Writing Feedback / IELTS- Families who choose private education should not support the state education system [3]

Families who send their children to private schools should not be required to pay taxes that support the state education system.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
The following is my essay. Please kindly help me to correct it and give me some suggestions to improve

It is argued that parents should not be required to pay taxes to fund the government education system if their children are sent to private schools. I completely disagree with this opinion.

There are several reasons that it would be wrong to reduce taxes for families who pay for private education. Firstly, it would be difficult to compute the exact number of money that should be reduced, and more government stuff would be needed for this process. Secondly, all citizens pay for public services that they might not use, such as police and sports, and they would not expect to receive a refund from the government. Finally, the funding for education system cannot always provide the exact amount of services that parents pay for, even their children are in public schools. It depends on different cities or even different subjects that students take.

In my opinion, we should all be happy to pay the money that supports state education systems. A high quality education system contributes to the whole society rather than a particular family. It has a great impact on other areas of a country, such as economy and health care, which are concerned with every family. Besides, those who receive education from schools funded by government would be able to provide good services for the citizens, including families who choose private education.

In conclusion, I believe that all families should have the same responsibility to pay taxes for the education system of the nation, whether their children are in public school or not.

Writing Feedback / IELTS- We are more dependent on each other than ever? [3]

Some people think that in the modern world we are more dependent on each other, while others think that people have become more independent.
 Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

The following is my essay. Please kindly help me to correct it and give me some suggestions to improve

People have different views on whether or not human beings are more independent on others than ever. In my view, we tend to rely more on others than people did before.

There are two main reasons why it could be argued that we are more independent than people were in the past. Firstly, modern technology has made individual more powerful. A person are able to accomplish tasks which were impossible to be finished alone. A good example for this would be the application of computers, with which a skillful engineer could figure out every details of a huge project, which used to be done by a large group of people. Secondly, nowadays we have access to plenty of information through the internet. One can check weather forecast in a few seconds without asking anyone else.

However, I would agree with those who believe that people are more dependent on others these days. The problems that people need to deal with is far more complex and difficult than before, and we usually have to work in a group the tackle them. For example, in academic research, it has become much harder for a scientist to work in a specific area alone now. Also, our life has changed to a large extend and we are getting more dependent on the services provided by others, such as fast foods and clothes. Moreover, although it is convenient for us to use information from the internet, we are actually relying on those who are providing and updating it on the other side of the internet.

In conclusion, while there are some reasons to believe that people are more independent than ever, my own view is that we are more dependent on others now.

Writing Feedback / IELTS- Should foreign visitors pay more than local visitors for tourist sites? [2]

Foreign visitors should pay more than local visitors for cultural and historical attractions. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
The following is my essay. Please kindly help me to correct it and give me some suggestions to improve

There have been more and more people travel to other countries to enjoy their holidays in recent decades. It is argued that foreign visitors should be charged more than local residents to visit cultural and historical attractions. I completely disagree with this opinion.

It would be unjustified if ticket prices of the tourist sites for an international visitor are higher than that for a local visitor. Firstly, as these sites serve as places in which people can enjoy themselves and get educated, they are considered to be goods and the customers from all around the world should have equal rights for it. A gap on the prices would certainly result in unfairness among travelers. Secondly, oversea visitors would feel less welcome if they need to pay more to enter these sites. They might have an impression that they are given less importance than the local people.

A higher price for foreign visitors would have a negative impact on a nation's economy as well as international communication. If travelers realized that they have to pay more to visit historic and cultural sites in a particular country, they would perhaps decide not to go to that country on holiday. As a result, the number of foreign visitors would decrease which makes the country suffer from reduce of international communication and potential trades.

In conclusion, I believe that there should not be any difference among the ticket prices of historical and cultural attractions for people from different countries. Otherwise, it would be unfair for the oversea customers and the country would suffer from drawbacks in economy and international communication.

Writing Feedback / IELTS In my opinion government help should be given to those who work on art that is less commercial [4]

Some people think that governments should give financial support to creative artists such as painters and musicians. Others believe that creative artists should be funded by alternative sources. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

The following is my essay. Please kindly help me to correct it and give me some suggestions to improve

There are different views on whether governments should support the artists like painters and musicians financially. While some people think that creative artists should be able to be funded by alternative ways, I ague that a certain amount of funding from the governments is still needed.

One the one hand, some people believe that it is not the governments' responsibility to give the talented artists financial support. The main reason is that it usually takes time for the artists to publish a great work that could be enjoyed by a large group of people, and there are often no significant impact on the society even if a great deal of money are given to them. They suggest that the government budgets should be spent on other emergent areas such as healthcare, education and public facilities. Another reason could be that there is a market for the artworks and hence those creative workers on art could be funded. In fact, there are plenty of people who are willing to spend money on works of art and a piece of good painting would be sold at a price of millions of dollars.

On the other hand, it is argued that creative artists require government funding. It is true that many great artists lived in poverty in human history, as they were unable to earn enough money even if outstanding works were produced. An example for this would be Van Gogh, whose paintings are expensive nowadays, but he would never receive the money he deserved. Therefore, financial supports should be given by governments. In my view, in modern society, there are plenty of productive artists such as pop singers who are able to make profits through producing welcome works, but not every piece of artwork is commercial and the authors who contribute their meaningful works cannot always receive funding from nongovernment organizations. In this case, government are responsible to provide financial supports to them.

In conclusion, there are good reasons why artists should rely on alternative sources, but in my opinion government helps should be given to those who work on arts that are less commercial.

Writing Feedback / IELTS- Should experiments on animals be banned? [2]

Nowadays animal experiments are widely used to develop new medicines and to test the safety of other products. Some people argue that these experiments should be banned because it is morally wrong to cause animals to suffer, while others are in favour of them because of their benefits to humanity.

Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
The following is my essay. Please kindly help me to correct it and give me some suggestions to improve

It's true that animal experiments are commonly used to discover new medicines and to guarantee the safety of foods. While the experiments on animals are harmful to them, I argue that it is necessary for human beings to do that.

People benefit a lot from the products which are made and tested by animal experiments. A new medicine can be developed by experiments on a limited amount of animals, but it can reduce the sufferings of unlimited number of people or even save their lives. Besides, by making use of these experiments, scientists could find new types of foods, which could be helpful to tackle the problems of shortage of food around the world and lower down the death of hunger.

Some people, however, suggest that we should ban the animal experiments. One of their reasons is that every animal has its right to be alive, and we should not sentence it to death as it is innocent. Another reason would be that it is really cruel to have the laboratory animals to suffer from great pain and illness before killing them. As the technology is developing, we should be able to invent new process to achieve the same goal rather than do experiments on animals.

In my view, it is essential that we use the animal testing to develop products that we need. Although it causes some animals to suffer, it prevents the losing of lives of many other creatures. Hopefully there will be alternatives to these experiments in the future, but before that we still need to continue making advantage of them.

Writing Feedback / IELTS - Video games are harmful if people play them in the wrong ways [7]

Some people regard video games as harmless fun, or even as a useful educational tool. Others, however, believe that videos games are having an adverse effect on the people who play them. In your opinion, do the drawbacks of video games outweigh the benefits?

The following is my essay. Please kindly help me to correct it and give me some suggestions to improve

With the development of technologies, there are a variety of video games which are popular nowadays. While video games have some negative impacts on the players, I do believe the benefits outweigh the drawbacks.

Video games are harmful if people play them in the wrong ways. Firstly, it is time consuming to play the games. Our regular routines would be disrupted if we are addicted to them. There are plenty of cases in which people spend so much time on it that they are unable to handle their study or work properly as they did before. Secondly, video games would cause health problems to the players. After staring at the screens for a long time without any rest, people are likely to get a poor eyesight. The sedentary life style and lack of exercise that often accompany gaming addiction would also cause obesity, which may further results in other health problems such as heart disease.

On the other hand, it is true that people benefit a lot from video games. One of the essential things that people can harvest from video games is enjoyment. Indeed, this is the main reason that people are keen on them. The modern life and work are rather stressful and it is a good choice for people to get relaxed and refresh themselves by playing video games. Another benefits of video games is that they can serve as education tools. In recent decades, an increasing amount of media and tools are available for education, and video games are certainly one of the most effective tools among them. A video game can catch a child's attention quickly. It is possible to include knowledge of history, culture and other required elements in a game such that players learn things when they are enjoying the games.

In conclusion, I argue that video games have more benefits then drawbacks. One can have great fun and get educated as well in a video game, provided that it is used wisely.

Writing Feedback / IELTS- celebrities set a bad example to young people? [2]

Nowadays celebrities are more famous for their glamour and wealth than for their achievements, and this sets a bad example to young people.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
The following is my essay. Please kindly help me to correct it and give me some suggestions to improve

Modern celebrities are well known because they are rich rather than that they have great achievements. This has a significant impact on the young people.

Firstly, the opinion and personality of the young generation are affected by the reason that celebrities are famous for. Their glamour and wealth make young people believe that money is more important than the other things in their life, and consider the properties as a symbol of social status of a person. Consequently, people, including the young ones, tend to admire those who are rich rather than those who are talented and have outstanding achievements. Secondly, the behaviors of young people change according to the main reason that a person would be famous for. In fact, examples of the famous people who they believe to be successful guide them to behave in a similar way, in which they would like to make themselves rich rather do things that the society can benefit from. As a result, the creativity that is needed by different types of work are disappearing among the young people.

On the other hand, however, the rich and famous people set an example to the young people which motivates them to work hard. For instant, the wealth of Bill Gates encourage a great number of young people devote themselves into the development of modern technology. In this way, young people would be leaded to some important and less attracted works.

In conclusion, the celebrities are more famous for their properties rather for the achievements set a bad example for the young generation, though it affect them positively sometimes. In fact, a great amount of works which are important do not make people rich easily, and hence the young people tend to be not interested in them because of the "successful" examples for them.

Writing Feedback / Ielts: Just like different types of foods, different measures are required to improve public health [5]

Some people say that the best way to improve public health is by increasing the number of sports facilities. Others, say that this would have little effect on public health and that other measures are required.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.
The following is my essay. Please kindly help me to correct it and give me some suggestions to improve

The public health problems are receiving more and more attention in recent years. The measures of improving the public health are considered not only by the government, but also by individuals. However, there are two different opinions towards them.

Some people believe that increasing the number of sports facilities for the ordinary people is the most significant way to improve public health. Nowadays, with the development of technologies, the life of people is getting easier and easier. However, this change results in many health problems such as obesity. One of the most important reasons for this is that we do not have enough physical exercises in our daily life. Therefore, public health would be improved to a large extent if more sports facilities are available, which could encourage people to have more sports and keep physically fit.

The others, however, argue that it is far from enough to construct the sports facilities. The effect of this measure is limited and thus other measures are needed. By doing sports, one can get fit and keep away from many diseases. But our health could not be guaranteed by the single way. Other factors, such having a healthy diet, having a good schedule of working and relaxing, and having a good mood are equivalently important for the health. The corresponding measures should be considered as well.

As far as I am concerned, although the public health would benefit from the increasing of sports facilities, other measures such as providing more healthy foods and better medical cares are effective as well. Just like different types of foods are necessary for a kid to grow up healthily, different measures are required to improve public health.