Thursday, June 19, 2014
Nowadays we are going through a crisis, a crisis greater than political (and) wider than cultural. It’s the economic crisis which was intensified by the dramatic increase in fuel’s price. Individuals (people/ the government) may believe that this is the best way to solve the growing traffic and pollution problems. There is no doubt in my mind that (no comma) this statement will only scratch the surface of the main problems, and there are more beneficial and efficient solutions which will (old use: avail) benefit the society substantially.
(More and more nations are choosing to increase the price of petrol for many and different reasons. ---> unnecessary sentence, your topic sentence could be the next one) One of the repercussions (no comma) of raising the price of petrol is that petrol stations will turn into chaos with citizens who will try to fill their fuel tanks early enough, in order to be on time for a lower price. Consequently, this (measure) will only affect the civilians financially and not the petrol stations’ owners who will only have profits (make profit) from this situation. Moreover, from an environmental perspective, the whole
hazardous situation, will not raise any awareness on environmental issues. For instance, despite what many people might say, our (people's) pursuit will only be on how we/ they can decrease the gas consumption we/ they had last month.
To alleviate the situation, the government ought to provide citizens with cleaner and alternative fuels such as natural gas and diesel. Additionally, rarely do we see citizens using hybrid cars which seems to be a great solution to pollution problems. The government also needs to organize advertising campaigns so that individuals start using public transport (more)or
take their rides circulate on foot. Last but not least, a valuable idea would be if government establish some special courses at schools in order to educate the younger generations on certain pressing environmental issues.
On balance, the drawbacks of increasing fuel prices outweigh the advantages, so I (always capital) am inclined to believe that governments need to start prioritizing their reforms and think about the common good.
Comment: Well done Germanos! I can see you have understood the writing guidelines I have given you and with a little more practice you will more than ready for the exams! 6/ 9
IELTS Speaking Score 8.5 with Native English Speaker subtitles: To get acquainted with the beginning of the procedure
IELTS BAND 7 vocabulary for speaking test (part 1): Vocabulary tips
|The amazing future candidates!|
Tuesday, June 17, 2014
Monday, June 16, 2014
Many people think that it is the parents' duty to teach their offspring
s how to be positive members of the society by giving them the appropriate virtues. This argument is maintained because scientists support the view that parents have a significant impact on their children's behavior and this is a partly true, since most of the children tend to imitate their parents' characteristics. For instance, most of the children would like to adopt/ have achieve the same occupation as with their father or mother. (You overused introductory phrases, but did not explain your argument fully, eg with an example)
On the other hand , it cannot be denied that many families do not have the adequate educational levels for this purpose, thus they are unable to cultivate their children. As a consequence, the only capable institute to do this is the school, whose imperative duty is to teach their pupils how to become acceptable citizens of the society. (Why is education necessary for values like respect to be taught to children? Your argument here does not add up.) And: how can schools teach values? (Read the comments on Germanos' essay)
However, there is another group of people arguing that neither school or parents could teach the children how to be (good?) members, but the society through the communication and interaction with their peers would/will teach them.
Although However, from a social aspect, it is true that statistically the most of the criminals have less educational experience or descend from families which didn’t give them the appropriate tools and knowledge. Needless to say that the economic crisis has contributed to the low quality of the educational system that drives children to the wrong direction. (Is this part of the writing topic?)
Taking everything into account, it appears to me that children have to be cultivated by both parents and educators in order to become excellent members of the society. My opinion is that society should build strong institutions and organizations that would mentor families and teachers how to guide children into the appropriate direction. (The conclusion is OK)
As shown in the pie chart, the most harmful cause worldwide is over grazing which covers 35 percent of total causes. As we can see, the second adverse phenomenon is deforestation (by 5 units less--> is this a phrase?) and the last one is over cultivation (why by?) 28 percent of the total (opposing?) effects.
According to the table, European agricultural productivity has been affected in the most significant way. As can be observed (you have overused phrases beginning with as), the total land degraded in Europe is 23 percent, while at the same time it is 13 percent in Oceania and 5 percent in North America.
However, from the table it may be inferred that there is no over cultivation in Oceania, albeit this phenomenon is the third cause of worldwide degradation.
as we could see in the pie chart, there is a 7 percent of other factors that have not been estimated yet, which contribute to the decreased agricultural productivity. (Why refer back to the pie chart when you have not sufficiently covered the data in the table?)
Friday, June 13, 2014
According to the pie chart, (comma) the main cause of global land degradation was overgrazing (no gap necessary), reaching 35% of the total causes. In addition, deforestation was on the same range of levels as overgrazing, around 30%. Last but not least, overcultivation and other causes were the rest 28% and 7% respectively, which renders both of those causes as secondary roots of the problem.
From the data contained in the table, it can be seen that Europe had the highest level of land degradation, around 23%, and that’s mainly due to the fact that its (no apostrophe) influence/ OR better: the destruction by deforestation and over cultivation was significant, reaching 9.8% and 7.7% respectively. However, Oceania possessed the highest percentage of over grazing, at 11.3%, and the lowest percentage of overcultivation which amounted to 0%, while North American land was affected by those two phenomena by 1.5% and 3.3% correspondingly.
Taking everything into account,global land degradation was well distributed (this statement is unclear- do you mean among the 3 countries?), and over
the 50% was caused by over grazing and deforestation, whereas there were numerous fluctuations among the regions.
Note: do not just report data; make some more comparisons, as well.