dim/essayforum_raw_writing_10k huggingface dataset:
**They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement.  
  
To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste?**  
  
The waste recycling scale - should it be more widespread?  
  
Nowadays,the concept of eco-environment has been raised. People is facing the environmental issue eagerly and trying to find the solutions to repair it. There are several ways can achieve the goal, and recycling is one of them. Some people believe that only by making the law can make people do the recycle. In my opinion, I support this statement and my reasons are following.  
  
First of all, although recycling takes time to recognize which categories of your garbage and what is proper handing way, it is the easiest method which everyone can do it. However, lazy is people's nature that people would ignore to do so only for their own convenience. In order to let people practice the recycling, the government should be the leader sheet which not only announces the importance of recycling but also legislate. Furthermore, the laws should restrict not only individual but the industries. I think only when the whole society anticipate in this activity so as to make the laws meaningful.  
  
On the other hand, others argue that it is unnecessary to make the law because recycling should be integrated into our life. Rather than legislating, they assume the government should pay more attention on the education. I do believe the emphasis on the sustainable environmental education is able to let the next generation understand the importance of recycling, but it is easy becoming an empty talk. For example, in my country, people have to pay the considerable money to the government to handle the trash properly.The irony is that we learn lots of environment-friendly issue since young but grow up people never do the recycling.  
  
There is an old saying that actions speak louder than words. I convinced that if the government make recycling become an obligation, then the people is willing to obey.
Arlen, there is a certain degree of confusion in the way that you deliver the message of your essay. This is due to poorly constructed sentences stemming from your limited ability to properly form English sentences. For example, you said:  
  
*... the government should be the leader sheet...*  
  
The correct sentence formation should have been:  
  
*... the government should be the leader in legislating...*  
  
Do you see how your desire to create a complex sentence creates an improper simple sentence in the process? As such, you need to practice better word usage and sentence formation in your upcoming practice tests. In addition to that, there is also a need to for you to understand that the point of view that you do not support should never close the essay. That is because when you present the side that you do not support in the last part of the essay, that is most likely what the examiner will remember as your supporting statement. Mostly because the point of view that you support or are in agreement with is usually made the closing part because the strength of your essay comes from the way that you have a strong, positive finish to your message.
**Most countries allow 18-year-olds to drive a car. Some people say this is a good age to start driving. Other people say that the minimum age to drive a car should be at least 25 years.**  
  
## Youth or experience when driving?

  
  
For many years now, the debate has raged on about whether to raise the driving age from 18 to 25. There are a number of studies that show how susceptible 18 years old drivers are to accidents and many believe that boosting the driving age will keep the roads safer. Each side has valid points to make, so let's take a closer look at the pros and cons of this proposal.  
  
Those proponents of age raising argue that such decision has many benefits.  
For instance, it will allow additional exercise for young people. Statistics in USA show that obesity in American youth is at an all time high. If kids cannot simply drive everywhere, they will be forced to walk and ride bicycles, which is great for their long term health. There are many experts who believe that raising the driving age can put a serious dent in the epidemic of youth obesity.  
  
On the other hand, I agree with those who are in the camp of opponents of age upraising who argue that such decision has many drawbacks.  
  
Firstly, it can lead to less socially active teens, Teens who live in urban areas are typically able to get around without the use of a car, but those who live in rural regions may struggle to develop an active social life if they are not mobile. This can lead to a decreased self esteem and a failure to recognize social cues later in life.  
  
Secondly, teens can't run errands. While some parents may worry excessively about their teens when they are on the road, but those who look on the bright side tend to look forward to their kids turning 18. After being forced to play chauffeur for years, the tables finally turn and they can ask their kids to run errands for them.  
  
After looking at the drawbacks of raising the driving age to 25, it is clear that such decision will have negative effect on the long term although what could be seemingly thought of the contrast.
Ahmed, while you have written a pretty solid essay, I think there is an important part of the prompt requirement that you forgot to represent. You did not acknowledge having your personal point of view in any part of the essay. Please review the prompt requirement. You missed out on representing a significant part of the essay which would definitely lower the task accuracy score for this essay and possibly prevent you from getting a passing score if this had been an actual test. When you are required to present an opinion in the essay, that is to be presented at the end of the opening paragraph and be fully discussed within the 4th paragraph of the essay. At this point, your essay is problematic because, even though you created the proper discussion for the essay, the missing elements are of vital importance to properly representing the prompt requirements. Due to that error on your part, you ended up discussing the essay in the wrong manner and totally presented an essay that is not prompt adherent. I would not expect a passing score for this essay in an actual setting.
Unfortunately, that is not enough. You see the essay prompt is meant to test your knowledge of current events and / or its influence upon your life. Therefore, you need to discuss it as a totally separate paragraph in the essay. The examiner gives you the chance to prove your English comprehension skills, development of complex sentences, and lexical knowledge of the language by allowing you all opportunities to present your discussion strengths. By simply attaching your opinion to the reasons you provided for the agree or disagree discussions, you are selling yourself short and not allowing yourself to present your English written skills to its fullest potential to the reviewer. For an opinion paragraph, it is always best that you present it as the 4th paragraph in the essay because the weak discussion should be in the second paragraph and the strong discussion, in the third. That paragraph then acts as a supporting paragraph for your opinion so you can manage to just say "*I agree with the aforementioned reason for a number of personal reasons. Reasons such as ..."* This will then serve to create a strong personal opinion on your part and allow you to further develop the discussion that will prove your analytical English writing skills as well.
## Science at the expense of art and literature in universities?

  
  
Education is considered as one of the most important things in our life. It makes students live in a world full of information and creativity. Some subject such as art and literature have influence their thoughts and believes, while others such as science help them discover many things about the world. Science, art and literature must be taught at universities.  
  
Undoubtedly, teaching science as a subject at universities has many benefits. One of these benefits is that science gives students information about the world we live in. It helps them discover more scientific details of various natural phenomena. By way of illustration, without science it is impossible to know the answers of how and why earthquakes, volcanoes, and floods are happening. In addition, science allows students to become much smarter and intelligent. It leads them to think and to use their brain power. For instance, it is scientifically proved that almost all the students who have never studied science think in a passive way and rely more on memorizing things by heart rather than analyzing them logically. All in all, science must be the only subject to be taught at universities.  
  
However,we need literature and art to be taught at universities as well. Literature and art help students to develop their thinking skills as well as encouraging them to think deeply and share their thoughts with each other. As a case in point, when students read Romeo and Juliet's story ,each one of them will have his point of view on the story, what is even better is that they have the opportunity to share their thoughts with each other. Additionally, literature and art give students freedom to think without limits, a chance to live in a world of imagination .To illustrate, Students can write their own stories in which they use their imagination. In brief, Literature and art have a big value in our studies and our life in general.  
  
Undeniably, students at universities must study science,art and literature. Each one of these subjects completes the other. Namely, from science ,students learn how humans are born , and from art and literature they will learn how humans can be independent and see life from different perspective. In addition, when students have knowledge in science, art and literature together, it will provide them with great privileges. A lot of great writers and painters were men of science. As an illustration, Issac Asimov was an American author as well as a professor of biochemistry at Boston University .To conclude , as much as we need science, we also need art and literature in our education system.  
  
Indeed , science, art and literature are one of the most important subjects to be taught at universities. Each one of them has its benefits. teaching these three subjects at universities has proven beneficial for students . When students study all these subjects ,they will develop a sense of creativity, and they will get more intelligent.
Your essay is decent except for a few things that I noticed.  
"For instance, it is scientifically proved that almost all the students..." .. I would replace "proved" with "proven"  
I am confused as to why you ended the second paragraph saying science should be the only subject to be taught when your main point was that all three subjects are important. Also, I would consider revising the first sentence of your conclusion from, "Indeed , science, art and literature are one of the most important subjects to be taught at universities." to, "Science, art, and literature are some of the most important subjects to be taught at universities."
Hajar, first of all, you will need to learn how to develop more interesting titles for your posts other than just paraphrasing the prompt questions. Users here have been banned for not using creative titles for their posts. I hope you will be able to come up with a more creative title with your next new thread. I would hate to see you get banned on such a simple technicality. Now, about your essay...  
  
When you are asked to agree or disagree with a statement being made in the prompt, you must reflect that in your opening statement. The opinion that you will be supporting, whether in support of or not in support of the topic, is the whole point of your essay discussion. You state your opinion then support it with facts or experiences from your own life or knowledge. In this case, you should have presented information in the first paragraph that clearly indicates that you support a variation of the prompt proposal due to a number of reasons. Those reasons, would create the succeeding paragraphs in your essay as you have those sections developed now.  
  
Failure to properly address the prompt requirement in the opening statement will result in a lower Task Accuracy score for you in the actual test. Don't leave anything to chance. Always make sure that you represent all of the prompt requirements in the opening statement. That is the most critical part of your essay.
Essay question  
  
**Do children spend too much time watching television?**  
  
Notes  
  
Things to write about  
  
1. Education  
2. Physical activity  
3. Your own idea  
140-190 words.  
  
## TV screen lures children

  
  
Most kids today spend from three to five hours a day in front of a screen. They often have a TV in their bedroom and watching television is their favourite activity.  
  
On the one hand, I firmly believe that watching television is the best way to keep up to date, as it's much more reliable than the Internet. Furthermore, some TV programmes, such as documentaries or historical movies, can be very educational and they are much more enjoyable than textbooks.  
  
On the other hand, most kids watch programmes which are not suitable for their age and not educational at all. In addition, children who spend too much time watching TV are more likely to be overweight, as they don't play any sports.  
  
In conclusion, I don't think kids should stop watching television, as they need a form of entertainment, but they shouldn't spend more than two hours a day in front of the TV screen and they should be outdoors more.  
  
170 words
@Sarasped  
I'm curious about this essay's purpose. Is this a writing assignment?  
  
Your grammar is good. You may want to vary your sentence lengths a little bit to keep the readers interested. All but the last sentence are easy to follow.  
  
Content wise, you lay down lots of statements with little support. For example, you stated that television is more reliable than the Internet. However, the point is that you didn't provide any support or reason why one is more reliable. Maybe you should add something like "television programs are more reliable because the contents that go on TV are often selected carefully by professional editors. In contrast, contents on the Internet can be created by anyone." Perhaps you should pick only the most convincing statements to save space for the supports of such statements.  
  
One more thing, maybe you should state your position at the beginning. It would make things easier for the reader.  
  
Best,  
TN.
The question is not whether or not children should stop watching television, but if they watch TOO MUCH. Through your essay, you seem to err on the side that they watch too much television. However, your concluding sentence reads like you misunderstood the prompt.  
  
I agree with @catnguyen181  
  
Statements don't mean anything if you don't back it up with facts. Cut down wordiness so you have more space to back up what you're saying. Anyone can make points. Not everyone can back them up. Make your point clear in the first paragraph, and then conclude strongly.  
  
Change second paragraph. "While tv can be used to educate through documentaries and the news, it can also distract children from their education. Most children...." into third paragraph. "Studies also show that children who spend too much time watching tv are prone to become overweight. Due to today's obesity problems, this is a huge problem."  
  
Something like that. Think about it, then cut. There's a lot of fluff in here that is not necessary, like the stuff I just pointed out.
**Most countries allow 18-year-old to drive a car. Some people say this is a good age to start driving. Other people say that the minimum age to drive a car should be at least 25 years**  
  
================ IELTS ESSAY======  
  
Every country has its own rules for driving. There are many arguments for and against raising the driving age. While some people support 18 years as the minimum age for driving cars. Others, believe that driver's license should be permitted only for 25 years old or higher. This essay will analyze both points of view of this argument.  
  
On the one hand, many people strongly believe that 25 is a better age since people are more mature. A mature person will be a responsible driver. For example, my brother, who is 20 years old, was involved in an accident recently in Egypt and he had four driving penalties in last two years. I felt that he should have been more mature before being eligible for a driver's license. Additionally, when they are 18, most youth should be concentrating on their studies and careers.  
  
On the other hand, raising the age does not guarantee a reduction in deaths. The reason why drivers crash is a lack of experience. For instance, with one year driving experience, a driver whose age is 18 is having the same possibility to make accident as a driver in his 25, so, Age is not a determining factor as far as experience. Reducing the driving age will not dramatically increase the death or injuries.  
  
After looking at both sides of this debate, I believe that 18-year-olds are not mature enough to drive cars. The best age should be 25 when one is better prepared to take on the responsibilities of being a driver.  
  
please let me the band score for this ielts general essay , thanks in advance.
About your Introduction, I would rather remove your first sentence. It has nothing to do with the topic and giving general information is not really good in the IELTS.  
  
I like how you paraphrased the question, but I think it would be better to combine your second and third sentences.  
  
I really like your idea in the second paragraph, but the way you present it can definitely be improved. Your example is good, but before it - it would be better to expand your idea additionally - like right now it seems like, you are giving example, before fully developing your idea - which is not very good in my opinion.  
  
About your third paragraph, again the idea is good. But you have just explained why drivers over 25 are more responsible, so by inference, the chances for having an accident should be lower. You can write that the age is important, but the experience is more significant when it comes to safe driving.
@eetester  
Just a few things I noticed:  
"While some people support 18 ... Others, believe that driver's license ..."  
These two sentences seem to need revised. I would suggest either changing this information to, "While some people support 18 years as the minimum age for driving cars, some believe that driver's license should be permitted only for 25 years old or higher." or, "Some people support 18 years as the minimum age for driving cars; however, others believe that driver's license should be permitted only for 25 years old or higher."  
  
Also I would suggest expanding more on why you came to the conclusion that 25 is the ideal age.
**The graph below shows average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person in the United Kingdom, Sweden, Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007.**  
  
## average carbon dioxide (CO2) spread in different world areas

  
  
The provided line chart illustrates the average emission of the CO2 per person in four European countries for a 40 year period beginning in 1967.  
In detail, the CO2 emission in the United Kingdom and Sweden had decreased. Especially in Sweden, besides the markedly lift between 1967 and 1977, it had dropped from 9 to near 5.5 metric tonnes in 40 years. On the other hand, the graph depicts the steadily growth of CO2 emission in Italy and Portugal. The former grew from 4 to almost 8 metric tonnes and the later was 5 times as much a in 1967 as in 2007.  
  
We can observe from the chart that the CO2 emissions in four countries were quite apart originally, but in the year of 2007, the number became closer and closer. Interestingly, in 2007, the average CO2 emission in the UK was equal to that in Portugal.  
  
*
Arlen, your report summary is good, but it could have been better. You merely restated the facts as it was presented in the chart that you were given to analyze. However, the proper and more complete approach to the report presentation would have been if you did a complete comparison analysis of the provided information. Note how the lines in the chart intermingle and overlap one another at certain points? Those are the comparison points that should have been included in your discussion. By presenting those comparison aspects, the essay would have been more informative and would have easily met the paragraph development requirements in the final presentation. Remember how each paragraph has to have at least 3 sentences in it? Look at your essay, you missed a few sentences in paragraphs 1 and 2. The conclusion of the examiner will then be that the information that you are providing is incomplete. He would be right if he assumed that because you did not properly develop the accurate summary report of this illustrative chart.
**Some people claim that there are more disadvantages of the car than its advantages. Do you agree or disagree? Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of having a car.**  
  
And just one additional question. Did I use more linking words like "however", "In conclusion" - than I should  
  
## on the wheels

  
  
Nowadays, many people state that cars bring more positives rather than negatives, whilst others disagree and think that the disadvantages from motor vehicles, such as cars are significantly more. This essay argues that the advantages from cars outweigh the drawbacks. The principle advantage of cars is the convenience of the transportation, whereas the main drawback is that automobiles are the main cause of the air pollution.  
  
Cars are the easiest and cheapest mean for traveling from place to place. Nearly everybody on the planet can travel wherever he wants due to the very well developed infrastructure in the most regions of the world. Moreover, the travel by cars is considerably cheaper compared to the other means of transportation. For example, according to a research conducted by Harvard university, in every major European city, the traveling with a car is three to seven times cheaper than the travel with public transport. As a result, cars make our lives dramatically more convenient and affordable.  
  
However, it is worth noticing that motor vehicles including cars are culpable for the increasing air pollution. In addition to this, exhaust gasses emitted by cars has caused Global Worming, as well as they are the main ingredients for creating smog. Because of this, many governments have imposed strict rules for the usage of cars and have restricted the entrance of many automobiles into the city centers. On the other hand, science offers a solution to this problem, as in the last few years many car manufacturers introduced many electric and non-polluting motor vehicles.  
  
In conclusion, the disadvantages of cars are clearly overshadowed by the benefits. Therefore, having weighed up the pros and cons and as a concomitant, of the recent innovations in the car industry, I am convinced that cars should continue to be used.
I think the following edits would be more suitable:  
  
Nowadays, many people believe that cars bring possess more positive attributes than the negative ,..  
  
Cars are the easiest and cheapest mean of transportation, indeed.  
  
...he wants due to the availability of urbane infrastructures in ~~the~~ most of the places ...  
  
I am convinced that the utilization of cars should still continue.  
  
George, overall the diction use is fine and your content is also appreciable. Well done. I advice you to use the connecting words only when necessary. Overuse of those tools can be fatal for your presentation. So, use it but under limit.