Please provide feedback and a band score for my essay.

[Mohammed]

Some experts believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at primary school rather than secondary school.Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?It is sometimes argued that children should start learning a second language since primary school instead of secondary school. While there are convincing points both for and against of this opinion, I personally believe that advantages of this statement are superior to its disadvantages.On the one hand, it is understandable that learning another language can be a burden for younger children. For example, as there are more important subjects such as math, science or mother tongue, an extra language module can let children back from learning these basic and essential subjects. This, in turn, may demotivate young pupils to study fully focused due to loads of materials.On the other hand, however, there are some benefits of learning a foreign language at primary school. Firstly, teaching any given subject as well as a language in younger ages is relatively easy, as kids can catch up everything they taught instantly and remember it for a long period of time or even sometimes this knowledge can stay with them over the whole lifetime. Secondly, by teaching a second language to children, we can extract their linguistic abilities and improve them further. For instance, there might be talented students in terms of linguistic skills, and they can be trained in this field more deeply. Finally, if children learn any other language, it can help them to grow up more intellectually. For example, they can watch some TV programs or movies in foreign languages. To sum up, I would argue that the benefits of learning a foreign language beginning from junior school years do outweigh its drawbacks.

[neethu mathew]

You should spend about 20 minutes on this task.

The chart below shows the number of men and women in further education in Britain in three periods and whether they were studying fulltime or part-time.

 

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

Write at least 150 words.

file:///C:/Users/Ajit/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image002.jpg

The given bar chart illustrates how many male and female students were enrolled for higher education in Britain in part time and full time basis over a period of twenty years.

Overall, it is clear from the graph hat majority of students were involved in full time education whereas females depicted an upward trend and males demonstrated downward trend here. Apparently, number of part time students was soaring among both genders in the given period.

In 1970-1971, the male students dominated female students for part time and full time education. The number of male students were gradually declined in full time education from 1000 to nearly 800 by 1980-1981 whereas the number of female students rose significantly to its peak 800 which was equal to their male counter parts. Interesting factor was female proportion was further increased to a little above 1000 by reaching 1990-1991. But male number shown only slight increase during that time.

In contrast, both males and female engaged in part time education dramatically shot up from 1970-1971 to 1990-1991. The females were almost 200 which was similar to males by the third given year even though their proportion was significantly different in 1970-1971.

To sum up , with respect to above mentioned details, females outnumbered males in further education at Britain by 1990-1991. At the same time, the students preference to part time education were soared to its peak which was less opted in 1970-1971.

[neethu mathew]

People think that living in the big cities is not healthy. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 

Nowadays, most of the people prefer to live in urban areas. Some people argue that this is unhealthy due to emerging physical and mental health problems. In this essay I would examine the positive as well as negative impacts of city life.

In cities it is very easy to access a job for our livelihood due to the massive number of industries and shopping malls. In rural areas the development process are very slow compared to cities. As a result the large number of people moves from villages to the sprawling cities. Due to this there is tremendous increase in the number of vehicles and lead to pollution from carbon dioxide emission. Recently the government of China decided to reduce the number of private transport to tackle this environmental issue in southern part of China including Beijing. This shows that cities are not safe for living but helpful to earn a large amount of money.

However, the living standards in cities are very high compared to rural areas. For example, those are staying in innermost part of Perth are saying the train services are in an interval of one hour while in Sydney, it takes only 5 minutes. So that people are facing lot of problems in transportation. But the increased number of public as well as private vehicles led to air pollution as well as noise pollution. This pollution rate sparks respiratory disorders, hearing problems and stress among the people.

Furthermore, the people in cities are following a sedentary life style. They depend on technologically and scientifically advanced machines and junk foods for meeting their needs. This leads to sedentary life style and increases the number of people with major health conditions life diabetes mellitus and blood pressure, which is considered as major killer diseases in the twenty first century.

To conclude, while outweighing the consequences of city lives it is better to spend our life time in rural areas to extend our life span and to follow a healthy life style. In my opinion, it is helpful to reduce the outburst of new health issues.