Governments should spend more money on railways rather than roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

The argument regarding government investment in railways rather than roads is a subject of debate. While some believe roads are indispensable, I strongly agree with the notion that prioritizing rail lines is crucial. This is primarily because railways offer greater environmental benefits and can alleviate traffic congestion.

Investing in railways promotes eco-friendly travel. Specifically, funding underground or tram lines aids in reducing carbon emissions. For example, if policymakers allocate resources to subways or trains, it would encourage more people to opt for public transportation. Consequently, this could diminish the number of commuters relying on private vehicles. Conversely, investing in roads might encourage increased use of private vehicles, leading to heightened pollution.

An efficient rail system can significantly mitigate traffic jams. With expanded tram and subway lines, the volume of cars on roads and highways would decrease. Consequently, individuals would face fewer traffic snarls during peak hours. Moreover, trains have higher passenger capacities compared to private vehicles, enabling them to transport more individuals in less time. Additionally, their ability to operate at higher speeds makes them a time-efficient alternative for certain travel routes, further reducing congestion.

In conclusion, it is imperative for governments to allocate funds towards railways rather than roads. Not only do improved railway services promote environmentally conscious travel, but they also play a pivotal role in reducing traffic congestion on roadways.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"argument regarding government investment" -> "debate over government investment"
Explanation: Replacing "argument regarding government investment" with "debate over government investment" provides a more precise and formal expression, aligning with academic language conventions.
"roads are indispensable" -> "roads are essential"
Explanation: Substituting "indispensable" with "essential" maintains formality while offering a more standard term to convey the importance of roads.
"I strongly agree with the notion" -> "I strongly support the idea"
Explanation: Changing "I strongly agree with the notion" to "I strongly support the idea" enhances formality and clarity without sacrificing the author’s stance.
"railways offer greater environmental benefits" -> "railways provide superior environmental benefits"
Explanation: Substituting "offer" with "provide" and using "superior" instead of "greater" elevates the language, emphasizing the enhanced environmental advantages of railways.
"funding underground or tram lines" -> "investing in underground or tram systems"
Explanation: Changing "funding" to "investing in" and rephrasing to "underground or tram systems" enhances precision and aligns with a more formal tone.
"if policymakers allocate resources" -> "if policymakers allocate resources effectively"
Explanation: Adding "effectively" after "allocate resources" improves the precision of the statement and emphasizes the importance of efficient resource allocation.
"Consequently, this could diminish" -> "As a result, this could reduce"
Explanation: Substituting "Consequently" with "As a result" and changing "diminish" to "reduce" contributes to a more formal and precise expression.
"Conversely, investing in roads" -> "In contrast, investing in roads"
Explanation: Replacing "Conversely" with "In contrast" maintains the logical flow while adhering to a more formal transition between ideas.
"heightened pollution" -> "increased pollution"
Explanation: Substituting "heightened" with "increased" maintains formality and provides a more straightforward term for expressing the rise in pollution.
"traffic snarls" -> "traffic congestion"
Explanation: Replacing "traffic snarls" with "traffic congestion" is a more formal and widely recognized term for describing traffic issues.
"rail system can significantly mitigate" -> "rail system can effectively alleviate"
Explanation: Substituting "mitigate" with "effectively alleviate" maintains the emphasis on positive outcomes while employing a more formal term.
"volume of cars on roads and highways would decrease" -> "number of vehicles on roads and highways would decrease"
Explanation: Changing "volume of cars" to "number of vehicles" contributes to a more precise and formal description of the decrease in traffic.
"Furthermore, trains have higher passenger capacities" -> "Moreover, trains boast higher passenger capacities"
Explanation: Replacing "Furthermore" with "Moreover" and changing "have" to "boast" adds formality and emphasizes the superior passenger capacity of trains.
"ability to operate at higher speeds" -> "capability to operate at higher speeds"
Explanation: Substituting "ability" with "capability" contributes to a more formal and precise expression.
"it is imperative for governments to allocate funds" -> "it is essential for governments to allocate funds"
Explanation: Replacing "imperative" with "essential" maintains the strength of the statement while using a more formal term to convey the importance of allocating funds to railways.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 4

Band Score: 4.0 – UNDER WORD

Quoted text: "The argument regarding government investment in railways rather than roads is a subject of debate. While some believe roads are indispensable, I strongly agree with the notion that prioritizing rail lines is crucial."
- Explanation and Improvement Suggestions: The introduction clearly presents the writer’s position; however, it lacks a brief roadmap outlining the main points that will be discussed in the essay. To enhance clarity, consider providing a concise overview of the reasons supporting your preference for railways. For instance, briefly mention the environmental benefits and traffic congestion alleviation that will be explored in the subsequent paragraphs.
- Improved example: "The ongoing debate about government investment in transportation infrastructure has led to differing opinions. While some argue for the indispensability of roads, I firmly support prioritizing railways. In the following paragraphs, I will delve into the environmental benefits and traffic congestion alleviation associated with this preference."
Quoted text: "Investing in railways promotes eco-friendly travel. Specifically, funding underground or tram lines aids in reducing carbon emissions. For example, if policymakers allocate resources to subways or trains, it would encourage more people to opt for public transportation."
- Explanation and Improvement Suggestions: The idea presented is relevant, but the explanation lacks depth and specificity. To improve, provide more detailed examples or elaborate on how funding underground or tram lines reduces carbon emissions. Additionally, consider incorporating personal experiences or real-world examples to make the argument more convincing.
- Improved example: "Investing in railways promotes eco-friendly travel by significantly reducing carbon emissions. For instance, allocating funds to develop underground or tram lines not only encourages people to choose public transportation but also contributes to a substantial decrease in air pollution. Personally, I have witnessed the positive impact of such initiatives in my city where the introduction of a new tram system led to a noticeable reduction in traffic-related emissions."
Quoted text: "An efficient rail system can significantly mitigate traffic jams. With expanded tram and subway lines, the volume of cars on roads and highways would decrease. Consequently, individuals would face fewer traffic snarls during peak hours."
- Explanation and Improvement Suggestions: While the point is valid, it lacks expansion and concrete examples. To strengthen your argument, provide more detailed insights into how an efficient rail system mitigates traffic jams. Share specific instances or draw from personal experiences to illustrate the impact of expanded tram and subway lines on reducing road traffic.
- Improved example: "An efficient rail system plays a pivotal role in alleviating traffic jams. For example, the expansion of tram and subway lines in my hometown led to a noticeable decrease in the volume of cars on roads and highways. As a result, individuals experienced smoother traffic flow during peak hours, enhancing overall commuting efficiency."

Overall, the essay provides relevant points but needs further development in terms of depth, specificity, and the incorporation of personal experiences for a more compelling argument.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 8

Band Score: 8.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a logical sequence of information and ideas, presenting a clear progression throughout. Cohesive devices are used effectively, contributing to the overall coherence of the essay. Paragraphing is managed well, with a clear central topic within each paragraph. The argument unfolds in a structured manner, making it easy for the reader to follow the train of thought.

How to improve:
While the essay is strong in coherence and cohesion, a slight enhancement could be achieved by ensuring a more varied and sophisticated use of cohesive devices. This may involve incorporating a wider range of linking words and phrases to further refine the connection between sentences and ideas. Additionally, attention to maintaining a consistent tone and style throughout the essay could contribute to an even more seamless reading experience.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 8

Band Score: 8.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable range of vocabulary, with a strong command of lexical features. There’s a fluency and flexibility in conveying precise meanings, and the writer skillfully incorporates uncommon lexical items. While there are occasional inaccuracies in word choice and collocation, they are minor and can be considered ‘slips.’ Spelling and word formation errors are rare and do not impede communication.
How to improve: To further enhance the Lexical Resource, aim for even more varied and sophisticated vocabulary. Pay close attention to precision in word choice and collocation, minimizing the occurrence of occasional inaccuracies. Keep an eye on spelling and word formation, maintaining the high standard demonstrated in the essay.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 8

Band Score: 8.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a commendable command of grammatical structures, contributing to a smooth and coherent expression of ideas. A wide range of sentence structures is utilized, showcasing flexibility and accuracy. The majority of sentences are error-free, with only very occasional minor errors present. The essay effectively employs complex structures, contributing to a sophisticated and nuanced argument. Overall, the grammatical range and accuracy meet the criteria for Band 8.

How to improve:
To further enhance grammatical range and accuracy, the author could consider incorporating a few advanced sentence structures or complex grammatical forms. Additionally, a careful review for minor errors, such as punctuation or word choice, can contribute to achieving a flawless, Band 9 level of grammatical precision.

Bài sửa mẫu

The debate over government investment in railways versus roads is a topic that sparks discussion. While some argue for the indispensability of roads, I strongly support the idea that giving priority to rail lines is crucial. This is mainly because railways offer significant environmental benefits and can help ease traffic congestion.

Investing in railways encourages environmentally friendly travel. Specifically, allocating resources to underground or tram lines helps in reducing carbon emissions. For instance, if policymakers invest in subways or trains, it would motivate more people to choose public transportation. As a result, this could decrease the number of commuters relying on private vehicles. In contrast, investing in roads might lead to an increase in the use of private vehicles, contributing to higher pollution levels.

An efficient rail system can substantially alleviate traffic jams. With expanded tram and subway lines, the number of cars on roads and highways would decrease. Consequently, individuals would encounter fewer traffic snarls during peak hours. Moreover, trains have higher passenger capacities compared to private vehicles, allowing them to transport more people in less time. Additionally, their ability to operate at higher speeds makes them a time-efficient alternative for certain travel routes, further reducing congestion.

In conclusion, it is crucial for governments to allocate funds towards railways rather than roads. Not only do improved railway services promote environmentally conscious travel, but they also play a pivotal role in reducing traffic congestion on roadways.