参加4月雅思考试的小伙伴们

感觉写作题目的难度如何？

来自环球雅思的王牌名师Hope老师第一时间

写了两篇优秀范文供同学们参考哟~

快来看看你和高分作文的差距在哪里~

Some people think the government funding should not be used for supporting art and culture. Others think supporting cultural activities may be beneficial for the population and the culture. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. 

When we think of art and culture, the pictures that spring immediately to mind are cultural activities. Therefore, whether or not governments should support such activities does create quite a buzz among the general public. In my opinion, it is one of governments’ responsibilities to support these regarding as population and the culture.

There are health benefits to be gained by participating in different types of cultural activities. Research conducted in Sweden has explored the relationship between attending cultural activities and health, suggesting that the more frequently participants attended cultural activities during their leisure time, the better their physical health.

Most types of arts involvement have a social dimension that is an important basis for building community identity. The arts, through their communicative power, enhance individual engagement with the world in ways that have both personal and public benefits. These effects are instrumental in that they can open people to life and create the fabric of shared values and meanings that improve the public sphere. Collective artistic activity has the potential to provide a forum for voice, affect social change, or promote a community's unique cultural identity.

However, too much attention and resources allocated to arts and culture may pose a threat to the further development of other industrials. For one thing, education equality may not achieve due primarily to the lack of financial support used to build more public schools in rural areas. Secondly, if local residents may pay draw their focus on to artistic fields rather than science and technology, then not enough students will learn these majors at universities, thus leading to insufficient human resources to supply the technological advances. Fortunately, both issues can be strategically addressed within policy adopted.  

In conclusion, I agree that using public money to support art and culture may make governments’ budgets allocated to other industries restricted in some cases, but to benefit population and culture, then cultural activity is required. With the current interest in arts among the public, it is predicted that it is only a matter of time before cultural activities attract the attention of mass media pressing public concerns. 

Some people think the government funding should not be used for supporting art and culture. Others think supporting cultural activities may be beneficial for the population and the culture. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. 

Organized tour to remote places and communities is becoming more and more popular. Is it a positive or negative development for the local people and environment?

How to develop tourism industry is one of the problem that governments are facing to. The soaring tours to remote places and communities gives the answer. In my opinion, it is not a good tendency for local environment, but a good one for local people.

Firstly, the exploration of wild tourism plays a vital role for giving rise to local work opportunities. As we all know, the development of tourism needs human resources to plan, to implement and to operate. Each of these stages require workers to involve in and to take the position. This provides a large number of work opportunities for local people to take.

Further more, the popularity of wild tourism also provides local residents a chance to show their great culture to others. To most of us, the local artworks and lifestyles of remote communities tend to be mysterious and attractive, but it is hard for us to get a good understanding of these due primarily to its far location and isolation. Therefore, once they open their communities to the world, they would like to build up a stage to show how they live, how to celebrate and what the beautiful works mean.

However, we cannot ignore the cost brought by such organized tour. Even though local governments do not need to invest a huge amount of money in wild tourism as it is the wildness that attracts tourists, the real cost is the negative impact on local environment. For one thing, inappropriate behavior, such as littering, from tourists usually results in non-degradable rubbish being left in these area forever. For another, with the development of tourism, local governments will have to build facilities to keep pace with the increasing demand from tourists, thus occupying wildlife’s habitats and damaging local ecosystem. However, these issued can be addressed within policy adopted.

In conclusion, wild tourism is beneficial to local residents regarding as job opportunities as well as culture spreading. In order to take the advantage of it, local governmental authorities should set up related policies to preserve environment effectively.