In the past, important knowledge about history and culture was stored in museums. However, today, people can see everything on the internet without paying any money. Therefore, we no longer need museums. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

These days, the widespread use of the Internet has offered individuals access to information, which was once the main role of museums. Because of this, some argue that the existence of museums is not necessary. I, however, disagree with this proposal, while acknowledging reasons for it.

Advocates of removing museums often point to the more convenient and economical access to information that the Internet has to offer compared to museums. These structures, in the past, often served as hubs of information, where people usually visited to obtain knowledge through antiques, historical masterpieces, or striking artworks. However, now, the widespread use of the Internet has undermined this function of museums, as Internet users can access any kind of information with just a few clicks and without incurring costs, such as entrance fees. This, therefore, would save them a huge amount of time and money spent browsing museums, making the proposal of removing museums seem justifiable.

Despite acknowledging the importance of the Internet in providing access to information, I believe the "Internet browsing" experience suffers in comparison to the immersive and multi-sensory experience that museums offer. Indeed, the internet's presentation of information often lacks the emotional impact of experiencing artifacts firsthand, while museums, apart from their role in providing information, can offer visitors opportunities to encounter objects and artifacts in person, learn about their origins, and appreciate their historical and cultural contexts through audios or videos. It would help visitors obtain knowledge in ways that are far more engaging compared to just scrolling their screens. Therefore, the removal of museums would deprive society of these unique and valuable experiences.

Furthermore, museums can serve as safe storages for historically or culturally significant items. Indeed, these structures are often equipped with cutting-edge security technology, such as digital cameras or sensitivity sensors, to detect any suspicious behavior. This prompts curators and security teams to take timely actions to handle the situation and protect the displayed items. Besides this role, museums can serve as tourist attractions, which draw visitors from places around the world, and therefore boost local tourism. It can be exemplified by the Louvre museum in Paris, which each year welcomes millions of tourists to witness fine collections of the museum, thus not only creating jobs for local citizens but also generating a huge income for the French government.

In conclusion, while there are certain valid arguments for removing museums, I believe that their roles are not just confined to providing information, but offering multi-sensory experiences, protecting artifacts, and promoting the local economy. Therefore, their existence is not just worthwhile, but essential.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"These days" -> "Currently"
Explanation: "Currently" is a more formal and precise temporal indicator suitable for academic writing, replacing the colloquial "These days."
"offered individuals access to information" -> "provided individuals with access to information"
Explanation: The phrase "provided individuals with access to information" is more formal and precise, enhancing the academic tone.
"the main role of museums" -> "the primary function of museums"
Explanation: "Primary function" is a more specific and formal term than "main role," aligning better with academic language.
"I, however, disagree" -> "However, I disagree"
Explanation: Moving "I" to the end of the sentence follows standard academic structure, improving the formal tone.
"removing museums" -> "abolishing museums"
Explanation: "Abolishing" is a more formal and precise term than "removing," which is commonly used in academic discussions about policy and institutional changes.
"Internet browsing" -> "Internet usage"
Explanation: "Internet usage" is a more formal and encompassing term than "Internet browsing," which is somewhat informal and specific to the act of browsing.
"justifiable" -> "justifiable"
Explanation: The word "justifiable" should not be used as an adverb; it should be used as an adjective, "justifiable," to describe the proposal.
"Internet’s presentation of information" -> "Internet’s presentation of information"
Explanation: The possessive form "Internet’s" is grammatically correct and more formal than the non-possessive "Internet."
"audios or videos" -> "audio or video"
Explanation: "Audio or video" should be singular to maintain consistency in formality and grammatical correctness.
"scrolling their screens" -> "scrolling through their screens"
Explanation: "Scrolling through their screens" is a more precise and formal way to describe the action of browsing on the Internet.
"safe storages" -> "secure storage"
Explanation: "Secure storage" is a more formal and precise term than "safe storages," which is grammatically incorrect.
"sensitivity sensors" -> "sensors"
Explanation: "Sensors" is sufficient and more formal without the redundant "sensitivity."
"boost local tourism" -> "enhance local tourism"
Explanation: "Enhance" is a more formal and precise verb than "boost" in this context, fitting better in academic writing.
"fine collections of the museum" -> "fine collections within the museum"
Explanation: "Within the museum" is more precise and formal than "of the museum," which is vague and less specific.
"not just worthwhile, but essential" -> "not only worthwhile but essential"
Explanation: "Not only… but" is a more formal and academically appropriate conjunction than "not just… but," which is less formal and slightly colloquial.

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 the prompt by presenting a clear disagreement with the statement that museums are no longer necessary. The writer acknowledges the opposing viewpoint regarding the convenience of the internet but counters it with strong arguments supporting the value of museums. Each part of the question is addressed, including the historical role of museums and the contemporary relevance of their existence.
- How to improve: To enhance the response further, the writer could explicitly outline the specific aspects of the prompt in the introduction, ensuring that both sides of the argument are clearly defined. This would provide a more structured approach to addressing the question and reinforce the essay’s focus.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position throughout, consistently arguing against the removal of museums. The use of phrases like "I, however, disagree with this proposal" establishes a strong stance early on. The writer effectively supports this position with logical reasoning and examples, such as the immersive experience of museums and their role in tourism.
- How to improve: While the position is clear, the writer could strengthen it by reiterating the main argument in the conclusion with a more emphatic statement. This would reinforce the stance and leave a lasting impression on the reader.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: Ideas are well-presented and supported with relevant examples, such as the comparison between internet browsing and the museum experience. The essay discusses various roles of museums, including their educational value and contribution to local economies, which are effectively elaborated upon. The use of specific examples, like the Louvre, adds credibility to the argument.
- How to improve: To improve further, the writer could incorporate more diverse examples or statistics to support claims, particularly regarding the economic impact of museums. This would provide a more robust foundation for the arguments presented.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay remains focused on the topic, consistently discussing the relevance and necessity of museums in the context of the internet’s rise. There are no significant deviations from the main argument, and each paragraph contributes to the overall thesis.
- How to improve: While the essay stays on topic, the writer could enhance coherence by using clearer topic sentences at the beginning of each paragraph. This would help guide the reader through the argument and reinforce the connection between each point and the central thesis.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong understanding of the task and effectively communicates the writer’s position. By implementing the suggested improvements, the writer could elevate their score even further.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 8

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear and logical structure, beginning with an introduction that outlines the main argument and acknowledges opposing views. Each paragraph addresses a specific point, with the first discussing the argument for the removal of museums, the second countering that argument by highlighting the unique experiences museums provide, and the third elaborating on the protective and economic roles of museums. This logical progression aids the reader’s understanding and keeps the argument coherent throughout.
- How to improve: To further enhance logical organization, consider using more explicit linking phrases between paragraphs. For instance, at the beginning of the second paragraph, a phrase like "On the contrary" could reinforce the contrast between the views presented. Additionally, summarizing the main points at the end of each paragraph could help reinforce the argument’s development.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate distinct ideas, which contributes to clarity. Each paragraph has a clear focus, with the first addressing the argument for the removal of museums, the second countering with the benefits of museums, and the third discussing their protective and economic roles. The paragraphs are well-structured, with topic sentences that introduce the main idea and supporting details that elaborate on it.
- How to improve: While the paragraphing is strong, consider ensuring that each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence that succinctly states the main idea. This would enhance the reader’s ability to quickly grasp the focus of each paragraph. Additionally, ensuring that the concluding sentence of each paragraph ties back to the overall thesis could strengthen the cohesion of the essay.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good use of cohesive devices, such as "however," "despite," and "therefore," which help to connect ideas and indicate relationships between them. These devices contribute to the overall flow of the essay and guide the reader through the argument. The use of examples, such as the reference to the Louvre museum, also serves as a cohesive element that reinforces the points made.
- How to improve: To diversify the range of cohesive devices used, consider incorporating more varied linking phrases and transitional words. For example, instead of repeatedly using "however," alternatives like "nevertheless" or "on the other hand" could be employed. Additionally, using phrases that indicate cause and effect, such as "as a result" or "consequently," could further enhance the logical connections between ideas.

Overall, the essay is well-structured and coherent, demonstrating a strong command of coherence and cohesion principles. By implementing the suggested improvements, the writer can elevate their essay to an even higher level of clarity and effectiveness.

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 relevant to the topic of museums and the internet. Terms such as "widespread," "economical," "immersive," and "multi-sensory" are effectively used to convey nuanced ideas. The writer also employs phrases like "historical masterpieces" and "cutting-edge security technology," which enhance the sophistication of the language. However, there are instances of repetition, such as the overuse of "information" and "museums," which could be varied to showcase a broader lexical range.
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary diversity, the writer could replace repetitive terms with synonyms or related phrases. For example, instead of repeatedly using "information," alternatives like "knowledge," "data," or "insight" could be integrated. Additionally, exploring more descriptive adjectives or verbs could enrich the essay further.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary accurately, but there are moments where word choice could be more precise. For instance, the phrase "the Internet has undermined this function of museums" could imply a negative connotation that may not be intended. The term "justifiable" in the context of removing museums may also suggest a stronger endorsement of the idea than the writer intends.
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should consider the connotations of words and select those that align closely with the intended meaning. For example, substituting "undermined" with "transformed" could better reflect the change in the role of museums without implying a negative impact. Additionally, using "arguable" instead of "justifiable" could convey a more balanced view of the debate.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay displays a strong command of spelling, with no noticeable errors throughout the text. Words such as "significant," "opportunities," and "experience" are spelled correctly, demonstrating the writer’s attention to detail in this area.
- How to improve: While spelling is accurate, the writer should maintain this standard by proofreading for any potential typographical errors in future essays. Engaging in regular spelling practice, such as using flashcards or spelling apps, can also help reinforce this skill.

Overall, the essay effectively utilizes a range of vocabulary and demonstrates a good understanding of lexical resource criteria. By focusing on enhancing variety, precision, and maintaining spelling accuracy, the writer can aim for an even higher band score in future writing tasks.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 8

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable variety of sentence structures, including complex and compound sentences. For instance, the use of phrases like "while acknowledging reasons for it" and "which draw visitors from places around the world" showcases the writer’s ability to incorporate subordinate clauses effectively. Additionally, the essay employs a mix of declarative and interrogative forms, enhancing the overall fluency. However, there are instances of repetitive structures, particularly in the way arguments are introduced, such as "Advocates of removing museums often point to…" and "Despite acknowledging the importance of the Internet…".
- How to improve: To further diversify sentence structures, the writer could incorporate more varied introductory phrases or transition words. For example, instead of repeatedly using "Despite acknowledging," alternatives like "While it is true that…" or "Although one might concede that…" could be employed. Additionally, integrating more rhetorical questions or conditional sentences could enhance engagement and complexity.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally exhibits strong grammatical accuracy, with few errors. For example, the phrase "the Internet has undermined this function of museums" is grammatically correct and effectively conveys the intended meaning. Punctuation is mostly accurate, with appropriate use of commas to separate clauses and enhance readability. However, there are minor issues, such as the phrase "which was once the main role of museums," where the use of "which" could be more clearly defined to avoid ambiguity. Additionally, the sentence "This prompts curators and security teams to take timely actions to handle the situation and protect the displayed items" could benefit from a comma before "and" to clarify the separation of actions.
- How to improve: To enhance grammatical accuracy, the writer should carefully proofread for clarity and punctuation usage. Specifically, ensuring that relative clauses are clearly linked to their antecedents will improve coherence. Furthermore, practicing the use of conjunctions and transitional phrases can help in creating smoother connections between ideas, thereby reducing the likelihood of run-on sentences or comma splices.

Overall, the essay is well-structured and presents a clear argument with a strong command of grammatical range and accuracy. By focusing on diversifying sentence structures and refining grammatical precision, the writer can further elevate their writing to achieve an even higher band score.

Bài sửa mẫu

These days, the widespread use of the Internet has provided individuals with access to information, which was once the primary function of museums. Because of this, some argue that the existence of museums is not necessary. However, I disagree with this proposal, while acknowledging reasons for it.

Despite acknowledging the importance of the Internet in providing access to information, I believe the Internet browsing experience suffers in comparison to the immersive and multi-sensory experience that museums offer. Indeed, the Internet’s presentation of information often lacks the emotional impact of experiencing artifacts firsthand, while museums, apart from their role in providing information, can offer visitors opportunities to encounter objects and artifacts in person, learn about their origins, and appreciate their historical and cultural contexts through audio or video. It would help visitors obtain knowledge in ways that are far more engaging compared to just scrolling through their screens. Therefore, the removal of museums would deprive society of these unique and valuable experiences.

Furthermore, museums can serve as secure storage for historically or culturally significant items. Indeed, these structures are often equipped with cutting-edge security technology, such as digital cameras or sensitivity sensors, to detect any suspicious behavior. This prompts curators and security teams to take timely actions to handle the situation and protect the displayed items. Besides this role, museums can serve as tourist attractions, which draw visitors from places around the world, and therefore enhance local tourism. This can be exemplified by the Louvre museum in Paris, which each year welcomes millions of tourists to witness fine collections within the museum, thus not only creating jobs for local citizens but also generating a huge income for the French government.

In conclusion, while there are certain valid arguments for removing museums, I believe that their roles are not just confined to providing information, but also offering multi-sensory experiences, protecting artifacts, and promoting the local economy. Therefore, their existence is not only worthwhile but essential.