It is indisputable that government spending is of a paramount importance, and the question of the government should spend money on earth or other planets is a hotly debated topic issue.

It is indisputable that studying extraterrestrial life is of a paramount importance and the question of whether the billions of dollars used to finance this endeavor is justified or not is a hotly debated topic. Some people believe that finding life outer space is a worthwhile investment, while others think that it is better to take financial concentration on solving available problems on Earth.
First of all, when it comes to finding clues of life beyond earth, a plethora of advocates assert that the appearance of similar environment with earth is feasible to study and this represents the most optimal and efficacious approach for the exhaustible mineral on earth for several reasons. Firstly, they contend that the population growth has raised concerns about the scarity of essential mineral. Obviously, resources supply on earth are not eternal and finding resouces from others resource is necessary to sustain the life of human on earth. On top of that, the environment of our plant is at risk and there are no guarantee that scientists found the effective solutions so finding the life of other plants is not only provides place for living, but also scientists can study the structures of environment in those plant for amending problems on earth.
However, varied viewpoints exist regarding the researching space life is too costly, especially considering how the funding for experimentation in outer space could be used for more practical issues closer to home and moreover the qualification of human science is not enough modern for practicing specific studies in space. Factoring in how few, if any at all, of the fruits of these studies are actually being enjoyed by ordinary citizens, spending huge amount of money to tax on obtaining and studying life beyond earth do seem obscene and unjustified. In term of that sense, the fact that resources though are considered to be exhausted, people can ultilize for thousands of years from now so this is far from making people fall into scare cases.
In conclusion, it is not wrong to be averse to the idea of spending billions of dollars on researching minerals in space, but I am convinced that this is an investment that will pay major dividends. As the earth’s resources become depleted and adoption of renewables has not yet proved viable at a global scale, identifying new stores of minerals on other planets and studying them do not seem like folly at all.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"It is indisputable that" -> "It is widely acknowledged that"
Explanation: "It is widely acknowledged that" is a more precise and academically appropriate phrase, as it avoids the absolute certainty implied by "indisputable," which can be seen as overly strong in formal academic writing.
"finding life outer space" -> "the search for extraterrestrial life"
Explanation: "The search for extraterrestrial life" is a more precise and formal term, avoiding the colloquial "outer space."
"take financial concentration on" -> "allocate financial resources to"
Explanation: "Allocate financial resources to" is a more formal and accurate expression, replacing the awkward and incorrect "take financial concentration on."
"appearance of similar environment with earth" -> "identification of analogous environments on Earth"
Explanation: "Identification of analogous environments on Earth" is more precise and formal, replacing the vague and incorrect "appearance of similar environment with earth."
"the exhaustible mineral on earth" -> "the finite mineral resources on Earth"
Explanation: "Finite mineral resources on Earth" is a more accurate and formal way to describe the limited availability of minerals.
"scarity of essential mineral" -> "scarcity of essential minerals"
Explanation: Corrects the grammatical error and pluralizes "mineral" to match the context.
"finding resouces from others resource" -> "obtaining resources from other sources"
Explanation: "Obtaining resources from other sources" corrects the grammatical error and uses more formal language.
"the environment of our plant" -> "the environments of other planets"
Explanation: Corrects the grammatical error and clarifies the intended meaning by specifying "planets."
"finding the life of other plants" -> "finding life on other planets"
Explanation: "Finding life on other planets" is grammatically correct and more precise.
"the qualification of human science is not enough modern" -> "the qualifications of human scientists are not sufficiently modern"
Explanation: "The qualifications of human scientists are not sufficiently modern" corrects the grammatical structure and uses more formal language.
"spending huge amount of money to tax on obtaining" -> "spending a significant amount of money on obtaining"
Explanation: "Spending a significant amount of money on obtaining" corrects the awkward and incorrect phrase "to tax on."
"In term of that sense" -> "In this sense"
Explanation: Corrects the grammatical error and simplifies the phrase for clarity.
"utililize for thousands of years from now" -> "utilize for thousands of years to come"
Explanation: "Utilize for thousands of years to come" is grammatically correct and more formal.
"not wrong to be averse to the idea" -> "not unreasonable to be opposed to the idea"
Explanation: "Not unreasonable to be opposed to the idea" uses more precise and formal language.
"spending billions of dollars on researching minerals in space" -> "investing billions of dollars in researching minerals in space"
Explanation: "Investing billions of dollars in researching minerals in space" is a more formal and precise way to express the action of spending money on research.

These changes enhance the academic tone and precision of the essay, aligning it more closely with formal writing standards.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Task Response: 7

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay addresses the prompt by discussing both sides of the debate regarding government spending on extraterrestrial research versus addressing problems on Earth. The introduction clearly states the topic and the two opposing views. However, the essay could benefit from a more explicit mention of the specific aspects of government spending being debated, such as the allocation of resources and the potential benefits of space exploration. The conclusion reiterates the author’s position but does not fully summarize the arguments made for both sides.
- How to improve: To improve, the essay should ensure that each part of the prompt is explicitly addressed. This could include clearly defining what "spending money on Earth or other planets" entails and providing a more balanced exploration of the implications of both choices. Adding a brief summary of the key points made for each side in the conclusion would also enhance clarity.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear position that favors investment in extraterrestrial research, especially in the conclusion. However, the argument could be more consistently articulated throughout the essay. For instance, while the author presents valid points regarding the necessity of exploring other planets, the transition between ideas can be somewhat unclear, leading to moments where the position appears less defined.
- How to improve: To maintain a clear and consistent position, the author should use topic sentences that clearly state the main idea of each paragraph and how it relates to the overall argument. Additionally, reinforcing the main thesis in each body paragraph would help to keep the focus on the author’s stance throughout the essay.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas, such as the potential for finding new resources and the risks to Earth’s environment. However, some points are not fully developed or supported with concrete examples. For instance, the claim that studying other planets could provide solutions to Earth’s environmental issues is intriguing but lacks specific examples or evidence to substantiate it.
- How to improve: To enhance the development of ideas, the author should aim to provide specific examples or data to support claims. This could involve referencing successful space missions or studies that have yielded practical benefits for Earth. Additionally, elaborating on the implications of each point would strengthen the overall argument.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, discussing government spending and the debate over space exploration versus Earth issues. However, there are moments where the focus shifts, such as when discussing the qualifications of human science and the potential for resource exhaustion. These points, while related, could distract from the main argument.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the author should ensure that all points made directly relate to the central question of government spending priorities. It may be beneficial to outline key points before writing to ensure that each paragraph contributes to the overall argument without veering off-topic.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents a clear position, it could benefit from more explicit connections to the prompt, better development of ideas with supporting evidence, and a stronger focus throughout.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a reasonably clear organizational structure. It begins with an introduction that sets up the debate on government spending on Earth versus other planets. Each paragraph addresses a distinct viewpoint: the benefits of exploring extraterrestrial life and the opposing view regarding the cost and practicality of such endeavors. The conclusion neatly summarizes the author’s stance.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, ensure that each paragraph maintains a clear focus on one main idea. Use topic sentences to introduce each paragraph’s main point more explicitly. This clarity will help readers follow the argument more easily.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay is divided into paragraphs, but some are overly long, which can make the structure less effective. For example, the second paragraph covers multiple ideas about the reasons for exploring extraterrestrial life, which could be better segmented for clarity.
- How to improve: Aim for more concise paragraphs that each focus on a single aspect of the argument. Break longer paragraphs into smaller ones where appropriate. This will improve readability and help maintain a coherent flow of ideas.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs cohesive devices such as linking words ("firstly", "on top of that", "however", "in conclusion") and pronouns ("they", "these", "this") to connect ideas within and between paragraphs. However, there is limited variety and some devices are overused.
- How to improve: Expand the range of cohesive devices used. Consider incorporating a wider variety of transition words and phrases (e.g., moreover, consequently, nonetheless) to enhance coherence. Ensure that each cohesive device is used appropriately to strengthen the logical connection between ideas.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid grasp of coherence and cohesion, improvements in paragraph structure and the variety of cohesive devices used could elevate the clarity and effectiveness of the argument. Focus on enhancing these aspects to achieve a higher band score in future assessments.

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, with terms such as "extraterrestrial," "plethora," "exhaustible," and "investment." However, there are instances where the vocabulary used is somewhat repetitive or lacks variation. For example, the phrase "life beyond earth" is used multiple times, which could be replaced with synonyms or paraphrased to enhance lexical variety.
- How to improve: To improve, the writer should aim to incorporate a broader array of synonyms and phrases. For instance, instead of repeating "life beyond earth," alternatives like "life in outer space" or "extraterrestrial life" could be utilized. Additionally, exploring more advanced vocabulary related to the topic, such as "interstellar" or "cosmic exploration," could enhance the essay’s lexical range.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: There are several instances of imprecise vocabulary usage that detract from the clarity of the argument. For example, the phrase "the appearance of similar environment with earth" is awkward and unclear; it would be more precise to say "the existence of environments similar to Earth." Additionally, "the qualification of human science is not enough modern" is confusing and could be better expressed as "the current state of human scientific knowledge is insufficiently advanced."
- How to improve: To enhance precision, the writer should focus on using vocabulary that accurately conveys their intended meaning. This can be achieved by revising sentences for clarity and ensuring that terms are used in their correct context. Engaging with academic texts on the topic may also help in identifying more precise terminology.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors that impact the overall quality. Words such as "scarity" (should be "scarcity"), "resouces" (should be "resources"), "plant" (should be "planet"), and "ultilize" (should be "utilize") are misspelled. These errors suggest a lack of attention to detail and can detract from the reader’s understanding.
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, the writer should implement a proofreading strategy. This could include reading the essay aloud to catch errors, using spell-check tools, or even writing drafts and revising them after a break to gain a fresh perspective. Additionally, practicing spelling through vocabulary exercises or flashcards can help reinforce correct spelling of commonly used words.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents a coherent argument, improvements in vocabulary range, precision, and spelling are necessary to achieve a higher band score in Lexical Resource.

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 demonstrates some variety in sentence structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. For instance, the sentence "Some people believe that finding life outer space is a worthwhile investment, while others think that it is better to take financial concentration on solving available problems on Earth" effectively contrasts two viewpoints. However, the essay often relies on simpler structures, which limits the overall complexity and sophistication of the writing. Additionally, there are instances of awkward phrasing, such as "the appearance of similar environment with earth," which detracts from the clarity and effectiveness of the argument.
- How to improve: To enhance the range of structures, the writer should practice incorporating more complex sentences with subordinate clauses and varied conjunctions. For example, instead of saying "the environment of our plant is at risk," the writer could say, "Given that the environment of our planet is at risk, it is crucial to explore alternative habitats." Furthermore, using transitional phrases can help improve the flow of ideas and connect sentences more effectively.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues that hinder clarity. For example, the phrase "the scarity of essential mineral" should be corrected to "the scarcity of essential minerals," as "scarcity" is misspelled and "minerals" should be plural. Additionally, the sentence "finding the life of other plants is not only provides place for living" is grammatically incorrect; it should be revised to "finding life on other planets not only provides a place for living." There are also punctuation errors, such as missing commas in compound sentences, which can confuse readers.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on proofreading for common errors, such as subject-verb agreement and pluralization. It may also be beneficial to review punctuation rules, particularly regarding the use of commas in complex sentences. Engaging in grammar exercises and seeking feedback from peers or instructors can help identify recurring mistakes and facilitate improvement.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a reasonable attempt at addressing the prompt with some variety in structure, it suffers from grammatical inaccuracies and awkward phrasing. By focusing on diversifying sentence structures and enhancing grammatical accuracy, the writer can work towards achieving a higher band score.

Bài sửa mẫu

It is indisputable that studying extraterrestrial life is of paramount importance, and the question of whether the billions of dollars used to finance this endeavor is justified or not is a hotly debated topic. Some people believe that finding life in outer space is a worthwhile investment, while others think that it is better to concentrate financial resources on solving existing problems on Earth.

First of all, when it comes to finding clues of life beyond Earth, a plethora of advocates assert that the identification of analogous environments on Earth is feasible to study, and this represents the most optimal and efficacious approach for the finite mineral resources on Earth for several reasons. Firstly, they contend that population growth has raised concerns about the scarcity of essential minerals. Obviously, resource supply on Earth is not eternal, and obtaining resources from other sources is necessary to sustain human life on Earth. On top of that, the environment of our planet is at risk, and there are no guarantees that scientists will find effective solutions. Therefore, finding life on other planets not only provides a place for living, but also allows scientists to study the structures of environments on those planets for amending problems on Earth.

However, varied viewpoints exist regarding whether researching space life is too costly, especially considering how the funding for experimentation in outer space could be used for more practical issues closer to home. Moreover, the qualifications of human scientists are not sufficiently modern for practicing specific studies in space. Factoring in how few, if any at all, of the fruits of these studies are actually being enjoyed by ordinary citizens, spending a huge amount of tax money on obtaining and studying life beyond Earth does seem obscene and unjustified. In this sense, the fact that resources are considered to be exhausted does not mean that people cannot utilize them for thousands of years to come, so this is far from making people fall into a state of panic.

In conclusion, it is not unreasonable to be opposed to the idea of spending billions of dollars on researching minerals in space, but I am convinced that this is an investment that will pay major dividends. As the Earth’s resources become depleted and the adoption of renewables has not yet proved viable at a global scale, identifying new stores of minerals on other planets and studying them does not seem like folly at all.