TOEFL iBT Wriging for an Academic Discussion Will more people travel abroad after the pandemic? (Revised)

In recent years, it has become easier to travel abroad due to advancements in technology and transportation. However, the number of people traveling internationally has not fully recovered since the pandemic. Do you think more people will be willing to travel abroad in the future or not? Discuss the potential reasons for your opinion, considering factors such as technology, economic conditions, and social trends.

 

 

 

☆Let’s think

1.       Are more people traveling now than before the pandemic as of 2026?

2.       What are the factors that can increase or decrease the number of international travelers?

 

 

☆Hints for Points

Note: International tourism has exceeded pre-pandemic level in terms of in-bound arrivals.

 

Factors to encourage traveling

1.       Technology: easier arrangements for traveling such as online booking for airline tickets and accommodation, translation apps, social media information, new medicine, etc.

2.       Economic conditions: economic growth, lower currency rates, promotion of tourism, etc.

3.       Social trends: globalization, viral videos, cultural exchange programs, etc.

 

Factors to discourage traveling

1.        Technology: spread of virous, increase of carbon footprints, etc.

2.        Economic conditions: widening wealth gap discouraging people from traveling a long distance

3.        Social trends: xenophobia, nationalism, etc.

 

 

☆Sample Answer for ideas and expressions

【Thesis】Ignorance is bliss, and we are forgetful when it comes to epidemics especially when fun and adventure are involved. Therefore, I think Alice is right. People will promote international traveling, expecting its positive impacts on economy and social trends. However, I am concerned about promoting more robust international traveling without proper containment of COVID-19, which has taken lives and devastated businesses. The speed of the infection and reality of politics must be taken into account.

【Supporting Details】The pandemic of COVID-19 started in China at the end of 2019. The next month, a luxury cruise ship named Diamond Princess was found to be carrying infected passengers and was kept off the coast of Yokohama, Japan, without proper treatment. In a couple of months, the virus was rampant around the world. It has killed over 7.1 million as of 2026.

【Counterargument-treatment】It is true that airport quarantine and proper government countermeasures ought to prevent the spread of virus, but the fact is that we are living the 7^th year of the pandemic. Not all governments can make proper moves based on science for the public good.[ns1]  In Japan, government officials didn’t notice the airborne nature of the coronavirus even after the release of the related article of The Lancet, and after they noticed the truth, they have covered up their mistake by not providing PCR tests. Once vaccine was available, it degraded Covid on the list of infectious diseases down to the level of influenza, lifted mask-mandate, raised the price of the drugs, putting the real situation of the disaster under carpet. In the U.S.A, Trump pretended not to know the virus is airborne, with the idea of applying social Darwinism to pandemic to eliminate those who were socially vulnerable. US under Biden and some other countries contained the virus well for a while, but soon they started getting variants from other countries. As long as the world is connected by advanced transportation, without measures based on successful models, which won’t be taken, the next pandemic is on its way. Meanwhile, health is precious enough to give up the short-term benefits and profits.

【Conclusion】As many governments are getting in the hands of those who lack scientific reasoning and compassion, and as development keeps invading animal habitats, increasing the risk of human contacts with unknown viruses, not to speak of new variants of coronavirus, it is not a good idea to keep the human flow free. If the world majority start thinking that less vibrant social activities are better than deaths and lockdown, international traveling will not be on top of their wish list in the future. (433 words)

 

---

 [ns1]

TOEFL iBT Writing for an Academic Discussion Mandatory Voting (Revised)

In recent years, voter turnout has been declining in many democracies around the world. This trend has led to growing concerns about the legitimacy of elected governments and the health of democratic systems. One proposed solution is to make voting compulsory, as is the case in some countries. Should voting be made compulsory? Discuss the potential benefits and drawbacks of mandatory voting, considering its impact on democracy, civic engagement, and representation.

 

 

 

☆Let’s Read

Read the following excerpt from an article of Harvard International Review, underlined by yours truly Sasaki, and think about why mandatory voting is recommended and what problems can be expected.

 

Compulsion Emboldens Democracy: A Deep-dive into Australia’s Mandatory Voting  12/10/2023

Expanding to Democracies Around the World

As a direct comparison to the turnout at past Australian referendums, the United Kingdom’s referendum to leave the European Union only had a 72.2 percent voter turnout. The lack of voter turnout appears to plague many of the most prominent countries in the world. In India, 67.4 percent of eligible voters voted in the 2019 election. In the United States, 66.8 percent of eligible voters went to the booths in the 2020 election. To further prove the lack of voter turnout, Canada had a 62.6 percent turnout in the 2021 elections. Democratic governments are founded upon the people’s voice, but when nearly a third of the population is left out of the consideration in a country, it is hard to call the country democratic.

 

Australia’s model, which will be on display in the upcoming referendum, could possibly serve as a mechanism by which to increase participation across the world; however, transposing the Australian voting system to democratic systems across the world requires a conversation within the respective countries among its citizens and the government on the way in which it is implemented.

 

A common argument made against accessible elections is the possibility of voter fraud and the reduction in democratic security; the potential trade-off requires a consideration about the different mechanisms that should be implemented to achieve both simultaneously instead of having to comprise one. In Australia, voter fraud was found to be fairly low because of the methods they have instituted behind the scenes to confirm votes and to reduce the likelihood of fraud including digital cross-referencing. On the surface, voting is largely accessible, but the intensive review process provides security on the back-end: accessibility and security do not have to be mutually exclusive.

 

The benefits of compulsory voting does not mean the implementation can be completely uniform. Voters in every country often go through personal struggles that limit their ability to vote, do not agree with any of the candidates running for election, which might necessitate the need for blank ballots to be an option for citizens as a sign of protest, or simply cannot afford the punishments that would ensue if they are unable to vote. So while the system is rigid, it ought to be fluid enough for people to avoid being trapped: they cannot vote, and when they do not, they cannot afford the punishment. The ultimate goal of compulsory voting is to maximize the amount of people interested in the voting process—not contribute to people loathing it because of the punishments they face.

 

When implementing a voting system, countries have to seriously consider the difficulties citizens face when attempting to vote in their country. Who are those citizens? The people who work on weekends because they do not make enough for a two-day break might require a national holiday; the people who live in areas that do not have polling stations nearby; the people who need access to public transportation to reach the booths; the people who are simply disinterested in the democratic process because of a lack of political education, or even the people who are unaware about voter registration. Implementing drastic policy change requires intensive policy analysis to ensure people do not get left out of consideration.

 

In the end, regardless of the voting model adopted by countries across the world, the bottom line is clear: the means for people to vote in an election are crucial for higher voting rates.

 

 

☆Let’s Think

1.        What are the voting rates in Japan?

2.        When you turn the voting age, would you like to go to the poll station to vote? Why/Why not?

 

 

☆Hints for Points

True democracy 

1.       Low voting rates will lead to tyranny because it is a sign that people are not watching those in power. (Japan)

2.       Forced voting is not a form of true democracy, which is “a government of the people by the people for the people” - Abraham Lincoln.

3.       Civics classes must be a required subject before making voting required to increase voluntary voters.

 

Civic engagement

1.        “Just because you don’t take an interest in politics doesn’t mean politics won’t take an interest in you.” - Pericles

2.        People who are poor, who will most benefit from political reforms, are the least to vote (‘Voting is not on their radar': lowest turnout predicted in poorest areas – The Guardian). Mandatory voting will give them a chance that they will appreciate in the end.

3.        Other means for higher turnout such as a referendum on daily issues that accompanies the election would be more effective. (State of Michigan, the U.S.A.)

 

Representation

1.        The change of demography of the U.S.A. makes more progressive candidates elected. The current majority of America are either non-whites, women, or the young, in other words, the anti-Trump demography.  

2.        Poorly informed, uneducated citizens will vote for a wrong candidate or agenda. (Japan)

3.        Good candidates will mobilize voters. (Obama and Bernie)

 

 

☆Sample Answer

【Thesis】I don’t really agree with mandatory voting. Though Eliza’s logic that higher voting rates reflect the will of the public may apply to a working democracy, the real world won’t work that way, where people are not properly informed and are discouraged from choosing the best candidate for them. In the worst-case scenario, it could be a good tool for tyrants. Russia and North Korea celebrate their extremely high voting rates of their presidential elections.

【Supporting Details】Providing correct information and proper civics education, including information about current political climate and candidates to promote voluntary voter participation is necessary as Tim says. If there is a referendum on mandatory voting, probably the bill won’t pass, as no one likes to be controlled. Rather, accessing needs and interests of the constituents and connecting them to politics by getting them to realize that everything in their lives is related to politics will lead to active civic engagement, which will realize good representation and true democracy. The current Mayor of New York Zohran Mandan get elected by listening to the people in the street every day, and he has been praised for his good government since he took office.

【Counterargument-treatment】In an ideally democratic world, voters would be well-informed through the media that check candidates’ legitimacy, political visions, and specific strategies; good election campaign like accessible townhall meetings and direct contact with the candidates; active union movements; and individual citizens’ actions. But actually, the corporate media report either little or false information about candidates, and as a result, people’s interests are focused not on election but on daily matters. In this circumstance, compulsory voting may have an inverse effect on civic engagement. Active pursuers of their best choice, or least horrible choice, are exceptions. Most people will either vote for those who are said to win or resort to a blank voting, which works as either an abstention or a ballot for the incumbent, and so it’s bad for democracy because it contributes to, for example, a reelection of a corrupt incumbent by reducing the votes for the challenger who can correct the corruption.

【Conclusion】Therefore, compulsory voting does not seem to be a good cure for indifference to politics, or low civic engagement. (318 words)

 

 

☆Sample Answer Structure

Thesis

Supporting Details

Why the advantages/disadvantages don’t matter

Conclusion

Corporate Cops by Michael Moore

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nzhqec_bj-4

早稲田国際教養学部AO入試 注意事項

 

本講座の授業形式と予定

Day 1～6　予習して授業中に解答します。　

Day 7　テストゼミ形式 予習無しで授業中に読んで解答します。　

どちらも解答を添削・採点し、1週間後に返却します。

                                                                                                       

予習復習の手順

Day ５まで：　

予習　１）所定時間で辞書無しで解く　２）できるだけの時間と辞書を使って本文の内容を理解し解き直す

復習　１）テキストの復習　２）添削されて返却された答案を見て書き直す

 

Day ６

予習　無し　

復習　１）テキストの復習　２）添削されて返却された答案を見て書き直す

 

テキスト以外の勉強のアドバイス

☆実践練習中心にする：　授業以外でも補助問題集の過去問や英検1級の読解問題を実際に解く（解答を実際に書いて見る）ことを中心に勉強しましょう。本番同様に時間を計って行いましょう。

☆筆記問題は最低3回解く：　1) 最初は１題40分で時間を計り本番と同じように解き、2) 次に（まだ解答を見ないで）使えるだけの時間を使って解き直します。3) その後解答をみて再度解きなおします。

☆推敲を重ねる：　添削済み答案・模範解答を読んだ後、1回以上書き直すことが大切です。推敲を重ねるほど次に一度でよい文章を書くことができるようになります。

☆設問は本文の内容に基づいて答案を書く：　一見知識を使って答える問題のようでも、ほとんどの問題が本文の内容理解を見ています。本文を資料として正確に読み、読み取った事実を元に解答しましょう。

☆英文読後日記をつける：　要約と感想を各１～２文にまとめて書く習慣をつけましょう。表現力がつくと共に書く材料集めにもなります。

☆答案の再解き直し：　不正解だったもののみ、時間がたってからもう一度解き直しましょう。

☆苦手分野の学習：　苦手分野の問題は解くたびに落ち込むので回避しがちですが、最も学習が必要です。今まで知らないでいた常識などを発見した場合、「こんなことも知らないのではだめだ」と思わず、「テスト前に知ることができてよかった」と考えるようにしましょう。やる気が出ないときは本番でその苦手分野が出題されて困っている自分を想像してみてください。その時のつらさを回避するために前もって苦手分野を学習するのです。

☆小手先の技術で切り抜けようとしない：　早稲田国際AO入試の筆記テストも基本的には英語のテストです。見られるのは英語の読解力と表現力及び一般教養と人格です。実力を見られるのであって要領のよさではありません。要領よく解こうとするよりも、本文と問題を正確に読み取り、筆者の一番言いたいことと質問のポイントを理解することに集中しましょう。良い解答の第一歩はそこからであり、それができれば7割とれたも同然です。（もちろん反論や具体例などで重要でないところは流し読みするなどの時間の節約は大切ですが、これも内容を理解することによってどこを流せばよいかが分かるのですからまずは内容理解です。）また、解答欄が余っても余計なことは書かないようにしましょう。減点されかねません。うまく最後をまとめる練習は普段からしておきましょう。解くときの優先順位は　１）本文・資料の理解　２）答案の内容　３）答案の量でよいと思います。

☆ポイントを先に書く：　筆記問題の解答ワード数はTOEFLエッセイの3分の１程度なのですから前置きは不要です。また論じ方の説明や問題文の内容の繰り返しも要りません。1行目でストレートに言いたいことを書いてください。詳細は後でいくらでも書き足すことができます。そのほうが時間配分もしやすくなります。最後はできればまとめの1文をつけましょう。

 

☆要約問題は簡単な言葉、個性を見せる問題は精一杯の語彙で解答する

内容を問う問題(要約問題)は内容を理解していることを示すことが大切です。簡単な言葉でよいので理解したことを自分の言葉で表現しましょう。自分の経験・知識を使って答える問題の場合、経験・知識＝語彙なのですから出せるものは全て出しましょう。【簡潔にまとめる／個性を発揮する】のメリハリをつけた答案にして下さい。

 

チェックすべきテーマ

記事等を読むとき、志望理由書のテーマ関連のものは必ずチェックしましょう。それ以外の記事の選択で大切なのは他者への共感や鋭い批判精神、正義感を持つことです。その意味では皆さんが親近感を持つ（あるいは気になる）国・人々の記事を追うことが大切です。これらを通して個性ある解答を書くもとになるものが確立されてゆきます。また、現代社会の重要課題や普遍的な問題の理解は問題文の理解に役立ちますので過去問関連の記事も読みましょう。以下は過去に出題され今後も出題されると考えられるテーマのキーワードです。

global warming  climate crisis  climate justice  environmental destruction   food shortage  water shortage

capitalism  globalization  free trade    wealth gap  fight against poverty democracy  socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor welfare state big/small government  class war  discrimination  human rights  genocide American diplomacy  global south  gender gap   violence   technology 

 

 

 

 

チェックしておくと参考になる人・本・雑誌・新聞・番組・ホームページ等

☆以下は全くの私の独断で選んだinformationやinspirationを得る役に立つと思われるものです。全て無料です。

 

♦michaelmoore.com: アカデミー賞、スタインベック賞などを受賞した映画監督マイケル・ムーアのホームページです。現代の重要な政治・社会問題をユーモアを交えて解説。映画は全て必見です。

♦Al Jazeera English: 中東の放送局。イスラエルによるパレスチナの民族浄化を始め西側の外交政策やアジア・アフリカ地域のレポートが大変参考になります。

♦Democracy Now!: インディペンデント放送局。主流メディアでは聞けない重要課題を毎日取り上げます。

♦NPR: アメリカのラジオ局。All Things Consideredでは興味深い話が多数聞けます。

♦Voice of America: 記事が音声で聞けます。ニュースが簡潔にまとめられています。

♦BBC のpodcast: “The Inquiry”は時事問題のまとめ番組で要チェックです。（最後をご覧ください） また、World Have Your Say”という視聴者参加討論番組はargumentの参考になります。

♦Newsweek/Time: 格調高い英語で時事問題を詳しく報じています。♦Daily Yomiuri: 日本国内のニュースを英文で読んで表現の仕方を学びましょう。早稲田大学の教授陣が英文で論文を投稿しています。

♦In These Times: かなり左寄り（革新思想寄り）ですが過激な内容ではありません。不正・不平等・人権問題等に関して一般の人々の視点からの取材を丁寧に行っています。

♦NatureとScience のpodcast: 科学雑誌NatureとScienceのpodcast では一般の人にも分かる形で科学関連ニュースを発表しています。温暖化、食料・水危機、公害、幹細胞研究、宇宙探査、米政府の科学研究援助方針など地球・人類にとって重要な問題を多数取り上げています。Transcriptもあります。

♦Progressive! Channel: 上智大教授による「基本的なところから政治について解説」簡潔かつ濃い内容。

♦Jeffery Sachs:　温暖化・人口増加と貧困対策専門の経済学者です。科学者・経済学者・政府・民間が力を合わせることにより危機を乗り越えることは可能だと主張しています。著作が早稲田国際AO筆記試験で過去２回出題されています。YouTubeにインタビュー等のビデオがあります。

 

 

☆以下はBBC Podcast “The Inquiry”のバックナンバーの抜粋です。

時事問題・一般教養のフォローに使えると思います。（Is Inequality About to Get Unimaginably Worse?はほぼ同じ内容のものが2017年度早稲田国際教養学部のAO入試で使用されました。但し、BBC以外にもCNNやThe Economist, The Guardian等様々なメディアから出題されますので毎日ニュースに目を通すようにして下さい。）アンダーラインのあるものは特に最近の話題や日本の問題、普遍的な問題に関連が大きいものですので優先的に聞いてみられると良いと思います。ひとつが20分ぐらいの長さです。Googleで検索すれば見つかります。スクリプトがあるものもあります。聞いている途中でlostになっても、区切りごとにナレーターのまとめが入っているので内容理解はしやすいです。要約かナレーター部分のディクテーションor書写をするとさらに良いです。

 

Can We Teach Robots Ethics?

How Do We Stop People Dying in Floods?

How Has Ku Klux Klan Lasted So Long?

How Do You Fix Someone Else’s Election?

Is Inequality About to Get Unimaginably Worse?

Should We Give Homeless People Homes?

What Kind of Person Becomes a Violent Jihadi?

Is Japan Abandoning Pacifism?

Why do Tax Havens Still Exist?

Is Opposition to GM Crops Irrational?

Is There a New Nuclear Arms Race?

Should We Fear Artificial Intelligence?

Why Aren’t More Dishonest Bankers in Jail?

What’s Killing Black American Babies?

What’s the Real Difference between Sexes?

How can we feed 11 billion people?

Are smart cities dumb?

Why can’t so many children read?

Are We Heading for another Mass Extinction?

How Did We Mess up Antibiotics?

Can Delhi Clean Up Its Air?

Why don’t we care about Yemen?

Why do we care about statues?

Can we make the super-rich pay more tax?

Are *killer robots* the future of warfare?

Is Antifa the threat it’s made out to be?

Is online censorship going too far?

Is recycling broken?

Why are boys academically underperforming?

How will Hollywood respond to the Black Lives Matter and Me Too movements?

Why are murder rates in Chicago so high?

Why aren’t countries doing more to stop climate change?

Can Putin be prosecuted for war crimes?

Has the war in Ukraine sparked the world food crisis?

How do pandemics end?

Is Africa’s Great Green Wall failing?

Why are there millions of empty houses in Japan?

Will hydrogen solve our energy needs?

Is the global nuclear threat rising?

How can we stop wildfires?

Can we stop Oil?

Why is life expectancy falling in America?

Why is the US Army struggling to recruit new soldiers?

What does Iran want?

Can anyone broker peace in the Middle East?

Do we need the International Criminal Court?

Do we need a new NATO?

What does Japan’s rice crisis say about its economy?

How crucial is the strait of Hormuz to the world oil supplies?

Is AI eroding our critical thinking?

How are drones changing the landscape of modern warfare?

Is the world ready for more climate migration?

Will ever be a single global language?

Is History Repeating Itself in Iran?

Is the World Cup 2026 an own goal?

How can rewilding help combat climate change?

 Why Is Basic Income Being Debated?

Will drones change the landscape of modern warfare?

Is Japan moving to the right?

TOEFL iBT Writing for an Academic Discussion Military or Sports Programs? (Revised)

Imagine your country has a certain budget that can be allocated either to the self-defense force or to sports programs. Which area should receive the funding, and why? Consider the potential impacts on national security, international prestige, and community well-being in your response.

 

 

☆Let’s Read and Think

Read the excerpt from An Appeal from the “Article Nine Association” and answer the following question:

…The use of force only results in robbing a country and its people of their livelihood and of their happiness. Since the 1990s, armed interventions by major nations into regional conflicts have also failed to result in effective resolutions. That is why, in such places as Europe and Southeast Asia, efforts are being strengthened to create regional frameworks that can help to resolve conflicts through diplomacy and dialogue. … Based on Article Nine, Japan needs to develop ties of friendship and cooperation with the peoples of Asia and other regions, and change a diplomatic stance that only prioritizes a military alliance with the United States. Japan must play an active role in the tide of world history by exercising its autonomy and acting in a pragmatic manner. It is precisely because of Article Nine that Japan can engage its partner nations in peaceful diplomacy while respecting their various positions, and collaborate with them in the fields of economy, culture, science and technology.  

 

Question: How would spending more money on each choice affect national security, international prestige, and community well-being?

 

 

☆Hints for Points

National Security

1.       Japan is already one of the largest military powers in the world. The Self-Defense Forces have been training with the U.S. military for almost 20 years. Constitutional amendment will finalize the process.

2.       Militarization of Japan will emphasize its geopolitical position as a buffer country for the United States against China and Russia, which facilitates the U.S. to keep its hegemony in the world.

 

International Prestige

1.        Shift from arms competition to business corporation promotes international security.

2.        Supporting sports rather than increasing military spending will improve the national image (soft power).

3.        Japan has a history of violent past: imperial Japan before and during WWII. Militarization would give a bad impression to other countries, especially countries that Japan invaded in the past. Also. Japan has a history of diplomatic solutions of international problems since the end of WWII. This has earned us a good reputation and has kept us free from terrorism. We must continue this diplomatic peace-building.

4.        Strengthening the military-industrial complex makes the economy dependent on weapons deal as in North Korea and Israel, whose images are extremely bad. 

5.        Self-defense forces are often dispatched to disaster-stricken countries for humanitarian-aids.

 

Community well-being

1.        Self-defense forces are indispensable in rescue efforts while disasters have been increasing recently.

2.        Weapons are much more expensive than sports promotion, while  government spending on sports has been tight as well as those on basic researches, art, education, and fundamental researches in science. To revitalize the economy, these areas must be funded.

3.       Sports are not free from problems. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) is corrupt, prioritizing the profit-making through television broadcasting rights. The government of the host country often funnel tax to related industries, but the trickle-down effect has been proven wrong. The public suffer from the government debt. The environment is influenced.

 

☆Sample Response

【Thesis】Japan, where I live, should not spend more on defense than sports.

【Supporting Details】The defense budget has exponentially increased over the past 15 years. Now it is nearly 2% of its GDP and can be raised to 3.5 of its GDP soon. This sends a negative message to our neighbors like China, Korea, and South-East Asian countries because of the past invasion and war crimes of Imperial Japan. Moreover, most of our military spending goes to the purchase of outdated weapons from the U.S. or is used to make up for the deficit of the U.S. military. It is a waste of money and it makes Japan a potential battle ground.

【Counterargument-treatment】It is true that sports programs are hotbeds of corruption. However, it is within the sphere of who benefits the most, while military spending leads to wars and deaths.

【Conclusion】Instead of using money for fear, I would like my government to use it for peaceful purposes.