IELTS task 2: STUDYING OVERSEAS OR STAYING HOME

Topic: The idea of going overseas for university study is an exciting prospect for many people. But while it may offer some advantages, it is probably better to stay at home because of the difficulties a student inevitably encounters living and studying in a different culture. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Nowadays, education is commonly taken as vital precedence of those who want to acquire basic background knowledge to have a bright career prospect in forward future. To pursue higher education, many people claim that studying overseas would be a practical option, whilst the concerns about experiencing difficulties in an unfamiliar culture may hinder students from taking such valuable chances. In my perspective, they should utilize this method despite the encountered obstacles rather than procrastinating their studies' progress.

To begin with, the issue involved when being in a foreign country is mainly about a widespread phenomenon called culture shock. In details, it is considered as the personal disorientation when students moving to a new country encounter a foreign way of life. Despite the fact that culture shock's impacts, such as language barrier, information overload or infinite regress, on individuals are inevitable, it is only a short-term issue basically dealt by the students' positive response rather than hostile preliminary attitudes. Yet, as students in any society are personally affected by cultural contrasts differently, hardly are there any solutions to entirely prevent culture shock.

In addition, the advances in educational infrastructure of most foreign schools would be a tangible motivation for people to study abroad. Once affording this unrivalled opportunity, students' knowledge acquisition would be highly encouraged due to rich facilities, high-quality curricular materials, qualified lecturers which are mainly subsidized by the governments. Drawing from Canadian methodology about investing in education, it has spent an immense fund only on this major to improve the quality of curricular system.

To conclude, as the anxiety about going overseas for further education is apparently understandable. However, the promising benefits through such valuable opportunity are worth being derived.

hope will get your supports and comments :)

I think education has always been important, not only "nowadays".


Pursuing higher education is not a "method". You could use "study overseas" instead.


This part is not necessary and "procastinating their studies' progress" sounds unnatural. Actually, if students decided not to study overseas, they could pursue higher education in domestic university instead.


Most students experience culture shock when moving to a foreign country.


Despite the impacts of culture shock



I don't think this sentence adds much value to your paragraph. Instead, you should conclude why students should study overseas in spite of culture shock.


What do you mean by this?


I feel that this is irrelevant to the topic.


This sentence is incomplete.

"precedence" means the condition of being considered more important than someone or something else. So you always need to have two things to compare if you use this word. So you need to tell us education is taken precedence over what!


.... don't cramp up your sentences with too many unnecessary words that tend to disturb your main idea. Give priority for clarity and it helps the reader to grasp your ideas with ease.

To begin with, the first issue arises when being in a foreign country is the culture shock.


.... Let's take the first part of the sentence. It should have gone to the introduction because it is the background of this argument.So there is no need in repeating that idea in a body paragraph which is there for you to give reasons to justify your position in the argument. Then the second part really does not tell the reader anything new as you have talked about the same in the previous sentence.

Your introduction follows the desired structure. However, you need to improve the presentation of your ideas. Your sentences seem to be unnecessarily crowded with too many words. I found Pahan too has commented on this point. That is very true and what is more important is the clarity. Let's take this line for example;


This is actually a very simple idea, but you take the reader through a riddle to understand it. Having too many synonyms or advance vocabulary is not what makes your writing interesting. It is how interestingly you present your idea. When the reader has to spend time in understanding what you have written he would be bored and lose his interest in following your writing.

Thank you for your supports. They would help me a lot in further essays :)

some people claim that ... whilst others concern that ...


they should take the former approach