Subscribe via email

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

For some people shopping is not just about buying what is necessary, but a form of entertainment. Do you think it is a positive or a negative development? Give your opinion and examples from your experience.

Shopping is generally thought of in terms of fulfilling needs. Shopping is seen first as a function and secondarily as something that serves emotional and social needs. As incomes have grown, choices have exploded and free time has increased, shopping has become entertainment as much as anything else. This can be seen as both – a positive as well as a negative development. In the following paragraphs I intend to explore the pros and cons of shopping as an entertainment.

On the positive side, shopping satisfies our needs. Everyone needs the basics of life such as items of food, clothing and shelter. Apart from that, needs vary from person to person. The things which were considered the luxuries of yesteryears have become the necessities of today. For example, the mobile phone has become a must-have for even the lower income group of people. Many businesses and jobs thrive on the connectivity provided by the mobile phone and the internet.

Furthermore, shopping has given rise to the consumerist society of today. This has given employment to many. For instance, people are working in the manufacturing industries and in the retail sector also. Mega stores and malls are also having a mushroom growth. What is more, psychologists claim that the best way to cope with stress or any kind of strong and negative emotion is to hit the shops and do plenty of shopping. It is called retail therapy and, according to many, it is guaranteed to boost spirits.

On the negative side, excessive shopping makes us pile up things in the home which we don’t even need. It also leads to a throw-away society which is detrimental to the environment. To do shopping, people need a lot of money and if this money does not come by fair means people resort to unethical means of getting it which leads to violence and crime in the society.

To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, shopping is good as long as it is done for need, but when it is done for greed then it becomes a bane. So we should do shopping only according to our requirement and then it will be a pleasurable experience also.

Thursday, November 25, 2010


There are many jobs which I find fascinating but the job I am going to talk about here is of an event organiser.
I came to know about this job after I saw the movie Hum Tum.
Later I came to know that such jobs are very popular nowadays even in small places such as my home town Phagwara.
People are very busy nowadays and do not have time to organise family functions such as marriage parties and anniversaries.
So, they give their budget to the event organiser and he takes over the responsibility.
Actually I am very fond of organising such functions.
Whenever there is any function in the family, I do all the planning.
I note down everything to the smallest detail and then distribute duties to the family members.
When I came to know that I can get paid for this I was very fascinated.
No special training is needed for this job.
With every event you organise, you learn something new and your confidence grows.
You need to have contacts with various people who do the catering and decorations.
You even organise the DJ and the orchestra.
The most enjoyable part of this job is that you get to attend all the parties and meet new people.


Advertisements are ubiquitous nowadays.
I have seen many ads in my life but the ad I am going to talk about here is of Nokia N8
I saw this ad on Star News Channel
It’s a very attractive and beautiful phone.
It has a fully touch screen interface.
It is available in black, white and silver colours.
It has a 12 megapixel camera
It is 3 G enabled
It has a qwerty key pad.
It has many other applications such as video player, MP3 player
It also has latest mobile games
It has a calculator, alarm, timer, FM radio, calendar and internet facility.
Its memory is 8 GB
It has a wi-fi facility
It has a navigation system
Priyanka Chopra is the brand ambassador for this phone.
She is the leading Bollywood star nowadays.
She is also my favourite actress.
I have seen all her movies.
She also anchored the TV show – Khatron Ke Khilari
I watched this show because of her.
She has a versatile personality.
She fits into every role.
So when she endorses a product, people really want to buy it.
After seeing this ad I really wish to buy this phone.
But it is out of the range of my pocket
I have started saving money for this.
It is for 24,000 rupees.

Many diseases are spreading such as cancers and AIDS People are going abroad for treatment Is it beneficial for them?

It is true that many diseases are spreading and many people are going to foreign countries for their treatment
They think that treatments for such diseases are possible only in other developed countries
However, I don’t think so.
I believe that India is also very advanced in such treatments now a days.
In fact people from other countries come to India for advanced treatments now.
Many times we read in the papers that people come for their surgeries to India.
The doctors in India are very strong academically.
Some hospitals in India are one of the best in the world.
The cost of treatment in India is very less as compared to anywhere else in the world.
You know madam, one of my neighbours suffered from liver cancer.
He had to get a liver transplant.
The cost of the treatment was 1 crore in Singapore.
But he got it done in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital at Delhi for only 25 lacs.
He is perfectly fine now and enjoying his life.
I feel it is better to get treatment done in one’s own country because all your nears and dears are with you.
In such times you need a lot of moral support
Not everyone can travel abroad with you
You also need follow-up check-ups.
That is also possible in your own country.

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Some companies and organizations require their employees to wear uniform. What are the advantages and disadvantages of wearing uniform?

Setting a dress code in the workplace is becoming increasingly common. In the following paragraphs, I intend to delve into the advantages and disadvantages of wearing uniform at work.

One of the major benefits of a dress code within the office is that it establishes an atmosphere of discipline and uniformity. It ensures that inappropriate or dirty clothing is not worn to work. It is also a social leveller. If everyone is dressed to the same standard, there will be no judgements made towards other employees on the basis of their clothes. Having a uniform also reduces employee confusion: a clear dress code means they don't have to wonder "what" to wear or whether something would be appropriate to wear to work.

A dress code is also very important in non-office environments, such as in factories, for keeping employees safe. For example, if the employees work around machinery that a tie could get caught in, ties are not appropriate. The same is true of jewellery, belts, scarves, and long hair. Therefore, a dress code keeps employees safe from injury and also allows them to look presentable if clients or visitors come on site. This dress code is also very beneficial for other places of service, such as fast food, or grocery stores. It portrays a feeling of cleanliness when you know the staff is wearing their appropriate uniform, as opposed to if they were wearing their own clothing.

Furthermore, a dress code sets the "tone" of the company. For example, a law office with all the lawyers and associates wearing suits and formal business attire is viewed as being professional and able to handle court cases. How the public perceives a company is important to the type and amount of business it does.

The disadvantages are that it can become very boring to wear the same clothes daily. Secondly, the uniform may not be very comfortable to wear. These disadvantages can, however, be lessened by giving the employees a say in the choice of uniform.

To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, a dress code is very essential nowadays in the workplace. The disadvantages are negligible as compared to the advantages.

Friday, November 19, 2010

Students at schools and universities learn far more from lessons with teachers than from others sources (such as the internet, television). To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is irrefutable that students can learn a lot nowadays from internet and television and these have become an indispensable part of education but I firmly believe that teachers play a more significant role in the classroom. I believe that no amount of technology can ever undermine the importance of the teacher. In the following paragraphs, I intend to support my views with my arguments.

To begin with, teachers can stimulate interest and it is an undeniable fact that interested stimulated people tend to learn more. They can keep students focused on study. A student studying by himself through internet and TV may get bored and stop studying. Teachers can provide a faster and simpler way to present information to the students. They can come down to the level of a student and so are definitely better than computers. In addition, teachers are role models for students. They are scholars in action. They not only teach academic subjects, but also many social skills.

Furthermore, there are many practical subjects which students can learn best from the teacher. For example, experiments of physics and chemistry are best learnt by the teacher guiding you at every step. What is more, teachers give assignments and regularly check them. This helps the teachers to recognise the weak points of students and guide them accordingly. All this cannot be done by the internet and TV.

On the other hand, it is also true that the internet is an ocean of knowledge. You can get information about any topic on Earth from the internet. But there is no authenticity of this information. What information to get and from where to get requires a lot of expertise. The television also has a lot of educative programmes but students still need the guidance of the teachers at all stages of learning. Teachers can make even the dull and boring subjects seem interesting. So definitely students learn more from teachers.

To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, no doubt TV and the Internet are very educative these days but students definitely learn more from the teacher.

Some people believe the range of technology available to individuals today is increasing the gap between poor people and rich people. Others think it is having an opposite effect. Discuss these points of view. What is your opinion?

Technology seems to promise infinite benefits for mankind. While it could be argued that the development of new technology always expands the gap between rich and poor, it is also true that the level of technology used in developing countries and low-income countries has been quicker than the developed countries over the last few years and this has helped to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor. So, both views have some ground which I shall be discussing in this essay.

There are many reasons why people say that technology increases the gap between rich and poor. To begin with, new technology itself tends to be affordable by only the richer elements of society and the poorer elements are denied the opportunities that this provides, such as the ability to be able to train for better paid work. It is understandable that because of their ability to acquire new technology, the learning ability within the richer elements of society is much improved. Therefore they get better job placements and continue to grow further.

What is more, with the power that wealth and knowledge brings, richer segments are more able to exert influence over the direction of society, usually to their own benefit. The poorer segment does not have this ability, and therefore their demands and needs tend to be driven lower down the list of political priorities.

On the other hand there are reasons to hold the opposite view. While it is true that the initial level of technology in lower-income countries was much lower to begin with, there is strong evidence of catch-up between middle-income and high-income countries. Technological progress increased 40% to 60% faster in developing countries than in rich countries. Use of some new technologies, such as mobile phones, has risen quickly.

Technology has created huge opportunities for the poor where none existed previously. For example, some technologies such as communications or networking give poor people a chance to earn a better living. It is not uncommon for some people who used to live in poverty becoming millionaires or billionaires by taking advantage of the internet. This has definitely led to narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor.

To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that technology can do both – widen the gap between the rich and poor as well as narrow the gap if the poor get access to it. Therefore, it is not the technology to blame for the gap; it is the access to technology which is to blame. So, we should see to it that everyone gets equal access to technology.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Some people think that paying taxes is enough to contribute to the society. Others argue that being a citizen involves more responsibilities. Discuss, what is your opinion?

A good citizen is a blessing to society. Some people opine that paying taxes is enough contribution towards the society whereas others believe that a good citizen has a lot more responsibilities than just paying taxes. I personally go with the latter view. In the following paragraphs I intend to enumerate the responsibilities of a good citizen.

It is irrefutable that paying all the taxes and in a timely manner is one of the major responsibilities of a citizen. It is necessary to pay taxes because the money that is paid by citizens is used for constructive purposes, like building and maintaining roads, schools, fire protection, defence services etc. The different types of taxes to be paid by citizens are income tax, excise tax, property tax, sales tax etc. Most people try to avoid taxes, but to have the freedoms that we have, we must fund our government agencies. All taxes exist to make our lives better. To enjoy our comparatively trouble free lives, we must pay taxes.

However, there are many other obligations which a good citizen must fulfil. To begin with, voting in elections is very important. When citizens fail to vote or have political opinions, they allow vested interests to have their way. Secondly, they must obey law and order. If all citizens are law abiding, then the whole nation would be a paradise on Earth.

It is also the responsibility of a good citizen to provide public service to the government. This means volunteering for various agencies and charities. Finally, it is a citizen's duty to scrutinize the government's actions and take stands when something wrong happens. When citizens get too complacent, they will not notice when their freedom is being cut down.

To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, a good citizen should pay taxes, exercise his voting rights, be law abiding, do voluntary work to help the government and take a stand if anything goes wrong. Blythe Danner has rightly said, “We all have an obligation as citizens of this earth to leave the world a healthier, cleaner, and better place for our children and future generations.”

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Talk about a friend that you’ve met a long time ago. Please say - How did you meet? - How do you keep in touch? - Why is this person important to you?

• I had many friends in childhood, but the friend I am going to talk about here is Sukhninder.
• I met him when I was in the 4th class, in the Government Primary school where I studied.
• When we were in 6th he and his family moved to America.
• Now we are in touch through e-mail.
• Occasionally he calls me.
• Sometimes we video-chat through Skype software.
• We share our nostalgic memories of the past days with each other.
• He is very important to me because we are bosom friends and we share all our joys and sorrows with each other.
• I like him because he is an honest and straightforward person.
• He had a very helping mentality.
• Whenever I was in trouble he used to come and help me.
• He tried to understand me.
• He never fought with me.
• In class I was weak at maths and he used to help me.
• I had a very bad handwriting and he helped me to improve my handwriting also.
• He is a very loving, caring and affectionate person.
• So he became a very intimate friend.
• When he was here he was very skinny.
• But now, he has grown very tall and handsome.
• He has done his graduation in computer animation
• He made an animation of me and it was so funny that I remembered his naughty pranks of childhood.

Monday, November 15, 2010

Mothers generally stay home to take care of their children after pregnancy. Do you support the opinion that these mothers should be compensated by the government?

I definitely agree with the notion that mothers, who stay at home to look after their children after pregnancy should be compensated by the government. In the following paragraphs I intend to put forth my arguments to support my views.

My major argument is that the future of the world rests largely in the hands of the generation we are rearing. Once a child is born, it becomes national property. Mothers are the front line child care providers and therefore, if they are supported by the government they can do their job better. This help can be in the form of a paid maternity leave. In most Indian homes the mother’s salary is necessary to support the family. So, if the mother does not get a paid maternity leave, then she has to go back to job earlier and this affects the childcare. Nurseries fail to provide the one-to-one interaction children need.

Secondly, a woman has to go with very stressful time physically, emotionally, and financially during pregnancy period. There is extra financial burden related to her prenatal care, preparing for a new baby, and then the care of the baby. Therefore, government help can ease their burden and they can look after their babies nicely. Finally, if women are supported by the government, they can look after their health. Health as such involves several factors. It is not simply being free from diseases. So, proper education, enough employment opportunities, food security and affordable medical care are some of the contributory factors that the government can provide to make women healthy. Needless to say, there should be enough provision for all these in a society that expects to be healthy today and tomorrow. It is well known that women play the most crucial role in managing the health of the family. And healthy families contribute greatly to social welfare.

The opponents, however, claim that it is a personal choice to have a baby. So, why should there be government support for women who stay at home to look after their children? They have a point, but I still feel that women need the aid considering the physical, emotional, and financial stress they face.

To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, women should be supported by the government after delivery to look after the baby and themselves. This can contribute a lot to social welfare.

Friday, November 12, 2010

Everyone should stay in school until the age of eighteen. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

In many countries, school attendance is mandatory for all children up to a specific age. In India this is 14 years of age. In the UK and many other countries it is 16, although the UK government now has plans to raise the school leaving age to 18. I agree that children should be in school till the age of 18. In the following paragraphs, I intend to put forth my arguments to support my views.

The most important reason for raising the school leaving age to 18 is that, the age of 14-18 is the most impressionable age of a child’s life. During this period of adolescence, the children undergo physical and hormonal changes because of which they are under a lot of pressure. Therefore, lengthening compulsory schooling helps protect childhood. While at school students will be protected from some of the pressures in life. They have the rest of adulthood to work, make budgets balance and make choices. Providing them with space to grow for as long as possible can make them better prepared for adult life.

Secondly, more education provides the opportunity to acquire more skills and therefore more options. It has been shown many times that those with more education find it easier to find work and that they are more likely to find that work satisfying. What is more, raising the school-leaving age is a crucial investment in society's future. Doing so increases the economic potential of the future workforce, and so will bring increased tax revenues in the long term.

However, the opponents claim that extending the period of compulsory education requires a huge investment in teachers, books and new school buildings which would be very expensive. They also say that many families need their children to make an economic contribution to the family income and working early can help these families to survive. Finally, just being in school does not guarantee that a student is learning. Unwilling students become disruptive and damage the education of others in their class.

To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, as every garden has weeds, similarly compulsory schooling also has some drawbacks. However, these drawbacks are nothing as compared to the vast benefits this approach would bring and the cost needed to implement would be negligible if compared to the huge economic potential of the future workforce. Therefore, I believe that everyone should stay in school until the age of eighteen.

Thursday, November 11, 2010

IELTS Graphs -

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Talk about a useful application of computer that you had a personal experience with, please say: - How did you do this? - Was it difficult for you? - Has anyone helped you?

·        Computers are very important part of our life.
·        They are a source of information.
·        I have used many computer applications in my life.
·        Here I am going to talk about Microsoft Word
·        It is a part of MS office
·        In fact it is the most useful application of MS office.
·        It is also very easy and convenient to use.
·        I remember, when I was in school, I had to make an assignment on Global warming.
·        I first got the material from the library.
·        Then I had to type it.
·        I went to my school computer lab.
·        My teacher helped me in organising the material.
·        It was quite difficult for me because I had never before used the computer for making an assignment.
·        I had to type the written matter.
·        I also had to scan and copy the pictures.
·        I found it very interesting.
·        This application is very nice because I could check my spellings and grammar also.
·        When I had typed everything, my teacher helped me in organising the whole assignment.
·        Then I took a print out.
·        I remember, I got A+ grade in the assignment.
·        Then I pestered my parents to buy me a computer.
·        Now I find using the MS word very easy.
·        I have also learnt many new features of this application.

Friday, November 5, 2010

These days many people leave their country to work abroad and take their family with them. Do you think benefits of this outweigh disadvantages in terms of family development?

The opportunities to work abroad are more today than they have ever been in the history of mankind. The big planet Earth has become a small global village and sovereign barriers seem to have disappeared. While working in a foreign country, some individuals take their family with them. This situation has both merits as well as demerits but definitely the merits outweigh the demerits.

There are many obvious benefits of going abroad to work along with family. To begin with, individuals have more bonding with family. The family relationship would not be weakened by distance. Some couples finally end up in divorce, as one or both of them cannot endure the long-term separation. Secondly, many people feel homesick and lonely and therefore cannot adjust in the foreign country and return home thereby missing the golden opportunity of working abroad.

The most important point is that children, especially who are in young ages, need the care from both parents. Childhood is a crucial phase of life and comes only once. If children are deprived of one parents love it may have a considerable impact on their psyche. Therefore, working abroad with family can provide complete love and care to the children.

On the other hand, there are some problems of working abroad with families. To begin with, living with family members abroad means more expenses. A single person can share room with someone in the initial stages but a complete family needs a proper house. What is more, all the members face stress of adaptation to alien surroundings. Parents themselves feel culture shock and therefore cannot help their children.

To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, there are both advantages and disadvantages in any choice of this issue. Personally, I believe that people should decide according to their specific circumstances. If there are financial constraints, then it is better to go alone initially. However, the family should be called as early as possible.

Thursday, November 4, 2010

Some people think that charity organizations should only offer help to people of their own country. But others believe that these organizations should give aid to people in great need wherever they live. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

“To have enough to share; to know the joy of giving; to thrill with all the sweets of life - is living”. Helping others is a very virtuous thing. Charities help in basically two ways. One is by offering support to people in their own country, and the second is by helping the needy irrespective of their country. In this essay I intend to delve into the benefits of both approaches.

There are many advantages if charities help their own country’s people. Firstly, these organisations remain directly in touch with the needy. They can see how the money or other the other resources provided by them are being used. It has been well said that charity begins at home. What is more, domestic charities target problems specific to their home country, for instance the Help Age India is an Indian charity providing help for the aged in India.

There are also many advantages if these organisations help the needy in any corner of the world. In such cases these organisations work on a larger platform and provide help for global issues. A larger platform is a must if one has a lot to offer in charity. Help activities can be better spread through a larger network. Help need not be always in the form of money. It can be in the form of services also.  For example, these organisations can provide doctors and teachers who volunteer to provide medical aid and also teach in the under-developed nations.

Help in any form is good. The condition of one’s country could influence the way of helping. In a developed country, where even the poorest of the poor has the basic amenities of life, it would be better to help in any part of the world where people need help. But, in the case of a developing or underdeveloped country it would be better to help those around you.

To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that the purpose of charity organizations is to help people in need and it does not matter where this help goes. If people of the home country need help then it would certainly be advisable to help those around you first.

Some languages are increasingly spoken in different countries, while the usage of others is rapidly declining. Is this a positive or a negative development?

Today, we do not belong to a big planet called Earth. We are part of a global village and there is more interaction among people of different parts of the globe than ever before. Therefore, some languages are being spoken more and the use of a few languages is declining. This is both – a negative as well as a positive development.

On the positive side, the increasing use of some languages is easing communication among people. For example, English is now spoken in more than 86 countries of the world and French in around 33 countries. In fact English has become the lingua franca in many parts of the world. Because of this people do not face difficulty when they travel from one country to the other. What is more, if people speak the same language then they also find it easy to do business with each other. Global trade is based on good communication. We all know that lack of communication gives rise to many misunderstandings. Businesses cannot flourish if for every small communication an interpreter is required.
Nowadays we belong to a 24/7 society. Many multinational companies have opened in different parts of the world. The rich nations who own these MNCs provide jobs to millions of people worldwide. Naturally, a person who knows their language is better placed in these companies. The pay package is also better and chances to work abroad also go up. In a way the widespread use of a few languages also helps to decrease the gap between the rich and the poor.

On the downside, the decline in use of some languages is also something to be concerned about. It is a well known fact that language and culture are inter-related. If languages die out then culture also dies out. We all enjoy life on this planet because of its diversity. If diversity decreases, then boredom sets in and the earth becomes a dull and boring place to live in. 

To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, the increase in use of a few languages and the decline of others is both good as well as bad. This situation is an inevitable sequel of globalisation. If the governments take steps to protect the endangered languages, then the negative effects can be minimised.
( 30th Oct. 2010 IELTS essay - India)

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

The computers are widely used in education and some people think that teachers do not play an important role in the classroom. To what extent do you agree?

It is irrefutable that computers have become an indispensable part of education but I disagree that teachers do not play a significant role in the classroom. I believe that no amount of technology can ever replace the teacher. In the following paragraphs, I intend to support my views with my arguments.

It is an undeniable fact that teachers can never lose their importance. In learning and practice of more complex ideas, the computer is not adequate. It can tell if the answer is right or wrong but it cannot tell where the student went wrong. Tasks involving reasoning cannot be taught using computers. Moreover, teachers add their own knowledge gained through experience to that of books and other resources. 

Furthermore, teachers can stimulate interest and it is an undeniable fact that interested stimulated people tend to learn more. They can keep students focused on study. A student studying by himself may get bored and stop studying. Teachers can provide a faster and simpler way to present information to the students. They can come down to the level of a student and so are definitely better than computers. What is more, teachers are role models for students. They are scholars in action. They not only teach academic subjects, but also many social skills.

On the other hand, it is also true that the use of computers in today’s classrooms is also the need of the day. Teachers should use computers to add innovation to their teaching methods. Power point presentations can make even the dull and boring subjects seem interesting. So computers and teachers should not be treated as rivals to each other. They should play a complementary role so that today’s classrooms become very interesting and our children can compete with other children of this global village.

To put it in a nutshell, I can say that, no doubt computers are being used in the classrooms but they can never replace the teacher.

The world would be a much poorer place without colour. To what extent would you agree or disagree.

Colours are one of the greatest blessings that god has bestowed upon people in the world. Have you ever thought what it would be like to live in a world without colour. Forget everything for a moment and start using your imagination. Try to think how you would feel if people, cats, dogs, birds, butterflies and fruits had no colour at all. You would never want to live in such a world. Would you?

Colours have a crucial role in man’s communication with the outside world and in the proper functioning of his memory. Hearing or touch alone are not enough to define objects. How can we define colourless flowers placed on a colourless table.

Human eye can recognise millions of colours. Identifying objects and our surroundings are not the only benefits of a diversity of colours. Colours also give us a lot of pleasure. The beautiful blue sky, the blood red sunset or a rainbow after a rainfall do add happiness to our lives. The colours of nature have been arranged so as to appeal to the human soul. Nowadays some prisons are painted pink and green to put prisoners in a better mood.

Colours hold a special significance in our culture also. In some parts of the world white is worn for weddings and black for funerals. In other parts white is the colour of mourning. Red is the symbol of love. Red also represents danger. Blood is red; fire engines are red and traffic signals are also red.

Colours also reflect the personality of a person. The colour of your clothes can have a considerable impact on how you are perceived. Light colour reflects a sober personality. Colours also have been used as a treatment of some mental disorders.

To put it in a nutshell, I can say that the world would definitely be a much poorer place without colour. They add life and beauty to our world.


Blog Archive