Human activities have a negative effect on plant and animal species. Some people think it is too late to do anything. Some people think that we should take effective action to improve the situation. Discuss both views + give opinion

In recent years, the detrimental effects on wildlife brought by human actions have been a topic of much interest. While some argue that this issue has gone beyond the point of no return, others contend that people should take immediate actions to ameliorate the situation. This essay aims to discuss both perspectives before presenting my personal conclusion on the matter.

On the one hand, proponents of the irreversible anthropogenic impact point to several key factors. Foremost among these concerns the efficacy of their actions. Specifically, the issue occurs on such a vast scale that individual efforts may seem futile and insignificant. For example, replacing plastic bags with paper ones will not improve the situation overnight, and the amount of time it takes for noticeable results often exceeds the average human being's life-span. Therefore, this notion undoubtedly discourages people from taking the problem seriously, not to mention the present-oriented people, who tend to prioritize immediate gratification over long-term consequences. Another plausible explanation would be the financial challenges. That is, conducting large-scale environmental reforms is often considered prohibitive, especially for developing countries. As a result, collaboration between nations is critical; however, there might be a lack of political will for countries to cooperate and address the issue effectively.

On the other hand, advocates for taking effective measures emphasize several compelling arguments. They argue that people have an ethical and moral responsibility to preserve biodiversity for the sake of future generations. These people also point towards the advancements in technology. Development in science and technology offers a number of innovative solutions to mitigate environmental damages such as green energy. Although these methods cannot completely reverse and counter the damage inflicted by human activities, they certainly prevent the situation from deteriorating. Finally, protecting the environment is directly linked to human health and well-being, emphasizing that a healthy planet is essential for our quality of life.

In conclusion, while not taking any actions due to the ineffectiveness of individual actions and financial difficulties is justifiable, we cannot overlook the moral responsibility to save our planet. From my point of view, every cloud has a silver lining, so I urge the collective to join hands to conserve biodiversity for a better quality of life.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"the detrimental effects on wildlife" -> "the adverse impacts on wildlife"
Explanation: "Adverse impacts" is a more precise and formal term than "detrimental effects," which is somewhat vague and less commonly used in academic contexts.
"gone beyond the point of no return" -> "exceeded the point of no return"
Explanation: "Exceeded" is a more precise verb choice than "gone beyond," which is somewhat colloquial and less formal.
"take immediate actions" -> "initiate immediate action"
Explanation: "Initiate" is more formal and specific than "take," which is somewhat vague and informal in this context.
"the issue occurs on such a vast scale" -> "the issue is of such a vast scale"
Explanation: "Is of such a vast scale" is grammatically correct and maintains the formal tone, whereas "occurs on such a vast scale" is awkwardly phrased.
"the average human being’s life-span" -> "the average human lifespan"
Explanation: "Lifespan" is a noun and should not be possessive, making the phrase more grammatically correct and formal.
"not to mention the present-oriented people" -> "not to mention individuals focused on the present"
Explanation: "Individuals focused on the present" is a clearer and more formal way to describe people who prioritize immediate gratification over long-term consequences.
"conducting large-scale environmental reforms" -> "implementing large-scale environmental reforms"
Explanation: "Implementing" is a more precise and formal verb choice than "conducting" in this context, which is less commonly used in discussing policy or action.
"collaboration between nations is critical" -> "international cooperation is crucial"
Explanation: "International cooperation" is a more formal and precise term than "collaboration between nations," which is slightly informal and less specific.
"there might be a lack of political will" -> "there may be a lack of political will"
Explanation: "May" is more formal than "might" in academic writing, and it maintains the hypothetical tone appropriately.
"Development in science and technology offers" -> "Advances in science and technology provide"
Explanation: "Advances" is a more precise term than "Development," and "provide" is more formal than "offers" in this context.
"mitigate environmental damages" -> "mitigate environmental damage"
Explanation: "Damage" should be singular when referring to the general concept, not the specific instances of damage.
"cannot completely reverse and counter" -> "cannot fully reverse and mitigate"
Explanation: "Mitigate" is more appropriate than "counter" in this context, as it correctly describes reducing the severity of the damage.
"every cloud has a silver lining" -> "every situation has a silver lining"
Explanation: "Situation" is a more general and formal term than "cloud," which is metaphorical and less suitable for academic writing.
"join hands" -> "unite"
Explanation: "Unite" is a more formal and precise term than "join hands," which is colloquial and less appropriate for academic writing.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Task Response: 8

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses both perspectives outlined in the prompt. It discusses the viewpoint that it may be too late to take action due to the scale and perceived ineffectiveness of individual efforts, alongside the perspective advocating for immediate action to mitigate environmental damage. The writer also presents their own opinion in the conclusion.
- How to improve: While the essay does cover both views, it could strengthen its analysis by providing more specific examples or data to support each perspective. This would enhance the depth of the discussion and provide a clearer contrast between the two viewpoints.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear stance throughout, expressing a nuanced viewpoint that acknowledges the challenges and arguments of both sides before concluding with a personal opinion favoring immediate action despite the difficulties.
- How to improve: To further improve clarity, the writer could reinforce their stance by explicitly connecting it to specific arguments or evidence discussed earlier in the essay. This would reinforce the coherence and consistency of their position.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: Ideas are generally well-presented and supported throughout the essay. Each paragraph develops a distinct argument related to the prompt, such as the scale of environmental impact and the ethical responsibility to act.
- How to improve: To enhance the essay’s depth, the writer could consider integrating more detailed examples or case studies to illustrate the points made. This would provide richer context and strengthen the persuasiveness of their arguments.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay remains focused on the topic of human impact on plant and animal species throughout. It effectively discusses the various dimensions of the issue without significant deviation.
- How to improve: While the essay maintains focus, ensuring that all examples and arguments directly relate to the prompt’s specific focus on environmental impact could further strengthen coherence. This could involve tighter linkage of examples back to the core themes of irreversible impact versus the potential for effective action.

Overall, this essay demonstrates a strong grasp of the prompt’s requirements and effectively presents arguments from multiple perspectives while maintaining a clear stance. To improve, the writer could deepen their analysis with more specific evidence and ensure all examples directly support the central themes outlined in the prompt.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a reasonably clear organization with distinct paragraphs addressing different aspects of the prompt. Each paragraph focuses on either the arguments for the irreversible impact of human activities or the arguments for taking effective measures, followed by a concluding paragraph presenting the writer’s opinion. However, transitions between these paragraphs could be smoother to enhance coherence. For instance, the shift from discussing the irreversible impact to advocating for effective measures could be better signaled to improve the overall flow.
- How to improve: To improve logical organization, consider using more explicit transition phrases or sentences at the beginning of each main section to guide the reader through the essay’s structure. For example, phrases like "Turning to the perspective of those advocating for…" or "Contrarily, proponents argue…" can help clearly delineate shifts in focus.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs paragraphs effectively to separate different arguments and perspectives. Each paragraph contains a central idea supported by examples and explanations. However, some paragraphs could benefit from clearer topic sentences to enhance coherence within each paragraph. For instance, the paragraphs discussing financial challenges and technological advancements could start with clearer topic sentences that directly relate to the essay’s thesis.
- How to improve: Ensure that each paragraph begins with a topic sentence that not only introduces the main idea of the paragraph but also connects back to the thesis statement or the overall argument of the essay. This will provide a stronger sense of cohesion within paragraphs and reinforce the essay’s structure.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses a variety of cohesive devices, such as linking words (e.g., "however," "therefore," "although"), pronouns ("these," "they," "those"), and repetition of key terms ("environmental reforms," "anthropogenic impact"). These devices generally contribute to coherence by connecting ideas and creating flow between sentences and paragraphs. However, there are instances where more precise and varied cohesive devices could be used to strengthen connections between ideas.
- How to improve: Aim to diversify cohesive devices by incorporating more sophisticated connectors such as "conversely," "in contrast," "nevertheless," or "subsequently" to articulate relationships between ideas more explicitly. Additionally, ensure that pronouns and demonstratives are used consistently and clearly to avoid ambiguity or confusion.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the prompt and effectively presents arguments from both perspectives with a clear personal opinion, enhancing coherence and cohesion through clearer transitions, stronger topic sentences, and more varied cohesive devices would elevate the organization and readability of the essay, potentially leading to a higher 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 commendable breadth of vocabulary, utilizing a variety of terms such as "irreversible," "anthropogenic," "efficacy," "prohibitive," "collaboration," "mitigate," "deteriorating," and "biodiversity." These words are well-integrated into the context and contribute to a nuanced discussion of the topic.
- How to improve: To further enhance lexical resource, consider incorporating more sophisticated synonyms and exploring nuanced shades of meaning where possible. For instance, instead of "advancements," one might use "breakthroughs" or "innovations" to add variety and depth to the discussion.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally employs vocabulary precisely, though there are a few instances where clarity could be improved. For example, the phrase "not taking any actions due to the ineffectiveness of individual actions" could be more succinctly expressed to avoid redundancy. However, terms like "ethical responsibility," "mitigate environmental damages," and "long-term consequences" are used effectively to convey specific meanings.
- How to improve: To refine precision, ensure that each word or phrase used aligns precisely with the intended meaning. Consider revising sentences for conciseness without losing depth, and pay attention to the context in which each term is used to avoid potential ambiguity.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: Spelling accuracy is generally strong throughout the essay. There are no significant errors noted, indicating a good grasp of spelling conventions and attention to detail.
- How to improve: Maintain this level of accuracy by continuing to review and practice spelling commonly used words and technical vocabulary related to environmental and ethical discussions. Consider utilizing spell-check tools and proofreading techniques to catch any overlooked errors.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong command of vocabulary and spelling, contributing to a coherent and well-structured argument. To enhance future writing, focus on further diversifying vocabulary with nuanced synonyms, ensuring precision in expression, and maintaining consistent spelling accuracy. These refinements will help strengthen the lexical resource and overall effectiveness of your essays.

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 commendable range of sentence structures. It effectively utilizes complex sentences ("While some argue… others contend"), compound sentences ("For example, replacing plastic bags…"), and conditional sentences ("Although these methods cannot completely reverse…"). This variety enhances clarity and engagement.
- How to improve: To further enhance variety, consider integrating more complex structures like inversion ("Not only is collaboration crucial…") or passive voice ("Development in science and technology is accompanied by…"). These additions can elevate the sophistication of the argumentation.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: Overall, the essay maintains a high level of grammatical accuracy. Errors are infrequent and minor, such as occasional issues with subject-verb agreement ("the amount of time it takes… exceeds") and minor punctuation inconsistencies (comma usage in complex sentences). However, these do not detract significantly from comprehension.
- How to improve: Focus on ensuring consistency in punctuation usage, particularly in complex sentences. Review rules for comma placement in compound and complex sentences to maintain clarity and readability. Additionally, pay attention to subject-verb agreement in complex sentence structures to avoid subtle errors that can affect grammatical precision.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong command of grammatical structures and accuracy, contributing to its Band 7 score. With attention to enhancing sentence structure variety and fine-tuning punctuation and grammar consistency, further improvement toward higher band scores is achievable.

Bài sửa mẫu

In recent years, the adverse impacts on wildlife caused by human activities have garnered significant attention. While some argue that the situation has exceeded the point of no return, others advocate for initiating immediate action to improve it. This essay will discuss both perspectives before presenting my opinion on the matter.

On one hand, proponents of the irreversible anthropogenic impact highlight several key factors. They emphasize the enormity of the issue, suggesting that individual efforts may seem futile. For instance, simply switching from plastic to paper bags will not yield immediate results, often surpassing the average human lifespan before significant change is noticeable. This perspective particularly discourages those focused on the present, who prioritize immediate gratification over long-term consequences. Additionally, financial constraints pose a challenge to implementing large-scale environmental reforms, particularly in developing nations. Consequently, international cooperation is crucial, yet there may be a lack of political will among nations to collaborate effectively.

On the other hand, advocates for taking effective measures stress several compelling arguments. They argue for the ethical duty to preserve biodiversity for future generations. Furthermore, advances in science and technology provide innovative solutions, such as green energy, which can mitigate environmental damage. While these solutions may not fully reverse the harm caused by human activities, they certainly prevent further deterioration. Moreover, safeguarding the environment is essential for human health and well-being, underlining the critical link between a healthy planet and our quality of life.

In conclusion, while it may be justified to hesitate due to the scale of the problem and financial constraints, we cannot ignore our moral obligation to protect our planet. In my view, every situation has a silver lining, urging us to unite in conserving biodiversity for a better quality of life.