Some cities have vehicle-free days when private cars, trucks and motorcycles are banned from the city center. People are encouraged to use public transportation such as buses, taxis and metro on vehicle-free days. To what extent do you think the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

Some people claim that having vehicle- free days would be inconvenienced. People usually use cars or motorbikes because they are convenient and help people get to the location that they want. In contrast, public transport like buses or metro would not get them to the exact location but only go to the nearest station to their location which could be uncomfortable for some people. However, one of the disadvantage of using personal cars or motorbike is is that they could release too much carbon dioxide which is the main cause to air pollution. Furthermore, too much vehicles on the city center would cause traffic jam and that could be annoyed for some people when they are in a hurry.

On the other hand, encouraging people to use public transport on these day would have some benefits. Public transport may produce less carbon footprint than private cars or trucks as well as reduce the amount of vehicle on the street when metro or buses can carry hundreds of people as the same time. For example, in some European cities like Amsterdam or Copenhagen, the local authorities have imposed policies that banned cars, motorbikes and trucks going to the city centre on some special days which bringa positive result when the air pollution in these cities has decreased as well as less traffic congestion. Although other people would say that public transport still can not be as convenient as personal cars or motorbikes, I believe that if the government can develop the public transport systems and create more stations, the problem could be solved. Moreover, taxis are described as a type of public transportation and they can help customer to go to the exact location so the problem of inconvenience in public transportation would be minimised.

In conclusion, persuading people to use public transport on vehicle- free days could helps to reduce air pollution and traffic congestion in city. Also when the public transport systems are developed, they would be as convenience as personal cars, trucks or motorbikes. So I would say this idea is useful and should be encouraged in many cities.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"Some cities have vehicle-free days" -> "Certain cities implement vehicle-free days"
Explanation: "Implement" is a more precise and formal term than "have," which better captures the active decision-making involved in establishing such policies.
"private cars, trucks and motorcycles are banned" -> "private vehicles, including cars, trucks, and motorcycles, are prohibited"
Explanation: "Prohibited" is a more formal synonym for "banned," and specifying "including" clarifies that the list is not exhaustive, enhancing the formality and precision of the statement.
"People are encouraged to use" -> "Citizens are urged to utilize"
Explanation: "Urged" conveys a stronger, more formal encouragement than "encouraged," and "utilize" is more formal than "use" in an academic context.
"inconvenienced" -> "inconvenienced"
Explanation: The verb "inconvenienced" should be corrected to "inconvenience" to maintain grammatical accuracy.
"People usually use cars or motorbikes because they are convenient" -> "Individuals typically opt for cars or motorbikes due to their convenience"
Explanation: "Opt for" is more precise than "use," and "due to their convenience" is a more formal way of expressing the reason.
"would not get them to the exact location" -> "do not directly transport them to the exact location"
Explanation: "Do not directly transport" is more precise and formal than "would not get," which is vague and informal.
"could be annoyed" -> "may be inconvenient"
Explanation: "May be inconvenient" is a more formal and accurate description of the potential impact on individuals.
"would have some benefits" -> "would yield certain benefits"
Explanation: "Yield" is a more formal synonym for "have," and "certain" is more precise than "some."
"as well as reduce the amount of vehicle on the street" -> "as well as reduce the number of vehicles on the streets"
Explanation: "Number of vehicles" is grammatically correct, and "streets" should be plural to match the plural subject "vehicles."
"metro or buses can carry hundreds of people as the same time" -> "metro or buses can transport hundreds of people at the same time"
Explanation: "Transport" is more specific and formal than "carry," and "at the same time" is the correct phrase.
"banned cars, motorbikes and trucks going to the city centre" -> "prohibited vehicles, including cars, motorbikes, and trucks, from entering the city center"
Explanation: "Prohibited" is more formal than "banned," and specifying "from entering" clarifies the action.
"bringsa positive result" -> "yielded positive results"
Explanation: "Yielded" is the correct past tense of "yield," and "results" should be plural to match the plural subject "cities."
"less traffic congestion" -> "reduced traffic congestion"
Explanation: "Reduced" is a more precise and formal term than "less," which is vague in this context.
"could helps to reduce" -> "could help to reduce"
Explanation: "Help" should be singular to agree with the singular subject "could."
"as convenience as" -> "as convenient as"
Explanation: "As convenient as" is the correct idiomatic expression, and "as" should be used before the comparative form "convenient."

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

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Task Response: 6

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to address both the advantages and disadvantages of vehicle-free days. It discusses convenience issues with public transport versus private vehicles and touches on environmental benefits and traffic congestion reduction.
- How to improve: To improve, the essay should provide a more balanced and nuanced exploration of both sides of the argument. Specific examples and deeper analysis could strengthen the discussion.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally maintains a clear stance in favor of vehicle-free days, suggesting they are beneficial for reducing pollution and congestion, with potential improvements in public transport to mitigate inconveniences.
- How to improve: To enhance clarity, ensure that the stance is consistently maintained throughout each paragraph. Avoid equivocation and strengthen the thesis statement for clearer reader guidance.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas but lacks depth in supporting them. For instance, while it mentions pollution reduction and traffic congestion, there are limited examples or data to substantiate these claims.
- How to improve: Develop each idea further with specific examples, statistics, or studies to bolster the argument. This would provide a more convincing and thorough exploration of the topic.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay mostly stays on topic by discussing the advantages and disadvantages of vehicle-free days. However, there are moments where the discussion on public transport’s inconvenience could be more directly linked to the central theme.
- How to improve: Ensure that every point connects back to the central theme of vehicle-free days. This can be achieved by consistently referring back to how these days impact pollution, congestion, and public convenience.

In summary, while the essay effectively addresses the topic of vehicle-free days and presents a clear position in favor of them, there is room for improvement in depth of analysis, consistency of stance, and the use of supporting evidence. By providing more balanced arguments with specific examples and ensuring a focused discussion throughout, the essay could achieve a higher band score in 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 reasonable attempt at organizing information. It begins with an introduction that paraphrases the essay prompt and provides a clear thesis statement. Each paragraph generally presents a distinct viewpoint or argument, with some attempt at transitioning between ideas. For instance, the first paragraph discusses the inconvenience of vehicle-free days, while the subsequent paragraphs delve into the advantages of reducing air pollution and traffic congestion.
- How to improve: To improve logical organization, focus on developing a clearer structure with more explicit transitions between paragraphs. Ensure that each paragraph relates directly to the essay prompt and thesis statement. For instance, after discussing disadvantages, the essay could seamlessly transition to advantages, and finally, a balanced conclusion.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay utilizes paragraphs to separate different ideas, although the structure within each paragraph is sometimes unclear. For instance, the first body paragraph begins discussing inconvenience but shifts abruptly to environmental impact without a smooth transition. Additionally, some paragraphs lack topic sentences, making it challenging to discern the main point of each paragraph.
- How to improve: Implement topic sentences at the beginning of each paragraph to clearly introduce the main idea. Ensure that each paragraph focuses on one cohesive point related to the thesis statement. For example, start the body paragraphs with statements that directly address the advantages or disadvantages of vehicle-free days, followed by supporting details and examples.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to use cohesive devices such as conjunctions ("however", "on the other hand"), and examples ("for example", "like"), but these are inconsistently applied. Some transitions between ideas are abrupt or missing, making it challenging for the reader to follow the logical flow of arguments.
- How to improve: Increase the use of cohesive devices throughout the essay to improve coherence. Use linking words more consistently to connect ideas within and between paragraphs. For instance, replace simple transitions like "but" with more nuanced transitions such as "despite this", "nevertheless", or "conversely" to enhance coherence and clarity.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a basic understanding of coherence and cohesion, there are areas for improvement in structuring arguments more logically, refining paragraph organization with clear topic sentences, and employing a wider variety of cohesive devices. These enhancements will not only strengthen the overall coherence of the essay but also improve its clarity and effectiveness in conveying ideas to the reader.

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 are instances where vocabulary is adequate but lacks depth or sophistication. For example, terms like "inconvenienced," "carbon dioxide," "traffic jam," and "reduce air pollution" are used appropriately but are somewhat basic and lack variety. The essay could benefit from more nuanced and precise vocabulary to enhance clarity and sophistication.
- How to improve: To improve the range of vocabulary, consider incorporating more advanced synonyms and specific terminology. For instance, instead of "inconvenienced," use "disrupted" or "inhibited"; replace "reduce air pollution" with "mitigate environmental impact." Utilize domain-specific vocabulary where appropriate, such as "urban congestion" or "emissions regulation."
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: While the essay generally uses vocabulary accurately, there are instances of imprecise usage. For example, "would be inconvenienced" could be more precisely stated as "might find inconvenient." Also, "persuading people" might be more precisely replaced with "encouraging or incentivizing individuals." These minor adjustments would enhance precision and clarity.
- How to improve: Aim for greater precision by carefully selecting words that convey the exact meaning intended. Consider the nuances of each word choice to ensure they fit contextually and grammatically. Review each sentence to identify opportunities for more accurate vocabulary use, enhancing the overall impact of your arguments.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: Spelling accuracy is generally adequate throughout the essay. However, there are a few minor errors, such as "bringa" (should be "bring") and "convenience" (should be "convenient"). These errors do not significantly detract from comprehension but indicate a need for closer attention to detail.
- How to improve: Improve spelling accuracy by proofreading carefully before submitting. Pay particular attention to common problem areas and consider using spell-check tools to catch errors. Practicing writing under timed conditions can also help improve spelling under pressure.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid command of vocabulary and spelling, enhancing the range and precision of vocabulary usage while maintaining spelling accuracy will contribute to achieving a higher band score. Focus on incorporating more varied and sophisticated vocabulary choices and refining spelling accuracy through consistent practice and review.

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 demonstrates a variety of sentence structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. For instance, simple sentences like "Some people claim that having vehicle-free days would be inconvenienced" are used alongside more complex constructions such as "Although other people would say that public transport still cannot be as convenient as personal cars or motorbikes."
- How to improve: While the essay includes a range of structures, there is room to enhance the variety further by incorporating more complex sentence patterns. Introducing conditional sentences, passive voice constructions, or inverted sentences could enrich the essay’s syntax and demonstrate greater linguistic flexibility.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally maintains grammatical accuracy with minor errors. There are instances of incorrect verb forms ("would be inconvenienced" should be "would be inconvenient") and a few punctuation issues, such as missing commas in compound sentences ("For instance in some European cities like Amsterdam or Copenhagen").
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, focus on verb agreement and tense consistency throughout the essay. Proofreading for punctuation, particularly in compound sentences and after introductory phrases, will help to refine the clarity and cohesion of ideas. Consider using commas more effectively to clarify the structure of sentences and aid readability.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid grasp of grammar and punctuation, though occasional errors and minor inconsistencies are present. Strengthening the use of diverse sentence structures and refining grammatical accuracy will further enhance the clarity and sophistication of the essay’s expression.

Bài sửa mẫu

Some cities implement vehicle-free days where private cars, trucks, and motorcycles are prohibited from entering the city center. On these days, citizens are urged to utilize public transportation such as buses, taxis, and the metro.

Some argue that such measures may be inconvenient. Individuals typically opt for cars or motorbikes due to their convenience and their ability to transport them directly to their desired location. However, the emissions from these vehicles contribute significantly to air pollution, and the sheer volume of vehicles in city centers often leads to traffic congestion, causing frustration for those in a hurry.

Conversely, promoting public transport on these days would yield certain benefits. Public transport generally produces fewer emissions than private vehicles, and the metro or buses can transport hundreds of people at the same time, reducing the overall number of vehicles on the streets. For instance, cities like Amsterdam and Copenhagen have prohibited vehicles, including cars, motorbikes, and trucks, from entering the city center on special days, which has yielded positive results such as reduced air pollution and traffic congestion.

While some may argue that public transport may not be as convenient as personal vehicles, advancements in transport infrastructure and increased station accessibility could help mitigate these concerns. Additionally, taxis, considered a form of public transportation, can transport passengers directly to their destinations, minimizing inconvenience.

In conclusion, encouraging the use of public transport on vehicle-free days could help to reduce air pollution and alleviate traffic congestion in cities. With further development of public transport systems and infrastructure, these modes of transport could become as convenient as private cars, trucks, or motorbikes. Therefore, implementing such measures is beneficial and should be considered in more cities worldwide.