What is the fee of registering for the TOEFL iBT Paper Edition?

Applicants who choose to take the TOEFL iBT Paper Edition must pay an amount of INR 16,900 for registering, which is the same for TOEFL iBT.

How many times is the TOEFL iBT Home Edition conducted in a month?

The TOEFL iBT Paper Edition is offered once or twice every month.

As the TOEFL iBT exam is conducted in two sessions, do I have to book two dates or one?

You need to schedule two appointments when you register: one at your neighbourhood testing facility and the other at your house.

In some places, why is the duration of the first session of TOEFL iBT Paper Edition written as three and half hours? What is the actual duration?

The test duration at a centre is three hours. An additional thirty minutes is allocated for test administration tasks, such as admitting examinees, allowing them to input identifying information, and managing test materials.

Are there any special requirements for the Speaking section of the TOEFL iBT Paper Edition?

As the Speaking section is conducted from home, please ensure that you have the required setup for both the equipment and environment before registering. You will get the details from the official website.

Should Countries Abolish Nuclear Weapons - TOEFL Writing Integrated Practice Test

Home Practice Tests TOEFL Writing Practice Tests

Prity Mallick

8 min read

Updated On September 23, 2024

"Prepare for the TOEFL Writing Integrated Section with a practice test on 'Should Countries Abolish Nuclear Weapons' and learn the skills to improve your score in the TOEFL exam. "

Key Highlights

Should Countries Abolish Nuclear Weapons
Transcript of the Audio of the Lecture on Should Countries Abolish Nuclear Weapons
Sample Responses for the Integrated Writing Task on Should Countries Abolish Nuclear Weapons
Strategies for Taking the Integrated Writing Task on Should Countries Abolish Nuclear Weapons

In the TOEFL iBT^®exam, the test takers are evaluated on various abilities, particularly on their communication skills. With the practice test on 'Should Countries Abolish Nuclear Weapons', candidates can level up their preparation as the Writing Section is one of the significant ones.

This Writing Integrated practice test aims to enhance your writing abilities. It aims to assist you in understanding task instructions, structuring responses effectively, and enhancing your performance in the TOEFL Writing segment. So, let's start your journey towards attaining your desired TOEFL score!

Writing Instructions:

You'll read a passage and listen to a lecture on an academic topic.
You may take notes while listening to aid comprehension.
Then you will write a response to a question that asks you about the lecture you heard.
Answer the question comprehensively using information from the lecture. Avoid expressing personal opinions in the response.
There is no strict word limit. However, an effective response is considered to be within 150 to 225 words.
Your response will be assessed based on writing quality, content accuracy, and completeness.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Should Countries Abolish Nuclear Weapons

The debate over whether countries should get rid of nuclear weapons is a big issue in international relations. Supporters of getting rid of them say that nuclear weapons are a huge threat to humanity. Their destructive power is unmatched, and using them could cause massive loss of life and environmental damage. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II show just how terrible nuclear warfare can be. Also, having nuclear weapons makes the world less stable and increases the risk of accidental launches. Keeping and updating nuclear stockpiles costs a lot of money, which could be better spent on social programs, healthcare, and education. By getting rid of nuclear weapons, countries could use these funds to improve life for their citizens.

Another reason for getting rid of them is the moral and ethical issues with having such weapons. The potential for widespread killing and long-term environmental harm makes nuclear weapons fundamentally against human values. Many international treaties, like the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), show a global agreement on the need to move towards getting rid of these weapons. Finally, getting rid of nuclear weapons could lead to better international cooperation and trust. Without the threat of nuclear conflict, countries might be more willing to solve disputes peacefully. This could create a more stable and secure world, where resources are used for development rather than destruction.

Now play the audio.

Question

Provide a brief summary on the lecture's arguments and also highlight their relevance on the claims provided in the reading passage.

Response Time: 20 minutes

Transcript of the Audio of the Lecture on Should Countries Abolish Nuclear Weapons

Professor: While the idea of getting rid of nuclear weapons sounds good, there are several reasons why it might not work or be beneficial. One major concern is the issue of stopping wars. Nuclear weapons have historically stopped large-scale wars. The idea of total destruction has prevented conflicts between nuclear-armed states because the consequences would be too devastating for any rational country to consider. Also, making sure all countries completely disarm is very challenging. Ensuring that everyone follows the agreements would need high levels of openness and trust, which are hard to achieve in todays world. Some nations might secretly keep or develop nuclear capabilities, leading to an imbalance of power and potential security threats.

Another point is the role of nuclear weapons in maintaining balance. For some countries, especially those with smaller regular forces, nuclear weapons serve as a way to level the playing field against stronger adversaries. Getting rid of nuclear weapons could leave these nations vulnerable to threats, hurting their national security.

Lastly, the knowledge and materials to build nuclear weapons can't be forgotten or destroyed. Even if current stockpiles were dismantled, the risk of future development would still be there. This means that the danger of nuclear spread and new nuclear states would continue, posing ongoing challenges to global security.

Curious about what a good TOEFL score looks like? Check it out first, then explore the Integrated Writing sample answers!

Sample Responses for the Integrated Writing Task on Should Countries Abolish Nuclear Weapons

A comprehensive analysis of various responses is provided below, enabling you to identify areas requiring improvement to achieve your target score.

High-Level Response

The reading passage argues for the abolition of nuclear weapons, citing their destructive power, the financial burden of maintaining them, moral and ethical concerns, and the potential for improved international cooperation. However, the lecture presents several counterarguments that challenge these points. The professor argues that nuclear weapons have historically prevented large-scale wars. The threat of total destruction has acted as a deterrent, preventing conflicts between nuclear-armed states. This contradicts the reading's claim that nuclear weapons make the world less stable.

Additionally, the lecture highlights the difficulty of ensuring complete disarmament. Achieving high levels of openness and trust among nations is challenging, and some countries might secretly retain or develop nuclear capabilities. This challenges the reading's assertion that disarmament would lead to better international cooperation and trust. The professor also points out that nuclear weapons help maintain a balance of power. For countries with smaller conventional forces, nuclear weapons serve as a deterrent against stronger adversaries. This opposes the reading's view that getting rid of nuclear weapons would improve national security.

Lastly, the lecture emphasizes that the knowledge and materials to build nuclear weapons cannot be erased. Even if current stockpiles were dismantled, the risk of future development remains. This contradicts the reading's claim that abolishing nuclear weapons would eliminate the threat of nuclear conflict.

Rater's Comment

This response effectively captures the main points from both the reading and the lecture, demonstrating a clear understanding of the material. The essay is well-organized, with each paragraph addressing a specific counterargument from the lecture that challenges a point made in the reading. For example, the response accurately summarizes the lecture's argument about nuclear weapons preventing large-scale wars and how this contradicts the reading's claim about instability. The response also highlights the difficulty of ensuring complete disarmament, the role of nuclear weapons in maintaining a balance of power, and the persistent risk of future development, all of which are key points from the lecture that challenge the reading's assertions.

The language used is clear and concise, with appropriate transitions that help to maintain coherence and flow. The response avoids personal opinions and focuses on summarizing the relationship between the reading and the lecture, which is a crucial aspect of the task. Additionally, the response demonstrates strong control over grammar and vocabulary, with only minor errors that do not affect the overall meaning. Overall, this response meets the criteria for a high score, effectively presenting the key information from both the reading and the lecture in a well-organized and coherent manner.

Mid Level Response

The reading passage argues that countries should get rid of nuclear weapons because they are a huge threat to humanity. It says that nuclear weapons cause massive loss of life and environmental damage, and that keeping them is very expensive. The passage also mentions moral and ethical issues and says that getting rid of nuclear weapons could lead to better international cooperation. However, the lecture disagrees with these points. The professor says that nuclear weapons have stopped large-scale wars because the idea of total destruction prevents conflicts between nuclear-armed states. This goes against the reading's claim that nuclear weapons make the world less stable.

The professor also says that making sure all countries disarm is very difficult. It needs high levels of openness and trust, which are hard to achieve. Some countries might secretly keep or develop nuclear weapons, leading to an imbalance of power. This challenges the reading's idea that disarmament would lead to better international cooperation. Another point the professor makes is that nuclear weapons help maintain balance. For countries with smaller regular forces, nuclear weapons serve as a way to level the playing field against stronger adversaries. This opposes the reading's view that getting rid of nuclear weapons would improve national security.

Lastly, the professor says that the knowledge and materials to build nuclear weapons can't be forgotten or destroyed. Even if current stockpiles were dismantled, the risk of future development would still be there. This contradicts the reading's claim that abolishing nuclear weapons would eliminate the threat of nuclear conflict.

Rater's Comment

This response provides a summary of the main points from both the reading and the lecture, but it lacks some depth and detail. The essay is generally well-organized, with each paragraph addressing a specific counterargument from the lecture. However, some key points from the lecture are not fully developed. For example, the response mentions the difficulty of ensuring complete disarmament but does not elaborate on the challenges of achieving high levels of openness and trust among nations. Similarly, the discussion on the role of nuclear weapons in maintaining balance could be more detailed.

There are also some grammatical and punctuation errors that affect the clarity of the response. For instance, the sentence "It needs high levels of openness and trust, which are hard to achieve" could be clearer with better punctuation. Additionally, the phrase "This challenges the reading's idea that disarmament would lead to better international cooperation" is somewhat vague and could be more specific about how the difficulty of ensuring complete disarmament impacts international cooperation.

Despite these issues, the response does capture the main points from both the reading and the lecture and demonstrates a basic understanding of the material. The language used is generally clear, but there are noticeable errors that affect the overall coherence. Overall, this response meets the criteria for a mid-level score, providing a summary of the key information but lacking in depth and detail, with some grammatical and punctuation errors.

Strategies for Taking the Integrated Writing Task on Should Countries Abolish Nuclear Weapons

Here are the strategies for taking the Integrated Writing Task on Should Countries Abolish Nuclear Weapons.

Read the passage carefully, taking concise notes on key points.
Listen actively to the lecture, noting its relationship to the reading.
Begin your response by clearly stating how the lecture relates to the reading.
Explain any contradictions or connections between the reading and lecture.
Integrate information from both sources throughout your essay.
Use clear transitions and attributions for information from each source.

Prepared to enhance your TOEFL writing skills? Our collection of example responses and professional tips is here to support you in your journey. It's time to put your abilities to the test with some hands-on practice!

Additional Reads: