Master English Essays – Essay Bank

Welcome to the Essay Bank! 

This post is part of our course: Master English Essays

If you haven’t signed up yet for that course, check it out at this link. 

Master English Essays course – start studying now

Remember to use the discount code of MONTHYEAR (e.g. MARCH2023) to get a lower price. 

How to use this page

I recommend saving this page and following this order: 

1) Watch the video on Udemy. 

2) Do the writing challenges for the topic (e.g. Advertising) that I give you in the video. 

3) When you have finished writing your essay, come here to read mine in detail. 

Remember – try to write your own essay first! 

What you will find here

You will find: 

• The essay title
• The core question
• My full plan 
• My full answer

For the Essay Arguments package, check out the Udemy course (at the start of the Topics Section). 

Topic: Advertising

Question: Some parents claim that advertisements are misleading for children while others allege that they provide useful information. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Core: Are advertisements misleading or useful?

Opinion: Some benefits but overall, the effect is misleading and therefore negative

Introduction

• Background sentence – Advertising to children has long been controversial.   
• Thesis statement – This essay will discuss both sides.

Body Paragraph 1: Useful (Neutral Voice)

• Advertising is the best way to let kids know about the products that are available on the market for them

Body Paragraph 2: Misleading (Neutral Voice)

• Advertising that is aimed at children should be banned because children are easily manipulated and their minds aren’t able to recognize when they are being sold to

Conclusion + Opinion:

• Opinion: Advertising to young children under 14 is negative because its misleading.
• Advertising to over 14s can have some value.

Essay:

The question of whether children should be exposed to advertising causes strong feeling on both sides. This essay will discuss both the argument that advertisements can be misleading as well as the suggestion that they can impart useful information.

Many people claim that advertising is useful for children. This claim is based on the idea that children can learn about the world, and in particular, the products that the world has to offer, from watching and reading advertisements. It has been argued that advertising is a method through which companies can teach youngsters about their products and services, helping them to make informed decisions in crucial areas, including what to request for Christmas! For instance, a child who was kept away from advertising and thus remained ignorant of the newest and most suitable toys to match their hobbies would find it difficult to explain to their parents what exactly they were interested in. As such, proponents of advertising to children argue, it is clear that advertising can provide a useful public information service.

In contrast, a great many people believe that advertising to children can be misleading and should therefore be heavily restricted. These people claim that young children have low levels of critical thinking capacity compared to adults, and, knowing this, companies target those children with advertising which is replete with false claims and outlandish exaggerations. These companies, it is said, can rest easy in the knowledge that children are credulous enough to be willingly spoon-fed this false or incomplete information unquestioningly. For instance, an advertisement targeted at young children which falsely stated that their product would make the purchaser, ‘the coolest kid in school’, might well find favour with its target audience. It is therefore claimed by many that advertising directed at minors can mislead, and potentially hoodwink, those minors, to their detriment.

From my perspective, the effect and therefore morality of advertising depends largely on the age of the child in question. Anyone under the age of approximately 14 years would indeed lack the necessary critical thinking skills to soberly evaluate advertising claims, and as such, targeting that demographic would be misleading and therefore immoral. However, teenagers over the age of 14 should have sufficiently developed to the point that they can do more than just take advertisements at face value. Therefore, for that group, advertising could indeed be useful.

Topic: Animals & Pets

Question: Some people think that resources should be spent on protecting wild animals, while others think those would be better used for the human population. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

Core: Should we spend money on wild animals or humans?

Opinion: We have the responsibility as the top of the food chain to protect animals

Introduction

• Background sentence – Spending money to protect animals is increasingly common but isn’t always supported.   
• Thesis statement – This essay will discuss both sides

Body Paragraph 1: Pro-Human (Neutral Voice)    

• Animals should be left to protect themselves. The ones who are strong, smart or adaptable enough will survive, and the weak will die out. Humans should instead spend money protecting ourselves.

Body Paragraph 2: Pro-Animal Protection (Neutral Voice) 

• Humans are above animals in the food chain, but as the most intelligent creatures, we have the responsibility of stewards of the planet, so we should protect wild animals

Conclusion + Opinion:

• Opinion: We have the responsibility as the top of the food chain to protect animals

Essay:

Ever since humans arrived at the top of Earth’s food chain, we have questioned our responsibilities and attitudes towards other animals. This essay will discuss whether valuable resources should be spent on protecting wild animals, or whether humans are the more worthy recipients.

Many people argue that humans have no responsibility towards animals. Humanity, the argument goes, reached the top of the food chain through our intelligence and ability to adapt to different situations. Proponents of this argument state that our hard-earned position entitles us to behave as we please, and does not come with any obligation towards the natural world. They further claim that the resources that would be spent on animal protection could far more effectively serve to improve the situation of vulnerable humans suffering in famines, droughts, and other natural disasters. For instance, they would say that a human child who needs to be rescued from a flood is a far more worthy recipient of help than a shy panda who needs to be coaxed into reproducing. In summary, many people believe that society’s resources would be better spent on humans rather than wild animals.

In contrast, many other people claim that protecting wild animals is our duty and that significant resources should be spent in pursuit of this goal. These people take the moral stance that our position at the top of the food chain, while granting us a good level of safety and comfort, also comes with an inherent and unignorable responsibility towards the wild animals whose habitats we have destroyed in our rise to the top. For example, the dolphins which drown after becoming entangled in fishing nets are direct victims of human activities, people say. Expending resources on improved fishing nets which reduce or even eliminate unnecessary suffering is both within our power and the right thing to do, these people claim. Therefore, it is right to use the resources at our disposal to protect wild animals.

In my opinion, while it is true that we should work together to eliminate human suffering as far as possible, we do also have a moral duty to protect the natural world. Before the advent of the human age, animals lived together for millions of years in a delicate natural balance, which we have disturbed. Like a house guest cleaning up after themselves, we should ensure that our presence disturbs the other residents of Planet Earth as little as possible, and that we do what we can to preserve their safety and way of life.

Topic: Art

Question: The government should lower the budget on the arts in order to allocate more money to education. To what extent do you agree?

Core: Should government spend less money on art/more on education?

Opinion: Disagree, because art has a lot of value

Introduction

• Background sentence – Some argue that education is more important than art so it should receive more funding
• Thesis statement – Art should continue to receive funding because brings lots of value
• Main Points: Increase Tourism; Expand Minds

Body Paragraph 1: Increase Tourism   

• Giving a prominent place to local art can help to encourage visitors from other cities and countries, as it gives the local area a unique flavour for tourists.

Body Paragraph 2: Expand Minds

• Displaying international art can allow local people to widen their horizons and learn something of the rest of the world.

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion: Art should continue to receive funding because brings lots of value
• Restate main points: Increase Tourism; Expand Minds

Essay:

There is a long-running argument from advocates of increased education spending that transferring arts funding to pay for education would be a welcome policy shift. I strongly disagree with this position, as arts can provide both chances to expand minds and increase tourism, and is therefore worth continuing to fund.

The first major reason why the arts should continue to receive financial support from the government is that it can expand minds. The arts can take many forms, with everything from painting and sculpturing through to music and theatre coming under its umbrella. What each of these disparate pursuits has in common is the ability to transport its audience to another world and provide an opportunity to see the world from a perspective different to their own. While difficult to measure in financial terms, the value of this service is, nevertheless, enormous. For instance, a play about the struggles of a newly arrived immigrant family might open the eyes and hearts of its audience, making them more sympathetic to and less suspicious of similar cases in the real world. While this is just one example of potentially thousands, it illustrates the power of the arts to open minds and bring people together – thus making clear that the arts should not be defunded in favour of education.

The second argument in favour of maintaining government support for the arts lies in the boost a thriving arts scene can give to tourism. In the modern, interconnected and globalized world of the 21st Century, tourism is a major source of revenue for many countries. While some of those countries can rely on natural wonders to bring in tourism revenue, many others instead lean heavily on the arts as a way of first attracting and then wowing their visitors. Take Paris as an example. While some might visit purely to enjoy the ambience of France’s capital, most tourists would place The Louvre, The Eiffel Tower and Notre Dame at the top of their ‘must-see’ list. Stripped of these artistic wonders, Paris would lose much of its lustre and ability to attract the masses. It is therefore clear that developing and maintaining a strong arts scene justifies continued government funding through the return on investment it can provide.

While it is undoubtedly important to allocate appropriate funding to education, I strongly disagree that the arts is the place to find that hard cash. Whether through the expansion of world views or the expansion of tourism revenue, the arts plays an important role in the functioning of a modern country, and its place in government spending plans should reflect this fact.

Topic – Business and Money

Question: As well as making money, businesses also have a responsibility towards society. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Core: Do businesses have a responsibility to society?

Opinion: Completely agree – there are strong reasons why companies should exercise social responsibility.

Introduction

• Background sentence – Common debate over whether companies should have social responsibilities
• Thesis statement – They should, because it’s beneficial to society and themselves
• Main Points – Helping Society; Helping Themselves

Body Paragraph 1: Helping Society  

• Companies exist as part of society, using the benefits that society provides, and as such, they have a responsibility to give back to society whenever possible.

Body Paragraph 2: Helping Themselves 

• Companies can improve their financial performance by undertaking certain socially valuable activities, as long as those activities are sufficiently promoted in order to let the general population know about them.

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion: Completely agree – there are strong reasons why companies should exercise social responsibility
• Restate main points: Helping Society; Helping Themselves

Essay:

While few would question the importance of profit and growth to a company, the necessity of exercising social responsibility is more debatable. In my opinion, companies should pursue social responsibility goals, for both moral and self-interested reasons.

Firstly, companies should exercise social responsibility because they have a moral imperative to do so. No man is an island, and while some companies have workforces that exceed the population of many islands, they too do not and cannot exist in a vacuum. Companies rely on the same infrastructure as any other member of society, whether it is the roads that their products travel along, the broadband internet that allows their customers to find them online, or simply the electrical connections that keep the lights on in their stores and headquarters. As members and beneficiaries of society, they should do what they can to improve the world around them. This could be as simple as opening their doors to homeless people in winter, or as complex as funding outreach programs in their local area. The fact that they benefit from the advantages that society bestows means that they have a moral obligation to combat societal problems whenever and however they can.

A less obvious but arguably more compelling reason for companies to work towards the good of the world around them is that such acts can be done in their own self-interest. Companies live and die on their reputations. As such, a company that is seen to be giving back to the community can burnish its public image and, in doing so, give itself an advantage in its specific market. An example of this is The Body Shop. While their products alone might be enough to help them compete in the cut-throat world of cosmetics, their oft-stated social goals, including eschewing any form of animal testing, put them head-and-shoulders above many of their competitors in the eyes of their increasingly socially conscious target audience. As such, it can be clearly seen that embracing social responsibility can give companies advantages in their marketplace.

Given the moral and financial imperative of publicly undertaking socially responsible projects, it is therefore clear that companies should consider such activities a central part of their future plans.

Topic – Education and Children

Question: Because many children are not able to learn foreign languages, schools should not force them to learn foreign languages. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Core: Should schools make children learn foreign languages?

Opinion: Disagree – students should be challenged and learn practical skills, and foreign languages fulfil both goals.

Introduction

• Background sentence – Foreign languages can be difficult, but should they be studied?   
• Thesis statement – Schools should challenge students and give them practical skills, so they should study foreign languages
• Main Points: Practical Value; Challenge

Body Paragraph 1: Practical Value   

• Children should study subjects that have a clear and practical value, which will help them to find a job when they finish school.

Body Paragraph 2: Challenge

• Children should be forced to study subjects that expand their minds and challenge them, not just the subjects they find easy.

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion: Disagree, because schools should challenge students and give them practical skills
• Restate main points: Practical Value; Challenge

It is indisputable that foreign languages can be difficult for children to learn, but whether schools should force students to study foreign languages is a matter of some debate. As I see it, schools certainly should ensure that their students learn foreign languages, due to the practical value of the language and the challenge of the learning process.

The most obvious advantage of learning a foreign language is its value in the real world. One of the key responsibilities of any school should be to prepare its students for life outside the school gates. Any school worth its salt should ensure its students graduate with the ability to both survive and thrive in the modern world, and teaching students a foreign language is one of the best ways to prepare them for both the world of work and the world in general. This is particularly true for students from non-English speaking countries. Schools in those countries should prioritise English in their curriculum, as a good level of English can open countless doors for the students, in educational, professional and even cultural terms. Imagine a child growing up in a country with a small population and its own unique language. Only being able to speak that one language would hugely restrict that child’s ability to fulfil his/her potential, whereas learning English or another foreign language as well would allow the child to study abroad, get a better job and understand the wider world. It is clear that the practical value of a foreign language makes it an indispensable part of any school curriculum.

The second, more often-overlooked advantage of learning a foreign language is the challenge inherent in doing so. Learning another tongue is difficult. It requires countless hours of study, and a willingness to work through periods in which progress seems slow and even non-existent. A student who has successfully acquired a second language must also have developed a strong level of self-discipline and good study techniques alongside the language itself. These soft skills make it far easier for that student to acquire other skills quicker and more easily in future, be it another spoken language, a computer programming language, or a different skill entirely. To continue the example from the previous paragraph, the child’s success in learning English would be merely a gateway to the future acquisition of more languages and skills, paving the way for a happy and successful life. Given the enormous benefits gained from learning a language, it would clearly be a dereliction of duty for schools to abandon language tuition on the grounds that, ‘it is difficult’.

In conclusion, the real-world value and soft skill development that learning a second language provides make any decision by schools to allow students to opt out of language classes a grave mistake.   

Topic: Environment and Nature

Question: Governments should make people responsible for looking after their own local environment. To what extent do you agree?

Core: Who should protect the local environment?

Opinion: Partially agree – people should be responsible, but also companies

Introduction

• Background sentence – Climate change is increasingly serious.  
• Thesis statement – People should be responsible, but also companies.
• Main Points – People; Companies

Body Paragraph 1: People 

• The ultimate responsibility for protecting the environment lies with individuals, as we are the ones who drive cars, buy plastic bottles, and use excess electricity.

Body Paragraph 2: Companies 

• Large companies are responsible for the vast majority of the environmental damage that has been caused over the past hundred years, and thus they should take the responsibility of protecting the environment as a form of penance.

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion: People should be responsible, but also companies.
• Restate main points: People; Companies

Essay:

In a rapidly warming world, the question of who should be responsible for protecting the environment has taken on a greater urgency than ever before. I believe that, while it is fair for governments to ask individuals to shoulder some of this burden, companies must also play their part in green efforts.

It is beyond question that individuals have a role to play in protecting their local environment. It is individuals who drive cars, who acquire and discard plastic products, and who demand electricity for their every whim. Individuals cause environmental damage, and thus must have a hand in repairing that damage. This reparatory work can take many forms, depending on the personal circumstances of the person in question. For instance, someone who drives 30 kilometres to work every day could do their bit by switching from a fossil fuel-burning car to a hybrid or full-electric vehicle. In contrast, a person who cycles to class but regularly purchases plastic-covered products could ensure that the wrapping, and the product itself, is appropriately recycled once used. The form that the environmental protection takes may differ, but the idea that individuals can take whatever they want from Mother Nature and give nothing back is, in my view, morally repugnant. As such, normal people must play their part in protecting the environment.

The second group to whom governments should entrust the vital work of environmental protection is for-profit companies. This is for two reasons – ability, and responsibility. Firstly, companies like Amazon, Apple and Tesla have global reach and huge resources. They have the financial and human capital necessary to markedly reduce the damage done to the natural world by humanity, and should therefore act in the defence of the planet. Secondly, major corporations, like the ones mentioned, are themselves responsible for a great deal of the carbon emissions and pollution that blight the planet. A company like Amazon has factories and delivery drivers working constantly on every continent. As such, decisions Amazon makes on issues like the source of the electricity used to power their factories or the type of vehicles that carry Amazon packages can have huge repercussions, either positive or negative, for global efforts to protect the environment. Given both their ability and culpability on green issues, it is clear that companies should also be tasked by the government with protecting the environment.

Overall, while it is certainly fair to expect individuals to do their bit in green endeavours, companies should also be legally required to contribute to both local and international climate protection efforts.

Topic: Food and Cooking

Question: Some countries import a large amount of food from other parts of the world. To what extent is this a positive or negative trend?

Core: Is importing food from abroad good or bad?

Opinion: Positive and negative aspects

Introduction

• Background sentence – More and more options for international food in supermarkets
• Thesis statement – Positive and negative aspects
• Main points – Positive = More variety; Negative = Environmental cost

Body Paragraph 1: More variety

• The largest benefit of eating foods grown around the world is the amount of variety that consumers can enjoy.

Body Paragraph 2: Environmental cost

• Eating food produced domestically reduces a person’s carbon footprint, as the food doesn’t have to travel around the world to reach the customer.

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion (Positive and negative aspects of importing food)
• Restate main points (Positive = More variety; Negative = Environmental cost)

Essay:

The increasing prevalence of imported food options in supermarkets and restaurants is the topic of some debate as to its desirability. While this trend certainly has its advantages, most notably the variety it provides, it also has an unignorable environmental cost.

The primary advantage of importing food from abroad can be summarised in a single word: variety. While large countries with a range of geographical and climatic regions, notably China and the United States, can produce most types of food within their own borders, smaller countries are usually not so fortunate. Countries in the extreme northern or southern hemispheres, with poor soil quality or unfavourable weather conditions, can find it difficult to grow most types of fruit, vegetables or even livestock. Importing food from around the world allows those countries to serve their citizens with products unavailable from their own domestic agricultural industries, and provide the vitamins and minerals that are necessary for the continued good health of the population. Naturally, the variety of flavours that come along with those imported products is a benefit as well. For instance, a Nordic country like Finland can import oranges, limes and other citric fruits from tropical countries, providing in one fell swoop both health and pleasure to the Finnish people. It is therefore clear that variety is a big advantage of importing food.

There are, however, drawbacks to importing food, and the environmental impact of importing is one such disadvantage. The oranges and limes in Finnish supermarkets did not appear there by magic. They were transported many thousands of miles by sea and road, most likely in gas-powered vehicles. This in turn led to each and every box of oranges or limes having a significant carbon footprint. In contrast, food produced domestically has a far shorter distance to travel from farm to table, and as such, can be considered far more environmentally-friendly. For instance, an apple grown in an orchard in England that is then sold in a supermarket in the next town has required far less carbon to be emitted to propel it on its journey than the Spanish orange, the Colombian banana or the Madagascan papaya sitting next to it on the shelf. It is therefore clear that the environmental damage caused by importing food from around the world is a significant disadvantage of this trend.

In summary, the availability of food from across the globe in supermarkets and restaurants today has its upsides, notably variety, and downsides, most obviously the environmental cost. In an ideal world, food would be imported using carbon-neutral transportation methods, leaving consumers to enjoy the bounty of nature guilt-free.

Topic – Government and Globalisation

Question: The growth of multinational companies and the resulting rise of globalization creates positive effects for all. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Core: Is globalisation good for everyone?

Opinion: Partially agree – there are positive effects but also negative ones

Introduction

• Background sentence – Rise of globalization, but not popular with everyone 
• Thesis statement – Globalization has positives and negatives
• Main Points – More Choice; Exploitation 

Body Paragraph 1: More Choice 

• Globalisation has led to the proliferation of brands like McDonald’s and Xiaomi being spread around the world, giving more choice to consumers and allowing them a taste of life in other countries.

Body Paragraph 2: Exploitation 

• Globalisation has led to companies taking advantage of people in poorer countries by providing jobs in so-called sweat shops that barely cover the cost of living of their employees.

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion: Partially agree – there are positive effects but also negative ones
• Restate main points: More Choice; Exploitation 

Essay:

One of the most hotly-debated topics of the past twenty years has been globalisation, with some groups extolling its virtues and others waxing lyrical about its dangers. In my opinion, there are both positive and negative aspects to globalisation, with increased choice amongst the positive effects, and exploitation a major negative effect.

A major benefit of globalisation is the amount, and quality, of choice it gives to consumers around the world. Prior to the rise of multinational corporations, people were powerless in the face of the lottery of geography, which dictated which products would be available to them, and at what price and quality. If they were lucky, they would live in a country with great quality products at an affordable price. Sadly, most people were not so fortunate. Today, companies like Starbucks, Xiaomi and many others have become worldwide names not by accident, but because they provide products or services that meet a previously-unmet need in the market. For example, a coffee enthusiast unlucky enough to be born in the early- or mid- 20th Century in a country without a strong coffee culture would have no recourse in pursuing their passion. Today, however, it would be unusual to live in a country without access to a Starbucks or a similar coffee chain, thus allowing the pursuit of caffeinated pleasure. This example is just one of millions that, put together, indicate the great advantage of globalisation, namely the range and quality of choice it provides.

The dark side of globalisation, however, is exploitation. One of the major benefits of globalisation for multinational corporations is the access they have been granted to low-cost labour markets. Outsourcing work from expensive countries like the United States to countries where workers will work for a fraction of American wages allows companies to save a fortune. However, this cost-cutting is often taken much too far, to the point at which major corporations have been caught forcing child labourers to work long hours in dangerous conditions for extremely low wages, in so-called ‘sweat shops.’ For instance, in the 1990s, Nike was accused of employing sweatshops in Indonesia to produce its clothes and sports shoes at a very low cost and, therefore, a high profit margin. This exploitation of the vulnerable is clearly morally wrong, and is therefore one of the big downsides of globalisation.

While globalisation has given rise to a kaleidoscope of choice for consumers around the world, it has also led to the exploitation of child labourers, and as such, can clearly not be said to provide exclusively positive effects for all involved.  

Topic: Health (Physical and Mental)

Question: Experts claim that if older people do more exercise, they will be healthier and happier. However, many elderly people suffer from a lack of fitness. What are the causes of this and what are some possible solutions?

Core: Why are elderly people unfit, and how can we make them fit? 

Note – this essay isn’t an exact match for the arguments section, as its not talking about who should be responsible, but we can still repurpose the arguments to make a good essay

Introduction

• Background sentence – Older people increasingly unhealthy
• Thesis statement – Government has responsibility for cause and solution (mention briefly, not key part of essay).  
• Cause – Lack of green spaces
• Solution – More health education

Body Paragraph 1: Green Spaces

• The absence of green spaces in cities is a large contributing factor in the onset of obesity, as people living in large cities have few choices for outdoor activities, leading to them staying at home and engaging in more sedentary pursuits.

Body Paragraph 2: More Health Education

• Many people live unhealthy lifestyles due to a lack of education. Providing this education and enlightening the populace about the best ways to stay healthy is clearly the government’s responsibility.

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion (Government is responsible for cause and solution)
• Restate main points (Green Spaces; Health Education)

Essay:

As the populations of many countries around the world age, the health of elderly people has increasingly been placed under the microscope. Ensuring a high level of physical health and quality of life for elderly people must be a priority for governments, and their approach should include tackling the causes, most notably a lack of green spaces, and providing solutions, particularly through education.

One of the major causes of poor physical health in older populations is a lack of green spaces. The wealthiest older people in developed countries tend to live in the countryside, where access to parks, rivers, mountains and fresh air is virtually guaranteed. However, the vast majority of the world’s elderly people do not enjoy such access. They live in small apartments in crowded cities, with little access to parks or other green spaces. Those green areas are important because they provide a suitable environment for the gentle exercise that is an absolute necessity for maintaining good physical health. Without easy access to such places, elderly people tend to slip into a sedentary lifestyle, which in turn leads to a rapid physical decline. A clear example of this is China, where older people living in cities with parks are able to go out and dance, walk and talk, thus promoting their continued good health. However, the situation is quite different in cities and countries as with no such public facilities. It can therefore be clearly seen that a lack of access to green spaces is one of the key causes of poor health in older people.

Aside from providing parks and other green spaces, another solution to this health crisis is education. Elderly people across the world are, in general, fairly oblivious to recent advances in areas such as nutrition and the medical sciences. Their concepts of eating and living healthily are often rooted in the hugely outdated information they learned in their own school days, decades ago. As such, their daily decisions on what to eat, and how and when to exercise, can be deeply flawed. A public information campaign designed to raise awareness of how to maintain physical fitness, based on modern science, could be the impetus required to push many elderly people towards exercising more and eating more healthily. For instance, a leaflet campaign giving the elderly simple, easy to achieve exercise goals, such as walking for 30 minutes every day, could make a world of difference. Overall, it seems clear that providing better health education would be a great step towards ensuring better fitness for the more mature members of society.

In conclusion, given any government’s responsibility to its citizens, dealing with the issue of a lack of green spaces in some cities and providing modern health education to the elderly should both be high on its list of priorities.

Topic: News & Social Media

Question: Some people focus on news in their own country, while others think it is more important to be aware of international news. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Core: Is local or international news more important?

Opinion: International news more important – because people wouldn’t know about it other than through reading, whereas there are many ways to find out about local news.

Introduction

• Background sentence – Discussion between pro-local and pro-international news readers.
• Thesis statement – This essay will examine both sides.

Body Paragraph 1: Pro-Local (write in neutral voice)

• International news is usually negative, focusing on wars and famines in far-off places, whereas local news can have a more positive slant.

Body Paragraph 2: Pro-International (write in neutral voice)

• International news gives people a window to the world from the comfort of their own home, making a population wiser and more knowledgeable.

Conclusion + Opinion:

• Opinion: International news more important – because people wouldn’t know about it other than through reading, whereas there are many ways to find out about local news.
• Example: A new mall has opened – find out by being told by friends.

Essay:

The long-running debate between proponents of local news and international news has taken on fresh urgency in the past few years, with pandemics and wars having both international and local effects. Some argue that local news is far more important and worth paying attention to, while others claim that international news carries far more weight and should therefore be the priority.

A great number of people believe that local news is of far greater import when compared to international news. The core of this argument is in the tone that local news takes. A local story will often focus on the good news enjoyed by a particular member of the community, with the aim of both spreading information and bringing good cheer to the audience. For example, a news article about a child being successfully rescued from a cave and reunited with its family would put a smile on the face of all but the most cold-hearted reader. International news, on the other hand, rarely features anything other than horrifying tales of disaster and woe. People’s lives, the argument goes, are difficult enough without having to worry about a famine or earthquake on the other side of the world. As such, many suggest that local news should be a local population’s first port of call.

Other people claim that international news is too consequential to be ignored. Their claim is based around the idea of the importance of a well-educated populace in maintaining a contented and stable society. When people see news of wars abroad, it is said, it gives them a greater appreciation for the stability they may enjoy in their own country, and allows them to make more informed decisions about local situations. A great example of this trend is the recent war in Ukraine, which in no small part caused a spike in gas prices in Western Europe, triggering in turn a cost-of-living crisis in many European countries. Without an understanding of the root cause of this crisis, many people could have turned to protest and even revolution. Instead, their knowledge of, and sympathy and support for, the Ukrainian people meant that the vast majority of the population of Western Europe was willing to endure the crisis. As such, many claim that paying attention to international news is of greater import.

In my opinion, while local news does have its place, it is more important for people to read and watch international news. Knowledge of world events and global trends allows people to make more informed decisions about their own lives, and is more useful than hearing about the latest stories from their local area. Besides, any well-connected person can hear the story of the child rescued from the cave from a friend or relative, thus still receiving the happiness benefit.

Topic: Popular Culture

Question: Many adults nowadays prefer spending their free time playing computer games. Why do they do this? Is this a positive or negative development?

Core: Why do adults play video games, and is it a good thing?

Opinion: Reason – Relaxation; Opinion – Partly Positive, Partly Negative – There are advantages and disadvantages

(Note – i will be using ‘relaxation’ as both the reason and an example of why it is positive)

Introduction

• Background sentence – Computer games are increasingly popular with adults
• Thesis statement – There are advantages and disadvantages
• Main Points – Relaxation; Addiction

Body Paragraph 1: Relaxation

• One of the biggest benefits of popular culture, be it movies, TV shows, video games or music, is the relaxation and escape from reality that it provides to people suffering from stress or stuck in an unhappy situation.

Body Paragraph 2: Addiction

• A major drawback of video games is how addictive they are. This can lead to users playing for days at a time, which is a threat to both their educational or professional development as well as to their physical health.

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion: Partly Positive, Partly Negative – There are advantages and disadvantages
• Restate main points: Relaxation; Addiction

Essay:

The continued rise of adults playing video games in their spare time is a cause of much debate, both in terms of the reasons for it, and its desirability. In my opinion, the understandable desire to relax is both a key driver of adult interest in computer games, and one of its advantages, while the addictive nature of games is the most obvious drawback.

Adults mostly play video games because they want to relax. In the modern stress-filled and competitive world, being able to relax has never been more important. Computer games can transport adults from their pressured jobs to a world of enjoyment which is free from the worries of their daily lives. Many computer games require intense concentration, necessitating players to enter a state of deep focus on a topic far removed from whatever is troubling them outside of the game. An example from the arts is the character of President Frank Underwood in the popular show House of Cards. Underwood is frequently seen playing video games as a means of relaxing and escaping the pressure of his lofty position. It can therefore be clearly seen that games can be an excellent means of relaxation for any adult, from ordinary folk to the president.

While the relaxation they offer are a key advantage of video games, they can also be addictive. Modern games are designed very carefully to encourage gamers to keep playing. This is done both through traditional methods like an interesting storyline and worthwhile challenges, as well as more devious techniques such as the use of sound effects. These are designed to elicit a dopamine release in the brain of the player, making them feel good when playing. This dopamine-based approach also makes the rest of life seem pale and dull in comparison, and over time leads to a chemical and emotional dependency on games. For instance, in the field of language learning, the app Duolingo uses positive ringing noises to praise users for a correct answer, making it far more pleasurable and thus addictive than answering questions in a traditional textbook. While this might seem innocent, enough exposure to such artificial dopamine-inducers can lead to dangerously addictive relationships with video games. As such, the rise of adults playing video games certainly could not be said to be entirely positive.

Overall, while relaxation is both a reason for and a benefit of video games, their addictive nature means that the rise in the number of adults playing them is not an entirely positive development.

Topic: Shopping and Clothes

Question: Online shopping is becoming more common these days. Is this a positive or negative development?

Core: Is more people online shopping good or bad?

Opinion: Positive Development – several big advantages.  

Introduction

• Background sentence – Increasing popularity of online shopping. 
• Thesis statement – There are several big advantages to it.
• Main Points – Finances; Choice

Body Paragraph 1: Finances

• There are often significant cost savings associated with shopping online, as customers can shop around for the best price, and retailers don’t have to take expensive rents into account when setting prices.

Body Paragraph 2: Choice

• Online shopping allows customers to access a vastly wider range of options than they would ordinarily do so in an individual shop or mall.

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion: Positive Development – several big advantages
• Restate main points: Finances; Choice

Essay:

The explosion of online commerce in the past two decades has had a huge effect on economies around the world. In my opinion, this rapid rise is a good thing, because it provides both financial benefits and wider choice to consumers.

One of the major advantages of shopping online is financial. A person browsing from the comfort of their sofa can easily shop around and compare similar products across multiple shops. They can then make an informed decision about whether to choose the cheapest option or to pay more for a higher-quality item. For instance, an online shopper intent on buying a large television could compare prices and functionality of a dozen different products in a dozen different stores before making a final decision. This freedom of choice and the ability to save on big-ticket items is in direct contrast to the experience consumers have in brick-and-mortar stores, where they need to physically travel to another store to make even a single comparison. In such cases, financial considerations are often obscured by the desire to avoid the great inconvenience of finding a comparable store. It is therefore clear that, financially speaking, the rise of online shopping has been a positive development.

A second significant boon that online shopping provides is in range of choice. Any individual store is inherently limited in how many product options it can maintain at any one time, and the store then passes that limitation directly onto the consumer. The explosion of online shopping, however, has removed that restriction. With deliveries possible between cities and even countries, a determined consumer can consider the entire world as their store. Nespresso coffee pods are a great example of this. While a single physical shop might stock only three or four flavours of coffee pod, the wider internet provides access to an almost unlimited variety of options. This range of choice is a huge advantage that online shopping has over traditional shopping, and is a second reason why the explosion of the former has been a positive development.

Overall, it seems clear that the increased use of the internet for shopping is a net positive, with important factors including lower prices and increased choice.

Topic: Sports and Exercise

Question: Sports are nothing more than a leisure activity. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Core: Are sports just for fun, or something more?

Opinion: Disagree, because sports bring several non-leisure benefits   

Introduction

• Background sentence – Sports are popular, but are they just for leisure?
• Thesis statement – Actually many wide-ranging benefits of sports outside of leisure.
• Main Points – Education; National Pride

Body Paragraph 1: Education

• Sports are a critical part of any child’s education, as they allow the child to develop the important skill of teamwork.

Body Paragraph 2: National Pride

• Success in professional sports can bring great pride to a whole nation, in competitions like the Olympics or World Cup.

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion: Disagree, because sports bring several non-leisure benefits   
• Restate main points: Education; National Pride

Essay:

There have been fierce disagreements for many years about the level to which sports should be respected as something more than just a leisure activity. In my opinion, while sports certainly do provide enjoyment to billions worldwide, they can be considered as more than just leisure, as they are also a source of education and national pride.

Sports can be a great means of education for youngsters. A child playing in a sports team, be it football, basketball or another team sport, has to learn important skills like teamwork and self-sacrifice in a team effort. The pressure of not letting down teammates makes sports a crucible of practical learning, in contrast to the classroom or textbook. Similarly, a child playing an individual sport like tennis or golf has to learn key survival skills like self-discipline and perseverance. Again, the intensity of competition and the desire to win can force a child to acquire such abilities an order of magnitude quicker than in less intense surroundings. Overall, the education that sports provide is one of the things that sets them above the level of a mere leisurely pursuit.

Sport can also be a source of national pride for a country. A successful national sports team or successful sporting individuals can bring a country together like almost nothing else outside of actual warfare. Success in the Olympics or World Cup allows the ordinary people of a country to feel a sense of togetherness and shared destiny. People who ordinarily would want nothing to do with each other come together to cheer on their national representatives and, win or lose, come away with a feeling of being a part of something bigger and more consequential than themselves. This, naturally, is hugely beneficial for social stability. For instance, West Germany’s World Cup triumph in 1954 famously restored a sense of pride to the German people after the horrors of World War Two, setting the scene for a rapid economic recovery in the decades that followed. This ability to inspire pride and bring people together is another key strength that sport has beyond being simply a form of leisure.

Overall, it is clear that sport is much more than just leisure. Sport’s ability to educate youngsters and bring countries together means that it is a real force for good across the world, and should be recognised as such. 

Topic: Technology

Question: Some believe technology has made our lives too complex and the solution is to lead a simpler life without technology. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Core: Should we live without technology?

Opinion: Partially agree – some benefits to life with tech, some to life without

Introduction

• Background sentence – People worry about too much tech, should we live without it?
• Thesis statement – Some benefits to life with tech, some benefits without it
• Main Points – Healthcare; Deep Thinking

Body Paragraph 1: Deep Thinking

• Without the notifications and distractions used by technology to attract our attention, people would engage in deeper thinking about the issues that are important to them.

Body Paragraph 2: Healthcare

There is a huge range of healthcare equipment and medicine that would not exist today without the advances that have been made in technology.

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion: Partially agree – some benefits to life with tech, some to life without
• Restate main points: Healthcare; Deep Thinking

Essay:

The proliferation of modern technology and its impact on our lives is a topic of a huge amount of debate in countries around the world, with some going as far as to claim that life would be better without technology. In my opinion, while some aspects of life would improve in the absence of technology, most notably our ability to concentrate, there would also be some serious drawbacks, such as in the field of medicine.

The average individual’s ability to concentrate would benefit enormously from a world without technology. Modern media technology, in particular smartphones and social media, is engaged in a battle for eyeballs, in which companies able to distract users away from their normal responsibilities, and into a world of games, screens and scrolling, make obscene amounts of profit. In other words, technology is designed to distract us. A world with no smartphone notifications or automatic-next-episode-streaming software would be a world in which people could concentrate far more easily on important work. Imagine a modern William Shakespeare attempting to write his great works of art while trying to ignore his social media notifications. Compare that with the real Shakespeare, who had no such temptation and was thus able to produce a vast quantity of high-quality literature. It seems clear that a primary advantage of a world without modern technology would be an increase in people’s ability to focus.

A world stripped of its technological advancements would not, however, be such an idyllic place when one considers the effect on medical treatment. Medical technology, with vaccines, MRI machines, and powerful antibiotics, has saved the lives of countless millions of people over the past century. It would not be an exaggeration to say that it is indispensable in the modern world. Very few people would willingly subject themselves to pre-Industrial Revolution medical techniques if given the choice. For instance, practitioners of bloodletting using leeches and amputation without anaesthetic receive perilously few customers nowadays! As such, it can be said with some confidence that the removal of modern medical technology would make a world sent back to the Dark Ages highly undesirable.

In summary, while there would be some limited upsides to a world without technology, with concentration levels at the forefront, the losses society would suffer without technology, in areas like medicine, would significantly outweigh any benefits.

Topic: Traditions & Minorities

Question: Traditional ideas from older people about the way to live and behave are not helpful to young people and their futures. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Core: Do older people’s traditional ideas help young people?

Opinion: Partially agree – not always useful, but some benefits   

Introduction

• Background sentence – Society changing quickly, difficult to know whether to listen to older relatives & believe traditional ideas
• Thesis statement – Some ideas are not helpful, but there is still value in other traditional ideas & what old people say. 
• Main Points – Fairer Society; Timeless ideas 

Body Paragraph 1: Fairer Society 

• Modern attitudes are often considered fairer and more equal, particularly in areas like gender and racial equality.

Body Paragraph 2: Timeless Ideas 

• Some traditional ideas are timeless and are as true now as they were hundreds of years ago. Things like the Golden Rule

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion: Partially agree – not always useful, but some benefits   
• Restate main points: Fairer Society; Timeless ideas 

Essay:

With the world changing ever faster, traditional ideas are often perceived to be of little value to young people today. I would argue that in some areas, such as equality, young people have little to gain from traditional ideas, but equally, traditional ideas can be valuable in other areas, most notably in timeless principles like the Golden Rule.

One of the key areas in which traditional ideas from older people are perceived as lacking value is in the area of equality. In the past century and a half in the United States alone, there have been amazing advancements in equality, with a journey from the abolition of slavery in the 1860s through the feminist and civil rights movements of the 1960s to the era of #metoo and trans-rights debates of today. However, depending on the age of the older person in question, and indeed on their own upbringing and level of open-mindedness, their attitude towards equality may well be rooted in what was considered ‘normal’ when they were growing up. Teenagers in the 2020s hearing from their grandparents that a woman’s place is only in the home, or that homosexuality is abnormal or even sinful, are likely to find those ideas less than useful. This goes to show that, when it comes to social ideas about equality, traditional ideas from older people are often not very helpful for young people today.

However, it definitely would not be wise to discount all the wisdom that older people are able to impart, as certain principles are timeless. These ideas are often based in more long-lasting principles of psychology and sociology, which themselves are rooted in human biology. As such, there are many cases in which what was true five hundred years ago is still true today. For example, the Golden Rule, which states that we should treat others as we would wish to be treated ourselves, has been around for thousands of years, and is as true and valid today as it ever was. It is therefore clear that certain, timeless ideas that older people share very much are helpful to younger people in modern society.

In conclusion, while some older people can be ‘stuck in the past’ when it comes to areas like equality, their advice on more timeless principles certainly can be helpful to young people today.

Topic – Transportation

Question: More and more people today are buying and driving cars. Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

Core: Is it good for more people to have cars?

Opinion: Disadvantages of more people buying cars outweighs advantages.

Introduction

• Background sentence – Cars have been and are becoming very popular all over the world
• Thesis statement – There are serious disadvantages to this trend
• Main Points – Environment; Road Accidents

Body Paragraph 1: Environment 

• People taking their own personal cars and not carpooling is an extremely inefficient use of energy and space, and leads to increased levels of pollution.

Body Paragraph 2: Road Accidents 

• Cars are driven by people, who are fallible and liable to crash. As such, cars are involved in millions of preventable road deaths every year.

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion: Disadvantages of more people buying cars outweighs advantages
• Restate main points: Environment; Road Accidents

Essay:

The automobile has been a desirable possession for people for over a century, but recent economic growth around the world has led to huge increases in the number of people who own and drive cars. The disadvantages of this, from my perspective, outweigh the advantages, because increased numbers of cars lead to more pollution and more road accidents.

The first drawback of increased car ownership is the environmental damage it causes. More cars, simply put, mean more pollution. In a rapidly heating world in which every individual should be monitoring his or her own carbon footprint, buying and driving a fossil-fuel burning car is a clear step in the wrong direction. This is particularly true if carpooling is not prevalent. For instance, a car, or indeed a bus or van, propelling 4 or 5 human adults to their job is a far more efficient means of transportation than each of those 4 or 5 individuals driving their own private car. As car ownership leads to reduced use of public transportation, it can clearly be argued that it is damaging to the environment and thus a negative development.

The second disadvantage of widespread car ownership is the increase in road accidents it causes. Statistically speaking, more cars mean more journeys, and more journeys mean more accidents. These accidents can take many forms, including one car crashing into another, a car knocking a cyclist off of his or her bike, a car hitting an animal crossing the road, or even a car knocking over a pedestrian. Whatever the specific details of the case, it is beyond dispute that accidents are undesirable, yet are on the increase as the result of this trend towards greater car possession. Any accident is a tragedy, and this is another reason that the disadvantages of many people buying and driving cars outweigh the advantages.

While cars are undoubtedly desirable and are often seen as a sign of personal economic progress for an individual, when we zoom out and look at the bigger picture, it is clear that the disadvantages of increased car ownership outweigh the advantages. This is most clearly seen in the rises in pollution and road accidents that inevitably result from more cars being on the road.

Topic: Travel and Holidays

Question: Many people today are choosing to travel to other countries. Why is this happening? Is this a positive or negative development?

Core: Why are people traveling abroad, and is it good?

Opinion: Happening mostly to relax, but is negative development

Introduction

• Background sentence – International tourism is increasingly common.  
• Thesis statement – Happening mostly to relax, but is negative development
• Main Points: Relax (Why); Inappropriate Behaviour (Negative)

Body Paragraph 1: Relax  

• A key motivator for travel for many people is the chance to get out of one’s regular environment and relax.

Body Paragraph 2: Inappropriate Behaviour

• Foreign tourists, particularly young adults, can behave in an inappropriate manner when away from their usual environment, including engaging in such social blights as excessive drinking, fighting and vandalism.

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion: Happening mostly to relax, but is negative development
• Restate main points: Relax (Why); Inappropriate Behaviour (Negative)

Essay:

One of the most notable trends of recent years has been the inexorable rise in people traveling abroad. This is largely done with the goal of relaxation, but is, in my opinion, a negative trend due to the inappropriate behaviour that often ensues.

The primary reason that people travel abroad is to relax. Employees working all hours of the day and night, students burning the midnight oil in aid of passing a final exam, and retirees fresh from escaping the daily grind are all very much in need of a chance to let off steam. Traveling abroad to a country with a different climate, food and culture is a perfect chance to get away from the pressure of one’s daily life. For instance, Chinese ‘big tech’ employees working a so-called “9-9-6” schedule often escape for a much-needed week of food and relaxation in Thailand before returning to the pressure cooker of their jobs. Overall, it is clear that the chance to relax is a key driver of foreign travel.

While traveling abroad can allow people to relax, this ‘letting off steam’ is very often taken too far, meaning that this trend is, overall, a negative development. People traveling abroad very often fail to adequately prepare themselves for the cultural differences they will encounter in a new country, and are therefore unaware of what does and does not constitute acceptable behaviour. This failure to prepare can lead to cultural misunderstandings, disagreements and even violence. For instance, the hordes of British tourists visiting Barcelona each summer bring their rather extreme alcohol-drinking habits with them, leading to inevitably unpleasant scenes of vomiting, fighting and even rioting in the streets. The frequency, visibility and widespread nature of this type of behaviour means that, on balance, the recent increase in traveling abroad has been a negative development.

Overall, while relaxation is certainly a reason for traveling abroad and a clear benefit of it, the appalling behaviour that many foreign tourists are guilty of outweighs any benefit and makes increased foreign travel a negative development.

Topic: Work and Jobs

Question: The leaders of most organizations tend to be older people. However, some argue that younger people make better bosses. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Core: Are younger bosses better than older bosses?

Opinion: Partially agree – there are advantages of older and younger bosses

Introduction

• Background sentence – Age of leaders is topic of debate 
• Thesis statement – Both age groups have their own advantages
• Main Points – Younger = Can use technology; Older = More experience 

Body Paragraph 1: Younger = Technology 

• People under the age of 40 have grown up in a world full of rapidly developing technology. As a consequence, they tend to have a strong intuition for any new platforms, software, or devices that appear

Body Paragraph 2: Older = Experience

• An executive of age 60 is likely to have worked for nearly 40 years, and in that time, accumulated the experience to help him or her deal with virtually any management situation

Conclusion:

• Restate opinion: Partially agree – there are advantages to both age groups
• Restate main points: Younger = Can use technology; Older = More experience    

Essay:

The discussion of whether younger or older people make better bosses has been raging for many years. From my perspective, younger people can make excellent leaders, particularly due to their familiarity with new technology. However, older people have their own leadership advantages considering their extensive experience.

The primary advantage that younger bosses have is their aptitude with modern technology. People under the age of 40 have grown up in a world full of rapidly developing technology. As a consequence, they tend to have a strong intuition for any new platforms, software, or devices that appear, allowing them to work more efficiently than their older counterparts. In recent years, there has been a rise in the use of video conferencing software such as Zoom and Skype. Younger leaders have taken full advantage of these tools. This is just once instance of the technological advantages that younger leaders can provide.

On the other hand, older leaders can bring their own strengths to bear, most notably their experience. An executive of age 60 is likely to have worked for nearly 40 years, and in that time, accumulated the experience to help him or her deal with virtually any management situation. This vast wealth of managerial knowhow can allow them to identify potential issues before they arise, as well as heading off emerging crises with a sure hand. For instance, a 60-year-old manager will likely have dealt with employee tardiness on multiple occasions throughout their career, and will know exactly the right words or actions to choose to remind the employee in question of their responsibilities, without overly alienating them. As such, the experience that older leaders can bring can be invaluable in maintaining a harmonious and efficient working environment.

With all this in mind, it is clear that younger and older leaders each have their own strengths when it comes to management. Whether in the area of technology or the accumulation of experience, each age group is uniquely equipped to lead companies and people.