Numerous animal species worldwide are currently facing extinction. Some argue that countries and individuals should prioritise protecting these animals, while others believe resources should be focused more on human issues. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

There is a current divergence of opinions on the topic of countries’ main priorities. While many advocate for the government budget to be allocated to protecting endangered animals, some state that the main focus of the authorities should be human matters. Although the notion of one wanting to save the animals is reasonable, it is not as practical as prioritising human matters first-hand. In this essay, I will discuss both sides and highlight the practicality of allocating funds and attention to human affairs.

On the one hand, animals, like any beings, play crucial parts in keeping biodiversity balanced, unless they are protected, many repercussions will follow. Firstly, wild animals keep a key role in nature, putting specific types of creatures in danger would cause a drastic imbalance in the local environment. Coyotes, for instance, are predators and their main meal is rats; ever since the last pack of coyotes became extinct, the reproduction rates of rats in Northern Europe skyrocketed. As a result, many diseases occurred leading to increased infant fatalities and decreased quality of life. Moreover, as a matter of fact, humans and nature have been co-dependent on each other from the very dawn of Earth. Losing animals to extinction can cause enormous problems for society. To exemplify, some specific aqua creatures have the ability to purify water, and cleanse the environment for some water bodies that humans are very much dependent on.

On the other hand, humans are the base of societies, unless human-related problems have not been solved before reaching out to other matters, the basis of humanity will fall, leading to consequences. To begin, human beings are the cells of society, and addressing the problems will strengthen the community as a whole. If the government is aware of the illiteracy in some areas of the country and implements policies on providing public education, the future workforce will be fully educated, resulting in high-quality productions benefiting the economy. The same process applies to most issues. Moreover, if the citizens are not ensured to be safe and have a high quality of life, there is almost no possibility for the authorities to identify any natural issues. They might consider working on solutions and plans for the betterment of individuals in one country since it is more urgent, before identifying a problem regarding environment and animal extinctions.

To be concluded, the notion of saving endangered animals is rational since it has a key role in balancing biodiversity and strengthening the bonds and co-dependence with humans. Nevertheless, it is more practical to pay more attention to human-related issues as for the society construction and the urgency of the matter.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"There is a current divergence of opinions" -> "There is a current divergence of opinions"
Explanation: The original phrase is acceptable, but for a more formal tone, it can be slightly refined by removing "on the topic of countries’ main priorities."
"While many advocate for the government budget to be allocated to protecting endangered animals" -> "While many advocate for allocating government funds to the protection of endangered animals"
Explanation: Restructuring the sentence for conciseness and formality, avoiding unnecessary words like "budget" and specifying the action more directly.
"some state that the main focus of the authorities should be human matters" -> "some argue that the primary focus of authorities should be human welfare"
Explanation: Using "argue" instead of "state" adds a formal touch, and "human welfare" is a more precise term than "human matters."
"Although the notion of one wanting to save the animals is reasonable" -> "While the idea of preserving animals is reasonable"
Explanation: Replacing "notion of one wanting to save" with "idea of preserving" maintains formality and clarity.
"it is not as practical as prioritising human matters first-hand" -> "it is less practical than prioritizing human concerns firsthand"
Explanation: Substituting "prioritising" with "prioritizing" for consistency and changing "human matters" to "human concerns" for precision.
"On the one hand, animals, like any beings, play crucial parts in keeping biodiversity balanced" -> "On one hand, animals play a crucial role in maintaining balanced biodiversity"
Explanation: Streamlining the sentence for conciseness and removing redundant elements.
"Firstly, wild animals keep a key role in nature" -> "First, wild animals play a crucial role in nature"
Explanation: Adjusting the word order for better flow and replacing "keep a key role" with "play a crucial role" for simplicity.
"As a result, many diseases occurred leading to increased infant fatalities and decreased quality of life" -> "Consequently, numerous diseases occurred, resulting in increased infant fatalities and a diminished quality of life"
Explanation: Enhancing the clarity and formality by specifying the consequences more explicitly.
"Moreover, as a matter of fact, humans and nature have been co-dependent on each other from the very dawn of Earth" -> "Furthermore, humans and nature have been mutually dependent since the dawn of Earth"
Explanation: Removing unnecessary phrases like "as a matter of fact" and rephrasing for a more concise and formal expression.
"To exemplify, some specific aqua creatures have the ability to purify water" -> "For example, certain aquatic organisms have the ability to purify water"
Explanation: Substituting "To exemplify" with "For example" for formality and using "certain aquatic organisms" for specificity.
"On the other hand, humans are the base of societies" -> "On the other hand, humans form the foundation of societies"
Explanation: Refining the expression by replacing "base" with "form the foundation."
"unless human-related problems have not been solved" -> "unless issues related to humans have been addressed"
Explanation: Clarifying and simplifying the sentence for better readability.
"the basis of humanity will fall, leading to consequences" -> "the foundation of humanity will crumble, resulting in dire consequences"
Explanation: Introducing a more vivid term ("crumble") and specifying the consequences more explicitly.
"the future workforce will be fully educated, resulting in high-quality productions benefiting the economy" -> "the future workforce will be well-educated, leading to high-quality output and benefiting the economy"
Explanation: Enhancing clarity and formality by replacing "fully educated" with "well-educated" and rephrasing the latter part for better flow.
"The same process applies to most issues" -> "This principle applies to various challenges"
Explanation: Strengthening the sentence by using "principle" and specifying "various challenges" instead of the more generic "most issues."
"there is almost no possibility for the authorities to identify any natural issues" -> "there is almost no opportunity for authorities to identify environmental issues"
Explanation: Substituting "possibility" with "opportunity" for precision, and specifying "environmental issues" for clarity.
"They might consider working on solutions and plans for the betterment of individuals in one country since it is more urgent, before identifying a problem regarding environment and animal extinctions" -> "They might prioritize developing solutions and plans to improve conditions for individuals in one country, given its urgency, before addressing environmental and animal extinction concerns"
Explanation: Clarifying the sequence of actions and refining the wording for a more formal tone.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0

Quoted text: "Although the notion of one wanting to save the animals is reasonable, it is not as practical as prioritising human matters first-hand."
- Explanation and Improvement Suggestions: The introduction is clear in presenting the writer’s opinion; however, it lacks a concise overview of the main points to be discussed. Providing a roadmap of the upcoming arguments would enhance the essay’s organization and help the reader anticipate the structure. For example, you can briefly mention that you will discuss the importance of animals in biodiversity and the urgency of human-related issues.
- Improved example: "Although the idea of preserving endangered animals is reasonable, in this essay, I will argue that prioritizing human matters is more practical. I will first delve into the crucial role animals play in maintaining biodiversity. Following that, I will discuss the urgency of addressing human-related issues for the overall well-being of society."
Quoted text: "Firstly, wild animals keep a key role in nature, putting specific types of creatures in danger would cause a drastic imbalance in the local environment."
- Explanation and Improvement Suggestions: The first supporting point is relevant, but it lacks depth in explaining how specific animals contribute to biodiversity. Consider providing concrete examples or elaborating on how the extinction of certain species can disrupt ecosystems. Additionally, ensure that your examples are connected explicitly to the task, which is discussing both views (protection of animals and focus on human issues).
- Improved example: "Firstly, wild animals, such as predators like coyotes, play a crucial role in maintaining the balance of local ecosystems. For instance, the extinction of coyotes in Northern Europe led to a surge in the rat population, resulting in the spread of diseases and adverse effects on human and environmental health."
Quoted text: "To exemplify, some specific aqua creatures have the ability to purify water, and cleanse the environment for some water bodies that humans are very much dependent on."
- Explanation and Improvement Suggestions: This point is well-stated, but it could benefit from more specificity. Provide examples of these aquatic creatures and their impact on water purification. Additionally, consider linking this example back to the overarching theme of biodiversity and human dependence on these natural processes.
- Improved example: "To exemplify, certain aquatic species, such as oysters and mussels, possess the remarkable ability to purify water. These organisms play a vital role in cleansing the environment and maintaining the health of water bodies that are crucial for human consumption and various industrial processes."

Overall, the essay adequately addresses the task, but improvement lies in providing more detailed and specific examples to strengthen the argument and ensure a more nuanced understanding of both perspectives.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a clear and logical organization of information and ideas. There is a discernible progression throughout, with well-structured paragraphs presenting distinct viewpoints. The use of cohesive devices is generally effective, contributing to the overall coherence of the essay. The essay appropriately uses referencing and substitution, enhancing clarity. Paragraphing is mostly logical, contributing to the essay’s overall coherence.

How to improve: While the essay generally meets the criteria for Band 7, there are instances where the use of cohesive devices could be more varied and refined. Additionally, the essay could benefit from more precise and consistent paragraphing. Ensure that each paragraph focuses on a single central topic to further enhance coherence. Overall, maintaining a consistent level of proficiency in cohesive device usage and paragraphing will contribute to achieving a higher band score.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a sufficient range of vocabulary with attempts at using less common lexical items. There’s an awareness of style and collocation, allowing for flexibility and precision in conveying ideas. Some uncommon vocabulary is used to articulate arguments on both sides, contributing to a nuanced discussion. Occasional errors in word choice and collocation are present but don’t significantly impede understanding.

How to improve: To enhance lexical resource, strive for greater precision and accuracy in word choice. Proofreading for minor errors in collocation and vocabulary usage would further elevate the essay’s quality. Additionally, incorporating a wider variety of sophisticated vocabulary could strengthen the overall lexical range and sophistication.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a good variety of sentence structures, incorporating both simple and complex sentence forms effectively. It successfully employs a range of vocabulary and grammatical structures to convey ideas. There is evidence of complex sentences used with relative clauses and dependent clauses, enhancing the overall structure and demonstrating the ability to manipulate language at a higher level.

The majority of sentences are error-free and exhibit a commendable grasp of grammar and punctuation. While there are some minor errors and occasional inaccuracies, they don’t significantly hinder communication. The essay maintains coherence and clarity throughout.

The writer effectively discusses both perspectives—prioritizing the protection of endangered animals and focusing on human issues. The arguments are presented logically and supported with relevant examples and explanations.

How to improve:
To reach a higher band score, continue refining the complexity and accuracy of sentence structures. Pay close attention to minor errors and inaccuracies, aiming for even fewer occasional mistakes. Additionally, further development and elaboration on ideas could strengthen the depth of the essay.

Overall, the essay displays a commendable command of grammar and sentence structures, effectively addressing the prompt with clarity and coherence.

Bài sửa mẫu

The question of national priorities sparks varied opinions, with some advocating for directing government resources towards safeguarding endangered animals, while others argue for a focus on human-centric concerns. While the idea of preserving wildlife is commendable, it may not be as pragmatic as prioritizing human issues. This essay explores both perspectives, emphasizing the practicality of channeling funds and attention toward human affairs.

On one side of the debate, animals, as integral components of biodiversity, maintain a delicate balance in nature. Failure to protect them could lead to far-reaching consequences. For instance, certain predators, like coyotes, play a crucial role in controlling rat populations. The extinction of these predators in Northern Europe resulted in a surge in rat numbers, leading to the spread of diseases and a decline in the quality of life. Additionally, many animals, particularly aquatic species, contribute to the purification of water, vital for human dependence. Losing these species to extinction poses significant challenges for society.

On the flip side, humans form the foundation of societies. Addressing human-centric issues is paramount, as unresolved problems could undermine the fabric of humanity. For example, tackling illiteracy through public education policies enhances the overall education level of the workforce, contributing to a more productive economy. The same principle applies to various societal issues. Ensuring the safety and well-being of citizens is crucial, as it allows authorities to identify and address pressing issues. Only by securing the foundation of society can governments effectively engage in solving environmental and animal extinction problems.

In conclusion, while the idea of preserving endangered animals is rational due to its role in maintaining biodiversity and the interconnectedness with human well-being, a more practical approach involves placing a greater emphasis on human-related issues. This prioritization aligns with the urgency of societal construction and the immediate needs of the population.