IELTS - Writing - For Band 7 or Above.

[raamishasadraza]

Qs. The first chart shows the population of England and wales between 1700 and 2000. The second chart gives information about the birth and death rate in the same countries in the same period.

The first bar chart represents the number of people living in England and Wales during a period of 300 years while the second one shows the birth and death rate of the two nations over a similar period.

Overall, the number of population climbed over the years, with the time between 1700 and 1800 showing the most dramatic rise. On the other hand, the birth and death rates fluctuated over the years, rising dramatically in 1800 and declining from thereon. The birth rates were always higher than the death rates over 300 years.

The population started at a low of just below 10 million people in 1700 and rose dramatically between the years 1700 and 1800 from approximately 15 million to just below 40, steadily increasing from thereon and reaching a high of nearly 50 million people at the end of 2000.

Although, the birth and death rates were the lowest in the beginning being about 9 and 7 per 1000 respectively, they both saw a significant rise in the year 1800; the birth rate rose to well over 20 per 1000 from just about 9 while the death rate saw a rise of just about 10. Afterwards they declined, with the birth rate finishing just above 10 in 2000, more than double the death rate which was exactly 5 per 1000 in the same year.

I have got some questions. Can we write something in the overview and not explain it in the paragraphs below as I have done. How many major points do we have to write about in the overview. i wrote about 3 things. the rise of population, the rise and fall of birth and date rate, and birth rate being higher overall than death rate. I didnt explain the last one. Would 2 have been enough in the overview? Can you also check the answer
@cansha

 

[cansha]

Qs. The first chart shows the population of England and wales between 1700 and 2000. The second chart gives information about the birth and death rate in the same countries in the same period.

The first bar chart represents the number of people living in England and Wales during a period of 300 years while the second one shows the birth and death rate of the two nations over a similar period.

Overall, the number of population climbed over the years, with the time between 1700 and 1800 showing the most dramatic rise. On the other hand, the birth and death rates fluctuated over the years, rising dramatically in 1800 and declining from thereon. The birth rates were always higher than the death rates over 300 years.

The population started at a low of just below 10 million people in 1700 and rose dramatically between the years 1700 and 1800 from approximately 15 million to just below 40, steadily increasing from thereon and reaching a high of nearly 50 million people at the end of 2000.

Although, the birth and death rates were the lowest in the beginning being about 9 and 7 per 1000 respectively, they both saw a significant rise in the year 1800; the birth rate rose to well over 20 per 1000 from just about 9 while the death rate saw a rise of just about 10. Afterwards they declined, with the birth rate finishing just above 10 in 2000, more than double the death rate which was exactly 5 per 1000 in the same year.

I have got some questions. Can we write something in the overview and not explain it in the paragraphs below as I have done. How many major points do we have to write about in the overview. i wrote about 3 things. the rise of population, the rise and fall of birth and date rate, and birth rate being higher overall than death rate. I didnt explain the last one. Would 2 have been enough in the overview? Can you also check the answer
@cansha

It appears you're appearing for IELTS academic and this task is task 1 of academic test. My apologies as I have never appeared for IELTS academic and have no knowledge on how to answer task 1 on IELTS academic. Task 2 is common for both academic and general so if you have any questions on task 2 I can offer some advice. I'm afraid I can't help you with task 1 of IELTS academic.

 

[raamishasadraza]

It appears you're appearing for IELTS academic and this task is task 1 of academic test. My apologies as I have never appeared for IELTS academic and have no knowledge on how to answer task 1 on IELTS academic. Task 2 is common for both academic and general so if you have any questions on task 2 I can offer some advice. I'm afraid I can't help you with task 1 of IELTS academic.

No problem. here is any essay i made after listening to your advice. In one area i could not get rid of "essay" bcuz i wanted to say about both views. apart from this mistake is my task response better this time?

It is thought by some that it is better to live in city while others believe life is better in the countryside.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion


Some people believe that it is beneficial to live in the city while others feel that spending life in the countryside is a much better prospect. I agree with the view that life in the city is better than the countryside. This essay will discuss both arguments in depth.

There are many that feel that spending life in the countryside is more fruitful as there is less pollution compared to cities. This is because there are very few industries located in these areas. In addition to that, there is a low number of vehicles on the road because the population in these areas is considerably lower compared to cities. This results in fewer emissions of carbon monoxide from cars and factories which makes the air more healthy to breath and thus less damaging to the lungs. For example, research shows that the air in a small village in Pakistan contains much lower levels of carbon monoxide compared to the metropolitan city of Lahore.

Despite this benefit, there are those that claim that residing in cities poses a greater advantage because of the more advanced health facilities available. This is because a large city has to have more hospitals to successfully treat its larger population while villages in the countryside do not. These hospitals are also equipped with advanced facilities to cater to a larger number of patients. In the countryside, however, these hospitals are few and far in between and any person who has a complex medical issue has to travel to these cities to get treated. For instance, according to a research, 50% of the patients admitted in Civil Hospital in the metropolitan city of Karachi belong to rural villages. This proves that there is a big disadvantage to living in the countryside.

In conclusion, there are some who prefer to reside in the countryside due to lesser degree of pollution present while others are of the view that residing in the city serves more benefit due to availability of better health facilities. In my opinion, even though living in the countryside carries a positive side to it, residing in the cities is ultimately superior.

 

[raamishasadraza]

Can you please check this essay @cansha my exam is on coming wednesday and i want to be sure i can correct any mistakes before it takes place. my major problem is in putting commas. Can you please check it today and tell if im making a major mistake so that I may have time to correct. I am sorry to bother u so much.



Qs. In many cities many people are living in large apartment blocks. Does this accommodation have more advantages or more disadvantages?


There is a general trend among city people to live in large apartment buildings. I believe there are more disadvantages to this than advantages. Although, apartments are more affordable for general public, they have less accommodation space and high safety hazards.

The chief reason why many people prefer to reside in apartments is due to the cheap rates at which they are offered. People have to purchase a house in order to live in while the other option is to pay rent in an apartment. With house prices sky rocketing these days, the latter seems a more favourable option. Also, many areas are offering cheap prices for them. For instance, a recent study showed that the cost of purchasing a house is twice that of a hiring an apartment in Karachi, a Pakistani city.

However, despite this benefit, there are some drawbacks to this as well such as the issue of reduced living space. Most apartments are compact and not built for a lot of people to occupy. Thus, it becomes difficult for people with families to live in them comfortably which leads to tension among family members. For example, research shows that majority of families that reside in America dislike the idea of living in apartments due to the small amount of living space it provides.

Another drawback to residing in flats is a greater risk to life. If an emergency occurs, there is not a lot of time to escape, especially for those living on the top floors. This is because it takes time for people to reach the ground safely by using elevators. For example, recently, when the Roosevelt apartments caught fire, about a 100 people died and most of them were found to be residents of the top floor. If a house catches on fire people still have time to escape but not in the case of a burning apartment building.

In conclusion, many people choose to live in apartments because of the cheap rent; however, there are downsides to this as well such as decreased living space and a greater risk to life. In my opinion, there are more drawbacks than benefits to spending life in a flat.

 

[cansha]

No problem. here is any essay i made after listening to your advice. In one area i could not get rid of "essay" bcuz i wanted to say about both views. apart from this mistake is my task response better this time?

It is thought by some that it is better to live in city while others believe life is better in the countryside.

Discuss both sides and give your opinion

Thanks for reading my posts and trying to incorporate those tips. Let's see how you did.
Okay so I read the essay and there are a few issues to solve here. And the first big one is as always is task response. Now this topic is a little tough. Normally one theme per paragraph would be enough but this is a topic where you probably need to have more points per paragraph.

Let me explain. The crux of your essay is
Countryside is good because -> low polution
City life is good because -> Better health facilities

Do you see the issue here? This is like comparing apples to oranges. For example if I ask you which phone is better. You say in this one battery is better and in that one camera is better. yes this comparison makes sense but if you give "context". if you tell me everything else in both phones is comparable but if you value battery buy phone 1 and if you value camera more buy phone 2.

Now coming back to essay ... how do you do that in this essay? Think. That is why I said in this topic giving one reason is not enough. Compare some more things. Job prospects may be. Do you get same jobs in city vs village. Naturally villages would have less jobs so cities win again. I can think of many more such comparisons. You need to set the context which you have not done here.

The challenge is no one on this thread is actually focusing on task response. You are following one size fit all approach for each topic and it won't work. In some topics you need more points and in some topics you can compare only one aspect. Now how do you know which one applies? That is where reading more and thinking more comes in to picture.

Once you have understood that then comes the question of writing the in a structure. With that now let's look at the structure and language review.

Some people believe that it is beneficial to live in the city while others feel that spending life in the countryside is a much better prospect. I agree with the view that life in the city is better than the countryside. This essay will discuss both arguments in depth. I guess you already know my feedback here. Now to your question that you could not get rid of "this essay" here. Read this post https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/ielts-writing-for-band-7-or-above.540392/page-38#post-7269377


There are many that feel that spending life in the countryside is more fruitful as there is less pollution compared to cities. See the issue here now is that you are explaining the reasons why there is less pollution rather than telling me why less pollution is beneficial. Now if you want to say but everyone knows why less pollution is beneficial then with that logic even why there is less pollution in villages is also obvious.
Are you writing why life in villages is better or why there is less pollution in villages. And hence BAD TASK RESPONSE.
This is because there are very few industries located in these areas. In addition to that, there is a low number of vehicles on the road because the population in these areas is considerably lower compared to cities.
This results in fewer emissions of carbon monoxide from cars and factories which makes the air more healthy to breath and thus less damaging to the lungs. Just keep this line after the first line and say less pollution means better health .. rest of the stuff is redundant and use the remaining lines to explore some more aspects of life in country side.
For example, research shows that the air in a small village in Pakistan contains much lower levels of carbon monoxide compared to the metropolitan city of Lahore.

Despite this benefit, there are those that claim that residing in cities poses a greater advantage because of the more advanced health facilities available. This is because a large city has to have more hospitals to successfully treat its larger population while villages in the countryside do not. These hospitals are also equipped with advanced facilities to cater to a larger number of patients. In the countryside, however, these hospitals are few and far in between and any person who has a complex medical issue has to travel to these cities to get treated. For instance, according to a research, 50% of the patients admitted in Civil Hospital in the metropolitan city of Karachi belong to rural villages. This proves that there is a big disadvantage to living in the countryside. This para is good content wise.

In conclusion, there are some who prefer to reside in the countryside due to lesser degree of pollution present while others are of the view that residing in the city serves more benefit due to availability of better health facilities. In my opinion, even though living in the countryside carries a positive side to it, residing in the cities is ultimately superior. your conclusion reads more like an introduction para. Review how to write conclusion again.

 

[raamishasadraza]

Thanks for reading my posts and trying to incorporate those tips. Let's see how you did.
Okay so I read the essay and there are a few issues to solve here. And the first big one is as always is task response. Now this topic is a little tough. Normally one theme per paragraph would be enough but this is a topic where you probably need to have more points per paragraph.

Let me explain. The crux of your essay is
Countryside is good because -> low polution
City life is good because -> Better health facilities

Do you see the issue here? This is like comparing apples to oranges. For example if I ask you which phone is better. You say in this one battery is better and in that one camera is better. yes this comparison makes sense but if you give "context". if you tell me everything else in both phones is comparable but if you value battery buy phone 1 and if you value camera more buy phone 2.

Now coming back to essay ... how do you do that in this essay? Think. That is why I said in this topic giving one reason is not enough. Compare some more things. Job prospects may be. Do you get same jobs in city vs village. Naturally villages would have less jobs so cities win again. I can think of many more such comparisons. You need to set the context which you have not done here.

The challenge is no one on this thread is actually focusing on task response. You are following one size fit all approach for each topic and it won't work. In some topics you need more points and in some topics you can compare only one aspect. Now how do you know which one applies? That is where reading more and thinking more comes in to picture.

Once you have understood that then comes the question of writing the in a structure. With that now let's look at the structure and language review.

Some people believe that it is beneficial to live in the city while others feel that spending life in the countryside is a much better prospect. I agree with the view that life in the city is better than the countryside. This essay will discuss both arguments in depth. I guess you already know my feedback here. Now to your question that you could not get rid of "this essay" here. Read this post https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/ielts-writing-for-band-7-or-above.540392/page-38#post-7269377


There are many that feel that spending life in the countryside is more fruitful as there is less pollution compared to cities. See the issue here now is that you are explaining the reasons why there is less pollution rather than telling me why less pollution is beneficial. Now if you want to say but everyone knows why less pollution is beneficial then with that logic even why there is less pollution in villages is also obvious.
Are you writing why life in villages is better or why there is less pollution in villages. And hence BAD TASK RESPONSE.
This is because there are very few industries located in these areas. In addition to that, there is a low number of vehicles on the road because the population in these areas is considerably lower compared to cities.
This results in fewer emissions of carbon monoxide from cars and factories which makes the air more healthy to breath and thus less damaging to the lungs. Just keep this line after the first line and say less pollution means better health .. rest of the stuff is redundant and use the remaining lines to explore some more aspects of life in country side.
For example, research shows that the air in a small village in Pakistan contains much lower levels of carbon monoxide compared to the metropolitan city of Lahore.

Despite this benefit, there are those that claim that residing in cities poses a greater advantage because of the more advanced health facilities available. This is because a large city has to have more hospitals to successfully treat its larger population while villages in the countryside do not. These hospitals are also equipped with advanced facilities to cater to a larger number of patients. In the countryside, however, these hospitals are few and far in between and any person who has a complex medical issue has to travel to these cities to get treated. For instance, according to a research, 50% of the patients admitted in Civil Hospital in the metropolitan city of Karachi belong to rural villages. This proves that there is a big disadvantage to living in the countryside. This para is good content wise.

In conclusion, there are some who prefer to reside in the countryside due to lesser degree of pollution present while others are of the view that residing in the city serves more benefit due to availability of better health facilities. In my opinion, even though living in the countryside carries a positive side to it, residing in the cities is ultimately superior. your conclusion reads more like an introduction para. Review how to write conclusion again.

can u also look at my outweigh adv. and disadv essay. its the first time i wrote it in a different pattern and included 2 adv or 2 disadv depending on which one i chose. so the one which outweighs the other has 2 reasons to it so 3 main body paragraphs in total. do u find my opinion clear as this is what im really worried abt. a comment on the task response will also be helpful

 

[cansha]

can u also look at my outweigh adv. and disadv essay. its the first time i wrote it in a different pattern and included 2 adv or 2 disadv depending on which one i chose. so the one which outweighs the other has 2 reasons to it so 3 main body paragraphs in total. do u find my opinion clear as this is what im really worried abt. a comment on the task response will also be helpful

The challenge is you didn't really read my review but you want the other essay reviewed. It is fine by me but if you think just writing more essays is the solution then let me reiterate again - it is not. The other essay has all the issues which have been discussed in the past. Yes you changed the structure and added one more paragraph but the core of writing essay is the same and has all the same issues.

I really want to help but a bit disappointing when no one seems to really care about what I'm saying. Anyhow let me point out same things again on the other essay.

 

[cansha]

Can you please check this essay @cansha my exam is on coming wednesday and i want to be sure i can correct any mistakes before it takes place. my major problem is in putting commas. Can you please check it today and tell if im making a major mistake so that I may have time to correct. I am sorry to bother u so much.



Qs. In many cities many people are living in large apartment blocks. Does this accommodation have more advantages or more disadvantages?

There is a general trend among city people to live in large apartment buildings. I believe there are more disadvantages to this than advantages. Although, apartments are more affordable for general public, they have less accommodation space and high safety hazards.
So good thing is you gave more reasons in the introduction itself. I would just suggest combine sentence 2 and 3 to make it less abrupt. Something like Although, apartments have advantages like being more economical, I believe disadvantages like <disadvantage 1>,<disadvantage 2> outweigh the advantages.


The chief reason why many people prefer to reside in apartments is due to the cheap rates at which they are offered. People have to purchase a house in order to live in while the other option is to pay rent in an apartment. With house prices sky rocketing these days, the latter seems a more favourable option. Also, many areas are offering cheap prices for them. For instance, a recent study showed that the cost of purchasing a house is twice that of a hiring an apartment in Karachi, a Pakistani city.

However, despite this benefit, there are some drawbacks to this as well such as the issue of reduced living space. Most apartments are compact and not built for a lot of people to occupy. Thus, it becomes difficult for people with families to live in them comfortably which leads to tension among family members. For example, research shows that majority of families that reside in America dislike the idea of living in apartments due to the small amount of living space it provides.

Another drawback to residing in flats is a greater risk to life. If an emergency occurs, there is not a lot of time to escape, especially for those living on the top floors. This is because it takes time for people to reach the ground safely by using elevators. For example, recently, when the Roosevelt apartments caught fire, about a 100 people died and most of them were found to be residents of the top floor. If a house catches on fire people still have time to escape but not in the case of a burning apartment building.

In conclusion, many people choose to live in apartments because of the cheap rent; however, there are downsides to this as well such as decreased living space and a greater risk to life. In my opinion, there are more drawbacks than benefits to spending life in a flat. Again the conclusion reads more like introduction. You need to read conclusions in essays.

Now finally let's look at task response. Technically, you have addressed task response because you listed one advantage and two disadvantages. And then you say 2>1 so more disadvantages and hence your opinion.

But look at your essay. Are your advantages and disadvantages even comparable? Think about it.

If you argument is a person would rent an apartment because it is cheaper. Fair enough. Now if a person can not afford a house as you mention isn't the price the biggest factor and hence any other disadvantage like less area (ofcourse less area because price is less) wouldn't matter to him.
This is very similar to the comment I made on your other essay and gave you example of choosing a mobile phone. See context is important. Unless you set the context you would feel okay I listed advantages and disadvantages so I completed the task response. But the reader will feel confused. Is advantage vs disadvantage function of # of points or the impact of those points? Think about it if you were to choose between a house and a flat and you only had money for a flat would other factors even matter for your decision. I'm not saying your points are not valid but in this context price far outweighs any other disadvantage from a practical scenario.

 

[ar_uw]

I will be taking my test this weekend. @cansha It will be really appreciated if you can please look over my writing and point out my mistakes/areas to improve in order to ensure a band 7.

Question:
In many cities, many people are living in large apartment blocks. Does this accommodation have more advantages or disadvantages.

Response (340 words):

With the growth in population, a lot of the residents, in major cities, live in apartment blocks instead of their own houses. Although tenancy in a self-owned house provides a great sense of security and allows bonds to develop between the local community, apartments are the best way to cope with the needs of the modern society.

The fast-paced lives of today’s society often drives people to move to new cities for better job prospects. Apartments ease the move by providing a great short-term rental solution as you do not need to worry about acquiring a mortgage. Apartments are also fairly risk-free as they often include around the clock security, which is a key consideration when moving into a new house. Large apartment buildings also include several very convenient amenities, such as gyms and swimming pools, which are great for the physical health of their residents. Also, it is easier for people living in apartments to move to other cities, if a better opportunity arises, because they do not have to worry about selling or renting their home.

Despite the benefits of large apartment blocks, it is important to note that such residency places are often overcrowded and the residents have very little interaction with their neighbours. The large number of tenants in apartment buildings often creates a noisy environment which can lead to a difficult situation for families with very strict schedules or small children. These building blocks also have a very individualized environment where there is very little community building between neighbours. For example, families living in houses usually have a great bond, formed over a long time of living in the same community, with their neighbours and this allows their kids to easily find friends to play with.

To conclude, traditional houses provide a peaceful place which encourages community building but the fast-pace of today’s society is best served by apartment blocks that provide a quick and easy rental in a secure place that comes with all the important amenities that ease the transition into a new location.

 

[Dflyer]

Hello, can someone please evaluate this essay. I'm new here. Please give detailed feedback and areas that need improvement.

Question
Some people say that the main environmental problem of our time is the loss of particular species of plants and animals. Others say that there are more important environmental problems.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Response

Our planet earth encounters various types of environmental issues, and the extinction of flora and fauna is one of them. Unfortunately, this problem has been getting worse over the past few decades. In fact, such is the gravity of the situation and the effects that it is argued to be the principal concern when prioritizing the issues related to the environment. However, the question is whether there is a more serious matter to worry about and the need for urgent action.

Admittedly, this trend is alarming as humans, plants and animals are naturally interconnected in a chain. If one part of the chain ceases to exist the other will face the consequences. The efficiency of the chain will be negatively affected so much that its effect will last for a lifetime. Take, for example, bees and other insects like butterflies are an important part of our ecosystem. They play a major role in pollinating flowers, plants and trees. An estimated one-third of food is pollination dependent. If bees become extinct, their decline will result in a complex cascade of impacts on animals and humans, threatening ecological stability.

This loss is unquestionably a grave one, but there are more serious issues that need immediate attention. Such issues are the root causes of the extinction of these species. Air pollution is one of the contributing factors that’s has resulted in the death of millions of humans and animals. Besides its detrimental impact on our health, this out of proportion environmental threat also impact our economies, food security, and climate. Air pollution and climate change are intrinsically linked since air pollutants impact the climate and are often co-emitted with greenhouse gases.

Undoubtedly, the extinction of some species is really disturbing and measures should be taken to reverse this trend. However, other environmental issues need to be addressed for greater attention so that future generations don’t suffer.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Milan Desai]

@cansha can you evaluate my essay and point out my flaws.
Thanks in advance

Question: Some people believe that if people are allowed to work after the age of 60, it could cause problems. Do you agree and disagree?

It is commonly believed that there could be concerns if the elderly people is permitted to continue to job after attaining retirement age. In my opinion, I am partially agreed with this notion that a person should be allowed to work after the age of 60.

On the one side, delaying retirement enable individuals to contribute actively to the society. On a personal level, working past retirement age provides an avenue for individuals to remain not only physically but mentally active. Moreover, this option empowers the aging population to be financially independent and economically self-sustained past retirement age. In countries such as India, for instance, citizens are given an option to work beyond their existing retirement age based on the demand for their job and their capabilities to handle these tasks. Hence working beyond past retirement age empowers workers, ensure economic growth of the nation and alleviate the challenges faced by aging people.

On the other hand, working beyond retirement age may result in adverse health impacts on workers and a decrease in productivity levels. In Japan, the suicide rates have gradually increase due to rising stress level at work faced by the older people who are pushed beyond their optimal work capacity. Besides this, increasing stress levels from work lead to various health complications putting a strain on the healthcare system. Hence, working beyond retirement age worsen the overall welfare of individuals and adversely impact the economy.

To conclude, though working beyond advancing years may impose health hazards leading to reduction in productivity, it seems to me that the benefits outweigh the demerits. In my opinion, the firms and organizations should actively involve their workers to be productive beyond their retirement age.

 

[Dflyer]

Hello, @cansha and hopeandfaith please evaluate my essay.

Question

Some people think that money is the best gift for teenagers. Others disagree. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Response

People often get in dilemma to decide what should be given to teenager as gifts. Some think that money is the perfect gift for them while others oppose it. In my opinion, teenagers should receive productive gifts like calculators, books or toys than money. In this essay, we will discuss why money should not be given to teenagers as gifts.

On the one hand, People argue that money is the best gift for teenagers because the main reason is that it’s difficult to buy something as teenagers have different likings. This situation makes it difficult for adults to decide on a gift. Hence, they decide to give money as a gift. At the same time, it frees an adult from purchasing things. They think that by giving them money a teenager can purchase anything according to his/her need rather than the gifted items they never use. According to a recent survey by Indian market research, 26% of teenagers received unwanted gifts on various occasions that they didn’t end up liking or using.

On the other hand, I believe money should not be offered as a present for teenagers. The main reason is they don’t have the maturity to spend the money in the right manner. They Might probably spend that money on gambling or drugs or they could waste that money on buying useless things that are not actually needed. Thus, giving money to teenagers potentially may not be beneficial. Anyhow, parents provide their children with pocket money to spend. In this way, teenagers would not get involved in any wrongdoings due to dearth of cash as a gift.

To conclude, I would say that young people do not Possess the maturity to spend money in the right way. Hence, they should be provided with gifts that they can use in everyday life or at least that has a use in the long run. Money can be given to them by their progenitor.

 

[cansha]

@cansha can you evaluate my essay and point out my flaws.
Thanks in advance

Question: Some people believe that if people are allowed to work after the age of 60, it could cause problems. Do you agree and disagree?

It is commonly believed that there could be concerns if the elderly people is are permitted to continue to in a job after attaining retirement age. In my opinion, I am partially agreed In my opinion and I agree is repetition use one of those. Also I am partially agreed is wrong English with this notion that a person should be allowed to work after the age of 60. Mention why?

On the one side hand, delaying retirement enable individuals to contribute actively to the society. How?
On a personal level, working past retirement age provides an avenue for individuals to remain not only physically but also mentally active. Moreover, this option empowers the aging population to be financially independent and economically self-sustained past the retirement age. In countries such as India, for instance, citizens are given an option to work beyond their existing retirement age based on the demand for their job and their capabilities to handle these tasks. Hence working beyond past retirement age empowers workers, ensure economic growth of the nation and alleviate the challenges faced by aging people.

On the other hand, working beyond retirement age may result in adverse health impacts on workers and a decrease in productivity levels. In Japan, the suicide rates have gradually increase due to rising stress level at work faced by the older people who are pushed beyond their optimal work capacity. Besides this, increasing stress levels from work lead to various health complications putting a strain on the healthcare system. Hence, working beyond retirement age worsen the overall welfare of individuals and adversely impact the economy.

To conclude, though working beyond advancing years may impose health hazards leading to reduction in productivity, it seems to me that the benefits outweigh the demerits. In my opinion, the firms and organizations should actively involve their workers to be productive beyond their retirement age.

Overall this is a much better written essay compared to your past attempts. I could read it in one go and could understand the logic and your arguments as there was a natural progression and points have been explored to the required depth .. So well done!

However, there are some issues in grammar which I have marked. So you need to be careful as such errors could lead to a lesser scores.

The bigger issue to fix now is to fix your introduction. You need to add more flavor to your introduction to start strong and be unique in your essay so give more glimpse of your essay in the introduction itself.

And finally, your conclusion sounded like intrduction. Avoid phrases like "In my opinion" in conclusion as you already used the phrase in introduction. But you revisited the main points in conclusion so well done!

I would say this essay is really close to a 7. On a good day you would get 7 straightaway or may be a 7 on reval. But you're still leaving some scope on table for examiner to give you 6.5 and justify it. So fix issues with intro and conclusion. Try and reduce grammar errors (most difficult thing to do)

But most importantly, keep focus on task response and logical idea organization. Seems like you are getting a hang of it. I would say read a lot more before you write your next essay. All the best!

 

[cansha]

I will be taking my test this weekend. @cansha It will be really appreciated if you can please look over my writing and point out my mistakes/areas to improve in order to ensure a band 7.

Question:
In many cities, many people are living in large apartment blocks. Does this accommodation have more advantages or disadvantages.

Response (340 words):

With the growth in population, a lot of the residents, in major cities, live in apartment blocks instead of their own houses. Although tenancy in a self-owned house provides a great sense of security and allows bonds to develop between the local community, apartments are the best way to cope with the needs of the modern society.

The fast-paced lives of today’s society often drives people to move to new cities for better job prospects. Apartments ease the move by providing a great short-term rental solution as you do not need to worry about acquiring a mortgage. Apartments are also fairly risk-free as they often include around the clock security, which is a key consideration when moving into a new house. Large apartment buildings also include several very convenient amenities, such as gyms and swimming pools, which are great for the physical health of their residents. Also, it is easier for people living in apartments to move to other cities, if a better opportunity arises, because they do not have to worry about selling or renting their home.
This essay is good till now.

Despite the benefits of large apartment blocks, it is important to note that such residency places are often overcrowded and the residents have very little interaction with their neighbours. The large number of tenants in apartment buildings often creates a noisy environment which can lead to a difficult situation for families with very strict schedules or small children. These building blocks also have a very individualized environment where there is very little community building between neighbours. For example, families living in houses usually have a great bond, formed over a long time of living in the same community, with their neighbours and this allows their kids to easily find friends to play with.
This paragraph is just too superficial.


To conclude, traditional houses provide a peaceful place which encourages community building but the fast-pace of today’s society is best served by apartment blocks that provide a quick and easy rental in a secure place that comes with all the important amenities that ease the transition into a new location.

No big issues with Grammar and it is clear you have good hold on English language. But, reading the essay it feels like you were fishing for disadvantges when you came to BP2 and didn't have many ideas. It looks really under cooked compared to your previous paragraph. Overall I can say you are closer to a 7+ score on this one even on an exam. But given how they have been marking essays these days you probably need to write a 7.5 / 8 essay to get a 7.

Having said that I think you should be able to get a 7 easy given your language ability. All the best!

 

[Milan Desai]

It is commonly believed that there could be concerns if the elderly people is are permitted to continue to in a job after attaining retirement age. In my opinion, I am partially agreed In my opinion and I agree is repetition use one of those. Also I am partially agreed is wrong English with this notion that a person should be allowed to work after the age of 60. Mention why?

On the one side hand, delaying retirement enable individuals to contribute actively to the society. How?
On a personal level, working past retirement age provides an avenue for individuals to remain not only physically but also mentally active. Moreover, this option empowers the aging population to be financially independent and economically self-sustained past the retirement age. In countries such as India, for instance, citizens are given an option to work beyond their existing retirement age based on the demand for their job and their capabilities to handle these tasks. Hence working beyond past retirement age empowers workers, ensure economic growth of the nation and alleviate the challenges faced by aging people.

On the other hand, working beyond retirement age may result in adverse health impacts on workers and a decrease in productivity levels. In Japan, the suicide rates have gradually increase due to rising stress level at work faced by the older people who are pushed beyond their optimal work capacity. Besides this, increasing stress levels from work lead to various health complications putting a strain on the healthcare system. Hence, working beyond retirement age worsen the overall welfare of individuals and adversely impact the economy.

To conclude, though working beyond advancing years may impose health hazards leading to reduction in productivity, it seems to me that the benefits outweigh the demerits. In my opinion, the firms and organizations should actively involve their workers to be productive beyond their retirement age.

Overall this is a much better written essay compared to your past attempts. I could read it in one go and could understand the logic and your arguments as there was a natural progression and points have been explored to the required depth .. So well done!

However, there are some issues in grammar which I have marked. So you need to be careful as such errors could lead to a lesser scores.

The bigger issue to fix now is to fix your introduction. You need to add more flavor to your introduction to start strong and be unique in your essay so give more glimpse of your essay in the introduction itself.

And finally, your conclusion sounded like intrduction. Avoid phrases like "In my opinion" in conclusion as you already used the phrase in introduction. But you revisited the main points in conclusion so well done!

I would say this essay is really close to a 7. On a good day you would get 7 straightaway or may be a 7 on reval. But you're still leaving some scope on table for examiner to give you 6.5 and justify it. So fix issues with intro and conclusion. Try and reduce grammar errors (most difficult thing to do)

But most importantly, keep focus on task response and logical idea organization. Seems like you are getting a hang of it. I would say read a lot more before you write your next essay. All the best!

Thanks a lot for putting efforts into these tasks and providing us inputs and evaluating them for us. We should be really thankful to you.