Sentence pattern:

表达数量：

a negligible amount

significantly more

approximately, about, around, close to

almost double the number of

the figure for

reach

second most...

数字，数字，数字 respectively

the equivalent figure for 国家 was 数字

, with+数字

just under+数字

well over+数字

A 动词 only half as much on 具体方面 as B

these figures were twice as high as those for A

a mere 数字 in total

表达趋势：

A overtook B

rose dramatically to a peak of

fell to 数 字 and remained at the level for the rest of the

period

remained at this level/remain relatively stable, at between

数字 and 数字 for the whole 数字 year period.

saw only a small rise to 数字 by 年份

the figure rose only slightly

figures fell by 数字

second highest...rising from 数字 to 数字

second highest, followed by A, B, C

to be precise,

表达百分比

the proportion of

accounted for the highest proportion

accounted for the third highest proportion

the majority of

be in the minority

其他：

over the period of/over the period shown/over the

following 数字 years

whereas/by contrast/while

than its counterparts

rank fifth with 数字

with the exception of 除了

five highest ranking countries

雅思大作文模板

minimum 250 words

40 minutes

universal topics

criteria: task response, coherence and cohesion;

vocabulary; grammar

 Introductions: 2 sentences: introduce the topic

(paraphrasing the question) +give a general answer

 Main Paragraph 1+2: >5 sentences

如何展开

① Topic sentence+firstly+secondly+finally

Topic sentence start with+also+at the same time

② Topic sentences+explain+examples

如何增加细节

① examples
 ② facts or statistics

③ explain why and how

④ comparisons (unlike)

⑤ use conditional sentences to hypothesize (if...)

⑥ break down ideas into subpoints and use

descriptive vocabulary

 Conclusion: 1 sentence: paraphrase the answer that

you gave in your introduction

Discussion (discuss both views and give your own opinion)

双方都要讨论

 People have different views about whether A or B While

there are some benefits to... I believe that...

 One the one hand, A

 On the other hand, it is perhaps even more important

to B (your view)

 In conclusion, I can understand why A, but it seems to

me that B is much more desirable.

Opinion（to what extent do you agree or disagree?）只说出自己观

点就可以

 ...has become a contentious issue. While A, I strongly

believe that B offers greater long-term benefits for

society.

 A has several limitations.

 In contrast, B yields numerous tangible benefits.

 In conclusion, while A may provide... benefits, the

evidence strongly suggests that B would offer more

substantial and far-reaching benefits.

Problem and Solution

 It’s true that...There are a variety of possible reasons

why.../behind this but steps definitely can be taken to

address this issue.

 In my opinion, three main factors are to blame for

XX(problem)

 XX can certainly be improved.

 In conclusion,

Two-part question
 Introduction: paraphrasing parts of the

question+general answer to Q1+general answer to Q2

 Specific answer to Q1

 Specific answer to Q2

 In conclusion

Some countries spend a lot of money preparing

competitors to take part in major competitions such as

Olympic Games or football World Cup. Some people say

that it would be better to spend this money encouraging

children to take up sports from a young age.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

修改后的版本

It is sometimes argued that governments should allocate

more funding to children’s physical education rather than

preparing athletes for major competitions. I completely

agree that increased funding should be directed toward

promoting sports among children.

There are several reasons why investing heavily in training

athletes for the Olympics or other international

competitions may not be the best approach. First and

foremost, winning a gold medal requires a tremendous

amount of effort, determination, time, talent, and financial

resources, yet only a minuscule proportion of people reach

this level. This approach clearly promotes an elitist model

of sports development, which offers limited benefit to the

general public. Furthermore, while achieving gold medals

may boost a country’s prestige, it does not yield tangible

benefits for society as a whole. Although I do not deny the

significance of the Olympic Games in pushing human

limits and fostering a spirit of sportsmanship, placing too

much emphasis on selecting and supporting elite athletes

could detract from other national priorities and ultimately

hinder broader social development.

In contrast, I believe that investing in public health,

particularly by promoting physical activity among children,

is far more impactful. Research suggests that regular

physical activity supports health and fitness, and

childhood is a critical period for physical growth.

Therefore, encouraging children to exercise is essential for

their physical development. Moreover, engaging in sports

helps young people relax and recharge, which is especially

valuable given the heavy academic pressures faced by

secondary and high school students in countries like

China, where longer breaks for sports are provided.

Finally, studies show that exercise promotes the growth of

new brain cells and enhances long-term memory, both of

which contribute to overall cognitive development. A

healthier, more intelligent younger generation will

undoubtedly lead to advancements in technology and

promote social progress.

In summary, the benefits of encouraging physical activity

among the younger generation far outweigh those of

investing in a few gifted athletes. Therefore, I believe

government funding should be directed primarily toward

children’s physical education.

范文

The allocation of government funding between elite sports

and grassroots participation has become a contentious

issue, particularly regarding major international

competitions. While achieving success in events like the

Olympics brings national pride, I strongly believe that

investing in children's sports participation offers greater

long-term benefits for society.

Investing heavily in elite athletes for major competitions

has several limitations. Firstly, this approach benefits only

a tiny fraction of the population, as very few individuals

possess the exceptional talent and dedication required to

compete at international levels. The resources required to

train one Olympic athlete could potentially fund sports

programs for hundreds or even thousands of children.

Furthermore, while Olympic medals may boost national

prestige temporarily, they rarely translate into lasting

societal benefits. Although international sporting success

can inspire young people, this inspiration is meaningless

without accessible opportunities for them to participate in

sports themselves.

In contrast, directing funds toward promoting children's

sports participation yields numerous tangible benefits.

Research consistently demonstrates that regular physical

activity during childhood contributes significantly to both

physical and cognitive development. Children who

participate in sports develop stronger bones and muscles,

better cardiovascular health, and enhanced motor skills.

Moreover, early exposure to sports helps establish lifelong

healthy habits, potentially reducing future healthcare

costs. Sports participation also fosters crucial life skills

such as teamwork, leadership, and resilience – qualities

that benefit individuals throughout their lives and

contribute to a more capable workforce.

The social impact of widespread youth sports participation

extends beyond individual benefits. When children engage

in regular physical activity, it creates a more active and

healthy society overall. School sports programs, for

instance, can help address rising childhood obesity rates

and improve academic performance through enhanced

concentration and cognitive function. Additionally,

community sports initiatives can strengthen social bonds,

reduce juvenile delinquency, and promote social inclusion

across different socioeconomic backgrounds.

In conclusion, while elite sports competition has its place

in society, the evidence strongly suggests that investing in

children's sports participation offers more substantial and

widespread benefits. Governments should prioritize

creating accessible sports opportunities for all children, as

this approach contributes more effectively to public

health, social development, and long-term national

success than focusing primarily on elite athletes. This

investment in the younger generation's physical activity

represents a more equitable and sustainable use of public

resources.

Some experts suggest people a method to solve the

environmental problem is to increase the cost of fuels and

all vehicles.

To what extent do you agree with this point?

修改后的文章：

Whether addressing environmental problems by raising

fuel prices is effective has become a contentious issue.

While higher prices may create a deterrent effect, I

strongly disagree with this approach and believe that

more comprehensive measures should be adopted.

Increasing fuel and vehicle costs indiscriminately has

several limitations. The primary concern is that in areas

where the public heavily relies on cars, higher fuel and

vehicle prices would undoubtedly impose a significant

financial burden. For instance, in some parts of the United

States, where public transportation is underdeveloped and

people depend on their cars for daily commuting, an

increase in fuel prices could make it unaffordable for

individuals to travel to work, potentially leading to higher

unemployment rates. Another crucial issue is that this

approach may not address environmental problems at

their root. The wealthy, who are less affected by rising

prices, would still continue to use private jets—modes of

transportation that emit far more pollution than the

combined emissions of hundreds of cars.

In contrast, alternative measures offer numerous benefits.

First, promoting public transportation can lead to lasting

societal benefits by reducing the carbon footprint per

person. Governments should invest in infrastructure

development, such as adding more subway lines, reducing

wait times between trains, and creating a more

comfortable commuting environment. By improving the

overall experience, more people would be inclined to use

public transportation instead of relying on private cars.

Moreover, governments should prioritize the development

of clean-energy vehicles. For example, offering tax

incentives for the purchase of electric or hybrid vehicles

could play a significant role in moving towards a zero-

emissions society.

In conclusion, while increasing travel expenses may

provide temporary environmental benefits, the evidence

strongly suggests that alternative measures, such as

promoting public transportation and clean-energy

vehicles, would offer more substantial and far-reaching

benefits.

范文：

The proposal to combat environmental challenges by

increasing fuel and vehicle costs is a complex policy

measure that warrants careful consideration. While this

approach has some merit, I believe it requires significant

refinement and should be implemented alongside other

more comprehensive solutions.

Raising fuel and vehicle prices as a standalone measure

presents several significant drawbacks. Primarily, it

disproportionately affects lower-income households,

particularly in regions with limited public transportation

infrastructure. For instance, in rural America where public

transport networks are sparse, residents who rely heavily

on personal vehicles for daily commuting would face

severe financial strain, potentially compromising their

ability to access employment and essential services.

Furthermore, this approach may have limited

effectiveness in curbing environmental damage from the

wealthiest segments of society, who can easily absorb

higher costs and continue using carbon-intensive modes of

transport such as private jets, which generate

substantially more emissions than conventional vehicles.

Instead, a more nuanced and multi-faceted approach

would yield superior environmental outcomes.

Governments should prioritize substantial investment in

public transportation infrastructure, focusing on expanding

metro networks, reducing service intervals, and enhancing

passenger comfort. Singapore exemplifies this strategy's

success, where extensive investment in public transport

has resulted in a highly efficient system that serves as an

attractive alternative to private vehicle ownership.

Additionally, governments should implement targeted

incentives for clean energy adoption, such as significant

tax rebates for electric vehicle purchases and subsidies for

renewable energy infrastructure. Norway's success in

achieving high electric vehicle adoption rates through

such incentives demonstrates the effectiveness of this

approach. A truly effective environmental strategy should

combine carefully calibrated price signals with substantial

investment in sustainable alternatives. Rather than simply

increasing costs, authorities should implement graduated

pricing schemes that account for income levels while

simultaneously investing in clean technology research and

development. This could include implementing congestion

pricing in urban centers while using the revenue to fund

public transport improvements and subsidize electric

vehicle adoption for lower-income households.

In conclusion, while price mechanisms can play a role in

environmental protection, they must be part of a

comprehensive strategy that includes infrastructure

development, technology innovation, and social equity

considerations. This balanced approach would create

lasting environmental benefits while ensuring fair access

to mobility for all members of society.

In some cultures elderly people are highly valued, while in

some other cultures youth are more valued.

Discuss both views and give your own

修改后的文章：

People have different views on whether elderly individuals

or the younger generation are more valuable. While the

accumulated knowledge and experience of older people

are highly regarded, I believe that young people are more

likely to contribute to the advancement of society.

On the one hand, it is undeniable that the older generation

possesses substantial and irreplaceable qualities. Wisdom

is often gained through experience, and their enriched life

experiences enable them to approach and analyze

problems from a more sophisticated perspective.

Additionally, due to the cyclical nature of history, issues

that may seem unsolvable to younger individuals might

have already been encountered by older people. For

example, Professor Zhong Nanshan, who successfully

battled SARS two decades ago, applied his invaluable

experience during the 2019 COVID-19 pandemic.

On the other hand, the younger generation has numerous

advantages. Firstly, they tend to have more energy and

stamina, allowing them to work longer hours compared to

older individuals, making them the primary workforce.

Secondly, their more active thinking patterns, quicker

reaction times, and relatively higher levels of intelligence

enable them to embrace new changes and keep pace with

societal developments. Moreover, having grown up in an

era of advanced technology, young people are already

proficient in basic computer skills. In contrast, it can be

mentally demanding for the elderly to fully grasp

technological knowledge and apply it in real-world

situations.

In conclusion, while I understand why some people believe

the experience of the elderly is highly valuable, I believe

that the youth play a more significant role in driving social

progress.

范文：

The relative value placed on different age groups varies

significantly across cultures, with some societies revering

their elderly members while others prioritize youth. While

both perspectives have merit, I believe a balanced

approach that recognizes the unique contributions of each

generation would be most beneficial for society.

In many traditional societies, elderly individuals are

viewed as repositories of wisdom and cultural heritage.

Their decades of accumulated experience provide

invaluable insights into human nature and problem-solving

approaches that transcend time. For instance, during the

COVID-19 pandemic, veteran epidemiologists like

Professor Zhong Nanshan drew upon their experience

from previous health crises to implement effective

containment strategies. Moreover, older generations often

serve as custodians of cultural traditions, preserving and

passing down essential knowledge that maintains social

cohesion and identity across generations.

Conversely, societies that place greater emphasis on

youth often do so because of their potential for innovation

and adaptability. Young people typically demonstrate

remarkable cognitive flexibility and possess an innate

ability to embrace technological advancement. Their

physical vigor and enthusiasm for change make them

particularly well-suited to driving economic growth and

social progress in our rapidly evolving world. Furthermore,

having grown up in a digital era, younger generations

possess an intuitive understanding of modern

technologies that positions them uniquely to solve

contemporary challenges.

However, rather than viewing this as a dichotomy, I

believe the most prosperous societies are those that foster

intergenerational collaboration. The elderly's wisdom and

experience can guide and temper the energy and

innovation of youth, while young people's technological

prowess and adaptability can help bridge the digital divide

and ensure older generations remain connected to

modern developments. This synergy between generations

creates a robust foundation for sustainable social

progress.

In conclusion, while different cultures may emphasize

either youth or age, the ideal approach lies in recognizing

and leveraging the complementary strengths of both

groups. By fostering mutual respect and collaboration

between generations, societies can harness both the

wisdom of experience and the dynamism of youth to

create more resilient and adaptable communities.

Some people want government to spend money on

searching for life on other planets. However, others think

it is a waste of public money when the earth has so many

problems. Discuss these two views and give your own

修改后的文章：
People have different views on whether space exploration

is a waste of public money. While both perspectives have

merit, I believe a balanced approach would be most

beneficial for society.

On the one hand, searching for intelligent life in space

offers long-term benefits. Firstly, global warming and

resource shortages are transforming our planet into a less

hospitable environment. Therefore, exploring alternative

options for survival may become essential in the future.

Secondly, the technological advancements required for

space exploration often lead to significant progress in

other areas. As space missions demand cutting-edge

technology, the innovations developed can have tangible

benefits in fields such as medicine, agriculture, and

engineering. Moreover, searching for life on other planets

can help humanity realize the insignificance of our

existence in the vast universe. This realization can foster a

sense of humility, encouraging greater respect for both

the Earth and the cosmos.

On the other hand, in the short term, space exploration

may create challenges. Given that the total amount of

public funding is limited, directing more resources toward

space missions could divert attention and funding away

from urgent issues such as climate change, education, and

poverty. Furthermore, even if life forms are discovered on

other planets, premature contact or communication could

result in unintended consequences, including conflicts or

disasters.

In conclusion, while there are valid arguments on both

sides, I believe the ideal approach lies in a balanced and

sustainable allocation of public resources that addresses

both current issues and long-term exploration goals.

范文：

The allocation of government funds for extraterrestrial

exploration has sparked considerable debate, with some

advocating for increased space research while others

prioritize addressing terrestrial challenges. This essay will

examine both perspectives before offering a nuanced

position on this complex issue.

Proponents of space exploration argue that searching for

extraterrestrial life represents a crucial long-term

investment in humanity's future. The deterioration of

Earth's climate and the depletion of natural resources

underscore the necessity of identifying alternative

habitats for human civilization. Furthermore, the

technological innovations driven by space exploration

frequently yield unprecedented breakthroughs in various

fields, from advanced medical equipment to sustainable

energy solutions. Space agencies' research has already

contributed to the development of satellite technology,

which proves invaluable for weather forecasting,

telecommunications, and environmental monitoring.

Critics, however, contend that allocating substantial

resources to space exploration while pressing terrestrial

issues remain unresolved reflects misplaced priorities.

They argue that immediate challenges such as poverty,

healthcare accessibility, and environmental degradation

demand urgent attention and substantial funding.

Moreover, these skeptics raise valid concerns about the

potential risks associated with detecting extraterrestrial

intelligence, citing the historical precedent of

technological civilizations often subjugating less advanced

societies.

In my view, while the skeptics' concerns about immediate

societal needs merit serious consideration, completely

dismissing space exploration would be short-sighted. The

optimal approach would involve maintaining a carefully

balanced funding strategy that allocates resources

proportionally between immediate terrestrial challenges

and long-term space exploration initiatives. This balanced

approach would allow humanity to address current

societal issues while simultaneously investing in

technological advancement and scientific discovery that

could ultimately benefit all of humanity.

In conclusion, rather than viewing space exploration and

terrestrial development as mutually exclusive endeavors,

governments should strive to integrate both into a

comprehensive strategy for human advancement. This

approach would ensure that immediate societal needs

receive adequate attention while maintaining humanity's

capacity for scientific progress and discovery.

Some people think that parents have a powerful influence

in child's life, while the influence from outside the home

plays a bigger part of child's development.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The extent to which parents versus external influences

shape a child's development has been widely debated in

child psychology and education. While acknowledging the

significant role of external factors, I firmly believe that

parental influence remains the cornerstone of child

development, though both forces work in complex

interplay.

Parents exert a profound and lasting impact on their

children's development through multiple channels. During

the critical period of early brain development (ages 0-5),

children's neural pathways are rapidly forming, and

parents serve as the primary architects of their cognitive

and emotional framework. For instance, research from

Harvard's Center on the Developing Child demonstrates

that responsive parenting - characterized by warm,

consistent interactions - directly enhances children's

executive function skills and emotional regulation abilities.

Furthermore, parents shape their children through both

genetic inheritance and environmental modeling. A

longitudinal study tracking 1,000 families over two

decades found that children whose parents demonstrated

strong problem-solving skills and emotional intelligence

were significantly more likely to develop similar

capabilities, highlighting the power of both nature and

nurture in the parent-child dynamic.

While external influences such as peers, teachers, and

media undoubtedly play a role, their impact is often

moderated by the foundation established at home. For

example, children with strong parental attachment and

clear family values tend to be more resilient to negative

peer pressure during adolescence. Additionally, parents

act as crucial mediators of external influences - they can

help children process and contextualize experiences from

school, media, and social interactions. Evidence from

educational psychology suggests that parental

involvement in education - through homework support,

communication with teachers, and fostering a learning-

positive environment at home - can significantly amplify

the benefits of formal schooling.

However, it's essential to recognize that the relationship

between parental and external influences is not strictly

binary but rather synergistic. The most successful child

development outcomes often occur when parents actively

engage with and leverage external resources - whether by

choosing appropriate educational environments,

facilitating positive peer relationships, or helping children

navigate media consumption. This collaborative approach

allows children to benefit from diverse influences while

maintaining the stable foundation provided by parental

guidance.

In conclusion, while external factors significantly

contribute to a child's development, the fundamental and

enduring influence of parents creates the lens through

which children interpret and integrate these outside

experiences. The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that

positive parental involvement remains the single most

powerful predictor of healthy child development, though

its effectiveness is optimized when working in harmony

with beneficial external influences.