Writing Feedback / IELTS-following host country's culture or not? [3]

Some people bilieve that visitors to other countries should follow local customs and behaviour.other disagree and think that the host country should welcome cultural differences.

Discuss-give your opinion

Nowadays it is quite common for people to travel to other countries. Different customs and behavior of the new country has always been a frequent topic of discussion as at least one of host country or the visitor should respect the customs of the other one.

There is no doubt that if a visitor decides to follow the new cultures, then he/she can take the advantages of understanding people and learning more about the country. Besides adapting is important since some customs are written in the law and treating against them leads to punishment. For instance chewing gums is banned in Singapore. Besides people who persist on ignoring new traditions may sometimes feel loneliness and isolated then. It is also worth noting that some moral values of western countries contradict eastern values. Therefore people might better be aware of them, too.

However, there are people who claim that host country should welcome different cultures. Firstly, countries with strong religious background are better to treat more flexible. So there will be on striking development in the matter of tourism. Moreover it is highly beneficial in international business and also appealing for Potential students to attend their universities for education. A good example here is Canada which is popular for being multicultural. Each year many students migrate to Canada to pursue their researches there.

In conclusion, there are quite wide cultural differences from a country to another. I think that visitors are more expected to adjust to the new circumstances. It leads to better enjoyment and preventing troubles and misunderstanding.

Writing Feedback / IELTS - pros and cons; working or traveling before starting university studies [5]

In some countries young people are encouraged to work or travel for a year between finishing high school and starting university studies. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages for young people who decided to do this.

Nowadays most of teenagers get the chance of attending a university subject. The start time is a common topic of discussion when some countries recommend them to spend a year for working or traveling after their high school and before entering university.

One cannot deny that traveling and working always make life more meaningful and practical and it gives young people new insights to way of living. When one works, he/she finds the value of job with more ease. Therefore he/she takes educating more seriously. Besides from their new experiences they can choose their area of interest education more carefully. Moreover this is an opportunity which they can work voluntarily and travel freely since there are not many things they are responsible for compared to their future that they have to meet the needs of their family and themselves.

However, there are some disadvantages. Teenagers are not mature enough to know how to spend their money. They may easily waste it for bad habits like smoking and drinking. During the trip they may be defrauded .Besides enjoyment of visiting new places and earning money may make them uninterested or reluctant to study. In fact a year gap between two stages of education has impacts on their feeling and ambition. It even can encourage them to quit their studies. It is also worth noting that these activities can be deferred to future time since if they work they don't do it as a professional and well-trained. Moreover there is no need to travel for an entire year.

In conclusion, there are pros and cons for discussion. I think taking a break from study to work or travel can give them a perspective of what they are going to do and why.

Writing Feedback / IELTS-sports professional can earn a great more money than others [12]

Successful sports professionals can earn a great deal more money than people in other important professions. Some people think this is fully justified while others think it is unfair.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Sports are of great importance to our life. No one can deny their effects in our health. Many people take part in at least one type of them in their life for entertainment/spare time. However there are some people who play sport as it is a way they work and make money.

Some people believe that professional athletes deserve to get more money. Firstly they devotes most of their time on exercising and particularly for heavy sports. It has dangerous impacts on their body. A good example here is weight lifters. So earning high paying might compensate such problems. Secondly their performances are assessed by many people all over the world and it puts them under severe pressure psychologically. Expectations make it hard for them to concentrate on their work. For example wrestling is one of the most popular sports worldwide and so is the result of its contest.

However others are of the opinion that it is unfair to pay sports professionals considerable salaries compared to workers in other important jobs. Anyhow sports are kind of entertainment and not so serious for the economical or social aspects of a country. While there are jobs which results are fateful to country's future, Politicians and government's employees that manage organization of country and approve law based on needs of society are good examples in this case.Moreover it is not justified since children are asked mainly to study their lesson at a first place and sports at the second importance. But the money devoted to sport shows an alternative.

In conclusion, there is a vast discussion on the issue of paying. But I think professional athletes deserve great money as it is their only job and they are responsible to perform well in it.

Writing Feedback / Competitive children admire the sense of fulfillment therefore they are always trying to be better. [6]

Some people think that a sense of competition in children should be encouraged. Others believe that children who are taught to co-operate rather than compete become more useful adults.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Teaching methods play important roles in building childrens' characters and future life. Besides, future responsibilities for a country will be held by them. Therefore different approaches of teaching children is common topic of discussion when some parents try to build a sense of competition in them but some others focus on their co-operative behavior.

One cannot deny that competitive children remarkably try to improve their achievement in any field since they admire the sense of fulfilment. As a result, adults who have had striking past will take the advantage in various opportunities and positions in the work place, in contrast to ordinary people who may fit only medium-level occupation. Moreover, competition motivates individuals to see how others act and what the positive and negative sides of their attempt are.This helps them to excel in various aspects like social activity or their business.

However, others put forward the view that children need to learn how to work cooperatively.but competition doesn't support this. They claim that every person has got its own talent and identifying his/her skill is more important since in a group activity various abilities are needed to result in development. Moreover in work methods big organizations have their duties divided and allocated to a several parts. Therefore a cooperation between employees is the only way to get the work done. It demands communication skills to share information.

In conclusion, I would concede that competition do come with some adverse effects. Despite that created benefits far outweigh the poor points. Overall, I am convinced that we should be inspired to be competitive, in order to achieve our goals best way possible.

Essays / Writing topics about agree or disagree with this opinion? [6]

Hi
I really need your help for my Ielts writing.Iam confused about what to answer to below question
- To what extent do yo agree or disagree with this opinion?

I dont know whether it is true to write either for agree & disagree aspects and then say my own idea.
some books say you should only give reasons & supports for your own idea not both.
thank you