Writing Feedback / (IELTS) What's the greatest invention in the modern world? [4]

Motorised flight is the greatest invention in the modern world. No other invention has influenced our lives more significantly. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Motorised fight, indeed, is an essential invention in recent society. But when people add it a precise title-the greatest invention-in order to emphasis its importance. I wonder that a large majority of opponents will put on a question mark at the end of the title like me.

Time-saving must be an obvious advantage, popping into people's mind. As the accelerated development of the modern world, that time is money has been viewed as one of the golden principles. When the disaster, such as earthquake, takes place, rescuers from home and abroad come to the first site within an hour. Without motorised flight, more lives will pass away when the rescuers struggle in the way. Therefore, it is reasonable for us to admit the importance of motorised flight in the modern world.

On the other hand, we can illustrate lots of inventions that have significantly influenced our lives. Computer should be in the list. We can stay at home and grasp the changeable information in every minute because of Internet. In addition, distance education provides a whole new way of study, breaking the geographical constraint for all kinds of citizens. This change is huge compared with the previous time when a piece of envelop will take up to two weeks to deliver.

To conclude, computer is just an example. So many inventions can be named as the crucial inventions in the modern world as they dramatically change our lives in every minute in terms of study, work and urgent events. It is hard to judge which one is the greatest although there are different degrees among them. But each of them will make difference in various situations. Thus I take the view that it is meaningless to compare the importance of inventions as no one is more superior than the other.

Writing Feedback / (IELTS) Internet teaching or traditional school? THX~ [4]

It is not necessary for children to go to school because far more information is accessible on the Internet. Do you agree or disagree?

Distance education breaks the geographical constraint between learners and teachers, offering a band new way for all citizens, particularly in rural area. Thus some parents suggest that traditional school education should be replaced as children could acquire more information through Internet.

Indeed, remote learning brings a couple of benefits. Instead of riding bike or taking bus to school, children save a great amount of time on the road. From the perspective of parents, they are able to devote themselves to working rather than worry about the security of their child. Further, none of teachers have capability to master various kinds of discipline knowledge. In other words, less information is taught by teachers compared with the powerful Internet.

Those who advocated the new education approach, however, fails to consider the fact that distinguishing the right from wrong is a tough task for the young. Although a sea of information is provided, it is a pity that most of the information has not been proved by the authority. Children may misunderstand if lacking of proper guidance given by professional teachers. In addition, school adopts systematic way to teach children physically and psychologically. Loads of activities are held in order to cultivate the skills in communication and cooperation, which helps students access to society smoothly and gain a promising future as well.

Compared with home study through Internet, traditional education still shines with irreplaceable benefits. The best way for children's education, I believe, should combine the two ways together. Mainly focus on the knowledge the teacher taught, grasping more extended information as supplement if children have enough time and interest.

Writing Feedback / (IELTS) The purpose of university education [6]

Some people think the purpose of university education is to prepare students for employment while others think it has other functions. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Every year, a great number of high school students compete against each other for entering university as they tend to believe that a decent job will wait for them after graduation in college.

Indeed, university education fosters students with basic knowledge. Being equipped with particular skill, there is no doubt to find a well-paid job in the future. Take the medical students for example, what they learn in university mainly focus on how to be a doctor or nurse. Thus, it is easy to find out that most of their courses are related to disease and medicine.

A large majority people, however, misunderstand the function of university. To gain a promising job is a reward for an excellent student, but not the ultimate goal for university education. Specifically, university offers students a wider platform to present themselves in front of others, helping students become more confident. After four year university's training, students have adequate ability to shoulder the stress from the complex society. In contract, the basic knowledge that high school student acquired mainly restricted in books-theoretical knowledge. Fewer of them attempt to enter society, which renders them hardly adapt themselves to the fierce competition in the job market. But though the practical activities, such as presentation and internship, held in university, graduates could become more mature.

To conclude, university education not just simply focuses on future employment, but pay more attention to students' self-improvement in dealing with different situation.

Writing Feedback / (IELTS) Will business and cultural contact cause countires lose identities? [4]

I am afraid the structure and argument...Could you make some comments related to this? Thanks a lot.

_________________________________________________________

Some people believe that the increasing business and cultural contact between countries has positive effects while others think it will cause countries to lose their identities. Do you agree or disagree?

Globalization promotes the interaction between countries in terms of business and culture. This raises questions about whether intensive contact is a blessing or a curse. From my perspective, the advantages of increased cooperation and communication outweigh the disadvantages.

The trades between counties, undoubtedly, accelerate the GDP growth no matter in import-oriented countries or export-oriented counties. Take China for example, the more products export, the more profits China gets. Once the commerce decease slightly, hundreds of thousands of Chinese would lose their job. Worse still, the stability of a country could not be guaranteed. In addition, for the imported countries, consumers can enjoy the benefits brings from the imported food as more alternative choices have been given. On the other hand, countries' communication in culture could reduce the misunderstandings to some extent. People could easily learn other countries' customs and languages, which greatly expends native citizens' cultural outlook without going abroad.

However, excessive business and cultural contact may contribute to vicious competition and identity loss. As we all know, business owners aim profit in priority, which leads them lower the price again and again to sell the products. But if the vicious competitions continue, the industries in the imported countries will be pushed to the brink of survival. The "green trade barrier" is good example. American government adopts this measure to protect its own business. What's more, with the invasion of foreign culture, most youngsters in China, for example, tend to celebrate western festivals, such as Christmas Day and Valentine's Day, and watch Hollywood movies.

To conclude, the interaction in business and culture is beneficial to economic growth, employment and consumers' options as a whole. As t o the negative side, I believe, it would not be a problem if the government regulates the competition among business field and advocates the native culture frequently.

Writing Feedback / Journalist quality - should we trust the journalist? [3]

We get knowledge from news, but some people think we cannot trust the journalist. What do you think? And what do you think is the important qualities that a journalist should have?

Nowadays, we are surrounded with so much information, the majority of which comes from journalists. While some people assert that journalists are unworthy to trust. I suppose their behavior can be understandable.

Everyone, undoubtedly, has his own views towards a news story as we have different educational backgrounds and upbringing environments. Journalists judge things by what they experienced. Therefore, prejudice cannot be avoided. Also, the media converge is normally controlled by the government. It is not easy for newsman to present the news to the public under certain rules created by the government. One careless mistake might lead to be cut down. Further, the most important trait of news is up-to-the-minute. Journalists have to report the news to the world within an hour, or even minutes. Thus, it is too limited for correspondents to get the whole picture of the emergencies, which result in the imperfect in the reporting.

In order to be an outstanding journalist, personally, learning to be neutral is a primary course, what I mean is that the main duty for journalists is to present the facts rather than instill the right and wrong on audiences. They should conceal their own feelings while doing their jobs. Additionally, a journalist ought to have the courage to break through the rules which prevent the public from learning the truth. The strong will to peruse truth, more vital than any other qualities, distinguish the remarkable from the average. Journalists need to rush to the primary scene immediately as soon as something happened, which may scarifies regular eating and sleeping habits temporarily.

Journalist, sacrifice a lot but receive a little, should be respected rather than be blamed. Whether we should believe the news presented by the journalist depends on our personal thinking.

Writing Feedback / <IELTS> should goverment control media crime? [3]

The government should control the amount of violence in the media to reduce the number of violent crimes. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The soaring crime rate has led to the proposal that it is time for the government to take action to control the proliferation of violent scenes in media.

Obviously, violence in the media is often portrayed as extreme as possible in order to attract audiences. This will definitely set a bad example for the immature audiences who, lacking correct parental guidance and abilities to differentiate the right from wrong, are prone to go astray by imitating the violent behaviours and committing real violent crimes as they regard the violence as reasonable and justifiable.

On the other hand, media, such as TV or film, is considered as the correct information source regulated by the government. It should be reporting and reflecting true phenomenon in the society. Violence, as one of the facts in the real world, certainly has to be reported. However, excessive violence would offer misleading information to the public and exert detrimental influence to the society as well. It is recently reported in the news that a seventeen-year-old boy killed all his family members, one sister and two parents out of hatred and jealousy. In the real world, we are inclined to take extreme approach to tackle a small problem due to excessive violence exposure.

We cannot deny that our society is occupied with the violent scenes and plots at present. What the government should do immediately is to strengthen censorship to control the amount of violence in media. Otherwise, the violent crime rate will rise continuously and out of control someday.

Writing Feedback / (IELTS) pressure on students good or not? [5]

Pressure on school and university students is increasing and students are pushed to study hard when they are young. Do you think it is a positive or a negative development?

It is easy to hear that students tend to complain that the excessive pressure they need to shoulder is entirely beyond their limitation. Even to the college students, the competitive atmosphere become stronger day by day rather than decrease gradually since they have been admitted to the prestigious universities.

This kind of phenomenon can be understandable as none of parents hope that their children are inferior to others, especially in study. Thus, the only effective way for parents to do is drive their children to study hard no matter how unwilling they are. Indeed, quite a few students around us gain a high score and credit in such circumstances, leading to successful future eventually. In other words, students' potential can be kindled under the mounting pressure. Without the pressure, students might not be able to achieve success and waste their precious time spent on playing as well.

In spite of this, the obvious drawbacks of pressure on students cannot be ignored. Yong as a child, their childhood are occupied by tons of books, which makes them become study machines rather than versatile youngsters. Additionally, once they feel tired on study and disobey what the parents said, it is hard to drive them back. Worse still, a few students lack communicative ability as all their time have been spent in reading books.

Overall, I take the view that pressure should be moderate. Otherwise, students would become bookworms who couldn't be called as human beings. Reasonable pressure, giving students' motivation, bring benefits outweigh drawbacks.（252）

Writing Feedback / <Ielts> traditonal skills should be protected? [5]

Cherish traditional skills in China

When people confronted the situation that our traditional skills vanish gradually under the fast-developed technology, some people argued that the behavior of attempting to keep them alive is meaningless. Obviously, traditional skills, the treasure of human beings, cannot be substituted regardless of the acceleration of high-tech. In this essay, I will interpret the importance of traditional skills in terms of symbol and memory.

China contains 56 ethnic minorities and each of them has its unique specialty. People could easily immerse into their culture by master their traditional skills. Besides, different kinds of ancient living style are reflected in different traditional arts. Just take a glance at silk, produced in Hangzhou province. No one can help sighing that how skillful the ancient women are! In addition, the silk represent the status in ancient China. That is, women are playing a family-binding role while men are responsible for earning money by farming. Thanks to traditional skills handed down from one generation to another, our history avoids emptiness and black for lacking evidences.

People are yeaning for finding a sense of belonging in China because they emphasis on the family root greatly. By touching the traditional art, it seems youngster are touching history directly, and even taking with their ancestors to some extent. That's a special experience for generations, helping to keep the family relationship survive. All this things happened when the traditional skills accompany with us. To the old, what triggers them most is the memory form past which offered them courage to stay alive.

Consequently, the advent of new technology is not equal to the distinction of traditional skills. Traditional skills play a pivotal role in our history and memory; thus, we must spare no effect to conserve them no matter how hard it is. If government and people joint endeavor to protect them, I believe, the tradition skills would blossom rather than die.

Writing Feedback / Group-studying couldn't be ignored - it still plays an essential part for us [5]

Some teachers think students should be organised into groups to study. Others argue students should study alone. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

With many students complaining that a multitude of homework they need to complete are entirely beyond their shoulder, some teachers assert to assign group work in order to release their burden, while others argue that studying in groups waste more time, compared with studying alone.

There is no denying that group work is an effective approach for students to develop a well-cooperated skill. Students form a sense of team sprits through the process, which exerts benefits consistently for the later job hunting. Besides, absorbing various perspectives is another advantage that cooperation brings us by exchanging different points of view towards the same question. Noticeably, loads of creative ideas would pop out, making the learning process more interesting rather than boring.

Even so, a small amount of students are inclined to study alone as they claim that they could focus on study more intensively, which boost the efficiency greatly. Just imagine that you, as a leader, spend your all spare time in gathering teammates together, but the consequence comes to reach no consensus. That sense of frustration immerses you consistently, even keeping you away form being a leader any more. Worse still, youngsters tend to turn to be self-centered and form the characteristic with selfish and arrogant, which drive them away from others and be isolated.

In spite of the drawbacks of group-studying couldn't be ignored, I take the view that group-studying still plays an essential part for us in terms of study and future career. The time, indeed, cost much in discussion, but it's rewarding undoubtedly.ïźˆ281ïź‰

Writing Feedback / (IELTS) old building preserve or demolish? [5]

With the acceleration of economy, there is no denying that less land are available for new buildings. Confronted with the alternatives of preserving or demolishing the old buildings, some people support the latter. From my point of view, however, old buildings should be conserved due to their own irreplaceable values.

Buildings, as the emblem of culture heritage, witness the fast tempo development of society. Thanks to the old buildings, youngsters are able to touch the history directly. Take Chan Clan Academy for example, this historical building was preserved by one generation to another, making a great different to the one as Chen family's decedent. If without the old buildings, I could not imagine how blank and weak our history is.

Besides, old buildings contain plenty of memory to people, which could not be ignored. In China, Chinese think highly of the culture of family root. And the old buildings symbolizing the family root bear valuable memory among several generations. That's why, I suppose, most people take the old building as their heirloom, especially the elder. In other words, that sense of belonging couldn't be substituted no matter what reason it is. If the old buildings were demolished, endless void would occupy people's heart.

In addition, old buildings are a big amount of fortune for architect designers. Through studying the structure or style of the old buildings, specialties are capable to create more distinctive buildings. According to a report publishing on Chinese architecture website, it's said that 20% of the new buildings originate from the old ones. By collecting the preference of citizens, the figure indicates 76% citizens consider that the new buildings with traditional fashion are more attractive.

From analyzing above, it can be easily conclude that old buildings play an indispensible role in reflecting history, conserving memory as well as stimulating inspiration. Government should think twice before demolish the unique treasure -old buildings.

Writing Feedback / (IELTS topic) innate talent or pratice makes perfect? [3]

It's generally believed that some people are born with certain talents, for instance for sport or music, and others are not. However, it is sometimes claimed that any child can be taught to become a good sports person or musician.

Discuss both these views and give you own opinion.

I once read a heated debate about whether should YaoMing change his nationality before his daughter was born. That private issue that generates public concern enables me to think about people are born with talents or train to be excellent.

Some people consider that sport or music stars are born due to inherited genes. Even though supporters couldn't explain why different classifications of genes can determine people's talent, admittedly, loads of geniuses are living around us. Take Zhouzhou for example, people from home and abroad are fascinated by his commanding talent in music rather than paying attention to his intelligence.

In contrast, some people hold the view that outstanding sport players and musicians are cultivated. When boys and girls age 3 or 4 years old, their parents send them to attend training classes, such as playing piano and dancing in order to arouse their interests. Besides, living in the world that full of fierce competitions, it's easy to be substituted unless improves continually. To some extent, people who become successful confirm the truth that practice makes perfect. The relation between success and talent seems ambiguous.

Personally, innate talent is the gift given by god, which render people a step forward than the common, who are struggling to achieve to the comparable level. Training, however, is a significant method to shape remarkable person. Without cultivating by others, the talented who are not likely to know how to tap their gifts will waste them eventually. Thus, practice plays more vital role in the group of the less talented because it gives them possibility to obtain achievement.

Consequently, I claim that practice outweighs talent as any child has competence to success. Whether he could be depends on the way that how to explore their potential.

Thanks for correcting~~sincerely~~~ ^O^