Should Governments Enforce Stricter Laws on Environmental Pollution - TOEFL iBT® Writing Integrated Practice Test

The TOEFL Integrated Writing task challenges your ability to comprehend, analyze, and synthesize information from both a reading passage and a lecture. In this practice test, we focus on the topic, ‘Should Governments Enforce Stricter Laws on Environmental Pollution,’ a debate with significant global importance.

This task will help you sharpen your writing skills by teaching you how to effectively summarize differing viewpoints. With practice, you'll be better prepared to approach the Writing section confidently and structure your responses with clarity.

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 issue of environmental pollution has become more critical, sparking debates on whether governments should apply stricter rules to tackle it. Supporters of tougher rules argue that these measures are crucial for several reasons.Environmental pollution poses serious health risks to people. Contaminants in the air, water, and soil can cause lung diseases, heart problems, and even cancer. For example, studies show that areas with high air pollution have higher rates of asthma and other breathing issues. By applying stricter rules, governments can cut down these contaminants, improving public health.

Also, tougher environmental rules can boost technological innovation and economic growth. When companies must follow strict rules, they often develop new, environmentally friendly technologies and processes. This not only helps reduce pollution but also creates new industries and jobs. For instance, the renewable energy sector has grown significantly due to rules promoting cleaner energy sources.On top of that, the long-term environmental benefits of stricter rules are significant. Natural systems are very sensitive to contaminants, and even small amounts can cause major damage. Stricter rules can help preserve the variety of life, protect natural habitats, and ensure resources are long-lasting for future generations. Countries with rigorous environmental rules have seen improvements in air and water quality, showing how effective these measures can be.

Now play the audio.

Question 

Highlight the core arguments of the lecture and show how they relate to the assertions found in the reading passage.

Transcript of the Audio of the Lecture on Should Governments Enforce Stricter Laws on Environmental Pollution

Sample Responses for the Integrated Writing Task on Should Governments Enforce Stricter Laws on Environmental Pollution

Below is a detailed review of different responses, including both mid-level and high-level examples, to help you pinpoint areas for improvement and reach your desired score:

Mid-Level Response

The reading passage says that governments should enforce stricter laws to protect the environment. It mentions that pollution causes health problems like lung diseases, and strict laws could help reduce these health risks. The passage also states that strict rules can lead to new technologies that are environmentally friendly, which will also create jobs. Lastly, it says that stricter rules can protect natural habitats and help save resources for future generations.

The lecture disagrees with these ideas. The professor says that strict rules can be very expensive, especially for small businesses that can't afford the costs. He also says that innovation doesn’t only come from strict rules but also from market demand, as companies want to attract eco-friendly customers. Lastly, the professor questions how effective these laws are because some countries can’t enforce them properly, and sometimes companies find ways to avoid the rules.

Rater’s Comment:

This response falls into the mid-level category due to its clear but somewhat basic handling of the task. The writer summarizes the key points from both the reading and the lecture, but the response lacks depth and specificity. For instance, the discussion of how stricter laws could help protect public health is addressed briefly, but it does not explore the specific health issues mentioned in the passage, such as asthma or cancer.

There are also a few grammatical and stylistic errors that detract from the overall quality of the response. For example, the sentence “The professor says that strict rules can be very expensive, especially for small businesses that can't afford the costs” could be more precise. A more advanced phrase could replace “can't afford the costs,” such as “may struggle to bear the financial burden of compliance.”The transitions between points are somewhat abrupt, and the response could benefit from more cohesive structuring. Additionally, the vocabulary and sentence structures are quite simple, lacking the sophistication that would be expected in a higher-level response. Nonetheless, the response successfully captures the main ideas and demonstrates a reasonable understanding of the material, but its limitations in language control and depth justify a mid-level score.

High-Level Response

The reading passage argues that stricter environmental laws are necessary to safeguard public health, encourage technological innovation, and provide long-term environmental benefits. It points out that pollution can cause serious health problems, such as asthma and heart diseases, and stricter regulations could reduce these contaminants. Furthermore, the passage suggests that tighter rules can stimulate the development of green technologies, which not only reduce pollution but also create new jobs. Lastly, it highlights that stricter regulations can protect natural habitats and preserve resources for future generations.

The lecture, however, presents several counterarguments. It claims that stricter laws might impose significant economic burdens, particularly on small businesses that may struggle to afford the cost of compliance, leading to potential closures and job losses. The professor also challenges the idea that technological innovation is solely driven by regulations, noting that market demand and consumer preferences can be equally strong motivators for companies to adopt green technologies voluntarily. Lastly, the lecture argues that stricter regulations may not always be effective due to inconsistent enforcement, especially in countries with limited resources or issues like corruption, suggesting that these rules alone may not be sufficient for environmental protection.

Rater’s Comment :

This high-level response demonstrates a strong understanding of both the reading passage and the lecture. It effectively summarizes the key points from both sources and shows a clear connection between them. The response is well-organized, and each point is thoroughly developed, giving depth to the discussion, particularly when addressing the economic burden on small businesses and the role of market demand in driving innovation.The language is mostly clear and precise, with only minor grammatical issues that do not interfere with comprehension. For instance, a slight improvement could be made in the sentence “The professor also challenges the idea that technological innovation is solely driven by regulations...” to make the transition more seamless. Overall, this response showcases a high level of control over language and content, providing detailed analysis while maintaining coherence and flow, which justifies a high score.

Strategies for Taking the Integrated Writing Task on Should Governments Enforce Stricter Laws on Environmental Pollution

Here are effective strategies to approach the topic ‘Should Governments Enforce Stricter Laws on Environmental Pollution’:

1. Summarize the Key Points: Concentrate on capturing the main arguments from both the reading and the lecture, highlighting how they support or contradict each other.

2. Use Clear Structure: Make sure your response has a clear structure, including an introduction, body paragraphs that contrast the sources, and a conclusion.

3. Avoid Personal Opinions: Keep your response strictly based on the information provided in the passage and lecture, without adding your own views.

4. Practice Time Management: Manage your time effectively for reading, listening, and writing within the allotted time to ensure a complete and organized response.

5. Highlight Contradictions: Clearly point out areas where the lecture contradicts or opposes the reading passage, as this contrast is crucial for scoring well in TOEFL Integrated Writing tasks.

6. Use Transition Words: Incorporate transition words and phrases such as "on the other hand," "in contrast," and "however" to illustrate the relationship between the reading and the lecture.

7. Paraphrase Effectively: Avoid directly copying phrases from the reading or lecture. Instead, rephrase the ideas in your own words to showcase strong language skills.

Hope this practice test on 'Should Governments Enforce Stricter Laws on Environmental Pollution' was helpful for you! Keep practicing to master the TOEFL Writing section and improve your chances of scoring high. With consistent effort, you'll surely get closer to achieving your desired score!

Also Read:

• Group Of People- TOEFL Writing Integrated Practice Test
• Pluto - TOEFL Writing Integrated Practice Test with Answer
• Solar Energy - TOEFL Writing Integrated Practice Test
• Speaking Through Social Media - TOEFL Writing Integrated Practice Test
• The Role of Volunteerism in Community Development - TOEFL Writing Integrated Practice Test