Writing Feedback / The involvement of well-known people in international aid organisations attracts the attention [5]

Some people believe famous people's support towards international aid organizations draws attention to problems. Others think celebrities make the problems less important. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Many people believe that the involvement of well-known people in international aid organisations attracts the attention of the problem. Meanwhile, others suppose that the participation of famous people downplays the significance of the problem. I would argue that famous people's support provides the numerous and positive changes to the society.

On the one hand, famous people can make the problem less important. One of the reasons is that some people often consider that the main purpose of celebrities' support is a way to enhance their reputations. Therefore, to attract the attention of the community, some famous people attempt to be involved in as many volunteer projects as possible without any particular passion or interest in those. Moreover, every work in the effort of international aid corporations could be trivialised since the concentration of followers can be shifted away from endeavours to the fame and the image of specific characters concerned. This change possibly creates a concerned question to the public about their motivates.

On the other hand, I firmly believe that international aid organisations' activities can be more effortless thanks to the association of celebrities. Firstly, they have a huge number of fans who are inspired by their actions. For instance, Phan Anh, a well-known M.C in Vietnam, encouraged thousands of youngsters joined his project as well as charities in locals by donating money and working as volunteers supporting flood victims in the central part of Vietnam. Secondly, celebrities are usually trusted by the society; that may lead to a rise of the profile of international aid. Hence, it could be easy to organisations appeal more people to donate money, work as a volunteer to help either practically or in fund-raising.

In conclusion, although there are some drawbacks of celebrity cooperation to international aid organisations, it seems to me that it brings more benefits for the community when they take part in voluntary activities.

Dear all, please help me to correct the essay and evaluate band score for it. Thanks in advance!

Writing Feedback / The pie chart depicts the main three reasons which led to the degradation of agriculture in the 90's [6]

Hi all, I have just started writing IELTS task 1, please help me to correct and evaluate band score. Thanks in advance!

The pie chart below shows the main reasons why agricultural land becomes less productive. The table shows how these causes affected three regions of the world during the 1990s.

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The pie chart depicts the main three reasons: overgrazing, over-cultivation, deforestation which led to the degradation of agriculture in the 1990s. The table illustrates three regions, North America, Europe and Oceania suffered land degradation from those reasons. Overall, as we can see that the percentage of over-grazing is the highest, and Europe experienced land degradation most.

Looking at the first chart, 35% of land degradation due to overgrazing; deforestation followed, accounting for 30% of land degraded. Moreover, there was a major percentage of 28% of farmland degradation caused by over-cultivation, while only 7% of other reasons made agriculture becomes less productive.

Turning to the second chart; it is clear that Europe had the highest percentage of land degraded, at 23% in total with 9.8% of land affected due to deforestation, 7.7% due to over-cultivation and 5.5% affected from over-grazing. In contrast, North America suffered the lowest percentage with 5% of land degradation in total, 3.3% of land degraded caused by over-cultivation, while 0.2% and 1.5% of land degradation due to deforestation and over-grazing respectively. Regarding Oceania, there was 13% in total of degrading farmland on this continent, therein 11.3% of land affected from animal grazing compared to 1.7% of land impacted from deforestation.

•