In companies promotions to high positions should be given to employees inside the company , not to someone from outsiders or new hiring. Do you agree or disagree?

In current time, there are still controversies that it is necessary that in companies, promotions to lofty statuses should be given to employees who work inside them, not to outsiders or hiring counterparts. In my perspective, I totally advocate this notion.

The primary reason why high positions ought to be given to employees who work inside is because it is fair for workers. This is because it takes a lot of time for a person to get into a point at which he can work with his 100% capacity. Therefore, it is probably unfair to give promotion for someone who didn't spend any time to get that job. Furthermore, if a company is partial, its staffs will feel like they are being lied to and as a result many conflicts will transpire. For instance, manual workers are inclined to destroy the machines in the factories if they feel unfair and discontented.

Empirical factor is another reason why employees who work inside should be granted promotions to higher positions rather than outsiders. Holistic grasp about the system and operations in the company tend to be possessed by employees who have worked there for a very long time. So, it is intelligible to say that they can carry out highly demanding tasks in those positions more effectively than ones who haven't exposed much to the manner and environment. Without experienced individuals doing advanced tasks, it would be difficult for an institution to make a leap

Bottom line, giving promotions to soaring positions to in-house staffs is preferable as it brings fairness and sustainability for the company. One cannot do his job in higher status well if he hardly works in the interior environment.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"In current time" -> "Currently"
Explanation: "In current time" is an awkward phrase; "currently" is more concise and formal, aligning better with academic style.
"there are still controversies that it is necessary" -> "there are still debates regarding the necessity"
Explanation: "controversies that it is necessary" is unclear and convoluted. "Debates regarding the necessity" is a clearer and more concise phrase.
"should be given to employees who work inside them" -> "should be given to internal employees"
Explanation: "employees who work inside them" is redundant and awkward. "Internal employees" is a more precise and concise term.
"I totally advocate this notion" -> "I strongly support this notion"
Explanation: "totally advocate" is informal; "strongly support" is more academically appropriate and maintains the intended meaning.
"it is probably unfair" -> "it is likely unfair"
Explanation: "probably unfair" is too uncertain for academic writing. "Likely unfair" conveys a similar meaning but in a more confident tone.
"partial" -> "biased"
Explanation: "partial" can be ambiguous; "biased" is a clearer term in this context, referring to favoritism.
"its staffs will feel like they are being lied to" -> "its staff will perceive deceit"
Explanation: "staffs" is incorrect pluralization; "staff" is the correct singular form. "Will feel like they are being lied to" is informal; "will perceive deceit" is a more formal alternative.
"many conflicts will transpire" -> "many conflicts may arise"
Explanation: "transpire" is overly formal; "may arise" is a more natural alternative in academic writing.
"Empirical factor is another reason" -> "Another empirical factor"
Explanation: "Empirical factor" is unclear; starting the sentence with "Another empirical factor" provides clarity and coherence.
"Holistic grasp about" -> "Comprehensive understanding of"
Explanation: "Holistic grasp about" is awkward; "comprehensive understanding of" is a more precise and formal alternative.
"So, it is intelligible to say" -> "Thus, it is reasonable to argue"
Explanation: "It is intelligible to say" is informal and unclear; "thus, it is reasonable to argue" is a more formal and clear expression.
"ones who haven’t exposed much to the manner and environment" -> "individuals who lack extensive exposure to the company’s processes and environment"
Explanation: "ones who haven’t exposed much to the manner and environment" is awkward and informal; "individuals who lack extensive exposure to the company’s processes and environment" is more formal and descriptive.
"Bottom line" -> "In conclusion"
Explanation: "Bottom line" is colloquial; "in conclusion" is a standard phrase for academic writing.
"soaring positions" -> "senior positions"
Explanation: "Soaring positions" is metaphorical and informal; "senior positions" is more precise and formal.
"One cannot do his job in higher status well" -> "Individuals cannot perform effectively in higher-level roles"
Explanation: "One cannot do his job in higher status well" is informal and grammatically incorrect; "Individuals cannot perform effectively in higher-level roles" is more formal and grammatically correct.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Task Response: 8

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay adequately addresses all parts of the prompt. It acknowledges the debate surrounding whether promotions to high positions should be given to internal employees or outsiders, and the writer clearly states their agreement with the idea of promoting internal staff. The arguments provided center around fairness to employees and the benefits of experience within the company.
- How to improve: To further enhance the response, the writer could delve deeper into the potential drawbacks of promoting external candidates and provide more concrete examples or statistics to bolster their argument. Additionally, expanding on the implications of fairness and sustainability for the company could add depth to the analysis.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear stance throughout, consistently advocating for the promotion of internal employees to high positions within companies. The writer’s position is evident from the thesis statement to the concluding remarks, providing a coherent and focused argument.
- How to improve: While the position is clear, ensuring that each paragraph directly supports this stance without veering into tangential topics could strengthen the clarity of the argument. Additionally, refining transitions between paragraphs could improve the overall coherence of the essay.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents and supports ideas adequately, providing reasoning behind the preference for internal promotions and offering examples to illustrate the points made. The arguments are logically organized and effectively developed, demonstrating a solid understanding of the topic.
- How to improve: To enhance the depth of analysis, the writer could explore counterarguments and refute them to strengthen their position. Additionally, incorporating additional evidence, such as case studies or expert opinions, could further validate the arguments presented.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay largely stays on topic, addressing the issue of promotions within companies and the reasons for favoring internal candidates. However, there are minor instances where the discussion slightly deviates, such as the mention of manual workers destroying machines, which could be more directly tied to the main argument.
- How to improve: To maintain a tighter focus on the topic, the writer should ensure that all examples and explanations directly relate to the central argument of promoting internal employees. Eliminating tangential points and refining the thesis statement to encompass all aspects of the discussion could help in staying more closely aligned with the topic.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong understanding of the prompt and effectively argues in favor of promoting internal employees to high positions within companies. With some minor refinements to further strengthen the argument and maintain focus, the essay could achieve an even higher score.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a clear overall organization with an introduction, body paragraphs discussing reasons, and a conclusion. Each paragraph addresses a specific point, providing reasoning and examples to support the argument. However, there are instances where the logical flow could be improved. For example, the transition between paragraphs could be smoother, ensuring a seamless connection between ideas.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, focus on improving transitions between paragraphs. Use cohesive devices such as transitional phrases ("Moreover," "Furthermore," "However") to connect ideas and guide the reader through the argument more effectively. Additionally, consider restructuring sentences within paragraphs to ensure a clearer progression of ideas.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs paragraphs to organize distinct ideas, which is essential for clarity and coherence. Each paragraph addresses a specific aspect of the argument, such as fairness for workers and the importance of experience in promotions.
- How to improve: While the essay effectively uses paragraphs, there is room for improvement in paragraph structure. Ensure that each paragraph has a clear topic sentence that introduces the main idea, followed by supporting details and examples. Additionally, consider varying the length and complexity of sentences within paragraphs to maintain reader engagement and convey ideas more effectively.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay utilizes cohesive devices such as "because," "therefore," and "for instance" to connect ideas within and between sentences. These devices contribute to coherence by clarifying relationships between different parts of the argument.
- How to improve: While the essay demonstrates an understanding of cohesive devices, diversifying their use can further enhance coherence. Introduce a wider range of cohesive devices, including pronouns ("this," "these"), conjunctions ("although," "while"), and adverbs ("additionally," "consequently"), to create a more varied and sophisticated writing style. Pay attention to the placement of cohesive devices to ensure they effectively link ideas and improve the overall flow of the essay.

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 variety of vocabulary throughout, with words like "controversies," "advocate," "empirical," "partial," "discontented," and "sustainability" contributing to a diverse lexical resource. However, some phrases and expressions could be more sophisticated to further enhance the range. For instance, instead of "current time," using "contemporary era" or "present-day" could elevate the lexical richness.
- How to improve: To improve further, strive for greater diversity in lexical choices. Utilize synonyms and advanced vocabulary where possible without sacrificing clarity. Additionally, aim to incorporate idiomatic expressions and phrasal verbs to add depth to your language.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally employs vocabulary effectively, but there are instances where the usage could be more precise. For example, the phrase "lofty statuses" could be replaced with "senior positions" for clearer and more precise communication. Similarly, the word "partial" might be better replaced with "biased" or "unfair," depending on the intended meaning.
- How to improve: Focus on selecting words that precisely convey your intended meaning. Consider the context and nuances of each word choice to ensure clarity and accuracy. Use a thesaurus to explore alternative terms and refine your vocabulary usage.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: Spelling accuracy in the essay is generally satisfactory, with no glaring errors observed. However, there are a few minor spelling mistakes, such as "transpire" instead of "ensue" and "sustainable" instead of "sustainability." While these errors do not significantly detract from comprehension, refining spelling accuracy can enhance the overall professionalism and credibility of the writing.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, consider employing spell-checking tools during the writing process and carefully proofreading your work before submission. Additionally, familiarize yourself with common spelling patterns and irregularities to minimize errors in future compositions.

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 moderate variety of sentence structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. There is an attempt to vary sentence length and structure, though some sentences could benefit from further complexity to enhance coherence and fluency. For instance, the use of subordinate clauses and participial phrases could enrich the essay’s syntax.
- How to improve: To enhance the essay’s grammatical range and coherence, consider incorporating more complex sentence structures, such as subordinate clauses, appositives, and parallelism. Experiment with varying sentence lengths to maintain reader engagement and improve the overall flow of ideas. Additionally, employing rhetorical devices like parallelism or antithesis can add sophistication to your writing.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: Overall, the essay demonstrates a satisfactory level of grammatical accuracy. However, there are instances of grammatical errors and punctuation inconsistencies that slightly hinder comprehension. For example, there are issues with subject-verb agreement ("if a company is partial, its staffs will feel like they are being lied to"), awkward phrasing ("Empirical factor is another reason"), and punctuation errors ("Bottom line, giving promotions to soaring positions to in-house staffs").
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, carefully review subject-verb agreement, verb tense consistency, and proper word usage. Proofreading the essay for punctuation errors such as missing commas, incorrect comma usage, and fragmented sentences will enhance clarity. Consider utilizing grammar-checking tools or seeking feedback from peers to identify and rectify these errors effectively. Additionally, practice writing complex sentences and pay attention to grammatical structures to refine your language skills further.

Bài sửa mẫu

In the present era, there are still debates regarding the necessity of granting promotions to senior positions within companies to internal employees rather than outsiders or new hires. I strongly support this notion.

The primary reason why promotions to high positions should be given to employees who work within the company is because it is fair to the workers. It takes considerable time for an individual to reach a point where they can perform at their full capacity. Therefore, it is likely unfair to promote someone who hasn’t invested time and effort into the role. Moreover, if a company appears biased, its staff will perceive deceit, leading to potential conflicts. For example, manual workers may resort to damaging machinery in factories if they feel unfairly treated and dissatisfied.

Another empirical factor supporting the promotion of internal employees to higher positions is their comprehensive understanding of the company’s processes and environment. Employees who have spent a significant amount of time within the company tend to possess a holistic grasp of its systems and operations. Thus, it is reasonable to argue that they can perform highly demanding tasks in these positions more effectively than individuals who lack extensive exposure to the company’s processes and environment. Without experienced individuals in key roles, a company may struggle to progress.

In conclusion, promoting in-house staff to senior positions is preferable as it promotes fairness and sustainability within the company. Individuals cannot perform effectively in higher-level roles if they lack familiarity with the internal environment.