In the future, it seems it will be more difficult to live on the Earth. Some people think more money should be spent on researching other planets to live, such as Mars. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Currently, it is widely acknowledged that the environment on the earth will become uninhabitable. Therefore, a number of people argue that more resources should be allocated to space research to explore other planets suitable for human life. I agree with the former statement but disagree with the latter for some reasons.

On the one hand, there are various factors leading to that it will be challenging for people to settle down on the earth. The first reason is that human civilization has disposed of a considerable amount of toxic waste into the natural habitat, causing negative phenomenons namely air, water and soil pollution as well as flooding and hurricanes. As a consequence, local residents would tend to be at risk of these problems.For instance, vietnamese might increasingly suffer from cancer disease on the grounds of being exposed to contaminated resources of water. Furthermore, there could be an energy crisis because different industries have been over-exploiting different energy resources such as gas,oil and coal. Consequently, the future generations have the possibility of not only running out of these kinds of sources but also facing a severe problem that society would be unable to operate efficiently.

Thus, I am of the opinion that humans should not pour budget into researching other livable planets because it can be a waste of money; instead, invest more on other practical solutions. Firstly, more money ought to be spent on the development of several kinds of pollution treatments in order to tackle the consequences of environmental pollution. Water treatment system; for example, is a method to filter unfresh water into fresh one. Secondly, allocating resources to encouraging green movement might be a proper action. This would probably promote the invention of eco-friendly energy, leading to a sustainable world.

In conclusion, it seems to me that it is likely that life on the earth can be more harsh but space investigation should not be invested significantly because there are other solutions to this situation.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"Currently, it is widely acknowledged" -> "It is widely acknowledged"
Explanation: Removing "Currently" simplifies the sentence and maintains a formal tone without losing the intended meaning.
"the environment on the earth" -> "the environment of the Earth"
Explanation: "Of the Earth" is a more precise and formal way to refer to the environment of the planet.
"a number of people argue" -> "many argue"
Explanation: "Many" is more concise and formal than "a number of people," which is somewhat vague and informal.
"for some reasons" -> "for several reasons"
Explanation: "Several reasons" is more specific and formal than "some reasons," which is vague and informal.
"leading to that it will be challenging" -> "leading to the challenge"
Explanation: "Leading to the challenge" is more direct and formal, avoiding the awkward construction "leading to that it will be challenging."
"namely air, water and soil pollution as well as flooding and hurricanes" -> "namely air, water, and soil pollution, as well as flooding and hurricanes"
Explanation: Adding commas after "pollution" and "water" improves readability and maintains the formal structure of the list.
"vietnamese might increasingly suffer" -> "Vietnamese may increasingly suffer"
Explanation: Capitalizing "Vietnamese" correctly and using "may" instead of "might" aligns with formal academic style.
"on the grounds of being exposed to contaminated resources of water" -> "due to exposure to contaminated water resources"
Explanation: "Due to exposure to contaminated water resources" is more precise and formal.
"over-exploiting different energy resources such as gas,oil and coal" -> "overexploiting various energy resources such as gas, oil, and coal"
Explanation: Correcting the typo "gas,oil" to "gas, oil" and using "various" instead of "different" enhances formality and clarity.
"the possibility of not only running out of these kinds of sources but also facing a severe problem that society would be unable to operate efficiently" -> "the possibility of not only depleting these resources but also facing a severe problem that could render society inefficient"
Explanation: "Depleting these resources" is more precise than "running out of these kinds of sources," and "render society inefficient" is a more formal expression than "be unable to operate efficiently."
"pour budget into researching" -> "allocate funds to research"
Explanation: "Allocate funds to research" is more formal and precise than "pour budget into researching."
"invest more on other practical solutions" -> "invest more in other practical solutions"
Explanation: "Invest in" is the correct preposition for financial investment, improving the grammatical accuracy.
"Water treatment system; for example, is a method to filter unfresh water into fresh one" -> "For example, the water treatment system is a method to filter untreated water into clean water"
Explanation: Correcting "unfresh" to "untreated" and "fresh one" to "clean water" clarifies and formalizes the description.
"allocating resources to encouraging green movement" -> "allocating resources to promoting green initiatives"
Explanation: "Promoting green initiatives" is a more precise and formal term than "encouraging green movement."
"This would probably promote the invention of eco-friendly energy" -> "This could potentially lead to the development of eco-friendly energy"
Explanation: "Could potentially lead to the development of" is more formal and precise than "would probably promote the invention of."

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: 7

Band Score for Task Response: 7

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay addresses the prompt by discussing the difficulties of living on Earth and the debate over whether to allocate more resources to space research. The introduction clearly states the writer’s agreement with the notion that living conditions on Earth will worsen, but disagreement with the idea of spending more on space exploration. However, the essay could benefit from a more nuanced exploration of the implications of both sides of the argument, particularly regarding the potential benefits of space research.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer should consider briefly acknowledging the potential advantages of researching other planets, even if they ultimately disagree with prioritizing this funding. This would provide a more balanced view and demonstrate a deeper engagement with the prompt.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The position is mostly clear, with the writer stating their agreement and disagreement upfront. However, the transition between agreeing that life on Earth will become more difficult and disagreeing with the funding for space research could be smoother. The phrase "I agree with the former statement but disagree with the latter for some reasons" is somewhat vague and could be more explicitly articulated.
- How to improve: The writer should strive for clearer transitions between points. For instance, explicitly stating the reasons for disagreeing with space research funding right after presenting the agreement would help maintain clarity. Using phrases like "While I acknowledge the challenges on Earth, I believe…" can help to clarify the position.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas regarding environmental issues and suggests practical solutions, such as pollution treatment and promoting green initiatives. However, some points lack depth. For example, the mention of cancer rates in Vietnam is relevant but could be supported with more specific data or examples to strengthen the argument. Additionally, the solutions proposed could be elaborated further to illustrate their potential effectiveness.
- How to improve: To improve the support for ideas, the writer should provide more detailed examples and evidence for each point. This could include statistics on pollution effects or case studies of successful environmental initiatives. Expanding on how these solutions could be implemented or their potential impact would also enhance the argument.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the challenges of living on Earth and the debate over funding for space research. However, there are moments where the discussion of pollution and environmental issues could be more directly linked to the central argument about resource allocation. For instance, while discussing pollution treatment, the connection to the prompt could be made clearer.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should consistently relate each point back to the main argument about resource allocation. Using topic sentences that explicitly tie back to the prompt can help keep the discussion relevant. For example, when discussing pollution treatment, the writer could state, "Investing in pollution treatment is crucial not only for immediate environmental relief but also as a more viable alternative to exploring other planets."

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a good understanding of the topic and presents a coherent argument, enhancing the depth of analysis, clarity of position, and relevance of supporting details would elevate the response further.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear argument structure, with a logical progression from the introduction to the conclusion. The first body paragraph effectively outlines the challenges facing Earth, while the second body paragraph presents the author’s stance against investing in space research. However, the transition between ideas within paragraphs could be smoother. For instance, the shift from discussing pollution to energy crises feels abrupt and could benefit from clearer connections.
- How to improve: To enhance logical flow, consider using transitional phrases that link ideas more explicitly. For example, when moving from discussing pollution to energy crises, a phrase like "In addition to pollution, another pressing issue is…" could help create a more cohesive narrative. Additionally, ensuring that each point directly supports the thesis will strengthen the overall argument.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs effectively, with each paragraph focusing on a distinct aspect of the argument. The introduction sets the stage, the first body paragraph discusses the challenges on Earth, and the second body paragraph presents alternative solutions. However, the paragraphs could be more balanced in terms of length and detail. The first body paragraph is quite lengthy and contains multiple ideas, which may overwhelm the reader.
- How to improve: Aim for more balanced paragraphs by ensuring that each one contains a single main idea supported by evidence. Consider breaking the first body paragraph into two separate paragraphs: one focusing on pollution and the other on the energy crisis. This will allow for deeper exploration of each point and improve readability.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "On the one hand" and "Firstly," which help to structure the argument. However, the range of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and there are instances where the connections between sentences could be clearer. For example, the use of "As a consequence" is appropriate, but additional cohesive devices could enhance the overall coherence.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a variety of linking words and phrases, such as "Moreover," "Furthermore," "In contrast," and "For example." Additionally, using pronouns or synonyms to refer back to previously mentioned ideas can help maintain cohesion. For instance, instead of repeating "pollution," you could use "this issue" or "such challenges" in subsequent sentences to avoid redundancy.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents a coherent argument, improvements in logical flow, paragraph structure, and the use of cohesive devices will enhance clarity and coherence, potentially raising the band score.

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 reasonable range of vocabulary, with terms like "inhabitable," "toxic waste," and "pollution treatments." However, the vocabulary is somewhat repetitive, particularly in phrases like "different industries" and "different energy resources," which could be varied for a richer lexical range. Additionally, the use of "various factors" and "several kinds" lacks specificity and could be enhanced with more precise terms.
- How to improve: To improve lexical variety, the writer should aim to incorporate synonyms and more specific terms. For example, instead of "different industries," the writer could specify "manufacturing, agriculture, and energy sectors." Using a thesaurus to find synonyms for commonly used words can also help diversify vocabulary.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains instances of imprecise vocabulary usage, such as "negative phenomenons" which should be "negative phenomena," and "cancer disease," which is redundant as "cancer" suffices. The phrase "pour budget into researching" is also awkward; a more precise expression would be "allocate budget to research." These inaccuracies can lead to confusion and detract from the clarity of the argument.
- How to improve: The writer should focus on using vocabulary that accurately conveys the intended meaning. Reviewing common collocations and phrases in academic writing can help. For instance, instead of "pour budget into," the writer could use "invest funds in" or "allocate resources to." Regular practice with academic vocabulary can also enhance precision.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors, such as "vietnamese" (should be capitalized as "Vietnamese"), "unfresh" (a non-standard term; "contaminated" or "polluted" would be better), and "water treatment system; for example," which should use a comma instead of a semicolon. These errors can distract the reader and undermine the overall professionalism of the writing.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should proofread the essay carefully, ideally after a break to gain a fresh perspective. Utilizing spell-check tools and reading the essay aloud can help catch errors. Additionally, maintaining a list of commonly misspelled words and practicing them can be beneficial.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a foundational understanding of vocabulary use, there are clear areas for improvement in range, precision, and spelling accuracy. By focusing on these aspects, the writer can work towards achieving a higher band score in the Lexical Resource criterion.

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 simple, compound, and complex sentences. For example, the use of phrases like "On the one hand" and "As a consequence" effectively introduces contrasting ideas and results. However, there are instances where sentence structures could be more varied. For instance, the sentence "The first reason is that human civilization has disposed of a considerable amount of toxic waste into the natural habitat" is somewhat straightforward and could be enhanced with more complex structures to convey ideas more dynamically.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, consider incorporating more complex sentences that include relative clauses or participial phrases. For example, instead of saying, "The first reason is that human civilization has disposed of a considerable amount of toxic waste," you could say, "One significant reason for this is the disposal of a considerable amount of toxic waste by human civilization, which has severely impacted our natural habitat." Additionally, using varied sentence beginnings can enhance the flow and interest of the writing.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues that affect clarity and coherence. For instance, in the phrase "local residents would tend to be at risk of these problems.For instance," there is a missing space after the period, which disrupts the flow. Additionally, the phrase "the possibility of not only running out of these kinds of sources but also facing a severe problem that society would be unable to operate efficiently" could be more clearly articulated. The use of "namely" is also somewhat awkward in the context it is used, as it does not smoothly introduce the list that follows.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, it is essential to proofread the essay carefully to catch punctuation errors, such as missing spaces and incorrect comma placements. Furthermore, revising sentences for clarity can help; for example, breaking down overly complex sentences into simpler components can enhance understanding. Practicing the rules of subject-verb agreement and ensuring consistent verb tenses throughout the essay will also contribute to grammatical accuracy. Additionally, consider using more varied punctuation, such as semicolons and dashes, to create more complex sentence structures and improve readability.

By addressing these areas, the essay can achieve a higher band score in Grammatical Range and Accuracy.

Bài sửa mẫu

Currently, it is widely acknowledged that the environment of the Earth will become uninhabitable. Therefore, a number of people argue that more resources should be allocated to space research to explore other planets suitable for human life. I agree with the former statement but disagree with the latter for several reasons.

On the one hand, there are various factors leading to the challenge of settling down on the Earth. The first reason is that human civilization has disposed of a considerable amount of toxic waste into the natural habitat, causing negative phenomena, namely air, water, and soil pollution, as well as flooding and hurricanes. As a consequence, local residents tend to be at risk of these problems. For instance, Vietnamese may increasingly suffer from cancer due to exposure to contaminated water resources. Furthermore, there could be an energy crisis because different industries have been overexploiting various energy resources such as gas, oil, and coal. Consequently, future generations face the possibility of not only running out of these resources but also encountering a severe problem that could render society inefficient.

Thus, I am of the opinion that humans should not pour budget into researching other livable planets because it can be a waste of money; instead, we should invest more in other practical solutions. Firstly, more money ought to be spent on the development of several kinds of pollution treatments in order to tackle the consequences of environmental pollution. The water treatment system, for example, is a method to filter untreated water into clean water. Secondly, allocating resources to promoting green initiatives might be a proper action. This could potentially lead to the development of eco-friendly energy, leading to a sustainable world.

In conclusion, it seems to me that life on the Earth is likely to become harsher, but space investigation should not be significantly invested in because there are other solutions to this situation.