Thread: Check my essay, please

Hi everybody. I'm going to pass IELTS exam. Could you check my essay.

Do the benefits of study abroad justify the difficulties? What advice would you offer to a prospective student?

Today, many young people can get higher education in foreign country. No doubt, global thinking and knowledge other culture are big advantages. At the same time, you have to live separately from your family and friends. This essay will discuss some arguments for and against getting education abroad.

There are several good points about getting education abroad in contrast with domestic one. First of all, people have to study new language and culture. As a result they can compare their own culture with foreign one and think more globally. The second point is that people get better standards of teaching abroad than in their own country. For instance, there are many Asian students which go in Australia to get tertiary education. Before enroll at a university they usually pass IELTS exam. Finally, after several year of studying young people make friends. So they can share their time together and have interesting and fun life.

On the other hand, there several disadvantages of getting degree abroad. The main bad point is that students have to live there without parents, relatives and old friends. Therefore man can feel loneliness and nostalgia. The next point is that tuition fee is usually more expensive than it at home. Moreover, young people have to find accommodation to live in and will have to pay for it during their education.

To sum up, I sincere believe that we have to extent the opportunities for our children to get education abroad. But parents don’t have to forget about issues there and have to support them. I’m sure exchange of knowledge and cultures is progress for our civilization.

Hello alusov, here are my suggested corrections and alternative or optional words:

Originally Posted by alusov

Do the benefits of studying abroad justify the difficulties? What advice would you offer to a prospective student?

Today, many young people can get higher education in a foreign country. No doubt, global thinking and knowledge of other cultures are big advantages. At the same time, you have to live separately from your family and friends. This essay will discuss some arguments for and against getting an education abroad.

There are several good points about getting an education abroad in contrast with a domestic one. First of all, people have to/students must study a new language and culture. As a result they can compare their own culture with a foreign one and think more globally. The second point is that people/students get better standards of teaching abroad than in their own country. For instance, there are many Asian students who go to Australia to get a tertiary/higher education. Before enrolling at a university they usually pass the IELTS exam. Finally, after several years of studying abroad young people/students will have made many friends. So they can share their time together and have an interesting and fun life/experience.

On the other hand, there several disadvantages of getting a degree abroad. The main bad point is that students have to live there without their parents, relatives and old friends. Therefore one can feel loneliness and nostalgia. The next point is that the tuition fee is usually more expensive than it is at home. Moreover, young people have to find accommodations to live in and will have to pay for it/this during their education.

To sum up, I sincerely believe that we have to extend the opportunities for our children to get an education abroad. But parents should not forget about the issues their children will face there and have to/and must support them. I’m sure that the exchange of knowledge and cultures is progress for our civilization.

Ken! as always!

Originally Posted by Lampada

Ken! as always!

Well thanks for the compliment Lampada, I don't know if I deserve it. Anyway, yeah, I like George Carlin too, and with his recordings and videos he will always be with us when we want him.

Well done!!!
If you want the same check in Russian please don't hesitate!
I will do my best.

Originally Posted by alusov

...If you want the same check in Russian please don't hesitate! ...

Ха! Знаешь, сколько здесь будет желающих помогать Кену с русским? Не протолкнёшься!

Hi every body!
It's my next essay. Could you check it?

Topic: Some people prefer to work for a large company. Others prefer to work for a small company. Which would you prefer? Use specific reasons and examples to support your choice.

Many people believe that it is better to make career in a corporation. However, other choose a small firm for it. In this essay, I will consider benefits of working for these two types of the companies.

There are many advantages of working for a large firm like a multinational corporation. First of all, one gets a steady job. A large company usually has a specified share of the market and as a result one has many clients. Secondly, as a rule employees in a corporation have some perks. For instance, while they are sick, employer pays them a sickness benefit. Moreover, after definite term one gets a paid holiday. Finally, the workers of the large corporation have more opportunities to be promoted, in contract to their colleagues in a small company. It is the known fact, that there are more open as well as new positions in a big company.

On the other hand, there are some benefit of employing for a small firm like a start-up. No doubt, an employee usually has more responsibility because he has to do different types of work at the same time. For example, one can be responsible for working with the clients as well as run some technical work. As a result, one becomes more experienced and knows how a company work inside. In additional, worker can feel own important for the company and has more opportunities for a self-realization.

In conclusion, I am sure it is very useful to have experience of working in both type of the companies. In the future, it allows you to create your own start-up or make successful career in a multinational company.

Originally Posted by alusov

Hi every body!
It's my next essay. Could you check it?

Topic: Some people prefer to work for a large company. Others prefer to work for a small company. Which would you prefer? Use specific reasons and examples to support your choice.

Many people believe that it is better to make a career in a corporation. However, some choose to work in smaller firms. In this essay, I will consider the benefits of working for these two types of _ companies.

There are many advantages of working for a large firm like a multinational corporation. First of all, one gets a steady job; a large company usually has a specified share of the market and as a result one has many clients. Secondly, as a general rule, employees in a corporation have more perks. For instance, while they are sick, the employer compensates them. Moreover, after definite term [unclear what is meant here] one gets a paid holiday. Finally, _ workers in large corporations have more opportunities to be promoted, in contrast to their colleagues in _ small companies. It is a known fact_ that there are more _ positions to fill in a big company.

On the other hand, there are some definite benefits for employees of _ small firms like _ start-ups. _ An employee usually has more responsibility because he has to do different types of work at the same time. For example, one can be responsible for working with the clients as well as running some technical work. As a result, one becomes more experienced and knows how a company works from the inside. In addition_, workers can feel more ownership of the company and have more opportunities for _ self-realization.

In conclusion, I am sure it is very useful to have the experience of working in both types of _ companies. It allows you, in the future, to create your own start-up or to have a successful career in a multinational company.

I take it you're an advanced student. You gotta look out for plurals, articles, and some inconsistencies in tense and verb conjugation, but nothing major in those categories. Really well written compared to most I've seen.

«Every body» — это как-то забавно даже. Слитно должно быть.

Originally Posted by Rtyom

«Every body» — это как-то забавно даже. Слитно должно быть.

Нэйтивы на это ( не все конечно ) плюют запросто. More over, them selves, и тп. Слышится как слышится ? Ну и славненько, there/their/ they're - фигня какая, выберем какое-нибудь одно и будем придерживаться. -ться/-тся/-цца? не вопрос...

It's my next essay. Whould you check it.
Thanks.

Topic: In order to reduce crime, we need to attack the causes of crime such as poverty and lack of educational opportunities. It’s not enough to simply have more police on the street and put more people into prison. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

Many people believe that in order to combat crime, the most effective means are the jails and the police. However, other think it’s better to effect on the causes of the misdeeds such as bad education and poverty. In this essay I will discuss both points of view.

There are several important causes why people commit a crime. First of all, the shortage of the educational can lead to a crime. It is obvious that a good education allows to get a well-paid job. The second reason is poverty that can turn people in the criminals. So, the state has to create the work places and develop business. As a result it will decrease the unemployment and crime. Finally, it is a well-known fact that the maintenance of the jails and the police are very expensive for the state. In many cases, community service are more right sentence than a prison.

On the other hand, there are many evidence when rich and well-educated people commit the crimes. For instance, children from the rich families can take drugs. Their parents spend most of the time at work and don’t attend to their children in the enough extent. Moreover, last decades bring us new type of the fraud such as computer crimes. In this case one has to have a very good education for it. Furthermore, there are crimes such as murder, kidnapping and drug smuggling. It’s clear that these kinds of offences demand the serious punishment such as prison or even capital punishment.

In conclusion, I agree that firstly we have to understand causes of crime. In this case only we can decrease crime and create more safe society for our future generations.

Hello Alusov, here are my suggested corrections, alternative and optional words, and moved words:

Originally Posted by alusov

Many people believe that in order to combat crime, the most effective means are the jails and the police/are increasing the police force and putting more criminals in jail. However, others think it’s better to have an effect on the causes of the misdeeds such as bad education and poverty. In this essay I will discuss both points of view.

There are several important causes/reasons why people commit a crime. First of all, the lack of a good education can lead to crime. It is obvious that a good education allows one to get a well-paid job. The second reason is poverty, which can turn people into criminals. So, the state has to implement policies that help to create jobs and develop business. As a result it will decrease unemployment and crime. Finally, it is a well-known fact that the maintenance of/that the cost of maintaining the jails and the police is very expensive for the state. In many cases, community service is a more just sentence than prison.

On the other hand, there is much evidence that rich and well-educated people commit crimes. For instance, children from rich families can take illegal drugs. Their parents spend most of their time at work and don’t pay enough attention to their children. Moreover, in recent decades we have seen new types of crimes such as computer fraud. In this case one has to have a very good education for it/to commit this type of crime. Furthermore, there are crimes such as murder, kidnapping and drug smuggling. It’s clear that these kinds of offences demand the most serious punishment such as prison or even capital punishment.

In conclusion, I agree that firstly/first we have to understand the causes of crime. In this case only can we decrease crime and create a more safe society for our future generations.

Originally Posted by alusov

Hi everybody. I'm going to sit an IELTS exam. Could you check my essay.

Here is my next essay. Thank you for checking my last essay. It was very useful.

Topic: In your opinion should government intervene in the rights of the individual with regard to family planning?

Today there are many countries which face with a problem of the overpopulation. On the other hand there are nations with low fertility. In this essay I will discuss why and when authority should control family planning.

First of all, I believe that government has to adjust fertility in order with the demographic situation in the country. For example, since 1970 China has been having a one child per family policy. This policy allows to solve problem of overpopulation of China. Otherwise China would inevitably meet with poverty, starvation and unemployment. As a result China has the most educated and the healthiest the generation of young people for all their history.

Secondly, there are societies with low level fertility. In other word it is when rate of mortality is more than one of fertility. As a result population will gradually decline and it can lead to problem of national safety. In this case, authority have to encourage family to give birth more than one child. For instance, in some country families get money from government for the birth of the second child. This policy allows to increase fertility and decrease the percent of old people. As a result society will have more working people and will become more economically developed.

However, some scientists claim that humanity can meet with issue which didn’t exist before. For example, one child per family policy lead to the situation when child doesn’t have any siblings. Moreover a grandchild doesn’t have any uncles and an ants. The families with one child are risky ones for society in case of the natural disaster or the war.

In conclusion, in my opinion every country has to have its own policy for planning of family. This is fundament for strong and health society and will resolve many social problems.

Hello again alusov, here are my suggested corrections, alternative or optional words, and moved words:

Originally Posted by alusov

Today there are many countries which are faced with an overpopulation problem. On the other hand there are nations with low fertility. In this essay I will discuss why and when governmental authority should control family planning.

First of all, I believe that government has to adjust fertility in accordance with the demographic situation/adjust fertility along demographic lines in the country. For example, since 1970 China has been having a one-child-per-family policy. This policy attempts to solve/This policy is directed to provide a solution to the problem of overpopulation in China. Otherwise the population in China would inevitably meet with poverty, starvation and unemployment. As a result China has the most educated and the healthiest generation of young people in all its history.

Secondly, there are societies with low-level fertility. In other words it is when the rate of mortality is more than/the rate of mortality exceeds the rate of fertility. As a result population will gradually decline and it can lead to problems of national safety. In this case, governmental authority must encourage a husband and wife to give birth to more than one child. For instance, in some countries families get money from government for the birth of the second child. This policy encourages an increase in fertility and a decrease the percentage of old people. As a result society will have more working people and will become more economically developed.

However, some scientists claim that humanity can meet with issues which didn’t exist before. For example, the one-child-per family policy can lead to a situation where a child doesn’t have any siblings, and where a grandchild doesn’t have any uncles and aunts. The families with only one child are risky ones for society in cases of natural disaster or war.

In conclusion, in my opinion every country has to have its own policy for planning of the family/for family planning. This is fundamental for a strong and healthy society and will resolve many social problems.

Hello everyone! Please check my essay. In turn I'd check your essay in Russian.
Damage of the environment is an inevitable consequence of worldwide improvements in the standard of living. Discuss.

I think that the issue about whether rising of the standard of living influences on pollution of the environment is the one that is rather topical and open for debate. Some people believe that the better we live the worse our environment is. However, other people are sure that we can improve the quality of life without any impact on our ecology. In this essay I will discuss both points of view and present my opinion in favor of people who believe that we would not damage the environment.
From the one hand, there are many evidences about ecological problems which are connected with people’s willing to live better. Let us take for example the fact that nowadays many people prefer to use their own cars as contrasted to public transport. As a result, many cites have air pollution and there is no doubt that dwellers suffer from it. Moreover, burning of fossil fuel causes global warming when greenhouse gases heat our planet. Another important aspect of this issue is deforestation. It is well known fact that our forests are cut down for many needs such as new houses, new lands, papers and so on. The consequences of it are very poor because the most dangerous issue is that we have many endangered as well as extinct species. Unfortunately many wild animals don’t have their natural habitat anymore.
From the other hand, many scientists and environmentalists are sure that in order to live better we have always take into account men’s influence on the environment. First of all, I would like to say about using of alternative source of energy such as solar power. The most obvious advantage of it is that industry could not burn fossil fuel and as a result air pollution and greenhouse effect will incline. Second of all, in addition to the mentioned above benefit, last decades brings us breakthrough in the field of the information technologies. For instance appearance of telecommuting allows employees to work from their homes using the high-speed Internet. In turn this way of doing things lead to no using private cars and petrol. So our air will not contaminated and our roads will not so crowded.

Originally Posted by alusov

Hello everyone! Please check my essay. In turn I'd check your essay in Russian.
Damage [s:flhnw09z]of[/s:flhnw09z] to the environment is an inevitable consequence of worldwide improvements in the standard of living. Discuss.

I think that the issue about whether the rising [s:flhnw09z]of the[/s:flhnw09z] standard of living influences [s:flhnw09z]on[/s:flhnw09z] pollution of the environment is the one that is rather topical and open for debate. Some people believe that the better we live the worse our environment is. However, other people are sure that we can improve the quality of life without any impact on our ecology. In this essay I will discuss both points of view and present my opinion in favor of people who believe that we would not damage the environment.
[s:flhnw09z]From[/s:flhnw09z] On the one hand, there [s:flhnw09z]are many[/s:flhnw09z] is much evidence about ecological problems [s:flhnw09z]which[/s:flhnw09z] that are connected with people’s willingness to live better. Let us take for example the fact that nowadays many people prefer to use their own cars as contrasted [s:flhnw09z]to[/s:flhnw09z] with/. . . their own cars instead of public transport. As a result, many cites have air pollution and there is no doubt that city dwellers suffer from it. Moreover, burning of fossil fuel causes global warming, that is [s:flhnw09z]when[/s:flhnw09z] greenhouse gases that trap heat in our planet's atomosphere. ( http://www.globalwarming.org.in/green-h ... arming.php ) Another important aspect of this issue is deforestation. It is a well known fact that our forests are cut down for many needs such as new houses, new lands, papers and so on. The consequences of it are very poor because the most dangerous issue is that we have many endangered as well as extinct species. Unfortunately many wild animals don’t have their natural habitat anymore.
[s:flhnw09z]From[/s:flhnw09z]On the other hand, many scientists and environmentalists are sure that in order to live better we have always taken into account men’s influence on the environment. First of all, I would like to say something about using [s:flhnw09z]of[/s:flhnw09z] alternative sources of energy such as solar power. The most obvious advantage of it is that industry that uses solar power would not burn fossil fuel and as a result air pollution and greenhouse effect [s:flhnw09z]will[/s:flhnw09z] would [s:flhnw09z]in[/s:flhnw09z]decline. Second of all, in addition to the benefit mentioned above [s:flhnw09z]benefit[/s:flhnw09z], the last decades have [s:flhnw09z]brings[/s:flhnw09z] brought us breakthroughs in the field of [s:flhnw09z]the[/s:flhnw09z] information technologies. For instance the appearance of telecommuting allows employees to work from their homes using [s:flhnw09z]the[/s:flhnw09z] high speed Internet. In turn this way of doing things lead to [s:flhnw09z]no[/s:flhnw09z] less use[s:flhnw09z]ing[/s:flhnw09z] of private cars and petrol. So our air will not be so contaminated and our roads will not be so crowded.

To Ken Watts.
I'm glad to see you here! Thank you a lot for helping me with the essay