08.9664.1068 - 0903.941.875

195/53 Xô Viết Nghệ Tĩnh, P.17, Bình Thạnh - 64 Út Tịch, phường 4, quận Tân Bình

10 Dạng Đề IELTS Writing Cần Biết – Dạng 6: Agree or Disagree –  Useful Writing Task 2 Guidance

Trong bài viết này, IPP sẽ hướng dẫn chiến thuật viết bài dạng Agree or Disagree để đạt band điểm cao trong IELTS Writing.

1. Những điều cần lưu ý khi gặp dạng bài Agree or Disagree

Với dạng bài này, IPP chủ yếu hướng dẫn HV viết totally agree >< disagree chứ không viết theo kiểu partially nửa đồng ý >< nửa không đồng ý. Bạn sẽ cần nghĩ ra 02 lý do để hoàn toàn đồng ý hay hoàn toàn phản bác ý tưởng đưa ra trong đề.

Khi trình bày ý tưởng trong bài, bạn sẽ cần 02 body pars với các phrases như sau:

  • Intro: I completely agree with the statement based on the two main reasons.
  • One reason for my view is that ….
  • Another justification is related to ….

IELTS Writing Task 1 - Agree or Disagree

2. Writing Sample dạng Agree or Disagree



TOPIC: The international community must act immediately to ensure all nations reduce their consumption of fossil fuel such as gas and oil. To what extent do you agree?

KEY WORD 01: must act immediately = instantly

KEY WORD 02: all nations

PURPOSE: to reduce the use of fossil fuel

The term “international community” refers to the collective of sovereign states, international organizations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and other entities that interact on the global stage to address common issues and challenges.

=> đặc điểm của “the international community” là họ có thể introduce policies & enforce rules on a global scale.

THESIS STATEMENT: I totally disagree with this practice=this suggestion based on two main reasons.

=> hoàn toàn không đồng ý với đề vì việc giảm fossil fuel consumption không thể “immediate” mà cũng không thể for “all countries”


impossible => One reason for my belief is that forcing all countries to mitigate their dependence on fossil fuel instantly would be nearly unfeasible.

detrimental [focus on the consequences for countries] => Another point is that this approach || might lead to detrimental consequences for countries.


On a dangerous ongoing range of environmental problems, the cross-national community must act instantly to ensure all nations decrease their use of fossil fuels. I completely disagree with this practice based on its unfeasible and its consequences for countries.

My first justification is that forcing all countries to immediately reduce their reliance on fossil fuels would be nearly unfeasible. Each nation operates under its own regulations and industry development plans, making enforcing such measures impossible for the international community. Attempting to do so could be seen as a violation of national sovereignty, leading to diplomatic tensions and conflicts among governments and nations involved in the production and trade of these resources. The Paris Agreement, which serves as a prime example of these difficulties, outlines a gradual reduction of the target over decades by changing to greener alternative resources but is unable to reach an agreement due to the differences in nations’ economic backgrounds and interests in importing and exporting fossil fuels. This example highlights that the interventions and effectors of the international community would not be effectively carried out on a global scale.

Another point is that this approach might have detrimental consequences for countries. Firstly, being independent of fossil fuels can bring significant economic drawbacks. It would require extensive campaigns involving politicians, business leaders, and civil society to mobilize people and promote the use of alternative resources. These endeavors require substantial investments and may strain other resources such as electricity, solar, or wind power, thus leading to energy resource exploitation, which can cause nationwide blackouts and disrupt economic activities. Additionally, abruptly reducing fossil fuel use by citizens could negatively impact their daily commute and result in job losses in sectors dependent on fossil fuels, potentially lowering overall living standards and leading to a rise in the crime rate, creating social chaos. This future proves that this approach may lead to significant social problems.

In conclusion, I entirely disagree with the practice of forcing all nations to cut their dependence on fossil fuels immediately due to its impossible and significant consequences for the economy and society. Therefore, efforts in this regard should be implemented in a more sustainable manner.


TOPIC: Schools are no longer necessary because children can learn through the Internet as well at home. To what extent do you agree or disagree?


It stands to reason that studying from home is gaining in surging popularity on a global scale, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, making many to believe that children are no longer required to attend offline classes. From a personal perspective, I emphatically disapprove of this assumption due to the pitfalls of online learning and the long-standing importance of formal education.

One point is that e-learning cannot entirely replace schools given its restricted accessibility and inclusivity. Indeed, except for financially advantaged ones, online education is inaccessible for students lacking instructions and essential devices as smart phones or laptops. Therefore, the traditional manner of studying still plays an integral role in such circumstances. Furthermore, the frequent technical issues triggered by distance learning can exert detrimental impacts on the quality of both teaching and learning. For instance, any power cut or lost Internet connection might interrupt learners’ understanding and concentrating process, hence adversely affecting the continuity in remote studying, which is always present in formal education.

Another reason supporting my view is related to the significance of offline schools. Considering the absence of face-to-face communication, this form of learning might fail to build up healthy relationships between students as effectively as formal education. For example, with human interaction provided in schools, children can exchange useful information, experience, and learn from each other more freely than being confined to the computer’s screen. As such, via ample scope for developing vital life and social skills, namely communication and networking skills, students can benefit more from learning in a school environment rather than being solitary and detached at home.

To conclude, despite their rising popularity in the current tech-driven era, Internet-connected learning and home study still prove ineffective in wholly superseding formal education. Hence, I am convinced that offline schooling should be maintained with the necessary aid of online studying for the sake of students’ optimal learning outcome.

Các bạn lưu lại bài viết để tham khảo và học thật tốt IELTS Writing nhé!

Hãy ghé IPPEdu ngay để có cơ hội được học trực tiếp với các giáo viên IELTS 8.0+ giúp nâng cao kỹ năng writing của mình nha! Để biết được trình độ của mình đang ở level nào thì bạn có thể tham gia Test miễn phí tại IPPEdu nhé!

Theo dõi ngay fanpage IPP IELTS – A Holistic Approach to IELTS để nhận được thêm những nội dung hấp dẫn bạn nhé!

Kiểm tra đầu vào