Some people think governments should spend money looking for life on other planets, while others think that there are many unsolved problems on earth. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Some people think governments should spend money looking for life on other planets, while others think that there are many unsolved problems on earth.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Opinions are divided on whether authorities should invest funds in discovering other planets to find a new home for humans or focus on solving the pressing issues on our own planet. This essay will discuss both of these perspectives, and then support the latter argument.
On the one hand, those who view that the government funding should be spent on the discovery of the universe may have a convincing argument. They may well argue that discovering habitable planets beyond our solar system is crucial for the survival of the human race. On top of that, our planet is facing major challenges such as climate change, overpopulation, and resource depletion, and finding a new place to live is the only solution. Furthermore, they claim that space exploration can bring many benefits to humanity, such as technological advancements, scientific discoveries, and potential economic growth.
However, I believe that the state should prioritize dealing with the problems on Earth before venturing into space. Firstly, while space exploration has the potential to bring about scientific and technological advancements, it is not without risks. The dangers of space travel, such as radiation exposure, equipment malfunctions, and the possibility of accidents, should not be overlooked. The resources required to mitigate these risks could be better spent on addressing problems on Earth such as climate change, pollution, and deforestation. Secondly, space exploration is an expensive effort that requires a significant investment of resources. The funds allocated to space exploration could be better used to handle more critical issues such as poverty, hunger, and disease. By investing in education, healthcare, and social welfare programs, we can improve the quality of life for people on Earth and ensure that they have access to necessities.
In conclusion, although both arguments have their own merits, I am of the stronger opinion that the state should pay more attention to what real humans suffer.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

1. "On the one hand" -> "One perspective suggests"
   Explanation: Replacing the colloquial expression "On the one hand" with "One perspective suggests" maintains formality and academic style.

2. "may well argue" -> "may contend"
   Explanation: Substituting "may well argue" with "may contend" introduces a more formal and precise term, aligning with academic language.

3. "finding a new place to live" -> "seeking an alternative habitat"
   Explanation: Replacing "finding a new place to live" with "seeking an alternative habitat" enhances the formality of the phrase and provides a more sophisticated expression.

4. "Furthermore, they claim that" -> "Moreover, proponents assert that"
   Explanation: The replacement of "Furthermore, they claim that" with "Moreover, proponents assert that" contributes to a more formal and structured presentation of ideas.

5. "state should prioritize" -> "government should prioritize"
   Explanation: Substituting "state" with "government" improves precision and formality, aligning with the context of discussing public policy and decision-making.

6. "venturing into space" -> "exploring outer space"
   Explanation: Replacing "venturing into space" with "exploring outer space" maintains the meaning while adopting a more formal and academic term.

7. "Firstly" -> "First and foremost"
   Explanation: Replacing "Firstly" with "First and foremost" provides a more formal transition, enhancing the structure of the argument.

8. "risks could be better spent" -> "resources could be more effectively allocated"
   Explanation: Substituting "risks could be better spent" with "resources could be more effectively allocated" improves precision and aligns with a more formal tone.

9. "handle more critical issues" -> "address more pressing concerns"
   Explanation: Replacing "handle more critical issues" with "address more pressing concerns" maintains clarity while using a more formal and precise expression.

10. "By investing in education, healthcare, and social welfare programs" -> "Through strategic investments in education, healthcare, and social welfare programs"
    Explanation: The suggested change enhances the formality and coherence of the sentence, providing a more academic tone.

11. "real humans suffer" -> "human populations face"
    Explanation: Substituting "real humans suffer" with "human populations face" introduces a more formal and academically appropriate expression without sacrificing clarity.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Task Response: 8

• Answer All Parts of the Question:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay adequately addresses both perspectives of the prompt. It discusses the viewpoint of investing in space exploration and presents a clear stance in favor of prioritizing issues on Earth.
  • How to improve: While the essay covers both views, providing more specific examples or counterarguments for the space exploration perspective could enhance the depth of the discussion.

• Present a Clear Position Throughout:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position by favoring the prioritization of solving Earth’s problems. The stance is consistent throughout the essay, with the introduction and conclusion supporting this viewpoint.
  • How to improve: To further strengthen the clarity, consider explicitly stating the stance in the introduction and reiterating it in the conclusion.

• Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents and supports ideas adequately. It provides reasons supporting the prioritization of Earth’s issues over space exploration and gives examples of potential risks associated with space travel.
  • How to improve: To enhance the essay, elaborate more on the potential benefits of space exploration, acknowledging its positive aspects while maintaining the argument for prioritizing Earth’s problems.

• Stay on Topic:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay remains focused on the given topic of whether governments should spend money on exploring other planets or solving Earth’s problems. There are no significant deviations from the central theme.
  • How to improve: Ensure that each point made directly relates to the topic, avoiding any tangential discussions that may distract from the main argument.

Overall Comments:
The essay effectively addresses the prompt, providing a well-structured and coherent argument. To improve further, consider adding more depth to the discussion by including specific examples and counterarguments for the space exploration perspective. Additionally, explicitly stating the position in the introduction and reiterating it in the conclusion can enhance the overall clarity of the essay. Overall, a strong response with room for slight refinement.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

• Organize Information Logically:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a generally logical organization of information. It begins with a clear introduction presenting both perspectives and concludes with a concise summary of the author’s opinion. Each paragraph discusses a specific aspect of the argument. However, there is room for improvement in the flow between ideas, particularly in transitions from one paragraph to the next. For instance, the transition from discussing the potential benefits of space exploration to the author’s opinion could be smoother.
  • How to improve: Enhance the logical flow by using transitional phrases that guide the reader through the essay’s progression. Consider providing a more seamless connection between the exploration of opposing views and the author’s stance.

• Use Paragraphs:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs effectively to separate distinct ideas. Each paragraph focuses on a specific aspect of the argument, making the essay easy to follow. However, there is a slight imbalance in paragraph lengths, with the paragraph discussing the author’s opinion being comparatively shorter.
  • How to improve: Ensure a more balanced distribution of content across paragraphs. Elaborate further on the author’s opinion, providing additional supporting points or examples to match the depth of the paragraphs discussing opposing views.

• Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay employs a variety of cohesive devices, including transition words (e.g., "on the one hand," "furthermore," "secondly") and pronouns to link ideas. However, there is a tendency to overuse certain phrases, such as "on the one hand." Additionally, more sophisticated cohesive devices, such as parallelism or advanced linking words, could be incorporated to enhance cohesion.
  • How to improve: Diversify the use of cohesive devices by incorporating a wider range of linking words and varying sentence structures. This will contribute to a more sophisticated and coherent presentation of ideas.

In summary, while the essay effectively organizes information and uses paragraphs to present ideas cohesively, there is room for improvement in enhancing the logical flow between paragraphs and diversifying the use of cohesive devices. These refinements will contribute to a more polished and cohesive essay, potentially elevating the coherence and cohesion score.

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 moderate range of vocabulary. There is a reasonable attempt to use diverse words, but it falls short of consistently incorporating an extensive lexicon. For instance, terms such as "convincing argument," "habitable planets," and "economic growth" showcase a fair vocabulary range. However, there is a tendency to rely on common phrases and lacks precision in vocabulary choice in some areas.
  • How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, consider introducing more specialized terms related to space exploration and environmental issues. Additionally, explore alternative expressions for commonly used phrases. For instance, instead of repeating "problems on Earth," experiment with phrases like "challenges on our home planet" to diversify your word choice.

• Use Vocabulary Precisely:

  • Detailed explanation: While the essay generally communicates ideas clearly, there are instances where vocabulary could be more precise. For example, the phrase "may well argue" is somewhat vague, and replacing it with "can convincingly argue" would enhance precision. Additionally, in the conclusion, the phrase "real humans suffer" lacks specificity and precision.
  • How to improve: Focus on using words that precisely convey your intended meaning. Instead of general terms like "may well argue," opt for stronger expressions like "can convincingly argue" or "can compellingly assert." In the conclusion, consider specifying the challenges faced by humans, such as "socio-economic struggles," to add clarity and precision.

• Use Correct Spelling:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally maintains correct spelling throughout. However, there are minor instances where accuracy can be improved. For instance, "convincing" is spelled correctly, but a more diverse vocabulary could be employed to replace repetitive terms like "space exploration."
  • How to improve: Continue to prioritize accurate spelling, and consider utilizing a thesaurus to identify alternative words to prevent repetition. Proofread carefully to catch any potential spelling errors and ensure a polished final product. Additionally, expand your vocabulary by exploring synonyms for commonly used terms, contributing to a richer and more varied expression of ideas.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7

• Use a Wide Range of Structures:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a moderately wide range of sentence structures. It effectively employs complex sentences, compound sentences, and some varied phrase structures. There is noticeable use of transitional phrases to connect ideas, contributing to coherence. However, the essay could benefit from greater diversity in sentence structures to enhance the overall fluency and engagement of the reader.
  • How to improve: To improve, consider incorporating more intricate sentence structures, such as conditional sentences, inversion, or parallelism, where appropriate. Vary the length of sentences for a more dynamic flow. This can elevate the complexity of your writing, showcasing a broader range of grammatical structures.

• Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

  • Detailed explanation: Overall, the essay demonstrates a commendable level of grammatical accuracy. There are, however, instances of minor grammatical errors, such as subject-verb agreement issues (e.g., "what real humans suffer"), and some awkward phrasing. Punctuation is generally accurate, but there are a few areas where clarity could be improved with more precise punctuation usage.
  • How to improve: To enhance grammatical accuracy, pay careful attention to subject-verb agreement, especially in complex sentence structures. Review sentence constructions to ensure clarity and eliminate awkward phrasing. Regarding punctuation, be mindful of the effective use of commas, semicolons, and colons to enhance sentence structure and coherence. Proofread your work thoroughly to catch and correct these minor errors.

In summary, the essay demonstrates a strong command of grammatical range and accuracy, earning a Band Score of 7. To improve further, focus on expanding the variety of sentence structures and addressing minor grammatical errors, ensuring precise punctuation usage throughout the essay.

Bài sửa mẫu

Opinions diverge on whether governments should invest funds in exploring other planets to secure a new home for humans or concentrate on resolving pressing issues on our own planet. This essay will examine both perspectives and then advocate for the latter argument.

On one side, those supporting government funding for the exploration of the universe may have a compelling argument. They may contend that discovering habitable planets beyond our solar system is crucial for the survival of the human race. Moreover, proponents assert that space exploration can yield various benefits for humanity, including technological advancements, scientific discoveries, and potential economic growth. Additionally, our planet is currently grappling with major challenges such as climate change, overpopulation, and resource depletion, and seeking an alternative habitat is seen as a plausible solution.

However, I am of the opinion that the government should prioritize addressing the problems on Earth before delving into space. Firstly, while space exploration holds the potential for scientific and technological advancements, it is not without risks. The hazards of space travel, such as radiation exposure, equipment malfunctions, and the possibility of accidents, should not be overlooked. Resources earmarked for mitigating these risks could be more effectively allocated to tackling issues on Earth, such as climate change, pollution, and deforestation. Secondly, space exploration demands a significant investment of resources, and the funds allocated could be more judiciously used to address more pressing concerns like poverty, hunger, and disease.

In conclusion, although both perspectives have merits, I firmly believe that the government should focus more on addressing the tangible issues that human populations face. Through strategic investments in education, healthcare, and social welfare programs, we can enhance the quality of life for people on Earth and ensure access to necessities.