Have a look at the two paragraphs below. The second version is better in terms of task response. Can you see why?
Version 1 - highlighted sentences don't extend my response
The negative implications of genetic engineering are often discussed in terms of two key areas, which are food production and the cloning of humans. Genetically modified crops are already being grown, and people are concerned that they may damage whole ecosystems as foods become resistant to diseases and natural predators. But perhaps even more worrying is the possibility that humans could be modified or cloned. Some people imagine a world in which cloned humans are used to fight wars or to provide body part replacements. Although perhaps not a threat to life on earth, the implications of such practices would be unprecedented.
Version 2 - highlighted sentences extend and develop my ideas
The negative implications of genetic engineering are often discussed in terms of two key areas, which are food production and the cloning of humans. Genetically modified crops are already being grown, and people are concerned that they may damage whole ecosystems as foods become resistant to diseases and natural predators. For example, scientists are able to produce a variety of corn that releases a toxin to kill certain insects, but this intervention could lead to the disappearance of birds that feed on those insects. In the human realm, some people imagine a world in which clones are used to fight wars or to provide body part replacements. Perhaps cloning could even be used to bring deceased people back to life, which would certainly be a threat to humanity as we know it.
I think the version 2 is better because 2 highlighted sentences are explained to more details for the thesis statement.
Two main ideas of the thesis statement :
1/ food production explained by the 2nd and 3rd sentences.
2/ the cloning of humans explained by the 4th and 5th sentences.
When I think in that way I imagine to make a good body paragraph is not too difficult in terms of structure =)
Posted by: arch1001face | November 21, 2019 at 03:32
Hats off!
I just love the way you write your points.
Posted by: Vishaal | November 21, 2019 at 05:09
Hi Simon.
2nd Version now looks perfect 9. However, if we look cover the complete essay, this paragraph is 130 words. Will it undermine the length appropriateness of each paragraph? Shouldn't ideal length be 100 words. Is there a possible way to concise it?
Posted by: AB17 | November 21, 2019 at 06:32
Hi Simon.
I think the second version is more well-supported because of the example provided. It makes the idea of damaging to the ecosystems clearer.
The last highlighted sentence in the second version is more convincing than the equivalent one in the first version, because it helps to expand the idea in a more consistent way.
Posted by: HHatt | November 27, 2019 at 09:48
I also like the second one better. it is more organized and more detailed actually. but both are great. thanks for this great post.
Posted by: آموزش آیلتس | November 30, 2019 at 11:13
"which would certainly be a threat to humanity as we know it". Wouldn't the examiner ask how it could be a threat and reduce your score for not explaining enough?
Posted by: Erfan | February 17, 2020 at 14:27
Hi Erfan,
In any IELTS essay, there will always be something that could be explained in more detail. If an examiner wants to be nasty, he/she will find something that could be extended.
However, I would argue that my paragraphs are easily good enough for a band 9, if not band 10 :)
Posted by: Simon | February 18, 2020 at 13:11
The 'band 10' thing was a joke, before anyone asks!
Posted by: Simon | February 18, 2020 at 13:11
I think even deceased people back to life is extended of body parts replacement.
Posted by: JPêt | June 19, 2020 at 16:51