It is a natural process for animal species to become extinct (e.g. Dinosaurs, dodos …). There is no reason why people should try to prevent this from happening. Do you agree or disagree?

It is widely assumed that there are no compelling reasons for us to protect animal species from extinction as it occurs naturally. From my perspective, I totally disagree with this statement by elaborating on a number of reasons.

The first idea to support my point of view is that many modern extinctions are directly caused by human activities, leading to irreversible damage to ecosystems. Human actions such as deforestation, pollution, and overfishing have pushed numerous species to the brink of extinction. For example, the critically endangered vaquita, a small porpoise native to Mexico, is nearing extinction primarily due to illegal fishing practices and habitat destruction. This species' rapid decline highlights how human interference disrupts marine life, leading to the potential loss of an entire species. Therefore, since these extinctions are not purely natural but are driven by humans, it is our responsibility to prevent further damage and preserve the biodiversity essential for ecological balance.

Another idea to advocate my belief is that the extinction of species also results in lost opportunities for scientific research and potential medical breakthroughs. Many species possess unique biological traits that can inspire new technologies or treatments. For instance, studies on the regenerative abilities of the axolotl, a type of salamander, have provided valuable insights into human tissue regeneration and wound healing. The axolotl’s remarkable ability to regenerate entire limbs and organs has led researchers to explore ways to apply similar mechanisms in human medicine. Thus, by preserving species, we can continue to explore these possibilities and advance scientific knowledge, potentially leading to significant medical advancements and improved healthcare outcomes.

In conclusion, I strongly disagree with the view that species extinction is a natural process and does not require intervention, overlooking significant concerns given the aforementioned reasons.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"It is widely assumed" -> "It is commonly believed"
Explanation: "Commonly believed" is a more precise and academically appropriate phrase than "widely assumed," which can imply a less formal or less supported notion.
"I totally disagree" -> "I strongly disagree"
Explanation: "Totally" is somewhat informal and can be seen as overly emphatic for academic writing. "Strongly" maintains a formal tone while conveying a similar level of disagreement.
"The first idea to support my point of view" -> "The first point to support my perspective"
Explanation: "Idea" is less formal and can be vague in this context. "Point" is more specific and appropriate for academic writing, and "perspective" is a more formal synonym for "point of view."
"leading to irreversible damage" -> "resulting in irreversible damage"
Explanation: "Resulting in" is a more precise and formal way to express causality in academic writing compared to "leading to."
"pushed numerous species to the brink of extinction" -> "have driven numerous species to the brink of extinction"
Explanation: Adding "have" clarifies the verb tense and makes the sentence more formal and precise.
"nearing extinction" -> "approaching extinction"
Explanation: "Approaching" is a more formal and scientifically precise term than "nearing" in this context.
"This species’ rapid decline" -> "This species’ rapid decline"
Explanation: The possessive form "This species’" is grammatically correct and maintains the formal tone.
"Another idea to advocate my belief" -> "Another point to support my argument"
Explanation: "Idea" is less formal and specific than "point," and "advocate" can be replaced with "support" for clarity and formality in academic writing.
"lost opportunities for scientific research and potential medical breakthroughs" -> "lost opportunities for scientific research and potential medical advancements"
Explanation: "Advancements" is a more precise and formal term than "breakthroughs," which can be seen as slightly informal and vague.
"Many species possess unique biological traits" -> "Numerous species exhibit unique biological traits"
Explanation: "Exhibit" is more precise and formal than "possess" in this context, emphasizing the display or manifestation of traits.
"inspire new technologies or treatments" -> "inform the development of new technologies or treatments"
Explanation: "Inform the development" is more specific and academically appropriate than "inspire," which can be seen as less direct and less formal.
"The axolotl’s remarkable ability" -> "The axolotl’s remarkable ability"
Explanation: The possessive form "axolotl’s" is grammatically correct and maintains the formal tone.
"has led researchers to explore ways to apply similar mechanisms" -> "has led researchers to investigate ways to apply similar mechanisms"
Explanation: "Investigate" is a more precise and formal verb than "explore," which is slightly more casual and vague in this context.
"does not require intervention" -> "does not necessitate intervention"
Explanation: "Necessitate" is a more formal and precise term than "require," fitting better in an academic discussion about policy and action.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 9

Band Score for Task Response: 9

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses all parts of the prompt by clearly stating the author’s disagreement with the notion that species extinction should not be prevented. The introduction sets the stage by acknowledging the opposing viewpoint while firmly establishing the author’s stance. Each body paragraph provides substantial arguments against the idea of inaction, focusing on human-induced extinctions and the potential losses in scientific research. The use of specific examples, such as the vaquita and axolotl, strengthens the response by illustrating the consequences of extinction and the benefits of conservation.
- How to improve: While the essay is comprehensive, it could enhance its depth by briefly acknowledging counterarguments to further demonstrate critical engagement with the topic. This could involve mentioning a specific reason why some might argue against intervention and then refuting it.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The author maintains a clear and consistent position throughout the essay, firmly stating their disagreement with the idea of allowing species extinction to occur unchecked. The use of phrases like "I totally disagree" and "I strongly disagree" reinforces this stance. Additionally, the logical flow of ideas supports the position, as each argument builds upon the previous one, culminating in a strong conclusion that reiterates the main point.
- How to improve: To further solidify the clarity of the position, the author could incorporate transitional phrases that explicitly connect each argument back to the central thesis. This would enhance coherence and remind the reader of the overarching viewpoint throughout the essay.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents well-developed ideas supported by relevant examples. The arguments regarding human impact on extinction and the potential for scientific advancement are both compelling and well-articulated. Each point is extended with specific examples that illustrate the importance of the arguments, such as the mention of the vaquita’s plight and the axolotl’s regenerative abilities.
- How to improve: While the examples are strong, the author could enhance the essay by providing additional supporting details or statistics related to the examples mentioned. For instance, including data on the current population of the vaquita or the number of species that have been lost due to human activity could provide a more robust foundation for the arguments.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay remains focused on the topic throughout, consistently addressing the question of whether humans should intervene in the extinction of species. There are no deviations from the main argument, and all content is relevant to the discussion of extinction and conservation.
- How to improve: To ensure continued focus, the author could occasionally refer back to the prompt in the body paragraphs, explicitly linking the arguments to the question of whether intervention is justified. This would reinforce the relevance of each point made and keep the reader engaged with the central theme.

Overall, this essay demonstrates a high level of proficiency in addressing the Task Response criteria for IELTS, achieving a Band Score of 9 through its comprehensive, clear, and well-supported arguments.

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 progression of ideas. The introduction effectively outlines the writer’s stance, and each body paragraph focuses on a distinct supporting argument. For instance, the first paragraph addresses human-caused extinctions, while the second discusses the implications for scientific research. This structure aids the reader in following the argument. However, the transition between the two main points could be smoother to enhance overall coherence.
- How to improve: To further improve logical organization, consider adding transitional phrases or sentences that explicitly connect the two main ideas. For example, after discussing human-caused extinctions, a sentence like, "In addition to ecological concerns, the loss of species also hampers scientific progress," could serve as a bridge to the next paragraph.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively employs paragraphs to separate different ideas, with each paragraph serving a specific purpose. The introduction and conclusion are clearly defined, and the body paragraphs are well-structured. Each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence that states the main idea, followed by supporting details and examples. This structure enhances readability and comprehension.
- How to improve: While the paragraphing is strong, consider ensuring that each paragraph not only begins with a clear topic sentence but also ends with a concluding sentence that summarizes the main point. This can reinforce the argument and provide a sense of closure for each section. For example, a concluding sentence in the first body paragraph could reiterate the responsibility humans have in preventing extinction.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good use of cohesive devices, such as "for example," "therefore," and "thus," which help to clarify relationships between ideas and enhance the flow of the argument. These devices effectively guide the reader through the reasoning process. However, the range of cohesive devices could be expanded to include more varied linking words and phrases to avoid repetition and enhance the sophistication of the writing.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider range of linking phrases. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "for example," consider alternatives like "such as," "to illustrate," or "in particular." Additionally, using contrasting cohesive devices like "on the other hand" when discussing opposing views could enrich the essay’s complexity and demonstrate a nuanced understanding of the topic.

By addressing these areas for improvement, the essay could achieve an even higher level of coherence and cohesion, potentially elevating the band score further.

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 extinction and conservation. Terms such as "irreversible damage," "critically endangered," and "biodiversity" are effectively used to convey complex ideas. The use of phrases like "pushed numerous species to the brink of extinction" showcases the writer’s ability to articulate nuanced arguments. However, there are moments where the vocabulary could be more varied; for instance, the repeated use of "extinction" could be substituted with synonyms such as "vanishing" or "disappearance" to enhance lexical diversity.
- How to improve: To improve, the writer should aim to incorporate a broader range of synonyms and related terms throughout the essay. For example, instead of repeatedly using "extinction," consider using "endangerment" or "obliteration" in different contexts. This will not only demonstrate a wider vocabulary range but also keep the reader engaged.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary with precision, particularly in the context of scientific and ecological discussions. Phrases like "human interference disrupts marine life" and "unique biological traits" are well-chosen and convey the intended meaning clearly. However, there are instances where the vocabulary could be more precise. For example, the phrase "many modern extinctions are directly caused by human activities" could be more specific by mentioning "anthropogenic factors" instead of the broader term "human activities."
- How to improve: To enhance precision, the writer should focus on using terminology that is specific to the field of ecology and conservation. Incorporating terms like "habitat degradation" or "anthropogenic extinction" can provide clearer insights into the arguments being made. Additionally, ensuring that all terms used are appropriate for the context will strengthen the overall clarity of the essay.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a high level of spelling accuracy, with no noticeable errors in the text. Words such as "deforestation," "pollution," and "biodiversity" are spelled correctly, reflecting a strong command of English spelling conventions. This accuracy contributes positively to the overall readability of the essay.
- How to improve: While the spelling is currently accurate, the writer should maintain this level of attention to detail in future writings. To further enhance spelling skills, regular practice with vocabulary exercises, reading extensively, and utilizing spell-check tools can be beneficial. Additionally, reviewing common spelling rules and exceptions can help solidify this strength.

In summary, the essay achieves a Band Score of 7 for Lexical Resource due to its effective use of a wide range of vocabulary, precise word choice, and correct spelling. To improve further, the writer should focus on expanding vocabulary variety, enhancing precision with more specific terms, and maintaining spelling accuracy through consistent practice.

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. The writer effectively employs complex sentences, such as "Human actions such as deforestation, pollution, and overfishing have pushed numerous species to the brink of extinction," which showcases the ability to connect multiple ideas within a single sentence. Additionally, the use of conditional structures, as seen in "if we do not intervene," adds depth to the argument. However, the essay could benefit from more varied introductory phrases and transitions to enhance the flow between ideas.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures further, the writer could incorporate more varied introductory clauses and phrases. For instance, instead of starting sentences with "The first idea to support my point of view is that…" or "Another idea to advocate my belief is that…", the writer could use phrases like "One compelling argument is…" or "Additionally, it is important to consider that…". This would not only add variety but also make the writing more engaging.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a high level of grammatical accuracy, with only minor errors. For example, the phrase "leading to irreversible damage to ecosystems" is correctly structured, and the use of commas is appropriate throughout the essay. However, there is a slight awkwardness in the phrase "by elaborating on a number of reasons," which could be more succinctly expressed. The punctuation is generally accurate, but the essay could benefit from more varied punctuation, such as semicolons or dashes, to enhance clarity and emphasis.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy and punctuation skills, the writer should focus on refining sentence clarity. For example, rephrasing "by elaborating on a number of reasons" to "by presenting several compelling reasons" would enhance clarity. Additionally, practicing the use of semicolons to connect closely related independent clauses could add sophistication to the writing. For instance, "The axolotl’s remarkable ability to regenerate entire limbs and organs has led researchers to explore ways to apply similar mechanisms in human medicine; this could revolutionize healthcare." This would not only demonstrate a higher level of grammatical range but also improve the overall flow of the essay.

Overall, the essay is well-structured and effectively communicates the writer’s stance, but there is room for improvement in sentence variety and grammatical precision to achieve an even higher band score.

Bài sửa mẫu

It is commonly believed that there are no compelling reasons for us to protect animal species from extinction, as this process occurs naturally. From my perspective, I strongly disagree with this statement and will elaborate on a number of reasons.

The first point to support my perspective is that many modern extinctions are directly caused by human activities, resulting in irreversible damage to ecosystems. Human actions such as deforestation, pollution, and overfishing have driven numerous species to the brink of extinction. For example, the critically endangered vaquita, a small porpoise native to Mexico, is approaching extinction primarily due to illegal fishing practices and habitat destruction. This species’ rapid decline highlights how human interference disrupts marine life, leading to the potential loss of an entire species. Therefore, since these extinctions are not purely natural but are driven by humans, it is our responsibility to prevent further damage and preserve the biodiversity essential for ecological balance.

Another point to support my argument is that the extinction of species also results in lost opportunities for scientific research and potential medical advancements. Numerous species exhibit unique biological traits that can inform the development of new technologies or treatments. For instance, studies on the regenerative abilities of the axolotl, a type of salamander, have provided valuable insights into human tissue regeneration and wound healing. The axolotl’s remarkable ability to regenerate entire limbs and organs has led researchers to investigate ways to apply similar mechanisms in human medicine. Thus, by preserving species, we can continue to explore these possibilities and advance scientific knowledge, potentially leading to significant medical breakthroughs and improved healthcare outcomes.

In conclusion, I strongly disagree with the view that species extinction is a natural process that does not necessitate intervention, as this perspective overlooks significant concerns given the aforementioned reasons.