Animals should not be used for entertainment. To what extent do you agree or disagree.
Animals should not be used for entertainment. To what extent do you agree or disagree.
It is believed that animals should not be used as a form of recreation, while others argue that it helps to preserve the endangered species. I completely agree that the exploitation of animals for entertainment should be abolished due to its inhumanity.
Proponents of using animals for amusement claim that zoos can contribute to the increased number of vulnerable species through controlled breeding program. In terms of reproduction, animals’ diet are regulated strictly to lessen the risk of deteriorated health when producing cubs, whom are given special attention because of their weakness. By this way, young animals can survive their early period of life before they transform into adults. In fact, this activity should be viewed as a last resort in creatures recovery because of unadoptable habitat and genetic erosion. It could be complex and even impossible for an animal to get used to such an artificial ecosystem, compared to the wild areas. The scarce of genes also worsens the situation, preventing biologists’ attempts to store the genetic structure or conduct asexual reproduction.
Employing animal for entertainment is considered unethical since it leads to adverse injuries and even deaths of animals. When being trained, animals at the circus might be manipulated to act unnaturally through punishment and food deprivation, therefore tormented their mental and physical health. Research shows that performing animals live shorter than their cousins in zoos and in the wild, resulting from inadequacy of freedom and health damage. In addition to torture, animals can suffer from procrastinated death after they are being used to satisfy the pleasure of the public. Let’s take a bullfight as an example, the bull is badly wound by spikey lances before it is stabbed by a matador.
To conclude, it is my belief that utilising fauna for entertainment, which may bring about welfare issues and kill of species, contradicts the ethical norms. Although some animals protected area like zoos might succeed in the reintroduction of creatures, the effectiveness of those sites are not apparent due to modification in environment and rare genes.
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
-
"It is believed" -> "It is widely believed"
Explanation: Adding "widely" enhances the formality and specificity of the statement, indicating a broader consensus among people. -
"should not be used as a form of recreation" -> "should not be exploited for recreational purposes"
Explanation: "Exploited for recreational purposes" is more precise and formal, emphasizing the negative connotation of using animals for entertainment. -
"I completely agree" -> "I strongly agree"
Explanation: "Strongly agree" is more academically appropriate than "completely agree," which can sound overly emphatic and informal. -
"inhumanity" -> "inhumane treatment"
Explanation: "Inhumane treatment" is a more specific and formal term that accurately describes the mistreatment of animals. -
"Proponents of using animals for amusement claim" -> "Advocates of using animals for entertainment argue"
Explanation: "Advocates" and "entertainment" are more precise and formal terms than "proponents" and "amusement," aligning better with academic style. -
"animals’ diet are regulated" -> "the animals’ diets are regulated"
Explanation: Correcting the possessive form "animals’" and the plural form "diets" improves grammatical accuracy and clarity. -
"whom are given special attention" -> "who receive special attention"
Explanation: "Who receive" is grammatically correct and more formal than "whom are given," which is awkward and less commonly used in formal writing. -
"By this way" -> "By this method"
Explanation: "By this method" is more formal and precise than "by this way," which is colloquial and vague. -
"unadoptable habitat" -> "uninhabitable environments"
Explanation: "Uninhabitable environments" is a more precise and formal term than "unadoptable habitat," which is unclear and informal. -
"The scarce of genes" -> "the scarcity of genes"
Explanation: "Scarcity" is the correct noun form, replacing the incorrect "scarce," which is an adjective. -
"Employing animal for entertainment" -> "Employing animals for entertainment"
Explanation: Correcting the singular "animal" to plural "animals" matches the context of multiple animals being used for entertainment. -
"adverse injuries and even deaths" -> "serious injuries and fatalities"
Explanation: "Serious injuries and fatalities" is a more formal and precise way to describe the harm caused to animals. -
"tormented their mental and physical health" -> "compromised their mental and physical well-being"
Explanation: "Compromised their mental and physical well-being" is a more formal and academically appropriate phrase than "tormented their mental and physical health," which is overly dramatic. -
"procrastinated death" -> "delayed death"
Explanation: "Delayed death" is a more precise and formal term than "procrastinated death," which is incorrect and unclear. -
"the effectiveness of those sites are not apparent" -> "the effectiveness of these sites is not apparent"
Explanation: Correcting the subject-verb agreement from "are" to "is" and changing "those" to "these" improves grammatical accuracy and clarity.
Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 9
Band Score for Task Response: 9
-
Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses the prompt by clearly stating a position against the use of animals for entertainment. The introduction presents both sides of the argument, acknowledging the perspective that zoos can help preserve endangered species, but the author firmly aligns with the view that such practices should be abolished. This dual acknowledgment enriches the response and demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the topic. The body paragraphs provide substantial arguments against animal exploitation, focusing on ethical concerns and the detrimental effects on animal welfare, which directly relates to the prompt.
- How to improve: While the essay does a commendable job of addressing both sides, it could enhance its response by providing more specific examples of successful animal conservation efforts outside of entertainment contexts. This would further solidify the argument against using animals for entertainment by showcasing viable alternatives.
-
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear and consistent position against the use of animals for entertainment. The author states their agreement in the introduction and reinforces this stance throughout the essay, particularly in the discussion of ethical issues and the negative consequences for animals. The use of phrases like "I completely agree" and "it is my belief" clearly signals the author’s viewpoint.
- How to improve: To further strengthen the clarity of the position, the author could use transitional phrases that explicitly link back to their main argument throughout the essay. For example, reiterating the main stance at the beginning of each body paragraph could enhance coherence and remind the reader of the central argument.
-
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a variety of ideas, including the ethical implications of animal exploitation and the negative impacts on animal health. Each point is supported by relevant examples, such as the mention of bullfighting and the conditions in circuses. The use of research findings adds credibility to the claims made, illustrating the depth of the argument.
- How to improve: While the ideas are well-supported, the essay could benefit from further elaboration on some points. For instance, the author could include more detailed statistics or studies regarding the lifespan of performing animals versus those in the wild. This would provide a stronger empirical basis for the argument and enhance the overall persuasiveness of the essay.
-
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay remains focused on the topic of animal exploitation for entertainment throughout. The author does not deviate into unrelated areas, maintaining a strong relevance to the prompt. Each paragraph contributes to the central argument against the use of animals for entertainment, ensuring that the discussion remains pertinent.
- How to improve: To maintain topic focus even more rigorously, the author could ensure that each example directly ties back to the main argument. For instance, when discussing zoos, it would be beneficial to explicitly connect how their practices can still be problematic despite their role in conservation, reinforcing the central thesis.
Overall, this essay demonstrates a high level of proficiency in addressing the Task Response criteria for IELTS, effectively presenting a well-structured argument against the use of animals for entertainment. With minor enhancements in elaboration and explicit connections to the main argument, it could achieve even greater clarity and depth.
Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7
Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7
-
Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear stance on the issue, stating that animals should not be used for entertainment. The introduction effectively outlines the two opposing views, setting the stage for the argument. However, the organization within paragraphs could be improved. For instance, the first body paragraph discusses the potential benefits of zoos but lacks a clear transition to the subsequent argument against animal exploitation. The ideas within the paragraphs are somewhat jumbled, making it challenging to follow the progression of thought.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using clear topic sentences that summarize the main point of each paragraph. Additionally, ensure that each paragraph flows logically into the next by using transitional phrases that connect ideas. For example, after discussing the benefits of zoos, a transition could be made by stating, "However, despite these potential benefits, the ethical implications of using animals for entertainment cannot be overlooked."
-
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs, but their structure could be more effective. The first body paragraph is overly long and contains multiple ideas that could be better organized into separate paragraphs. The second body paragraph effectively focuses on the ethical concerns of animal exploitation, but it could benefit from clearer delineation of points.
- How to improve: Aim for a more balanced structure by ensuring that each paragraph covers a single main idea. For instance, separate the discussion of zoos and their breeding programs into its own paragraph, and focus solely on the ethical concerns in another. This will help the reader follow your argument more easily and allow for a more in-depth exploration of each point.
-
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "however," "in addition," and "to conclude," which help to connect ideas. However, the use of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and there are instances where the connections between sentences and ideas could be clearer. For example, the phrase "by this way" is awkward and does not effectively link the ideas presented.
- How to improve: To diversify and effectively use cohesive devices, consider incorporating a wider range of linking words and phrases. Use synonyms for "however" (e.g., "nevertheless," "on the other hand") and include phrases that indicate cause and effect (e.g., "as a result," "consequently"). Additionally, ensure that all cohesive devices are used correctly and naturally within the context of the sentence. For instance, replace "by this way" with "in this manner" or "this approach," which would be more appropriate in the context of discussing animal breeding.
Overall, while the essay demonstrates a clear position and presents relevant arguments, improvements in organization, paragraph structure, and the use of cohesive devices will enhance the overall coherence and cohesion, potentially raising the band score.
Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7
Band Score for Lexical Resource: 7
-
Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good range of vocabulary, with terms such as "exploitation," "vulnerable species," "inhumanity," and "genetic erosion." These words are appropriate and convey the writer’s arguments effectively. However, there are instances where the vocabulary could be more varied. For example, the repeated use of "animals" could be replaced with synonyms like "creatures," "fauna," or "wildlife" to enhance lexical diversity.
- How to improve: To improve, the writer should aim to incorporate more synonyms and varied expressions throughout the essay. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "animals," consider using "wildlife" or "species." Additionally, exploring more advanced vocabulary related to conservation and ethics could elevate the essay’s overall quality.
-
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains instances of imprecise vocabulary usage. For example, the phrase "the scarce of genes" is awkward and should be "the scarcity of genes." Similarly, "creatures recovery" should be "creature recovery." The term "procrastinated death" is also misleading; a more precise term would be "prolonged suffering" or "delayed death." These inaccuracies can detract from the clarity of the arguments presented.
- How to improve: To enhance precision, the writer should review vocabulary choices and ensure that terms accurately reflect the intended meaning. Utilizing a thesaurus can help find more appropriate words, and proofreading for clarity can prevent awkward phrases. Additionally, practicing writing with a focus on specific vocabulary can lead to improved precision over time.
-
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors, such as "procrastinated" (which should be "prolonged" in this context) and "utilising" (which is correct in British English but should be "utilizing" in American English if that is the intended audience). The phrase "kill of species" is also incorrect; it should be "extinction of species." These errors can undermine the overall professionalism of the writing.
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, the writer should engage in regular spelling practice, perhaps through flashcards or spelling apps. Additionally, proofreading the essay multiple times, or using spell-check tools, can help catch errors before submission. Reading extensively can also enhance spelling skills, as it exposes the writer to correct forms of words in context.
In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and employs a good range of vocabulary, there are areas for improvement in lexical variety, precision, and spelling accuracy. By focusing on these aspects, the writer can enhance the overall quality of their writing and potentially achieve a higher band score in the Lexical Resource criteria.
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 reasonable variety of sentence structures, including complex sentences and conditional clauses. For example, phrases such as "while others argue that it helps to preserve the endangered species" and "when being trained, animals at the circus might be manipulated to act unnaturally" showcase an ability to use subordinate clauses effectively. However, there are instances of repetitive structures, particularly in the use of simple sentences and phrases that could be varied further. For instance, the sentence "In addition to torture, animals can suffer from procrastinated death after they are being used to satisfy the pleasure of the public" could be restructured for greater complexity.
- How to improve: To enhance the range of structures, the writer should incorporate more varied sentence beginnings and explore different ways to combine ideas. For example, using participial phrases or relative clauses can add sophistication. The writer might also consider varying the length of sentences to create a more engaging rhythm in the writing.
-
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay shows a good level of grammatical accuracy overall, but there are notable errors that detract from clarity. For example, "animals’ diet are regulated strictly" should be "animals’ diets are regulated strictly" to ensure subject-verb agreement. Additionally, the phrase "the scarce of genes" is incorrect; it should be "the scarcity of genes." Punctuation is generally well-handled, but there are some areas where commas could improve clarity, such as before conjunctions in complex sentences. The use of "Let’s take a bullfight as an example, the bull is badly wound by spikey lances" could be improved by separating it into two sentences or using a semicolon.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on subject-verb agreement and the correct use of singular and plural forms. Regular practice with grammar exercises and proofreading for common errors can also be beneficial. Additionally, reviewing punctuation rules, particularly regarding the use of commas in complex sentences, will enhance clarity and coherence in writing.
Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of grammatical range and accuracy, focusing on diversifying sentence structures and refining grammatical precision will help elevate the writing to a higher band score.
Bài sửa mẫu
It is widely believed that animals should not be used as a form of recreation, while others argue that it helps to preserve endangered species. I strongly agree that the exploitation of animals for entertainment should be abolished due to its inhumanity.
Proponents of using animals for amusement claim that zoos can contribute to the increased number of vulnerable species through controlled breeding programs. In terms of reproduction, animals’ diets are regulated strictly to lessen the risk of deteriorated health when producing cubs, who receive special attention because of their weakness. By this method, young animals can survive their early period of life before they transform into adults. In fact, this activity should be viewed as a last resort in creatures’ recovery because of uninhabitable habitats and genetic erosion. It could be complex and even impossible for an animal to get used to such an artificial ecosystem compared to wild areas. The scarcity of genes also worsens the situation, preventing biologists’ attempts to store the genetic structure or conduct asexual reproduction.
Employing animals for entertainment is considered unethical since it leads to serious injuries and even fatalities among animals. When being trained, animals at the circus might be manipulated to act unnaturally through punishment and food deprivation, therefore compromising their mental and physical well-being. Research shows that performing animals live shorter lives than their cousins in zoos and in the wild, resulting from a lack of freedom and health damage. In addition to torture, animals can suffer from delayed death after they are used to satisfy the pleasure of the public. Let’s take a bullfight as an example: the bull is badly wounded by spiky lances before it is stabbed by a matador.
To conclude, it is my belief that employing animals for entertainment, which may bring about welfare issues and the death of species, contradicts ethical norms. Although some animal protected areas like zoos might succeed in the reintroduction of creatures, the effectiveness of these sites is not apparent due to modifications in the environment and rare genes.