TOEFL · Письмо · Академическая дискуссия · Технологии

TOEFL Академическая дискуссия: темы технологий — практические задания и стратегии 2026

Технологии — одна из наиболее часто встречающихся тем в задании TOEFL 2026 «Написать для академической дискуссии». Задания охватывают искусственный интеллект, цифровые инструменты в образовании, автоматизацию и влияние социальных сетей на общество. В этом руководстве вы найдёте примеры практических заданий, образец ответа объёмом 100+ слов, стратегии написания и разбор типичных ошибок.

Практические задания на основе шаблонов и прогнозов тем TOEFL · Исследовательская группа LingoLeap

Ограничение времени

~10 мин

Минимальный объём

100 слов

Тема

Технологии

Являются ли технологии самой распространённой темой академической дискуссии?

Да. Технологии — одна из наиболее часто встречающихся тем в задании TOEFL 2026 Академическая дискуссия. Согласно типичным шаблонам заданий TOEFL и прогнозам тем, задания об искусственном интеллекте, технологиях в классе, автоматизации и рынке труда, а также влиянии социальных сетей появляются регулярно, поскольку эти вопросы порождают чёткие противоположные точки зрения и связаны с академическим опытом студентов университетов по всему миру.

Почему темы технологий встречаются так часто

Задание «Академическая дискуссия» создано для того, чтобы воспроизвести атмосферу споров, которые ведутся на университетских онлайн-форумах. Темы, связанные с технологиями, идеально подходят для этой цели: они достаточно широки, чтобы любой студент мог высказаться, независимо от своей специальности. Для обсуждения того, помогает ли ИИ обществу или вредит ему, не нужно техническое образование — тема опирается на повседневный опыт, знакомый каждому студенту.

Технологические темы также органично порождают дискуссии с двумя противоположными точками зрения. Такие вопросы, как автоматизация, использование EdTech в классах и влияние социальных сетей на психическое здоровье, имеют чёткие позиции «за» и «против» — именно то, что требуется в формате задания. Профессор задаёт дискуссионный вопрос, двое студентов занимают разные стороны, а вы должны выразить собственную точку зрения.

Наконец, технологии развиваются стремительно, поэтому темы ощущаются актуальными и злободневными. Вопросы о контенте, созданном ИИ, цифровых инструментах для обучения и влиянии автоматизации на занятость отражают реальные академические дискуссии, которые прямо сейчас ведутся в университетах по всему миру.

30 практических заданий с примерами ответов

Эти практические задания составлены по образцу TOEFL. Нажмите на любое задание, чтобы увидеть пример ответа для академической дискуссии (100+ слов).

1Some argue that AI tools should be banned in university classrooms, while others...

Dr. Martinez

Some argue that AI tools should be banned in university classrooms, while others believe they enhance learning. What is your opinion and why?

Alex

I think AI tools should be banned in classrooms because they prevent students from developing critical thinking on their own. When students can ask an AI for answers, they skip the struggle that leads to real understanding. Universities should protect that process.

Mei

I disagree — banning AI ignores how much it can help learners. AI grammar checkers and writing assistants give immediate feedback that helps students improve faster than waiting for a professor to respond. The key is teaching responsible use, not banning the tool.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe AI tools should be carefully integrated into classrooms rather than banned outright. When used responsibly, tools like AI writing assistants can help students brainstorm ideas and improve their drafts through instant feedback. For example, in my writing class last semester, using an AI grammar checker helped me identify recurring errors I was not aware of, which significantly improved my essays over time. However, I do think universities need clear guidelines to prevent misuse. Students should use AI as a supplement to their own thinking, not a replacement. If professors design assignments that require critical analysis and personal reflection, AI becomes a learning aid rather than a shortcut. The key is teaching students how to use these tools ethically while still developing their own skills.
2AI-powered virtual tutors are becoming more common. Some educators worry they wi...

Professor Lee

AI-powered virtual tutors are becoming more common. Some educators worry they will replace human teachers, while others see them as valuable supplements. Do you think AI tutors help or hurt education?

Jordan

AI tutors are genuinely helpful because they are available around the clock. A student struggling at midnight before an exam can get immediate help without waiting for office hours. That kind of accessibility levels the playing field for students who cannot afford private tutoring.

Sofia

Human teachers do far more than deliver information — they mentor, motivate, and adapt emotionally to each student. An AI cannot notice when a student is overwhelmed or needs encouragement. Replacing that relationship with a chatbot risks turning education into a purely transactional experience.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I think AI tutors are a valuable supplement to human instruction, not a replacement for it. One clear advantage is availability: an AI tutor can answer questions at midnight before an exam, something no human teacher can realistically do for every student. A friend of mine used an AI math tutor to review calculus problems outside of class, and her grade improved from a B to an A over one semester. That said, AI tutors lack the emotional intelligence that human teachers bring. A good professor notices when a student is struggling emotionally and adjusts their approach accordingly. For that reason, I believe the best model combines both — AI for on-demand practice and human teachers for mentorship, motivation, and deeper discussions.
3Some people rely on AI assistants like smart speakers and chatbots for everyday ...

Dr. Chen

Some people rely on AI assistants like smart speakers and chatbots for everyday tasks such as scheduling, cooking, and navigation. Is this reliance beneficial or does it make people less capable? Share your view.

Jamal

Using AI assistants for daily tasks is clearly beneficial because it saves time and mental energy. Delegating routine decisions to an AI frees people to focus on more creative and meaningful work. This is no different from using a calculator instead of doing arithmetic by hand.

Priya

Over-relying on AI assistants erodes basic human skills. People who depend on GPS for every trip lose their sense of direction. Those who ask chatbots to draft every message lose confidence in their own writing. We should be cautious about outsourcing too much of our daily thinking.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe using AI assistants for everyday tasks is mostly beneficial because it frees up mental energy for more important decisions. For instance, I use a smart speaker to set reminders and check the weather each morning, which saves me several minutes of routine planning. That time adds up over a week and allows me to focus on studying or creative projects instead. Critics may argue that relying on AI makes people less self-sufficient. However, we have always used tools to simplify daily life — from calculators to washing machines — without losing fundamental skills. The key is maintaining awareness of what we delegate. As long as people can still perform basic tasks without technology when needed, AI assistants represent a practical improvement in daily efficiency rather than a threat to human capability.
4Universities are beginning to use AI to detect plagiarism and even grade student...

Dr. Williams

Universities are beginning to use AI to detect plagiarism and even grade student essays. Some students feel this is unfair, while others believe it increases objectivity. What is your position?

Carlos

AI plagiarism detection is a fair and necessary tool because it ensures every student is held to the same standard. When cheating goes undetected, honest students are disadvantaged. Automated detection removes the inconsistency of relying on professors to catch dishonesty manually.

Emma

AI grading is deeply problematic because writing is a creative and contextual act. An algorithm cannot appreciate a student's unique argument style or cultural context. I have seen students receive low scores from AI graders on essays that professors later praised as exceptional work.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I support the use of AI for plagiarism detection because it creates a fairer academic environment for all students. Before these tools existed, dishonest students could copy work without consequence while honest students earned their grades through genuine effort. AI detection levels the playing field by holding everyone to the same standard. However, I am less comfortable with AI grading essays. Writing involves creativity, nuance, and cultural context that current AI systems cannot fully evaluate. A classmate once received a low AI-generated score on an essay that her professor later praised as exceptional. This shows that human judgment remains essential for subjective assessments. In my view, AI should assist the grading process — flagging issues and providing preliminary feedback — but the final evaluation should always come from a human instructor.
5Some people argue that AI-generated art and writing threaten human creativity, w...

Dr. Patel

Some people argue that AI-generated art and writing threaten human creativity, while others believe these tools open new creative possibilities. What do you think about the role of AI in creative fields?

Ryan

AI-generated art expands creative possibilities by letting artists experiment rapidly with ideas they could not realize on their own. A graphic designer who uses AI to generate visual concepts can explore dozens of directions in an afternoon. This accelerates creativity rather than replacing it.

Yuki

When AI can produce artwork and writing on demand, it devalues the skill and effort that human creators invest. If a machine can generate a painting in seconds that looks indistinguishable from a professional's work, it threatens the livelihoods of artists and undermines the meaning of creative achievement.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe AI tools in creative fields open new possibilities rather than threaten human creativity. Throughout history, new technologies — from the camera to digital editing software — were initially feared as replacements for human artistry, yet they ultimately expanded what creators could achieve. AI is following the same pattern by giving artists and writers new ways to experiment with ideas quickly. For example, a graphic designer I know uses AI image generators to brainstorm visual concepts before refining them by hand. The AI does not replace her skills; it accelerates the early stages of her creative process. The final product still requires human taste, judgment, and emotional depth. I think the real concern should not be the tool itself but ensuring that credit and ownership are handled ethically when AI contributes to creative work.
6Social media platforms have become a primary news source for many young people. ...

Professor Kim

Social media platforms have become a primary news source for many young people. Some say this democratizes information, while others worry about the spread of misinformation. What is your view?

Daniel

Social media democratizes news by giving ordinary people and independent journalists a platform that traditional media gatekeepers once controlled. Marginalized voices can now share stories that large news corporations ignore. This is a genuine gain for public information.

Aisha

The spread of misinformation on social media far outweighs any democratizing benefit. Algorithms reward engagement over accuracy, so false and sensational content spreads faster than corrections. During elections, social media misinformation has demonstrably influenced voters based on fabricated stories.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe social media as a news source is a double-edged sword, but the risks currently outweigh the benefits. While these platforms do give a voice to independent journalists and underrepresented communities, the algorithms that drive engagement tend to prioritize sensational or misleading content over accurate reporting. During a recent election in my country, several viral posts containing false statistics were shared millions of times before fact-checkers could respond. Many of my classmates believed the claims simply because they appeared repeatedly in their feeds. This experience showed me how easily misinformation spreads when there is no editorial oversight. I think young people should continue using social media for news, but they must develop stronger critical thinking skills and cross-reference stories with established outlets before accepting them as fact.
7Some researchers argue that social media increases political polarization by cre...

Dr. Martinez

Some researchers argue that social media increases political polarization by creating echo chambers, while others claim it exposes people to diverse viewpoints. Which perspective do you agree with?

Sofia

Social media absolutely creates echo chambers. Recommendation algorithms show users content that reinforces their existing beliefs, so people never genuinely encounter opposing arguments. Over time, this makes political disagreement feel more extreme because each side only sees the most outrageous version of the other.

Carlos

Actually, social media exposes people to more diverse content than they would encounter in their physical communities. In my town, almost everyone shares the same political views. Social media introduced me to people with completely different perspectives that challenged and expanded my thinking.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I largely agree that social media contributes to political polarization through echo chambers. Platform algorithms are designed to show users content that aligns with their existing beliefs because that content generates more engagement. Over time, this creates a feedback loop where people see increasingly extreme versions of their own views and rarely encounter thoughtful opposing arguments. I noticed this in my own experience when I realized that my news feed contained almost exclusively one political perspective. After deliberately following accounts with different viewpoints, I found that my understanding of complex issues became more nuanced. This suggests the problem is real but not unsolvable. If platforms adjusted their algorithms to occasionally surface well-reasoned opposing perspectives, social media could become a tool for understanding rather than division.
8Many companies now use social media platforms to market products through influen...

Professor Lee

Many companies now use social media platforms to market products through influencers. Some people believe influencer marketing is manipulative, while others see it as a natural evolution of advertising. What is your opinion?

Mei

Influencer marketing is just word-of-mouth advertising at scale, and there is nothing inherently manipulative about it. People trust personal recommendations more than corporate ads. When an influencer genuinely uses a product and shares their honest experience, it is more informative than a traditional commercial.

Jamal

Influencer marketing becomes manipulative when paid promotions are disguised as genuine recommendations. Many influencers fail to disclose sponsorships clearly, making followers believe they are seeing an unbiased opinion. This deception is particularly harmful when it targets young audiences who may not recognize the commercial intent.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I think influencer marketing is a natural evolution of advertising, but it needs clearer regulations to protect consumers. People have always trusted personal recommendations more than traditional ads, and influencers essentially scale that concept to larger audiences. When an influencer I follow genuinely uses and recommends a product, I find their review more helpful than a polished television commercial. The problem arises when influencers promote products they do not actually use or fail to disclose paid partnerships. A popular fitness influencer was recently exposed for promoting a supplement she never consumed, which misled thousands of followers. This kind of deception is manipulative. The solution is not to ban influencer marketing but to enforce strict disclosure requirements so audiences can distinguish genuine recommendations from paid advertisements.
9Some parents strictly limit their children's social media use, while others allo...

Dr. Chen

Some parents strictly limit their children's social media use, while others allow unrestricted access, believing children need to learn digital skills. What approach do you think is best?

Priya

Strict parental limits on social media protect children from cyberbullying, inappropriate content, and the psychological harm of comparison culture. Young children do not yet have the emotional maturity to navigate these risks safely, so parental oversight is not restrictive — it is responsible.

Ryan

Unrestricted social media access teaches children digital literacy through real experience. Sheltering kids from online environments means they enter adulthood without the skills to navigate them safely. Guided freedom, where parents are involved but do not micromanage, prepares children better than strict bans.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe a balanced approach with guided access is more effective than either extreme. Completely banning social media can leave children unprepared for the digital world they will inevitably join, while unrestricted access exposes them to risks they may not be mature enough to handle, such as cyberbullying and inappropriate content. My younger cousin's parents took a middle-ground approach: they allowed her to use social media starting at age thirteen but required her accounts to be visible to them and set daily time limits. Over two years, she learned to navigate online interactions responsibly, and her parents gradually gave her more independence. This approach taught her digital literacy and self-regulation at the same time. I think the goal should be preparing children to manage their own social media use independently by the time they reach adulthood.
10Some argue that social media has made people more narcissistic and self-centered...

Dr. Williams

Some argue that social media has made people more narcissistic and self-centered, while others believe it simply provides a platform for healthy self-expression. What do you think?

Yuki

Social media encourages narcissism by rewarding people for self-promotion. Likes, follower counts, and curated profiles create an incentive to present an idealized version of yourself rather than engage authentically. This constant performance of identity is unhealthy and pulls attention inward.

Daniel

Social media is a tool for self-expression, not a factory for narcissism. Artists, activists, and writers use these platforms to share meaningful work and build communities around shared interests. Labeling all self-expression as narcissistic ignores the genuine connections these platforms enable.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I think social media provides a platform for self-expression, but its design can encourage narcissistic behavior in some users. The core features of most platforms — likes, follower counts, and curated profiles — reward people for presenting idealized versions of themselves. This creates incentives to focus on appearance and approval rather than genuine connection. However, I do not think the platform itself makes people narcissistic. People who use social media to share creative projects, discuss ideas, or support their communities are engaging in healthy self-expression. A classmate of mine uses her account primarily to share her artwork and connect with other artists, which has helped her develop her skills and confidence. The difference lies in how individuals choose to use these tools, not in the tools themselves. Personal awareness and intentional use can prevent social media from becoming a vehicle for vanity.
11Many apps and services collect personal data to provide personalized experiences...

Dr. Patel

Many apps and services collect personal data to provide personalized experiences. Some people accept this trade-off, while others view it as a serious invasion of privacy. Where do you stand?

Aisha

The data-for-convenience trade-off is acceptable when users are genuinely informed and give meaningful consent. Personalized recommendations on streaming and shopping platforms make life more efficient. As long as companies are transparent about what they collect and why, this exchange can be fair.

Emma

Most people have no real idea how much of their data is collected or how it is used. Terms-of-service agreements are impossibly long and filled with legal jargon. Calling this 'consent' is misleading. Companies profit enormously from data while users receive minor conveniences in return.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe the trade-off between personal data and convenience has gone too far in favor of companies, and consumers need stronger protections. While I appreciate personalized recommendations on streaming services or shopping platforms, most users do not fully understand how much data is collected or how it is used beyond their immediate experience. Last year, I discovered that a free weather app on my phone had been tracking my location continuously and selling that data to advertising companies. I had no idea this was happening because the permission was buried in a lengthy terms-of-service agreement. This experience convinced me that informed consent is largely an illusion in the current system. I think governments should require companies to explain their data practices in plain language and give users genuine control over what information is shared.
12Facial recognition technology is being adopted by governments and businesses for...

Professor Kim

Facial recognition technology is being adopted by governments and businesses for security purposes. Some people welcome it as a safety measure, while others see it as a threat to civil liberties. What is your view?

Alex

Facial recognition enhances public safety by helping law enforcement identify criminals and missing persons quickly. In busy airports and transit systems, the technology speeds up security screening without requiring intrusive manual checks. These practical benefits justify its deployment in controlled settings.

Jordan

Widespread facial recognition enables mass surveillance that fundamentally alters the relationship between citizens and the state. Even if governments promise responsible use today, the infrastructure can be misused by future administrations. The threat to civil liberties is too great to accept in exchange for incremental security gains.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe facial recognition technology poses significant risks to civil liberties that outweigh its security benefits. While it can help identify criminals in specific situations, widespread deployment creates a surveillance infrastructure that could easily be misused by authorities. The potential for abuse is too great when any government has the ability to track citizens' movements in real time without their knowledge. Studies have also shown that many facial recognition systems have higher error rates for women and people with darker skin tones, which raises serious fairness concerns. An innocent person being wrongly identified by a flawed algorithm could face detention or harassment. I think facial recognition should be limited to narrow, well-regulated applications — such as unlocking personal devices — rather than being deployed broadly in public spaces without meaningful oversight.
13Smart home devices like voice assistants and connected cameras offer convenience...

Dr. Martinez

Smart home devices like voice assistants and connected cameras offer convenience but constantly collect household data. Do you think the convenience justifies the privacy risks?

Carlos

Smart home devices genuinely improve daily life — they let you control your home hands-free, save energy, and enhance security. The data these devices collect is mostly mundane and provides limited risk to ordinary users. The convenience and safety benefits outweigh theoretical privacy concerns.

Sofia

Inviting always-listening microphones and cameras into your home is an enormous privacy risk. These devices have been caught recording private conversations unintentionally. Beyond accidental recordings, the data they collect builds detailed profiles of household routines that are vulnerable to hacking and corporate misuse.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I think smart home devices offer genuine convenience, but most consumers underestimate the privacy risks involved. Voice assistants are always listening for their activation phrase, which means they occasionally record private conversations unintentionally. Connected cameras and sensors build detailed profiles of household routines that could be valuable to hackers or data brokers. My roommate installed a smart speaker, and we later learned it had recorded fragments of our private conversations that were reviewed by company employees for quality improvement. Neither of us had read the fine print explaining this practice. After that experience, I became much more cautious about which devices I bring into my home. I believe these products should be designed with privacy as the default setting, requiring users to opt in to data sharing rather than forcing them to opt out.
14Some countries have implemented strict data privacy laws, while others take a mo...

Professor Lee

Some countries have implemented strict data privacy laws, while others take a more relaxed approach to encourage innovation. Which approach do you think is better for society?

Priya

Strict data privacy laws are essential for protecting citizens from corporate overreach. Without regulation, companies will always collect as much data as possible because it is profitable, regardless of user welfare. Strong laws create accountability and give individuals genuine control over their personal information.

Mei

Heavy data privacy regulation stifles innovation by increasing compliance costs and slowing down the development of useful AI and data-driven services. Countries with lighter regulations attract more tech investment and produce more innovative products. A more flexible approach benefits consumers in the long run through better technology.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe strict data privacy laws are better for society in the long run, even if they create short-term challenges for businesses. When companies operate without strong privacy regulations, they tend to collect as much data as possible because it is profitable, regardless of whether consumers understand or consent to the practice. This erodes public trust in technology over time. The European Union's data protection regulations provide a useful example. After implementation, companies had to redesign their data practices and give users more control over personal information. While some businesses initially complained about compliance costs, consumer trust in digital services has generally increased in those markets. I think innovation and privacy can coexist — companies simply need to build products that respect user data from the start rather than treating privacy as an afterthought.
15Employers increasingly monitor employee activity through software that tracks ke...

Dr. Chen

Employers increasingly monitor employee activity through software that tracks keystrokes, screenshots, and browsing history. Some say this improves productivity, while others call it an invasion of privacy. What do you think?

Ryan

Employee monitoring is a legitimate management tool, especially for remote workers. When people work from home without any oversight, productivity can suffer. Monitoring software gives managers objective data about whether work is actually being done, which is fair to employees who are performing well.

Yuki

Tracking every keystroke and screenshot signals a fundamental lack of trust that destroys workplace culture. Constant surveillance creates anxiety and resentment rather than motivation. Workers under heavy monitoring report higher stress and lower creativity, which undermines the very productivity employers claim to protect.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I think extensive employee monitoring is an invasion of privacy that ultimately harms workplace culture more than it helps productivity. While employers have a legitimate interest in ensuring that work gets done, tracking every keystroke and taking random screenshots signals a fundamental lack of trust. This kind of surveillance creates anxiety and resentment rather than motivation. A friend who works remotely told me that her company installed monitoring software that flagged her as unproductive whenever she stepped away from her computer for more than five minutes — even to use the restroom. The constant pressure made her less creative and more stressed, which actually decreased the quality of her work. I believe employers should measure results rather than monitor activity. Setting clear goals and evaluating output gives employees autonomy while still ensuring accountability.
16Self-driving vehicles could transform the transportation industry. Some argue th...

Dr. Williams

Self-driving vehicles could transform the transportation industry. Some argue they will improve safety and efficiency, while others worry about massive job losses for drivers. What is your position?

Daniel

Self-driving vehicles will dramatically improve road safety by eliminating human error, which causes the vast majority of accidents. Drunk driving, distracted driving, and fatigue-related crashes could become rare. The safety benefit alone justifies pursuing this technology despite the disruption it causes.

Aisha

Millions of professional drivers worldwide depend on driving for their income. Truck drivers, taxi operators, and delivery workers face unemployment if self-driving technology scales rapidly without support systems in place. The human cost of this disruption deserves more attention than the technology's potential benefits.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe self-driving vehicles will ultimately benefit society through improved safety, but the transition must include support for displaced workers. Human error causes the vast majority of traffic accidents, and autonomous vehicles have the potential to dramatically reduce fatalities by eliminating distracted and impaired driving. From a safety perspective alone, the technology is worth pursuing. However, millions of people worldwide earn their living as drivers — taxi operators, truck drivers, delivery workers. Ignoring their displacement would be irresponsible. When my city introduced automated subway trains, the transit authority offered retraining programs that helped former operators move into maintenance and supervisory roles. A similar approach should accompany self-driving vehicle adoption: governments and companies must invest in retraining programs and transitional support so that workers are not left behind as the technology advances.
17Some experts predict that automation will lead to shorter work weeks, giving peo...

Dr. Patel

Some experts predict that automation will lead to shorter work weeks, giving people more leisure time. Others worry it will simply lead to unemployment. Which outcome do you think is more likely?

Emma

Automation could enable shorter work weeks if governments and companies choose to distribute productivity gains fairly. As machines handle repetitive tasks, humans could work fewer hours for the same output. Several countries have already piloted four-day work weeks with positive results for both workers and employers.

Alex

History shows that productivity gains from technology rarely lead to shorter work hours for ordinary workers. Instead, the financial benefits accumulate for company owners and shareholders while workers either lose their jobs or are expected to take on new tasks. Without deliberate policy intervention, automation leads to inequality, not leisure.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I think automation is more likely to lead to unemployment in the short term unless governments actively intervene to redistribute the benefits. History shows that productivity gains from technology do not automatically translate into shorter work weeks or higher wages for most workers. Instead, the financial benefits tend to concentrate among company owners and shareholders. For example, manufacturing output has increased dramatically over the past few decades thanks to automation, yet factory workers have not seen proportional reductions in working hours. Many have simply lost their jobs. I believe the shorter work week outcome is possible, but only if societies choose to implement policies — such as adjusted labor laws and profit-sharing requirements — that ensure the gains from automation are shared broadly rather than captured by a small group at the top.
18Automated customer service systems like chatbots are replacing human support age...

Professor Kim

Automated customer service systems like chatbots are replacing human support agents in many companies. Some customers prefer the speed of automation, while others find it frustrating. What is your perspective?

Jordan

Chatbots handle simple customer service tasks more efficiently than human agents. Checking order status, resetting passwords, or finding store hours can all be done instantly with automation, without waiting on hold. For routine inquiries, this is faster and more convenient for customers.

Carlos

Chatbots are deeply frustrating when a customer has a complex or unusual problem. I spent twenty minutes in a chatbot loop once before I could reach a human, all because the system could not understand my situation. When companies rely entirely on automation for support, they signal that customer relationships are not worth investing in.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I think automated customer service systems are useful for simple inquiries but frustrating for complex problems, and companies should offer both options. Chatbots excel at answering frequently asked questions — checking order status, resetting passwords, or providing store hours. For these routine tasks, automation is faster and more efficient than waiting on hold for a human agent. However, when I had a billing dispute with my phone company last month, the chatbot could not understand my situation and kept redirecting me in circles for twenty minutes before I could reach a human representative. The experience was deeply frustrating. I believe the best approach is a hybrid model where automation handles straightforward requests and seamlessly transfers customers to human agents when problems require judgment, empathy, or creative problem-solving.
19Some people believe governments should tax companies that replace workers with a...

Dr. Martinez

Some people believe governments should tax companies that replace workers with automation and use the revenue for worker retraining. Others argue this would discourage innovation. What do you think?

Sofia

An automation tax is a fair way to ensure that the economic benefits of technology are shared broadly. When companies replace workers with machines, they dramatically cut labor costs. A modest tax on that automation would fund retraining programs and social safety nets that help displaced workers transition to new careers.

Priya

Taxing automation punishes companies for efficiency and would slow the adoption of technology that benefits consumers and the broader economy. Instead of penalizing innovation, governments should focus on improving education systems to prepare workers for the types of jobs that automation creates, not just the ones it eliminates.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I support a targeted automation tax because the societal costs of mass displacement should not fall entirely on displaced workers. When companies automate jobs, they reduce labor costs and increase profits, but the former employees bear the burden of finding new careers, often without adequate support. A modest tax on automation could fund retraining programs, extended unemployment benefits, and education initiatives that help workers transition. Critics argue this would slow innovation, but I disagree. Companies will still automate because the long-term savings are substantial even with a small tax. The goal is not to prevent automation but to ensure that its economic benefits are shared more equitably. Several economists have proposed models where the tax rate decreases as companies invest in their own worker transition programs, which creates a balanced incentive structure.
20Robots are increasingly used in healthcare — for surgery, patient care, and phar...

Professor Lee

Robots are increasingly used in healthcare — for surgery, patient care, and pharmaceutical dispensing. Do you think this trend benefits patients or introduces unacceptable risks?

Mei

Surgical robots perform procedures with a precision that human hands simply cannot match. Minimally invasive robotic surgery results in smaller incisions, less blood loss, and faster recovery. Patients benefit directly from these advantages, and the technology continues to improve rapidly.

Ryan

The risks of robot malfunction in a surgical or pharmaceutical context are catastrophic. A software error during surgery or an automated dispensing mistake with medication could cause serious harm or death. The healthcare sector demands near-perfect reliability, and robotic systems are not yet at a level where we should trust them with critical decisions.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe robots in healthcare primarily benefit patients, especially in surgical precision and medication accuracy. Robotic surgical systems can perform minimally invasive procedures with steadier movements than human hands, leading to smaller incisions, less blood loss, and faster recovery times. My grandfather had robotic-assisted knee surgery last year and was walking again within a week, compared to the months-long recovery typical of traditional surgery. That said, I recognize there are risks when technology fails. A malfunctioning surgical robot could cause serious harm, and over-reliance on automated pharmaceutical systems without human oversight could lead to dangerous medication errors. The key is treating robots as tools that enhance human medical professionals rather than replace them. As long as trained doctors and nurses supervise these systems and maintain the authority to override them, the benefits to patient outcomes clearly outweigh the risks.
21Video conferencing has made remote meetings standard in many workplaces and univ...

Dr. Chen

Video conferencing has made remote meetings standard in many workplaces and universities. Some prefer the flexibility of virtual meetings, while others believe in-person interaction is irreplaceable. What is your view?

Yuki

Video conferencing is excellent for routine coordination because it eliminates commuting time and allows people to join from anywhere. For status updates, presentations, and logistical discussions, virtual meetings are just as effective as in-person ones and far more convenient for participants in different locations.

Daniel

In-person interaction enables the kind of spontaneous, collaborative exchange that builds real working relationships and drives creative breakthroughs. Video calls make it harder to read body language, build rapport, and have the informal conversations that are essential for team cohesion. Some things simply cannot be replicated through a screen.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I think video conferencing is excellent for routine meetings and logistical discussions, but in-person interaction remains essential for building deeper professional and academic relationships. Virtual meetings save commuting time, allow participation from anywhere, and work well for status updates and presentations. During the pandemic, I attended lectures remotely and appreciated the convenience of studying from home. However, I noticed that group projects suffered because virtual communication made it harder to brainstorm spontaneously and read nonverbal cues. When our team finally met in person, we accomplished in one afternoon what had taken weeks of video calls. I believe the ideal approach is a hybrid model: use virtual meetings for efficiency and routine coordination, but prioritize face-to-face interaction for creative collaboration, relationship building, and discussions that require nuanced communication.
22Text messaging and social media have become the dominant forms of communication ...

Dr. Williams

Text messaging and social media have become the dominant forms of communication among young people. Some experts argue this has weakened interpersonal skills. Do you agree or disagree?

Aisha

Heavy reliance on text messaging weakens the ability to communicate spontaneously in real time. When every response can be carefully crafted and edited before sending, young people miss out on the practice of thinking quickly, managing discomfort, and navigating real-time social interactions. This affects their confidence in face-to-face conversations.

Emma

Digital communication has created entirely new interpersonal skills that older generations overlook. Managing online communities, communicating across cultural boundaries, and writing clearly and concisely are all valuable abilities. Young people are not losing interpersonal skills — they are developing different ones suited to a digital world.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I partially agree that heavy reliance on text-based communication can weaken certain interpersonal skills, particularly the ability to navigate real-time, face-to-face conversations. When people primarily communicate through text, they have time to craft responses carefully and avoid the discomfort of spontaneous interaction. Over time, this can make in-person conversations feel more challenging. I have noticed this in my own social circle. Friends who prefer texting often seem uncomfortable during phone calls or struggle to maintain eye contact in group discussions. However, I do not think digital communication is entirely negative — it has also created new social skills, such as managing online communities and communicating across cultural boundaries. The issue is balance. If young people supplement their digital communication with regular face-to-face interaction, they can develop both traditional interpersonal skills and modern digital literacy.
23Some universities are moving courses entirely online, arguing that it increases ...

Dr. Patel

Some universities are moving courses entirely online, arguing that it increases accessibility. Others believe the quality of education suffers without in-person instruction. Which position do you support?

Alex

Fully online education removes geographic and financial barriers that prevent many students from accessing higher education. A student in a rural area or a working parent can attend a top university remotely. This democratization of education is a profound benefit that outweighs the drawbacks of virtual instruction.

Jordan

The quality of education suffers significantly without in-person instruction. Laboratory work, hands-on practice, peer discussion, and the informal mentorship that happens between students and professors are all difficult or impossible to replicate online. Moving everything online for the sake of accessibility ultimately shortchanges students.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe fully online education increases accessibility but sacrifices important elements of the learning experience, so a blended approach is preferable. Online courses remove geographic and financial barriers — a student in a rural area can access lectures from top universities without relocating. This democratization of education is a significant benefit that should not be dismissed. However, my experience taking courses in both formats showed me clear limitations of online-only instruction. In my in-person biology lab, I learned techniques through hands-on practice and immediate feedback from my professor. The online version of the same course relied on videos and simulations that could not replicate that experience. I think universities should use online delivery for lecture-based content while preserving in-person sessions for labs, discussions, and collaborative projects where physical presence genuinely enhances learning.
24Some people argue that email and messaging apps have made professional communica...

Professor Kim

Some people argue that email and messaging apps have made professional communication too informal. Others say faster, casual communication improves workplace efficiency. What do you think?

Carlos

Casual communication in the workplace improves efficiency and makes collaboration more natural. Quick messages and brief emails allow teams to make faster decisions without drafting formal correspondence for every question. In fast-moving industries, this speed is a genuine competitive advantage.

Sofia

Overly informal professional communication can damage relationships with clients and senior stakeholders who expect a certain level of professionalism. A casual tone that works among close colleagues can appear disrespectful when used with external partners or in formal settings. Some situations still require polished, formal writing.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I think the shift toward informal professional communication has mostly improved workplace efficiency, though some situations still require formality. Quick messages and brief emails reduce the time spent on unnecessary pleasantries and allow teams to make faster decisions. In my internship last summer, our team used a messaging app for daily coordination, and the casual tone made it easier to ask quick questions without drafting a formal email each time. That said, there are contexts where informality creates problems. An overly casual email to a client or a senior executive can appear unprofessional and damage relationships. I believe the solution is situational awareness rather than rigid rules. Professionals should learn to adjust their communication style based on the audience and context — casual with close colleagues, more polished with external partners — rather than defaulting to one extreme.
25Long-distance relationships and friendships are now sustained largely through di...

Dr. Martinez

Long-distance relationships and friendships are now sustained largely through digital communication tools. Some believe technology has strengthened these connections, while others think digital bonds are weaker than in-person ones. What is your opinion?

Priya

Digital communication tools have made it possible to maintain close relationships across thousands of miles in a way that was impossible before. Regular video calls, voice messages, and shared media keep friendships alive and meaningful. Without these tools, many long-distance relationships would simply fade away.

Mei

Digital communication gives the illusion of closeness while missing the physical presence that makes relationships truly deep. Shared experiences, nonverbal communication, and the comfort of physical proximity cannot be replicated through a screen. Long-distance digital relationships may remain emotionally meaningful, but they are inevitably thinner than in-person bonds.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe digital communication tools have genuinely strengthened long-distance relationships by making regular contact possible in ways that were impractical before. When my best friend moved abroad for graduate school, we maintained our friendship through weekly video calls and daily messages. Without these tools, our connection would likely have faded due to the cost and inconvenience of international phone calls and letters. However, I do think digital bonds have limitations. Sharing a screen is not the same as sharing a physical space, and important emotional nuances can be lost in text messages. When my friend returned for a visit, I realized how much richer our conversation was in person. Digital tools are essential for maintaining long-distance connections, but they work best as a bridge between in-person interactions rather than a permanent replacement for them.
26Many health experts warn that excessive screen time is harmful to physical and m...

Professor Lee

Many health experts warn that excessive screen time is harmful to physical and mental health. Others argue that screen time concerns are exaggerated given how central technology is to modern life. What is your view?

Ryan

Excessive screen time is a real health concern backed by research. Prolonged screen use disrupts sleep, contributes to sedentary lifestyles, and is associated with higher rates of anxiety and depression, particularly among teenagers. These are measurable harms that justify serious attention and behavioral change.

Yuki

Screen time concerns are overblown and fail to account for what people actually do on screens. Educational content, creative work, and meaningful social connection all happen on screens. Treating all screen time as harmful is as irrational as treating all time spent in a library as harmful because sitting too long is unhealthy.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe excessive screen time is a legitimate health concern, but the conversation should focus on the quality of screen use rather than total hours alone. Spending four hours on a creative project or educational course is fundamentally different from spending four hours passively scrolling social media. Lumping all screen activities together oversimplifies the issue. That said, I have personally experienced the negative effects of too much passive screen time. During a period when I spent several hours each evening watching random videos, I noticed my sleep quality declined and I felt more anxious. Once I set boundaries — no screens after ten at night and a daily limit on social media — my well-being improved noticeably. I think the key is mindful use: being intentional about how and why we use screens rather than trying to eliminate screen time entirely in a world that depends on technology.
27Some schools have implemented phone-free policies during class hours. Supporters...

Dr. Chen

Some schools have implemented phone-free policies during class hours. Supporters say this reduces distraction, while opponents argue it prevents students from using phones as learning tools. What position do you take?

Daniel

Phone-free policies significantly improve learning because even a visible phone on a desk reduces students' cognitive performance. The temptation to check notifications is nearly impossible to resist for most people. Removing phones from the classroom eliminates this distraction and forces students to engage more deeply with the lesson.

Aisha

Phones are powerful learning tools that students should be encouraged to use responsibly. Educational apps, instant research, and language learning platforms all run on phones. Banning them outright treats students as incapable of self-regulation and prevents them from developing the digital discipline they will need in college and work.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I support phone-free policies during class hours because the distraction costs outweigh the learning benefits in most classroom settings. Research consistently shows that even having a phone visible on a desk reduces cognitive performance, and the temptation to check notifications during a lecture is difficult for most students to resist. When my university professor required phones to be placed in a wall pocket during class, I noticed I retained information much better and participated more actively in discussions. Opponents argue that phones can serve as learning tools for research or educational apps. While this is true, the same functions are available on school-provided laptops and tablets that do not carry the same distraction risks. I believe schools should provide dedicated devices for educational purposes while keeping personal phones stored away during instructional time to protect the learning environment.
28Technology companies design apps to maximize user engagement, often using featur...

Dr. Williams

Technology companies design apps to maximize user engagement, often using features that some critics call addictive. Should these companies be held responsible for technology addiction, or is it a matter of personal responsibility?

Emma

Technology companies bear significant responsibility for addictive design because they deliberately engineer features — infinite scrolling, variable reward systems, push notifications — to exploit psychological vulnerabilities. They spend billions on behavioral research to make their products as difficult to put down as possible. This is not accidental; it is intentional manipulation.

Alex

Personal responsibility must be the primary framework here. Adults have the agency to set their own limits, delete apps, or choose not to engage with addictive features. Holding companies legally responsible for how individuals choose to use their products sets a troubling precedent that removes individual accountability from the equation.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I believe technology companies share significant responsibility for addictive app design because they deliberately engineer features to exploit psychological vulnerabilities. Infinite scrolling, autoplay, push notifications, and variable reward systems are not accidental — they are carefully designed to keep users engaged as long as possible. Placing the burden entirely on individual willpower ignores the billions of dollars spent on making these products difficult to put down. However, personal responsibility also plays a role. Users can take practical steps like disabling notifications, setting app timers, and choosing to uninstall particularly addictive platforms. I think the most effective approach combines both: companies should be required to offer transparent usage tools and reduce manipulative design patterns, while individuals should educate themselves about these tactics and take proactive steps to manage their own digital habits.
29Some experts recommend that children under age two should have zero screen time,...

Dr. Patel

Some experts recommend that children under age two should have zero screen time, while others believe age-appropriate digital content can be educational. What approach do you think parents should take?

Jordan

Toddlers learn best through hands-on exploration and face-to-face interaction with caregivers. Brain development research suggests that screens offer a poor substitute for the physical and social experiences that build language, motor skills, and emotional understanding in the earliest years. Zero screen time for children under two is sound developmental advice.

Carlos

Rigid zero-screen-time rules are unrealistic for modern families and ignore the genuine educational value of high-quality children's programming. Short, supervised sessions with age-appropriate educational content can introduce language and concepts in engaging ways. The key is content quality and parental involvement, not a blanket ban.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I think very limited, supervised screen time with age-appropriate educational content is acceptable for young children, but parents should prioritize physical play and human interaction during the earliest years of development. Research on brain development suggests that toddlers learn most effectively through hands-on exploration and face-to-face communication with caregivers, which screens cannot adequately replicate. My sister follows a middle-ground approach with her two-year-old. She allows fifteen minutes of an educational program during mealtimes but spends the rest of the day on outdoor play, reading books, and interactive activities. The child is developing strong language and social skills without being entirely isolated from technology. I believe rigid zero-screen-time rules are unrealistic for modern families, but keeping exposure minimal and intentional during the first few years gives children the best foundation for healthy development.
30Digital detox retreats and screen-free vacations are growing in popularity. Some...

Professor Kim

Digital detox retreats and screen-free vacations are growing in popularity. Some see them as necessary for mental health, while others view them as impractical given modern life's dependence on technology. Do you think digital detoxes are valuable?

Sofia

Digital detoxes are genuinely valuable because they help people recognize how much of their time and attention technology consumes. Stepping away from screens even briefly reveals habitual behavior that many people are not consciously aware of. This awareness is the first step toward building healthier long-term habits.

Priya

Digital detox retreats are a privilege that most people cannot afford, and their benefits evaporate quickly when people return to unchanged habits. Instead of recommending dramatic screen breaks, we should focus on building sustainable daily practices — phone-free meals, no screens before bed — that address the root cause without requiring people to disconnect entirely.

Пример ответа (100+ слов)

I think digital detoxes are valuable as a reset mechanism, but they are not a long-term solution to unhealthy technology habits. Taking a weekend or a week away from screens can help people recognize how much time they spend on devices and how it affects their mood, sleep, and relationships. After a three-day camping trip without phone service last summer, I returned feeling more focused and aware of my habitual phone-checking behavior. However, the benefits fade quickly if people return to the same patterns immediately afterward. A digital detox without lasting behavioral changes is like a crash diet — temporarily effective but unsustainable. I believe the real goal should be building daily habits that regulate technology use, such as designated phone-free hours, no screens during meals, and intentional choices about which apps deserve attention. Sustainable moderation matters more than periodic abstinence.

Как написать сильный пост для дискуссии по теме технологий

Следуйте четырём стратегиям, чтобы писать хорошо структурированные ответы с высоким баллом на любое задание академической дискуссии по теме технологий.

1. Сформулируйте свою позицию в первом предложении

Начните с чёткого, прямого утверждения — например: «Я считаю, что ИИ принесёт обществу больше пользы, чем вреда». Проверяющие должны понять вашу позицию уже с первой строки. Избегайте размытых вступлений вроде «Технологии — это интересная тема», которые затягивают изложение вашего аргумента.

2. Приведите конкретный технологический пример

Подкрепите своё утверждение одним конкретным, детально описанным примером. Вместо «ИИ помогает во многих областях» назовите конкретное применение: «Диагностические инструменты на основе ИИ помогают врачам выявлять онкологические заболевания на ранней стадии». Личный опыт, реальные случаи или широко известные примеры — всё это подходит. Именно конкретность отличает ответ на 4 балла от ответа на 5.

3. Кратко признайте контраргумент

Продемонстрируйте осведомлённость о противоположной точке зрения, не уделяя ей равного внимания. Одна фраза, например: «Хотя некоторые опасаются потери рабочих мест, данные свидетельствуют о том, что появятся новые отрасли», — демонстрирует критическое мышление и связывает ваш ответ с общей дискуссией. Это также отсылает к ответам студентов, на что проверяющие обращают особое внимание.

4. Естественно используйте тематическую лексику

Включайте знакомые вам технологические термины: «автоматизация», «цифровые инструменты», «экранное время», «алгоритм», «онлайн-платформа». Специализированный технический жаргон не нужен. Цель — продемонстрировать словарный запас, сохраняя ясность изложения. Используйте термины, которые можете объяснить, а не слова, заученные без понимания контекста.

Типичные ошибки в сочинении-дискуссии на тему технологий

Избегайте этих распространённых ошибок, которые снижают баллы в ответах на академическую дискуссию с технологической тематикой.

!

Пересказ мнений студентов вместо добавления новой точки зрения

Резюмирование слов Клэр и Маркуса впустую тратит объём вашего ответа и ничего не добавляет к дискуссии. Проверяющие хотят видеть вашу собственную позицию с оригинальной аргументацией. Кратко сошлитесь на студентов и переходите к своему уникальному вкладу.

!

Расплывчатые обобщения о «технологиях»

Фраза «Технологии изменили мир во многих отношениях» не даёт проверяющему ничего конкретного. Назовите конкретную технологию — приложение, платформу, инструмент или систему — и чётко объясните, как именно она подтверждает вашу точку зрения.

!

Слишком короткий ответ (менее 100 слов)

Ответы, не достигающие минимума в 100 слов, не могут получить высокий балл вне зависимости от качества содержания. Стремитесь к 120–180 словам. Если вы закончили раньше, добавьте ещё один подтверждающий аргумент или расширьте пример, а не отправляйте скудный ответ.

!

Игнорирование вопроса профессора

Некоторые сдающие пишут о технологиях в целом, не отвечая на конкретный заданный вопрос. Если профессор спрашивает о влиянии ИИ на общество, ваш ответ должен быть именно об этом — а не о технологиях в широком смысле.

Практикуйте темы дискуссий о технологиях с помощью ИИ

Получайте мгновенную обратную связь по качеству аргументации, грамматике и связности текста с помощью практики написания TOEFL на основе ИИ от LingoLeap — специально для академических дискуссионных заданий на технологическую тематику.

Начать практику TOEFL

Часто задаваемые вопросы

Как часто темы, связанные с технологиями, встречаются в задании TOEFL на академическую дискуссию?+
Технологии — одна из наиболее часто встречающихся тем в задании TOEFL 2026 «Write for an Academic Discussion». Согласно типичным моделям заданий TOEFL, вопросы об искусственном интеллекте, цифровых инструментах в образовании, автоматизации и социальных сетях появляются регулярно, поскольку эти темы порождают содержательную академическую дискуссию с чёткими противоположными точками зрения.
Какие типы вопросов о технологиях встречаются в Academic Discussion?+
Задания о технологиях, как правило, предлагают занять позицию по спорному вопросу — например, приносит ли ИИ пользу или вред обществу, помогают ли технологии в классе обучению или мешают ему, создаёт ли автоматизация рабочие места или уничтожает их. Каждое задание включает вопрос профессора и два ответа студентов, с которыми необходимо взаимодействовать.
Какой длины должен быть мой ответ в Academic Discussion?+
Задание требует не менее 100 слов, однако эффективные ответы обычно содержат 120–180 слов. При работе с темами о технологиях сосредоточьтесь на чётком изложении своей позиции, подкреплении её конкретным примером и кратком участии в обсуждении. Качество аргументации важнее количества слов.
Нужны ли технические знания для ответа на вопросы о технологиях?+
Нет. Проверяющие TOEFL оценивают качество аргументации, языковую точность и связность — а не ваши технические знания. Вы можете опираться на повседневный опыт использования приложений, социальных сетей или онлайн-инструментов. Хорошо выстроенный аргумент на простом и грамотном языке получит более высокую оценку, чем технически насыщенный, но плохо организованный ответ.
Нужно ли соглашаться или не соглашаться с ответами студентов в дискуссии?+
Вы можете соглашаться, не соглашаться или предлагать взвешенную позицию. Главное — чётко изложить собственную точку зрения, подкрепить её конкретным обоснованием или примером и принять участие в обсуждении, а не просто пересказывать слова студентов. Добавление новой перспективы — ключ к высокой оценке.
Можно ли практиковать темы TOEFL Academic Discussion о технологиях с помощью ИИ?+
Да. LingoLeap предлагает практику письма TOEFL на основе ИИ с реалистичными заданиями Academic Discussion на технологические темы, сессиями письма с таймером на 10 минут и мгновенной обратной связью по качеству аргументации, грамматике, словарному запасу и связности текста.

Похожие руководства