Written by: IELTS I-Ready, 17/7/2023
Marked by: Examiner
The chart below shows the percentage of government spending on roads and transport in four countries from 1990 to 2005.
The bar graph illustrates the distribution of government spending on roadways and transportation infrastructure in four different nations between 1990 and 2005, at five-yearly intervals. Overall, the spending of America increased over the given period, whereas other countries decreased. Additionally, the highest investment was seen in Portugal except for the third year when Italian authorities spent a larger share.
Portugal and Italy were the major investors in the traffic system. Portugal ranked first at nearly 27% at the start, after which their expenditure fell consistently to precisely 20% by 2005. Similarly, the figure for Italy dropped from approximately 22% in 1990 to 20% in 1995. After reaching a peak of roughly 23% in 2000, it plunged to a low of just under one-fifth by the end.
Concerning the other countries which spent significantly less, the British authorities allotted the lowest rate of 10% in 1990 and later it further decreased minimally by about 1% in the following five years. Despite recovering to a high of around 12% after five years, it declined by about 4% in the end. In contrast, the American government allocated approximately 11% of their state budget in 1990, followed by a slight drop to 10% five years later before increasing moderately by 5% in the final year. (208 words)
Written by: IELTS I-Ready, 177/2023
Marked by: Examiner
(IELTS Academic – 15/7/2023)
Question: In the modern world, schools are no longer necessary because there is so much information available through the internet that children can study just as well at home. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Version 1: Partially agree
In today’s society, it is believed that the abundance of information readily accessible online has rendered formal schooling redundant. Although online platforms can customise users’ learning experiences, I mostly disagree with this notion because schools can develop students’ social skills and offer many pedagogical amenities that online learning does not possess.
The first argument for my opposition is that schools can help shape children’s personal development. When attending a physical class, students may have valuable chances to interact with their teachers or befriend various people who share the same hobbies. All these activities can instil a sense of community, boosting their confidence as they transition into adulthood and reducing the risk of social isolation.
To add further credence to my belief is that educational institutions accommodate a wide array of resources which the internet is devoid of. These resources include spacious sports halls to play various sports, well-equipped laboratories with specialised equipment to conduct complex experiments or dedicated music rooms with numerous musical instruments to nurture student’s inborn musical talent. For example, corrosive chemicals are potentially hazardous to manipulate without the supervision of qualified teaching personnel.
However, my concession is that the wealth of learning materials from the internet can personalise learners’ academic endeavours. In fact, universal education is often fragmented and unfocused in which one student has to study many subjects which are even against their taste. In contrast, students can utilise the diversity of courses present online to tailor their curriculum to save time and develop their forte.
In conclusion, I somewhat contend that traditional classrooms still hold immense value even in this digital era as they provide diverse social environments for interaction and house particular educational facilities so they should not be a surplus. Nonetheless, I acknowledge that the customised features of internet-based learning can cater learners’ needs for a more targeted program. (309 words)
Version 2: Fully disagree
In the digital age, it is believed the revolution of the internet which provides a wealth of knowledge could substitute the traditional schooling system. I fully disagree with this opinion as schools foster learners’ social development and provide a wide range of necessary facilities for different activities that online learning may lack.
The first argument for my opposition is that schools can help develop children’s social skills. When attending a physical class, students may have valuable chances to communicate with their teachers or befriend various people who share the same hobbies. All these activities can make them more confident and lower the risk of being antisocial as they grow up. For example, students who display a preference for acting can join a drama club to socialise with other members and partake in their favourite plays which is impossible when they study online.
To add further credence to my belief is that educational institutions accommodate a wide array of resources which the internet may be devoid of. Places such as or modern experiment rooms, which can provide students an academic learning environment to translate their learnt theories into practical scenarios, are expensive to be constructed at home. For example, a specialised chemistry laboratory equipped with safety measures and protective gear enables students to work with corrosive chemicals or conduct reactions under strictly–controlled conditions.
In conclusion, I utterly oppose that the increasing popularity of internet-based learning can trivialise the importance of formal schooling. This is because schools can enable students to interact in different social settings and offer specialised resources for academic progress. Therefore, learners should only leverage the internet as a subsidiary learning platform since they lack functions of a conventional productive classroom. (285 words)
|Tham gia vào
|Kiểm soát chặt chẽ