People should be allowed to continue to work as long as they want to and not be forced to retire at a particular age such as 60 or 65. Do you agree or disagree?

Never before have people longed to retire at older age as much as now. I believe that this is justifiable for people with financial needs. However, governments however, governments had better or real they humans resources do not face shortage or redundancy because of this better inter-vendor to make sure.

One major reason why people should be allowed to work as well as they want to is financial needs. This means, some elderly has low income or loans so they rely on their families. With financial difficulties, they can support them. As a result, their family and how to won’t to be independent of this brings social stability and safety for the community.

Another reason why I think that old people should have the right to work. These continue wanting or not is health conditions. In the other words, some people have enough strength to work so they are not your work; this can lead to less. They may feel forced because of wealth, because they are not ensuring work, quality.

On the other hand, there also fast reason why people should work until their age is that some chaos. The explanation for this could be workforce whatever they want. As a consequence, that people may abuse their authority to stop working brings economic issues for some serious problems including unemployment, and young stems, degradation of work quality

In conclusion, I believe that to achieved the best productivity, I think governments should allow people who have special circumstances or

Some people think that they should work as long as they can and the other believe that want to retire at a particular age. I believe not work as long as possible on healthy conditions for people with financial needs or can be reasonable however, government and social can to face with shortage or redundancy because of this.

First of all, work as long as possible can solve the problem of financial people with financial difficulties such as support family members or loans, they have to continue to work to bring they can be financially independent. This can be so they can stability for society such as financial aspect and people can live more safely.

Moreover, if people have healthy conditions, they will make up a decision to continue working and for people who have problem with their health they can still retire a “ earlier. So that can ensure the work quality because the people who work in a long time they can have more experience than the beginners! work.

Work as long as possible, which will bring more workforce chaos of workforce because if people can retire at the age they want can also be make lack of workforce but can make people want to work youngsters in a long time but when almost to redundancy so as we can not have work and degradation of work quality.

In conclusion, I believe that people should retire at a particular age and if someone someone who wants to work after retirement they can work under contract.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"Never before have people longed to retire at older age as much as now." -> "Never before have individuals sought retirement at an older age as frequently as they do now."
Explanation: Replacing "people longed" with "individuals sought" and "older age" with "an older age" refines the phrase to sound more formal and precise.
"governments however, governments had better or real they humans resources do not face shortage or redundancy" -> "governments, however, should prioritize ensuring that human resources do not face shortages or redundancies."
Explanation: This revision clarifies the sentence structure and removes the awkward and incorrect phrase "had better or real they humans resources," which is grammatically incorrect and unclear.
"better inter-vendor to make sure" -> "better ensure inter-vendor relations"
Explanation: "Better ensure inter-vendor relations" is a more precise and formal way to express the idea of maintaining positive relationships between vendors.
"some elderly has low income or loans" -> "some elderly individuals have low incomes or outstanding loans"
Explanation: Changing "some elderly has" to "some elderly individuals have" corrects the subject-verb agreement, and "outstanding loans" is more specific than "loans."
"how to won’t to be independent" -> "how they won’t become independent"
Explanation: "How to won’t to be independent" is grammatically incorrect. "How they won’t become independent" corrects this and clarifies the meaning.
"These continue wanting or not is health conditions" -> "Whether they continue working or not depends on their health conditions"
Explanation: "Whether they continue working or not depends on their health conditions" is grammatically correct and clearer than the original phrase.
"not your work; this can lead to less" -> "not their work, which could lead to a decrease"
Explanation: "Not your work; this can lead to less" is awkward and unclear. The revised version clarifies the meaning and corrects the grammar.
"fast reason why people should work until their age" -> "further reason why people should work until their retirement age"
Explanation: "Fast reason" is incorrect and unclear. "Further reason" is the correct adverbial form, and specifying "retirement age" clarifies the context.
"workforce whatever they want" -> "workforce regardless of their choice"
Explanation: "Workforce whatever they want" is informal and vague. "Workforce regardless of their choice" is more formal and precise.
"I think governments should allow people who have special circumstances or" -> "I believe governments should permit individuals with special circumstances to"
Explanation: "I think governments should allow people who have special circumstances or" is incomplete and grammatically incorrect. The revised version is more complete and formal.
"I believe not work as long as possible on healthy conditions" -> "I believe individuals should not work as long as possible unless they are in good health"
Explanation: The original phrase is awkward and unclear. The revision clarifies the condition and maintains formal tone.
"can be reasonable however, government and social can to face with shortage or redundancy" -> "can be reasonable, however, governments and society can face shortages or redundancies"
Explanation: The original sentence is grammatically incorrect and awkward. The revision corrects these issues and improves clarity.
"work as long as possible can solve the problem of financial people with financial difficulties" -> "working as long as possible can alleviate financial difficulties for individuals with financial challenges"
Explanation: "Work as long as possible can solve the problem of financial people with financial difficulties" is awkward and unclear. The revised version is more precise and formal.
"So that can ensure the work quality because the people who work in a long time they can have more experience than the beginners! work." -> "This ensures quality work because individuals who work for a long time have more experience than beginners in the field."
Explanation: The original sentence is grammatically incorrect and informal. The revision corrects these issues and improves the formal tone.
"Work as long as possible, which will bring more workforce chaos of workforce" -> "Working as long as possible could lead to a shortage of workforce"
Explanation: "Workforce chaos of workforce" is unclear and incorrect. "A shortage of workforce" is a clear and accurate term.
"but can make people want to work youngsters in a long time but when almost to redundancy so as we can not have work and degradation of work quality." -> "but may lead to a shortage of workers and degradation of work quality when nearing redundancy, making it difficult for us to maintain work quality."
Explanation: The original sentence is grammatically incorrect and unclear. The revision corrects these issues and provides a clearer, more formal explanation.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 5

Band Score for Task Response: 5

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to address the prompt by discussing both sides of the argument regarding whether people should be allowed to work as long as they want or be forced to retire at a certain age. However, the response is somewhat unbalanced, as it primarily focuses on the reasons for allowing people to work longer, with only a vague mention of potential drawbacks. The arguments presented are often unclear and lack depth, making it difficult to ascertain a comprehensive understanding of the topic. For example, the statement about "chaos" and "economic issues" is not well-explained and leaves the reader confused about the author’s intent.
- How to improve: To better address all parts of the question, the essay should clearly outline both the advantages and disadvantages of allowing people to work longer. Each point should be elaborated with specific examples or evidence. A more structured approach, perhaps by dedicating separate paragraphs to each side of the argument, would enhance clarity and depth.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a position that supports allowing people to work as long as they want, particularly for those with financial needs. However, the clarity of this position is undermined by frequent grammatical errors and awkward phrasing, which distract from the main argument. For instance, phrases like "governments had better or real they humans resources do not face shortage" are convoluted and obscure the author’s stance.
- How to improve: To maintain a clear position, the author should explicitly state their viewpoint in the introduction and consistently refer back to it throughout the essay. Using clear topic sentences at the beginning of each paragraph can help reinforce the main argument. Additionally, proofreading for grammatical accuracy and coherence would significantly improve the clarity of the position.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents some ideas, such as financial needs and health conditions, but these points are not well-developed or supported with sufficient detail. For example, the discussion about financial difficulties lacks specific examples or statistics that could strengthen the argument. Similarly, the mention of health conditions is vague and does not clearly connect back to the main argument about the right to work.
- How to improve: To enhance the development of ideas, the author should aim to provide specific examples, anecdotes, or data that support their claims. Each point should be elaborated upon in a way that clearly connects back to the thesis. Using transitional phrases can also help to extend ideas logically and cohesively.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay occasionally deviates from the main topic, particularly in the latter sections where the discussion becomes muddled with unclear phrases and concepts, such as "chaos of workforce" and "degradation of work quality." These points are not directly related to the prompt and detract from the overall focus of the essay.
- How to improve: To maintain focus on the topic, the author should regularly refer back to the prompt and ensure that each paragraph contributes directly to answering the question. It may be helpful to outline the essay before writing to ensure that all points are relevant and clearly connected to the central argument.

In summary, while the essay attempts to engage with the prompt, it suffers from a lack of clarity, depth, and coherence. By addressing the outlined areas for improvement, the author can enhance their Task Response score in future essays.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 5

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 5

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents arguments for allowing people to work as long as they wish, but the organization is somewhat chaotic. For instance, the introduction lacks clarity and coherence, with phrases like "governments had better or real they humans resources do not face shortage" that confuse the reader. Additionally, the points made in the body paragraphs are not clearly linked to the thesis, leading to a lack of logical progression. The transition between ideas is abrupt, making it difficult to follow the author’s line of reasoning.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, the writer should clearly outline their main arguments in the introduction and follow a structured approach in the body paragraphs. Each paragraph should begin with a clear topic sentence that relates back to the thesis statement. Using a logical sequence—such as presenting financial reasons first, followed by health considerations, and then addressing counterarguments—would improve clarity.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs, but their effectiveness is undermined by poor structure and unclear topic sentences. For example, the second paragraph begins with "One major reason why people should be allowed to work as well as they want to is financial needs," but it fails to maintain focus and coherence throughout. The paragraphs often blend ideas without clear transitions, leading to a disjointed reading experience.
- How to improve: To improve paragraphing, the writer should ensure that each paragraph has a clear main idea and is focused on a single aspect of the argument. It would be beneficial to start each paragraph with a strong topic sentence that summarizes the main point, followed by supporting details. Additionally, using linking words and phrases (e.g., "Furthermore," "In addition," "Conversely") can help create smoother transitions between ideas.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates limited use of cohesive devices, which hampers the flow of ideas. Phrases like "On the other hand" and "As a result" are present but are not used effectively. The repetition of phrases and lack of variety in cohesive devices contribute to a monotonous reading experience. For instance, the phrase "financial needs" is repeated without variation, which detracts from the overall cohesion of the essay.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, the writer should incorporate a broader range of linking words and phrases to connect ideas more effectively. For example, using synonyms or related phrases can help avoid repetition (e.g., instead of repeatedly saying "financial needs," the writer could use "economic pressures" or "monetary constraints"). Additionally, employing more complex cohesive devices, such as subordinating conjunctions (e.g., "although," "because," "while"), can enhance the sophistication of the writing.

In summary, while the essay presents relevant ideas, it suffers from issues related to logical organization, paragraph structure, and the effective use of cohesive devices. By focusing on these areas for improvement, the writer can enhance the coherence and cohesion of their writing, potentially leading to a higher band score in future assessments.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 5

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 5

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a limited range of vocabulary, with repetitive phrases and a lack of variation in word choice. For instance, terms like "financial needs" and "work" are used frequently without synonyms or alternative expressions. Additionally, phrases such as "old people" and "young stems" show a lack of sophistication in vocabulary selection. The use of "chaos" and "redundancy" is somewhat appropriate, but their context is unclear, which detracts from the overall clarity.
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, the writer should incorporate synonyms and varied expressions. For example, instead of repeatedly using "work," alternatives like "employment," "labor," or "occupation" could be used. Additionally, the writer could explore more advanced vocabulary related to the topic, such as "financial stability," "economic independence," or "retirement policies."
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several instances of imprecise vocabulary usage. For example, the phrase "governments had better or real they humans resources" is confusing and lacks clarity. The term "chaos" is used in a context that does not clearly convey its intended meaning, leading to ambiguity. Furthermore, phrases like "less" and "your work" are vague and do not effectively communicate the intended message.
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on using vocabulary that accurately reflects their ideas. For instance, instead of "chaos," they might consider "instability" or "disruption" when discussing workforce issues. Additionally, clarifying phrases and ensuring that each term is used in the correct context will enhance the overall coherence of the essay.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains multiple spelling errors, such as "inter-vendor" (possibly intended as "intervene"), "won’t to be independent" (should be "want to be independent"), and "degradation of work quality" (which is correct but could be misinterpreted due to the surrounding context). These errors detract from the professionalism of the writing and can confuse the reader.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should proofread their work carefully, possibly using spell-check tools or asking someone else to review it. Practicing spelling common vocabulary related to the topic can also be beneficial. Additionally, breaking down complex words into smaller parts during revision may help in identifying and correcting spelling mistakes.

In summary, to improve the Lexical Resource score, the writer should focus on expanding their vocabulary range, using words more precisely, and ensuring correct spelling throughout the essay. Engaging with a broader array of vocabulary through reading and practice will also contribute positively to their writing skills.

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 some attempt to use a variety of sentence structures, such as complex sentences ("As a result, their family and how to won’t to be independent of this brings social stability and safety for the community.") and simple sentences ("One major reason why people should be allowed to work as well as they want to is financial needs."). However, the effectiveness of these structures is often undermined by awkward phrasing and grammatical errors. For example, phrases like "had better or real they humans resources do not face shortage" are unclear and convoluted. The use of conjunctions and transitions is inconsistent, which affects the flow of ideas.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, the writer should practice combining simple and complex sentences more effectively. For instance, instead of using a simple sentence followed by a complex one, they could integrate ideas into a single complex sentence. Additionally, using varied sentence openings (e.g., starting with adverbial phrases) can enhance the essay’s dynamism. Regular practice with sentence combining exercises and reading a variety of well-structured essays can help improve this aspect.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains numerous grammatical errors that detract from clarity and coherence. For instance, "some elderly has low income" should be "some elderly people have low incomes," and "they are not your work" is grammatically incorrect and unclear. Punctuation errors are also present, such as the misuse of commas and the lack of necessary punctuation in complex sentences. The phrase "governments however, governments had better or real they humans resources" is particularly problematic, as it lacks clarity and proper punctuation.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on subject-verb agreement, proper noun usage, and sentence clarity. Practicing grammar exercises that target common errors, such as subject-verb agreement and article usage, can be beneficial. Additionally, proofreading for punctuation errors and reading the essay aloud can help identify awkward phrasing and improve overall clarity. Utilizing grammar-checking tools may also assist in catching errors before submission.

Overall, while the essay presents some relevant ideas, the grammatical range and accuracy need significant improvement to achieve a higher band score. Focusing on sentence structure variety and grammatical correctness will enhance the clarity and effectiveness of the writing.

Bài sửa mẫu

Never before have people longed to retire at an older age as much as they do now. I believe that this is justifiable for those with financial needs. However, governments had better ensure that human resources do not face shortages or redundancies because of this, and better inter-vendor relations should be established to make sure.

One major reason why people should be allowed to work as long as they want is financial needs. This means that some elderly individuals have low incomes or outstanding loans, so they rely on their families. With financial difficulties, they can support them. As a result, their families may feel how they won’t become independent, which brings social stability and safety for the community.

Another reason why I think that older people should have the right to work is that whether they continue working or not depends on their health conditions. In other words, some people have enough strength to work, so they are not forced to stop; this can lead to a decrease in work quality. They may feel pressured because of financial issues, which does not ensure work quality.

On the other hand, there is also a further reason why people should work until their retirement age: the potential chaos in the workforce. The explanation for this could be that people may abuse their authority to stop working, which brings serious economic issues, including unemployment and degradation of work quality.

In conclusion, I believe that to achieve the best productivity, governments should allow people who have special circumstances to continue working.

Some people think that they should work as long as they can, while others believe they should retire at a particular age. I believe individuals should not work as long as possible unless they are in good health. This can be reasonable; however, governments and society can face shortages or redundancies because of this.

First of all, working as long as possible can solve the financial problems of individuals with difficulties, such as supporting family members or paying off loans. They have to continue to work to become financially independent. This can bring stability to society in terms of financial aspects, allowing people to live more safely.

Moreover, if people have good health conditions, they can make the decision to continue working, while those who have health problems can still retire earlier. This ensures work quality because individuals who work for a long time have more experience than beginners in the field.

Working as long as possible could lead to chaos in the workforce because if people can retire at the age they want, it may also create a lack of workers. However, it can motivate young people to work for a long time. When nearing redundancy, we may not have enough workers, which can lead to degradation of work quality.

In conclusion, I believe that people should retire at a particular age, but if someone wants to work after retirement, they can do so under contract.