IELTS MASTER | Writing

Writing

Writing

SUMMARIZE WRITTEN TEXT
Read the passage below and summarize it using one sentence. You have 10 minutes to finish this task. Your response will be judged on the quality of your writing and on how well your response presents the key points in the passage.

It wasn’t until the 19lh century that Britain had a police force as we know it today. In medieval times, the maintenance of law and order was in the hands of local nobles and lords who were expected to keep the peace in their own land, and they would often appoint “constables” to police it. For a long time policing remained an unpaid activity or was paid for privately, either by individuals or organizations. There were also people who made a living as “thief takers”. They were not paid wages, but were rewarded by a proportion of the value of the stolen possessions they recovered. Later, in London, where the population was rapidly increasing and crime was rising, night-watchmen – the first paid law enforcement body – were created and worked alongside the unpaid, part-time constables.
Britain, then, was slower to create and develop a police force than the rest of Europe: France had one long before – indeed, the word police is taken from the French. This fact was not unimportant, as the very idea of a police force was seen as foreign – that is, French – and particularly undesirable, and was generally regarded as a form of oppression.
It was not until Robert Peel set up his “new police” as a separate force in 1829 that policemen began to replace the old part-time constables. Sir Robert “Bobby” Peel’s own name provided two common nicknames for the new force: “Peelers” or “Bobbies”. These names seem mild, if not affectionate, and are possibly an interesting gauge of how the police were viewed by people at the time, in contrast with the kind of names they get called these days.

 


 


 

SUMMARIZE WRITTEN TEXT
Read the passage below and summarize it using one sentence. You have 10 minutes to finish this task. Your response will be judged on the quality of your writing and on how well your response presents the key points in the passage.

Many people have problems with irony, both in their everyday lives and as it is used or deployed in literature. We learn early on at school about “dramatic irony”, that is, we are told, when the audience of a play is aware of some situation or circumstance, or has information that one or more characters in the play do not. If you like, you are sharing a secret with the writer – you axe in the know. Perhaps, as you go about your daily business, irony is not so clear-cut.

Here’s an example: your neighbour draws your attention to how lovely the dandelions and daisies growing in your lawn are. Now, to someone not familiar with the care and attention many English people give to their gardens, this might need a bit of explanation. Lawns are grass, and are cut and rolled regularly so that a professional golfer could practice his putting on it. Daisies and dandelions are weeds. For a moment – but just for a moment – you wonder how serious your neighbour is being. Does he really think the weeds are lovely or is he telling you – in a rather superior way – that you’re a lousy gardener?

Irony, however, usually needs an audience; and not only does it need some people to get the poinL, it also very much needs there to be people who don’t. There is, it has to be said, a rather undemocratic air of superiority about it.

Irony is slippery, sometimes difficult to get a firm hold on, and can easily backfire, like a joke that falls flat. Those who don’t like irony – usually those who don’t get the point — argue that, in a world that is already difficult enough to deal with, why should we want to complicate things further? Why throw everything you say into doubt? Besides, there’s an unpleasant air of intellectual snobbery about it, and that sort of thing doesn’t go down well any more.

 


 


Write Essay

You will have 20 minutes to plan, write and revise an essay about the topic below. Your response will be judged on how well you develop a position, organize your ideas, present supporting details, and control the elements of standard written English. You should write 200-300 words.

It has recently been suggested that the classical, or “dead”, languages Latin and Greek should be re-introduced into the school curriculum. Those that oppose the idea claim that the ancient languages are of no practical use and no help in getting a job. Those in favor of the idea say that education is more about training the mind than preparing for a career.

Which of these points of view do you most agree with? Support your argument, where possible, with reasons and/or examples from your own experience and observations.


Comments are closed.