2019年2月23日雅思写作真题回忆及参考范文

Task 1题目 The charts below show the percentage of working time in office spending on different tasks.

范文解析 该题目是动态饼图，关于办公室时间的分配变化，时间分别是1980和2006。办公事务包含6种不同的任务，比如会议，邮件，电脑等。变化趋势有上升，下降及保持不变。考生可以根据时间为主线分段来描述各自的变化及各个项目之间的对比。

Task 1范文

The two pie charts illustrate there were significant changes in the proportion of office time spent on a range of tasks in 1980 and 2006.

At 35%，it is explicitly noticed that the largest proportion of time was consumed in paper documents in 1980, which，however, were not used at all in 2006. By contrast, as high as exactly half of the total time was allocated to computers in 2006. Also noticeable is that meeting time and other things remained unchanged, which leveled out at 16% and 14% separately.

Over the same period, a dramatic drop could be witnessed in the time spent on the remaining tasks, with talking with colleges declining sharply from 17% to 9%. It is using telephones and using emails that also lost people’s favor, diminishing by a half to 8% and 3% respectively in 2006.

Overall, workers spent more time on paper documents in 1980 but using computers became the dominant task in 2006.

范文原创自牛学老师Alice. Hua

字数 163 words

Task 2 类型 环保类

题目Some people think that a huge amount of time and money is spent on the protection of wild animals and that money is better spent on human population。

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement.

范文解析 本题讨论政府资金是应该投入到动物保护，还是花在人民生活水平的提高上。四段式或者是五段式都是可以，建议大家要多熟悉基本的议论文写作结构，同时注意亮明观点，同意替换，本文四段。

文章结构

P1：引入话题+亮明观点;

P2：反驳观点一：单纯花钱在动物保护是没有用的，提出其他的方法;

P3：指出为什么同意观点二：改善人们的生活，同时也可以根本上解决动物濒危的问题;

P4：总结全文：重申中心论点。

高分话题表达:

Coexist 共存

Interdependent 相互依存的

Disparity 差距

By no way 绝不

biota 生物圈

Scheme 措施

Mockery 嘲笑

Introduce 制定

Plague 困扰

Meagre 微薄的

高分结构：In a way that… 状语从句

What next should be mentioned.. 主语从句

Lies in a fact that 概括性同位语

Without….. 条件状语

While…..,……. 状语从句 对比

If it should be 插入语 补充

Task 2范文

As the two species coexisting on this planet, human beings and animals are interdependent parts regardless of the disparity in intelligence and nature. Under this circumstance, while animals keep on feeding each other some humans start to consider animal rights and advocate distributing funds towards its protection. In my view, I cannot agree with this to any extent.

Above all, funding any campaigns of animal protection is by no way the feasible solution to the illegal hunting and improving the harsh situations of wildlife conservation. In this respect, this kind of investment can only protect some specific species drawn people’s attention, such as panda and koala, whereas most other varieties that we lose sight of but serve important roles in balancing the biotas cannot be benefited from this scheme, which is would be a mockery to all the efforts made by animal activists and environmentalists in a sense. Consequently, rather than pouring large portions of revenue, raising the awareness by publicity and introducing laws may be superiorities in the current days with better and more satisfying outcomes in a long term.

What next should be mentioned is the urgencies plaguing human populations should be given first priority to. From one perspective, despite the advancement in technology and rise in the living standard in metropolitan areas, still many people are stuck in poverty struggling for daily meals and being racked by rather meagre payment. Compared with worrying about extinction of animals, humanitarianism lies in this fact in a more reasonable way, if it should be. In another aspect, this practice also contributes to alleviating poaching as many valuable and endangered animals are killed and sold to make a living and survive by civilians living in the primitive mountains and remote areas where they have no choice.

In conclusion, I firmly believe receipts should be allocated to poverty-relief of people in the underdeveloped nations and regions instead of doing some superficial work in preservation of animals. Without the improvement of cognition and living standard, money would be continuously wasted and harmony is always a word between humanity and wildlife.