جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید.

Popular events like the football World Cup and other international sporting occasions are essential in easing international tensions and releasing patriotic emotions in a safe way. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? Popular events aren't really essential in easing international tensions or in some cases the cause of releasing patriotic emotions in a safe way. I understand popular events just motive motivate some people to ease tensions or to release some emotions in a safe way. Basically, It's a the matter of motivation motivating not essentiality (necessity). In my words, the concept of motivation can be substituted for the concept of essentiality. It simply means that we can give some people a piece of cake to ease tensions or to release their emotions in a safe way. As I remember there was a plan in my school where that teachers could give elementary students candy as a reward. It was said candy is motivation for students. I think that was a a good plan and it really worked because, first of all, students love candy. So they did their best and worked extra hard to get candy. Secondly, it was about the reward. There is always willingness to reward. Hence, candy as a prize/rewarding were motivated strongly students. strongly strongly stronglystrongly To summarize, there are some people that are motivated by a candy at any age. A candy motives them to release their emotions in a safe way not a dangerous way.

جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید.

Question:Car ownership has increased so rapidly over the past thirty years that many cities in the world are now one big traffic jam. 1‐how true do you think statement is? 2‐what measures can governments take to discourage people from using their cars? It is completely obvious that massive traffic is a consequence of the burgeoning car ownership .Although people have effect on this change, the government can control this by mandating some rules. Firstly, these days, people are prone to use their vehicles instead of social transport systems. In this respect, some commuters reject to go to their office by bus or metro just because these facilities are not available for them in their nearby or if they wanted to reach a subway, it would take too long. Secondly, by increasing ascending the number of car factories, the price of cars is completely affordable for every individual in comparison with past. Therefore, both of these events lead us to have a heavy traffic every day for most parts of the world. However, governments can embolden people by giving them some incentives such as improving not only the quality, but also the quantity of social/public transports and making them more prevalent and accessible for everyone in each part of city and especially for metropolitan areas. On the other hand, governments can put in some restrictions on downtown regions in order to force citizenries to have an access to those parts only with public plenary transportation. To sum up, by considering the all the potency that governments have, the best decision that they can make is to develop the norm or culture of their community in order to educate /raise awareness of teach their people to conserve energy instead of just consuming them and also teach them to be more moderate about using cars and definitely after that these people will prefer social transport systems than their personal cars voluntarily/willingly/eagerly autonomously and subconsciously

جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید. 

Many museums charge for admission while others are free. Do you think the advantages of charging people for admission to museums outweigh the disadvantages? A vast majority of museums charge a fee /get money for permission to allow people to their centers but others are free of charge. While there are persuasive arguments in favor of demanding admission money to entering museums I would argue that it is better do not to charge them. people for entering museums .This essay will discuss this issue in details. On the one hand ,some people believe that there are numerous advantages to letting people visit museums without any payment for it. From their point of view they maintain that by making free for people to visit museums they there will be more opportunities for low‐ income persons to visit historical and monumental places without so many difficulties.it is also mentioned some museums intentionally do not charge people for admission because in by this way they want to encourage more people to come and visit museums and this kind of act will increase the cultureal of visiting museums among different levels of society. Furthermore,emore it can be mentioned that being free of charge for visiting museums is very helpful for schools because most schools have plans for free times of their students to provide them with valuable activities such as visiting museums so if these facilities were free of charges more school would will be eager to participate in these events. On the other hand, some people argue that free admission for entering museums has several drawbacks .to begin with, it is said that those museums which are accepting visitors without getting any money they will face financial problems in the long run and they will not be cannot provide their staff with salaries and they will be run out of business because they do not have enough income. Besides, some experts believe that running any business without getting money from customers will reduce the value of the activity which they are providinge for to customers and this is also true for cultural businesses like running museums In conclusion, although charging people for admission has advantages I believe the drawbacks are far more. Charging people for visiting museums not only discourages people, but also reduces the cultural visiting of historical and monumental places

جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید.

In many countries children are engaged in some kind of paid work. Some people regard this as completely wrong, while others consider it as valuable work experience, important for learning and taking responsibility. I tend to agree that children should be occupied with by some careers to gain some experiences and learn the way of management of money while obtaining different skills. However, some ignore this important fact and prevent their children from working. it. There are many benefits to employed children for some duties from an the early age. Dealing with different situations and learning to communicate with a majority of people are the first important parts of children's work. Secondly, by taking some duties and responsibilities they will be a self‐determining and well‐organized one in the future. In addition, the one who has taken more responsibilities from childhood/young ages/teenage /an the early age, they would be more of an innovator. Also, they have a specific ability to come up with a new idea. As a result of that, those children could be a eminent/prominent/distinguished /particular leader in the future Such as, a President or a manager of a famous company. However, the government and organizations should apply some restrictions regarding time and consider that the first duty of children is education and then . Then, provide some part time jobs for them. Moreover, the job should be according to with the interests and abilities of each child. In fact, this is an as especial and affordable opportunityies for some organizations that they do not need so much time and energy regarding the traineeing courses for new recruits coming. In conclusion, constructions and development are the results/products offspring of a society with numerous young capable young citizen. This is not achievable/attainable unless children fulfill some kinds of paid work.

جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید.

In recent years some countries have experienced very rapid economic development. This has resulted in much higher standards of living in urban areas but not in the countryside. This situation may bring some problems for the country as a whole. What are these problems? How might they be reduced? Nowadays, one of the major difficulty that many developed cities are struggling with is the high rate of immigration to urban cities. In fact this issue has had some destructive consequences on the people's lifestyles. According to the latest statistical article published by the Research Center of Tehran University (R.C.T.U), more than 80 percent of people who live in the rural areas have left their houses to enjoy the facilities in the big cities. Now, having considered the importance of the issue and how destructive it could be for the urban planning a question arises as to what are the influential factors in to restricting this high rate of immigration? First of all, a majority of people believe it is as important to provide different facilities in the countryside sides as to improve only the urban cities. In fact it would

جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید.

As most people spend a major part of their adult life at work, job satisfaction is an important element of individual wellbeing. What factors contribute to job satisfaction? How realistic is the expectation of job satisfaction for all workers? Throughout ages, people have always had dreams to gain and have a perfect career in terms of salary, social status and working place environment. The question is what elements bring us job satisfaction and is it feasible to provide a situation that all the employees enjoy their occupations or it is not achievable. To be realistic, salary plays a substantial role in every position especially among the worker of each organization. There are exceptions who mention that they love their jobs without a good pay. In addition, because of some financial problems that so many people are faced with that, organizations should provide some opportunities for their employees in order to motivate them to be more efficient and capable. First of all, company companies should consider the interest of employees and create a friendly environment for all of them. Secondly, providing some facilities and accommodation for worker is essential as well. For instance, free tickets for some special occasions namely; concerts and theater and also, free transportation to go to work. Moreover, some bonuses, perks and annual travelling could make eager employees eager to be the first and best at work. It is good to mention that Google is the best example of a company that could provide every issue and item beside each other. Another point that must be taken in to account is that some people such as, the sweepers and cleaners are working with a low pay low‐paid and just because of our benefits. Then, the government should pay attention to them more than the others. Since they have an unpleasant professions in comparison with other parts of society. Thus, we should not be idealistic and expect except the a high salary with a low experience and easy position. Furthermore, job satisfaction depends on our character and lifestyle of each person to the careers and lives. Therefore, it is better to consider our abilities and status in the working place then request the higher salary. All in all, living with no financial worries is not impossible but gathering all the requirements for that is too difficult. I hope one day everyone is be mature enough to tolerate all the hardships of their jobs and so enjoy more

جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید.

IELTS test in Nepal and Australia – September 2015 (Academic Module) Writing task 2 (an essay) Some people believe that free housing should be provided by the government for underprivileged and people who can't afford to buy a house. To what extent do you agree and disagree with the statement? Give examples based on your own experience. Over the last half century expenses of basic requirements have constantly increased. For instance, for most people who are financially disadvantaged buying a house is difficult, thus it is argued by some people that the administration should provide accommodation for them. It seems the advantages and disadvantages of this trend should be considered by experts. When it comes to buying a house, there are some people who are not financially capable affordable and they require assistance. In such circumstances the government plays a crucial role. providing a place for to living for those people is one of the options, and they can use their ability for resolutions of the country weaknesses. For instance, there were 65 per cent of people who did not have their own house ,in 2002, in South Africa. Thus, the government allocated ten billion dollars to making made houses for those people; therefore at the in end of this project ,in 2005, the problem of 60 per cent of the people was were solved. Moreover, instead of free houses, the administration used their ability for other sectors of the some part of county like farming. With Whit many people abusing situations, it is hard to help people. In in addition, we should be aware of accurate homelessness rate percentage of homeless because there are some abusers who tend to have having free accommodation. Furthermore, in part of hisMr. Obama speech in United Nations in 2008, Mr. Obama's he mentioned that the more development you want, the less lazy people you need ; and indolent people are an unfortunate by‐products of helping. Besides, this trend has put a heavy pressure on governments and there is a view that educations and health issues are most more important than that houses, and therefore the government should focused on those parts instead of this. to sum up, each country has their own problems and the government not only should not only be aware of that, but also they should solve it with priority

جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید.

It is sometimes said that people should be encouraged to get married before they are 30 ,as this is the best both for the individuals and for society. Do you agree or disagree? Nowadays , marriage is has been considered as one of the most significant issues in our life .In every society , young people with a minimum level of income and a secure job are being encouraged to get married and make family .Some people are strongly believe that Despites all the barriers and unavoidable problems ,the young generation should not delay their marriage after the age of 30 while others are against this idea. I strongly agree that making family before the age of 30 has numerous benefits for both citizens and society . The first consequence of marriage after the age of 30 is the increase of life expectation expectancy for most individuals .People at with lower ages have more simple attitudes and expectations and also enjoy more in their life with even simple things .They can easily get on well with each other and also can easily became adapted to adopted with others' other's beliefs and attitudes .Even In some traditional societies the age of marriage is less than that 22 for men and 17 for women .Also , the rate of divorce has been dropped at a very low rate among these people which is very important in latest years . The second undeniable merit of an early sooner marriage is having a healthier future generation in every society. The latest research has been proved that mothers who give birth before the age of 30 have healthier babies with less diseases for both the mother and the baby . on in this occasion the society will have a healthy generation in the future time. Also , mothers can easily tolerate the unwilling conditions of pregnancy and also bear the pain of surgery when they are younger . Also , they can easily become pregnant and the society will not allocate financial aids in the health sector to cure infertility which is very expensive . By considering all the barriers in every society regarding marriage , the benefits of marriage in twenties are more beneficial for both citizens and society due to a better interaction between men and women in those ages and also having a healthier generation by younger mothers

جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید.

It is important to ensure that children with a wide range of abilities and from a variety of social backgrounds mix with each other at school. To what extant do you agree or disagree? In this day and age, combining students from all social spectra and various practical capacities at a same school has become a major principal for many authority figures seeking to achieve an equality in accessing the educational facilities for the society as a whole. having said that, however some argue it cannot be a wholly positive approach, since it can be conducive to a large number of problems for pupils who encounter the completely different ideas and life‐styles facing neither their higher nor lower‐class counterparts. To begin with, reaching to this idealistic purpose that which all people should be able to utilize the same educational services, social planners have organized systems which allows all families to enroll their children in public schools without considering their social classes or students' merits. Thus, it can be beneficial for both weak and powerful pupils due to the chance of learning from or teaching to a classmate which in turn can be extremely helpful in the process of learning. Moreover, not only can this attitude facilitate the public education, but also it can be regarded as a moral activity. For instance, public schools in my country give the priority to people who live nearby the school and not those mentioned factors. In stark contrast, students may face cultural and economic differences among themselves and other peers which maybe impact on their educational trend or their mental health. That is to say, it is common at schools which include a wide spectra of individuals that students attempt to display their families' superiority priority to other children through exaggerating their economic and social status. In other words, this kind of childish manner can create make complexes for other students who are belong to poor families. To make an example, formal statistics reveals that more than half of the crimes which happen in schools have a direct correlation with deep economical gap among classmates. In a nutshell, although it is an ethical objective to teach the whole people in the a same condition, it might cause problems that hurt both students and society