ALISHER

WRITES 1.0

IELTS

Alisher Abduvohobov

TABLE OF

CONTENTS

TASK 1 ........................................................................ 1

TASK 2 ........................................................................ 1

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 1 -

The process by which ceramic pots are made can be outlined in a series of

consecutive steps. Overall, there are four major stages to the process,

starting with digging and delivering sand to a factory, followed by the

industrial process in the factory, as well as coloring stages before the pots

become ready for use or sales. Also, this process is a highly machine-driven

one, requiring much time and equipment for its completion.

The first two stages are somewhat simple: sand is excavated from the

ground, which then needs to be delivered to a factory via trucks. Once

brought to the factory, the clay has to be crushed before it is mixed with

water in the following stage. The mud should be moulded, forming a new

shape and staying dried from 4 up to 6 hours.

From that point forward, the dried mud obtains the appearance of a half-

ready pot, assembled to a clay oven, where the temperature reaches 1000 C

to heat the pots. Having been heated, the pots are covered with colors, in

which case the main color is green. To ensure the permanence of colors, pots

are stacked in a color-firing device, after which those products are available

to use or sell.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 2 -

Society would benefit from a ban on all kinds of advertising because it serves

no useful purpose and can be damaging.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There is a view that imposing a ban on every advertisement can benefit the

whole society, as adverts are generally trivial and may pose harm. While I

acknowledge the potential negative impacts of advertisements, I believe that

prohibiting any endorsement may not be a logical course of action because

their potential positives - informing the public and generating more revenue

for companies - are far more significant.

It is thought that advertisements fail to present anything useful, therefore

restricting all of them is a proper response to the “issue”. Some commercials,

such as cosmetics and soda beverages, are so ubiquitous that they seem to

serve no value. Such advertisements do not necessarily cater to the needs of

the majority of customers, who want to purchase other more important

products , like medicine and clothes, they can use on a regular basis.

Bombarding them with a constant barrage of advertisements targeted at

goods they normally avoid buying may deserve some limitations.

On a broader scale, certain promotions of products can be destructive as they

mainly focus on young children and contain harmful substances that can put

the

health

of

customers

at

risk.

Take

an

example

of

fast-food

advertisements. Seeing their endorsements on their phones, children can be

tempted to insist their parents on buying them junk food. In most cases,

parents tend to comply with their children’s temptation and buy them food

packed with unhealthy ingredients. So, it is imperative that governments

make their best efforts to limit the spread of advertisements discussed

above.

In my opinion, however, advertisements play a key role in raising the

awareness

of

people

about

the

availability

of

products.

Without

the

promotions of household appliances or clothes, for example, customers would

find it hard to seek their desired products via other means. Implementing a

ban on such goods is indeed coupled with trade-offs, including the lack of

awareness of people.

From an economic perspective, manufacturers display their products to the

public mainly through advertisements, attracting more consumers and

making a bigger amount of money in general. If advertisements were to be

prohibited altogether, companies would suffer a loss of financial profit and

an influx of customers who previously bought the products only after seeing

them advertised.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 3 -

In conclusion, although some drawbacks can stem from the widespread

availability of advertisements, health risks and unwanted promotions, I think

that calling for a ban on any endorsement would not solve the issue anyway.

Certain adverts are a tool to keep the people updated regarding the

accessibility of goods and help companies gain more profit. Therefore,

limiting dangerous promotions only would benefit the society as a whole.

Some people think news has no connection to people’s lives. So then it is a waste

of time to read the

newspaper and watch television news programs. To what extent do you agree

or disagree?

Some individual have started to question the relevance of news outlets,

asserting that they have no connection to people’s daily lives. Therefore,

spending time reading and watching news reports is deemed merely a waste

by

those

people.

While

I

acknowledge

the

flaws

of

reporting

news,

misinformation

and

widespread

propaganda,

I

believe

that

news

still

continues to play a significant role in our society because it can raise people’s

awareness and foster their critical thinking.

One shortcoming of today’s news coverage is that it tends to misinform

people. This incorrect version of reality is worsened by the biased reporting

in media, who sometimes works for the benefit of one political or ideological

party trying to portray themselves as a dominant force. The conflict between

Israel and Palestine is a good example of such a prejudiced approach to deliver

messages to the world. Both countries involved in the fight seem to be

presenting divergent narratives, leading to a lack of objectivity. Once people

discover inaccuracies of the news, this will likely cause the erosion of public

trust in media as a whole.

Additionally, spreading propaganda is another factor contributing to the lack

of public confidence towards news. Looking at the political tensions between

the USA and North Korea can reveal the picture clearly. In both countries,

there is a growing focus on broadcasting the information against the other

nation, emphasizing the outbreak of possible wars in between. Naturally,

when the citizens of these countries find out that the media is somehow

deceiving them with fake messages, intentionally or not, those people may

start to question the relevance of news to their lives. This is fueled by the

rise of social media, where any message, whether that be true or false, can

go viral and cause public backlash against the way information is handled.

Despite the concerns expressed above, I still think that the news coverage is

crucial in heightening people’s awareness about different happenings. In case

of an emergency or natural disasters, it is critical that people be informed

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 4 -

and prepared for these events beforehand and this is when news about such

incidents can help people to be updated in advance. In contrast, someone

who dismisses news as nothing more than a waste of time may find it

difficult to adapt to these challenges and take necessary measures. It is

therefore essential for people to consume news regularly if they should avoid

certain misfortunes.

Another benefit of staying updated with current news is that readers can

improve their critical understanding. It is because they receive information

from different sources, credible or not, and can discern the truth from

misinformation. While analyzing the reports of various media outlets, people

may realize that not every news is reliable, hence should be considered

carefully before making any conclusions. Sometimes it is possible that

individuals expose themselves to fake stories, but with enough awareness

people know that falsehoods can occur and that they have to clarify the

facts for their own good.

In conclusion, although I admit that the news coverage is not without its

drawbacks - the proliferation of fake news and biased reporting - I am sure

that they are easily overshadowed by the news’ advantages, people’s

improved understanding and the survival factor in emergencies. So, reading

and watching news daily should not be considered a waste of time.

Nowadays, it is not only large companies that are able to make films as digital

technology enables anyone to produce films. Do you think this is a positive or

negative development?

Due to the advancement of modern technologies, literally anyone with

necessary devices can now make films on their own, which was confined to

giant movie producers before. While I acknowledge the potential risks of this

development – an excessive competition among film-makers and production

of unwanted movies – I believe that this is a change for the better because

it caters to the varying needs of different audiences.

People making their own films can fuel an unhealthy competition among

other producers. It is because virtually any person with technological devices,

smartphones or digital cameras, is able to create movies, leading to the

proliferation of the same products on the market. Considering that we have

enough of any movie, ranging from Blockbusters to locally-produced ones, I

feel that prospective movies made by any individual are bound to push the

limits to the extreme. Oftentimes, such films will be created by amateur or

novice producers, who may fail to resist the existing competition in the film

industry and become obsolete after some time.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 5 -

The

widespread

presence

of

undesirable

movies

can

stem

from

this

development. It is natural to assume that new film producers from any walk

of life make films according to their own taste and personal preferences.

This, in fact, can negate others’ interests for the genre of the films, possibly

leading to a mass of unnecessary films. For example, a movie producer may

create episodes which mainly portray the suffering and grief throughout the

film because they have these misfortunes in their lives. For people who are

leading a happy life, such films are nothing more than an illustration of

misery and mental traumas. As a result, the movies produced by any person

may not be found appealing and welcomed by others.

Despite the concerns expressed above, I still think that this trend is a positive

turn of events. It primarily adds to the diversity of the film industry. If big

movie producers are not presenting a movie that some viewers want to see,

newcomer film-makers can take an advantage of this neglect and start

producing films that are most appreciated by a certain audience. In case

there are not enough horror films to entertain people, youngsters in

particular, those willing to follow their passion in film-making can meet

their needs and produce such films, hence a better range on the whole

market. With the rise of social media platforms, this process is better

facilitated as film directors can instantly share their work to reach more and

more people.

The individuals that want to make films on their own also tend to consult

their possible audiences and discuss the genre and the plots of their movie.

This is normally done to avoid future failures while making the film to match

the preferences of viewers. These sit-downs, in turn, can enhance the quality

of the film because it no longer contains an episode that is not universally

well-liked by the audience. Most major film makers do not engage in two-

way communication with their viewers, falling short of their expectations in

most cases.

In conclusion, although there are certain disadvantages associated with the

phenomenon that everyone can create films independently, the unhealthy

competition spirit among film companies and the increased numbers of

unwanted

films,

I

share

the

view

that

these

limitations

are

easily

overshadowed by the possible advantages, involving broader ranges of films

and the viewer's overall satisfaction.

Some education systems make students focus on certain subjects at the age of

15, while others require students to study a wide range of subjects until they

leave school.

What are the benefits of each system? Which is better?

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 6 -

There are different opinions as to how many subjects school students should

learn. Some people think a specified number of subjects should be taught,

while others propose the incorporation of more subjects. Each system has its

own merits to offer, but I view the former suggestion as a viable option.

The first advantage of teaching only a handful of subjects to 15-year-olds is

that it provides a sense of necessity. In other words, school children at this

tender

age

are

better

adapted

to

absorbing

less,

but

more

urgent

information. Allowing them to attend a certain number of subjects can make

them concentrate on their preferred lessons, reducing study load and

enhancing learning outcomes.

Additionally, the availability of only a number of subjects can present

flexibility in learning experience. Students occupied by so many subjects may

find it challenging to be flexible with their studies as these lessons are

normally extra burden and can easily exhaust learners. With a specific

number of course components, however, school students can study more

efficiently without heavy assignments involved.

The latter proposal, on the other hand, can also lead to fruitful results.

Introducing more subjects to the school curriculum does benefit students in

terms of understanding the world better. Being a young individual, most

students tend to be curios about exploring the immediate surroundings and

for this to happen subjects like physics, chemistry and history should be

taught, regardless of the school policies on excluding some subjects.

Moreover, having a diverse range of school subjects can equip children with

more options to choose from. They are no longer limited to a set of subjects

and can discover the broad range in their education. Having this diversity

may help learners to develop their passion for a variety of subjects, which

results in the wider scope of education in schooling years.

In my opinion, however, compelling students to focus on specific numbers of

school subjects is a positive turn of events overall. For one, this limited range

can shape students’ further interests for their future profession since they

will

not

be

overwhelmed

by

subjects

irrelevant

to

their

prospective

employment. For another, students themselves would not experience mental

burnout, added stress and disinterest for the school curriculum if they were

to study solely a handful of subjects.

In conclusion, both educational suggestions share distinct values to children.

Although the incorporation of a huge number of subjects would lead to a

better grasp of the world and greater diversity, teaching school students only

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 7 -

certain subjects is a change for the better as it would eliminate distracting

subjects and prepare students for the later life.

The bar chart compares the proportion of males, females, and children in the

UK based on their following to a fruit and vegetable-rich diet from 2002 to

2010. Overall, all the categories shown followed similar patterns: after

increasing in the second year, they saw a minimal drop in the final year.

While the share of women eating recommended amounts of organic food was

the highest, the reverse was true for that of children.

Focusing on the percentage of adults first, males and females, the former

gender started at 22% while the latter just ahead, with 25%. The further

growth, however, widened the gap between two genders’ share, with men’s

proportion improving to 26% and women’s peaking at 32%, a figure that

marked a 6-percentage-point difference in 2006. The percentage of both

sexes reversed their direction of change after four years: women’s proportion

decreased to 26% and that of men fell to 24%.

Turning to the smallest figures shown, children shared the lowest figures

throughout the period. Despite starting at a mere 11%, their percentage saw

the biggest positive change, growing to 18% in 2006. This increase was

followed by a slight reduction to 16% in the last year, still showing children

as the consumers of the least organic food.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 8 -

Although more and more people read news on the Internet, newspaper will

remain

the most important source of news.

Do you agree or disagree?

An increasing number of people are reading news online, but there is a view

that newspapers will still hold their most crucial position as a source of

news. I personally disagree with this claim because using the Internet to

receive news will supersede reading traditional magazines and newspapers.

The importance of newspapers as a source of news is not lost, even in the

age of modern technologies. Many people still prefer to read the news

depicted on the physical newspapers, either due to a lack of willingness or

opportunities to get online and be updated about the current happenings.

Even if we have the privilege to use the Internet, we may simply resort to

newspapers as a means of staying in touch with the real-world happenings.

Another key benefit of newspapers is their employment of highly skilled and

professional journalists and editors that ensure the credibility of news

presented. They tend to make sure that the messages they are spreading to

the public are reliable and checked thoroughly, whereas using the Internet

for the same purpose can sometimes entail flaws because online sources of

news may be filled with fake messages and misinformation.

In my opinion, however, the emergence of online sites to receive news will

replace paper-based experience. It is normally because the Internet can

facilitate the process of sharing news, the ability to comment on certain

messages and increase the individual contribution to producing news.

YouTube, Reddit and Facebook, for example, are the platforms where people

can impart news with even visuals, photos and video. This aspect of the

Internet is what traditional newspapers will never succeed in replicating.

Additionally, the news websites can provide instant access to immediate

happenings sooner than the physical sources. Individuals are now able to

download news on their portable devices connected to the Internet and even

watch the events live. During the war between Ukraine and Russia, for

instance, people watched the conflict zones in real time, without having to

rely on the news narrated on the newspapers after a week or so. The easy

access and quick updates are the features with which online sources will

easily

take

over

the

position

of

magazines

as

a

primary

source

of

information.

In conclusion, while I acknowledge the current role of newspapers in

delivering news for those deprived of the Internet connection and providing

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 9 -

trustworthy information, I still think that they are easily overshadowed by

the advantages of online websites – rapidity and easiness of spreading news

and visual depictions of the events.

The most important aim of science should be to improve people's lives.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

There is a view that the sole aim of science should be to enhance people’s quality

of

life.

I

favor

this

suggestion

because

science

is

a

base

for

human’s

advancement for a bright future.

For science to develop, a great deal of government funding is allocated in the

hope of producing desirable outcomes. This is normally done to elevate the

quality of people’s lifestyles as the welfare of a country largely depends on

the overall well-being of citizens. Healthcare sector, for example, requires

financial backing from the government so that better medicine can improve

the health of individuals. It then becomes clear why the science sector should

pay attention to raising the living standards of people.

Another area of research is a space exploration, which can promise new

prospects for people. As we continue to destroy our ecosystem through

various ways, mutual wars, global pollution and climate change, our planet

may become uninhabitable in the instant future. Exploring a new planet or

source of life that can support our needs to exists is crucial in this sense. We

can potentially discover an Earth-like planet and colonize it to meet our

requirements of life with the help of scientific findings.

Additionally, modern engineering is facilitating our lives in many aspects.

Urban architecture, for instance, is now focusing on the creation of

environmentally-friendly residential areas as opposed to the industrial cities’

layout in the past. This development is largely thanks to the efforts made in

science. Genetically modified food is a pertinent result of vigorous scientific

studies. Since we are facing a severe shortage of food available for human

use because of overpopulation, the need for GM food is increasing, and

scientists are offering viable solutions to this problem by changing the

genetic structures of organic food.

Lastly,

science

can

ensure

the

long-term

survival

of

our

ecosystem,

eliminating some environmental issues. In the late 20st century, for example,

the ozone layer was becoming deteriorated due to carbon footprint and

science was the fragile hope of people to recover the layer. Governments

spent millions of dollars in an attempt to rejuvenate the ozone layer to its

previous condition, saving the future of humankind.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 10 -

In conclusion, I fully agree that the main purpose of science should be to

serve the best interests of the public as it can equip us with necessary

protection and tools to survive and thrive.

The bar chart compares females of different age brackets from Australia

based on when they bore their first children from 1966 to 2006. Overall, there

was a considerable variation in terms of the trajectories the age groups

followed: while the proportion of those giving birth under the age of 19 and

in their early 20s decreased, that of more mature females saw an upward

trend over the period, who were within the age range of 25 to 40+.

Focusing on the younger generation of mothers first, 19-year-olds and below

stood at 30% in 1966, a figure that had more than halved after 40 years,

representing a mere 11%. Despite leading the chart with 60% initially, women

who delivered their first babies at the age of 20-24 experienced a two-fold

decline in their proportion over time, reaching a low of 30% in 2006, the same

pattern of negative change as the youngest category.

Later motherhood in Australia became common during the time given. Just

under 40% of females aged 25-29 gave birth to their first babies in 1966, with

this figure further improving by a 10-percentage-point after 20 years and

remaining unchanged in the next two decades. The biggest rise, however,

was seen in the percentage of mothers in the age bracket of 30-34. Starting

at only around 13% in the first year, their share had nearly quadrupled in the

following 40 years, eventually peaking at 50%. A similar scenario was

observed in the figures of 35-39-year-olds, whose share recorded a three-fold

growth, from roughly 10% to 30% between 1966 and 2006. The oldest mothers

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 11 -

saw a minimal change in their proportion, exceeding no more than 5% in the

entire period.

Creative artists should always be given the freedom to express their own ideas

in words, pictures, music, or film, in whichever way they wish. There should be

no government restrictions on what they do. To what extent do you agree or

disagree with this option?

There is a view that we should allow creative artists to create a work of art

colored with their independent ideas according to their own taste, therefore

no

governmental

intervention

should

limit

their

actions.

While

this

suggestion seems valid on the face of it, I do not fully favor it as it not only

leads to a mass of unwanted artistic works, but it also undermines the role

of governments in enforcing necessary policies over the job of artists.

Admittedly,

artists

can

gain

permission

to

express

their

views

while

producing their own work. It is because those individuals are normally

innovative, hence able to come up with new masterpieces that can serve the

best interests of people. Take the music industry as an example. Singers and

songwriters often create songs based on their worldviews, personal attitudes

towards certain matters, such as love, friendship and mutual affection of

people to one another. Listeners

of these lyrics tend to relate their

experiences to the expressed stories, consuming such content on a regular

basis.

Another reason why artistic people need to gain freedom of speech and

thoughts over their production is that they are also equal members of society

like anyone else is. Restricting their ability to deliver personal messages

through their masterwork can backfire on their creativity. As this skill

largely depends on thinking outside the box and neglecting limitations,

preventing artists from sharing their personal beliefs may lead to undesirable

outcomes when the artwork is ready to release. Poets in the past, for

example, were supposed to adhere to the creeds of governments, heavily

hindering their own talents to write poems a certain way.

In my opinion, however, giving too much freedom to artistic individuals to

choose their style of work has some trade-offs. Once permitted to produce

any kind of artwork of their liking, song and film makers may create

unwanted productions with no government supervision involved. Lil Nas X,

for instance, is a renowned singer who writes and sings songs that praise

Satanism and provoke negative reactions from the religious viewers. If

limited, his work would not outrage the public to this extent.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 12 -

The leading role of authorities in controlling the pieces of art may be lost

due to excessive personal freedom for artists. Traditionally, churches and

governing bodies have long monitored the creation of artistic production. If

we were to grant the singers, film-makers, poets and photographers

permission to release any product of their choice, we would neglect the

fundamental position of governments to control the intellectual property

and its impact on others.

In conclusion, although I admit that artistic people should be free to express

their ideas without governments imposing limitations on their work, I still

think that this permission can have negative consequences: the spread of

unacceptable work of art and the ignored role of governments to supervise

certain productions.

Doctors recommend that older people exercise regularly. However, many of

them do not get enough exercise.

What are the reasons?

What can be done to encourage them to do exercise?

Even though doctors stress the importance of regular physical exercises for

the elderly, these recommendations tend to be neglected. The reasons behind

this reluctance of senior people to do workout are social norms and a lack

of sport facilities, and necessary steps should be taken by the governments

to improve the situation.

The societal expectations of the elderly are the main reason why they are

not physically active. Such norms are deeply embedded in many cultures and

old people are expected to stay in, which is why they have developed a fear

or strong aversion to daily exercises, such as running, swimming and cycling.

The elderly seem to be afraid of others’ perception of them once they engage

in sport activities, eventually quitting these exercises after a while.

The shortage of sport facilities and required equipment is another common

cause behind old people’s lack of willingness to do sports. In many parts of

the world, especially in rural and far-off regions, opportunities to become

involved in sports are quite scarce. The elderly in such locations are

essentially deprived of the luxury of doing regular exercises in sport arenas

and venues. This scarcity of facilities to do physical activities encourages not

just old people but anyone to give up on frequent exercises.

There are, however, possible remedies to counter the problem. The first step

involves changing the attitudes of other people towards the elderly who

want to do sports. Governments should distribute leaflets about the

importance of sports for old people in the community, and seeing this, we

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 13 -

could defy the individuals’ stereotypes claiming sports are confined to young

people only. This measure would potentially inspire the old to take up

physical exercises on a routine basis.

The most viable solution to this issue would be to build more sport venues

and exercise fields, alongside with fully-equipped changing and recreational

rooms. Entertainment sections inside the sport arenas, including table tennis

and board games, should encourage senior people to make sport activities

amusing rather than physically demanding. An element of fun in such

facilities along with modern look and tools to use can definitely make a huge

difference in altering the attitudes of old people to sport activities.

In conclusion, the major reasons behind the growing tendency of the elderly

not to do sports vary from the social norms to shortage of necessary

facilities. Governments should change the people’s perceptions and erect

more sport venues to encourage the oldest age group to keep fit and stay

physically active.

The table compares the survey results on the most preferred TV programs of

three age brackets in a European nation in 2012. Overall, while watching

cartoons fell out of favor as people grew older, showing a significant

disparity between the youngest and the oldest age profiles, the opposite was

true for news consumption, which attracted mostly adults. Other TV

programs – features films, soap opera, TV dramas and sports - were also

popular among relatively mature people.

Looking first of all at the TV program whose main audience was the youngest

age group, 11-15-year-olds, 29% of these children enjoyed watching cartoons.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 14 -

This figure, however, was lower for those aged 15-20 and 21-25, with

respective figures of 18% and 4%.

The reverse scenario could be told about watching news, universally well-

liked by adults compared to a minority of 11-15-year-old audience. Whereas

19% of viewers at the age of 15-20 and 23% of people in the age range of 21-

25 preferred watching news, merely 6% of children below the age of 15 were

reported to have enjoyed watching news programs.

The share of viewership of the remaining TV programs revealed a rather

similar picture. Starting with children under the age of 15, 18% and 17% of

them were keen to watch feature films and soap operas, while only 8% of

this audience preferred TV dramas and 22% were interested in sport

programs. More mature audience, 11-15-year-olds, on the other hand,

demonstrated

positive

sentiments

to

these

TV

programs,

with

23%

viewership for feature films, 12% for soap operas, 10% for TV dramas and

18% for sport programs. Finally, the oldest age group shown, those in 21-25

years of age, liked these TV programs more than younger age profile. A fifth

of them enjoyed watching feature films, with another 19% liking soap operas

and 13% and 21% preferring TV dramas and sports.

Some people think that children should aim to be the best at what they are

doing while others believe it is not necessary for them.

Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Opinions

vary

as

to

whether

or

not

young

children

should

be

most

accomplished in their chosen fields. Some people believe that it is crucial for

children to be groomed to be the best version of themselves, while others

take issue with this claim. In my opinion, children should be encouraged to

do their best from an early age despite the potential difficulties involved.

In many cultures, young children are increasingly expected to be better than

everyone else in the same sphere. It is normally because early phases of their

life are considered to be the best starting point of embarking on anything

new, including sports, art, science and whatnot. Childhood is a stage where

cognitive and physical development can reach its peak, allowing youngsters

to be resilient, industrious, hardworking and determined. These attributes

can be a strong predictor of future success, stressing the importance of

excellence in any field from a young age. The example of young chess

grandmasters goes to show that strides made in childhood will eventually

manifest themselves in world-class achievements. It is therefore a logical

course of action for parents and teachers to aspire youngsters for personal

growth.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 15 -

Nevertheless, it is often argued that children do not necessarily have to

become superior to others in their opted spheres. This argument mainly

stems from the concerns revolving around the heavy responsibility children

should carry otherwise. Strong feelings of urgency for young children to try

their best all the time can strain their mental state, causing unnecessary

stress and a fear of failures. While attempting to live up to their social

expectations and constant peer comparison, young children may find it

difficult to cope with the anxiety coupled with possible depression. More

importantly, according to some, children are supposed to enjoy their

childhood years rather than setting their sights on personal brilliance. This

phase of their lives should be a source of enjoyment, carefree moments and

freedom from the mental disorders mainly adults have to deal with.

Encouraging young people to excel in what they do may deprive them of the

benefits childhood can offer.

In my view, however, young children should try to be the most complete

version of themselves regardless of the odds and challenges stacked against

them. If they do not take action from a young age to improve themselves as

individuals, they may regret their wasted chances when they become adults.

As opposed to living a miserable life in adulthood, children now have the

opportunities and willpower to turn their life around and clarify their

directions in life because their physicality and cognitive growth enable them

to try at a high level without even becoming constantly exhausted.

In

conclusion,

despite

the

difficulties

associated

with

encouraging

youngsters to be the best in their fields, the stress and fear of failures, I still

believe that children should most certainly do their best as childhood

provides important elements of future success that can prevent them from

later regrets in life.

People are having more and more sugar-based drinks. What are the reasons?

What are the solutions to make people to drink less?

Sugar-packed beverages have gained in huge popularity among people in

recent years. While this rise can be attributed to the role of social media

campaigns in promoting such drinks and the relentless production of sugary

food items, governments can play their part in addressing the situation by

providing healthier options to consume, taxation system and alerting people

to the risk of the long-term poor health resulted from the consumption of

sugary drinks.

Social media platforms are to blame for the growing popularity of unhealthy

beverages.

Manufacturers

of

these

products

mainly

target

a

broader

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 16 -

audience to make them buy their production on impulse, and different

networking sites are a tool to reach their goals. Having seen the constant

promotion of sugary drinks on the Internet, millions of people, if not billions

yet, are tempted to buy the drinks and become a regular customer of the

companies making them. More significantly, the beverage-making companies

generally use celebrity endorsement to encourage more people to drink

sweetened drinks. Pepsi, for example, invited Lionel Messi, a celebrated

football player, to their promotional content, leading to increased sales of

this beverage because of the massive influence of Messi over many people,

including his fans.

The production of sugary drinks has risen recently, compared to the past

decades when the manufacturing scale was fairly low. Companies in the past

did not have means available to endorse their products as they can do now,

because TV and traditional paper media were the only ways to reach out to

their customers. Thanks to the advent of modern technologies, those

businesses have at least doubled their production scale, delivering products

to stores in different areas and fostering the ubiquity of sugary drinks.

There are, however, still remedies to reverse the situation. To start with,

governments can impose taxes on the sugary-drink manufacturers. This

policy can urge the companies to slow down their production process and

become more responsible for their actions. Instead of helping with their

promotional campaigns, governing bodies should remind those companies of

their moral imperative for their customers who may be negatively affected

by the consumption of sugary drinks.

The other two solutions include the greater provision of healthier drinks and

informing people about the adverse consequences of overly consuming

sweetened

beverages.

Governments

should

invest

in

increasing

the

availability of better alternatives to drink, offering, for instance, more

natural fruit juice, fresh water and drinks with less sugar. This would

immensely encourage people to consume vitamin-rich beverages, improving

their overall well-being as well. Educating people about the detrimental

effects of sugary drinks is another measure. This objective can be achieved

using influencers on social media to raise the awareness of individuals about

how sugar-packed drinks can deteriorate their health. As these celebrities

can influence even the behavior of their followers, using them to combat the

issue can be a sound decision.

In conclusion, the main reasons behind the popularity of sugary beverages

vary from the use of social media platforms as a marketing device and

increased

production

process,

necessary

actions

should

be

taken

by

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 17 -

reinforcing taxation policies on companies and spreading the awareness on

the trade-offs that sugary drinks can bring.

The bar chart compares the average hours allocated to different pastime and

physical activities by two age groups: those aged 15-19 and 75 and over in

the USA in 2015. Overall, while the younger people devoted more time to

social activities, online games and sport exercises compared to their older

counterparts, they spent significantly less time on watching TV, reading,

relaxing and thinking than the elderly.

Looking first of all at the highest number of hours spent on particular

activities by youngsters, they allocated a little over 1 hour to playing virtual

games, well ahead of the time the elderly spent on this activity, only half an

hour. The gap between the two age profiles in terms of their time spending

on different activities was smaller in social interactions and physical &

recreational activities. 0.6 hours were expanded by young people to sport

exercises & recreation, whereas nearly a half of this was spent by old

individuals. The time disparity between both age groups was negligible in

social communications, with 15-19-year-olds spending around 0.7 hours to

daily interactions and those over 75 less than that, almost 0.6 hours.

Turning to the activities occupying much time of the elderly, it was watching

TV that topped with chart, with whooping 4.5 hours being dedicated to this

activity, while young generation spent less than 2.5 hours on the same daily

activity. The huge difference, however, became rather irrelevant in reading

and relaxing & thinking activities, on which the old people spent 1 and

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 18 -

youngsters devoted 0.2 hours and the former dedicated over half an hour and

the latter spent 0.1 hours respectively.

The line graph compares the frequency of three fast food items’ consumption

by youngsters in Australia: pizza, fish and chips, and hamburgers from 1975

to 2000. Overall, despite the initial popularity of fish and chips among young

people, they were eaten less over time. Hamburgers and pizza consumption,

however, followed a different, upward trajectory, with their gap in between

growing bigger.

Looking first of all at the downward trend, the number of times fish and

chips were consumed stood at 100 per year, a figure that decreased steadily

to 85 after 5 years and slightly improved to 95 in 1985, before declining

significantly for the better part of the period. This reduction was continuous,

reaching a low of 40 times each year in 2000.

A completely different picture could be observed in the frequency rate of

pizza and hamburger consumption. Australian youngsters ate the former and

the latter types of fast food 5 and 10 times a year respectively in 1975.

Consuming hamburgers gained in huge popularity until it reached an all-time

high of 100 times per year after 25 years. The same trend was followed by

pizza intake, albeit to a different extent. The consumption rate of this fast

food hit 85 times each year in 1995, after which this figure remained

unchanged for the rest of the period.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 19 -

The bar chart compares the weekly hours of teenagers spent on engaging in

seven different activities in Chester between 2002 and 2007.

Overall, an upward trend was observed in the number of hours spent on going

to pubs/discos, watching TV and shopping per week over the years, among

which watching television was the most popular activity. The opposite

trajectory of change was followed by the amount of time allocated to doing

homework and sport activities, and bowling with the exception of watching

DVDs. The last activity was spent more time on initially, but this figure

declined in the second half of the period.

Focusing on the bigger picture first, watching television topped the chart

with the highest number of hours devoted to this particular activity.

Standing at 25 hours each week in 2002 and 2003, these numbers maintained

a consistently positive change, reaching a peak of around 37 hours in 2007.

This was distantly followed by the amount of time spent on shopping, seeing

a twofold increase during the period, picking up from about 7 hours to 15

hours per week. The same scenario was seen in the weekly hours dedicated

to going to pubs and discos. With only 8 hours spent on this entertainment

activity first in 2002, youngsters devoted 12 hours to pubs and discos in

2004,2005 and 2006, before finally spending 18 hours each week in the last

year.

The number of hours spent on other activities, however, revealed a different

course of change. Doing homework and sport exercises maintained the same

downward trend in the weekly hours spent on them: starting at similar

hours, 12 and 10 respectively in 2002, their figures fell gradually, eventually

reaching a low of 7 and 3 hours accordingly in 2007. Negligible 4 hours were

spent on bowling first, a figure then only declined to mere 2 hours in the

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 20 -

final year. Watching DVDs, on the other hand, was gaining in popularity in

the first part of the period, increasing from 10 weekly hours to 15 hours from

2002 to 2004, thereafter which this figure slowly returned to its initial

standing at 10 hours in 2007.

Schools should teach students how to become successful in their work instead

of focusing on academic success.

Do you agree or disagree?

There is a view that school children should be prepared from an early age to

excel

in

future

employment

rather

than

to

focus

on

their

academic

achievements. I personally agree with this suggestion as school subjects are

mostly irrelevant to real-life applications and mastering them would take

up students’ valuable time that could be better spent on preparing for their

prospective careers.

Striving for excellence at school is, on the flip side, crucial for two main

reasons. For one, this desire to master subjects in school curriculum is

believed to be a strong predictor of a child’s professional success later on. A

good case in point is Elon Musk, the wealthiest person in the world, who

realized the essential role of certain school subjects such as Math and Physics

to achieve his ambitions. Studying these subjects inside out equipped Elon

with sufficient competence and knowledge that he has used to establish the

world’s most powerful companies like SpaceX and Tesla. To neglect the part

of academic achievements in improving career prospects would have been

costly for the richest man alive.

For another, schooling years are the period for young children to mostly

socialize with fellow students, enjoy their carefree childhood and learn their

interested subjects as opposed to feeling forced to prepare for later

employment. They should not necessarily be deprived of these years to

dedicate to areas of improvement in school subjects, build connections with

a social circle and shape their basic understanding of the world. Constantly

pushing them to be ready for future professions would take its toll on their

creativity as well. Children would be fully following the instructions of their

teacher as he or she has already a job and knows how to prepare for

employment if we were to shift the main focus from innovative approaches

to learning, for example History or Chemistry, to school curriculum known

as “factory-of-workers’.

In my opinion, however, teaching students about their choice of career

should still be prioritized. It is because future prospects of employment are

crucial due to the possible unemployment caused by the prevalence of robots

in the workplace sooner or later. If students are not well-prepared from now

on for the kind of job they want to do later on, they may be easily superseded

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 21 -

by the use of AI, since human workforce may lack proficiency. To alleviate

the issue of joblessness, immediate measures must be taken at school and

the first step includes the education of professions. This would prevent

possible losses in human personnel in companies because employers would

hire highly-trained applicants rather than relying on Artificial Intelligence.

Another reason why studying for future employment is important is that

most school subjects are irrelevant to real-life applications. It is almost

impossible to apply the knowledge gained through, for instance, Social

Sciences and Arts, which are taking the valuable time of students that can

be better spent on studying IT, logistics, business management – to name

but a few. Once teachers teach young students more practical subjects such

as those, they can vastly improve the chances of students getting into their

desired companies with enough prior knowledge. This education will, in turn,

naturally foster the overall economic growth of a nation through increased

numbers of employees and decreased levels of unemployment.

In conclusion, while academic success can anticipate the future success of a

child and studying only career-related subjects may prevent children from

enjoying their life and school years, I still believe that they should be taught

about

their

future

profession

as

this

education

can

help

cope

with

unemployment and reinvigorate a country’s economy.

With a growing population, many people believe that we should focus on

producing more GM foods.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of doing this?

There is a view that GM food products should be produced on a larger scale

to feed the increasing numbers of people all over the world. While this

practice can offer several benefits to humans – the massive availability of

edible harvests and the alleviation of global starvation – I believe it is not

without its shortcomings such as health issues and public distrust that stem

from the production of GM crops.

There has been a boom in the global population in recent years, emphasizing

the importance of more food provisions to feed the entire nations. This

concern has led to the invention of genetically-modified crops, which are

now believed to counter the issue of international hunger. Such crops have,

indeed, generally proven to meet people’s demand for food, who are suffering

from the severe shortages of edible production in most deprived areas,

including Africa and war-torn nations. The problem of starvation has been

considerably lessened through farming practices aimed at producing more

GM foods and there is even a fragile hope that in the distant future when

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 22 -

the global population will far exceed the current capacity of the planet to

provide food, GM harvests could be the only solution.

Nevertheless, genetically-modified crops may entail certain trade-offs. For

one, they may still pose harm to the well-being of consumers. It is largely

because such foods have been grown using somewhat artificial additives to

increase the efficacy of products, whereas traditional organic produce is

mainly free of this chemical exposure or injection. Having eaten GM food

items, people may become prone to ailments related to digestive system,

which is surely an undesirable turn of events. For another, the public seems

to be still reluctant to accept the newly-introduced food as the main source

of their diet. Knowing that the GM food is still in its infancy and there is

considerable progress to be made yet, people may naturally question the

importance and application of these harvests. Unless we gain the trust of

society for genetically-altered crops, it will remain impossible to convince

them of the potential advantages associated in the process.

In conclusion, producing GM produce is a double-edged weapon, with both

opportunities and limitations involved. The former vary from the greater

availability of food to dealing with global hunger and the latter include

medical and trust issues.

Sending spacecraft and astronauts into space is very expensive. It would be

better for governments to use the money spent on space exploration to improve

the quality of life on Earth.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

There is a view that the carrying out space exploration is prohibitively costly.

Therefore, living standards and the overall quality of life on our own planet

should be funded instead. I personally favor this proposal since the ecological

and human crisis must be urgently addressed here on the Earth before

furthering expeditions into the solar system.

Annually, billions of dollars are directed at space investigations in the quest

of discovering a habitable planet given the overpopulation and environmental

issues such as air and water pollution. These expenditures, however, have

not yet proven to be of use since no source of life has been unfolded. NASA,

for example, has been spending an obscene amount of money on its

expeditions since the last century, most of which have gone in vain with no

tangible outcomes for humans’ welfare.

Additionally, space voyages and aircraft are out of everyday person’s

financial capacity, therefore limited to the rich who can afford such a luxury.

Considering that the yearly income of an ordinary citizen in the USA may not

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 23 -

exceed $100,000 and the cost of space journeys and special equipment far

surpasses this figure, those with low incomes will remain unable to explore

the space. The world’s most affluent person, Elon Musk, is planning on

colonizing Mars and relocating people to that planet by 2050. This ambitious

project, unfortunately, may end up incomplete because of the excessive

spendings and investment involved.

Prioritizing expenditures to deal with serious ramifications caused to our

planet by human activities is more sound decision. The biggest threat to the

ecosystem is probably air pollution. This environmental problem has been

exacerbated by the massive use of private cars, factories and plants. Unless

this issue is solved immediately, our own planet may not support the basic

elements of life like oxygen and the ozone layer. To that end, governments

should expand their funding to the alleviation of such global matters, by, for

instance, producing more e-cars and putting more taxes on industries that

are damaging the atmosphere.

On an individual level, global starvation and poverty are two of the most

pressing issues that require instant action from government agencies. As the

population on Earth is increasing at an alarming rate, food resources and

employment opportunities are becoming scarce. These shortages are leading

to the depletion of food provision and unemployment, hence more people in

despair. Rather than ameliorating these concerns and elevating the quality

of life here, spending billions on space explorations that do not offer instant

benefits would not be a wise use of money.

In conclusion, allocations of funds into investigating the remaining corners

of the solar system are yet to result in practical outcomes, which is why I

believe governments should channel their budget into lessening the severity

of problems on our own doorstep.

Violence in the media promotes violence in society. To what extent do you agree

or disagree?

It is said that the depiction of violence in media coverage can be ground for

such actions in community. I personally agree with this view because of the

influence of the media over people’s perception and behavior, but there are

other contributing factors to this social unrest, such as films and songs that

prioritize the demonstration of violence.

The media, whether traditional or digital, holds its impact on citizens’

understanding of the reality. This influence may lead to some people believing

in the fact that violent acts portrayed in news may provoke the same

reaction. Newspapers and TV news programs are two of the sources that

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 24 -

relate to the illustration of aggressive actions committed by offenders,

thereby broadcasting the illegalities of those criminals to the ordinary public

may fuel misplaced anger in the mind of some readers and viewers. Having

seen their fellow peers turning to knife crime, for example, many teenagers

in the UK may emulate the unacceptable behavior patterns of those juvenile

offenders and this blind imitation may be a by-product of excessive exposure

to news coverages connected to the topic of violence.

The news outlet is not the only medium to blame for the emergence of

aggressive acts in society due to the production of horror movies and songs

at the same time. It has become a common picture to see many youngsters

obsessed with the release of such products that promote violence, murdering,

stabbing and slaying. They tend to watch the thriller movies and listen to

songs of the same theme over and over again, gradually internalizing the

notion that violating others is normal and can be performed freely. Some

tempted, immature people may want to resort to crime path, openly willing

to victimize others in their neighborhood, by, for instance, pickpocketing,

robbing and hijacking. For this violence to happen the production of horror

films and songs has a fair share at play.

In conclusion, the role of media in promoting aggression and escalated crime

rates cannot be denied thanks to its massive influence to convince people of

the distorted reality and to change their behavior. That said, we should defy

the fact that other factors, films and songs with the content of violence,

should be neglected.

It is better for children if the whole family including aunts, uncles and so on are

involved in a child's upbringing, rather than just their parents.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There is a view that an extended circle of relatives – aunts and uncles –

should have a share in bringing up a child, not just their parents. I personally

favor this proposal as it can strengthen mutual affiliations between children

and their relatives, as well as alleviating massive responsibility parents are

shouldering to raise their children.

The idea that uncles and aunts should be involved in the upbringing of a child

sounds appealing. First of all, the bonds linking young children and their close

relatives would be tier if the latter party were to contribute to the grooming

of the former. It is almost inevitable to ignore that there is a social distance

between aunts/uncles and children in current family structures where

parents are the only ones to tend to the needs of young children. However,

with increased engagement of near relatives in raising a child, this disparity

would narrow down, eventually making families become even closer.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 25 -

Apart from this, parents would not have to experience difficulties breeding

their children if the suggestion in question was put into practice. Living

expenses are skyrocketing these days, leaving parents no chance but to work

endlessly to cover daily requirements for a sustainable lifestyle. This, as a

result, emphasizes the need for more caregivers to look after a child when

their parents are busy working. When a parent is absent from home, uncles

and aunts can come over and take good care of their nephews and nieces

until their parents return to a house.

In conclusion, the view that children should also be looked after by their

uncles and aunts can be justified on two grounds: enhanced connections

between relatives and reduced huge responsibility of the parents to keep an

eye on their children the entire time even while they are not home.

The bar chart compares five different food items based on how many times

they are sold in winter and summer.

Overall, there is a huge disparity in the sales of the five food stuffs in two

different seasons. While hot coffee and soup are the most sought-after foods

in winter, the reverse is true for iced coffee and ice cream in the same season.

However, the patterns are changed for summertime sales, with iced foods

being sold more than any other product. Salads, on the other hand, do not

show any irregularities in their sales, remaining the same in either season.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 26 -

Looking at the data regarding winter sales first, the purchases of hot coffee

top the chart, with 75 daily servings. This figure is distantly followed by those

of soup, served 50 times a day. The shares of other food items are less

significant,

with

ice

cream

and

salad

sharing

the

same

figure,

each

comprising 25 daily purchases. Iced coffee sales are found at the bottom of

the graph, merely 2 servings of this drink are made in winter.

A completely different picture can be seen in summertime servings. While

coffee and ice cream sales go up in this season, with their importance

growing to 40 and 35 everyday servings respectively, hot coffee is bought less

in summer, followed by a decrease in sales to a low of 30 purchases. Lastly,

soup and salad sales exhibit the same figures in summer, both of which stand

at 25 regular servings.

More and more people today expect to get what they want instantly (goods,

services, news), without having to wait.

Why is this?

Do you think this a positive or negative development?

An increasing number of people are gravitated towards instant gratification:

quick purchases, services and news without delays. The main reasons behind

this development are consumeristic society and advent of technologies that

allow for rapid exchanges between individuals, and I view this trend

negatively.

We are living in a society which is mainly characterized by material

possession, shifting attitudes towards more consumerism. Many people want

to buy goods immediately, and they are ending up with a stack of possessions

that they do not use or need shortly after. This acquisition of belongings

requires speedy purchases, compelling customers to outcompete one another

instantly

in

terms

of

having

the

latest

version

of

products.

“Apple”

smartphones are a good case in point. No sooner is one iPhone released than

the newer type follows. This streak of goods is tempting individuals,

especially youngsters, to own a brand-new phone without waiting any

further.

Contemporary technologies are partly blame for the spread of instant

gratification. In the case of news coverage, social media platforms, including

Telegram and Reddit, are fully fledged to offer quick updates of the current

affairs. The way information used to be delivered in the past was confined

to newspapers and magazines, both of which would take weeks to publish

the news for the public. Money transfers are another pertinent example of

the technologies’ impact on people’s changing desires. Individuals used to

mostly travel to a bank to perform cash transfers, whereas now applications

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 27 -

on our portable devices, like Payme and Uzum, are facilitating the whole

process by allowing us rapid exchanges of money. This instant service is

eliminating the need for long trips to achieve the same result.

In my opinion, however, this observable trend can be seen in a negative light.

First of all, the insatiable demand for rapid material collection can bring

about unhealthy competitions between people to follow the latest trend. A

person in the neighborhood, for example, buys a new car or house, eventually

becoming a target of gossip and possible burglaries. This, as a result, may

predispose people to hostile attitudes to one another, creating a society

bound to disintegrate.

Even worse, the online exchange of money may put the prospects of banks

at risk by reducing the need for human factor. People in the past would

heavily rely on a third party to get their cash delivered to another person, a

trend that has fallen out for favor by many. Individuals’ preferences towards

using online apps to quickly transfer their money are why bankers would

possibly lose their role in the long-run. The unemployment issue is usually

accompanied by a number of other economy problems, too.

In conclusion, the driving forces of instant gratification are consumerism and

emergence of modern technologies, and I reiterate that this trend is not

positive because of the reasons expressed above.

The government should spend more money on medical research to protect

citizens’ health rather than on protecting the environment.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There is a view that the state budget should be allocated to the advancement

of healthcare to promote better public well-being instead of spending this

much money on environmental conservation projects. While I realize the

significance of financial allocation to medical research, I believe that it

should not come at the expense of funds given to environmental protection.

The expenses of medical studies should be covered by governments because

of two key reasons. For one, it is the healthcare sector that ensures the

healthy lifestyle of ordinary people and this is becoming even more relevant

than ever as new unknown diseases, viruses and a multitude of unfamiliar

illnesses are springing up in different corners of the world. To effectively

combat such issues, medical investigations should receive adequate financial

backing from the governments to establish laboratories, afford special

equipment

and

develop

new

drugs.

For

another,

dedicating

funds

to

healthcare will help improve the general satisfaction of common people

towards governments. It is because the overall life fulfilment largely depends

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 28 -

on how healthy one is, and with better healthcare can accompany positive

health

outcomes.

Governing

bodies

should

foot

the

bill

for

all

these

expenditures.

In my opinion, however, states should not neglect the significance of

maintaining ecological integrity since biosystem is an integral part of our

survival. To that end, substantial amounts of money are needed to restore

destructed areas, such as forests and natural habitats of different species,

purify the ozone layer, reduce the air and water pollution and conduct

reservation

projects

aimed

at

recovering

the

lost

flaura

and

fauna.

Governments must also set aside some budget to set up public awareness

campaigns and promote environmental literacy among the public so that

everyday people would realize the consequences of their daily activities to

the surrounding nature. Only then would individuals hopefully reduce their

carbon footprint and chemical waste into the atmosphere, all of which may

need subsidies from the government.

In conclusion, although I acknowledge the essence of financing medical

research to facilitate the healthy lifestyles of the ordinary people through

the discovery of vaccines and medicine to deal with different ailments, this

is not to say that the underfunding of environmental conservation efforts is

a sensible course of action because improved ecology is as important as

decent healthcare.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 29 -

The pie charts compare two genders, males and females, on the basis of their

participation rate in manual and non-manual labor in 1992. Overall, non-

manual occupations attracted the majority of men and women compared to

manual ones. While most women ventured into clerical and related jobs, their

male counterparts mainly opted for management and professional roles. The

share of both sexes doing general labor, on the other hand, was the lowest

on the chart.

Looking at the proportion of workers in manual labor first, around a third of

males took up management and professional jobs, a figure that was slightly

higher than that of females, accounting for 29%. More women, however, were

hired for clerical and similar jobs, with 31% of them choosing this profession,

whereas merely 6% of men went on this career path. Unspecified non-manual

jobs, finally, employed the fewest proportion from the both genders, with

female and males showing respective figures of 9% and 6%.

Turning to manual employment patterns, unknown jobs in this labor market

employed a significant number of females and males compared to other

professions. Females constituted 27% in this occupation, just ahead of males

with 26%, marking a negligible 1-percentage-point-difference. Next followed

crafts and related jobs that demonstrated a remarkable disparity in gender

involvement in the occupation. A staggering 24% of men took over this

position, while only 3% of females chose this job as their career. No notable

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 30 -

discrepancy was evident in the share of males and females engaging in

general labor, with the former and the latter comprising 2% and 1%

respectively.

Environmental

protection

should

be

the

responsibility

of

politicians,

not

individuals as individuals

can do too little.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There is a view that

policy-makers should bear the responsibility of

environmental conservation, rather than individual people because of their

limited influence over the matter. I personally disagree with this claim as

people can also play their part in protecting the environment by reducing

their carbon footprint and using more environmentally-friendly products.

True, governments have more power to preserve the natural surrounding

than the individuals, since they can establish rules to save the environment

and enforce them across the country. One of such laws is to encourage people

to take public transport more instead of private forms of transportation to

minimize the dare impact of personal vehicles to the atmosphere. Private

cars are commonly regarded as the major contributors of air pollution by

discharging CO2 emissions on a massive scale. Therefore, limiting their usage

is

the

rule

that

governments

can

impose

on

people

to

minimize

environmental consequences despite the fact that most individuals prefer

use their car on a regular basis.

Another role of governments in improving the ecosystem is the financial

resources at their disposal. This financial budget can be allocated to the

research and application of renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind

power, that can vastly enhance the current environmental situation. By

prioritizing expenditure on the exploration of sustainable energy sources

such as these, governments would curb the dependence on fossil fuels, like

coal and oil, which are damaging the water bodies and atmosphere alike.

Once implemented successfully, renewable energy producers can lead to

cleaner air and water reserves.

In my opinion, however, individuals should also be held accountable for this

mission of protecting the environment as much as governments are. It is

primarily because people tend to pose harm to the environment by relying

on transport means that are essentially damaging to the nature. As

expressed above, private cars are one instance, but there are many of such

means of transportation individuals can start using less for the sake of

better environment. Aeroplanes are a good case in point. Regular flights to

other countries or regions are contributing to the overall environment

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 31 -

degradation because of the chemical waste planes produce. By taking fewer

flights and resorting to eco-friendly options – public transport – individuals

would definitely make a huge difference.

People can also quit using non-biodegradable materials such as plastics bags

and bottles to reduce their negative effects to the natural surroundings.

These types of products usually remain on the surface of water for hundreds

of years, resulting in bad implications on marine animals' well-being as well.

Since fish and other species in the ocean or rivers need unspoiled water to

survive, thrown-away plastic materials would put their survival at stake. So,

individuals should not fill water bodies with such products to ensure the

longevity of marine animals and purity of rivers and seas too. Starting to use

less-packaged goods would be a sound decision that people can make to

achieve desired environmental results.

In conclusion, while I realize the key role of governments in tackling

environmental issues because of their power and financial resources – rules

and investments into more sustainable practices to harness energy – it is

not to say that individuals are hopeless in this regard. If people become

consciously aware of their actions through reducing their daily carbon

footprint and using more eco-friendly choices, I believe this joint effort with

states would leave a better world to upcoming generations.

Some people think we should keep all the money we earn and not pay taxes to

the state.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There is a view that all of our earnings should be kept and not go to taxes

for the government. While I see some valid reasons behind this claim, I do

not necessarily approve of it because taxation policies can help governments

remain financially stable in both prosperous and difficult times.

One of the commonly cited reasons for why we should not pay any tax to

the state lies in the lack of public trust towards governments. Many people

tend to be skeptical about whether their money devoted to taxes can

actually arrive at its final destination or it becomes the target of corruption

and financial dishonesty of any sort. Quite often, taxes are collected from

the general public and can be used for one policymaker’s own good instead

of being spent on improving the overall quality of citizens' lives, by, for

example, providing them with social benefits such as better pay or decent

road infrastructure. This financial misconduct by some politicians has

resulted in erosion of public confidence about tax policies.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 32 -

Another argument for tax abolitions is that we should have a right to own

our income without dispersing it. Individuals spend their whole life earning

a living to make their ends meet and satisfy their own financial needs.

Depriving them of one portion of their money can be met with harsh criticism

in most cases, especially among people who are already struggling with their

limited incomes. Therefore, imposing regular taxes on individuals can make

their hardships even more severe.

In my opinion, however, taxes can be a source of funds for governments to

sustain the economy of their nation. For one, fines and taxes usually make

up a substantial proportion of governments’ income streams, allowing them

to allocate subsidies to key branches of society, such as healthcare and

education. Since these two fields require a great deal of investment to

flourish, the money collected from ordinary people would alleviate the

financial burden of states to improve medical and educational campaigns. If

it were not for taxes, governments would fail to cover such high expenses

using the money at their disposal.

Besides this, taxes can help countries in times of hardship as well. It is

common for nations to face an economic crisis due to many reasons,

including the outbreak of wars, diseases, and natural disasters. In these

scenarios, a good deal of money is needed to reverse the situation as soon as

possible, and low incomes would have far-reaching negative consequences.

For example, Nigeria has to deal with terroristic attacks once in a while, and

recovering from the potential damage depends on the scale of national

taxation system. If the nation cannot sufficiently supply financial aids

through taxes, their governments may remain defenseless and desperate in

the face of challenges.

In conclusion, while I tend to agree with some people claiming that they

should not give any money to the state, I also believe that it is the taxes

that ensure the advances of nations as the state budget alone would not be

enough to run the whole country when financial matters become important.

Some people think the qualities a person needs to become successful in today’s

world cannot be learned at a university or similar academic institutions.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There is a view that educational institutions, universities and colleges,

cannot equip individuals with necessary knowledge required to achieve

lifetime success. While this claim seems valid on the face of it, it is not

without

bias.

Therefore,

I

believe

that

one

should

acquire

university

education to become successful without entirely neglecting its importance.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 33 -

Admittedly, many subjects taught at university are not practically applicable

in today’s world, rendering the odds of being successful rather obsolete. One

of such classes is social sciences. During these lessons students are basically

taught how to be socially responsible, to interact with others, and be a law-

abiding citizen. While this knowledge appears to serve a useful purpose, it

can be better learned and honed in social connections with other people in

real

life.

Young

learners

may

therefore

squander

their

precious

time

assimilating theories without really experiencing the actual events.

It is also argued that four years dedicated to university education are a

complete waste of time, which could be spent on other commitments like

working and travelling to gain real-life experiences. Advocates of this

argument are critical of how time-consuming the education system at

universities is, imploring youngsters to take a gap year or totally decline the

decision to study at colleges. While working, for example, young individuals

can become financially independent of their parents by earning their own

money, affording the luxury of a stable lifestyle. Travelling can also offer

unique benefits that broaden young people’s horizon by exposing them to

new cultures, traditional norms and societies from different backgrounds.

This exposure would shape young minds, allowing them to grow more

tolerant and well-rounded individuals.

In my opinion, however, university education still remains an important

element of success in this modern era. One advantage of universities is their

systematically-organized education that allows for step-by-step knowledge

acquisition. Although this education can be gained via online sources too,

supervision and constant monitoring at colleges supersede online education,

which often lacks strict control and continuous examination. It is only

through rigid education system at universities can students improve their

future prospects, including employment. As most jobs require employees to

be diligent, punctual and agile, students taught these skills at their

university can easily cope with these pre-requisites. So, tertiary education

can enable individuals to become successful in their pursuits.

Additionally, university campuses are great places to meet like-minded

fellow students, who can help with one’s future endeavors. Since there is a

growing

focus

on

social

network

to

build

businesses

and

successful

entrepreneurship in today’s world, the need to align a person’s values and

interests with others who share the same preferences is also significant.

Collaborations

with

other

students

during

university

years

can

prove

advantageous after graduation and before embarking on a career path

because strong teamwork would grow more quickly than individual efforts.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 34 -

In conclusion, even though university education is deemed impractical and

waste by some people, I do not necessarily approve of this claim because

tertiary education can enhance the future prospects of individuals by

providing them with necessary skill sets and social interactions.

Some people say that modern technology has made shopping today easier while

others disagree.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Opinions differ as far as the impact of modern technologies on shopping is

concerned. Some individuals claim that the process of shopping has become

facilitated with the emergence of technologies, whereas others claim

otherwise. While I understand some concerns revolving around the effect of

technologies on shopping as a whole, this shift is still a good turn of events.

One of the primary issues linked to the use of modern technologies while

shopping is that we have infinite choices to make, most of which are

bewildering. Since the advent of social media, for example, manufacturers

have been using it as a promotional tool to attract more customers, making

their own advertisements extremely ubiquitous. Having such a variety of

products available online, customers are second guessing themselves when

it comes to making sound purchasing decisions. This, as a result, leads to

poorly-developed buying habits.

Additionally, there is a fear of fraudulent personal information shared via

websites when inserting private data online. Many buyers tend to complain

that

their

personal

information

is

stolen

and

used

for

hacking

and

impersonating once they want to make purchases online. This is one of the

contributing factors to reluctance to buy goods on different sites, and this

phobia is especially noticeable among the elderly – generally illiterate to do

online shopping. In many cases, this unauthorized data leads to financial

losses and identity fraud, which makes the online shopping less appealing to

most customers.

Despite the problems listed above, there are significant advantages to buying

products using available technologies. The first one is definitely convenience.

People in the past had to be physically present in stores, traveling for long

distances. By contrast, now, they can purchase groceries, clothes, furniture

and so on from the comfort of their home: people are just a few telephone

clicks away from having their items delivered. Such a facility was unheard

of before and has made people’s lives easier to a great extent.

Online

reviews

and

rates

of

products

are

another

benefit

of

using

technologies for shopping. Customers previously used to buy things first and

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 35 -

rest assured they were in perfect state, but these days they can read readily-

available comments of other customers who bought the same product. This

observation can enhance purchasing outcomes and bring about positive

sentiments of consumers to companies since there are fewer complaints and

misunderstandings about the quality of goods now.

In conclusion, although I realize the potential drawbacks of applying

technologies to purchase goods – the loss of personal information and

overwhelming numbers of choices - these disadvantages are easily eclipsed

by substantial benefits that include convenience and observations of others’

opinion about a certain product before purchasing it.

The table compares the proportion of cell phone holders who used different

aspects of their phones in 2006, 2008, and 2010. Overall, the percentage of

mobile phone users using their phones for various purposes grew in all

categories, except making calls that saw a negligible decline. The most

significant improvement was observed in the share of people searching the

Internet.

Looking at less notable rises first, sending & receiving text messages had

seen their users grew from 73% to 79% over the course of 4 years, showing

a mere 6-percentage-point growth. The figures of individuals using their cell

phones for making calls followed a similar pattern of change, picking up from

66% to reaching a high of 76%. Playing music gained in small popularity over

the period, with only 12% users in 2006, a figure that rose to 18% and then

to 26% in 2010.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 36 -

Turning to a bigger picture on the table, the percentage of people using their

cell phones for playing games skyrocketed: standing at 17% first, this share

climbed rapidly to 42% in the following two years before seeing a marginal

drop to 41% in 2010. With no preliminary data in 2006, the people recording

a video made their debut after two years with just 9%, followed by a fourfold

increase to 35% by 2010. Searching the Internet, however, had witnessed its

users grew substantially in figures, from no evidence to a whooping 41% in

2008 till it peaked at a staggering 73%. In the first two years shown, every

cell phone owner would use their phones for making calls before a slight

reduction to 99% in 2010.

Some people say patriotism causes problems and is negative overall. Others feel

that it is beneficial for society at large. Do the advantages of patriotism

outweigh its disadvantages?

People fall into two camps as to whether patriotism is beneficial or not.

While

I

agree

that

this

feeling

may

cause

some

social

problems

-

disintegration and selfishness - I would argue that being patriotic and

respectful to fellow compatriots is a positive trait to possess, therefore more

advantageous.

One of the issues linked to being overly patriotic is that this feeling may lead

to social unrest by dividing it into sects and groups. It is not uncommon to

see that a great many people can live in one country, regardless of their

ethnicity, nationality and backgrounds. The host nation, however, would not

welcome individuals with another identity, fracturing bonds within the

community.

Take

our

neighboring

countries

as

an

example.

In

2008,

Uzbekistan and these countries had a mutual conflict, which then had to be

resolved soon, partly thanks to patriotism and pushing personal agendas over

the interests and liberties of other people living in the same country. This

instance serves as a notable case, in which a sense of belonging may prove

worrying.

Another disadvantage that accompanies patriotism is the state of self-

absorption. Some people may not tend to the needs of others from different

cultures or backgrounds purely because they are not descended from the

same ethnicity. This negative behavior becomes apparent when two people

from unrelated backgrounds become neighbors. In local areas, people rely on

each other heavily in many aspects, including the exchange of goods and

services. However, national differences may turn people mean and self-

centered, who can neglect the importance of maintaining relationships with

people coming from dissimilar communities.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 37 -

In my opinion, whatsoever, patriots are the backbone of any country, serving

for the best interests of the people in their country. For one, such people

with vigorous affection for their nation can defend their country against

outside interference and invaders. The history has proven that only the ones

with sheer love for their country were regarded as heroes and heroines,

marking their impact for generations to follow. Patriotism has enabled them

to protect themselves and their people from the evil intentions of intruders,

ensuring the long-term welfare of compatriots in turn.

For another, obviously, people with care for their country cannot be

corrupted or manipulated. They stand on their ground, fight for their

independence and rights, hence maintaining their dignity. When this trait

lacks, in contrast, the very core of nations will fade away - unity and

stability. These two components of any thriving country requires people to

become concerned about the needs, past, present and future of others,

despite the cultural disparities. Once a misfortune occurs, whether that be a

natural disaster or war, the national discrepancies are no longer relevant;

everyone should deal with the consequences. This responsibility does not

exclude one’s nationality.

In

conclusion,

even

though

I

acknowledge

the

potential

drawbacks

associated with patriotism, social division and selfishness, I generally think

that this feeling presents more advantages than it backfires.

A rise in the standard of living in a country often only seems to benefit cities

rather than rural areas.

What problems can this cause? How might these problems be reduced?

The improvements in the quality of life within a country appear to prove

beneficial for urban areas more than countryside. The issues stemming from

these

changes

are

rural-to-urban

migration,

which

further

entails

overcrowding in cities and joblessness in villages, and the solutions vary from

investing in better employment and public facilities in rural areas.

The high standards of living in cities tend to lure people from villages

searching for lucrative jobs and better education prospects. This influx of

people from rural areas may consequently lead to congestions in cities, food

and space shortages. It is because the number of rural dwellers coming to

cities permanently can exceed the current capacity of public transport in

major urban conurbations. The lack of food and free space provision is also

due to the increasing numbers of migrants, and this issue can attract

negative criticism

from

urban

dwellers

who

now

have

to

suffer

the

consequences of enhanced living standards in their local areas.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 38 -

Apart

from

this,

unemployment

in

villages

is

another

problem

that

accompanies changes brought about to the living conditions in cities. Those

abandoning their rural areas in the quest of ample job opportunities can

weaken the workforce in their locality seeing as not many remain to do farm,

agricultural work and rural errands. This movement to cities naturally gives

rise to joblessness, creating more unforeseen problems such as youth crime.

Unable to find a well-paid job in rural areas, many young people, in particular,

may turn to illegal actions to earn a livelihood, making villages generally

unsafe to reside. The loss of personnel in countryside can also mean that

these places hardly ever thrive from an economic standpoint.

These issues, however, can be averted to a great extent. One possible remedy

is to subsidize local businesses in villages so that their people would be

discouraged from migrating to cities for desirable employment. This objective

can be achieved with governments’ taxpayer funds that generally support

the job deficit across the nation, employing millions of jobless people from

different parts of the country to sectors that require more workers.

Agriculture is the backbone of villages that has the potential to involve many

unemployed

people

in

farming

work,

including

tending

to

livestock,

harvesting and exporting the organic produce.

Another measure to reverse the situation is to foster public facilities,

infrastructure, and amenities in rural areas. The government’s integration is

yet again essential in ensuring that this aim is reached as it can allocate

funds to widening and repairing roads for smoother transport circulation,

providing access to educational and entertaining facilities along with

improving trade in villages. Once these goals have been reached, rural areas

can finally revitalize their economy with more people willing to stay to run

businesses and generate profit from their companies. Youth crime and

unemployment would be greatly alleviated, too.

In conclusion, the unequal lifestyles in cities and rural areas can present

several problems like overcrowding and joblessness, and these two pressing

issues

can

be

overcome

through

state

budget

channeled

into

better

employment and access to different public infrastructure.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 39 -

The bar chart compares the yearly average expenditure on clothing items

each person in the USA in 1985, 1995 and 2005. Overall, all categories shown

on the graph followed an upward trend, albeit to varying degrees: while the

annual spending of boys and girls rose noticeably, the increase was much

more pronounced in that of men and women. Additionally, women had the

highest rate of expenses on clothes in 1995 and 2005.

Focusing on the smaller expenditure patterns first, boys’ and girls’ spending

on clothes made up the same amount in 1995, at around $100. The former

category saw a minimal rise to roughly $160 in the following ten years, while

the latter one grew to about $170 during the same period. Boys’ expenditure

rates remained unchanged at $160 on an annual basis in 2005; however, girls

dedicated a little over $180 to clothes in the last year shown.

Turning to a bigger picture on the chart, there was a huge discrepancy in the

expenditure levels of men and women, with females taking the lead. A $200-

difference was recorded between men and women in 1995, with males

allocating $300 and the opposite gender spending a whooping $500 on clothes.

This disparity narrowed down over the next decade as males devoted little

under $500 on clothing items, whereas women’s spending did not exceed

$520. Nevertheless, the gender difference based on annual expenditure on

clothes grew bigger in 2005, with men’s spending rate dropping to $400 and

women’s allocation reaching an all-time high of around $670.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 40 -

The line graphs show the proportion of families with electrical devices and

the number of hours spent on household errands each week for every

household from 1920 to 2019. Overall, ownership of all three appliances listed:

washing machine, refrigerator and vacuum cleaner gained in popularity,

albeit to varying degrees. While the proportion of families with refrigerators

increased

dramatically,

the

rise

was

less

pronounced

in

the

washing

machine-owning households. The number of hours dedicated to household

chores decreased substantially as families started having more appliances

during the period.

Focusing

on

the

share

of

households

with

electrical

appliances

first,

refrigerator owners had seen their figures skyrocketed over nearly a hundred

years. At the outset of the period, no family had one of these appliances;

however, their percentage maintained an upward trend for the better part

of the years shown, with 100% families possessing a refrigerator in 1980, a

figure that remained unchanged for the rest of the period. The disparity

between the figures of washing machine and vacuum cleaner owners was

narrow first, with the former making up 40% and the latter 30%. This

discrepancy grew bigger over the years once families with a vacuum cleaner

accounted for the largest share - 100% - at the turn of the century, marking

a 30-percentage-point difference with households with washing machines.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 41 -

Turning to the hours devoted to housework on a weekly basis, families used

to spend 50 hours on these activities every week, a trend that witnessed a

huge drop during the century. The weekly time expenditure on household

errands fell to 20 hours in the first 40 years, after which this figure had

halved to 10 hours per week by 2019.

The bar chart compares the expenditure patterns of four different countries,

the US, Canada, the UK and Japan, on five spending brackets in 2009. Overall,

costs associated with housing made up the largest share of financial

allocation of countries, closely followed by food and transportation prices.

Health care and clothing received the smallest amount of people’s budget in

presented countries.

The figures for housing, food and transportation expenditure exhibited

somewhat similar trends, with housing prices taking the lead. The USA and

Japanese people showed a discrepancy of 5-percentage-points, with the

former accounting for 27% and the latter 22%. Similarly, Canadians spent a

fifth of their budget on housing and the UK people devoted around a quarter

of their finance to such expenditures. The disparity between countries,

however, became more pronounced in food costs, marking a twofold

difference the US and Japan citizens’ expenditure level (13% and 26%

respectively).

Another

5-percentage-point

gap

was

evident

between

Canadians and the UK individuals’ spending, with respective figures of 15%

and 20%.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 42 -

Transportation expenditure also constituted a large proportion of people’s

budget, with Canadians spending a staggering 20% of their income on these

costs. This figure was lower for the US (17%) and the UK people (15%), while

a mere 10% of income was devoted to transport costs by the Japanese, twice

as low as that of Canadians.

Focusing on the smaller picture on the graph, the costs related to health care

and clothes varied from only 3% to 9% at most. While people in Canada and

the UK spent noticeably more money on clothing items (7% and 6%

accordingly), their share was comparatively lower than other countries in

terms of health care expenditure (4% and 2%). The United States spent just

under 10% of their earning on health care; interestingly, the same country

dedicated the least amount of money on clothing (3%).

The bar chart compares how often people used to consume fast food at

specialized restaurants in the USA in the years 2003, 2006 and 2013. Overall,

the percentage of people who would eat fast food once a week and once or

twice a month was highest over the years, while that of consumers with no

and daily fast-food consumption showed the opposite trend. Eating such food

several times a week and a year also gained in popularity among the USA

people.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 43 -

The proportion of people in the mix, who used to consume fast food once a

week, started at 31% in 2003, a figure that then rose minimally to 33% after

three years before seeing a marginal drop to 27% in the last year. In the

meantime, 30% people in the USA would eat fast food once or twice a month,

whose figures dropped to a quarter in 2006 prior to staging a recovery at the

peak of 33% in 2013.

Focusing on the rarer frequency of fast-food consumption, around 17%

people ate it a couple of times per week in 2003, after which their proportion

grew to a fifth over the following three years, finally reversing back to 16%

seven years later. As for the share of those who used to consume fast food a

few times during the year, despite starting at 13% in the first year, their

proportion had climbed to 15% by 2006 only to remain unchanged in 2013 as

well.

Lastly, the daily consumers of fast food made up a mere 4% in 2003, followed

by a negligible decrease to 3% after three years and staying static in the last

year, too. People who never ate fast food accounted for 5% first, with their

figures reducing to 4% in 2006 and leveling out in 2013, marking the same

pattern of change as those who ate fast food every day.

The bar chart compares five of the most influencing celebrities on Instagram

based on how many people followed them on this social media platform in

2018 and 2021. Overall, every famous person shown witnessed an upward

trend in the number of their subscribers, with Cristiano Ronaldo seeing the

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 44 -

biggest change of all. The Rock, Ariana Grande, Kylie Jenner and Selena Gomez

had nearly the same scale of social media presence in 2021.

In 2018, the number of followers each celebrity had varied remarkably.

C.Ronaldo, A.Grande and S.Gomez had over a hundred million followers each,

with Selena taking the lead with around 130 million Instagram subscribers.

The Rock and K.Jenner did not exceed the threshold of 100-million followers,

with a discrepancy of about 18 million followers. The former celebrity had

around 80 million Instagram users following him and the latter roughly 98

million.

The figures in the mix had changed considerably by 2021. While Ronaldo was

followed by 320 million people on Instagram that year, quarter of a billion

people subscribed to the remaining influencers with the exception of Selena

Gomez. The famous singer lagged behind with a following of around 240

million people in 2021.

The table compares the wages of teachers of secondary/high schools in five

different countries: Australia, Denmark, Luxembourg, Korea and Japan in

2009.

Overall, teachers in Luxembourg had the highest amount of upfront, annual

and maximum salary among their counterparts in the remaining countries,

while the reverse was true of Australian and Japanese high/secondary school

teachers’ pay. The longest period of time it took to reach the highest salary

was in Korea, whereas teachers in Denmark would have to wait for the

fewest years to attain the maximum wage.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 45 -

Focusing on the bigger picture on the table first, school educators in

Luxembourg started their career with a wage of $80,000, a figure which rose

to $112,000 on a yearly basis and then to a staggering $139,000 after thirty

years of experience in teaching. These figures were distantly followed by the

salary of Denmark teachers, with initial pay of $47,000. After gaining an

additional annual wage of $7,000, their salary would remain unchanged even

eight years later, representing $54,000 as the top wage. The same pattern of

change was observed in the salary of Australian teachers who had begun

their job with $34,600 wage, with this figure further improving to $48,000 a

year and staying static for another nine years to come.

The Asian countries provided their high/secondary school teachers with

comparatively lower salaries. While Korean teachers started off with $30,500,

their

Japanese

counterparts

had

an

initial

standing

of

$28,000.

This

discrepancy grew bigger somewhat, once teachers in the former country

received an annual wage of $52,600 and those in the latter one $49,000. The

remuneration gap, however, would become more pronounced when Korean

teachers obtained the top salary of $84,500 after 37 years and Japanese

educators reached their maximum wage of $62,400 34 years later.

Is mental strength important for success in sports or is it more important to be

strong and fit for success in sport?

Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Opinions tend to be polarized when it comes to what contributes to athletic

success most. Some people claim that it depends on mental toughness, while

others ascribe it to high levels of fitness. I would argue that each of these

personal attributes plays an equal part in achieving greatness in sport.

Being mentally strong shares undoubted benefits for sportsmen to attain

their sport endeavors. One immediate advantage is a source of hope and

inspiration when athletes face challenges and setbacks, or constantly lose

against their opponents. However physically able they are, if they do not

have mental courage to stage a recovery from their losses, sportsmen may

easily lose their motivation to make further strides. Take Lionel Messi – a

famous football player – as an example. Having lost back-to-back finals in

different national tournaments, he was desperate and about to quit his

whole career as a result. His intrinsic mental sharpness, however, has enabled

him to come back despite the past failures and mistakes, and made him a

World Cup 2022 winner two years ago. This goes to show that staying

mentally ready for any scenario can benefit athletes while they are on the

way to their success.

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 46 -

Another

merit

that

mental

resilience

provides

comes

at

play

during

preparation. Obvious as it is, nearly all sportsmen have to undergo training

sessions and medical check-ups before they are allowed to participate in any

championship. Some athletes may sometimes be reported bad news that they

cannot continue in the tournament or should be a substitution player during

matches. In these cases, it is imperative that athletes demonstrate mental

readiness to prevent any discouragement and despair as they can master

their stellar career sooner or later anyway.

Physical stature should not be neglected as far as the overall success in

sports is concerned. Apparently, almost any type of sport requires activeness,

energy expenditure and high levels of fitness. Poorly developed body, which

is out of shape, can cost athletes even their entire sportsmanship considering

the

fierce

competitions

in

sport

to

reach

the

top.

Decent

physical

appearance, in contrast, is likely to increase the odds of winning in contests

and tournaments as being physically presentable is a pre-requisite for sport

success. A good case in point is yet again a football player – Cristiano

Ronaldo. The Portuguese has put a massive deal of effort in the work for over

20 years now, all of which has paid off and made him one of the greatest

footballers in the world. This athlete is a pertinent example of a physically-

fit sportsman that has gained most of his success through relentless gym

and training activities.

Additionally, physical readiness almost guarantees a good ending in sports.

It is argued that to be a fearsome and indefatigable opponent in any realm

of sport endeavors, athletes must focus on their physical growth before

anything else. This is true in many respects, with the most notable one being

Mike Tyson, a celebrated boxer. At his peak in boxing career, not only did his

opponents use to fear him, but also virtually everyone around the world felt

the same way. This excellence and capability are mostly thanks to his

physical stature, causing him to be labeled as a ‘Shadow of Death’ in his

prime.

In conclusion, while there are opposing suggestions as to what is the main

contributor of sport success, I still think that mental and physical toughness

cannot be compared to define their integral role in achieving greatness in

sports since both of them have unique values for sportsmen depending on

the context.

It's a natural process for animal species to become extinct( e.g. dinosaurs ,

dodos and etc ). There is no reason why we should prevent from happening. Do

you agree or disagree ?

Alisher Writes 1.0

@IELTSwithTrent

- 47 -

There is a view that the natural cycle of animal extinction should not be

disturbed. Even though history has witnessed the disappearance of dinosaurs

and dodo birds before, I believe that we – human beings – should make efforts

to preserve the biodiversity of our planet by not allowing animals to go

extinct because they are an integral part of the food chain and the livelihood

of billions of people.

It is irrefutable that certain animal species naturally face extinction and

there is little we can do to reverse these natural disasters. Looking at how

dinosaurs vanished completely reveals a better picture of the matter. They

fell victim of complete extinction as a result of the meteorite that hit the

Earth around 65 million years ago, disapproving of the fact that humans can

bring these events under control and save some animals from disappearance.

In my opinion, however, the onus for safeguarding vulnerable species from

extinction lies on our shoulders. For one, many animals on this planet play a

key role in maintaining the dietary connections in the wild world. It is only

with animal species can we balance the food chain because once it is

interrupted, we may pay the price of disastrous consequences that we bring

to the rest of the animals. The extinction of deer, for instance, may deprive

carnivores of their main diet, which can also lead to starvation and possible

deaths among these animals, too.

For another, a vast majority of people all over the world still rely on animals

as a means of their livelihood and food reservation, and just being a witness

of the extinction of their primary source of life can be costly. Fish and cattle

serve as a notable example of such significant animal species to sustain

millions of lifestyles. People living in coastal areas and countryside tend to

depend on these animals to earn a living through fishing, producing and

selling dietary and meat products so that they can afford the basic

necessities of decent living standards. If these species became extinct, the

dependent people would have to deal with famine, poverty and disease and

crime that accompany the first two issues.

In conclusion, as much as I agree that some natural events can drive certain

animals to extinction and our capacity to undo the consequences is limited,

I would still argue that ensuring the long-term survival of fauna is important

since animals link the food chain and are a source of income and food for

many people.