaching national literature
and history. Firstly, children enjoy learning about where they live, and by studying the ideas,
culture and history of their own countries they begin to develop a sense of identity. At the same
time, this approach is appealing to parents, who studied the same books and historical events
and can therefore help their children with school work. English children, for example, read
Shakespeare and learn about the Battle of Hastings just as their parents did, and there is
educational continuity across the generations. Finally, an emphasis on national literature and
history gives educators a narrower teaching scope, making curriculum design an easier task.
By contrast, the study of global events and foreign novels could cause unnecessary difficulty
and confusion for school pupils. For example, I do not see the point in presenting Russian or
Chinese history to a British child who has not yet studied the history of his or her own country in
detail. Surely the child would be more able to comprehend historical events that took place in
London than those that happened in Moscow or Beijing. Similarly, any exposure to international
literature is likely to require the teaching of a foreign language or the use of translations. Young
people at primary or secondary school age are simply not ready for such complications.
In conclusion, I would argue that it is undesirable for schools to cover aspects of foreign history
and literature; they should ground their pupils in the local culture instead.

40
 Caring for children is probably the most important job in any society. Because of this, all
mothers and fathers should be required to take a course that prepares them to be good
parents. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view?
It is true that parents shoulder a huge responsibility and that raising children is by no means an
easy task. However, I completely disagree with the idea that we should therefore force all mothers
and fathers to attend parenting courses.
In my opinion, the idea that all future parents should take a parenthood preparation course is
completely impractical. Many prospective parents have jobs and busy schedules, and they may
not be willing or able to attend regular parenting classes. This raises the question of whether
those who missed the classes, or perhaps refused to attend, would be punished. I believe that it
would be wrong to do this, and it would therefore be impossible to enforce the idea of compulsory
training for parents. Besides, even if parents could be forced to attend, I doubt that people would
agree on what good parenting entails, and so it would be difficult to create a parenting course to
suit everyone.
As well as being impractical, I would argue that training courses for parents are unnecessary.
Mothers and fathers have been raising children without any formal help or official interference for
thousands of years. Parenting skills are learnt from family members, friends, neighbours and the
surrounding culture. Perhaps more importantly, adults learn to be good parents by instinct, by trial
and error, and by getting to know their own children; for example, a good parent will try different
strategies when faced with a badly-behaved child, and will gradually develop an understanding of
what works to correct the behaviour. None of this requires the intervention of a taught course.
In conclusion, while compulsory parenting lessons might seem like a good idea, I believe that
such a scheme would be unworkable and largely pointless.

41
 Some people think that employers should not care about the way their employees dress,
because what matters is the quality of their work. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
In the modern workplace, dress codes are changing as employers focus more on results than
on the rules that employees must follow. While I agree that the way people dress should be seen
as irrelevant in many work contexts, I believe that dress codes still exist for good reason in certain
professions.
On the one hand, many employers have stopped telling their staff how to dress, and I see this
as a positive trend. Some of the most successful companies in the world, including technology
giants like Google and Facebook, are famous for the relaxed office environments that they try to
create. Employees are encouraged to dress casually, and even the company executives and
leaders are rarely seen wearing anything other than T-shirts and jeans. However, while managers
and programmers are free to dress how they like, they are expected to produce work of
outstanding quality. It is clear from the performance and global dominance of such companies
that strict dress codes are completely unnecessary in the technology sector.
However, I would also argue that rules regarding employees' clothing are still relevant in other
work situations. We expect certain professionals, such as nurses, police officers and airline pilots,
to wear uniforms. These uniforms may have a practical or safety function, but perhaps more
importantly they identify the person’s position or role in society. Similarly, a lawyer, politician or
school principal may choose to wear formal clothing in order to portray an image of authority,
trustworthiness and diligence. I believe that most of us prefer to see these professionals in smart,
formal attire, even if it is not strictly necessary.
In conclusion, I support the trend towards relaxed dress codes for workers, but I do not see it as
applicable to all occupations or sectors of the economy.

42
 Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled. They say that
the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement.

To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste?
It is true that we do not recycle enough of our household waste. Although I accept that new
legislation to force people to recycle could help this situation, I do not agree that a recycling law
is the only measure that governments should take.
In my view, a new recycling law would be just one possible way to tackle the waste problem.
Governments could make it a legal obligation for householders to separate all waste into different
bins. There could be punishments for people who fail to adhere to this law, ranging from a small
fine to community service, or even perhaps prison sentences for repeat offenders. These
measures would act as a deterrent and encourage people to obey the recycling law. As a result,
the improved behaviour of homeowners could lead to a clean, waste-free environment for
everyone.
However, I believe that governments should do more than simply introduce a recycling law. It
might be more effective if politicians put education, rather than punishment, at the centre of a
recycling campaign. For example, children could be taught about recycling in schools, and
homeowners could be informed about the environmental impact of household waste. Another
tactic that governments could use would be to create stricter regulations for the companies that
produce the packaging for household products. Finally, money could also be spent to improve
recycling facilities and systems, so that waste is processed more effectively, regardless of
whether or not people separate it correctly in the home.
In conclusion, perhaps we do need to make recycling a legal requirement, but this would
certainly not be the only way to encourage people to dispose of their waste more responsibly.

43
 In many cities the use of video cameras in public places is being increased in order to
reduce crime, but some people believe that these measures restrict our individual freedom.
Do the benefits of increased security outweigh the drawbacks?
It is true that video surveillance has become commonplace in many cities in recent years. While
I understand that critics may see this as an invasion of privacy, I believe that the benefits do
outweigh the drawbacks.
There are two main reasons why people might disapprove of the use of video cameras in public
places. The first objection is that these cameras invade our privacy, in the sense that we are
constantly being watched by the authorities or by private security firms. Many people find this
intrusive and feel that the recording of their movements is a form of state control that curtails their
individual freedom. The second argument against the proliferation of CCTV cameras is that they
are being used as an alternative to police officers patrolling the streets. If this is indeed happening,
then it is unlikely that members of the public will feel safer.
In spite of the drawbacks mentioned above, I believe that the use of video cameras to monitor
public areas is a positive measure. The key objective of video surveillance is to deter criminals
and to prevent crime. For example, petty criminals like shoplifters and pickpockets are less likely
to operate in parts of cities where they know that they are being watched. At the same time, when
crimes are committed, the police can use video evidence to catch and prosecute offenders.
Therefore, in my view, video cameras offer valuable support to police officers, and they make
cities safer for inhabitants, workers and visitors alike.
In conclusion, it seems to me that we gain more than we lose from the enhanced security that
CCTV cameras bring to our cities.

44
 Some parents buy their children whatever they ask for, and allow their children to do
whatever they want. Is this a good way to raise children? What consequences could this
style of parenting have for children as they get older?
It is true that some parents are overly permissive and tend to spoil their children. In my opinion,
this is not a good parenting style, and it can have a range of negative long-term consequences.
If parents want to raise respectful and well-behaved children, I believe that a certain amount of
discipline is necessary. Having worked with children myself, I have learnt that clear expectations
and boundaries are necessary, and it is important to be able to say ‘no’ to children when they
misbehave or try to push against these boundaries. This is the only way to help young people to
regulate their desires and develop self-control. In my view, parents who do the opposite and
constantly give in to their children’s demands, are actually doing more harm than good. They are
failing their children rather than being kind to them.
The children of indulgent or lenient parents are likely to grow up with several negative personality
traits. The first and most obvious danger is that these children will become self-centred adults
who show little consideration for the feelings or needs of others. One consequence of such an
attitude could be that these adults are unable to work successfully in teams with other colleagues.
A second negative trait in such people could be impulsiveness. A person who has never lived with
any boundaries is likely to lack the patience to carefully consider options before making decisions.
This may lead, for example, to compulsive shopping, unwise financial decisions, or even criminal
activity.
In conclusion, parents should help their children to develop self-control and respect for others,
and I do not believe that the permissive parenting style supports this objective.

45
 Some people believe that school children should not be given homework by their
teachers, whereas others argue that homework plays an important role in the education of
children. Discuss both of these views and give your own opinion.
People’s opinions differ as to whether or not school children should be given homework. While
there are some strong arguments against the setting of homework, I still believe that it is a
necessary aspect of education.
There are several reasons why people might argue that homework is an unnecessary burden
on children. Firstly, there is evidence to support the idea that homework does nothing to improve
educational outcomes. Countries such as Finland, where school children are not given homework,
regularly top international educational league tables and outperform nations where setting
homework is the norm. Secondly, many parents would agree that the school day is already long
enough, and leaves their children too tired to do further study when they return home. Finally, it
is recognised that play time is just as beneficial as study time from the perspective of brain
development.
In spite of the above arguments, I support the view that homework has an important role to play
in the schooling of children. The main benefit of homework is that it encourages independent
learning and problem solving, as children are challenged to work through tasks alone and at their
own pace. In doing so, students must apply the knowledge that they have learnt in the classroom.
For example, by doing mathematics exercises at home, students consolidate their understanding
of the concepts taught by their teacher at school. In my view, it is important for children to develop
an independent study habit because this prepares them to work alone as adults.
In conclusion, homework certainly has its drawbacks, but I believe that the benefits outweigh
them in the long term.

46
 Some universities now offer their courses on the Internet so that people can study online.
Is this a positive or negative development?
It is true that online courses are becoming a common feature of university education. Although
there are some drawbacks of Internet-based learning, I would argue that there are far more
benefits.
The main drawback of the trend towards online university courses is that there is less direct
interaction. Students may not have the opportunity to engage face-to-face with their teachers, and
will instead have to rely on written forms of communication. Similarly, students who study online
do not come into direct contact with each other, and this could have a negative impact on peer
support, discussion and exchange of ideas. For example, whereas students on traditional courses
can attend seminars and even discuss their subjects over coffee after lessons, online learners
are restricted to chatting through website forum areas. These learners may also lack the
motivation and element of competition that face-to-face group work brings.
Despite the negatives mentioned above, I believe that online university courses are a positive
development for various reasons. Firstly, they allow learners to study in a flexible way, meaning
that they can work whenever and wherever is convenient, and they can cover the material at their
own pace. Secondly, the cost of a university education can be greatly reduced, while revenues
for institutions may increase as more students can be taught. Finally, online learning offers open
access to anybody who is willing to study, regardless of age, location, ability and background. For
example, my uncle, who is 65 years old, has recently enrolled on an online MBA course in a
different country, which would have been impossible in the days before Internet-based education.
In conclusion, while I recognise the possible disadvantages of online learning, I consider it to be
a positive development overall.

47
 It is inevitable that traditional cultures will be lost as technology develops. Technology
and traditional cultures are incompatible. To what extent do you agree or disagree with
this view?
Some people believe that technological developments lead to the loss of traditional cultures. I
partly agree with this assertion; while it may be true in the case of some societies, others seem
to be unaffected by technology and the modern world.
On the one hand, the advances in technology that have driven industrialisation in developed
countries have certainly contributed to the disappearance of traditional ways of life. For example,
in pre-industrial Britain, generations of families grew up in the same small village communities.
These communities had a strong sense of identity, due to their shared customs and beliefs.
However, developments in transport, communications and manufacturing led to the dispersal of
families and village communities as people moved to the cities in search of work. Nowadays most
British villages are inhabited by commuters, many of whom do not know their closest neighbours.
On the other hand, in some parts of the world traditional cultures still thrive. There are tribes in
the Amazon Rainforest, for example, that have been completely untouched by the technological
developments of the developed world. These tribal communities continue to hunt and gather food
from the forest, and traditional skills are passed on to children by parents and elders. Other
traditional cultures, such as farming communities in parts of Africa, are embracing
communications technologies. Mobile phones give farmers access to information, from weather
predictions to market prices, which helps them to prosper and therefore supports their culture.
In conclusion, many traditional ways of life have been lost as a result of advances in technology,
but other traditional communities have survived and even flourished.

48
 Most people have forgotten the meaning behind traditional or religious festivals; during
festival periods, people nowadays only want to enjoy themselves. To what extent do you
agree or disagree with this opinion?
Some people argue that we no longer remember the original meaning of festivals, and that most
of us treat them as opportunities to have fun. While I agree that enjoyment seems to be the priority
during festival times, I do not agree that people have forgotten what these festivals mean.
On the one hand, religious and traditional festivals have certainly become times for celebration.
In the UK, Christmas is a good example of a festival period when people are most concerned with
shopping, giving and receiving presents, decorating their homes and enjoying traditional meals
with their families. Most people look forward to Christmas as a holiday period, rather than a time
to practise religion. Similar behaviour can be seen during non-religious festivals, such as Bonfire
Night. People associate this occasion with making fires, watching firework displays, and perhaps
going to large events in local parks; in other words, enjoyment is people’s primary goal.
However, I disagree with the idea that the underlying meaning of such festivals has been
forgotten. In UK primary schools, children learn in detail about the religious reasons for celebrating
Christmas, Easter and a variety of festivals in other religions. For example, in late December,
children sing Christmas songs which have a religious content, and they may even perform nativity
plays telling the story of Jesus’ birth. Families also play a role in passing knowledge of religious
festivals’ deeper significance on to the next generation. The same is true for festivals that have a
historical background, such as Bonfire Night or Halloween, in the sense that people generally
learn the stories behind these occasions at an early age.
In conclusion, although people mainly want to enjoy themselves during festivals, I believe that
they are still aware of the reasons for these celebrations.

49
 Extreme sports such as sky diving and skiing are very dangerous and should be banned.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view?
In recent years, extreme sports have become increasingly popular, and some people argue that
governments should prohibit them. I completely disagree with the idea that these sports are too
dangerous, and I therefore believe that they should not be banned.
In my opinion, so-called extreme sports are not as dangerous as many people think. All sports
involve some element of risk, and there should always be clear regulations and safety procedures
to reduce the possibility of accidents. People who take part in extreme sports are usually required
to undergo appropriate training so that the dangers are minimised. For example, anyone who
wants to try skydiving will need to sign up for lessons with a registered club, and beginners are
not allowed to dive solo; they must be accompanied by an experienced professional. Finally, the
protective equipment and technology used in sports from motor racing to mountain climbing is
constantly improving safety.
While I support regulations and safety measures, I believe that it would be wrong, and almost
impossible, to ban extreme sports. In the first place, we should all be free to decide how we spend
our leisure time; as long as we understand the risks, I do not believe that politicians should stop
us from enjoying ourselves. However, an even stronger argument against such a ban would be
the difficulty of enforcing it. Many of the most risky sports, like base jumping or big wave surfing,
are practised far away from the reach of any authorities. I cannot imagine the police being called
to stop people from parachuting off a mountain face or surfing on an isolated beach.

50
 In many countries, a small number of people earn extremely high salaries. Some people
believe that this is good for the country, but others think that governments should not
allow salaries above a certain level.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
People have different views about whether governments should introduce a maximum wage.
While in some ways it may seem reasonable to allow people to earn as much as companies are
willing to pay, I personally believe that employee remuneration should be capped at a certain
level.
There are various reasons why it might be considered beneficial to allow people to be paid
extremely high salaries. If companies offer excellent pay packages, they can attract the most
talented people in their fields to work for them. For example, technology companies like Google
are able to employ the best programmers because of the huge sums that they are willing to pay.
Furthermore, these well-paid employees are likely to be highly motivated to work hard and
therefore drive their businesses successfully. In theory, this should result in a thriving economy
and increased tax revenues, which means that paying high salaries benefits everyone.
However, I agree with those who argue that there should be a maximum wage. By introducing
a limit on earnings, the pay-gap between bosses and employees can be reduced. Currently, the
difference between normal and top salaries is huge, and this can demotivate workers who feel
that the situation is unfair. With lower executive salaries, it might become feasible to introduce
higher minimum wages, and everybody would be better off. One possible consequence of greater
equality could be that poverty and crime rates fall because the general population will experience
an improved standard of living.
In conclusion, it seems to me that it would be better, on balance, for governments to set a limit
on the wages of the highest earners in society.

51
 Some people think that instead of preventing climate change, we need to find a way to
live with it. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Climate change represents a major threat to life on Earth, but some people argue that we need
to accept it rather than try to stop it. I completely disagree with this opinion, because I believe that
we still have time to tackle this issue and reduce the human impact on the Earth's climate.
There are various measures that governments and individuals could take to prevent, or at least
mitigate, climate change. Governments could introduce laws to limit the carbon dioxide emissions
that lead to global warming. They could impose “green taxes” on drivers, airline companies and
other polluters, and they could invest in renewable energy production from solar, wind or water
power. As individuals, we should also try to limit our contribution to climate change, by becoming
more energy efficient, by flying less, and by using bicycles and public transport. Furthermore, the
public can affect the actions of governments by voting for politicians who propose to tackle climate
change, rather than for those who would prefer to ignore it.
If instead of taking the above measures we simply try to live with climate change, I believe that
the consequences will be disastrous. To give just one example, I am not optimistic that we would
be able to cope with even a small rise in sea levels. Millions of people would be displaced by
flooding, particularly in countries that do not have the means to safeguard low-lying areas. These
people would lose their homes and their jobs, and they would be forced to migrate to nearby cities
or perhaps to other countries. The potential for human suffering would be huge, and it is likely
that we would see outbreaks of disease and famine, as well as increased homelessness and
poverty.
In conclusion, it is clear to me that we must address the problem of climate change, and I
disagree with those who argue that we can find ways to live with it.

52
 Many governments think that economic progress is their most important goal. Some
people, however, think that other types of progress are equally important for a country.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
People have different views about how governments should measure their countries’ progress.
While economic progress is of course essential, I agree with those who believe that other
measures of progress are just as important.
There are three key reasons why economic growth is seen as a fundamental goal for countries.
Firstly, a healthy economy results in job creation, a high level of employment, and better salaries
for all citizens. Secondly, economic progress ensures that more money is available for
governments to spend on infrastructure and public services. For example, a government with
higher revenues can invest in the country's transport network, its education system and its
hospitals. Finally, a strong economy can help a country’s standing on the global stage, in terms
of its political influence and trading power.
However, I would argue that various other forms of progress are just as significant as the
economic factors mentioned above. In particular, we should consider the area of social justice,
human rights, equality and democracy itself. For example, the treatment of minority groups is
often seen as a reflection of the moral standards and level of development of a society. Perhaps
another key consideration when judging the progress of a modern country should be how well
that country protects the natural environment, and whether it is moving towards environmental
sustainability. Alternatively, the success of a nation could be measured by looking at the health,
well-being and happiness of its residents.
In conclusion, the economy is obviously a key marker of a country’s success, but social,
environmental and health criteria are equally significant.

53