TOEFL Writing Example | TOEFL Independent Task Q1-10

Ten full sample essays for classic TOEFL "agree or disagree" and "which do you prefer" prompts. Each one states a clear position, develops two or three reasons with specific examples, and most include a concession paragraph ("Admittedly, …") that acknowledges the other side before returning to the writer's view.

Use them as models for structure, not as text to memorize. Notice how each body paragraph opens with a reason and then develops it with one concrete example. For the shorter responses on today's test, practice condensing one essay's position and best reason into a few sentences, using reusable position-and-reason phrases and transition words.

Q1: The most important thing a government can do to improve health care is to clean up the environment.

With growing public awareness of health, how to improve health care has become an issue of wide public concern. Many scientists and environmentalists recognize the harm that environmental damage does to public health, and they argue that the most important thing a government can do to improve health care is to clean up the environment. In my view, however, this argument oversimplifies a complicated problem.

Admittedly, a clean environment plays an important role in public health, because many kinds of pollution threaten it. For example, the heavy smog in some large cities is linked to respiratory illness. However, it is an overstatement to claim that cleaning the environment is the most important step, because there are two other measures that are equally important.

First, developing medical technology is another effective way to improve health care. Many diseases, such as some cancers, still have no reliable cure, so better treatments and therapies are badly needed. Governments should therefore take responsibility for advancing medical research in order to cure serious diseases and extend life expectancy. The SARS outbreak in 2003 is a good example. When it spread to many cities, governments quickly brought medical experts together, funded research, and strengthened hospitals, and these efforts helped bring the outbreak under control. The same approach can help in the fight against other diseases.

Second, governments should invest in sports facilities. Public support for sports facilities gives ordinary people a place to exercise regularly, and regular exercise strengthens the body and helps it resist illness, which in turn improves public health. Take my own neighborhood as an example. Our only sports facilities are a track in poor condition and a swing for children, so residents have nowhere to exercise even if they want to. If the local government invested in new playgrounds and a few table tennis tables, I believe many more people would start exercising and become healthier.

Taking all of this into account, it is an exaggeration to say that the most important thing a government can do to improve health care is to clean up the environment. Instead, governments should give equal attention to all three measures: a cleaner environment, better medical technology, and better sports facilities.

Q2: If the pay were the same, would you prefer an interesting, challenging job with less vacation time or a job with more vacation time that is less interesting?

Every year, a huge number of college graduates face this choice: an interesting and challenging job with less vacation, or a job with more vacation but less excitement. In my opinion, the challenging and interesting job is the better choice.

First, mentally challenging work can keep people's minds sharp, even long after they retire. A demanding job may cause stress today, but it can bring important benefits later. Research on retired workers has suggested that people whose jobs required a lot of thinking and problem-solving tend to keep their memory better in old age than people whose jobs were less demanding. In other words, a challenging and interesting job is good for your mind as well as your career.

Second, a challenging job usually leads to a better career and, eventually, a higher salary, which makes it possible to enjoy the time off you do have. Demanding jobs require employees to master many skills and take on more responsibility, and people who do this well tend to be promoted. For example, my friend Jason works as a senior software engineer at a well-known IT company. His job is demanding, but it pays well, and his hobbies are photography and travel. On weekends and public holidays, he takes photographs at historic sites or travels abroad, and over the past two years he has visited many countries in Europe and Southeast Asia. His experience shows that a demanding job can make short vacations richer, not poorer.

Admittedly, people who choose a less interesting job with more vacation can spend more time with their families and on their hobbies, and they may live a less stressful life. However, I believe people should make the most of their strengths and talents, especially when they are young, and a challenging job pushes them to do exactly that.

In conclusion, a challenging job with less vacation is better than a job with more vacation that is less interesting.

Q3: A university club wants to help people in the community. If you were a member, which activity would you choose: tutoring students at a nearby primary school, helping people find houses to rent, or helping elderly people with their daily lives?

Life is full of difficulties, especially for elderly people who can no longer take care of themselves because of poor health. Therefore, of the three choices (tutoring primary school students, helping people find houses to rent, and helping elderly people with their daily lives), I would definitely choose the last one.

First, many middle-aged adults are so busy with their careers that they can hardly take good care of their parents. Consider a few ordinary jobs. Businesspeople spend so much time and energy dealing with clients and partners that they have little time left for their families. Police officers must be ready to go on duty at any time to keep the public safe, which makes it hard for them to care for their parents. Teachers spend their evenings preparing lessons and grading assignments. Because so many adults are this busy, college students can make a real difference by helping their parents' generation care for the elderly.

Second, helping elderly people teaches college students a sense of responsibility that will matter in their future lives and careers. Growing up in a comfortable, technology-filled world, some young people develop unhealthy habits, such as spending too much time on video games or buying luxury goods to show off. Caring for the elderly can change their outlook. They see that there are vulnerable people in their own community who need help, and they learn that their efforts can ease an older person's loneliness. As a result, they gain the confidence to take on more responsibility in society.

Admittedly, some people would argue that helping children is more important because children are the future of a nation. However, primary schools already have trained teachers, so children's education does not depend on help from college students. As for helping people find houses to rent, there are already many websites and apps that do this job well.

In conclusion, helping elderly people benefits both the elderly and the students who help them.

Q4: Students should spend at least one year working or traveling before they go to university.

In many Western countries, taking a gap year, a period when students take a break from formal education, has become quite common. People have different opinions about whether students should spend at least one year working or traveling before university. In my view, high school graduates should take a year off to work or travel, because it helps them recharge and learn new skills.

First, a year of travel gives high school graduates a chance to escape the daily grind. High school students' lives are filled with assignments, quizzes, and exams, and many of them are under constant stress. What they need most is a way to release that pressure, and taking a break from school to travel does this well. During a gap year, students can go surfing in Hawaii, hike in the Alps, or go bungee jumping in New Zealand. A break like this is good for their mental and physical health, and it often gives them renewed energy and a more focused attitude when they return to their studies.

Second, a year of work or volunteering helps students gain practical skills and adapt to university life more smoothly. Many gap-year students choose volunteer work, such as teaching in a mountain village in Nepal, joining a conservation project in Madagascar, or doing an internship in Japan. Experiences like these teach things no classroom can. We can learn a lot at school, but we only fully understand what we have learned when we put it into practice in the real world. In addition, throughout school we are surrounded by people our own age. At work, we meet people from all walks of life and learn to get along with them, which sharpens our social skills. These skills will help students make friends and work well with classmates and professors at university.

In short, spending a year traveling or working before university is a wise choice, because it gives students a break from routine and a chance to learn new skills.

Q5: Agree or disagree: Reading that students choose for themselves is as important as, or more important than, reading assigned by teachers.

Reading is one of the main ways students gain knowledge, and they can read either what they choose themselves or what their teachers assign. In my opinion, reading that students choose for themselves is more valuable.

First, students should read what they are curious about, and this is especially true for college students. To develop their talents and prepare for a competitive job market, college students look for practical books that strengthen the skills they will need. Steve Jobs is a well-known example. After a few months of college, he could not see how his studies would help him, and his tuition was using up his parents' savings. He dropped out, stopped taking required classes that did not interest him, and began attending the ones that did, including a calligraphy class. Years later, he used what he had learned in that class when designing the typography of the first Macintosh computer. His story shows how valuable it can be for students to follow their own curiosity.

Second, students become more absorbed in books they enjoy. Compared with assigned articles, reading that students choose themselves gives them a stronger motivation to keep going. Many educators now believe that children should develop their own interests by reading books that excite their curiosity and imagination, which is why some people argue that primary school students should have more freedom to read things like science fiction and adventure stories. A student who loves what she is reading will read more, and reading more is the best way to improve.

Admittedly, assigned reading is also important. Teachers know which areas their students need to improve to do well academically, and they often assign extensive reading to build students' reading ability. However, this is not a reason to treat self-chosen reading as less important, because students often improve their reading ability faster when they are absorbed in something they love.

In conclusion, students should have the right to decide much of what they read.

Q6: Agree or disagree: Children today rely too much on technology, such as computers, smartphones, and video games, for fun and entertainment. Playing with simpler toys or playing outside with friends would be better for their development.

For parents, deciding how their children should spend their free time is a real challenge. Some children spend much of their time on technological devices, while others prefer activities such as playing with toys or playing outside with friends. In my opinion, technology is actually the better option, so I disagree with the statement.

Admittedly, simpler toys and outdoor play can be good for children. Building toys, such as Lego, teach children to solve problems step by step, and children can combine small pieces into something impressive, such as a model of Tower Bridge in London. Playing with friends is also helpful, because children learn to cooperate while playing sports or solving problems together. On balance, however, both options have limits. Parents need to spend a lot of money on new toys and organized activities, and for families under financial pressure, these are not practical ways to support a child's development.

First, the internet, whether on a computer or a smartphone, is an essential tool for children's development because it gives them access to a huge amount of information. When students have a question about their homework, they can search for answers online, and tools such as Google Scholar help older students find academic sources. The internet is also a source of entertainment: children can watch films, read stories, and explore their interests without their parents spending much money.

Second, video games can help children develop useful thinking skills. For example, when I play a soccer video game, I have to manage my team according to each player's strengths. Fast players are best in attack, while tall, strong players are better in defense. Using this strategy, I have won many tournaments in the game. I have even applied the same idea to my homework: I do the most difficult tasks when I have the most energy and save easier tasks for when I am tired.

In conclusion, while simpler toys and outdoor activities have some value, technology is a better way to support children's development.

Q7: Some people believe that video games can make young students more interested in learning and help them study more efficiently, rather than distracting them and wasting their time. Therefore, young students should be allowed to play video games. Do you agree or disagree?

I agree that young students should be allowed to play video games. Games are not automatically a waste of time, and the right ones, played within sensible limits, can make children more curious and help them organize their studying.

First, a good game can make a child want to learn more about a subject. My younger cousin used to find geography boring, but when he was nine, he started playing a game in which he built and managed his own city. Before long, he was asking questions I had never heard from him: Why do cities grow near rivers? Where does tap water come from? How is a subway built? His parents took him to the library, and he came home with three books about cities and engineering. The game did not teach him those facts itself, but it gave him a reason to go and find them, which is exactly what a good teacher tries to do.

Second, games can help students study more efficiently when they are used as a reward. In middle school, I made a deal with my parents: I could play for thirty minutes, but only after my homework was finished and checked. Before that, I used to drag my math problems out over the whole evening. Once I had something to look forward to, I sat down right after dinner, worked without wandering off, and usually finished within an hour. I also learned to plan my time, because I knew that careless mistakes would cost me my game time.

Admittedly, games can become a problem when there are no rules. Some children play late into the night, and some games are designed to keep players hooked. That is a reason for parents and teachers to set limits and choose games carefully, though, not a reason to ban games altogether.

Used this way, video games can be a small but useful part of a young student's life, one that sparks curiosity and builds better study habits.

Q8: During an economic crisis, which area should governments reduce their spending on: the arts, scientific research, or parks and public gardens?

When a government has less money during an economic crisis, every cut hurts someone. If I had to choose among the arts, scientific research, and parks and public gardens, I would reduce spending on parks and public gardens, because they can get through a few difficult years far better than the other two.

First, a park keeps most of its value even with a smaller budget. A park is mostly open space, trees, and paths, and those do not disappear when the city stops adding new features. In my hometown, the city once went several years without replanting the decorative flower beds or replacing the old benches in the main park. The park looked a little plainer, but it was still full of families on weekends, joggers in the morning, and children playing on the grass after school. Neighbors even organized monthly clean-up days. People kept enjoying the park because what they actually used it for — space to walk, play, and relax — was still there.

Second, cuts to research and the arts are much harder to undo. A laboratory depends on trained people and projects that take years to develop. If its funding stops, researchers move to other places or other careers, and the project may never restart. The arts face a similar risk. My aunt played in a small community orchestra that relied on a city grant. When the grant was cut, the orchestra could no longer rent a hall, and within a year the group had broken up. Even after the economy recovered, nobody had the energy to rebuild it from nothing. A park, by contrast, can have its flower beds replanted as soon as the money returns.

Admittedly, parks matter for public health, and in hard times people may need free places to exercise and relax more than ever. For that reason, I would not close parks or stop basic cleaning and safety repairs. I would only postpone new projects and decorative spending.

Reducing park budgets in this careful way protects the programs that would be hardest to rebuild, while still leaving people a place to go.

Q9: Some people think students learn best when schools start early in the morning. Others think schools should start later in the day. Which do you prefer? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.

Many schools are considering starting classes later in the morning, hoping to reduce lateness and improve learning. However, I believe a later start would encourage laziness and cause other problems. In my opinion, starting school early in the morning is the better choice.

First, an early start encourages students to live a disciplined life. To be on time for the first class, students have to get up early, and this habit brings many benefits. For one thing, it leads to a healthier lifestyle: students who know they must wake up early stop wasting time late at night, go to bed earlier, and have more energy during the day. For another, it builds good character traits such as self-discipline and persistence. Getting out of a warm bed every morning takes willpower, and doing it every day builds self-control, which is a key to success. The basketball star Kobe Bryant, for example, was famous for starting his workouts before dawn. An early schedule offers both physical and psychological benefits.

Second, an early start leaves students more time for activities after school. When classes start earlier, they also end earlier, and the extra free time lets students explore their studies further or develop their interests. They can do practical experiments to apply what they have learned in class, which deepens their understanding. They can also learn a musical instrument, paint, or play sports. Activities like these help students develop in a well-rounded way.

Admittedly, starting classes later might reduce lateness at first, because students would not have to rush in the morning, especially those who find it hard to get up early. In the long run, however, a later start would not solve the problem. It would encourage procrastination: students who do not need to get up early tend to put off their work until late at night, and staying up late makes them get up even later. This is a vicious circle. Their body clocks would shift later, and they would struggle to arrive on time once again.

In summary, starting the school day early brings more benefits than starting late. It helps students stay healthy in body and mind and gives them more time to explore their interests, all of which leads to better learning.

Q10: Which of the following would you choose to change in order to improve your health: the kind of food you eat, the amount of exercise you get, or the amount of stress in your life?

If I could change only one thing to improve my health, I would reduce the amount of stress in my life. Eating better and exercising more are both worthwhile, but in my experience, stress is what quietly undoes every other healthy habit I try to build.

First, stress is usually the reason my diet and exercise fall apart. Last year, during my final exams, I was studying late every night and worrying about my grades. Within two weeks, I had stopped going to the gym entirely, because it felt like time I could not spare. I was also eating instant noodles at midnight and drinking coffee all afternoon to stay awake. I knew these choices were bad for me, but when I felt that much pressure, I simply did not have the energy to make better ones. Once the exams were over, I went back to the gym and started cooking again without any special effort. That showed me that my habits were not the root problem; stress was.

Second, lowering stress improves my health almost immediately, especially my sleep. For a while, I had a habit of checking messages from my part-time job right before bed, and I often lay awake thinking about them. When I decided to turn off notifications after nine o'clock, I started falling asleep faster, and within about a week, I was waking up with more energy. Better sleep made me calmer and more focused during the day, which in turn made the next day less stressful. A change in diet or exercise usually takes weeks to show results, but this small change made a difference right away.

Admittedly, stress is harder to control than what I put on my plate, since much of it comes from things outside my control, such as deadlines or family problems. Still, I can control how I respond to it by setting limits, planning my time, and protecting my sleep.

For me, reducing stress is the change that makes all the other healthy changes possible.