Numerous animal species worldwide are currently facing extinction. Some argue that countries and individuals should prioritize protecting these animals, while others believe resources should be focused more on human issues. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
A great number of animal species are now on the verge of extinction. Some people opine that they should give precedence to animal protection, while others hold the belief that there are other human issues that should be taken into consideration instead. I agree with the latter opinion for its urgency.
On the one hand, there are several reasons why some people state that protecting these animal species should be prioritized. Firstly, it is believed that animal preservation facilitates biodiversity maintenance. Once people combated animal extinction, they might prevent the food chain disruption which can potentially help protect other species. Additionally, preserving animals may also strengthen the connection between humans and animals. This is a mutually beneficial relationship where both animals and people derive benefits from the other through many aspects of life. Therefore, protecting animals possibly translates to protecting human lives.
On the other hand, I believe that there are more urgent human issues that should be prioritized over imminent animal extinction. In the first place, poverty and starvation are problems that should be eradicated as soon as possible. These problems are associated with a higher crime rate which is detrimental to the nation. If people can address these problems, other predicaments such as high crime rates and death rates will certainly be resolved. Furthermore, the authority should invest more resources into dealing with illiteracy issues. Only when citizens acquire a rudimentary knowledge of literacy and numeracy does the country create a knowledge-driven society and lower the unemployment rate.
Proponents who place emphasis on animal protection state that protecting animals can help foster a sense of empathy in humans. While it is a valid concern, I believe that people cannot be considered empathetic if they prioritize saving these animal species instead of the nearby underprivileged lives. If people relocate the allocation for animal protection to addressing the aforementioned problems, not only can they cultivate a sense of empathy but they can also make a great contribution to society.
In conclusion, although animal extinction is a worth-concerning issue for its inexorable connection with other species and human beings, I believe that resources should be invested into human-related issues first to eliminate the damage.
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
Errors and Improvements:
"Some people opine" -> "Some individuals argue"
Explanation: Replacing "opine" with "argue" maintains formality and avoids a somewhat informal term. "Opine" is less commonly used in academic writing.
"give precedence to" -> "prioritize"
Explanation: The term "prioritize" is more concise and formal than "give precedence to," aligning better with academic language conventions.
"there are several reasons why some people state that" -> "several reasons support the argument that"
Explanation: The suggested change provides a more structured and academic expression, eliminating the informal "some people state that."
"Once people combated animal extinction" -> "By addressing the issue of animal extinction"
Explanation: The suggested change introduces a more proactive and formal approach, emphasizing action in addressing animal extinction.
"mutually beneficial relationship" -> "reciprocal relationship"
Explanation: "Reciprocal relationship" is a more formal and precise term, enhancing the academic tone of the sentence.
"there are more urgent human issues" -> "more pressing human issues"
Explanation: "Pressing" is a more formal and precise term, conveying a sense of urgency without relying on the informal "urgent."
"should be eradicated as soon as possible" -> "require immediate eradication"
Explanation: The suggested change replaces the colloquial "as soon as possible" with a more formal "require immediate eradication."
"associated with a higher crime rate" -> "linked to an elevated crime rate"
Explanation: The substitution of "associated with" with "linked to" contributes to a more formal and academic expression.
"other predicaments such as high crime rates and death rates" -> "subsequent challenges, including elevated crime and mortality rates"
Explanation: The revised phrase provides a more academic and refined description of the challenges, avoiding the repetition of "rates."
"authority should invest more resources into" -> "authorities should allocate additional resources to"
Explanation: The suggested change employs more formal language and specifies that it is the authorities investing resources.
"illiteracy issues" -> "issues of illiteracy"
Explanation: This modification adheres to a more conventional word order and is commonly used in academic writing.
"rudimentary knowledge of literacy and numeracy" -> "basic literacy and numeracy skills"
Explanation: The revised phrase is more concise and aligns with standard academic terminology.
"a knowledge-driven society" -> "a society driven by knowledge"
Explanation: This change follows a more conventional word order and is stylistically appropriate for academic writing.
"emphasize on animal protection" -> "emphasize animal protection"
Explanation: The correction removes the unnecessary preposition "on" for a more grammatically precise expression.
"people cannot be considered empathetic" -> "individuals cannot be deemed empathetic"
Explanation: The substitution of "considered" with "deemed" contributes to a more formal and precise tone.
"the nearby underprivileged lives" -> "the lives of nearby underprivileged individuals"
Explanation: This modification enhances clarity and adheres to a more formal style by specifying "individuals" instead of the informal "lives."
"relocate the allocation for animal protection" -> "redirect the resources allocated for animal protection"
Explanation: The revised phrase uses a more formal term ("redirect") and specifies that it is resources being allocated.
Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7
Band Score: 7.0
Quoted text: "Therefore, protecting animals possibly translates to protecting human lives."
- Explanation and Suggestions for Improvement: This point attempts to link animal preservation to the protection of human lives. However, the connection between protecting animal species and directly safeguarding human lives lacks clarity. A more comprehensive explanation regarding this connection is needed to strengthen the argument. For instance, providing a specific example where preserving a particular animal species directly benefited human lives would enhance the coherence of this argument.
- Improved example: "Therefore, protecting animals not only contributes to the preservation of ecological balance but also indirectly benefits human lives. For instance, the conservation of bees aids in pollination, ensuring the production of crops crucial for human sustenance."
Quoted text: "Furthermore, the authority should invest more resources into dealing with illiteracy issues."
- Explanation and Suggestions for Improvement: While addressing human-related issues, specifically mentioning illiteracy, the explanation lacks depth and relevance to the argument. To bolster this point, the essay could benefit from providing a clearer link between eradicating illiteracy and addressing other societal problems. A more detailed explanation of how combating illiteracy could lead to a knowledge-driven society and subsequently lower unemployment rates would strengthen the argument.
- Improved example: "Furthermore, prioritizing the eradication of illiteracy can significantly contribute to fostering a knowledgeable workforce. By ensuring basic literacy and numeracy skills among citizens, societies can cultivate a skilled labor force capable of contributing to economic growth and reducing unemployment rates."
Overall, the essay offers a balanced view of both perspectives and maintains a clear position throughout the response. However, to elevate the essay to a higher band score, more substantial development of ideas with specific examples linking animal preservation to direct human benefits and a deeper exploration of how addressing illiteracy can impact societal issues would be beneficial.
Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7
Band Score: 7.0
The essay demonstrates a logical organization of information and ideas, providing a clear progression throughout. It effectively uses a range of cohesive devices, contributing to overall coherence. The central topic within each paragraph is clearly presented. However, there are instances of underuse and overuse of cohesive devices, affecting the balance. The paragraphing is generally sufficient and appropriate, but there are moments where it could be improved for better clarity.
How to improve:
- Cohesive Devices: Ensure a more balanced and consistent use of cohesive devices throughout the essay. This will enhance the overall flow and coherence of ideas.
- Paragraphing: While generally appropriate, pay attention to logical paragraph breaks. Make sure each paragraph focuses on a specific aspect of the argument to enhance clarity and coherence.
Overall, the essay is well-organized and coherent but would benefit from a more even application of cohesive devices and fine-tuning of paragraph structure for optimal coherence and cohesion.
Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7
Band Score: 7.0
The essay demonstrates a commendable use of vocabulary, showcasing a good range of words and expressions throughout the text. The candidate adeptly employs vocabulary to express ideas, employing less common lexical items with some degree of awareness of style and collocation. The essay presents sophisticated phrases and lexical features, showcasing a substantial range of vocabulary, albeit with occasional inaccuracies in word choice and collocation. There are instances where the language choice is precise and nuanced, contributing to the overall effectiveness of communication. However, some minor inaccuracies and infrequent errors in word choice and spelling prevent it from reaching the higher bands.
How to improve:
To enhance the Lexical Resource further, the candidate could aim for more consistent and accurate use of less common vocabulary and idiomatic expressions. A careful review to refine word choice and improve spelling accuracy would contribute to a more refined and polished piece. Strengthening the link between vocabulary and the essay’s overall coherence can elevate the lexical sophistication.
This essay effectively navigates the topic, employing an array of vocabulary that significantly contributes to the overall lexical range. Continuing to explore and implement diverse vocabulary while focusing on precision and accuracy will further enrich the Lexical Resource aspect of the essay.
Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7
Band Score: 7.0
Explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable use of a variety of complex structures, contributing to a Band 7 score. The candidate successfully employs a mix of sentence forms, including both simple and complex structures, showcasing linguistic flexibility. The majority of sentences are error-free, and there is a good control of grammar and punctuation, with only a few occasional errors. The essay effectively communicates the writer’s perspective with clarity and coherence, meeting the criteria for a Band 7.
How to improve: To further enhance the grammatical range and accuracy, the writer could focus on refining sentence complexity by incorporating a greater diversity of sentence structures. Additionally, careful proofreading to eliminate minor errors and enhance punctuation consistency would contribute to achieving a higher band score. Striving for greater precision in language use and exploring more advanced grammatical structures could elevate the essay to a Band 8 level.
Bài sửa mẫu
A considerable number of animal species are currently teetering on the brink of extinction. Some individuals argue that the focus should be on safeguarding these animals, while others contend that resources should be directed towards human issues. I align with the latter perspective due to its pressing nature.
On one hand, proponents of prioritizing animal protection cite reasons such as maintaining biodiversity. The argument suggests that by combating animal extinction, we can prevent disruptions in the food chain, subsequently safeguarding other species. Additionally, preserving animals may strengthen the bond between humans and the animal kingdom, fostering mutual benefits. Protecting animals, in this view, translates to safeguarding human lives.
On the other hand, I believe there are more urgent human issues deserving priority over imminent animal extinction. Firstly, addressing poverty and starvation should take precedence, as these problems contribute to a higher crime rate, detrimentally impacting the nation. By tackling these issues, subsequent challenges like high crime rates and death rates can be effectively resolved. Moreover, investing resources in combating illiteracy is crucial. Only when citizens acquire basic literacy and numeracy skills can a knowledge-driven society be fostered, consequently lowering the unemployment rate.
Advocates for animal protection argue that it can cultivate empathy in humans. While this is a valid concern, I maintain that true empathy cannot be demonstrated if saving animal species takes precedence over addressing the immediate needs of underprivileged lives nearby. Redirecting resources from animal protection to these pressing problems not only fosters empathy but also contributes significantly to society.
In conclusion, while animal extinction is a concern due to its interconnectedness with other species and human well-being, I contend that resources should initially be invested in addressing urgent human-related issues to mitigate the overall damage.