Some people think all lawbreakers should be put into prison. Others believe that there are better alternatives. Discuss both views and give your opinion.


As the world witnesses an increasing number of crimes every year, people seem to become a lot less tolerable towards lawbreakers. Some even suggests that all of them should be put into prison. Personally, I can understand why people make such behest, even though their request has clearly gone too extreme. Nowadays, the public is bombarded with horrible news like random shooting on campus and drunk driver hit and run, naturally people feel scared and worried. To lessen their insecurity, they believe that it is necessary to take harsh and strict measures, i.e. putting every lawbreaker behind bars. Even though their cause is reasonable, I do not find it adequate or practical to implement such proposal.

First of all, it is simply impossible in practice to bring every lawbreaker into prison. The number of people who commit small wrongdoings such as petty theft and illegal drug use is surprisingly large. There is not enough of manpower, resources, or time to catch everyone in question. Secondly, prisoners are generally not permitted to work outside the facility. Therefore, they make little contribution to the society, at least economically speaking. We, the taxpayers, on the other hand, have to carry the financial burden that the growing number of inmates brings. I believe this money can be better spent on other issues, such as fighting the poverty, promoting education in rural areas or improving current pension system.

There are better alternatives to dealing with the lawbreakers. In my opinion, people with small crimes can be assigned to special factories manufactories or facilities to help with the production. Not only can they make economic contribution, they are also able to learn and develop new skills, which can be extremely beneficial after their time is due. Alternatively, instead of prison, some of the lawbreakers should enter special educational facilities to get help from professionals. For example, prisoners who behave behavior violently due to mental illness are better off in an asylum.

To summarize, even though the idea to throw everyone who committed crime into prison sounds understandable, it is, in my eyes, inappropriate and impractical. Better alternatives exist as on how to deal with criminals the crime makers.

Hi, how are you?

The grammar and vocabulary of this essay is quite good, but the structure is not appropriate for the type of task. Take not that the IELTS have different types of task 2 and each type would require a different approach. For the appropriate approach for this type, see samples at the end of this document.

6.5 <--OVERALL BAND
6 TASK RESPONSE/TASK ACHIEVEMENT
• Introduction is not appropriate to the type of task
• View 2 is not adequately discussed
7 COHERENCE & COHESION
• There is reasonable paragraphing
• Transition is somewhat suave
• Reasoning is sound
6 LEXICAL RESOURCE
• There is adequate range of vocabulary
• There are slips in word forms
• There is a tendency to be wordy
7 GRAMMATICAL RANGE AND ACCURACY
• there is a mix of structures
• there is frequent error-free sentences
REVISED VERSION
The changes you find here are only grammatical and mechanical. Any change in content is for you to incorporate. Ideas set in bold (if any) are the ones that need to be improved, developed, or changed.

As the world witnesses an increasing number of crimes every year, people seem to become a lot less tolerable towards lawbreakers. Some even suggests that all of them should be put into prison. Even though their cause is reasonable, I do not find it adequate or practical to implement such proposal.

First of all, it is simply impossible in practice to bring every lawbreaker into prison. The number of people who commit small wrongdoings such as petty theft and illegal drug use is surprisingly large. There is not enough manpower, resources, or time to catch everyone in question. Secondly, prisoners are generally not permitted to work outside the facility. Therefore, they make little contribution to the society, at least economically speaking. We, the taxpayers, on the other hand, have to carry the financial burden that the growing number of inmates brings.

There are better alternatives to dealing with the lawbreakers. In my opinion, people with small crimes can be assigned to special factories or facilities to help with the production. Not only can they make economic contribution, they are also able to learn and develop new skills, which can be extremely beneficial after their time is due. Alternatively, instead of prison, some of the lawbreakers should enter special educational facilities to get help from professionals. For example, prisoners who behave violently due to mental illness are better off in an asylum.

To summarize, even though the idea to throw everyone who committed crime into prison sounds understandable, it is, in my eyes, inappropriate and impractical. Better alternatives exist on how to deal with criminals.

Good luck!

Tip for the day

In many countries prices of airplane tickets have dropped. Is it positive or negative situation? Write about your personal experience or knowledge.\\Air travel is cheap these days, allowing ordinary people to travel further. Some people say that airfare should be increased because this leads to environmental problems. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

If we break down the task, it is asking you to:
1. Discuss whether the drop in prices of plane tickets is a positive or negative situation
2. Discuss the view that airfare should be increased because this leads to environmental problems
3. Discuss the view that airfare should not be increased
4. Give your own opinion about airfares in relation to environmental problems

So in your introduction, you have to provide a quick answer to each.

Here is an example of how to do it:

[hook/background] With the emergence of numerous low-cost airlines, plane fares have dropped; thus encouraging people to travel more. [positive/negative] Provided that travel is now more economical and convenient, the tourism industry is expected to flourish and lead to economic development. [view 1] Yet, some people believe that airfares should be increased to limit air travel which leads to environmental problems. [view 2 and my opinion combined] I, like most others who oppose the previous view, believe that increasing airfares and limiting air travels are not the only solution to environmental problems and so should not done.


Then in the body each item is discussed:

Paragraph 1: discusses the positive effect of price drop

[Topic Sentence] Economic development is the end goal of low cost airfare. [Detail 1] It may sound far fetch, but in reality, low cost airfares have made travelling very economical and convenient that every country’s tourist spots have an influx of visitors almost every day. [Specific Example] The Palawan Underground River in the Philippines, for instance, receives thousands of visitors a day. This is mostly because of the now available Php2,000 roundtrip tickets by Cebu Pacific, an airline in the Philippines that offers very low airfares. [closing sentence] If such travel behavior continues, the tourism industry will flourish, jobs will be available to the locals, collection of taxes will be better, and eventually, economic development is attained.

Paragraph 2: discusses the view of increasing the price to stop environmental problems.

[Topic Sentence] Yet, some people believe that this drop in airfares have led to higher air traffic which eventually creates environmental problems. [Detail 1] They are particularly concerned about the toxic gases emitted by planes. [Detail 2] The emission is said to be increasing due to more planes travelling each day. [specific example] Philippine Airlines flies Manila-Cebu and back almost every hour every day. Multiply this rate by the number of airlines flying the same route. This is how may time planes could emit the toxic gases, thereby polluting the air. [closing sentence] Thus, to environmentalists, limiting people’s travel by increasing plane fares will also limit air traffic and the emission of toxic gases that contaminates the air, thereby resolving air pollution problems.

Paragraph 3: discusses the opposite view

[Topic Sentence] To a significant number of people, it is shortsighted to say that limiting air traffic would resolve air pollution. [Detail 1] While it indeed could minimize air pollution, doing so will bring about problems in other social aspect, more particularly, economic development. [Example] Hypothetically speaking, if a country is not easily accessible or is not frequented by tourists, its hospitality and tourism industry will not thrive, its potential to house globalized business would be hampered, job opportunities would be at a low, and not only the country, but more importantly, the locals would suffer. [closing sentence] Thus, to the more practical minded people, there are other ways of addressing environmental problems without having to sacrifice a country’s economic potential.

The authors opinion appears in the conclusion
[Topic sentence] At the end of the day, what is important is the people of a country are empowered, and [detail] they feel so whenever they can afford things that used to be unaffordable and when they have more livelihood opportunities. Both of these can be addressed by lower airfares. [closing] So, in my opinion, people have to collectively gather their wisdom and conceptualize environment friendly air travel which will preserve the environment without sacrificing economic growth.


Some people think that university should prepare students for employment while others think it should help students acquire theoretical knowledge. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

[Hook/background] University education is a necessity for better employment prospects; this is probably why [view1]most people perceive the function of such institution as mostly to provide skills for employability. Yet, there are still [view2]some who believe students should learn theoretical knowledge from universities instead. [own opinion]I, on the other hand, believe in the balance of theory and practice; thus, universities should be providing both.

[topic sentence/view1]To most people, the sole function of universities is to provide practical skills that would help students market themselves after graduation. [detail]Thus, curriculums and syllabi should cover basic skills in management, communication, production, finance, design, or whichever specialization they desire to have in the future. [specific example]In our company, most new applicants or even employees would blame their universities if they turn out to be incapable of accomplishing something basic like answering business phone calls, especially the irate ones. [closing sentence]They believe such practical skill, regardless of being too basic, should have been included in their curriculums.

On the other hand, [topic sentence/view2]some other people believe theoretical knowledge should be the focus of universities. [detail]Theories are explanations to how things happen; thus, if students possess such knowledge, they would easily comprehend situations and address problems accordingly. [specific]Similarly, in our company, these employees lacking basic skills appears to have clear understanding of the company’s daily operation. [closing]Thus, they are able to address trivial issues, mostly by relating these issues to theories that they have encountered in universities.

[own opinion as conclusion]In a more personal note, considering the above mentioned situations, it clearly appears that there should be balance between practical and theoretical skills. [detail]This is theoretical know-how, meaning one is capable of applying a theory to a practical situation. [summary/wrapping up] If the employees who had problems answering phone calls were taught how they can use communication theories in dealing with clients, then no problems would occur. This is the basic role of universities, to provide students with theories and teach them how such theories could be applied on particular situations. [closing]With such capability, students will be more strategic and creative ones they enter the workforce.
Some people believe that zoos should be removed, others don't. discuss both view and give your opinion.

[hook] Zoos over the years have served both as methods of entertainment for people and sanctuaries for animals. [view 1] While some people are strongly against the existence of zoos, [view 2] others highly value zoos for purpose of protecting animals. [own opinion] In my view, zoos should be regarded as alternative habitats for endangered species.

[topic sentence] Operating zoos is thought to be a violation of animal rights by some people. [detail] Firstly, cages limit animal’s freedom, and prevent it from roaming, running or swimming freely as in their natural habitats. [detail] Secondly, being separated with families or colonies, some wildlife may conduct self-destructive behaviours; thereby worsening their survival rate. [detail] Thirdly, visitors sometimes create noises that disturb these creatures. [specific example] For example, a famous zoo in Guangzhou runs both day and night in pursuit of higher profits. In this regard, most animals in there could not rest and develop abnormal biological clocks.

However, [topic sentence] some people think that zoos are essential for animals’ survival. [detail] One argument would be that they act as sanctuaries to prevent some species from extinction. [example] To illustrate, some illegal human activities, such as poaching of whales, ivory trades, and deforestation threaten most natural habitats. Therefore, zoos are good substitutes for rescuing endangered animals. [detail] Furthermore, with regard to an educational purpose, zoos provide learning opportunities about wildlife for children, many of whom can then develop a strong consciousness of protecting animals.

In conclusion, [own opinion] although zoos are not the best choices for wildlife, it seems to me that most endangered animals should still be kept in these artificial places for protection until natural conditions recover and irrational human behaviours are regulated.