You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Present a written argument or case to an educated reader with no specialist knowledge of the following topic:

In some countries, marriages are arranged by the parents but in other cases, people choose their own marriage partner.
Discuss both systems.

You should write at least 250 words.

Use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and with relevant evidence.

model answer:

The idea that a marriage should be arranged by the parents of the couple, or by other members-of the family, is quite acceptable to some societies, yet completely out of the question for others. It all depends on your cultural expectations.

In so-called western societies, it is very unusual for marriages to be arranged. Most young people would not welcome the idea that their parents have the right to choose their partner for life. They feel that arranged marriages deny them their fundamental right to choose, even if they make a bad decision.

However, if we are honest about it, we might acknowledge that some parents organise their children's lives in such a way that they are likely to meet and marry partners the parents approve o£ It could be said that this is, to some extent, similar to an arranged marriage. It is always better when families support the relationship and welcome the grandchildren.

People for whom arranged marriages are the cultural norm often argue that the likelihood of the marriage lasting is greater when it is set up in this manner. Parents can be assured that their children are joining a family of similar standing and cultural background, and this, in the long run, makes for a more stable society if your parents' marriage was arranged, and has worked well, then why should you question the custom?

The important thing to ensure is that people are never forced into a marriage which will make them unhappy or lead to an unequal relationship where one partner is exploited by the other. This applies in all societies and situations.

(269 words)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Present a written argument or case to an educated reader with no specialist knowledge of the following topic:

People who have original ideas are of much greater value to society than those who are simply able to copy the ideas of others well.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

You should write at least 250 words.

Use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and with relevant evidence.

model answer:

I certainly agree that people who come up with new ideas; in other words those who 'invent' or 'discover' things are terribly important to society as a whole. However, I also think there is a role in society for good imitators.

No one would deny that key individuals must be thanked for providing us with certain facilities that we use every day. Where, would we be, for example, without basic items such as the washing machine, the television and, more recently, the computer? These items are now used so regularly that we tend to take them for granted.

In fact, the society we live in today has become increasingly consumer-oriented, and while it may be possible to constantly update and improve consumer goods, not everyone where I live can afford the prices of these innovations. Furthermore not everyone lives in an area that has accessibility to the latest models on the market. For this reason, there is a value to be placed on being able to provide good copies of expensive items.

Having said that, certain innovations have a more serious impact on our lives than consumer goods and cannot easily be replicated. Vital medicines like penicillin and vaccines against dangerous diseases also exist because people made continual efforts to develop them. Scientific ideas such as these enable us to live longer and escape illness.

(225 words)

-----------------------------------------------------------

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of having a car.

You should write at least 250 words.

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

model answer:

Nowadays, as roads are becoming more and more crowded, people are considering both the advantages and disadvantages of having a car before they buy one.

The main advantage of the car is that it gives the freedom to travel when and where you want, without being limited to fixed routes and timetables. What is more, you can carry several passengers and as much luggage as you like, at no extra cost. In addition to this, you can travel in comfort in a car, with a seat to yourself and the possibility of comforts such as a music system and air conditioning.

On the other hand, owning a car is very expensive. As well as the price of the car, the cost of tax, insurance, petrol and repairs must also be considered before buying. Moreover, the increase in traffic means that drivers are spending more and more time stuck in traffic jams. Perhaps the major disadvantage of cars in general is the huge damage that they do to human life and to the environment, and all motorists much accept that they are making a small contribution to this.

To sum up, provided you have access to an efficient public transport system, then buying and running your own car could be considered an expensive luxury.

(213 words)

----------------------------------------------------------------

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Scientists and the news media are presenting ever more evidence of climate change. Governmnets cannot be expected to solve this problem. It is the responsibility of individuals to change their lifestyle to prevent further damage.

What are your views?

You should write at least 250 words.

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

model answer:

Recently scientists worried about climate change have urged governments to introduce measures to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that are seen as its main cause. Simoultaneouslty, politicians and environmentalists have urged individuals to make changes to their lifestyle. I shall argue that governments and individuals should take join responsibility for this problem.

Firstly, industry accounts for a large proportion of the greenhouse gas emissions, and this can only be controlled by government action. Measures could be taken to discourage pollution, such as limiting or taxing the use of fossil fuels. Alternatively, subsidies could be offered to industries to clean up their production processes. If these ideas were adopted, I believe that businesses would regard pollution as a financial issue.

Secondly, only discussion between governments can ensure that solutions are successful. The Kyoto agreement, for example, tried to reach global agreement on how to address the problem. Without such co-operating, it seems to me that efforts to reduce fuel consumption are unlikely to be effective.

However, national and international policies will only secceed if individuals also change their lifestyle. For example, people could think more carefully about how they use energy in their homes. By using less electricity, installing energy-efficient light bulbs and electrical appliances, or investing in solar panels, individuals can make a real difference.

In addition, I think individual attitudes to transport need to change. Instead of making short tips by car, people could choose to walk, cycle, or take a bus. Since cars are a major source of the problem, changing our behaviour in this area would have a major impact.

In conclusion, I would maintain that only a combination of international agreement, national policies, and changes in individual behaviour will succeed in preventing further damage to the environment.

(291 words)

----------------------------------------------------------------

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Children should never be educated at home by their parents. Do you agree or disagree?

Discuss the advantages and disadvantages for young people who decide to do this.

You should write at least 250 words.

model answer:

Nobody can say with confidence that children should be taught at home or at any children's institutions. There are many different children and every one demand of education suitable only for him.

But for most of children the best way of learning the life is being in the children's institutions. Nobody would argue that contacts between children of the same age are very important for bringing your child up. Such a contact is very important for playing, entertaining and learning living with other people. The harmonious living with other people, to my mind, is the first task for any man. Lack of this harmony sets problems and troubles.

The children need space to run and make noise, to jump and cry. Do you or your neighbours allow these actions for your child? If you live in town, it is difficult to find a safe place to play. Kindergartens give such a possibility. They give space, a lot of toys and constructions for physical exercises. So, if you have bad living conditions, the kindergarten is the best way for you. But if you have a large family with many children and enough space, you may keep your child at home. You should be sure that the child feels, dressed and comfortable. His brothers and sisters give him necessary contacts. It's noticed long ago that children in big families are much more easy-tempered and calm. They are located in more harmonic world than others.

Sometimes differences in age put troubles in contacts between children in large families. Then it is better for child to be sent to the kindergarten (school). But if quarrels don't last for a long time, everything is all right. In general, quarrels develop ability to cooperate with people. They develop a personal initiative and force setting the balance. In such a way the child gets lessons of life. Addly, the quarrels often take place in kindergartens and schools and we shouldn't fear it.

Side by side with quarrels parents often are afraid of colds which happen in kindergartens more frequently. Parents prefer keeping the child at home. But for a healthy child odd cold (if illness occurs, it goes its normal course) can't make big harm to the child. And if the child is adaptable to the conditions of public places earlier it would be better for him in future.

In general, I am a follower of the theory of keeping children in adapted places such as good kindergartens. But keeping children in such a place can't replace family and home. Only together they make harmonic and beautiful union.

(431 words)

----------------------------------------------------------------

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Research indicates that the characteristics we are born with have much more influence on our personality and development than any experiences we may have in our life.
Which do you consider to be the major influence?

You should write at least 250 words.

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

model answer:

Today the way we consider human psychology and mental development is heavily influenced by the genetic sciences. We now understand the importance of inherited characteristics more than over before. Yet we are still unable to decide whether an individual’s personality and development are more influenced by genetic factors (nature) or by the environment (nurture).

Research, relating to identical twins, has highlighted how significant inherited characteristics can be for an individual's life. But whether these characteristics are able to develop within the personality of an individual surely depends on whether the circumstances allow such a development. It seems that the experiences we have in life are so unpredictable and so powerful, that they can boost or over-ride other influences, and there seems to be plenty of research findings to confirm this.

My own view is that there is no one major influence in a person's life. Instead, the traits we inherit from our parents and the situation and experiences that we encounter in life are constantly interacting. It is the interaction of the two that shapes a person's personality and dictates how that personality develops. If this were not true, we would be able to predict the behavior and character of a person from the moment they were born.

In conclusion, I do not think that either nature or nurture is the major influence on a person, but that both have powerful effects. How these factors interact is still unknown today and they remain largely unpredictable in a person’s life.

(249 words)