Your professor is teaching a class on political science. Write a post responding to the professor’s question.

In your response you should:

• express and support your opinion
• make a contribution to the discussion

An effective response will contain at least 100 words. You will have 10 minutes to write it.

Dr. Gupta

As I mentioned in class, governments make public policies to describe their responses to various problems that affect a community. Part of this process involves setting and defending priorities about which issues deserve the most attention and resources. For example, governments need to decide whether they should spend more money on education or on environmental protections. If you were a policy maker, which issue would you argue is more important—education or environmental protections? Why?

Kelly

We all live on planet Earth, and it is the only planet we have. Therefore, we must take care of it. Clearly, protecting the environment should be the government’s priority over education. I think the REAL question is, which approach to protecting the environment—restricting pollution, regulating population, promoting clean energy, or something else—should be the government’s priority.

Andrew

I disagree with Kelly that that the environment is more important than education. Education is actually the best way to protect the environment. Educated people can see how their decisions affect the world around them. Also, with better science and technology education, we can develop solutions to environmental problems. Therefore, I think the government should spend more money on education.

To earn a top score, you should state and support your opinion about whether education or environmental protections should be the priority for governments to spend money on. Your response is a contribution to the other two students’ posts in an online discussion for the class. Be sure to add your own perspective to the discussion, not merely repeat ideas that have already been stated. Typically, an effective response will contain a minimum of 100 words.

You might agree with Kelly that environmental protections should be the priority. You will need to add your own support for this viewpoint. For example, you could argue that environmental protections are a more important investment to sustain our economies. You could point out that governments currently spend a great deal of money compensating for climate change catastrophes such as increased flooding, wind damage, or ruined crops. Investing more in environmental protections now could actually save governments money later on—which could then be used for more education funding. This would differ from the support Kelly gave for her opinion.

If you agree with Andrew that education should be the bigger priority, you could add to his argument by pointing out the amount of research that universities conduct—not only on solving environmental problems, which Andrew alluded to, but also on treating diseases, creating useful technology, and developing sustainable agriculture. Therefore, education funding has a bigger overall impact on improving human lives than investment in environmental protections only. This would be a meaningful addition to the support Andrew provided for his opinion.

You may find you agree with a point Kelly made about the environment even though you think education is more important. Or you might even find that your opinion about government priorities depends on certain factors—that education should be a priority in some circumstances, environmental protections in others. This is perfectly acceptable as long as you explain and support your reasoning. There is no “correct” answer to the question. The important part of this task is to make sure that you state your opinion and provide reasonable, relevant support for it in a way that makes a meaningful contribution to the online discussion. Try to develop your opinion as well as you can within the time limit. A well-developed response will contain clearly appropriate reasons, examples, and details—ones that do a good job supporting or illustrating your own viewpoint.

The quality and accuracy of the sentence structure and vocabulary you use to express your ideas is also very important and part of what is considered when your response is scored. The task context—a post to an online discussion group—is not quite as informal as you might think.

While the task asks you to contribute to a discussion with fellow students, imagine that the professor would also be reading your post. It is true that your tone might be more casual than what you would use in an academic paper, but you should still follow standard grammar rules. Also, if disagreeing with another student post, be sure to express your disagreement in a respectful way as you would in a real online discussion.

Your professor is teaching a class on economics. Write a post responding to the professor’s question.

In your response you should:

• express and support your opinion
• make a contribution to the discussion

An effective response will contain at least 100 words. You will have 10 minutes to write it.

Dr. Achebe

When people are asked about the most important discoveries or inventions made in the last two hundred years, they usually mention something very obvious, like the computer or the cell phone. But there are thousands of other discoveries or inventions that have had a huge impact on how we live today. What scientific discovery or technological invention from the last two hundred years—other than computers and cell phones—would you choose as being important? Why?

Paul

I mean, we’re so used to science and technology that we are not even aware of all the things we use in our daily lives. I would probably choose space satellites. This technology happened in the last hundred years, and it has become important for so many things. Just think about navigation, or telecommunications, or even the military.

Claire

I am thinking about medical progress. Like, for example, when scientists discovered things about healthy nutrition. I am thinking of identifying all the vitamins we need to stay healthy. I am not sure exactly when the vitamin discoveries happened, but I know they are very important. Our health is much better than it was 200 years ago.

In the past 200 years, tons of scientific discoveries or technological inventions have been shown to the world. If I had to choose one in particular it will probably be vaccine or antibiotics. With Pasteur's work and discoveries, the world changed in a way people couldn't imagine. So many people were dying really young because at that time life's conditions were not as good as the one we have now. With vaccine, we could now irradicate diseases that were killing millions of people, we learn so much about the immune system and ways our body was reacting to pathogens and the answers he could produce to defend us against it. Medicine evolved so much and keeps evolving every day because scientists are curious to understand how our body is working and how he is able to communicate with our environment. People aged 40 are now not that old and still have a really long life to live and enjoy when 2 centuries ago it was synonymous of 80% chance of dying. (171 words)

This is a fully successful response. The writer chooses vaccines/antibiotics as the most important invention of the past 200 years. The author then provides a description, for contrast, of what life was like before Pasteur’s work (people dying young) and after the vaccine was created (millions of lives saved, more understanding of the immune system). The writer continues on to point out that medicine continues to evolve because of Pasteur’s work and how human lifespans have been extended. Overall, the response provides well-elaborated explanations and details to support the main opinion and provides a relevant contribution to the discussion.

While there are almost no errors in grammar and word choice, there are a few minor ones that have little impact on meaning (such as “life's conditions were not as good as the one we have” rather than “were not as good as they are now,” and “how our body is working and how he is able to communicate” rather than “how it is able to communicate”). However, these errors are fairly minor and such errors might be expected when writing under timed conditions. The writer is able to use some complex sentences and relatively precise vocabulary, which is expected in a 5-level response.

From my personal point of view, I think the most important invention is the light bulb. Before it was invented, people had have to use candles for illumination in the evening. It's performance is not very stable, and it is produce really high tempreture which would probably lead to a fire accident. Light bulbs, however, produce constant and bright lighting at nights. One light bulb could use for several years, which is quite convenient-people don't need to storage many bulbs. What's more, it is safer than past candles. This is a huge progress in technology, and I consider it as the most vital invention from the last 200 years. (109 words)

This is a generally successful response. The writer chooses the light bulb as the most important invention and contrasts it with the disadvantages of using candles (their unstable performance, high temperature, and possibility of fire. The writer then names several advantages of the light bulb (a stable, long-lasting performance; brightness; and safety). Notice these points are in direct contrast to the mentioned drawbacks of candles, which is an effective way to support the choice. However, the argument might have been a little stronger if the writer had discussed not only why light bulbs are better than candles, but also why light bulbs are the most important invention of the past 200 years (other than computers and cell phones, perhaps by mentioning at least one way in which they have helped societies progress.

While the writer uses a nice variety of grammatical constructions and fairly precise vocabulary, the number and type of errors in grammar and vocabulary prevent it from reaching the highest score level. Multiple small errors such as “had have to use”, “it is produce”, “one light bulb could use for years”, and “don’t need to storage” are distracting for the reader even though the intended meaning is still usually clear.