well said. Your writing should not seem mechanical ( learned phrases and linking words), it should come naturally. you can digress in speaking but not in writing, in writing one must stay close to the topic.
IELTS - Writing - For Band 7 or Above.
- Thread starter H0peAndFa1th
- Start date
Writing is scored in 4 separate sections. Anyone who wants a good mark needs to find a good teacher to learn the marking criteria, get *personal* and *professional* feedback and be willing to work hard to improve. Examiners are trained to mark, not teach; you need to find someone with a band 9 score themselves and a successful professional writing career.
you are totally right, Examiner and Teacher are two different things, I feel Examiners are rarely the best teachers.
reading, is all about comprehension, how quick you can locate the answer, there's no one can help you with this, but Practice can.
listening, its all practice again, Watch movies, tv-shows etc, besides, go to youtube https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ielts+listening+practice+test
and basically maul down every single video.
there's no magic wand, other than practice, which can help you out.
Hi everyone,
I never have had IELTS, had two times TOEFL IBT, with 75 and 85 scores accordingly (the last one was in 2012). I do not think that I am going to have IELTS at any foreseen perspective, but get interested in this thread. Thus, please find below two my essays, which I was writing with a 3-4 month period between them. Would be great to hear your general comments on both, and tell about any progress between two, if there is any.
1-st:
In the future, students may have a choice of studying at home by using technology such as computers or television or studying at traditional schools. Which would you prefer? Use reasons and specific details to explain your choice.
Nowadays the newest scientific achievements have impacted all aspects of our life including educational methods. As result, sooner or later traditional school education may compete with the education given at home by using such modern technologies as computers and television. If I could have a chance to make a choice between these two methods for my children I would prefer a traditional one for a number of reasons.
To begin with, technologies cannot completely replace traditional school methods because always an effective educational process requires a live teachers’ feedback. Teachers and pupils must see each other, properly perceive each other’s body language, and have ability to listen and express their own ideas. These are all necessary attributes of an effective study process. No one can deny that even most sophisticated videoconference tool cannot fully replace live talk.
Moreover, students, having home education through technological means, may face serious challenges in their future career development. Even if it had been possible to organize a study process using modern technologies, it would have been impossible to follow this method with work matters. It is a mater of fact, that almost all types of work links with daily communications, conversations, negotiations, and networking. A person who wants to succeed must have these skills, which easily can be gained in traditional school.
Finally, completely replacing traditional schools may affect our society’s values. Over the centuries humankind has co-existed together. And a traditional school is the first step for schoolchildren to associate themselves with their own community and people around. This is not only formal system to gain knowledge and skills, but also way to learn about mutual rights and responsibilities within a society. Children pick up these values indirectly only in traditional school.
To summarize, the new IT technologies are rapidly being introduced in all spheres of our life. And there is a chance that one day technologies may replace traditional schools allowing children to study at home. However, these innovations unlikely can replace traditional methods because they lack live feedback, may affect future development of students, and may negatively impact traditional values in our society.
2-nd
Essay # 55
Do you agree or disagree that progress is always good? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
The current condition of the planet is consequences of progress. It encompasses all, from highest accomplishments in sciences to saddest losses in environment. Progress brings us many positive results such us comfortable housing, effective transportation, better living standards. Alternatively, it influences negatively many other aspects of our life. Although we should be thankful for progress, we must always keep in mind a number of threats associated with the progress.
To begin with, progress destroys the humankind heritage in many fields. Over the course of humankind history we have had many remarkable issues, events and inventions. These prominent history moments sometimes might be missed with further progress development. For example, there is no example of the first car; it was destroyed many years ago as unnecessary. Similarly, humankind has lost many ancient books, which were simply burnt. Progress may replace many things, but we have to memorize them as the lessons learned for future generations.
Furthermore, progress might cause inevitable mutation weakening people. Truly, two centuries ago we have no public transportation and people were walking a lot. Nowadays with an omnipresent public transportation system human cardiovascular system changes narrowing blood flows. This may affect the average life expectancy because of reduction of physical activities.
Finally, progress changing authentic human relations. For example, such new progress achievements as social media have completely changed level of people interpersonal communication. People mostly prefer to surf social media web sites, instead of live discussions and regular day-to-day communications.
To sum up, progress brings us many good things and makes our life easier. However there are a few threats of progress we should pay attention. Progress might affect human heritage, change people physical and natural condition, and influence human relations.
I never have had IELTS, had two times TOEFL IBT, with 75 and 85 scores accordingly (the last one was in 2012). I do not think that I am going to have IELTS at any foreseen perspective, but get interested in this thread. Thus, please find below two my essays, which I was writing with a 3-4 month period between them. Would be great to hear your general comments on both, and tell about any progress between two, if there is any.
1-st:
In the future, students may have a choice of studying at home by using technology such as computers or television or studying at traditional schools. Which would you prefer? Use reasons and specific details to explain your choice.
Nowadays the newest scientific achievements have impacted all aspects of our life including educational methods. As result, sooner or later traditional school education may compete with the education given at home by using such modern technologies as computers and television. If I could have a chance to make a choice between these two methods for my children I would prefer a traditional one for a number of reasons.
To begin with, technologies cannot completely replace traditional school methods because always an effective educational process requires a live teachers’ feedback. Teachers and pupils must see each other, properly perceive each other’s body language, and have ability to listen and express their own ideas. These are all necessary attributes of an effective study process. No one can deny that even most sophisticated videoconference tool cannot fully replace live talk.
Moreover, students, having home education through technological means, may face serious challenges in their future career development. Even if it had been possible to organize a study process using modern technologies, it would have been impossible to follow this method with work matters. It is a mater of fact, that almost all types of work links with daily communications, conversations, negotiations, and networking. A person who wants to succeed must have these skills, which easily can be gained in traditional school.
Finally, completely replacing traditional schools may affect our society’s values. Over the centuries humankind has co-existed together. And a traditional school is the first step for schoolchildren to associate themselves with their own community and people around. This is not only formal system to gain knowledge and skills, but also way to learn about mutual rights and responsibilities within a society. Children pick up these values indirectly only in traditional school.
To summarize, the new IT technologies are rapidly being introduced in all spheres of our life. And there is a chance that one day technologies may replace traditional schools allowing children to study at home. However, these innovations unlikely can replace traditional methods because they lack live feedback, may affect future development of students, and may negatively impact traditional values in our society.
2-nd
Essay # 55
Do you agree or disagree that progress is always good? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
The current condition of the planet is consequences of progress. It encompasses all, from highest accomplishments in sciences to saddest losses in environment. Progress brings us many positive results such us comfortable housing, effective transportation, better living standards. Alternatively, it influences negatively many other aspects of our life. Although we should be thankful for progress, we must always keep in mind a number of threats associated with the progress.
To begin with, progress destroys the humankind heritage in many fields. Over the course of humankind history we have had many remarkable issues, events and inventions. These prominent history moments sometimes might be missed with further progress development. For example, there is no example of the first car; it was destroyed many years ago as unnecessary. Similarly, humankind has lost many ancient books, which were simply burnt. Progress may replace many things, but we have to memorize them as the lessons learned for future generations.
Furthermore, progress might cause inevitable mutation weakening people. Truly, two centuries ago we have no public transportation and people were walking a lot. Nowadays with an omnipresent public transportation system human cardiovascular system changes narrowing blood flows. This may affect the average life expectancy because of reduction of physical activities.
Finally, progress changing authentic human relations. For example, such new progress achievements as social media have completely changed level of people interpersonal communication. People mostly prefer to surf social media web sites, instead of live discussions and regular day-to-day communications.
To sum up, progress brings us many good things and makes our life easier. However there are a few threats of progress we should pay attention. Progress might affect human heritage, change people physical and natural condition, and influence human relations.
thanks alot, I wish, I could write like you.
your writing is quite precise, effective, fully developed idea, no digressing in paragraphs, concise conclusions, past and future tenses used effectively, natural use of rare words.
I have read alot of 8 or 9 band essay samples, for me both essays sounds like them, so they stand for 8 to 9 bands, depends on examiner and luck.
commenting on each para, what I liked the most.
As result,
could have a chance,
for my children
I would prefer
1st sentence, clear statement
2nd sentence, explained statement
3rd sentence, link the explanation to main topic which is study, so natural
4th sentence, gave an example even without saying it is, and debunked the technology, wow killed two birds with one stone, like it.
or re-inforced the main idea
again same pattern, clear idea > explanation > linked to main idea(study/school)
had been, would have been : great sentence formation
again same pattern, clear idea > explanation > linked to main idea(study/school)
concluded wonderfully,
1st sentence, first restated, yes technology is there
2nd sentence, conceded a little ( there is a chance), nice touch
3rd sentence, reverted back to supporting idea swiftly, re-stating all three main ideas, without adding any new idea or digressing.
one of the best conclusion, it is so precise, like a sniper shot.
actual question was
Which would you prefer?
direct answer in intro:
If I could have a chance to make a choice between these two methods for my children I would prefer a traditional one for a number of reasons.
if asked as you, one should answer with I, he did it.
If anybody reading my comments, then note, this essay matches the exact description of discursive essay writing, explained in many books on IELTS or essay writing, there is no chance for examiner to deduct marks from this one, except an arrogant one or an ignorant one.
that is how we all should practice to write if target is band 7 or above.
now this is an open ended question, A very hard one to write one, why ? because under exam pressure, one can easily switch sides, mean can loose purpose, focus, or can change the meaning entirely, or started writing something and ended with completely different one.
how would you define progress ? in which dimension is it ? what is it exactly ? how do you perceive it ?
yea it is all about one's perception, nothing else. And perceptions change alot, be careful there.
Let's see...
so he chose to take it in human evolution context, Planet condition, living standard, ease, comfort
see question "progress is always good?"
it said only good, but it implies that there is something bad or opposite of good, see its very tricky. be careful you people.
because question is open ended, you can define whatever good or bad, both are in your own hands.
he declared goods loudly, living standard, ease, comfort
bads in subtle way, : condition of planet,environment losses,negatively many other aspects of our life
this introduction is quite complex, if one wants to dissect further, it not a normal one right out of a mechanical mill, seems like a professional writer, the kind of one you normally saw in editorial pages.
"Although we should be thankful for progress, we must always keep in mind a number of threats associated with the progress."
from this sentence, it seems like balance approach essay, feels like saying, enjoy but with precautions. this can go in any way..
again same pattern, clear idea > explanation > linked to main idea(Progress)
1st sentence, clever use of word heritage, now it can include many things,
2nd sentence, issues, events and inventions, see neither good nor bad, use of 'we' because of humankind otherwise not possible to use it
3rd sentence, explanation
4th sentence, example, used semi-colon
5th sentence, ancient books are also heritage, right ?, clearly shows he knows what heritage is.
6th sentence, linked back to main idea
this pattern is quite standard one, a best one to fetch highest scores.
1st sentence, it doesn't sound good, should be something like :
Furthermore, progress might cause inevitable mutation in people.
Furthermore, progress might cause inevitable mutation and weaken people.
Furthermore, progress might cause inevitable mutation and weaken people physically.
2nd sentence, reason, use of Truly. Truly, I rarely see it in essays.
3rd sentence, explanation or result of reason. but sense doesn't seem right to me. so:
Nowadays, as a result of omnipresent public transportation system, need of walking is greatly reduced, thus human cardiovascular system narrowing blood flows in body.
Nowadays, as a result of omnipresent public transportation system, people rarely walk for long distances, thus human cardiovascular system narrowing blood flows in body.
4th sentence, clear conclusion of "negatively many other aspects of our life" but not linked back to progress, its okay, small para, started with "progress might"
again same pattern as above, started with main idea (progress) > example > explanation.
1st sentence, stated good
2nd sentence, a little concession or can say recognition of bad,
3rd sentence, precisely restated
Now there is a problem in this essay.
actual question was :
Do you agree or disagree
sadly, he neither agreed nor disagreed to any degree, this essay is neutral one,
best answer for , discuss advantages and disadvantages or progress is always good, now Discuss, or something like that.
his own opinion is missing in this essay which answers "you", means a single sentence with an "I" could have fixed it.
Fix:
"To sum up, progress brings us many good things and makes our life easier. However, there are a few threats of progress we should pay attention to. Progress might affect human heritage, change people physical and natural condition, and influence human relations."
read this conclusion, here "affect human heritage, change people physical and natural condition, and influence human relations"
all 3 are bad, right ?
he stated progress is good, but retaliated with more bad, therefore he must disagree with "progress is good"
why ??
all 3 paragraphs are also stating that progress is bad, I mean the result you take from each paragraph.
Do you agree or disagree that progress is always good?
problem is "Always" not progress, understand that:
re-written :
"To sum up, progress might brings us many good things and makes our life easier. However, there are some serious threats of progress we should pay attention to, such as human heritage,human relations and change in people's physical and natural conditions. Hence, I could not agree that progress is always good. "
now some would say, you totally pasted the "progress is always good", yup feels fine to me but we can rewrite it.
Hence, I disagree with the "always good" part of statement.
or
As some may consider progress is always good but, I disagree.
no doubt this essay is band 8 or above, but missing an important point costs band, he didn't write for it, but if someone is reading this, be careful..
some people would say, this guys is crazy over use of simple grammar such as would/could etc, but keep in mind, if english is not your first language or not learnt properly or not for extensive period of time, most non-native people will not use them in writing, their essays will contain of small simple sentences mostly, in other words, without any complexities.
and I can differentiate a bad essay from good one, but can rarely write a good one
maybe because I read alot.Its
2.30 in morning, and I am late for bed. see yaa.now this is an open ended question, A very hard one to write one, why ? because under exam pressure, one can easily switch sides, mean can loose purpose, focus, or can change the meaning entirely, or started writing something and ended with completely different one.
how would you define progress ? in which dimension is it ? what is it exactly ? how do you perceive it ?
yea it is all about one's perception, nothing else. And perceptions change alot, be careful there.
Let's see...
so he chose to take it in human evolution context, Planet condition, living standard, ease, comfort
see question "progress is always good?"
it said only good, but it implies that there is something bad or opposite of good, see its very tricky. be careful you people.
because question is open ended, you can define whatever good or bad, both are in your own hands.
he declared goods loudly, living standard, ease, comfort
bads in subtle way, : condition of planet,environment losses,negatively many other aspects of our life
this introduction is quite complex, if one wants to dissect further, it not a normal one right out of a mechanical mill, seems like a professional writer, the kind of one you normally saw in editorial pages.
"Although we should be thankful for progress, we must always keep in mind a number of threats associated with the progress."
from this sentence, it seems like balance approach essay, feels like saying, enjoy but with precautions. this can go in any way..
again same pattern, clear idea > explanation > linked to main idea(Progress)
1st sentence, clever use of word heritage, now it can include many things,
2nd sentence, issues, events and inventions, see neither good nor bad, use of 'we' because of humankind otherwise not possible to use it
3rd sentence, explanation
4th sentence, example, used semi-colon
5th sentence, ancient books are also heritage, right ?, clearly shows he knows what heritage is.
6th sentence, linked back to main idea
this pattern is quite standard one, a best one to fetch highest scores.
1st sentence, it doesn't sound good, should be something like :
Furthermore, progress might cause inevitable mutation in people.
Furthermore, progress might cause inevitable mutation and weaken people.
Furthermore, progress might cause inevitable mutation and weaken people physically.
2nd sentence, reason, use of Truly. Truly, I rarely see it in essays.
3rd sentence, explanation or result of reason. but sense doesn't seem right to me. so:
Nowadays, as a result of omnipresent public transportation system, need of walking is greatly reduced, thus human cardiovascular system narrowing blood flows in body.
Nowadays, as a result of omnipresent public transportation system, people rarely walk for long distances, thus human cardiovascular system narrowing blood flows in body.
4th sentence, clear conclusion of "negatively many other aspects of our life" but not linked back to progress, its okay, small para, started with "progress might"
again same pattern as above, started with main idea (progress) > example > explanation.
1st sentence, stated good
2nd sentence, a little concession or can say recognition of bad,
3rd sentence, precisely restated
Now there is a problem in this essay.
actual question was :
Do you agree or disagree
sadly, he neither agreed nor disagreed to any degree, this essay is neutral one,
best answer for , discuss advantages and disadvantages or progress is always good, now Discuss, or something like that.
his own opinion is missing in this essay which answers "you", means a single sentence with an "I" could have fixed it.
Fix:
"To sum up, progress brings us many good things and makes our life easier. However, there are a few threats of progress we should pay attention to. Progress might affect human heritage, change people physical and natural condition, and influence human relations."
read this conclusion, here "affect human heritage, change people physical and natural condition, and influence human relations"
all 3 are bad, right ?
he stated progress is good, but retaliated with more bad, therefore he must disagree with "progress is good"
why ??
all 3 paragraphs are also stating that progress is bad, I mean the result you take from each paragraph.
Do you agree or disagree that progress is always good?
problem is "Always" not progress, understand that:
re-written :
"To sum up, progress might brings us many good things and makes our life easier. However, there are some serious threats of progress we should pay attention to, such as human heritage,human relations and change in people's physical and natural conditions. Hence, I could not agree that progress is always good. "
now some would say, you totally pasted the "progress is always good", yup feels fine to me but we can rewrite it.
Hence, I disagree with the "always good" part of statement.
or
As some may consider progress is always good but, I disagree.
no doubt this essay is band 8 or above, but missing an important point costs band, he didn't write for it, but if someone is reading this, be careful..
some people would say, this guys is crazy over use of simple grammar such as would/could etc, but keep in mind, if english is not your first language or not learnt properly or not for extensive period of time, most non-native people will not use them in writing, their essays will contain of small simple sentences mostly, in other words, without any complexities.
and I can differentiate a bad essay from good one, but can rarely write a good one
Its
Hey!!! You've done a great work! Have never seen such a detailed analyses of my essays. And, as I am pretty selfish (as many are
) I liked to read some very positive words regarding my attempts. THANK YOU!!!I have no idea in what extent your assessment close to what IELTS examiners usually do, but if it is so - here is my way to ace writing skills: TO WRITE! Starting April 2017 I wrote more than 160 essays. I kept writing 3-5 per week. Recently I have stopped for a while, as do no need IELTS. But now I know that essay writing is extremely helpful to strengthen all language skills, i.e. reading, speaking and even listening. I do not know, maybe it is a type of synergy
Hey!!! You've done a great work! Have never seen such a detailed analyses of my essays. And, as I am pretty selfish (as many are
I have no idea in what extent your assessment close to what IELTS examiners usually do, but if it is so - here is my way to ace writing skills: TO WRITE! Starting April 2017 I wrote more than 160 essays. I kept writing 3-5 per week. Recently I have stopped for a while, as do no need IELTS. But now I know that essay writing is extremely helpful to strengthen all language skills, i.e. reading, speaking and even listening. I do not know, maybe it is a type of synergy
I have seen lot of videos, read books on essays, so seen them doing this. but do examiners do that ? I don't think so, they read, get an idea, band it. maybe because it becomes their second nature, I have experience with an ex-examiner, even though she gave me correct bands, but failed to improve my writing by giving any useful information. she just corrected few punctuation, spellings or grammar mistakes, nothing else. I have seen my previous written essays, now i feel that I could have improved alot, I mean from 6 band to 7.5 or even 8.
to learn a language, you have to immerse yourself in it, it is all about changing thought process from native language to new language, that is SELF TALK, which you do with yourself.
yes, its all about synergy.
WoundedTiger
Star Member
very thorough and beautifully explained assesment...H0peAndFa1th...brilliant..
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I need W:7.5 or in worst case at least a 7.
Does it worth at least a 7?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I need W:7.5 or in worst case at least a 7.
Does it worth at least a 7?
