One school of thought holds that governments should spend money searching for life on other planets. Others think that this money should be used to solve problems on Earth.

It is indisputable that the government pays to improve people's lives is of a paramount importance, and the question of government expenditure for finding the life on other planets or spending for earth issue is a hot debate topic. Some people believe that spending money looking for life in other planets, while others think that it is better to pay on many problems on Earth. In this essay, I will discuss both view and give my opinion.
On the one hand, when paying for government, a plethora of advocates assert that looking for living on the other planet represents the most optimal and efficacious approach for several reason. Firstly, they argue that when the government pays for the search for habitable planets, it will reduce the burden of overpopulation. Because humans are the main cause of environmental pollution and global warming, reducing the number of people in the world will also reduce major environmental problems. In addition, finding planets with life will also increase resources for humanity. Having more minerals and fuel makes life easier and creates more machines and equipment.
On the other hand, many advocates of government should spend money for people’ daily live. Currently, serious environmental pollution is occurring in every country and ozone layer depletion is extremely dangerous. The government needs to pay attention to environmental issues and pay properly to help people on earth. Furthermore, donation activities for people in difficult circumstances need to be focused and developed nationally. Therefore, the government needs to spend reasonably and improve people's quality of life.
In my opinion, government spending on the search for information about life on other planets is extremely important, it impacts life and the environment. However, the government should also improve people's lives rather than focusing too much on other things.
In conclusion, while some people believe that government should expenditure their money for people and life on the earth. Others think that they should find for life on the other planets.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"the government pays to improve people’s lives" -> "the government allocates funds to enhance the quality of life"
Explanation: "Allocates funds" is a more precise and formal term than "pays," and "enhance the quality of life" is a more specific and academically appropriate phrase than "improve people’s lives."
"finding the life on other planets" -> "searching for life on other planets"
Explanation: "Searching for life" is the correct phrase, as "finding the life" is grammatically incorrect and awkward.
"spending for earth issue" -> "addressing Earth-related issues"
Explanation: "Addressing Earth-related issues" is a clearer and more formal way to express the idea of dealing with problems on Earth.
"both view" -> "both views"
Explanation: "Views" is the correct plural form to refer to multiple perspectives.
"plethora of advocates assert" -> "numerous advocates argue"
Explanation: "Numerous advocates argue" is more precise and formal than "a plethora of advocates assert," which is somewhat redundant and less commonly used in academic writing.
"looking for living on the other planet" -> "searching for life on other planets"
Explanation: "Searching for life on other planets" is grammatically correct and more formal than "looking for living on the other planet."
"reduce the burden of overpopulation" -> "mitigate the effects of overpopulation"
Explanation: "Mitigate the effects of overpopulation" is a more precise and academically appropriate term than "reduce the burden of overpopulation."
"reducing the number of people in the world" -> "reducing the global population"
Explanation: "Reducing the global population" is a more formal and precise way to express the idea.
"finding planets with life" -> "discovering life-bearing planets"
Explanation: "Discovering life-bearing planets" is a more specific and scientifically accurate term than "finding planets with life."
"Having more minerals and fuel makes life easier and creates more machines and equipment." -> "Access to more minerals and fuel facilitates technological advancements and the creation of more machines and equipment."
Explanation: This revision clarifies the relationship between resources and technological development, using more formal and precise language.
"many advocates of government should spend money for people’ daily live" -> "many proponents of government expenditure advocate for allocation of funds to support daily life"
Explanation: This revision corrects grammatical errors and uses more formal language suitable for academic writing.
"pay properly to help people on earth" -> "adequately address environmental issues affecting people on Earth"
Explanation: "Adequately address environmental issues affecting people on Earth" is a more precise and formal way to express the need for government action.
"donation activities for people in difficult circumstances" -> "assistance programs for individuals in challenging circumstances"
Explanation: "Assistance programs" is a more formal and specific term than "donation activities," and "individuals in challenging circumstances" is more precise than "people in difficult circumstances."
"spend reasonably" -> "allocate funds judiciously"
Explanation: "Allocate funds judiciously" is a more formal and precise way to express careful financial management.
"improve people’s lives rather than focusing too much on other things" -> "prioritize improving the quality of life over other pursuits"
Explanation: "Prioritize improving the quality of life over other pursuits" is a more formal and precise way to express the idea of balancing priorities.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Task Response: 7

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay addresses both sides of the argument regarding government spending on extraterrestrial life versus addressing problems on Earth. The author presents the viewpoints clearly, mentioning the potential benefits of exploring other planets, such as reducing overpopulation and finding new resources. However, the discussion on Earth-related issues could be more robust, as it primarily focuses on environmental pollution and social support without delving into specific examples or broader implications.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the author should ensure that each part of the prompt is fully explored. This could include providing more detailed examples of Earth problems that could be addressed with government funding, such as healthcare, education, or infrastructure. Additionally, a more explicit comparison of the consequences of each spending choice would strengthen the argument.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear position in favor of both exploring other planets and addressing Earth’s problems, but it lacks consistency in the strength of this position. The conclusion suggests a preference for Earth-focused spending, yet the body of the essay does not strongly advocate for this view, which may confuse readers about the author’s true stance.
- How to improve: To maintain a clear position, the author should explicitly state their opinion in the introduction and consistently refer back to it throughout the essay. A stronger thesis statement that outlines the preference for one side over the other, along with a more definitive conclusion that reiterates this stance, would enhance clarity.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: Ideas are presented in both paragraphs, with some attempts to extend them through reasoning. However, the support for these ideas is often vague or underdeveloped. For instance, the argument about overpopulation reducing environmental issues lacks concrete evidence or examples. The discussion on Earth’s problems is also somewhat superficial.
- How to improve: The author should aim to provide more detailed explanations and examples for each point made. For instance, when discussing the benefits of finding new resources, specific examples of what those resources could be and how they would benefit humanity would strengthen the argument. Additionally, citing studies or statistics related to environmental issues could provide more credibility to the claims made.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, addressing the prompt’s key themes. However, there are moments where the focus wavers, particularly in the transition between discussing the two perspectives. The phrase "donation activities for people in difficult circumstances" feels somewhat disconnected from the main argument about government spending priorities.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the author should ensure that every point made directly relates back to the central question of government spending priorities. Avoiding tangential ideas and ensuring that each paragraph transitions smoothly into the next will help maintain coherence and relevance throughout the essay.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a good understanding of the task and presents relevant ideas, improvements in depth, clarity, and coherence would elevate the score 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 structure with an introduction, body paragraphs discussing both viewpoints, and a conclusion. However, the logical flow could be improved. For instance, the transition from discussing the benefits of searching for life on other planets to addressing issues on Earth lacks a smooth connection. The phrase "On the one hand" is appropriately used, but the subsequent transition to "On the other hand" could benefit from a clearer contrast or linking idea that emphasizes the shift in focus.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using transitional phrases that explicitly indicate the relationship between ideas, such as "In contrast" or "Conversely." Additionally, ensure that each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence that outlines the main idea, helping readers follow the argument more easily.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which is a strength. Each paragraph addresses a distinct viewpoint, making it easier for the reader to follow the argument. However, the second paragraph could be more cohesive, as it introduces multiple ideas without clear connections between them, such as the link between overpopulation and environmental issues.
- How to improve: To improve paragraph structure, ensure that each paragraph has a clear focus and that supporting sentences relate directly to the topic sentence. Consider using a concluding sentence at the end of each paragraph to summarize the main point and reinforce the connection to the overall argument.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "Firstly," "In addition," and "On the other hand," which help to guide the reader through the argument. However, the range of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and some phrases are used repetitively, which can detract from the overall fluency of the essay. For example, the phrase "the government needs to" appears multiple times, which could be varied to enhance readability.
- How to improve: To diversify cohesive devices, consider incorporating a wider range of linking words and phrases, such as "Moreover," "Furthermore," "In contrast," and "Consequently." Additionally, using pronouns and synonyms can help to avoid repetition and create a smoother flow between sentences and ideas.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents arguments clearly, improvements in logical organization, paragraph structure, and the use of cohesive devices could elevate the score further. Focusing on these areas will enhance the overall coherence and cohesion of the essay, making it more persuasive and easier to follow.

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 "indisputable," "paramount importance," "plethora," and "habitable planets." However, the vocabulary used is often repetitive and lacks sophistication. For instance, phrases like "spending money looking for life in other planets" could be expressed more elegantly as "investing resources in the exploration of extraterrestrial life." The use of "government" and "people" is also overly simplistic and could be varied with synonyms or more specific terms.
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, the writer should incorporate more varied expressions and synonyms. For example, instead of repeating "government," alternatives like "authorities," "administration," or "public sector" could be used. Additionally, using more descriptive adjectives and adverbs can enrich the writing. Engaging with a thesaurus or vocabulary-building exercises could be beneficial.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: There are instances of imprecise vocabulary usage that detract from clarity. For example, the phrase "looking for living on the other planet" is awkward and unclear; it should be "searching for life on other planets." Similarly, "donation activities for people in difficult circumstances" could be more precisely stated as "charitable initiatives for underprivileged communities." The phrase "pay properly" is vague and lacks specificity.
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on clarity and specificity in word choice. Reviewing the essay for vague phrases and replacing them with more accurate terms will enhance understanding. Practicing writing with a focus on clarity and directness can also help in this area.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors, such as "people’" (should be "people’s") and "expenditure" (used incorrectly in context). Additionally, "earth issue" should be "Earth issues," and "government should spend money for people’ daily live" should be "government should spend money on people’s daily lives." These errors can disrupt the flow of reading and distract from the argument.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should proofread the essay carefully, preferably reading it aloud to catch errors. Utilizing spell-check tools and practicing spelling through writing exercises can also be effective. Keeping a list of commonly misspelled words and reviewing them regularly may help improve overall spelling skills.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a reasonable command of vocabulary, it requires improvement in range, precision, and spelling accuracy to achieve a higher band score. Engaging in targeted vocabulary exercises, practicing clarity in writing, and thorough proofreading will significantly enhance the lexical resource in future essays.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 5

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of sentence structures. For example, simple sentences such as "The government needs to pay attention to environmental issues" and "In my opinion, government spending on the search for information about life on other planets is extremely important" are prevalent. While there are some attempts at complex structures, such as "when the government pays for the search for habitable planets, it will reduce the burden of overpopulation," the overall variety is insufficient. Additionally, there are instances of awkward phrasing, such as "spending money looking for life in other planets," which could be more effectively expressed as "spending money to search for life on other planets."
- How to improve: To enhance the variety of sentence structures, the writer should practice incorporating more complex and compound sentences. For instance, using subordinating conjunctions (e.g., although, because, since) and coordinating conjunctions (e.g., and, but, or) can help create more nuanced sentences. Additionally, varying the sentence openings and using different grammatical forms (e.g., gerunds, infinitives) can contribute to a richer writing style.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues that hinder clarity. For example, the phrase "the government pays to improve people’s lives is of a paramount importance" is grammatically incorrect; it should be restructured to "the government’s spending to improve people’s lives is of paramount importance." There are also issues with subject-verb agreement, as seen in "government should spend money for people’ daily live," which should be corrected to "government should spend money on people’s daily lives." Additionally, punctuation errors, such as missing commas in compound sentences and incorrect use of apostrophes, detract from the overall quality.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should review fundamental grammar rules, particularly focusing on subject-verb agreement, article usage, and the correct formation of plural nouns. Practicing sentence correction exercises can also be beneficial. For punctuation, the writer should familiarize themselves with the rules governing comma usage in complex sentences and the correct placement of apostrophes. Reading more academic essays can provide insight into proper punctuation and grammatical structures.

By addressing these areas of improvement, the writer can enhance their grammatical range and accuracy, potentially achieving a higher band score in future IELTS assessments.

Bài sửa mẫu

It is indisputable that the government paying to improve people’s lives is of paramount importance, and the question of government expenditure for finding life on other planets or spending on Earth-related issues is a hot debate topic. Some people believe that spending money searching for life on other planets is essential, while others think that it is better to allocate funds to solve many problems on Earth. In this essay, I will discuss both views and give my opinion.

On the one hand, a plethora of advocates assert that searching for life on other planets represents the most optimal and efficacious approach for several reasons. Firstly, they argue that when the government allocates funds to enhance the quality of life by searching for habitable planets, it will reduce the burden of overpopulation. Because humans are the main cause of environmental pollution and global warming, reducing the number of people in the world will also mitigate major environmental problems. In addition, discovering life-bearing planets will increase resources for humanity. Access to more minerals and fuel facilitates technological advancements and the creation of more machines and equipment.

On the other hand, many proponents of government expenditure argue that funds should be spent on people’s daily lives. Currently, serious environmental pollution is occurring in every country, and ozone layer depletion is extremely dangerous. The government needs to pay attention to environmental issues and allocate funds judiciously to help people on Earth. Furthermore, assistance programs for individuals in challenging circumstances need to be focused on and developed nationally. Therefore, the government needs to spend reasonably and prioritize improving the quality of life over other pursuits.

In my opinion, government spending on the search for information about life on other planets is extremely important, as it impacts life and the environment. However, the government should also improve people’s lives rather than focusing too much on other pursuits.

In conclusion, while some people believe that the government should allocate their money for people and life on Earth, others think that they should invest in searching for life on other planets.