Should Genetic Modification in Humans Be Allowed - TOEFL Writing Practice Test (Integrated)

In the TOEFL Writing section, the Integrated Writing task challenges you to evaluate and combine ideas from a reading passage and a lecture. This practice test is tailored to help you sharpen your analytical thinking and improve your essay-writing techniques. Let’s start this journey to achieve your target 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.

The debate over whether changing genes in humans should be allowed is a heated one, with supporters arguing that it offers many potential benefits for society.

One of the main advantages of changing genes is the potential to eliminate genetic diseases. By altering specific genes, scientists can prevent inherited conditions such as cystic fibrosis, sickle cell anemia, and Huntington's disease. This could significantly reduce the incidence of these serious diseases, improving the quality of life for many people and reducing the burden on healthcare systems. Changing genes could lead to a healthier population and lower healthcare costs in the long run.

Another big benefit is the potential for enhancing human abilities. Changing genes could be used to improve physical and mental skills, such as increasing muscle strength, enhancing memory, or boosting the immune system. These enhancements could lead to a more capable and resilient population, better equipped to tackle the challenges of the modern world. The ability to enhance human traits could also lead to advancements in various fields, including sports, education, and the military.

Changing genes can also help scientific and medical research. By studying altered genes, researchers can gain a deeper understanding of human biology and the mechanisms behind various diseases. This knowledge can lead to the development of new treatments and therapies, benefiting not only those with genetic conditions but also the broader population. The insights gained from gene-changing research can drive innovation and progress in the medical field.

Also, changing genes can address issues related to reproduction and fertility. For couples facing infertility or the risk of passing on genetic disorders, altering genes offers a potential solution. Techniques such as gene editing can ensure that embryos are free from genetic defects, increasing the chances of a healthy pregnancy and reducing the emotional and financial strain associated with infertility treatments. This application of gene-changing can provide hope and opportunities for families struggling with reproductive challenges.

Now play the audio.

Question

Summarise the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they oppose specific points made in the reading passage.

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 Genetic Modification in Humans Be Allowed

Examine the provided pair of sample answers - one representing a mid-level and the other a high level. By studying these responses closely, you'll discover valuable lessons to enhance and polish your written responses.

High-Level Response

The reading passage highlights the potential benefits of changing genes in humans. However, the lecture presents several counterarguments to these points.

The reading suggests that changing genes can eliminate genetic diseases, improving quality of life and reducing healthcare costs. The lecture counters this by arguing that the ethical implications are profound, raising questions about interfering with natural processes and potentially creating a society with increased inequality, where only those who can afford genetic enhancements benefit.

Regarding enhancing human abilities, the reading claims that gene changes could improve physical and mental skills, leading to a more capable population. The lecture, however, argues that the long-term effects of changing genes are unknown, with the potential for unforeseen consequences on other genes and biological systems, which could lead to new health problems.

The reading also emphasizes that changing genes can advance scientific and medical research by providing deeper insights into human biology. The lecture challenges this by suggesting that the potential for misuse of gene-changing technology is significant, raising ethical and moral concerns about creating genetically modified individuals for specific tasks or traits.

Finally, the reading highlights the benefits of gene-changing for addressing reproductive issues, such as infertility and genetic disorders. The lecture, however, argues that focusing on gene-changing might divert attention and resources from other important areas of medical research and public health, such as improving healthcare infrastructure and developing preventive measures.

Rater's Comment

This response deserves a high score because it effectively summarizes the main points from both the reading and the lecture, demonstrating a clear understanding of the material. The response is well-organized, with each paragraph addressing a specific point of contention between the reading and the lecture. Additionally, the response maintains an objective tone, focusing on summarizing the relationship between the reading and the lecture without expressing personal opinions. The use of transitions, such as "The lecture counters this by arguing" and "The lecture, however, argues," effectively highlights the opposing viewpoints, contributing to the overall coherence and flow of the essay. The language used is appropriate for a college-level response, with strong control over grammar and vocabulary, and only minor errors that do not affect the overall meaning. Overall, this response meets all 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 changing genes in humans has many benefits, such as eliminating genetic diseases, enhancing human abilities, advancing scientific research, and addressing reproductive issues. But the lecture has some points against this idea.

The reading say changing genes can eliminate genetic diseases, improving quality of life and reducing healthcare costs. But the lecture argue that the ethical implications are profound, raising questions about interfering with natural processes and potentially creating a society with increased inequality, where only those who can afford genetic enhancements benefit.

Regarding enhancing human abilities, the reading claims that gene changes could improve physical and mental skills, leading to a more capable population. The lecture, however, argue that the long-term effects of changing genes are unknown, with the potential for unforeseen consequences on other genes and biological systems, which could lead to new health problems.

The reading also emphasizes that changing genes can advance scientific and medical research by provide deeper insights into human biology. The lecture challenges this by suggesting that the potential for misuse of gene-changing technology is significant, raising ethical and moral concerns about creating genetically modified individuals for specific tasks or traits.

Rater's Comment

This response provides a summary of the main points from both the reading and the lecture, but it has some limitations that prevent it from achieving a higher score. While the response accurately identifies the key arguments from both sources, it lacks depth in its analysis and explanation. Additionally, the response has some grammatical errors. The response also lacks a conclusion, which would help to summarize the overall relationship between the reading and the lecture. Furthermore, the response could benefit from more effective use of transitions to improve coherence and flow. Despite these issues, the response demonstrates a basic understanding of the material and provides a clear comparison of the opposing viewpoints. Overall, this response meets the criteria for a mid-level score, but it could be improved with more detailed analysis, better organization, and fewer grammatical errors.

With these strategies and examples in mind, you're ready to practice and refine your writing abilities!

Also Read:

• Solar Energy - TOEFL Writing Integrated Test
• Rembrandt - TOEFL Writing Integrated Test
• Altruism - TOEFL Writing Integrated Test
• Teamwork - TOEFL Writing Integrated Test