Ielts writing task 2 topic hobbies; Industrial revolution 4.0

Some people prefer to spend their lives doing the same things and avoiding change. Others, however, think that change is always a good thing.

What is your opinion

Choosing to maintain or not is a preference. While some people resist with stability, however, I believe that we should have another point of view in becoming more flexible day by day.

On the one hand, people who greet new things outside are more creative, not only seize the opportunities for themselves but also benefit for communities. It is obvious to see that their interests are not in stereotype, such as paintings or making relationships. To achieve this, they curious about the diversity of the world, which input human being' minds with innovative and contracted ideas. Therefore, in consciousness, equivalent things are attracted to these characteristics from various aspects of life. In the workplace, by their agible in solving customer complaints, the boss would be satisfied and maneuver his or her to play an vital role in the company. As the type of their personality they are, their relationship and success are increased.

In my opinion, it is necessary to recognise the movement in each slice of life. Not only is fogy habit at the expense of a person's lifetime, but also the development of society. Industrial revolution 4.0 nowadays is a good example, where innovation and renewability are welcomed. In order to adapt with the new twenty-first century, having a readiness to horizon knowledge by learning from objects and events of life is compulsory. If not, people who are rigid with this instruction might not have priority in social class, as they are left behind. In consequence, when traditional methods and also the obsolete [mnvc1] professions are replaced by machines, when it comes to recruitment, there is little or no light for them; the recruiter might comment narrow minded in the note.

In conclusion, changing is an brilian option due to the better fate the option arranges.

The opening rephrasement of the original presentation left me highly confused. It is obvious that the writer understood the original presentation but, he has a problem with synonym accuracy and thought presentation in this particular section. The presentation was difficult to decipher / follow as the essence of the original topic was lost in the translation. Perhaps the writing made sense in the native language of the writer, but it really did not translate to English well. I was left with questions like:

Choosing to maintain what?
What does stability have to do with doing the same things and avoiding change?
How is flexibility relevant to this discussion?

These questions will lead the writer to receive a failing preliminary GRA score since the reader was left confused about the paragraph presentation. This is not a good occurence since this means the GRA score will begin with a failing mark.

The LR score of the writer will also get failing marks because he is not using the correct words to represent his thoughts. He also uses archaic English such as fogy, which is not used in everyday modern English. It is almost like he just opened a dictionary, looked up a word meaning and decided to use it, regardless of whether it is used properly in the sentence / paragraph or not. These mistakes affected the coherence of the overall paragraph, leading to another failing score.

Since the writer is not fully defending his opinion over 2 paragraphs, the cohesiveness of the paragraphs are also affected, resulting in non passing marks throughout all the scoring sections. I do not even need to comment on the concluding paragraph to come to the conclusion that the writer has show tremendous effort in the development of this paper, but without proper writing guidance, he produced a failing score essay.

On the one hand, people who greet new things outside are more creative, not only seize the opportunities for themselves but also benefit for communities. : what do you mean with benefit for the communities, just say contribute remarkably to the society or benefit the communities considerably.

they curious about the diversity of the world: where is to be verb ? this is a grammar mistake that affects your band score alot. The task response in body is bad. Since the 1st sentence you said about the personality and benefits of people want to change and the last sentence is about relationship. There is no connection between them. In this case, you failed to achieve the task response point.

More high level words must be used to diversify the vocabs.
The conclusion is so bad as they do not function as it should be, where is the restatement sentence ? and next a prediction and recommendation is advisable.