40 IELTS Writing Task 2 Practice Questions with Sample Answers

In this article, we will look at 40 practice IELTS Writing Task 2 essay prompts with full sample answers. Writing Task 2 asks you to write an essay of at least 250 words arguing your position on a topic of social, environmental, or educational interest. Each sample answer is written at a Band 7 level, the most common target for university and immigration applicants.

Question 1

Prompt: Some people think that having a single global language would significantly improve international communication and reduce misunderstandings. Others, however, believe that this would inevitably lead to the loss of cultural identity and diversity. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Example Answer:

Whether the world should adopt one shared language is a topic that divides people. Some believe a common language would help countries communicate more easily, while others worry that smaller languages and cultures could disappear. In my opinion, both views are partly true, but local languages can still survive if governments support them.

On the one hand, having a single global language would clearly make international communication much simpler. In business, science, and travel, people from different countries already need to share ideas every day, and using translators can be slow or inaccurate. English is a good example of this. Most international companies use English in meetings and emails, and many universities now teach courses in English even when it is not the country's main language. This means scientists and businesspeople from different parts of the world can work together without spending years learning each other's languages, which saves time and reduces misunderstandings.

On the other hand, I understand why some people worry about losing cultural diversity. A language is more than just words; it carries history, traditions, and ways of thinking that cannot always be translated. When young people stop using their native language at school or at work, older songs, stories, and ideas can slowly disappear. For example, many indigenous languages in Australia and Canada have become very rare because English replaced them in daily life. If this trend continues, future generations may grow up speaking only major languages, and important cultural knowledge could be lost.

In conclusion, a global language would help countries cooperate, but it could also push smaller languages out of use. The best solution is for governments and schools to support local languages while teaching English, so both communication and cultural identity are protected.

Question 2

Prompt: In recent years, cheap air travel has become increasingly common in many parts of the world. Do the advantages of this trend outweigh the disadvantages?

Example Answer:

Over the past few decades, flying has become much cheaper, and many people now travel by plane regularly. Some believe this trend has more benefits than problems, while others disagree. In my opinion, the advantages of cheap air travel slightly outweigh the disadvantages, though the environmental costs are serious.

On the positive side, low-cost flights have made travel possible for ordinary people who could never afford it before. In the past, only wealthy families could visit other countries, but today even university students can fly abroad during their holidays. This helps people learn about different cultures, try new food, and meet people from different backgrounds. Cheap flights also support local economies because tourists spend money on hotels, restaurants, and shops. For example, many small towns in Europe and Southeast Asia depend on visitors who arrive on budget airlines, and without these tourists many businesses would close. Families who live far apart can also see each other more often, which is important for personal relationships.

On the other hand, frequent flying causes real problems for the environment. Planes burn a lot of fuel and produce gases that contribute to climate change, so when more people fly, the damage gets worse. Popular cities also suffer from too many tourists; the streets become crowded, prices rise for local residents, and historic places are slowly damaged by daily crowds. In addition, cheap tickets sometimes encourage people to take short trips that they do not really need, which feels wasteful when we know how much pollution each flight creates.

In conclusion, cheap air travel brings clear benefits to ordinary travellers and local economies, but the environmental and social costs cannot be ignored. Overall, the advantages are slightly greater, especially if we fly more carefully.

Question 3

Prompt: Some people believe that healthcare should be free for everyone, regardless of their income. Others think that citizens should pay for their own medical care. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Example Answer:

Healthcare is an important issue in every country, and people often disagree about who should pay for it. Some believe medical treatment should be free for everyone, while others think individuals should cover their own costs. In my opinion, basic healthcare should be free, but private options should also exist for those who want them.

Those who support free healthcare argue that good health is a basic human need, not a luxury. When poor families cannot afford a doctor, small problems often become serious illnesses, and this is unfair in a modern society. If the government pays for hospitals and clinics through taxes, every citizen can get help when needed, regardless of income. For example, in many European countries, people can visit a doctor without worrying about huge bills, and this means workers stay healthier and children grow up properly. A healthy population is also good for the economy because people can study and work without long periods of illness, which helps the country develop in the long term.

On the other hand, some people argue that paying for your own medical care is fairer because it does not raise taxes for everyone. They also believe that when patients pay directly, hospitals work harder to give good service and reduce waiting times. In countries where healthcare is completely free, public hospitals are sometimes crowded, and patients may wait many months for an operation. Private clinics can offer faster treatment and more comfortable rooms for those who can afford it.

In conclusion, while private healthcare has some advantages, I strongly believe that basic medical care should be free for everyone. A mixed system, where the state covers essential treatment and private clinics offer extra services, seems the best balance.

Question 4

Prompt: Some people think that old historic buildings in cities should be preserved, while others believe they should be demolished to make way for new housing and modern infrastructure. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Example Answer:

As cities grow, governments face a difficult choice between protecting old buildings and building new homes. Some people argue that historic buildings should always be preserved, while others believe they should be replaced with modern housing and roads. In my opinion, both sides have a point, but most historic buildings should be kept whenever possible.

Those who support preservation believe that old buildings are an important part of a city's identity and history. When tourists visit a city, they usually want to see traditional churches, old markets, and historic streets, not just tall office towers that look the same everywhere. These buildings also remind local people of their past and help younger generations understand how their grandparents lived. For example, many cities in Italy and Japan attract millions of visitors every year because they have carefully protected their old centres, and this brings a lot of money to local businesses such as small hotels, restaurants, and craft shops. Once a historic building is destroyed, it cannot be brought back, so the loss is permanent.

On the other hand, I understand why some people support new construction. In many large cities, housing is very expensive and young families cannot find a place to live, so building new apartments is necessary. Modern infrastructure such as wider roads can reduce traffic and make daily life easier. If a city refuses to change anything, it may struggle to grow and offer enough jobs and homes for its population. Some old buildings are also unsafe and very expensive to repair.

In conclusion, both preserving the past and building for the future matter. The best approach is to protect important historic areas while allowing new development in less significant parts of the city.

Question 5

Prompt: Some people believe that modern agricultural methods have caused serious damage to the environment and that we should return to more traditional farming practices. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view?

Example Answer:

Modern farming has changed enormously, with machines, chemicals, and large fields replacing small family farms. Some people believe these methods have harmed nature so badly that we should go back to traditional ways of growing food. In my opinion, I partly agree, but a complete return to old methods would not be realistic.

There is no doubt that modern agriculture has caused serious environmental problems. Farmers often use strong chemicals to kill insects and weeds, and these substances can pollute rivers and harm wild animals such as bees and birds. Cutting down forests to create huge fields also reduces natural habitats, and keeping thousands of animals in small spaces produces waste and gases that affect the climate. For example, in parts of South America, large areas of forest have been removed for cattle farming, and many species are now in danger. Traditional methods, such as rotating crops and using natural fertilizer, are usually gentler on the land and can keep the soil healthy for many years.

However, I do not agree that we should completely abandon modern farming. The world's population has grown to billions of people, and traditional methods alone could not produce enough food to feed everyone. If farmers used only old techniques, prices would rise sharply and poor families in many countries would struggle to buy basic items such as rice and bread. The realistic answer is to combine the best of both approaches; farmers can use modern technology to plan their work carefully while reducing chemicals and protecting the soil.

In conclusion, while modern agriculture has clearly damaged the environment, returning fully to traditional practices is not possible. A balanced system that learns from older methods is the most sensible way forward.

Question 6

Prompt: Some people believe that the increasing use of digital devices during leisure time has created a barrier to face-to-face socialising. Others argue that it has actually enhanced our ability to connect with friends and family. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Example Answer:

Smartphones and computers now fill our free time, and people often argue about how this affects relationships. Some believe digital devices have damaged face-to-face contact, while others think they actually help us stay close to family and friends. In my view, both opinions have some truth, but the negative effects are stronger today.

On the one hand, those who worry about digital devices have good reasons. When friends meet in a cafe, it is now common to see everyone looking at their phones instead of talking to each other. Children also spend hours playing online games alone instead of going outside with neighbours. Over time, this can make people less confident in real conversations because they get used to typing. For example, many teachers say that students today find it harder to give a presentation or take part in a group discussion. If young people grow up mainly chatting through screens, they may struggle with social skills that they will need at work and in family life.

On the other hand, I can see why some people argue that digital devices help us connect. Video calls allow grandparents to see their grandchildren even when they live in different countries, and group chats help busy friends share news every day. During the pandemic, many people relied on video apps to stay close to relatives they could not visit, and this clearly reduced loneliness. For people with shy personalities, online tools can also be an easier way to start a friendship before meeting in person.

In conclusion, while digital devices offer real benefits for long-distance contact, I believe they often replace deeper face-to-face relationships. The best approach is to use technology carefully and still spend regular time with people in person.

Question 7

Prompt: In many countries, government funding is heavily directed towards university education. However, some argue that more resources should be allocated to vocational training and practical trades to meet the demands of modern society. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Example Answer:

In many countries, governments spend a lot on universities, while practical job training receives less attention. Some people believe more resources should go to vocational schools instead. In my opinion, both types of education are important, but governments should give more support to practical training than they do today.

Those who support strong university funding argue that higher education is essential for a modern country. Universities train doctors, engineers, scientists, and teachers, and these professionals are needed to keep hospitals, schools, and companies running. Research at universities also leads to new technology and medicine that benefits the whole society. For example, many useful inventions, from new medicines to clean energy systems, started in university laboratories. If governments stop investing in higher education, the quality of these professions will fall, and the country may lose talented young people to richer nations that offer better study opportunities.

On the other hand, I think the supporters of vocational training are largely correct. Many countries today have a shortage of plumbers, electricians, mechanics, and skilled construction workers, and these jobs cannot be done by university graduates with degrees in business or literature. Practical training is usually shorter and cheaper, and it leads directly to employment, which is helpful for students from poorer families. For instance, in Germany and Switzerland, young people can join good apprenticeship programmes after school, and many of them find stable, well-paid jobs without going to university. If governments invested more in technical schools, they could reduce youth unemployment and meet the real needs of local industries.

In conclusion, while universities still deserve support, governments should put more money into vocational training. A balanced education system that values both academic study and practical skills will serve modern society best.

Question 8

Prompt: Some people believe that having a hobby that is completely different from one's daily work is the best way to relax, while others think that hobbies should be related to one's profession to help improve their skills. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Example Answer:

People often disagree about what hobby is best after a long day at work. Some prefer activities that are completely different from their job, while others choose hobbies that develop their professional skills. In my view, hobbies that are unrelated to work usually offer better relaxation, although work-related hobbies can also be valuable.

Those who prefer different hobbies argue that switching activities helps the mind rest properly. If a person sits at a computer all day, more screen-based tasks at home will not feel like a break, and stress can build up. Choosing something physical or creative instead, such as cooking, gardening, or playing football, gives both the body and the brain a real change. For example, many office workers say they feel much fresher on Monday morning if they spent the weekend hiking or painting rather than checking emails. A clear separation between work and free time also protects mental health and family relationships, because people are more present at home.

On the other hand, I can understand why some people choose hobbies linked to their profession. A teacher who reads about new teaching methods in her free time may become more confident in the classroom, and a young programmer who builds small apps at home may learn skills that lead to a better job. These hobbies turn free time into useful preparation for the future, especially in fast-changing industries. For people who genuinely love their field, working on personal projects does not feel tiring; it actually feels enjoyable.

In conclusion, both types of hobbies have their advantages. However, I believe that, for most workers, hobbies that are different from daily work bring deeper rest and a healthier balance between professional and personal life.

Question 9

Prompt: In many urban areas, there is a rise in vandalism committed by teenagers. Some people argue that the most effective deterrent is to hold parents financially accountable for the property damage caused by their offspring. To what extent do you support this proposal?

Example Answer:

In many cities, vandalism by young people has become a serious problem, and governments are seeking ways to stop it. Some people suggest that parents should pay for the damage their children cause. In my opinion, I partly support this proposal, but it cannot be the only solution and must be applied carefully.

There are good reasons to hold parents responsible for their children's actions. Parents play the biggest role in teaching children right and wrong, so when a teenager destroys public property, the family has some responsibility. If parents know they will have to pay a large bill, they may pay closer attention to where their children go and who their friends are. This can be especially helpful for younger teenagers, who often follow the example of older friends. For example, when local councils start sending repair bills to families, parents usually become much stricter about evening curfews. In this way, the rule encourages families to take their parenting role more seriously, which benefits the whole community.

However, I have several concerns about using this idea alone. Many parents work long hours in two jobs and cannot watch their children every minute, so punishing them financially may feel unfair. Poor families would also suffer much more than rich families from the same fine, which could push them into deeper trouble. Vandalism often has wider causes, such as boredom, lack of youth centres, or difficult home situations, and these will not disappear just because parents receive a bill. Without other measures, the rule may simply hide the real issue.

In conclusion, holding parents partly responsible can be useful, but it should be combined with better youth programmes and education. Punishment alone cannot solve teenage vandalism in modern cities.

Question 10

Prompt: Some people think that in order to truly understand a different culture, one must first learn its language. Others believe it is entirely possible to understand a culture without learning the local language. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Example Answer:

When people travel or move abroad, they often wonder how deeply they can understand a foreign culture. Some believe that learning the local language is necessary for true understanding, while others think it is possible without it. In my opinion, language is extremely important, but a basic understanding of culture is still possible without speaking it.

Those who say language is essential have strong arguments. A language is full of jokes, polite expressions, and phrases that show how local people think and feel. When someone speaks only through a translator or in English, much of this meaning is lost, and conversations stay on the surface. For example, a foreigner who learns Japanese soon notices that there are several ways to say "thank you" depending on the situation, which teaches them about respect and social roles. Without the language, a visitor can see temples and try food, but they cannot really understand what their neighbours believe or worry about. To form deep friendships and follow local news, the language is almost always necessary.

On the other hand, I can understand why some people believe culture can be understood without language. Many travellers learn a lot by watching daily life, joining festivals, and trying traditional cooking, even when they do not speak a single word. Books, films, and documentaries with subtitles also explain history and customs clearly, and global cities now offer guided tours in English. For short trips or general knowledge, this kind of cultural learning is often enough.

In conclusion, while it is possible to gain a basic understanding of a culture without learning its language, deep understanding really requires the words people use every day. Language is the key that opens the most personal parts of any culture.

Question 11

Prompt: In many countries, an increasing number of people are choosing to shop online rather than in local stores. Do the advantages of this trend outweigh the disadvantages?

Example Answer:

Online shopping has grown quickly, and many people now buy clothes, food, and electronics from their phones instead of visiting local shops. Some worry about the effects of this change, while others welcome it. In my opinion, the advantages of online shopping clearly outweigh the disadvantages, although the problems should not be ignored.

On the positive side, shopping online is much more convenient for ordinary customers. People can compare prices from many shops in minutes, read reviews from other buyers, and order products at any time, even after work. This is especially useful for parents with young children, elderly people, and those in small towns where the choice of stores is limited. For example, someone in a rural village can now order books, medicine, or kitchen tools that no local shop offers, and the package usually arrives within days. Online shops also often have lower prices because they do not pay for expensive city locations, which helps families on a tight budget save money each month.

On the other hand, this trend brings real problems for traditional shops and city centres. When more people buy online, small local stores lose customers and many are forced to close, which leads to empty streets and fewer jobs in the community. Delivery vans also add to traffic and pollution in cities, and packaging from online orders produces a lot of plastic waste. In addition, some buyers receive products that do not match the photos, and returning items can be frustrating.

In conclusion, online shopping creates clear difficulties for local businesses and the environment, but the convenience, choice, and lower prices it offers are very valuable. Overall, I believe the advantages of this trend are greater than the disadvantages.

Question 12

Prompt: Some people believe that hosting major international sporting events brings significant economic and social benefits to a country, while others argue that it is a costly endeavor that creates more problems than it solves. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Example Answer:

Hosting big international sporting events such as the Olympics or the World Cup is something many countries dream of. Some people think these events bring real benefits to the country, while others believe the costs are too high. In my opinion, the benefits can be real, but only when the country plans carefully.

On the one hand, hosting a large sporting event can help a country in several ways. It often brings many tourists, who spend money on hotels, restaurants, and local services, and this money supports many small businesses. The government also has a reason to build new roads, stadiums, and public transport, which local people can use long after the event ends. For example, when South Korea and Japan hosted the World Cup, many cities improved their stadiums and train systems. There is also a social benefit, because people feel proud of their country and become more interested in sport and exercise.

On the other hand, I understand why some people are worried about the costs. Building new stadiums and hotels is extremely expensive, and these projects often go over budget, which means the government has less money for schools or hospitals. After the event, some stadiums are rarely used and become a waste of public money. In Brazil, for instance, several venues built for the World Cup were almost empty a few years later. Poorer families can also suffer if their neighborhoods are removed to make space for new buildings.

In conclusion, hosting a major sporting event can bring economic and social benefits, but only if the planning is realistic. Without careful budgets and long-term plans, the costs can easily become greater than the rewards.

Question 13

Prompt: Some people believe that environmental problems are too big for individuals to solve, and that only governments and large companies can make a real difference. Others argue that individual actions are essential for protecting the environment. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Example Answer:

Environmental problems such as pollution and climate change are some of the biggest challenges of our time. Some people argue that only governments and large companies can really solve them, while others believe that individuals must also play a part. In my view, both sides are needed, but individual actions still matter more than people often think.

On the one hand, it is true that governments and big companies have the most power to make real change. They control factories, energy production, and transport systems, which are the main sources of pollution. A single person cannot decide how electricity is produced or how trucks move goods across the country. Only governments can pass strong laws, for example, by limiting carbon emissions or requiring companies to recycle their waste. Large companies can also invest huge amounts of money in cleaner technology, such as electric trucks or recycling plants, in a way that ordinary people cannot. Without action at this level, small individual efforts may not be enough.

On the other hand, I believe individual actions are still very important. Governments often listen to what voters care about, so when many people demand cleaner air or less plastic, leaders are more likely to act. Daily choices also add up: when millions of people use public transport, eat less meat, or stop buying single-use plastic, the total impact is huge. For example, in many European cities, people now sort their rubbish carefully at home, which has made recycling much more effective. Children also learn from their parents, so good habits pass to the next generation.

In conclusion, while governments and large companies have the strongest tools to protect the environment, individual actions support and push these efforts. Real progress needs both working together.

Question 14

Prompt: Some people think that parents should teach children how to be good members of society. Others, however, believe that school is the best place to learn this. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Example Answer:

Teaching children to behave well and respect others is part of growing up. Some people think parents should be responsible for this, while others believe that schools are the best place to learn it. In my opinion, both parents and schools must share this responsibility, although the family has the stronger influence.

On the one hand, there are good reasons to say that parents should teach children how to be good members of society. Children spend their earliest years at home, long before they go to school, so the family is where they learn their first values, such as honesty and kindness. Parents also act as daily examples, because children watch how they speak to neighbours, treat older relatives, and react when angry. If a child sees a parent helping someone in need, they often copy this behaviour later in life. In addition, parents know their own child best and can correct bad habits in a way that a busy teacher with thirty students cannot.

On the other hand, schools also play an important role in shaping good citizens. At school, children meet classmates from different backgrounds and have to learn how to share, follow rules, and work in a team. Teachers can introduce topics such as honesty, the environment, and respecting different cultures through lessons and group activities. For example, many schools now organise volunteer projects where students help in the community, and this teaches responsibility in a practical way. School also prepares children for life in society outside the home.

In conclusion, both parents and schools are important in teaching children how to behave well, but the family lays the foundation. Schools can build on this work, yet they cannot fully replace what happens at home.

Question 15

Prompt: Some people believe that secondary school students should be taught practical skills like managing money and cooking, while others argue that they should focus purely on traditional academic subjects. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Example Answer:

There is debate about what secondary schools should teach. Some people believe students should learn practical skills such as managing money and cooking, while others argue that traditional academic subjects should remain the main focus. In my opinion, schools should teach both, because young people need balanced preparation for adult life.

On the one hand, practical skills are extremely useful in everyday life. Many young people leave school knowing how to solve complex equations but having no idea how to plan a budget, use a credit card, or cook a simple meal. This often causes problems later, because they may waste money, get into debt, or rely too much on fast food. If schools taught basic money management, students would understand how interest works and how to save for the future. Cooking lessons would also support better health, since diet-related diseases such as obesity are now common in many countries. These are not luxury topics; they affect daily life for almost everyone.

On the other hand, I understand why many people defend traditional academic subjects. Mathematics, science, history, and languages train students to think clearly, solve problems, and understand the world. They are also necessary for university and many good jobs, such as engineering, medicine, or teaching. If schools spend too much time on cooking or budgeting, students may fall behind in subjects that future employers really value. Academic learning also gives young people a wider view of culture and history, which helps them become more thoughtful adults.

In conclusion, both practical skills and academic subjects are important for teenagers. Schools should not have to choose between them; instead, they can include short, regular lessons on life skills while keeping academic subjects at the centre of the timetable.

Question 16

Prompt: As cities become increasingly crowded, there is a debate over how to use available land in urban centers. Some people argue that creating public parks and green spaces is the best use of this land, while others believe it should be used for commercial development to boost the local economy. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Example Answer:

As cities grow more crowded, there is debate about how empty land in city centres should be used. Some people believe parks and green spaces are the best choice, while others argue that shops and offices would help the local economy more. In my view, parks should usually be the priority, although some commercial development is also needed.

On the one hand, supporters of commercial development make some strong points. New shops, offices, and hotels create jobs and bring tax money to the city, which can fund schools, hospitals, and other public services. They also attract tourists and shoppers, who spend money in nearby restaurants and small businesses. In a competitive economy, cities that do not develop may fall behind others. For example, areas that used to be old factories in many European cities have been rebuilt as modern business districts, and this has helped the local economy grow. Without some commercial growth, a city may become less attractive to young workers.

On the other hand, I believe public parks and green spaces are usually a better long-term choice. Modern city life is stressful, and many people work long hours in small apartments without gardens. Parks give them a free place to walk, exercise, and relax with family, which is important for physical and mental health. Green spaces also reduce air pollution, lower the temperature in summer, and support birds and insects. For instance, large central parks in cities such as London and New York are still loved by millions of people more than a hundred years after they were built.

In conclusion, while commercial development brings short-term economic benefits, parks improve daily life for everyone. A balanced city plan should protect green spaces first.

Question 17

Prompt: Many countries nowadays rely heavily on importing food from other nations rather than producing their own locally. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this trend?

Example Answer:

In recent decades, many countries have started to import most of their food rather than growing it at home. This trend has clear advantages, but it also brings serious disadvantages that should not be ignored. In my view, the negative effects can become very strong if a country relies too heavily on foreign food.

On the positive side, importing food gives people much more variety and often lower prices. Customers can buy fruit, vegetables, and other products from all over the world, even in winter when local farms cannot grow them. For example, people in cold countries in northern Europe can easily buy bananas, mangoes, and tomatoes throughout the year. Imports also help when the local harvest is bad because of weather or disease, since the country can still feed its population. In addition, trade in food creates jobs in shipping, ports, and supermarkets, and it helps farmers in poorer countries to sell their products and earn more money.

However, there are several disadvantages too. First, depending on imports makes a country weaker during a war, a pandemic, or a sudden rise in shipping costs. During recent global problems, some supermarkets had empty shelves because food could not arrive. Second, transporting food across long distances uses a lot of fuel and creates pollution, which harms the environment. Third, when people stop buying local products, small farms often close, and traditional farming knowledge can slowly disappear. Over time, the country may lose the skill and land needed to feed itself again.

In conclusion, importing food brings variety, lower prices, and trade benefits, but it also creates serious risks for food security and the environment. The best approach is a careful balance between imports and strong local farming.

Question 18

Prompt: In recent years, it has become increasingly common for young adults to continue living with their parents well into their twenties or thirties. What are the reasons for this? Do you think this is a positive or negative development?

Example Answer:

In many countries, it is increasingly common for young adults to live with their parents into their late twenties or thirties. There are several reasons for this change, and in my view, it is a mostly negative development, although it can sometimes bring real benefits.

There are mainly two reasons why this trend is growing. The first reason is economic. Housing prices and rents have risen sharply in large cities, while wages for young workers have not kept pace. As a result, many young people simply cannot afford to live alone or even share a flat with friends. Many also have student loans to pay back. The second reason is cultural and personal. In some cultures, especially in parts of Asia and southern Europe, it is normal for children to stay with their parents until they marry. Some young adults also stay at home to save money for a future house, a wedding, or further education.

Overall, I believe this trend is more negative than positive. When young people live with their parents for too long, they often have fewer chances to develop independence, manage their own money, and make their own decisions. They may also avoid building strong personal relationships, since dating and inviting friends over can feel uncomfortable. Parents may have less freedom in their own home as well. However, there is one clear benefit: families spend more time together, and children can support older parents who may need help. For example, many young adults in Italy and Spain still live with their parents and care for them as they age.

In conclusion, although this trend has some advantages, the loss of independence makes it mainly negative.

Question 19

Prompt: Some people believe that municipal authorities should allocate more funds to developing public parks and sports facilities, while others argue that this money should be invested in improving public transport systems. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Example Answer:

Local governments must make difficult choices about how to spend limited public money. Some people argue that more should be spent on parks and sports facilities, while others believe public transport should be the priority. In my opinion, public transport should usually come first, but parks and sports areas must not be ignored.

On the one hand, there are clear reasons to invest more in parks and sports facilities. Many city residents work long hours and have few places nearby where they can be active outdoors. Free parks, swimming pools, and football fields let citizens be active, meet others, and relax outside their small apartments. This is especially important for children, who need safe places to play, and older people, who may feel lonely at home. Better sports facilities can also reduce health problems such as obesity and heart disease, which lowers the cost of healthcare in the long run. For example, cities with many running paths and free outdoor gyms often have healthier and happier residents.

On the other hand, I believe public transport usually deserves more funding. Buses, trains, and metros affect almost everyone every day. Good transport allows people to reach their jobs, schools, and hospitals quickly and cheaply, which supports the whole economy. It also reduces traffic jams and air pollution, because more people leave their cars at home. Cities such as Tokyo and Singapore are known for their excellent metro systems, which has improved daily life there. Without reliable transport, even the best parks become hard to reach.

In conclusion, while parks and sports facilities clearly improve health and quality of life, public transport has a wider impact on daily living. A city should invest in transport first, but still protect green and active spaces.

Question 20

Prompt: Some environmentalists argue that the most effective way to reduce pollution is to heavily tax industries that cause it. Others believe that educating consumers to buy eco-friendly products is a better approach. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Example Answer:

Pollution is a major problem today, and people disagree about how to fight it. Some environmentalists believe heavy taxes on polluting industries are best, while others argue that educating consumers to choose eco-friendly products works better. In my opinion, both ideas are useful, but taxes on polluters tend to bring faster results.

On the one hand, supporters of high taxes on polluting industries make a strong case. Factories, oil companies, and other heavy industries produce most air and water pollution, so changing their behaviour can have a huge impact. When pollution becomes expensive, companies have a strong reason to invest in cleaner machines and renewable energy. Without this kind of pressure, many businesses simply choose the cheapest method, even if it harms the environment. For example, in some European countries, taxes on coal power have pushed energy companies to switch to wind and solar power much faster than expected. Strong taxes also bring money that the government can use to clean rivers and plant more trees.

On the other hand, I understand why many people prefer education. Even the best laws cannot work if ordinary people do not care about the environment. When customers learn why plastic bags, fast fashion, and food waste are harmful, they start choosing better products and habits. Schools, social media, and TV campaigns can teach families how to save energy, recycle properly, and eat less meat. Over time, these small actions add up and also force companies to offer greener products because that is what the market wants.

In conclusion, education changes behaviour slowly but deeply, while taxes on polluters create quick and clear results. The most effective approach is to combine the two so that both companies and citizens take action.

Question 21

Prompt: Nowadays, people are increasingly relying on written digital communication, such as emails and text messages, instead of speaking face-to-face or on the telephone. What are the reasons for this? Is this a positive or negative development?

Example Answer:

In recent years, more people communicate through emails, text messages, and chat apps instead of talking face-to-face or on the phone. There are several reasons behind this change, and in my opinion, it is more negative than positive, although it does bring some real benefits.

There are two main reasons for this trend. The first is technology. Smartphones and fast internet are now available almost everywhere, and messaging apps are free, while phone calls can still be expensive across countries. The second reason is convenience and personal preference. Written messages can be sent at any time, and the receiver can reply when they are free. This is useful for busy workers and students, who do not always want to stop what they are doing for a long phone call. Many young people also feel less nervous when writing, because they have time to think about the words before sending.

However, I believe the negative effects are stronger than the positive ones. When people only write short messages, they lose the chance to hear tone of voice, see facial expressions, and react naturally to each other. This can lead to misunderstandings, since a short text can sound rude even when the writer did not mean it that way. Relationships can also become weaker, because deep emotions are hard to share through a screen. For example, many teenagers today say they feel lonely even though they send hundreds of messages a day. On the positive side, written communication does help people stay in touch across long distances and keep useful records of important information.

In conclusion, while digital writing is convenient, the loss of real human connection makes this trend mainly negative.

Question 22

Prompt: In many countries, large multinational companies and supermarkets are replacing small local businesses. Is this a positive or negative development?

Example Answer:

In many parts of the world, big international companies and large supermarket chains are slowly taking the place of small local shops. In my view, this is mostly a negative development, although it does bring some benefits to ordinary customers. The main problem is the loss of community character and local jobs.

On the positive side, large companies and supermarkets often offer lower prices and a wider range of goods. Because they buy products in huge quantities, they can sell items more cheaply than a small family shop. For many ordinary families, this is a real advantage, especially when wages are not rising quickly. Big stores also tend to be open longer hours and to have car parks, which is convenient for busy people. For example, when a new supermarket opens in a small town, customers often save both time and money on weekly shopping. In addition, these companies usually create some new jobs in their stores and warehouses.

However, I believe the negative effects are stronger in the long run. When small shops close, towns lose their unique character, because chain stores look almost the same in every country. Local bakers, butchers, and bookshops often know their customers personally and care about quality, but they cannot compete with very low prices. As they disappear, money also flows out of the local area to faraway head offices instead of staying in the community. In some neighbourhoods I have visited, the main street now has only banks and big chains, which feels less friendly and less interesting.

In conclusion, while big supermarkets and multinationals make shopping cheaper and easier, they also weaken local businesses and community life. On balance, I see this trend as more harmful than helpful.

Question 23

Prompt: Some people believe that governments should provide free admission to museums and art galleries, while others think that visitors should pay an entry fee. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Example Answer:

There is debate about whether museums and art galleries should be free or charge an entry fee. Some think free access is a basic right, while others believe visitors should help pay for running these places. In my opinion, museums should generally be free, with some exceptions for special exhibitions.

Those who support free entry argue that museums and galleries are an important part of education and culture. When tickets are expensive, many families and students simply cannot afford to visit, so they miss the chance to learn about history, science, and art. Free museums help reduce this gap between rich and poor visitors. For example, in cities where the main public museums do not charge a fee, you often see school groups, tourists, and local families all visiting together. This kind of shared cultural experience is good for society. Free entry also encourages people to return many times, which means they slowly build up real knowledge instead of rushing through one expensive visit.

On the other hand, supporters of entry fees point out that museums need money to protect their collections and pay their staff. Cleaning, security, and repairs are all expensive, especially in old buildings. If governments do not have enough money in their budget, charging visitors can help keep the museum open and modern. Tourists who come from other countries are often happy to pay a small fee, because the cost is still low compared with their travel expenses. In this way, fees can be fair if local people receive a discount or free access on certain days.

In conclusion, although charging fees can help fund museums, I believe free admission brings stronger educational and cultural benefits, especially for citizens of the country.

Question 24

Prompt: Many people today prefer to follow trends in mainstream global culture rather than preserving their local traditions and customs. To what extent do you think the advantages of this trend outweigh the disadvantages?

Example Answer:

These days, many young people prefer to follow global trends in music, fashion, and food rather than keep their own local customs alive. While this brings some benefits, I believe the disadvantages are slightly greater, because cultural identity is hard to rebuild once it is lost.

There are clear advantages to joining a more global culture. People who watch the same films, listen to similar music, and use the same social media can communicate easily with others around the world. This is helpful for students, workers, and travellers. For example, a teenager in Vietnam and a teenager in Brazil may both enjoy the same pop songs or video games, which gives them something to talk about online. Global culture can also bring more choice. In big cities, young people can try food from many different countries, wear modern clothes, and learn about new ideas that may not exist in their own traditions. For some, this feels more exciting and more open-minded than older customs.

However, the disadvantages should not be ignored. When everyone copies the same global trends, local festivals, traditional clothing, and old recipes can slowly fade away. Older family members may feel that their grandchildren no longer understand or respect the culture they grew up in. I have noticed that in many tourist areas, traditional houses are replaced by shopping streets that look the same as in any other country. If this continues, future generations may grow up without a strong sense of where they come from. Local crafts and music, once lost, are very difficult to bring back.

In conclusion, although global culture makes life more connected and varied, the loss of local traditions is a serious cost. Overall, I think the disadvantages slightly outweigh the advantages.

Question 25

Prompt: In many countries, supermarkets and manufacturers still use a large amount of plastic packaging for their products. Some people argue that the government should heavily tax the use of plastic packaging to reduce environmental damage. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Example Answer:

Plastic packaging is still common in supermarkets and factories, and it causes serious harm to the environment. Some suggest that governments should put a high tax on plastic packaging to reduce this damage. I largely agree with this idea, although I think it should be combined with other measures.

There are strong reasons to support a heavy tax on plastic. When plastic becomes more expensive, companies have a clear reason to look for cleaner options, such as paper, glass, or reusable containers. Without this kind of financial pressure, many businesses simply continue using plastic because it is cheap and easy. For example, in countries where shops have started charging customers for plastic bags, people quickly began to bring their own cloth bags instead. A similar effect could happen with bottles and food packaging if the price went up. In addition, money from the tax could be used to clean rivers and beaches and to support recycling programmes, which are often underfunded.

However, I also understand the concerns about a tax that is too heavy. Small shops and ordinary families could suffer if prices rise sharply, especially for basic foods like rice, milk, and bread. If poor families end up paying much more for daily shopping, the policy will feel unfair. Therefore, the government should also help by supporting cheaper alternatives, improving recycling systems, and educating people about waste. Companies that find creative ways to reduce packaging could even receive lower taxes as a reward, which would encourage real change instead of just punishment.

In conclusion, I mostly agree that taxing plastic packaging is a useful tool, because it pushes both companies and consumers to change their habits. However, it works best as part of a wider environmental plan.

Question 26

Prompt: Some people believe that with the rapid advancement of translation software and artificial intelligence, there is no longer any need for children to learn foreign languages in school. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Example Answer:

With the progress of translation tools and AI, some argue that children no longer need to study foreign languages at school. I strongly disagree with this view. Although technology is useful, learning a language brings benefits that machines cannot fully replace.

It is true that modern translation apps are surprisingly good. Travellers can now point a phone at a menu or a sign and read it in their own language almost instantly. For short conversations, simple emails, or quick searches online, this is very convenient. I can see why parents and students might think that spending years on grammar and vocabulary is a waste of time. However, relying only on machines is risky. Translations are not always accurate, especially when dealing with jokes, polite expressions, or specific subjects like law and medicine. If a child grows up unable to check whether a translation makes sense, they may believe wrong information without knowing it.

More importantly, learning a foreign language is about much more than communication. It trains the brain to think in different ways and understand other cultures from the inside. When young learners study English, French, or Chinese, they also discover new ways of seeing the world. For example, students who read stories from another country often gain more respect for different traditions and values. Language skills also remain very useful for future jobs in business, science, and tourism, where people prefer to talk directly rather than through an app. In addition, the process of learning a language develops patience, memory, and confidence, which help in many other school subjects.

In conclusion, although translation technology is becoming more powerful, children should still learn foreign languages at school, because the personal and cultural benefits are too valuable to lose.

Question 27

Prompt: As the population in urban areas continues to grow, some people believe that the best way to solve the housing shortage is to build taller residential buildings. Others, however, argue that expanding the city outwards into the surrounding countryside is a better solution. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Example Answer:

As more people move into cities, governments must decide how to provide enough housing. Some people believe the answer is to build taller blocks of flats, while others prefer to expand the city outwards into nearby countryside. In my opinion, building upwards is the better long-term solution, although both ideas have value.

Those who support taller buildings argue that this is the most efficient way to use limited city land. A single tall block can house hundreds of families on the same area of ground that would only fit a few small houses. This makes it easier to provide schools, hospitals, and public transport close to where people live. For example, in many Asian capitals, new high-rise neighbourhoods are built next to metro stations, so residents can travel to work without needing a car. This reduces traffic and saves time. Tall buildings also make better use of expensive city centres, which can keep house prices a little more reasonable for ordinary workers.

On the other hand, supporters of expanding cities outwards say that low-rise houses give people more space, gardens, and a quieter life. Many families with young children prefer this kind of environment to crowded apartments. New suburbs can also include parks and wider roads, which improve daily life. However, when cities grow too far outwards, farmland and forests are often destroyed, and people need to drive long distances to work. This increases pollution and traffic problems. In addition, providing buses, water, and electricity to faraway suburbs is very expensive for the government.

In conclusion, while expanding outwards offers more comfort, it also damages the environment and costs more. I therefore believe that building taller residential buildings, when carefully planned, is the more practical solution to urban housing shortages.

Question 28

Prompt: In modern society, people rely heavily on technology for everyday tasks such as cooking, navigating, and communicating. Some people argue that this heavy reliance is causing individuals to lose basic life skills. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Example Answer:

Modern technology helps us with simple tasks like cooking, finding our way, and talking to other people. Some people worry that this heavy reliance is making us lose basic life skills. I largely agree with this view, although technology also brings real benefits that should not be ignored.

There is clear evidence that some everyday skills are weakening. Many young adults struggle to cook a basic meal because they grew up ordering food through apps or eating ready meals from the microwave. Similarly, drivers who always follow GPS often have no idea how to read a paper map or remember the route between their home and a friend's house. I have noticed this in my own family. My younger cousin, for example, can hardly remember any phone numbers, because his phone stores them all. If his battery dies, he cannot even call his parents. These small examples show that important skills, which used to be normal for everyone, are slowly disappearing.

On the other hand, technology has also given us new abilities. People who were not good at cooking can now follow simple video lessons step by step, and travellers can visit unfamiliar cities without getting lost. Online learning platforms also let workers study new subjects at home, which was much harder in the past. So in some ways, technology is replacing one set of skills with another. However, the difference is that traditional skills work even without electricity or the internet, while modern tools fail in emergencies. When a strong storm cuts the power, people who depend completely on their devices can feel helpless.

In conclusion, although technology improves daily life in many ways, I agree that depending on it too much weakens basic skills that we still need.

Question 29

Prompt: Some people believe that governments should spend more money on improving public transportation, such as trains and buses. Others argue that this money would be better spent on building new roads and highways for private vehicles. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Example Answer:

Governments often face hard choices about transport spending. Some believe more money should go to public transport such as trains and buses, while others prefer new roads and highways for private cars. In my opinion, investing in public transport is the smarter long-term decision, even if road improvements are sometimes necessary.

Those who support better roads argue that cars give people more freedom and comfort. With a private vehicle, families can travel whenever they want, carry luggage easily, and visit places that buses do not reach. New highways can also reduce traffic jams and connect small towns to big cities, which helps the local economy. For example, when a new motorway opens between a rural area and a city, farmers and small businesses often find it easier to sell their products. People living far from the centre may also find new job opportunities. In countries where public transport is weak, building roads sometimes feels like the only realistic option.

However, I believe spending more on public transport brings stronger benefits. Trains and buses can move large numbers of people at the same time, which reduces traffic and air pollution. When public transport is fast, clean, and cheap, even drivers are happy to leave their cars at home. In several big cities I have read about, expanding bus networks and bicycle lanes have made commutes easier and reduced air pollution. Better buses also help poorer families who cannot afford a private car. In the long run, focusing only on roads encourages more driving, which leads to more accidents, pollution, and parking problems in city centres.

In conclusion, while new roads have some advantages, I think governments should spend more on public transport, because it is fairer, cleaner, and more efficient.

Question 30

Prompt: In many societies, the accumulation of wealth is considered the primary measure of personal success. Do you think this is a positive or negative development?

Example Answer:

In many societies today, people often judge personal success mainly by how much money someone has. I believe this is mostly a negative development, because it ignores other important parts of life and can put unhealthy pressure on individuals.

It is easy to see why wealth has become such a popular measure of success. Money provides security, comfort, and choices, and it is easy to compare. When someone owns a big house, drives an expensive car, or wears branded clothes, others can see their financial position. Social media has made this even more obvious, because people often share photos of holidays, gifts, and luxury items. Young people in particular grow up watching influencers and celebrities who appear rich and happy, so they begin to believe that earning a high salary is the most important goal. In this sense, focusing on wealth can encourage hard work and ambition, which is not entirely bad.

However, the problems are serious. When success is only measured by money, people may ignore their health, their families, and their personal interests. Workers who chase higher salaries often spend long hours in the office, become stressed, and lose contact with friends. Some choose jobs they dislike just because the pay is high, which can lead to deep unhappiness later. In addition, focusing only on wealth makes people look down on those who do important but low-paid work, such as nurses, teachers, and farmers. Without these workers, modern society would not function. A culture that respects only money also encourages dishonest behaviour, because some people are willing to cheat in order to get rich.

In conclusion, although wealth has obvious advantages, treating it as the main sign of success is, in my view, a clearly negative trend.

Question 31

Prompt: Some people believe that the increasing number of international tourists has a negative impact on local cultures and traditions. Others, however, argue that tourism actually helps to preserve these cultural identities. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Example Answer:

International travel has grown quickly, and the number of tourists at famous places keeps rising. Some believe this trend harms local cultures and traditions, while others think tourism helps to keep them alive. In my opinion, both effects are real, but tourism is more helpful when it is well managed.

Those who worry about tourism point to the changes in popular destinations. When millions of visitors arrive each year, traditional towns can turn into shopping streets full of souvenir shops, fast food chains, and identical hotels. Local people sometimes feel they are performing their culture for outsiders rather than living it. For example, in some old cities, residents have moved away because rents are now too high, and shops that once sold daily goods mainly serve foreign visitors. Festivals that used to be private community events can also become tourist shows, where the original meaning is partly lost. In these cases, tourism clearly damages the local way of life.

On the other hand, tourism can give cultures a strong reason to survive. When visitors are interested in traditional dances, food, music, or crafts, local people receive money for skills that might otherwise disappear. Young people may even decide to learn from their grandparents instead of moving to faraway cities for office jobs. Governments are also more likely to protect old buildings, museums, and natural sites if these places attract foreign currency. I have noticed that in some rural areas, small villages have used tourism income to repair temples, support local schools, and keep traditional festivals running each year.

In conclusion, tourism can both threaten and protect local cultures. With sensible rules and respect from visitors, I believe its positive effects can clearly outweigh the negative ones.

Question 32

Prompt: Some people believe that free time should be spent learning new skills or doing productive activities, while others think it should only be used for relaxing and unwinding. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Example Answer:

People have different opinions about how free time should be used. Some think it is best to learn new skills or do useful activities, while others believe rest is more important. In my view, both are valuable, but the right balance depends on the person and the situation.

On the one hand, using free time to learn something new has clear benefits. After work or school, many people feel they have wasted hours watching television or scrolling on their phones. If they spend even a few hours each week studying a language, learning to cook, or doing exercise, they can build skills that improve their daily life and career. For example, my cousin started taking online classes in graphic design during the weekends, and within a year she found a better job. This shows that productive hobbies can open new doors and give people a stronger sense of progress.

On the other hand, I also understand why some people prefer to use free time only for relaxing. Modern life is often stressful, especially for those who work long hours or study for difficult exams. If people never give themselves time to rest, they may feel tired all the time and even become sick. Activities like meeting friends, watching films, or simply sleeping more are not lazy; they help the mind and body recover. Without enough rest, it is hard to focus or be creative when work begins again.

In conclusion, both learning and relaxing have their place in our free time. I believe the best approach is to mix the two, so that people can grow their skills while also keeping their health and happiness in good condition.

Question 33

Prompt: Nowadays, many young people spend a large portion of their income on attending music festivals and traveling, rather than saving for their future. Is this a positive or negative development?

Example Answer:

These days, many young people prefer to spend their money on concerts, festivals, and travel instead of saving for the future. In my opinion, this is mostly a negative trend, although it does have some benefits when done in moderation.

There are several reasons why this development can be seen as positive. Travel and live music help young people gain experiences they cannot get from books or screens. When someone visits a different country or attends a festival, they meet new people, learn about other cultures, and often return with more confidence. These experiences can also reduce stress, which is important for young workers who deal with long hours and pressure at university or in their first jobs. For example, a friend of mine saved for months to travel around Southeast Asia after graduating, and she said the trip helped her decide what kind of career she really wanted. Spending on memories, in this sense, is not always wasteful.

However, I believe the negative effects are stronger overall. Housing prices and the cost of living have risen quickly in many cities, and young people who do not save early often struggle later when they want to rent a flat, get married, or have children. Festivals and trips abroad can also become a habit, especially when social media encourages people to share photos and feel that they must keep up with their friends. If a young person spends most of their salary every month on tickets and flights, they will have no protection when an emergency happens, such as losing a job or facing a medical bill.

In conclusion, while spending on enjoyable experiences has some value, ignoring savings is risky. Young people should try to balance fun and financial security.

Question 34

Prompt: To solve global environmental problems, some people believe that developing countries should adopt the same strict environmental policies as developed countries. Others argue that developing nations should be allowed to focus on economic growth first. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Example Answer:

The world faces serious environmental problems, and people disagree about how poorer countries should respond. Some believe that developing nations must follow the same strict rules as rich countries, while others think they should focus on economic growth first. In my opinion, a balanced approach is needed.

On the one hand, there are good reasons why developing countries should accept strict rules. Pollution, climate change, and the loss of forests do not stop at borders, so if some countries keep polluting heavily, every nation will suffer. Many large developing countries are now home to huge cities and factories, and the air quality there is very poor. If their governments do not control emissions or protect rivers and forests, the planet will continue to warm, and future generations will face floods, droughts, and food shortages. From this point of view, every country, no matter how rich, has a duty to act now.

On the other hand, I can also understand why some people argue that poorer countries should grow first. Rich countries became wealthy by burning coal and building heavy industries for many decades, and it seems unfair to suddenly stop developing nations from doing the same. People in many regions still lack clean water, basic schools, and stable electricity. If strict rules raise the cost of building factories, jobs may disappear, and families could remain in poverty. For example, banning cheap energy in countries where many people still cook with wood would create real hardship without solving the global problem alone.

In conclusion, both views have merit, but I believe developing countries should accept some environmental rules while receiving money and technology from richer nations. Only shared effort and shared cost will lead to a fair solution.

Question 35

Prompt: Many countries spend a large amount of money hosting major international sporting events. Some people argue that this money would be better spent on improving domestic public services, such as healthcare and education. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Example Answer:

Many governments spend huge amounts of money to host events such as the Olympic Games or the football World Cup. Some people argue that this money should instead go to hospitals, schools, and other public services. I largely agree with this view, although I see some value in big sporting events.

On the one hand, hosting an international sporting event can bring real benefits to a country. Such events attract tourists, create jobs in construction and hospitality, and can put a city on the map. New stadiums, roads, and airports built for the games may continue to be useful for many years. There is also a sense of national pride when athletes compete at home, and young people may feel inspired to take up sports themselves. For these reasons, I do not think the money is completely wasted.

However, I believe the disadvantages are more serious. The cost of building new stadiums and security systems is often much higher than planned, and taxpayers usually have to pay the difference. Once the event ends, the maintenance costs of huge venues continue for decades, falling on taxpayers who never planned to use them. Meanwhile, ordinary people may be waiting for hospital treatment or studying in old, crowded classrooms. If that money was used for better schools, medical equipment, or training more nurses and teachers, the benefits would reach everyone, not just visitors and sports fans. Public services are also more important during a crisis, such as a disease outbreak.

In conclusion, while international sporting events can boost national pride and tourism, I strongly agree that improving healthcare and education should be the higher priority. Governments should think carefully before spending so much on a few weeks of entertainment.

Question 36

Prompt: Some people think that making public transportation free is the best way to reduce traffic congestion. Others believe that increasing the cost of car ownership is a better solution. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Example Answer:

Traffic congestion has become a daily problem in many cities, and people debate the best way to reduce it. Some people believe free public transport is the answer, while others think making cars more expensive would work better. In my view, both ideas have value, but a combination is the most effective.

On the one hand, making buses and trains free is an attractive solution. Many drivers complain that public transport is slow or unreliable, but ticket cost is also a reason people choose to drive. If buses and trains were free, more workers and students would leave their cars at home for short trips. Pollution and noise in city centres would drop, and people on lower incomes would benefit the most. For example, in some European cities, free transport has been tested for short periods, and the number of cars in central streets fell quickly. This shows that price plays a strong role in daily travel choices.

On the other hand, raising the cost of owning a car can also be very effective. If parking fees, road taxes, and fuel costs rise, families think twice before buying a second car or driving into busy areas. The extra money can then be spent on better trains, cycle lanes, and clean buses. However, this approach must be careful, because people who live far from city centres truly need a car for work or for taking children to school. Punishing them with high costs without offering a real alternative would be unfair.

In conclusion, free public transport and higher car costs both have strengths and weaknesses. I believe cities should combine the two, so people are gently pushed towards trains and buses while also being given a service worth using.

Question 37

Prompt: In contemporary society, it has become common for people to throw away broken everyday items, such as smartphones and clothes, and buy new ones instead of repairing them. Do you think this is a positive or a negative development?

Example Answer:

In recent years, many people have started to throw away broken phones, clothes, and household items rather than repairing them. In my view, this is mostly a negative development, even though there are a few small benefits.

There are some reasons why this trend can seem positive. New products are often cheaper than they used to be, and the latest models usually offer better features and safety. For instance, a new phone may have a longer battery life and a better camera, which makes daily life easier. Buying new items can also support workers in factories and shops, and modern designs may use less electricity than older versions. From this point of view, replacing things instead of fixing them can sometimes feel like progress rather than waste.

However, the negative effects are much stronger. When people throw away broken items, huge amounts of plastic, metal, and fabric end up in landfills or in the sea, which damages the environment for many years. Clothing is a clear example of this problem. Many young people now buy cheap fashion items, wear them only a few times, and then throw them out when they are slightly damaged or out of style. This wastes water, energy, and the work of people in factories. In addition, repair skills are slowly being lost. In the past, many families could fix a chair, sew a shirt, or repair a simple machine at home, but today most people do not even try. They feel it is easier to buy something new, even when the broken item only needs a small part. Over time, this habit creates more rubbish and weaker communities.

In conclusion, although new products bring some benefits, the throwaway culture causes serious harm to the planet.

Question 38

Prompt: Some people believe that creative subjects such as art, music, and drama should be compulsory for all secondary school students. Others argue that schools should focus exclusively on subjects that are directly useful for future careers, such as science and technology. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Example Answer:

There is debate about whether art, music, and drama should be required for all secondary school students. Some argue these subjects are essential for a full education, while others believe schools should focus on more practical ones. In my opinion, creative subjects should remain compulsory, although their share of the timetable can be smaller.

On the one hand, I understand why some people want schools to focus only on subjects like science, mathematics, and technology. Modern job markets are competitive, and many high-paying careers require skills in coding, engineering, or data analysis. If teenagers spend many hours on painting or theatre instead of maths or computing, they may struggle to enter university or find a good job later. Parents who pay high taxes for public schools also expect a clear return, usually meaning good exam results and qualifications. From this view, creative subjects can seem like a luxury rather than a need.

On the other hand, I believe creative subjects bring benefits that science alone cannot provide. Art and music help students express feelings, work in teams, and think in new ways, which are skills that even technology companies now value. Drama, for example, builds confidence and the ability to speak in public, which is important in almost any career. Without these subjects, school can become very narrow and stressful, and some students who are not strong in maths may lose all interest in learning. Creative classes also give young people a healthy way to deal with the pressure of exams and social problems.

In conclusion, while it is right to teach useful subjects for future careers, art, music, and drama should still be required. A balanced education produces students who are skilled, thoughtful, and well-prepared for life.

Question 39

Prompt: Some experts believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at primary school rather than secondary school. Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

Example Answer:

Many experts now suggest that children should start learning a foreign language at primary school instead of waiting until secondary school. In my opinion, the advantages of this clearly outweigh the disadvantages.

There are a few possible drawbacks to teaching languages so early. Young children already have many subjects to study, including reading, writing, and basic maths in their own language. Adding another language may make their school day more tiring, especially for students still struggling with their first language. Some parents also worry that teaching quality may be low, because primary schools do not always have specialist language teachers. If children learn poor pronunciation or wrong grammar at this stage, it can be hard to correct later. In addition, in countries where families speak more than one language at home, extra language classes at school may feel less useful.

However, the benefits are much greater. Young children learn languages more easily than teenagers because their brains are still developing and they are less afraid of making mistakes. A six-year-old who hears English songs and stories every week will often pick up sounds and words almost without effort, while a fourteen-year-old may feel embarrassed to speak in class. Starting early also means that by the time children reach secondary school, they already have a strong base, so they can move on to more difficult topics like writing essays and reading novels. This is very useful in a globalised world, where many jobs and university courses require good English or another major language. Early learners also tend to be more open to other cultures, which is helpful in modern society.

In conclusion, although there are some small problems, starting language learning at primary school brings clear long-term benefits.

Question 40

Prompt: Many people believe that increasing the price of fuel is the most effective way to solve the world's environmental problems. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Example Answer:

Many people argue that raising the price of fuel is the best way to deal with environmental problems such as pollution and climate change. I partly agree with this view, but I do not believe it is enough on its own.

On the one hand, higher fuel prices can clearly change people's daily habits. When petrol becomes expensive, drivers often reduce the number of trips they take, share rides with neighbours, or use buses and trains more often. Companies that ship goods may also try to plan smarter routes to save money. Over time, these small changes add up and reduce the amount of carbon released into the air. Higher fuel costs can also push people to buy smaller cars or electric vehicles, which is good for the environment in the long term. For instance, in many European countries, fuel taxes are already quite high, and most families drive cars that use much less petrol than those in countries where fuel is cheap.

On the other hand, I do not think this single solution can fix such a complex problem. Pollution comes from many sources, including factories, farming, and electricity production, and these will not change just because petrol is more expensive. Higher fuel prices can also harm poorer families and small businesses the most, because they cannot easily switch to a new car or move closer to work. If governments only raise prices without offering better public transport, cleaner energy, and support for low-income workers, people will feel angry rather than encouraged. Real progress also needs international cooperation, since one country acting alone cannot stop climate change.

In conclusion, raising fuel prices can play a useful role, but I disagree that it is the most effective answer by itself.