dim/essayforum_raw_writing_10k huggingface dataset:
*Employers sometime ask people applying for jobs for personal information, such as their hobbies and interests, and whether they are married or single. Some people say that this information may be relevant and useful. Others disagree.  
  
Discuss both views and give your opinion.*  
  
## the extra information about a job seeker

  
  
It is a fact that in most of the employment forms we observe many fields to be filled up by the employees such as their hobbies, interest, marital status. To some people these fields seem meaningless for a job interview. However, these are indeed valuable to the employers to figure out their certain requirements and goals towards the benefits of the organizations.  
  
There are numerous advantages to the employers for assessments with such basic personal information. To state a few, it helps an interviewer to understand the area of interests of the interviewee. It also enables the employer to analyse the abilities and qualities of the candidate. By doing so, employers also aggregate how beneficial the candidate for the respective job.  
  
In addition, we all know that married persons also have many more responsibilities other than their work life. There could be many unavoidable reasons for them to quit jobs or migrate places which has a direct impact in the long run of the company benefits. By checking the status of the person could help the employers to organize structure and planning which would be beneficial for the company.  
  
On the other side of the coin, some short-sighted people argue that this additional information are less relevant for the job interviews. Even they also put their views by adding that these are just attention seekers to get recruited in the market. Moreover, it is undeniable that a candidate should be sound in technical aspects, more appropriate to the nature of the job.  
  
To recapitulate, though technical knowledge plays a key role in case of a job requirement, however, the additional information show a good view to the employers to pick right candidates for the job considering the objective and requirements of their organizations. I strongly assert this viewpoint of sharing valuable details.
@jagadish  
Welcome to the forum. I hope that this feedback serves you well in your writing endeavors! If it does, don't hesitate to approach us for more information and details. We'd be more than happy to help as always!  
  
Firstly, I find that the general flow of the composition is well-done. What I only recommend is trying to make everything a tad bit more comprehensive. For instance, the second and third paragraphs can be merged together to create something more impactful.  
  
Furthermore, on top of that, I also recommend reviewing your conclusive paragraph. While I do not think that anything is wrong with the composition, the last sentence appears to be rather hanging than anything else. Try to rephrase it in a way that it leads to a distinguishable conclusion for your narration.
## waste production statistics based on data from three different companies

  
  
The line grap compares the amount of waste output by three companies from 2000 to 2005.  
It clear from the grap that there were significantly changes in amount of waste produced by all three companies shown on the grap. Overall , company A and company B saw waste output declined over the period , whereas the amount of waste produced by company C increase steeply.  
  
In 2000, company A produced 12 tonnes of waste , this was far higher than company B and company C , which was produced approcimately 8 tonnes and 4 tonnes of waste. In 2005, the amounts of waste output by company B and company C climed about 10 tonnes and 6 tonnes of waste respectively, while company A saw waste produced plummeted nearly 11 tonnnes.  
  
By 2005, the amount of waste output by company C were highest. Almost 10 tonnes of waste were produced by company C , compares about 8 tonnes of company A and only 4 tonnes of company C  
  
*   
The line grap compares the amount of waste output by three companies from 2000 to 2005. It clear fro
## is music able to connect what's different?

  
  
It is undeniable that music plays a vital role in the spiritual life of virtually everyone who belong to different cultures and ages. The idea here is that music is a good way to bring them together; however, I do not totally subscribe to this statement.  
  
On the one hand, music has been proven to be valuable in connecting different cultures. There are a variety of popular music genres which have become bridges for the cultural melting pot these days. For example, Taylor Swift with the country music inspired by American culture or Richard Clayderman with the instrumental and pop music from France is one of the well-known artists whose music has help connect cosmopolitan people all over the world. Besides, music has been known as an effective therapy to decrease the discrimination on the grounds of race. Don Shirley, a victim of racism used his musical talent to prove that everyone needs to live in harmony with each other instead of accepting the ethnic tensions.  
  
However, bringing people of different ages together maybe out of control of music. Actually, generation gaps cause many people have distinctive tastes in music. By way of illustration, the juvenile people have preference in vibrant kinds of music as pop, rock, electrical dance music whilst the elderly prefer to classical or soothing music. Moreover, the difference of lifestyle is the pivotal reason for this. The old have taste in songs contain insightful and thoughtful lyrics without superficial meanings, which are not likely to apply to the young with an active and happy-go-lucky lifestyle.  
  
In conclusion, it seems to me that music is a decent way to bring people of different cultures without ages together.
@lehuuhoaloc  
Hi! Welcome to the forum. I'm here to give you feedback on your writing. Hopefully, this will somehow help you in your writing endeavors.  
  
Firstly, the introductory parts are quite put-together. I appreciate how you had integrated smoother transition materials, making your essay incredibly sophisticated from the get-go.  
  
My only suggestions would be focused on the body of your paragraphs. Consider your second paragraph. While it was great that you had included a chunk of information as an example, it certainly took away from deepening the analysis in the first parts. Always try your best to link back to your primary thesis statement as it is what you should focus on.  
  
Furthermore, balance out your writing by trying to add more into the conclusion. If you're able to do this, you will be able to integrate more appeal to the text.
## foreign visitors and the local customs

  
  
*Some people believe that visitors to other countries should follow local customs and behaviour. Others disagree and think that the host country should welcome cultural differences. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.  
  
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.*  
  
The issue of whether travellers should obey local customs and behaviors when they visit to other countries or not is certainly a controversial topic. Despite some people utterly disagree that and claim the host country should be open-minded and accept culture differences. However, I personally believe that visitors should follow local policy as and respect their culture. The following statements will illustrate my point of views.  
  
First of all, some people said that if one country would like to embrace different concepts of other nationalities, people will become more flexible and diversity, which can be easily get along with different kinds of people. Nevertheless, in my humble opinion, it means lose of their own culture's features. Take a real example, New York is an international city and millions of different countries' people live there, yet we even do not know how to describe New Yorker's behaviors or their customs. Their own customs are getting vanish due to the acceptance of culture difference. Based on this reason, it is quite inappropriate to accept all countries' culture difference.  
  
Second, following and respecting local policy would be a proper way out. Not only preserve the original of local people's behaviors,but also they share the different values to the visitors. In the meanwhile, visitors should respect that some people in the world who are not having similar concepts like them and it would be perfect if they can balance their culture differences. For instance, like Australia, they embrace people from around the world to immigrate to their country while they still keep their original culture concept and their culture and local customs are not influenced by outsiders at all.  
  
In summary, I still believe that respect local customs is necessary. No matter others dispute and think that host country should be open-minded, I strongly consider protecting local culture is overriding.  
  
**Question : I don't know if I should stand firmly at one side or not in summary..( I mean after I discuss both point of views, should I state which position I prefer or i think it is better than the other one in summary?)**
@roswita116  
*people utterly disagree **with** that*  
I would add a "with" here.  
  
*local policy ~~as~~ and ...*  
I don't see any need for the "as" here.  
  
*... more flexible and ~~diversity~~*  
"diverse" would be more appropriate in this sentence.  
  
*~~In the~~ meanwhile*  
Consider removing the "in the", or changing the phrase altogether.  
  
*... that respect**ing** local customs is necessary. No matter others dispute and think that host cou**ntries** should ..., I strongly ~~consider~~  protecting local culture is ~~overriding~~.*  
  
For the part in blue, you should rephrase as it doesn't make sense. For the last part, I think you should use a better word than "consider" in this case. "protecting local culture is overriding" doesn't make sense to me, so you should rephrase that.  
  
***I don't know if I should stand firmly at one side or not in summary..( I mean after I discuss both point of views, should I state which position I prefer or i think it is better than the other one in summary?)***  
  
The prompt asks for you to give your own opinion, so you should stand firmly on one side. I'm not sure what you mean by "state which position I prefer or I think it is better", as the position you prefer should be the "better" option *in your opinion.*  
  
Hope this helps.
## Young People are Encouraged To Work or Travel

  
  
**In some countries, young people are encouraged to work or travel for a year between finishing high school and starting university studies.  
Discuss the advantages and disadvantages for young people who decide to do this.**  
  
Utilizing gap year period through working or travelling is commonly supported in several countries. Many people argue it is unnecessary as it will reduce willingness to continue to higher education and it take much of budgets, but others claim it will give them job experiences and knowledge about others cultural lives.  
  
First of all, many students who have graduated from secondary school join directly to university and refuse gap year opportunity as they claim it is useless. They state that going to working place will reduce spirit to enter university because normally workers are merely focus on collecting money for purchasing properties. In addition, taking a year to explore other places requires excessive cost for recovering accommodations, flights, and foods during holiday time. The graduates think it would be useful if the money is channeled to educational fee. Thus, these activities have possibilities to decrease chance to enter further level of education.  
  
However, some people disagree with the previous opinion, and assume that involve in workplace has a huge benefit. The workers will acquire job experience that is fundamental to seek appropriate major prior to entering universities and they can collect money for paying annual fee of university. For travelers, it also gives them diversity perspectives because they have visited many regions with different traditions, behaviors, and characters. Moreover, they could enjoy the moment after conducting final exam in high school and preparing self to go to university.  
  
To sum up, working and travelling have possibilities to disturb of spirit to carry on to post-graduate level and need a plenty proportion of money. Meanwhile, it is valued meaningful due to having work experience and understanding of cultural diversity.
@Ali20  
*Utilizing **a** gap year*  
You should use "a" in the first sentence.  
  
*take much of budgets*  
You should rephrase this part as it doesn't sound right. "take up much of a budget" may sound better.  
  
*assume that ~~involve~~ in **a/the** workplace*  
It should be "involved" rather than "involve" and you should indicate if it's "a" workplace or "the" (a specific) workplace.  
  
You have good writing and great points. I hope this helps.
***Some people believe that unpaid community service should be a compulsory part of high school programmes (for example working for a charity, improving the neighbourhood or teaching sports to younger children)  
  
To what extent do you agree or disagree?***  
  
## unpaid social service as a part of mandatory program in the school

  
  
Giving an opportunity for pupils studying in secondary school to do unpaid social service is supported of some to apply as part of mandatory program in the school. In my point of view, I totally agree with the notion as it has it will enhance student's understanding about social surrounding and the will obtain job experience.  
  
To begin with, some of educational experts argue that the aim of education is to improve the quality of social life. Moreover, setting up social charity as the part of compulsory curriculum will elevate student's perspectives about the social life. Then, comprehensive assimilation of students can make synthesis with the relevant theories which they had been studied to deal with social problems. Taking for example, a massive number of agricultural students in Indonesia held voluntary project in rural area to help farmers for accelerate their fields and teach them about the way to sell the products on social platform.  
  
Secondly, today many of prominent companies need job experiences prior to joining. In contrast, only a minority of students who have it. Then, integrating between academic life with social project will give students job impressions. Example, I had friend who studied in accounting did social internship in cooperative business organization, he helped the members to measure cash flow and managed workers payments. Fortunately, after graduated from university he was directly hired by startup company in my town  
  
.  
To conclude, involving students to unpaid community service has huge benefits. First, students can know properly about the real of social condition and they can get working experience.
@Ali20  
*do unpaid social ...*  
This part is confusing. Do you mean that "unpaid social service is supported *by* some rather than *of* some?  
*it will enhance ... and ~~the~~ will obtain job experience.*  
"about social surrounding" also sounds confusing to me. I think surrounding*s* would sound better, or another phrase altogether.  
You also used *the* instead of *they*.  
*... held voluntary project in rural area ...*  
  
I would suggest saying "*a*" voluntary project rather than just "voluntary project" by itself, and "a" rural area or rural areas if multiple areas were involved.  
  
*... minority of students ~~who~~ have it.*  
I think the "who" here is unnecessary.  
*Fortunately, after graduated from ...*  
It should be "after graduating" rather than "after graduated"  
  
Hope this helped.
## choice of a study major

  
  
*Some people think that all university students should study whatever they like. Others believe that they should only be allowed to study subjects that will be useful in the future, such as those related to science and technology.  
  
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.  
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.*  
  
There are two opposing theory on the policy of choosing the major in which the person is going to pursue their study. Some people vote for personal interests and others insist on studying majors efficient for the future. Although there are many benefit to second attitude, considering the interests definitely is the preferable theory in ny idea.  
  
Nowadays most countries development seriously depends on science and technology. Moreover, in specific periods of time, lack of a certain field of study is needed. Consequently, countries should fill this needs by educating specialists. Despite the fact that it id an absolute right of each individual to be satisfied with their concentration, urging people to seek a particular degree in deniable in some occasions.  
  
On the other hand, being interested in something like your major, which is a time-consuming process, bring many benefits. Definitely it makes the person happy and content with their life. Furthermore, productivity, as the most important factor of any workplace, will go up considerably in this situation. Although in some cases it may turn out frustrating if there was no need for their skill in the job market. It is worth to get your loved field of study a chance.  
  
According to a paper, on disadvantageous of pursuing a compulsory education, 70 percent of the subjects scolded themselves of giving up their dreams. On the contrary, specialists in a field who faced unemployment, optimistically believed that the energy they take from their studies really suits them.  
  
On the whole, studying a major with career prospects is beneficial for both society and people. But interests are an integral part of choosing one that increase the quality of workplaces and the people's life styles.
Great structure!! 👍👍I think your writing task 2 at least can get band 6.5 !!!  
  
You both explained pros and cons and took several examples to support your statements.  
  
Furthermore, you utilized a lot of linking words and synonyms.🙂🙂  
  
I had written the same type of writing task 2 recently but don't know if I should stand firmly at one side or not..( I mean after I discuss both point of views, should I state which position I prefer or i think it is better than the other one in summary?)  
  
Hope my opinion would help you.🙂🙂
Hello @arhaz!  
  
these my comments;  
  
**\***~~majors efficient~~, ~~countries development~~  ( adj + N), efficient majors.developing/developed countries  
**\*** i really appreciate your way to deliver the paraphrase of question and you did it well, yet i'll suggest you to put your general reason of your thesis statement for helping examiners to understand your writing's aim.  
  
**\*** i examine your second paragraph don't give strong argument. you should make it cohesive between sentences contained your paragraph. it's like when you make history it needs good flow and well transition between accidents.  
  
Keep spirit! i believe you can solve it gradually.
**Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?**  
  
## **Railways versus Roads**

  
  
These days, people are discussing how should governments spend their income on transportation. Some people believe that governments should create new roads to improve the transportation system. In contrast, including me, thinks that building new railways is more beneficial and crucial then transportation then making new roads for society.  
  
Firstly, one advantage of railways, which is the possibility of reducing road crashes, can make it more reasonable to spend money. Mostly, road crashes happen because of the drivers' carelessness, such as drivers can be tired, look at her/his phone or talk with someone in the car. Even governments or other organizations create campaigns about drivers' carelessness, these acts still occur. So, governments can encourage people to use public transformation with spending funds to develop new efficiencies and less-time consuming railways instead of creating new roads and made people use their private cars. When governments spend money on railways which have more advantages than private cars, people will choose to use public transportation, and road crases will reduce.  
  
Secondly, from the perspective of governments, they probably will earn more money on railways instead of roads in the future. They will govern the system and take money from each person. Of course, mostly, governments take money from the highways too. However, on the roads, people give money for a car, not for the number of individuals who travel in the car. In the railways, they will charge each person. Of course, logically, people should choose to go with their private vehicles if it will be cheaper; however, a well-structured railway system will be less time consuming and comfortable. So, even it is more expensive, people will choose the railways system because of its advantages.  
  
As a result, both for governments and societies, making new railways is more logical than making new roads because the railway system will reduce the crashes, and the governments can earn more money from the railway system. So, because of these reasons, I firmly believe that governments should spend the transportation part of their incomes on railways.  
  
Hello, I am trying to achieve more than 6.5 points. Can you give me some suggestions about how I can improve my writing? Thanks.
Hello @nali1  
  
These my comments that my improve your score.  
  
I appreciate your way to deliver paraphrase of the question, it is amazing. Furthermore,if you want to get high score you should give general reason of your position. "...that building ... transportation as it the holistic way to reduce a road accident as well as adding government income"  
  
However , you have a variety range of vocabulary that i suppose as your strengh. keep it up!