Modern technology, such as chemical fertiliser, is being used more nowadays. Some people think that it is dangerous to human health and has negative effects on local communities. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the above statement?
Sample Response
Today, innovations in farming have changed citizens' lives far significantly. Some individuals believe that the new chemicals used in agriculture have had numerous drawbacks on people's health. However, others, myself included, believe that the positive influences can surpass the negative consequences. On the one hand, some people believe that chemical materials used for food are like a tip of an iceberg. One reason is that they can increase the risk of obesity. Hormones are the ones which are applied as fertilisers in vegetables or animal products, causing the users to become more overweight. For example, the rate of obesity has fundamentally grown among the U.S. citizens, who use the greatest amounts of non-organic foods in the world. These types of foods are considerably more economical than the organic ones, being used hugely by Americans, who are number one when it comes to the obesity rate. Another side effect is the risk of resistance. Using of these chemical materials, crops may defend less themselves against mutated pests. In particular, billions of tonnes of corn products were ruined in Canada in 2009 because of new species of these modified pests, reported by the National Geographic magazine. On the other hand, I give a green light to the usage of these products because of having more advantages. One important benefit is that these fertilisers have increased the productivity of agricultural products. Clearly, the more they are used by farmers, the more massive crops are generated. As a prime example, we can see the quality of apple has been improved notably, compared to the past. The shape, volume, colour and even price of it have been changed positively, and many of citizens can afford it; therefore, even low-income families are able to purchase it. Furthermore, crops are nourished by more valuable items. In many farm industries, vitamins and minerals are added to crops, leading them to become far nutritious than the organic products. In particular, had not these chemicals been used in rice, more children would have suffered from Vitamin B deficiency, the most abundant vitamin being found in non-organic rice. In conclusion, although consumption of chemical materials can be partly risky, I personally believe that their advantages can be greater than their negative side effects. These materials have helped humans to not only be able to afford better their food, but they can consume more healthy products than before. If I were a governor, I would support those industries producing them.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Remove faulty intensifier Original: far significantly Suggested revision: significantly Why it matters: Far does not naturally modify significantly.
- 2. Fix drawback preposition Original: on Suggested revision: for Why it matters: For correctly introduces the area negatively affected.
- 3. Use concise benefit noun Original: the positive influences Suggested revision: the benefits Why it matters: Benefits directly names the positive effects under discussion.
- 4. Fix idiom and article Original: like a tip of an iceberg Suggested revision: like the tip of the iceberg Why it matters: The fixed idiom uses the definite article and no article before iceberg.
- 5. Use defining noun phrase Original: Hormones are the ones which Suggested revision: Hormones are substances that Why it matters: The revision replaces the vague ones with a noun and a defining relative clause.
- 6. Clarify agricultural use Original: applied as fertilisers in vegetables or animal products Suggested revision: used in producing vegetables or animal products Why it matters: The revision clearly describes where the substances are used.
- 7. Name food consumers Original: causing the users Suggested revision: causing consumers Why it matters: Consumers accurately identifies people who eat the products.
- 8. Remove comparative error Original: become more overweight Suggested revision: become overweight Why it matters: Overweight is already an absolute condition in this claim.
- 9. Use rate collocation Original: has fundamentally grown Suggested revision: has risen substantially Why it matters: A rate rises, and substantially describes the scale naturally.
- 10. Remove general article Original: among the U.S. citizens Suggested revision: among U.S. citizens Why it matters: The general plural reference does not take the.
- 11. Use food price comparison Original: more economical than the organic ones Suggested revision: cheaper than organic food Why it matters: Cheaper directly compares prices, and food avoids the vague ones.
- 12. Use consumption collocation Original: being used hugely by Americans Suggested revision: therefore being widely consumed by Americans Why it matters: Food is consumed rather than used, and widely is the natural adverb.
Suggested Rewrites
- far significantly significantly
- on for
- the positive influences the benefits
- like a tip of an iceberg like the tip of the iceberg
- Hormones are the ones which Hormones are substances that
- applied as fertilisers in vegetables or animal products used in producing vegetables or animal products
Why this response received Band 6.0
The response maintains a clear position and develops several potential risks and agricultural benefits with examples, showing an ability to explore competing considerations. Its main limitation is incomplete task coverage: effects on local communities are largely replaced by claims about health, crops, and consumers, and some causal claims are insufficiently credible. The highest-priority improvement is to analyse concrete community impacts directly and support them with accurate, logically explained evidence.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
The writer clearly disagrees and develops benefits and health risks, but the prompt's effects on local communities are not adequately addressed.
Explain specific consequences for farmers, local employment, soil or water quality, and community health before reaching the final judgement.
Coherence and Cohesion
The opposing sides and conclusion follow a recognisable sequence, but the absence of paragraphing and some unclear referencing weaken organisation.
Separate the introduction, risks, benefits, and conclusion into distinct paragraphs with clear topic sentences.
Lexical Resource
A fairly broad topic vocabulary is attempted, although frequent unnatural collocations, forced idioms, and imprecise terms reduce accuracy.
Replace expressions such as give a green light and more massive crops with precise, neutral academic language.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
Complex sentence forms are attempted throughout, but errors in articles, agreement, word order, comparison, and clause structure occur regularly.
Prioritise accurate noun phrases and clause structure, particularly in participial openings, comparisons, and correlative constructions.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Writing Task 2
Modern technology, such as chemical fertiliser, is being used more nowadays. Some people think that it is dangerous to human health and has negative effects on local communities. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the above statement?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.