IELTS - Writing - For Band 7 or Above.

[velocityblood]

Hi Guys please review, I have tried writing WT1 and WT2 in one go, it is really exhausting could not do it properly.

@cansha @H0peAndFa1th @artificial.nocturne

https://imgur.com/a/xNYQbgW

Guys anyone had time to look at it?

 

[Raman Boparai]

bad words, bad grammar

I can see, it will end up getting 6.5 or 6 at worst.


bad words
bad grammar




very well written conclusion.

6.5, you can easily get 7, if you pay little more attention, proof read
------------------------

Now let me tell you, your problem,

bad grammar, advance problem, in complex sentences.
bad word choice,
influence of mother language, or first language.
out of context (digressing)

goo things.
you understand ielts format.
you know some good words
you identified the topic correctly, say tried to address the issue, good task achievement.
-----------------------


try reading this thread from first page, absorb it all, you will surely get 7.

Thanks alot i will work on the weak points

 

[Hannan Khan]

No, not really. But it can not necessarily insure you a 7. You must focus on writing the best essay possible. You had some issues with structuring your essay, for example in para 1 I do not recommend that you go on talking after giving an example, I personally always suggest that one should always end up the body para with an example - as it is the last supporting detail for your idea. Secondly problem with your conclusion where you said 'In conclusion, food arrives from around the world to satisfy the needs of local purchasers' this is just extra which you do not need to put in conclusion at all, you have already told that earlier in your essay no need to say the same thing over and over again, if you do this you will lose marks for task achievement/task response because you are not sticking to answering what the question is asking. Lastly, use advanced vocabulary here and there, refer to my guide for advanced vocabulary link if you haven't already. Also try to give the best examples and most convincing examples as much as possible e.g. when you start an example by saying 'According to a research published in blablabla' this adds more credibility your essay. Good Luck.

https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/my-guide-to-ielts-essay-writing.618687/

Thank you. Very helpful. I will be mindful of structure and vocab.

 

[Hannan Khan]

Hi All. Please evaluate this at your convenience.

Some countries spend a lot of money to make bicycle usage easier. Why is this? Is this the best solution to traffic congestion?


A huge amount is spent by the governments to make bicycle commute easier. Even though bicycle usage is seen as a solution to traffic problem, I believe improving public transport system is a better approach toward tackling the issue.


The usage of bicycles would result in decreased traffic congestion. Cars and other vehicles take up a lot road space, thereby becoming a bottleneck in ensuring smooth traffic. Comparatively, bicycles occupy less area of the road. For instance, the rush hour of most metropolises is during morning and evening hours. If bicycles are used at these times, the traffic will be reduced considerably. Bicycle commute ensures less occupance of road and per se, a decreased traffic.


However, an effective public transport system can be a better solution to the problem. Public transport such as trains and buses are a much faster way to commute. People need to reach their destinations quickly and public transport is known for a fast commute. What is more, modern buses and trains run on dedicated tracks. Subway systems in western countries for example, are plied on underground tracks which connect the entire city. People will be able to travel quickly, yet there will be no traffic on the roads if public transport is made effective.


In conclusion, a lot of investment is being made on the betterment of bicycle commute. The governments are seeing this as a solution to traffic problem. However, an effective public transport is a better solution as not only will it ensure quick commutes, but there will also be no traffic on the road.

 

[velocityblood]

Hello Guys @cansha @H0peAndFa1th @artificial.nocturne today again practiced on paper for below WT1 and WT2, I know it might feel burdensome to review essay in the pics form but I am supposed to practice it in paper, please review the work.

WT1: You work for an international company. You have seen an advertisement for a training course which will be useful for your job.
Write a letter to your manager. In your letter
> describe the training course you want to do
> explain what the company can do to help you
> say how the course will be helpful for your job

WT2: Some people say that it is possible to tell a lot about a person's culture and character from their choice of clothes.
Do you agree or disagree?

https://imgur.com/a/C1kicpW

P.S. @H0peAndFa1th Tried to add things from "The List"

 

[velocityblood]

Hi All. Please evaluate this at your convenience.

Some countries spend a lot of money to make bicycle usage easier. Why is this? Is this the best solution to traffic congestion?


A huge amount is spent by the governments to make bicycle commute easier. Even though bicycle usage is seen as a solution to traffic problem, I believe improving public transport system is a better approach toward tackling the issue.


The usage of bicycles would result in decreased traffic congestion. Cars and other vehicles take up a lot road space, thereby becoming a bottleneck in ensuring smooth traffic. Comparatively, bicycles occupy less area of the road. For instance, the rush hour of most metropolises is during morning and evening hours. If bicycles are used at these times, the traffic will be reduced considerably. Bicycle commute ensures less occupance of road and per se, a decreased traffic.


However, an effective public transport system can be a better solution to the problem. Public transport such as trains and buses are a much faster way to commute. People need to reach their destinations quickly and public transport is known for a fast commute. What is more, modern buses and trains run on dedicated tracks. Subway systems in western countries for example, are plied on underground tracks which connect the entire city. People will be able to travel quickly, yet there will be no traffic on the roads if public transport is made effective.


In conclusion, a lot of investment is being made on the betterment of bicycle commute. The governments are seeing this as a solution to traffic problem. However, an effective public transport is a better solution as not only will it ensure quick commutes, but there will also be no traffic on the road.

If I was to write this, I would be doing something like this:

Enormous money is being spend by a few nations to simplify the bicycle usage, this is mainly because the government see it as a tool to keep the populace healthy, moreover, this can not be believed as an alternate to optimize the traffic congestion, because commute by bicycle is only possible in a clean sky, not when the day is too bright or rainy, and is useful for short distance, short duration commute only.

 

[Hannan Khan]

If I was to write this, I would be doing something like this:

Enormous money is being spend by a few nations to simplify the bicycle usage, this is mainly because the government see it as a tool to keep the populace healthy, moreover, this can not be believed as an alternate to optimize the traffic congestion, because commute by bicycle is only possible in a clean sky, not when the day is too bright or rainy, and is useful for short distance, short duration commute only.

Do they look problematic, my ideas?

 

[AB17]

Do they look problematic, my ideas?

No, your ideas are good. I rephrased your intro using your points only.

Original: A huge amount is spent by the governments to make bicycle commute easier. Even though bicycle usage is seen as a solution to traffic problem, I believe improving public transport system is a better approach toward tackling the issue.

Rephrased: A huge amount of money is being spent by the nations to control the traffic congestion issue. Some of the governments believe in cycling to be the leading solution to mitigate heavy traffic and have taken measures to facilitate its usage. However, I believe improving public transport system including bus, local trains to be a better approach toward tackling the issue.

 

[AB17]

If I was to write this, I would be doing something like this:

Enormous money is being spend by a few nations to simplify the bicycle usage, this is mainly because the government see it as a tool to keep the populace healthy, moreover, this can not be believed as an alternate to optimize the traffic congestion, because commute by bicycle is only possible in a clean sky, not when the day is too bright or rainy, and is useful for short distance, short duration commute only.

Is this one big sentence? Its not a good practice. No doubt we have to write complex sentences, but they should come as natural not forced.

You mentioned that government is using it to keep populace healthy, where did that come from? Are you going to make that point in body paragraphs in favor of cycling? Also, the topic doesn't suggest that.

 

[velocityblood]

Do they look problematic, my ideas?

No your ideas are not problematic but they don't answer the question directly. Firstly, in first body para you should answer first question, that is why there is money being spend by government for ease of cycling? Secondly, in second question they asked is it the beat solution for traffic congestion? You should give reason, if you think it is not the best solution or the reason if you think it is beat solution. Why you are bringing your own solution? They did not asked for solution from you. Please learn to analyze the question first, analyzing the question is first step it comes even before planning. What I see your response to the question is, in BP1, you have explained it as solution to traffic congestion and in BP 2 you say that this is not the solution, solution is something else and you explained it. This is not the ask of the question.

 

[velocityblood]

• Is this one big sentence? Its not a good practice. No doubt we have to write complex sentences, but they should come as natural not forced. I am not saying anything about the sentence but the answer to the question.

You mentioned that government is using it to keep populace healthy, where did that come from? That is the first question why is it that the government is spending lot of money on making the cycle usage easy. Are you going to make that point in body paragraphs in favor of cycling? Yes in first body paragraph I am supposed to explain and give the reason for first question. Also, the topic doesn't suggest that. If you are saying this may be you need some brush up on the concept of analyzing the question.

.
The topic is asking you two things 1). Why government is spending so much money on cycling? You can give the reason. 2). Is it a best solution for traffic congestion? You need to give reason for your answer to this question.

 

[velocityblood]

No, your ideas are good. I rephrased your intro using your points only.

Original: A huge amount is spent by the governments to make bicycle commute easier. Even though bicycle usage is seen as a solution to traffic problem, I believe improving public transport system is a better approach toward tackling the issue. Where is this coming from? Did they ask your opinion or solution to the problem from you?

Rephrased: A huge amount of money is being spent by the nations to control the traffic congestion issue. Some of the governments believe in cycling to be the leading solution to mitigate heavy traffic and have taken measures to facilitate its usage. However, I believe improving public transport system including bus, local trains to be a better approach toward tackling the issue.

 

[velocityblood]

Hi @H0peAndFa1th do we have a post on analyzing the question? I don't see that in this thread. People need a help with analyzing the task, then only they will be able to get a 7 in essay. If task response is not as per the demand, I hope this will be a challenge for every one here.

 

[AB17]

.
The topic is asking you two things 1). Why government is spending so much money on cycling? You can give the reason. 2). Is it a best solution for traffic congestion? You need to give reason for your answer to this question.

Rightly said we have to analyse the question. But try to understand it, spending on cycling is being correlated to solving the traffic congestion issue and not to the health of population, that is an additional issue which cycling also addresses to it.

Question also asks, Is it the best solution to the XYZ issue? Here it can be answered with No It is not the best solution as it wont solve the XYZ issue. However i suggest another solution which could better address the problem. (I might be wrong in giving another solution, but in my understanding it should go like that)

What is missing in the original poster essay intro is the reasons for why it is not a best solution. Rather than giving alternative in intro section. should have focused on why cycling is not the best solution to congestion. (Like you did)

 

[velocityblood]

Rightly said we have to analyse the question. But try to understand it, spending on cycling is being correlated to solving the traffic congestion issue and not to the health of population, that is an additional issue which cycling also addresses to it. Just try to remove the second question and look at essay. Does it relates anywhere to traffic?

Question also asks, Is it the best solution to the XYZ issue? Here it can be answered with No It is not the best solution as it wont solve the XYZ issue. Exactly and then you to have to explain why it wont solve, rather than suggesting a new solution. However i suggest another solution which could better address the problem. (I might be wrong in giving another solution, but in my understanding it should go like that)

What is missing in the original poster essay intro is the reasons for why it is not a best solution. Rather than giving alternative in intro section. should have focused on why cycling is not the best solution to congestion. (Like you did)

See, you should start looking at questions logically, you should answer the question directly, it should not be left for the examiner to understand your position, your position must be clear in the essay. Why are you giving the another solution when they are asking for opinion on if cycle is best solution? If it is not explain it why and if you believe it is best solution explain why.