Larger proportions of people live and work in other countries today than at any time in the past. It is probable that in the future there will be no borders and people will be able to move freely between countries. To what extent do you agree with this opinion?
Sample Response
Yes, it is true that a large percentage of people today live and work in other nations compared to the past. However, it doesn’t imply that people would be able to move freely between nations in the future and countries will be borderless.
Just forget about the free commute between nations, it is even not possible within a country. Let us take the example of India. There are many youngsters who leave their native towns to work in metro cities to earn a good living for their family. However, they are not readily accepted by the city. The priority is always given to local residents who have knowledge of local people, traditions, and what works well in a particular city.
The outsiders are considered only when there is a need. When it comes to acceptance, let us get back to the time of financial crisis. At that time, the first people to lose their jobs were the people who came to work in the U.S. from other nations.
The various nations are implementing even more restrictive and stringent immigration policies. Such measures are being imposed at precisely the same time when migration to other nations has become an increasingly vital part of people’s plans for getting access to life resources.
Before even we think of no borders, it is essential to eradicate the other problems related to immigration. The spousal visa holders, renewable working permits and other temporary visas that face several challenges are often suspended in future with people stuck in devastating consequences.
To conclude, due to the prevailing cultural and economic diversities, and safety issues, the borders will continue to exist in the future.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Clarify the comparison Original: compared to the past Suggested revision: compared with the past Why it matters: "Compared with" more clearly marks a contrast between present and past proportions.
- 2. Use formal transition Original: Just forget about Suggested revision: Even before considering Why it matters: The replacement introduces the domestic example without a conversational command to the reader.
- 3. Use the correct term Original: free commute Suggested revision: free movement Why it matters: "Commute" usually means regular travel to work, whereas the argument concerns unrestricted movement.
- 4. Fix adverb placement Original: it is even not possible Suggested revision: this is not even possible Why it matters: The demonstrative gives the prior idea a clear referent, and "not even" is the natural word order.
- 5. Use standard term Original: metro cities Suggested revision: major cities Why it matters: "Major cities" is the conventional expression for large urban employment centres.
- 6. Use plural families Original: for their family Suggested revision: for their families Why it matters: The plural subject refers to different young people supporting their respective families.
- 7. Name the accepting group Original: accepted by the city Suggested revision: accepted by local residents Why it matters: A city cannot literally accept newcomers; the following sentence identifies local residents as the relevant group.
- 8. Clarify local knowledge Original: knowledge of local people Suggested revision: knowledge of the local community Why it matters: The replacement expresses familiarity with a community rather than treating people as an object of knowledge.
- 9. Remove the article Original: The outsiders Suggested revision: Outsiders Why it matters: A general plural group does not take the definite article when first introduced.
- 10. Use concise transition Original: When it comes to acceptance Suggested revision: Regarding acceptance Why it matters: The shorter phrase keeps the link to the preceding point in a formal register.
- 11. Use natural quantifier Original: The various nations Suggested revision: Many nations Why it matters: The original definite phrase implies a previously specified set of nations that the essay has not identified.
- 12. Remove overlapping adjectives Original: even more restrictive and stringent Suggested revision: increasingly restrictive Why it matters: "Restrictive" and "stringent" overlap here, while the replacement retains the trend towards tighter policies.
Suggested Rewrites
- compared to the past compared with the past
- Just forget about Even before considering
- free commute free movement
- it is even not possible this is not even possible
- metro cities major cities
- for their family for their families
Why this response received Band 6.5
The essay maintains a clear disagreement with a borderless future and supports it through examples of local preference, employment insecurity, restrictive immigration policies, and visa difficulties. Its main limitation is development: several short paragraphs make assertions without fully explaining how they prove borders will remain, and the visa sentence is grammatically obscure. Build two sustained cause-and-effect arguments—political protection of residents and unresolved security or visa controls—and express each with precise, complete sentences.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Detailed feedback by IELTS writing criterion after the annotated essay.
Task Response
A clear position is maintained and several relevant barriers to free movement are identified, though some are only briefly asserted rather than fully developed.
Select two major barriers and explain step by step why governments' protection of residents and control of migration make border removal improbable.
Coherence and Cohesion
The response follows a logical path from domestic mobility to employment, policy, and visa barriers, but several short paragraphs fragment closely related reasoning.
Combine the employment examples into one developed paragraph and the policy and visa points into another, using explicit causal links.
Lexical Resource
There is sufficient range for migration and policy issues, but phrases such as "free commute between nations," "life resources," and "stuck in devastating consequences" are imprecise.
Prefer standard expressions such as "free movement," "economic opportunities," and "left in precarious circumstances."
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
Simple and complex sentences generally convey the argument, although word order, tense, and clause-control errors remain noticeable.
Rewrite the visa sentence as two complete statements and use natural order in forms such as "Before we even consider removing borders."
Use this task for your next draft
Feedback is more useful when you actively apply it in a draft, rather than only recognising improvements on the page.
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.
The question will be loaded automatically.