Scientific research should be carried out and controlled by the governments rather than private companies. Do you agree or disagree?

The worldwide economy is rapidly on the rise, which is motivating enterprises to assert their dominance in the competitive edge. Some people argue that scientific research should be conducted by governments, not by private corporations. From my perspective, I agree with this statement that the states should take on responsibility for research studies in science.
In the light of perceived profits, for-profit companies are in favor of the highly profitable, but unethical business of publishing scientific research. The more enterprises introduce new products to markets, the more they can generate significant revenue. Therefore, they are likely to conduct inadequate trials, resulting in scientific studies subjecting to inaccuracies and having detrimental effects such as life-threatening defects, and genetic malformation as well. A series of scientific research exposed serious problems of products after they were introduced to consumers. For instance, Merk medical corporation developed a painkiller medicine that increased the risks of heart attacks in patients. Another example is related to genetically modified crops, which represent extra-efficient and fast-growing production. However, along with positive effects, adverse sides are evident in allergic reactions or antibiotic resistance.
Many areas of research are funded by Government grants for non-profit purposes, thus, it is crucial for authorities to engage in the highest standards of scientific investigation. When it comes to challenging projects, a meticulous and strategic approach is imperative for success. And, governments always prioritize community welfare above all else and aim to ensure high quality of products. Plus, scientific studies gain revenue for governments, universities, and research institutes to carry on further investigations.
In conclusion, I strongly agree that governments should undertake their responsibilities in scientific research.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"rapidly on the rise" -> "steadily growing"
Explanation: Replacing "rapidly on the rise" with "steadily growing" maintains a formal tone and avoids the informal use of "rapidly."
"assert their dominance in the competitive edge" -> "establish dominance in the competitive market"
Explanation: The phrase "assert their dominance in the competitive edge" is awkward and unclear. "Establish dominance in the competitive market" is more precise and formal.
"Some people argue that" -> "There is an argument that"
Explanation: The phrase "Some people argue that" can be made more formal and less personal by using "There is an argument that."
"From my perspective" -> "In my view"
Explanation: "From my perspective" is too casual for academic writing. "In my view" is a more formal alternative.
"in favor of the highly profitable, but unethical business" -> "in favor of highly profitable yet unethical practices"
Explanation: The suggested change streamlines the sentence and avoids redundancy by removing "business of."
"introduce new products to markets" -> "introduce new products to the market"
Explanation: "Market" should be singular in this context to refer to the general marketplace.
"inaccuracies and having detrimental effects" -> "inaccuracies and resulting in detrimental effects"
Explanation: This change clarifies the sentence structure and makes it more academically precise.
"A series of scientific research" -> "Several scientific studies"
Explanation: The phrase "A series of scientific research" is unclear. "Several scientific studies" is a more concise and clear alternative.
"Merck medical corporation" -> "Merck pharmaceutical company"
Explanation: Using "pharmaceutical company" instead of "medical corporation" is a more precise and formal term.
"related to genetically modified crops" -> "pertaining to genetically modified crops"
Explanation: "Pertaining to" is a more formal alternative to "related to."
"extra-efficient" -> "highly efficient"
Explanation: "Highly efficient" is a more appropriate and academically suitable term.
"funded by Government grants" -> "funded by government grants"
Explanation: "Government" should be lowercase in this context.
"for non-profit purposes" -> "for nonprofit purposes"
Explanation: The hyphenated form "nonprofit" is more commonly used in academic writing.
"a meticulous and strategic approach is imperative for success" -> "a meticulous and strategic approach is essential for achieving success"
Explanation: The word "essential" adds emphasis and formality to the statement.
"governments always prioritize community welfare above all else" -> "governments consistently prioritize the welfare of their communities above all other considerations"
Explanation: This change enhances clarity and precision while maintaining formal language.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Task Response: 8

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay addresses all parts of the question effectively. It acknowledges the prompt’s central argument – whether scientific research should be controlled by governments or private companies – and provides a clear stance in favor of government control. The essay also offers reasons to support this position.
- How to improve: There is no improvement needed in this aspect. The essay comprehensively addresses the question.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear and consistent position in favor of government control throughout the entire response. The writer consistently argues that governments should be responsible for scientific research and provides reasons to support this stance.
- How to improve: There is no improvement needed in this aspect. The essay maintains a clear and unwavering position.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively presents, extends, and supports its ideas. It discusses the potential drawbacks of private companies conducting scientific research, such as profit-driven motives leading to inadequate trials and negative consequences. Specific examples, like the case of Merk medical corporation and genetically modified crops, are provided to illustrate these points.
- How to improve: There is no improvement needed in this aspect. The essay successfully presents, extends, and supports its ideas with relevant examples.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay remains focused on the topic throughout and does not deviate from the central argument. It consistently discusses the role of governments in scientific research and the potential issues with private companies.
- How to improve: There is no improvement needed in this aspect. The essay maintains a strong focus on the topic.

Overall, this essay demonstrates a strong response to the given prompt. It effectively addresses all checklist items, maintains a clear and consistent position, presents ideas with relevant examples, and stays on topic throughout. To further improve, the writer could enhance the essay by providing counterarguments and addressing them to strengthen the overall argument. However, as it stands, this essay is well-written and deserving of a Band Score of 8 for Task Response.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a moderate level of logical organization. It begins with a clear thesis statement in the introduction, where the author states their agreement with the idea that governments should conduct scientific research. The body paragraphs present arguments in favor of this position, discussing the drawbacks of private companies conducting research and the benefits of government involvement. Finally, the conclusion restates the author’s agreement. However, the logical flow could be improved by providing smoother transitions between paragraphs.
- How to improve: To enhance the logical flow and structure of the essay, the author should consider using transition words or phrases to connect ideas between paragraphs. For example, using phrases like "Furthermore," or "On the other hand," can help guide the reader through the essay more smoothly.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs paragraphs effectively, with clear separation of ideas. Each paragraph focuses on a specific aspect of the argument, such as the problems with private companies conducting research or the benefits of government involvement. This division of ideas into paragraphs enhances the overall readability and structure of the essay.
- How to improve: There are no specific improvements needed in this aspect of the essay. The use of paragraphs is well-executed.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses some cohesive devices, such as pronouns (e.g., "they," "it") and conjunctions (e.g., "and," "but"), to connect ideas within sentences and between paragraphs. However, there is room for improvement in diversifying and utilizing a wider range of cohesive devices. The essay could benefit from the use of transitional words and phrases (e.g., "however," "in addition," "for instance") to create stronger connections between sentences and paragraphs.
- How to improve: To improve the use of cohesive devices, the author should incorporate a wider variety of transitional words and phrases to establish smoother transitions and strengthen the overall coherence of the essay. This will help the reader follow the argument more effectively.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates reasonable coherence and cohesion, there is room for improvement in enhancing the logical flow through the use of more diverse and strategically placed cohesive devices. Additionally, incorporating smoother transitions between paragraphs can further enhance the overall structure of the essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a reasonable range of vocabulary, including words like "perceived," "inaccuracies," "malformation," "meticulous," and "imperative." However, there is room for improvement in using a more diverse and nuanced vocabulary.
- How to improve: To enhance the vocabulary range, the writer could introduce more specialized terminology related to scientific research and its governance. For example, terms like "peer-reviewed studies," "ethical guidelines," or "research ethics committees" would add depth to the essay and showcase a broader vocabulary.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary with precision. For instance, the words "inaccuracies" and "malformation" are employed appropriately. However, in some instances, the usage could be more precise. For example, the phrase "highly profitable, but unethical business of publishing scientific research" could benefit from a more specific term like "exploitative practices" to convey the unethical aspect more precisely.
- How to improve: Pay close attention to the context in which words are used and seek more precise synonyms or terms that capture the intended meaning more accurately. Consulting a thesaurus or specialized dictionaries can be helpful in finding precise vocabulary.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains some spelling errors, such as "Merk" instead of "Merck" and "perceived" instead of "perceived." These errors, while not frequent, do affect the overall impression of language accuracy.
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, proofreading carefully is essential. Additionally, using spell-check tools and investing time in reviewing the essay for spelling errors before submission can help eliminate such mistakes.

Overall, the essay demonstrates reasonably good lexical resource, but there is room for improvement in vocabulary range, precision, and spelling accuracy. Expanding the vocabulary with more specialized terms related to scientific research and addressing occasional spelling errors will contribute to a stronger performance in the Lexical Resource criterion.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 6

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay utilizes a mix of sentence structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. There is some variety in sentence length, but many sentences are relatively short and lack complexity. The essay could benefit from more complex sentence structures, such as the use of subordinate clauses, to enhance fluency and sophistication.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, consider incorporating complex sentences with subordinate clauses. For example, instead of using primarily short sentences like "The worldwide economy is rapidly on the rise," you can use more complex structures like "With the global economy experiencing rapid growth." This will make your essay more engaging and better showcase your language skills.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: Overall, the essay demonstrates a good level of grammatical accuracy. However, there are a few instances where subject-verb agreement is not consistent, and minor grammatical errors are present. For example, in the sentence "The more enterprises introduce new products to markets, the more they can generate significant revenue," the subject "enterprises" should agree with the verb "generate," resulting in "generate" instead of "generates." Additionally, there are occasional punctuation issues, like missing commas before introductory phrases.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, pay careful attention to subject-verb agreement, verb tense consistency, and punctuation rules. Proofread your essay for errors and consider seeking assistance from grammar-checking tools or native speakers to identify and correct these issues.

Overall, your essay demonstrates a good command of grammar and a reasonable range of sentence structures. To achieve a higher score in Grammatical Range and Accuracy, work on diversifying sentence structures further and addressing minor grammatical errors and punctuation issues. Your content and arguments are clear and well-organized, which contributes to the overall effectiveness of your essay.

Bài sửa mẫu

The global economy is steadily growing, leading businesses to strive for dominance in the competitive market. There is an argument that scientific research should be conducted by governments rather than private companies. In my view, I agree with this statement that the states should take on the responsibility for research studies in science.

In the pursuit of perceived profits, for-profit companies tend to favor highly profitable yet unethical practices when it comes to publishing scientific research. As they introduce new products to the market, their primary focus tends to be generating significant revenue. Consequently, they may conduct inadequate trials, resulting in inaccuracies and detrimental effects such as life-threatening defects and genetic malformations. Several scientific studies have uncovered serious problems with products after their introduction to consumers. For example, the Merck pharmaceutical company developed a painkiller medicine that increased the risk of heart attacks in patients. Another example pertains to genetically modified crops, which are highly efficient and fast-growing in production. However, along with their positive effects, adverse consequences are evident, including allergic reactions and antibiotic resistance.

Many areas of research receive funding from government grants for nonprofit purposes. Therefore, it is crucial for authorities to engage in the highest standards of scientific investigation. When dealing with challenging projects, a meticulous and strategic approach is essential for achieving success. Moreover, governments consistently prioritize the welfare of their communities above all other considerations and aim to ensure the high quality of products. Additionally, scientific studies generate revenue for governments, universities, and research institutes, which can be reinvested in further investigations.

In conclusion, I strongly agree that governments should undertake their responsibilities in scientific research.