IELTS - Writing - For Band 7 or Above.

[H0peAndFa1th]

Some people believe that a vertical city in which people work and live in tall buildings is a good idea. Others say that horizontal living is better. Discuss both views and express your opinion.

Understand the question first, know the tricks in question, there are always two things in a a whole essay question,

First thing: a topic, an idea, an issue : here it's vertical tall buildings or horizontal , now there are two things. see it first.

Second thing: original question ->

if you already know that, good, but, if you don't know that what a question is ? or here, believe me, you are in a serious problem. Here question is "Discuss both views and express your opinion.", now again it has three parts​

First part : discuss one side (which is : vertical tall buildings)

Second part : discuss second side (which is : horizontal buildings)

Third part : your opinion, which is : I agree with a/b, I partly agree with a or b or both etc, I can't agree with anything it depends on the need or availability, it is your own opinion, you can say whatever you want !! mind it, be creative and unique.

why question has three parts ? because it says so, Discuss both views,mean two things, which are different or opposite view/idea/issue etc, " express your opinion." this tells the third part.
​

if I am about to do things in an order, I would not give my opinion in intro, BP1 or BP2, may be in BP3 or in conclusion.

There is no doubt that most cities are in need of more and more buildings to accommodate the largely increasing population. To lead this development, many people are in support of constructing the taller buildings, however, others opine to build them horizontally wide and not vertically high. As far as, my view is concerned, I am of the opinion that taller buildings offer more advantages than horizontal. This essay will discuss both the sides of this argument and will provide support to my opinion.

S1: fine
S1: fine
S3: As far as, totally wrong, you must not give your opinion,
S4: you turned it to an argument essay, its discussion essay!!, again wrong.

To commence with, people in support of low rise and widely spread construction argue that this way of development provides a better sense of neighborhood, and offers a better social bond among its residents. For instance, people living side by side are more prone to interact with each other than living above or below them. This provides a better sense of social relationship, and encourage people to engage in social as well as personal discussion. If there is no social interaction, a society will lose its significance and importance.

S1: fine
S1: example does not seem convincing, even there is no problem in it, but the word prone has negative connotation, you use it for positive, sounds awkward. better word is "tend to" "likely to" "happen to be"
S3: fine
S4: will lose its significance and importance. sorry seems too far fetched to me, by the way what is significance and importance in this context ? I can't see it (sorry) the word "will" make it definitive, means it must happen, avoid it, change it to "a society could lose its significance and importance." because, you never know, you can never be sure, so hand anything like that to could, its the best strategy. by using could, you are saying it is possible, may be, there is a chance etc.
and there is technical name for this whole thing called "generalization" look here : http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-generalization.html ,you will get the idea.

problem : you did not linked back to main idea of essay, remember cohesion and coherence ??
[S1]better social bond = [S3] personal discussion == good, proves the point.
But S4 is not a good conclusion, or say bad conclusion. what it should be it :
Therefore/hence/thus, living horizontally enhance the living experience by improving social ties.

living horizontally : is main idea - restated - linked to main idea, - user/reader know what you want to say by all this.
living experience and improving social ties : is your own idea : taken from first sentence which you proved by an example, word "bond" became "ties" so its rephrased, counts in vocabulary.

remember :
if living horizontally enhance the living experience, then this kind of line improves reader experience and band score consequently.

On the other hand, high-rise societies are beneficial in terms of accommodating multiple families in the comparatively very small area. To explain, a tall building in a few meters of the area can facilitate to inhibit more than 200 families in a twenty-five stories building. Thus, contributing to resolving land scarcity problems in various metro cities, such as New Delhi. This development provides an opportunity to leave open spaces for children parks and game fields, and also allow to build places for the members of society to relax, and lead a stress-free life.

all fine but..

count how many ideas in your this paragraph
very small area
land scarcity problems
children parks and game fields
members of society to relax
lead a stress-free life

and cynical person can even find more,
don't expect from examiner to glue your ideas, in his mind for your betterment or gain, got me ?? he simply will not.
its your duty to give him a ready-made, well-prepared meal, which is too easy to to eat, like drive thru burger with large coke.

you need only one idea, then elaborate the idea, give supporting examples, statements, arguments, logic, whatever is there to give.to improve this you need an umbrella

change to
On the other hand, high-rise societies are beneficial in terms of resolving various issues related to scarcity of land in metropolitan cities.

various issues related to scarcity of land in metropolitan cities = umbrella - take under whatever you want.
even that is your own idea, i didn't introduced anything new. its just matter of, how you present.

Final:
On the other hand, high-rise societies are beneficial in terms of resolving various issues related to scarcity of land in metropolitan cities.To explain, a tall building in a few meters of the area can facilitate to inhibit more than 200 families in a twenty-five stories building, where many kilometers of land would be needed for horizontal plain residency for even less amount of families. This saved land could be used for open space parks and game fields for children, and build recreational activity centers for adults where they can de-stress themselves from hectic lifestyle of metro cities.Hence, vertical housing options serves the purpose better, where land is scarce.
or
vertical housing options accommodate the needs, where land is scarce.

vertical housing options : closed the paragraph and gives purpose to the paragraph, make much more sense to reader.
scarcity becomes scarce, its new word with changed form, counts in vocabulary. now they know you know two forms of a word.

Personally, I believe that in future the problem of land crisis is going to rise, and there will not be any open space left for people and children to re-energize. Therefore, mega-structures is a prudent alternative to be made now, rather than repenting in future.

nice idea, but ...
S1: there will not be any open space left for people and children to re-energize = wrong logic
what do you mean by open space, does it mean space it there but its closed today ? or do you mean by a open space park ?
they are two different things, examiner will take the liberty to deem it as wrong, sorry for that, they are there to find your mistakes not ignore them.

S2: nice words, prudent, repenting
but...
Personally, I believe that the problem of land crisis is going to rise in the future, and and places for recreational activities is essential for current and future generations. Therefore, going vertical is prudent choice, rather than squander it.
Or
Therefore, going vertical is prudent choice, as we don't have luxury of unlimited land to squander. [idiomatic language]

To conclude, although development parallel to earth may seem to provide a better social bonding with neighbors, but in order to tackle the land crisis, high-rise building blocks is a viable option to maintain open to occupied land ratio.

S1: parallel to earth ??? where buddy ? totally wrong logic. nothing could be parallel to earth in any way, its a sphere in space resulting in unlimited directions. got it ? if you chose to go in one direction and i chose slightly another, my parallel plain will crash in yours, resulting in failure to find the right parallel plain.

change some wording, rest is fine. don't try to make things bold always, always will be always a problem.

S2: again open in open ended word, with no actual meaning. in your mind, you define what a open land is, in my mind its something else, so don't give the reader a chance to misinterpret things, use precise words to mean clearly.

To conclude, although development in horizontal plain may seem to provide a better life experience, but in order to tackle the land crisis, high-rise building blocks is a viable option to maintain a judicious living and recreational space ratio.

Does it worth at least a 7?

6.5

me judging you, does not mean me is best, I write like you, even worst

 

[nns14]

Hi Guys,

I will appreciate if you could provide your feedback and a potential band for the below essay. I am struggling with Writing at the moment.

Some people believe that a vertical city in which people work and live in tall buildings is a good idea. Others say that horizontal living is better. Discuss both views and express your opinion.

There is no doubt that most cities are in need of more and more buildings to accommodate the largely increasing population. To lead this development, many people are in support of constructing the taller buildings, however, others opine to build them horizontally wide and not vertically high. As far as, my view is concerned, I am of the opinion that taller buildings offer more advantages than horizontal. This essay will discuss both the sides of this argument and will provide support to my opinion.

First of all, I am not going to comment on your grammar mistakes; I am weak in this area.

I believe this paragraph there are two things you should improve. One is the vocabulary. If you can use better words such as Skyscraper, Condominium, apartment, bungalow, rather than 'taller buildings', 'horizontally wide', 'vertically high'.

Second point is, for discussion type of essays, you must not state your opinion in the introduction. The point of discussion is to see from both angles then come to conclusion. So, in your conclusion, you will have your 'view'.

To commence with, people in support of low rise and widely spread construction argue that this way of development provides a better sense of neighborhood, and offers a better social bond among its residents. For instance, people living side by side are more prone to interact with each other than living above or below them. This provides a better sense of social relationship, and encourage people to engage in social as well as personal discussion. If there is no social interaction, a society will lose its significance and importance.

I really like your structure here. Your topic sentence is clear and followed with example. The third sentence also connects the example and topic sentence. I believe here you should have added one more sentence which connects your paragraph to the main thesis "That is why, bungalows and similar types of housings are the preferred choice by some."

I think the example is little too vague. It is little too general and based on comments I have read from professionals they could say this 'lacks focus'. I will show you what I mean in the next paragraph.

On the other hand, high-rise societies are beneficial in terms of accommodating multiple families in the comparatively very small area. To explain, a tall building in a few meters of the area can facilitate to inhibit more than 200 families in a twenty-five stories building. Thus, contributing to resolving land scarcity problems in various metro cities, such as New Delhi. This development provides an opportunity to leave open spaces for children parks and game fields, and also allow to build places for the members of society to relax, and lead a stress-free life.

I like your topic sentence as it is clearly pointing out the competitive advantage tall buildings have over flat type of housing. Again, I am bit skeptical on how the example was worded. "To illustrate, a tall building in New Delhi with a base size of 50 meter square inhibits 200 families whereas for the same area-size only 3 small apartments can be fitted to with a total of 8 families; for this city, where land is scarcity, it is obvious where its benefits lie." (I am not sure about the spelling of "lie" here lol)

I really like your third sentence as it links very well the example to the topic sentence just like your other paragraph. However, like I said above, you need to have one more sentence bringing the thesis back to this paragraph.

Personally, I believe that in future the problem of land crisis is going to rise, and there will not be any open space left for people and children to re-energize. Therefore, mega-structures is a prudent alternative to be made now, rather than repenting in future. (You should never have two sentence paragraph especially in the middle of the essay. You can get away with two sentence in conclusion if you can complex sentences and/or complex-compund sentence type). (These two sentences should be part of the conclusion and the last two sentences of the essay as they are talking about future events in regards to this topic which is good.)

To conclude, although development parallel to earth (I don't understand this part) may seem to provide a better social bonding with neighbors, but in order to tackle the land crisis, high-rise building blocks is a viable option to maintain open to occupied land ratio.

I need W:7.5 or in worst case at least a 7.
Does it worth at least a 7?

Please check my in-line comments for above two paragraphs
I would have written it this way:

To conclude, the togetherness small houses bring to societies is liked by many, while others support that high-rise buildings benefit the ever growing population. I believe there is a clear benefit for tall buildings, thus, I support this notion. With the estimated rise in population in the coming decades, this is unlikely to change in the near future.

Personally I think your essay is worth 6.5. Your points are valid and well argued. However, the structure of the essay needs an improvement. In addition, the examples need to be direct and convincing. You can see how examples are presented in band 8 and 9 essays then you can do the same.

You can easily improve to 7.5. The difference between 6.5 and 7.5 is little in my opinion. It is little tweaks here and there and with a better grammar percentage.

I am not expert so take it with ease.

 

[nns14]

Understand the question first, know the tricks in question, there are always two things in a a whole essay question,

First thing: a topic, an idea, an issue : here it's vertical tall buildings or horizontal , now there are two things. see it first.

Second thing: original question ->

if you already know that, good, but, if you don't know that what a question is ? or here, believe me, you are in a serious problem. Here question is "Discuss both views and express your opinion.", now again it has three parts​

First part : discuss one side (which is : vertical tall buildings)

Second part : discuss second side (which is : horizontal buildings)

Third part : your opinion, which is : I agree with a/b, I partly agree with a or b or both etc, I can't agree with anything it depends on the need or availability, it is your own opinion, you can say whatever you want !! mind it, be creative and unique.

why question has three parts ? because it says so, Discuss both views,mean two things, which are different or opposite view/idea/issue etc, " express your opinion." this tells the third part.
​

if I am about to do things in an order, I would not give my opinion in intro, BP1 or BP2, may be in BP3 or in conclusion.


S1: fine
S1: fine
S3: As far as, totally wrong, you must not give your opinion,
S4: you turned it to an argument essay, its discussion essay!!, again wrong.



S1: fine
S1: example does not seem convincing, even there is no problem in it, but the word prone has negative connotation, you use it for positive, sounds awkward. better word is "tend to" "likely to" "happen to be"
S3: fine
S4: will lose its significance and importance. sorry seems too far fetched to me, by the way what is significance and importance in this context ? I can't see it (sorry) the word "will" make it definitive, means it must happen, avoid it, change it to "a society could lose its significance and importance." because, you never know, you can never be sure, so hand anything like that to could, its the best strategy. by using could, you are saying it is possible, may be, there is a chance etc.
and there is technical name for this whole thing called "generalization" look here : http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-generalization.html ,you will get the idea.

problem : you did not linked back to main idea of essay, remember cohesion and coherence ??
[S1]better social bond = [S3] personal discussion == good, proves the point.
But S4 is not a good conclusion, or say bad conclusion. what it should be it :
Therefore/hence/thus, living horizontally enhance the living experience by improving social ties.

living horizontally : is main idea - restated - linked to main idea, - user/reader know what you want to say by all this.
living experience and improving social ties : is your own idea : taken from first sentence which you proved by an example, word "bond" became "ties" so its rephrased, counts in vocabulary.

remember :
if living horizontally enhance the living experience, then this kind of line improves reader experience and band score consequently.


all fine but..

count how many ideas in your this paragraph
very small area
land scarcity problems
children parks and game fields
members of society to relax
lead a stress-free life

and cynical person can even find more,
don't expect from examiner to glue your ideas, in his mind for your betterment or gain, got me ?? he simply will not.
its your duty to give him a ready-made, well-prepared meal, which is too easy to to eat, like drive thru burger with large coke.

you need only one idea, then elaborate the idea, give supporting examples, statements, arguments, logic, whatever is there to give.to improve this you need an umbrella

change to
On the other hand, high-rise societies are beneficial in terms of resolving various issues related to scarcity of land in metropolitan cities.

various issues related to scarcity of land in metropolitan cities = umbrella - take under whatever you want.
even that is your own idea, i didn't introduced anything new. its just matter of, how you present.

Final:
On the other hand, high-rise societies are beneficial in terms of resolving various issues related to scarcity of land in metropolitan cities.To explain, a tall building in a few meters of the area can facilitate to inhibit more than 200 families in a twenty-five stories building, where many kilometers of land would be needed for horizontal plain residency for even less amount of families. This saved land could be used for open space parks and game fields for children, and build recreational activity centers for adults where they can de-stress themselves from hectic lifestyle of metro cities.Hence, vertical housing options serves the purpose better, where land is scarce.
or
vertical housing options accommodate the needs, where land is scarce.

vertical housing options : closed the paragraph and gives purpose to the paragraph, make much more sense to reader.
scarcity becomes scarce, its new word with changed form, counts in vocabulary. now they know you know two forms of a word.


nice idea, but ...
S1: there will not be any open space left for people and children to re-energize = wrong logic
what do you mean by open space, does it mean space it there but its closed today ? or do you mean by a open space park ?
they are two different things, examiner will take the liberty to deem it as wrong, sorry for that, they are there to find your mistakes not ignore them.

S2: nice words, prudent, repenting
but...
Personally, I believe that the problem of land crisis is going to rise in the future, and and places for recreational activities is essential for current and future generations. Therefore, going vertical is prudent choice, rather than squander it.
Or
Therefore, going vertical is prudent choice, as we don't have luxury of unlimited land to squander. [idiomatic language]



S1: parallel to earth ??? where buddy ? totally wrong logic. nothing could be parallel to earth in any way, its a sphere in space resulting in unlimited directions. got it ? if you chose to go in one direction and i chose slightly another, my parallel plain will crash in yours, resulting in failure to find the right parallel plain.

change some wording, rest is fine. don't try to make things bold always, always will be always a problem.

S2: again open in open ended word, with no actual meaning. in your mind, you define what a open land is, in my mind its something else, so don't give the reader a chance to misinterpret things, use precise words to mean clearly.

To conclude, although development in horizontal plain may seem to provide a better life experience, but in order to tackle the land crisis, high-rise building blocks is a viable option to maintain a judicious living and recreational space ratio.


6.5

me judging you, does not mean me is best, I write like you, even worst

Just saw your reply. I must say some of the points you pointed out are like the ones I mentioned. Even we gave the same band score. Haha.

If only I could correct my mistakes lol.

 

[H0peAndFa1th]

Just saw your reply. I must say some of the points you pointed out are like the ones I mentioned. Even we gave the same band score. Haha.

If only I could correct my mistakes lol.

Its nice to see another perspective on same essay, we can easily compare each other by doing this, it will help all of us.

mohit's grammar is fine, examples are vague or not so convincing or direct. less linking to main topic and paragraph statement, if he just had linked back to main idea in both paragraphs, I would have considered it as 7.

and my NOC is also 2147, so don't wonder about same conclusions

 

[mohit2018]

Understand the question first, know the tricks in question, there are always two things in a a whole essay question,

First thing: a topic, an idea, an issue : here it's vertical tall buildings or horizontal , now there are two things. see it first.

Second thing: original question ->

if you already know that, good, but, if you don't know that what a question is ? or here, believe me, you are in a serious problem. Here question is "Discuss both views and express your opinion.", now again it has three parts​

First part : discuss one side (which is : vertical tall buildings)

Second part : discuss second side (which is : horizontal buildings)

Third part : your opinion, which is : I agree with a/b, I partly agree with a or b or both etc, I can't agree with anything it depends on the need or availability, it is your own opinion, you can say whatever you want !! mind it, be creative and unique.

why question has three parts ? because it says so, Discuss both views,mean two things, which are different or opposite view/idea/issue etc, " express your opinion." this tells the third part.
​

if I am about to do things in an order, I would not give my opinion in intro, BP1 or BP2, may be in BP3 or in conclusion.


S1: fine
S1: fine
S3: As far as, totally wrong, you must not give your opinion,
S4: you turned it to an argument essay, its discussion essay!!, again wrong.



S1: fine
S1: example does not seem convincing, even there is no problem in it, but the word prone has negative connotation, you use it for positive, sounds awkward. better word is "tend to" "likely to" "happen to be"
S3: fine
S4: will lose its significance and importance. sorry seems too far fetched to me, by the way what is significance and importance in this context ? I can't see it (sorry) the word "will" make it definitive, means it must happen, avoid it, change it to "a society could lose its significance and importance." because, you never know, you can never be sure, so hand anything like that to could, its the best strategy. by using could, you are saying it is possible, may be, there is a chance etc.
and there is technical name for this whole thing called "generalization" look here : http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-generalization.html ,you will get the idea.

problem : you did not linked back to main idea of essay, remember cohesion and coherence ??
[S1]better social bond = [S3] personal discussion == good, proves the point.
But S4 is not a good conclusion, or say bad conclusion. what it should be it :
Therefore/hence/thus, living horizontally enhance the living experience by improving social ties.

living horizontally : is main idea - restated - linked to main idea, - user/reader know what you want to say by all this.
living experience and improving social ties : is your own idea : taken from first sentence which you proved by an example, word "bond" became "ties" so its rephrased, counts in vocabulary.

remember :
if living horizontally enhance the living experience, then this kind of line improves reader experience and band score consequently.


all fine but..

count how many ideas in your this paragraph
very small area
land scarcity problems
children parks and game fields
members of society to relax
lead a stress-free life

and cynical person can even find more,
don't expect from examiner to glue your ideas, in his mind for your betterment or gain, got me ?? he simply will not.
its your duty to give him a ready-made, well-prepared meal, which is too easy to to eat, like drive thru burger with large coke.

you need only one idea, then elaborate the idea, give supporting examples, statements, arguments, logic, whatever is there to give.to improve this you need an umbrella

change to
On the other hand, high-rise societies are beneficial in terms of resolving various issues related to scarcity of land in metropolitan cities.

various issues related to scarcity of land in metropolitan cities = umbrella - take under whatever you want.
even that is your own idea, i didn't introduced anything new. its just matter of, how you present.

Final:
On the other hand, high-rise societies are beneficial in terms of resolving various issues related to scarcity of land in metropolitan cities.To explain, a tall building in a few meters of the area can facilitate to inhibit more than 200 families in a twenty-five stories building, where many kilometers of land would be needed for horizontal plain residency for even less amount of families. This saved land could be used for open space parks and game fields for children, and build recreational activity centers for adults where they can de-stress themselves from hectic lifestyle of metro cities.Hence, vertical housing options serves the purpose better, where land is scarce.
or
vertical housing options accommodate the needs, where land is scarce.

vertical housing options : closed the paragraph and gives purpose to the paragraph, make much more sense to reader.
scarcity becomes scarce, its new word with changed form, counts in vocabulary. now they know you know two forms of a word.


nice idea, but ...
S1: there will not be any open space left for people and children to re-energize = wrong logic
what do you mean by open space, does it mean space it there but its closed today ? or do you mean by a open space park ?
they are two different things, examiner will take the liberty to deem it as wrong, sorry for that, they are there to find your mistakes not ignore them.

S2: nice words, prudent, repenting
but...
Personally, I believe that the problem of land crisis is going to rise in the future, and and places for recreational activities is essential for current and future generations. Therefore, going vertical is prudent choice, rather than squander it.
Or
Therefore, going vertical is prudent choice, as we don't have luxury of unlimited land to squander. [idiomatic language]



S1: parallel to earth ??? where buddy ? totally wrong logic. nothing could be parallel to earth in any way, its a sphere in space resulting in unlimited directions. got it ? if you chose to go in one direction and i chose slightly another, my parallel plain will crash in yours, resulting in failure to find the right parallel plain.

change some wording, rest is fine. don't try to make things bold always, always will be always a problem.

S2: again open in open ended word, with no actual meaning. in your mind, you define what a open land is, in my mind its something else, so don't give the reader a chance to misinterpret things, use precise words to mean clearly.

To conclude, although development in horizontal plain may seem to provide a better life experience, but in order to tackle the land crisis, high-rise building blocks is a viable option to maintain a judicious living and recreational space ratio.


6.5

me judging you, does not mean me is best, I write like you, even worst

I see your points buddy. and they are exactly pointing to the areas i was looking for to improve. Great work buddy. and thanks a lot for helping me with your very informative as well as helpful analysis.

 

[mohit2018]

First of all, I am not going to comment on your grammar mistakes; I am weak in this area.

I believe this paragraph there are two things you should improve. One is the vocabulary. If you can use better words such as Skyscraper, Condominium, apartment, bungalow, rather than 'taller buildings', 'horizontally wide', 'vertically high'.

Second point is, for discussion type of essays, you must not state your opinion in the introduction. The point of discussion is to see from both angles then come to conclusion. So, in your conclusion, you will have your 'view'.



I really like your structure here. Your topic sentence is clear and followed with example. The third sentence also connects the example and topic sentence. I believe here you should have added one more sentence which connects your paragraph to the main thesis "That is why, bungalows and similar types of housings are the preferred choice by some."

I think the example is little too vague. It is little too general and based on comments I have read from professionals they could say this 'lacks focus'. I will show you what I mean in the next paragraph.



I like your topic sentence as it is clearly pointing out the competitive advantage tall buildings have over flat type of housing. Again, I am bit skeptical on how the example was worded. "To illustrate, a tall building in New Delhi with a base size of 50 meter square inhibits 200 families whereas for the same area-size only 3 small apartments can be fitted to with a total of 8 families; for this city, where land is scarcity, it is obvious where its benefits lie." (I am not sure about the spelling of "lie" here lol)

I really like your third sentence as it links very well the example to the topic sentence just like your other paragraph. However, like I said above, you need to have one more sentence bringing the thesis back to this paragraph.



Please check my in-line comments for above two paragraphs
I would have written it this way:

To conclude, the togetherness small houses bring to societies is liked by many, while others support that high-rise buildings benefit the ever growing population. I believe there is a clear benefit for tall buildings, thus, I support this notion. With the estimated rise in population in the coming decades, this is unlikely to change in the near future.

Personally I think your essay is worth 6.5. Your points are valid and well argued. However, the structure of the essay needs an improvement. In addition, the examples need to be direct and convincing. You can see how examples are presented in band 8 and 9 essays then you can do the same.

You can easily improve to 7.5. The difference between 6.5 and 7.5 is little in my opinion. It is little tweaks here and there and with a better grammar percentage.

I am not expert so take it with ease.

Thanks a lot mate. I find your advice helpful too.

 

[nns14]

Guys, please check my essay. I am not sure if I have gone off-topic with second paragraph and conclusion part.

Would you please check thoroughly and give band score. I am going to sit for IELTS exam on this coming Saturday.

Kindly note, I copied to here exactly how I wrote on my notepad so there are obvious spelling mistakes and some grammar mistakes that I even see myself.

-----------------------------------------------------
Question:

Employers sometimes ask people applying for jobs for personal information, such as their hobbies and interests, and whether they are married or single. Some people say that this information may be relevant and useful. Others disagree.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

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

Response

Employers have the privilage of requesting any information, from prospective employees, that they deem to be relevant to the application, be it personal details like hobbies, interests, and maritial status. That is why, some are against this, while, others believe this might be related and helping the processing of hiring. This essay will analyze both sides and then reasoned conclusion will be reached.

To begin with, the gathered information from the job applicants can be used to cater to their respective future roles in the company. To illustrate, travelling overseas is one of the my all time hoppies. Hence, when I included that in my application to my current job, it became one of the deciding factors; this is because my current management wanted an engineer who would be willing to travel around to meet clients. This shows hobbies and interests can be well used by employers.

In contrast, personal information such as maritial status shared by job seekers could be used as means of discrimination. For instance, Joseph Eagle, an unemployed expat in the United States of America, recently won a court case against the popular company PEPSI. It was found by the court that the job applicant was denied the position after the company found out that he is married to the same gender. This highlights personal information can be unfairly used by the employers.

To sum up, by tailoring to the need of the applicants, personal information can be relevant and useful. On the other hand, it can be used to unjustly disqualify job hunters. After evaluating both sides, I believe personal information such as hobbies, interests, and maritial status does more harm than good. Therefore, I am against sharing such details.

 

[nns14]

Its nice to see another perspective on same essay, we can easily compare each other by doing this, it will help all of us.

mohit's grammar is fine, examples are vague or not so convincing or direct. less linking to main topic and paragraph statement, if he just had linked back to main idea in both paragraphs, I would have considered it as 7.

and my NOC is also 2147, so don't wonder about same conclusions

Please check my above essay and let me know your comments.

 

[Armour]

Hello friends, I will highly appreciate if someone can provide a feedback on my essay.

Q.
Most people accept that we now live in a globalised world but not everyone agrees that this is beneficial. To what extent is globalisation a positive or negative development?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Ans.
With the advent of science and technology over the last couple of centuries, world has turned into a global village. However, there is often an argument that whether globalisation is good or bad. I completely agree with the view that this is a positive development, and there are several reasons to support my position.

To begin with, it has made it tremendously easy for humans to access the resources which are far away from their actual location. We are living in the age of internet and online marketing where anything can be ordered immediately just at a click of a button on our computer or smartphone. For instance, I was looking for a 10TB hard drive which was not available anywhere in India. I instantly ordered it from the USA through Amazon without any hassle and it was delivered right at my doorstep within a week.

Another obvious benefit of globalisation is that it increases the overall efficiency of the world by letting the nations focus on producing what they are good at while importing other products. This ensures that countries are working on their strength and helping their main industries to flourish. For example, Japan may be having an upper hand in automobile sector due to its expertise in manufacturing but would not be able to compete in agriculture with countries having huge land resource. Therefore an ideal scenario would be for Japan to export cars to these countries while importing fruits, vegetables, and grains.

To sum up, it is clearly evident that globalisation has benefits ranging from ease of access to increase in efficiency. Therefore it must be considered as a massive achievement of mankind and should be encouraged accordingly.

 

[H0peAndFa1th]

Employers sometimes ask people applying for jobs for personal information, such as their hobbies and interests, and whether they are married or single. Some people say that this information may be relevant and useful. Others disagree.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. Write at least 250 words.

Employers have the privilage of requesting any information, [yes they have privilege, but it does not feel right here] from prospective employees, that they [they who ? it's right, but it's not] deem to be relevant to the application, be it personal details like hobbies, interests, and maritial status. That is why [ why exactly ? where is your "that", means reason ? where is your reason ? ], some are against this, while, others believe this might be related and helping the processing of hiring. This essay will analyze both sides and then reasoned conclusion will be reached. [I not sure, but still doubting sense of this line]

your intro tells me, it is not going right.

To begin with, the gathered information from the job applicants can be used to cater to their respective future roles in the company [cater their roles ? ambiguous sense, not clear to me ]. To illustrate, travelling overseas is one of the my all time hoppies [why you landed here ? don't use "my" examples]. Hence [hence for what ? you didn't proved or stated anything strongly, no reasons so far ], when I included that in my application to [ for] my current job, it became one of the deciding factors [factor for what ?]; this is because [which/what is because ?]my current management wanted an engineer who would be willing to travel around [travel around ? wrong sense ,right: travel overseas ]to meet clients. This shows hobbies and interests can be well used by employers.

feel like you don't how to say stuff in english properly. fragmented sentence and phrases are there, which confuse the reader, sense is not so clear. even though I know what you want to say, but you did not said it properly so you will loose bands.

In contrast, personal information such as maritial status shared by job seekers could be used as means of discrimination. For instance, Joseph Eagle, an unemployed expat in the United States of America, recently won a court case against the popular company PEPSI. It was found by the court that the job applicant was denied the position after the company found out that he is married to the same gender. This highlights personal information can be [re-link it to main idea, like: misused and justifies that personal information should not be asked by employers - it helps the reader to close the paragraph in his/her mind. you complete this thing by saying it.]

well written, there's structure, logic and sense, but does not feel like you wrote it.

To sum up, by tailoring [a what ? why ? ] to the need of the applicants, personal information can be relevant and useful. On the other hand [wrong, don't force linking devices like that keep it simple], it can be used to unjustly disqualify job hunters. After evaluating both sides, I believe personal information such as hobbies, interests, and maritial status does more harm than good. Therefore, I am against sharing such details.

sounds 6 bands to me, maybe someone can give you 6.5 for this, but its not 7 in any case.
you can improve it with few changes, you can easily achieve 7, with some practice.

best of luck. keep writing.

 

[nns14]

your intro tells me, it is not going right.



feel like you don't how to say stuff in english properly. fragmented sentence and phrases are there, which confuse the reader, sense is not so clear. even though I know what you want to say, but you did not said it properly so you will loose bands.


well written, there's structure, logic and sense, but does not feel like you wrote it.



sounds 6 bands to me, maybe someone can give you 6.5 for this, but its not 7 in any case.
you can improve it with few changes, you can easily achieve 7, with some practice.

best of luck. keep writing.

Thank you. You are right with the 6. As soon as I started writing onto the computer, I realized my mistakes. "That is why" in the intro felt so wrong. My opening sentence felt it wasn't inline with what's needed.

In the first supporting paragraph, I wanted to say companies can use personal information to adjust your job description so it can be included, if possible. Like the example I provided. But due to my limited vocabulary, I messed up almost the whole paragraph.

As for the second supporting paragraph, the word "discrimination" instantly came to my mind so I knew how to structure the paragraph around that. If I find the correct word to explain a whole point then my paragraph tends to go well. So, yes, I did write that paragraph! That closing sentence did feel wrong. That is why, I was worried about going off-topic.

With a familiar topic, like technology, education, families, etc... I think I can just about get the damn 7. If I must be optimistic, even may be 7.5.

I will post another essay tomorrow that's agree/disagree type. I will avoid similar mistakes.

 

[H0peAndFa1th]

Most people accept that we now live in a globalised world but not everyone agrees that this is beneficial. To what extent is globalisation a positive or negative development?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

With the advent of science and technology over the last couple of centuries, world has turned into a global village. However, there is often an argument that whether globalisation is good or bad. I completely agree with the view that this is a positive development, and there are several reasons to support my position.

Good, clear and precise. no mess.

To begin with, it has [what has ? I know its globalization, but still restate it]made it tremendously easy for humans to access the resources which are far away from their actual location. We are living in the age of internet and online marketing where anything can be ordered immediately just at a click of a button on our computer or smartphone. [computer=click, smartphone=touch, be careful.] For instance, I was looking for a 10TB hard drive which was not available anywhere in India. I instantly ordered it from the USA through Amazon without any hassle and it was delivered right at my doorstep within a week.[Hence, there is no doubt that globalisation made our/people's life easy.-- or something like that]

hmm, well done, but let me ask why you wrote it ? you are vouching for globalisation, then please state it, close your para with stating it, re-link to main idea. see green line

Another obvious benefit of globalisation is that it increases the overall efficiency of the world by letting the nations focus on producing what they are good at while importing other products. This ensures that countries are working on their strength and helping their main industries to flourish. For example, Japan may be having an upper hand in automobile sector due to its expertise in manufacturing [,]but would not be able to compete in agriculture with countries having huge land resource. Therefore[,] an ideal scenario would be for Japan to export cars to these countries[,] while [ while? doesn't feel right, right: whereas importing other goods such as] fruits, vegetables, and grains. [again not linked back to main idea, yes, it is not crime, but it feels right. gives sense of closure. ] [From this, it is obvious that everyone enjoying the benefits of globalisation.]

well written, logical progression in ideas, fully developed, no mess. clear message. keep it that way.

To sum up, it is clearly evident that globalisation has benefits ranging from ease of access to increase in efficiency. Therefore it must be considered as a massive achievement of mankind and should be encouraged accordingly.

I heard that, "a conclusion in two sentences is the best conlcusion" you did it.
you restated your main ideas "ease of access to" and "efficiency" in a nice way.

seems like 7 to 7.5 band essay to me,

only a mean person can give you 6.5 for this one, and a very generous one can rank it as 8. don't wonder, we have to factor the psychology of an examiner, his/her own prejudices. only a computer can judge your essay on merits only.

 

[priteshgondalia]

Hello friends, I will appreciate your help if somebody could please evaluate this essay and provide the band.

Question:
In many countries, women no longer feel the need to get married. Some people believe that this is because women are able to earn their own income and therefore do not require the financial security that marriage can bring. To what extent do you agree?

Answer:
Nowadays, women do not wish to get married at the early age specially from western nations. In addition, innumerable women are well-educated and working in disparate fields which certainly diminish the requirement of the marraige for the financial security based on some people's belief. To my mind, I agree to a large extent with this statement due to incresed literacy rate in female and various earning opportunities around the globe.

First of all, most women are educated and literate which brings various opportunities for them. As people know, nowadays, girls have been given equivalent attention in compare to the men and have provided proper education and training regarding modern world. In addition, innumerable female workers are fulfilling their and their family's requirement by working on professional areas, which prove that they do not need any marital supports for their needs. As a result, they do not feel to get married and wait until proper age and time. For example, recent research from Windsor university has described that eighty per cent women from western countries, who are employed as full-time employee,choose to get marry at the age between 27-35. Thus, education will aid women to employ for any organization and that will be the sole advantage for fulfilling basic requirements.

Second of all, countless opportunities to earn wealth for women also afflicts their mindset regarding relationship. Moreover, hard-working individuals structure their own businesses and provide their proper concentration toward the progress of the workplace. Consequently, they do not have adequate time to find appropriate partner for their life as they are already busy with their workload. Besides that, most of women do not even feel to have a relationship because they have their business or job as a financial security for their future which will eventually diminish the idea of marriage at early age. Therefore, enormous ways can be utilised to secure the future by earning ample amount of money and which will directly affect their conservative mindsets.

In conclusion, numerable girls are influenced with the western culture and approch the education for betterment of their life and which will lead them to a proper work place. As a result, they will not have a appropriate time period to fall in love with anyone or have a relationship only for financial support. Thus, I believe that women do not require the financial security as they can earn the wealth by themselves in distinct fields.

Thank you very much.

 

[H0peAndFa1th]

In many countries, women no longer feel the need to get married. Some people believe that this is because women are able to earn their own income and therefore do not require the financial security that marriage can bring. To what extent do you agree?

Nowadays, women do not wish to get married at the early age specially from western nations [wrong paraphrasing, derailed at first sentence, very bad, question does not contain age and west]. In addition, innumerable women are well-educated and working in disparate fields which certainly diminish the requirement of the marraige for the financial security based on some people's belief [totally wrong logic, and wrong sense, grammar is bad]. To my mind [I would say avoid saying that, seems odd], I agree to a large extent with this statement due to incresed literacy rate in female and various earning opportunities around the globe.[I sense you have two reasons and going to writing paragraphs on the same two, otherwise this is going to be serious problem, I particularly like this, telling the reader, what to expect further, keep doing it.]

need to work on paraphrasing.
I feel, forced linking devices, don't force them in every sentence.

First of all, most women are educated and literate which brings various opportunities for them [nice intro/general statement, as introduced before, good]. As people know, nowadays, girls have been given equivalent attention in compare to the men and have provided proper education and training regarding [ odd word choice - correct: for ]modern world. In addition, innumerable [odd word choice- twice - correct: considerable amount of - (just a fancy way of saying many)] female workers are fulfilling their and their [correct these words, try to say it in other words] family's requirement by working on [wrong preposition - correct just say : fulfilling requirements by working professionally (it means they are earning)] professional areas, which prove that they do not need any marital supports for their needs [I feel, wrong logic here, there are lots of needs, your reasons and logic cover only one, which is financial, they don't need money from men, that is all you are saying and your sentence logic is not correct, correct: which proves that women do not need men for their financial needs anymore. ]. As a result, they do not feel [wrong word choice, correct: they do not feel the need ] to get married and wait until proper age and time [what's proper age and time ?, don't say things that you can't explain, don't confuse reader]. For example, recent research from Windsor university has described that eighty per cent women from western countries, who are employed as full-time employee,choose to get marry at the age between 27-35 [okay, I see, you explained age here, you should write this example before that or that after the example.]. Thus, education will aid women to employ for any organization and that will be the sole advantage for fulfilling basic requirements. [I can't find the sense and purpose of this sentence, see I know what you mean, I know but you did not tell me, Understand this one, you did not linked it back to main idea, or your given idea which is "educated and literate" or "women no longer feel the need to get married" write lines which has clear purpose for reader, don't write for yourself, write for reader.]

I feel, forced linking devices, don't force them in every sentence. write in way that it become natural.

Second of all, countless opportunities to earn wealth for women also afflicts [what ? this is a negative word, totally wrong word use, from this sentence only I can tell your mindset: misogynistic one !! ] their mindset regarding relationship. Moreover, hard-working individuals structure their own businesses and provide their proper concentration toward the progress of the workplace. Consequently, they do not have adequate time to find appropriate partner for their life as they are already busy with their workload. Besides that, most of women do not even feel to have a relationship because they have their business or job as a financial security for their future which will eventually diminish the idea of marriage at early age. Therefore, enormous ways [what ways ? where are they, you did not tell us, confusing reader] can be utilised to secure the future by earning ample amount of money and which will directly affect their conservative [ again wrong word choice] mindsets .

forced linking devices, Almost same idea repeated from first para, maybe you think you are writing something new, but you are not.

you know some words, but don't know how to, where to use them. its bad for you. don't pretend to know.

In conclusion, numerable girls [ numerable girls ??] are influenced with [wrong preposition : from] the western culture and approch the education for betterment of their life and which will lead them to a proper [ and what is proper work place] work place. As a result, they will not have a appropriate time period to fall in love [what ?? that's new idea and not relevant one] with anyone or have a relationship only for financial support. Thus, I believe that women do not require the financial security as they can earn the wealth by themselves in distinct fields. [earning the wealth in fields, do you really need to say that, just end at themselves. ]

may be you won't like my comments, three main problems
1) forced linking device.
2) wrong word choice/use
3) saying inappropriate things (like love, afflicts, fields) and repetition.

5.5 bands at first, 6 Maximum, because the number of problems are there.

I think there are some stages for improvement.
1) need improvement or tweaks >> more practice >> for band range 6.5 to 7.5 >> target band 8
2) have some errors >> some learning >> more more practice >> for band range 6 to 6.5 >>target band 7 to 7.5
3) lots of error >> totally re-learning (can't be savaged anything) >> band range 5 to 6 >> target band 7

you stand on third stage, why that is so ? because I saw just one or one and half band jump after lots of improvements, most people comes in range 6 to 6.5, maximum score they got is band 8

 

[naten]

Please help me evaluate this essay. Thanks everyone!

Topic: in many places, new homes are needed, but the only space available for building them is in the countryside. Some people believe it is more important to protect the countryside and not build new homes there.
What is your opinion about this?

With gradual increase in population worldwide, there are trend to build new accommodations to sustain this new demand in the countryside since urban area is running out. I do believe this is a good alternative to fulfil all human needs of new homes.

To begin, those, who opine the idea of conserving the countryside scenery by banning new housing constructions in that area, have their own justifications. They think this would help maintaining the natural environments and other wildlife habitats, which are on the brink of being threatened from urbanization, a term for any regions being urbanized by humans. When there is an increase in housing in those areas, the ramification would include pollutions, the biggest as ever threat for damaging the countryside views. The amazon, for example, the largest forest in the world, reduces in size due to the demand of constructing new houses.

However, I suppose the alternative is appropriate in this scenario. One can not control the increase population within such a short period of time, but even for decades. Thus, to fulfill the need of human, building new houses in the countryside seems like the best solution to this kind of issue as the cost in the countryside, most important factor for housing, is always lower than that if those were to build in the urban area. Moreover, there are certain regulations about construction in any country about the location, which is reinforced by the government not to damage the countryside.

It is still debatable whether to build more or conserve the countryside, especially in those developed countries – the one with highest rise in population. The solution for this debacle is to portion the countryside for conservation and for housing construction.