Can a country be more interesting and develop quickly when it has a mixture of nationalities?

The influence of diverse population on a country

Topic: A country becomes more interesting and develops more quickly when its population includes a mixture of nationalities. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The rise of technology has brought many chances for people to move to another country. Many people argued that whether nationalities mixture could help a country become more fascinating and boost its development or not. In my opinion, I totally agree with the former.

On the one hand, I suppose that a country will become more engaging if it has a diversity of cultures. People from different countries will have chances to acquire knowledge of other cultures as well as other languages. It is an opportunity to learn about other cultures' advantages and integrate themselves in the diversified customs and traditions. The rise of migration wave also establishes parks, restaurants and entertainment malls with different styles contributing to the prosperity of a country's culture. This trend can be clearly seen at cosmopolitan cities like Los Angeles, Beijing, Tokyo and so on.

On the other hand, a mixed culture contributes considerably to a nation's economy. The business as well as the technology can get benefit from knowledge and strength from others. For example, the technology of USA is considered as one of the best in the world, but this achievement belongs to India and Jewish citizens that relocating in this country. Migration wave also diversifed the labour market, provide inexpensive and efficient source of labour for business which magnifies production and stimulates economic growth. Therefore the cost of production can be reduced and the business can gain more profit.

In conclusion, a diverse nationality has a positive impact on both culture and economy of a country.

(Please help me to check this writing. And I know that the conclusion is too short, can you recommend something to improve it? Thank you so much!)

Your discussion approach cannot be considered effective. That is because this is a single opinion, not a comparison essay. As a single opinion essay, you are to state your opinion in the paraphrase section then, offer 2 supporting reasons and examples in the individual reasoning paragraphs. You are to focus the discussion only on proving that your supported side is the correct side.

The reason why you should focus on only one side to support is simple, you need to score highly in the C&C section to ensure a higher than 5 final score. When you do not use connected discussions to prove your point, your essay becomes tangential in response. The examiner will only score you on the paragraph that relates to the side that you indicated in the prompt paraphrase. So you will not only be lacking in word count, as the alternate side you will be discussing will not be counted as part of the official word count, but your essay will also not be supporting a solid side in the presentation. Both errors will result in severe TA point deductions. So the TA deductions, plus the partial C&C scoring will not be good for your final score.

The conclusion is short because you did not follow the content requirement for that section. You should have:
- Restated the discussion topic, this time based on the discussed information
- Indicated the valid reasons for your discussion in one or two separate sentences
- Repeated your supporting opinion
- Made a closing statement

Based on the above format, you would have had a properly formatted and relevant concluding summary / concluding paraphrase.

Going back to your prompt paraphrase. I found it confusing to read. Why were you referring to information not included in the original prompt? You changed the discussion parameters in the process. You said:

The rise of technology has brought many chances for people to move to another country.

However, there was no mention of this in the original topic statement which was:

A country becomes more interesting and develops more quickly when its population includes a mixture of nationalities.

The aforementioned topic was included in your paraphrase as a second sentence. This should have been the first restated sentence in your presentation. There was no reference to technology so that line of reasoning or discussion should not have been included in your version. The focus of the discussion was on how a country becomes more interesting when its people begin to be composed of mixed nationalities. Nationalities development of the country do not have anything to do with technology, based on the original discussion reference.

Thank you for your comments! I will fix my mistakes!