Writing Feedback / IELTS:Working people are busy -don't have time for family and friends; severe consequences [5]

Topic:
Many people are busy with work and do not have enough time to spend with family and friends. Why does this happen? What are the effects of this on family life and society as a whole?

My essay:

In the modern society, people are being tied up by their work, which leads to lack of family time and friend reunion. The cause of this situation has rouses a massive concern of the public. From my point of view, this phenomenon roots in the increasing competition and prevalence of hi-tech devices.

Accompanied with the globalization, new the employees are facing competition not only from their city or their nation, but also from all around the world. If they do not put their best into the job, they would fail to keep pace with their peers, thus they might end up losing their job. It is understandable that after an exhausting work day, people would prefer taking a break rather than attending some social activities.

Although information technology provides people convenience and efficiency, it has negative effects on the way that we communicate with friends. We can access the internet and accomplish most of our needs, both personal issues and professional assignments, anytime as long as there is 3G connection. In the past, when we needed to have a talk with friends, we must go to their house, but now all we need is a phone call, a text message or even an online chat. So the time that we spent with friends is inevitably cut down.

The shortage of domestic hours and interpersonal activities may have severe consequence for both family and society. The relationship between husband and wife, parent and children may be ruined, and harmony harbor, which the family should be, would just be an unrealistic imagination. Those who do not have sufficient social communications may found themselves isolated, and they might cultivate the anti-social personality that is detrimental to the whole society.

Writing Feedback / IELTS :Distance-learning cannot bring the benefits that traditional colleges offer; Agree? [3]

Topic:
Many people use distance-learning programmes (study material post,TV,internet...)to study at home. But some people think that it cannot bring the benefit as much as attending college or university. Do you agree or disagree?

My essay

With the tremendous development in information technology, long-distance education enables people to study at home without going to school. Whether this teaching approach is more beneficial to pupils than the traditional way sparks off a heated debate. From my perspective, I agree with the view that students can acquire more benefits from the remote education.

To begin with, studying at home save the pupils enormous time and considerable expense. Students who use distance-learning programs can cut down their commuting time, tuition fees, textbook fees and so forth just by an internet connection. This especially makes a significant difference for the children who live in the far-off countryside and the children whose families are living below the poverty-line.

Besides that, long-distance education provides students the opportunity to access the immense knowledge resources and a variety of teaching approaches. Pupils can obtain materials for their curricula just by one mouse click, such as science reports, study posts, documentary records, etc. A student can even select a specific online course based on his own preference and time schedule so he can control the learning progress and make satisfactory achievement on this course.

It is undeniable that traditional education has its advantages in face-to-face communication, mental inspiration and physical educations. These make remarkable contributions in providing immediate feedbacks and cultivating pupils' personalities. But with the improvements in streaming and sensor technologies, remote education can eliminate the obstacles of distance and body contacts.

In conclusion, I concede that traditional education has some merits like feedbacks and inspirations that cannot be replaced in the near future. However, distance-learning outweighs the conventional way not only with its efficiency, convenience and economic value, but also with the self-regulated education that pupils can study on their own purpose.

Writing Feedback / Graduates from coeducational schools are more likely to integrate into the real life effortlessly [2]

TOPIC:

Some people think that it is better to educate boys and girls in separate schools. Others, however, believe that boys and girls benefit more from attending mixed schools.

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

MY ANSWER:

Children's education is the top priority both for every single family and for entire society. Some people state that single-sex schools are suitable for pupils' physical and psychological development; others believe that mixed schools are more effective.

Some experts consider that educating boys and girls separately is beneficial to their intelligence and personality. Male and female students have different stages in brain development and maturity, so they cannot share the same interests, behaviors and abilities. Teachers in single-sex schools could recognize these difference and adapt their approaches to suit the needs and progress of pupils. Furthermore, students, especially the adolescences, would not suffer from opposite gender's distraction, so they can just be themselves and pay more attention to the curricula.

However, some educationist insist that coeducation is superior in nurturing students' confidence and communication skills. The mixing of two sexes eradicates the inherent shyness between genders, enables students to negotiate, trust, discuss even quarrel with both sexes, like the real life outside the school. Getting accustomed to a diversity of opinions, ideas, lifestyles and values, students of coeducational schools are likely to adapt themselves into any new surroundings. In addition, it is a good start point to promote sexual equality by treating the children, who are the master of next generation, in same way.

In my view, I am in favor of mixed schools. The students in single-sex schools, although well-developed in intelligence, may have trouble fitting into the society due to lack of social skills. Mixed schools, on the contrary, are adept at cultivating the pupils' confidence, versatility and creativity. Graduates from coeducational schools are more likely to integrate into the real life effortlessly.

Writing Feedback / IELTS 7 WRITING TASK 2: ARE THE ENTERTAINERS PAID TOO MUCH? [3]

Thanks for your comments :)

Topic :
　Some people feel that entertainers (e.g. film stars, pop musicians or sports stars) are paid too much money. Do you agree or disagree?
　　Which other types o f job should be highly paid?

My essay:

It is common to rouse a debate on whether celebrities deserve their payments whenever we talk about them. Some people think these entertainers are significantly overpaid when compared to people from other occupations. From my perspective, their massive influences and immense contributions have made the high salary acceptable.

First of all, the leading factors of these idols' success and earnings are indomitable mettle and painstaking practice. They have sacrificed their leisure time, personal relationship, even health, to achieve the ultimate goal while others may just entertain themselves. Usian Bolt, world's fastest sprint runner, had spent enormous time on his intensive training before he gained the worldwide recognition and became the highest paid athlete..

Furthermore, whether the stars are overpaid or not should depend not only on their incomings, but also on their outputs. They play a prominent role in cultural dissemination and public relaxation; moreover, they have made considerable profits for the entertainment companies. The music they created, the TV programs they produced and the movies they filmed are indispensable parts of our daily life.

Admittedly the salary level is unfair to the professions which are important to society. Policemen who risk their lives fighting criminals, doctors who fulfill their duties saving lives, may receive extremely little money. But it is the government's responsibility to regulate the opportunities, investments and attentions toward the less advantaged people.

Base on the above argument, I concede that entertainers are paid reasonably, regardless what the amount is. To preserve equality, harmony and stability in society, other professionals like professors, nurses and policemen deserve more attentions and money. Meanwhile, the stars should show their sympathy and benevolence through donations and charity activities.