enjavi

IELTSライティング Task 2: バンド5.5 エッセイサンプル — 社会

Task 2 Band 5.5 社会

エッセイ問題

タイプ: 議論型

"Some countries achieve international sports by building specialised facilities to train top athletes, instead of providing sports facilities that everyone can use. Do you think this is positive or negative development? Discuss both views and give your opinion."

提出されたエッセイ

ハイライトされたテキストをクリックして提案を表示

Sports is an essential part to most of us , some of us consider it a lifestyle and others consider it a job or source of income , So it's a huge part in our live.

Building specialized facilities to improve and develop athelets levels it's kind of encouragment to this category of people , and it reflects enormous benefit to them. Either by providing to them the professional training or by make them ready to international competitions. But narrowing the attention of sports to a specific category and ignore other categories actually doesn't sounds a good idea.

Athelets consider as a important part of the community but the don't cover most of it, and other people have the right to have sport facilities that suits their level and everyone whatever is it beginner or professional can use it.

Sports is a public interest that doesn't include specific people in it, and it's important to all genders and all ages, so providing facilities to specific ones can end up with unfairness results. In other hand , providing this facilities to all public people will lead to increase in sport awarness and end up with more people having healthy lifesyle.

In conclousion , according to medical facts said that's doing sport daily and make it essence in your life decreases heart attacks and raise the life quality, specified just the athelets people with sports facilities is undesireable decision. In other hand , raising the number of gyms and sports areas will conclude with healthier society.

Nomad English 評価

総合バンドスコア 5.5

タスク達成度

6

一貫性と結束性

5.5

語彙力

5.5

文法の幅と正確性

5

試験官フィードバック

このエッセイは質問に答えようとしていますが、いくつかの面で不十分です。タスクへの回答は部分的で、「両方の意見を論じる」という指示に対して明確な二つの対立する見解が示されていません。構成が不明確で、文法的な誤り(主語と動詞の不一致、動詞の形の誤り)が頻繁に見られます。語彙は限られており、スペルミス(athelets, conclousion, undesireable)が多数あります。

バンド9 モデル回答

同じ問題に対するバンド9の模範回答:

The allocation of government funding toward sports infrastructure is a subject of ongoing debate. Some argue that building specialised facilities for elite athletes is the most effective path to international sporting success, while others contend that public sports provisions should be universally accessible. This essay will examine both perspectives before presenting my own position.

Proponents of investing in elite training facilities maintain that top-tier athletes require purpose-built environments to reach peak performance. High-performance training centres equipped with advanced technology, specialised coaching staff, and sports science support enable athletes to push the boundaries of human achievement. The success of nations such as China and Great Britain at recent Olympic Games can be largely attributed to systematic investment in elite sports infrastructure. From this perspective, channelling resources into a smaller number of exceptional athletes yields the greatest return in terms of international prestige and medal counts.

Conversely, those who favour universal access to sports facilities argue that restricting resources to the elite is both inequitable and counterproductive. Widespread availability of gymnasiums, swimming pools, and playing fields encourages mass participation, which delivers significant public health benefits including reduced rates of obesity, cardiovascular disease, and mental health disorders. Moreover, grassroots sports programmes serve as the essential pipeline from which future elite athletes emerge. Without affordable, accessible facilities at the community level, talented individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds may never have the opportunity to discover and develop their abilities.

In my view, prioritising universal sports access is the more beneficial approach. While elite facilities are important, they serve a negligible fraction of the population. Community sports infrastructure, by contrast, promotes physical wellbeing across all demographics, reduces healthcare costs, and ensures that talent identification is not limited by socioeconomic circumstances. A balanced policy that maintains some elite provision while significantly expanding public access would deliver the greatest benefit to society.

In conclusion, although investment in specialised training facilities can enhance a nation's competitive standing, universal sports provision is ultimately more valuable as it improves public health, promotes social inclusion, and broadens the talent pool from which future champions can emerge.

あなたのエッセイも即座にフィードバック

AI評価システムがIELTSライティングを数秒で採点 — 上記のような詳細な添削付き。

無料で試す