Some children find some school subjects difficult such as maths or philosophy, so these subjects should be optional rather than compulsory. What is your opinion?

With the growing concern for several difficult subjects that are compulsory in school curriculum. The question as to whether to make theoretical subjects such as maths or philosophy mandatory or not has long been hitted by many a debate. Although many hold the idea that these subjects should be a choice for students to learn, it is my conviction that it would be compulsory for them to grasp these logical subjects.

Firstly, it is irrefutably means continuous improvement of the brain for schoolchildren when it comes to sophisticated and unexpected situations. It stands to reason that problem-solving skills that can be achieved through maths or philosophy assist students in logicalizing the problems and offering feasible solutions. Schoolchildren undergo a barrage of thorny cases which requires professional competence sharpen their skills and thinking.

In addition, not only do difficult subjects enhance analytical skills but also they might pave the way for their career. This is substantially owing to challenging subjects often require students to engage in complex problem-solving, critical thinking, and advanced reasoning. These skills are highly valued in many professional fields, making individuals who have mastered them more competitive in the job market. For instance, some basic caculations and theorems in school curriculum lay the profound foundation for persuasive and technical system in companies. As a result, students who excel in demanding academic areas may find themselves better prepared for the rigors of their chosen careers, with a solid foundation of skills and experiences that can set them apart from others.

On the other side of the debate, however, many counter that these difficult subjects should be played as choices for school children rather than being mandatory. Although it may sound legitimate, I second that making these topics optional might lessen the integrity of the foundation that eduction have to provide. This is examplified that education is not just about adapt individuals’ preference but about equipping students with well-rounded understanding, so there might be gaps in cognitive process and shaping expertised skills.

In conclusion, despite several setbacks that offering choices for challenging subjects may cause toughness for educational programs. For the illustration, I contain that only remaining the value of mandatory subjects like maths or philosophy as an indispensable part in school curriculum can be achieved in the end.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"With the growing concern for several difficult subjects" -> "As concern grows regarding several challenging subjects"
Explanation: The phrase "As concern grows regarding" is more formal and precise, enhancing the academic tone of the sentence.
"hitted by many a debate" -> "has been the subject of much debate"
Explanation: "Has been the subject of much debate" is a more formal and accurate way to express ongoing discussion about a topic.
"it is my conviction" -> "I firmly believe"
Explanation: "I firmly believe" is a more direct and academically appropriate expression of personal opinion.
"it would be compulsory for them to grasp" -> "it is essential for them to study"
Explanation: "It is essential for them to study" is more direct and formal, avoiding the colloquial tone of "grasp."
"it is irrefutably means" -> "it undoubtedly means"
Explanation: "Undoubtedly" is more precise and academically appropriate than "irrefutably" in this context, which is typically used to emphasize the impossibility of refutation.
"problem-solving skills that can be achieved through maths or philosophy" -> "problem-solving skills that can be developed through mathematics and philosophy"
Explanation: "Developed" is more precise than "achieved," and "mathematics" is the formal term preferred in academic contexts.
"Schoolchildren undergo a barrage of thorny cases" -> "Schoolchildren face numerous complex challenges"
Explanation: "Face numerous complex challenges" is a clearer and more formal way to describe the difficulties faced by schoolchildren.
"requires professional competence sharpen their skills" -> "requires professional competence to sharpen their skills"
Explanation: Adding "to" corrects the grammatical structure, making the sentence more formal and correct.
"not only do difficult subjects enhance analytical skills but also they might pave the way for their career" -> "not only do challenging subjects enhance analytical skills but also they can facilitate career advancement"
Explanation: "Facilitate career advancement" is a more precise and formal way to describe the career benefits of challenging subjects.
"caculations and theorems" -> "calculations and theorems"
Explanation: Corrects the spelling error in "caculations."
"lay the profound foundation for persuasive and technical system" -> "provide a profound foundation for persuasive and technical systems"
Explanation: "Provide" is more appropriate than "lay" in this context, and "systems" is plural to match the generalization implied.
"On the other side of the debate, however, many counter that these difficult subjects should be played as choices" -> "On the other side of the debate, however, many argue that these challenging subjects should be optional"
Explanation: "Argue" is more precise than "counter," and "optional" is the correct term for "played as choices."
"lessen the integrity of the foundation that eduction have to provide" -> "undermine the integrity of the educational foundation"
Explanation: "Undermine" is more precise and formal than "lessen," and "educational foundation" is the correct term.
"examplified that education is not just about adapt individuals’ preference" -> "illustrates that education is not just about adapting to individual preferences"
Explanation: "Illustrates" is the correct verb for this context, and "adapting to individual preferences" is grammatically correct and more formal.
"shaping expertised skills" -> "developing specialized skills"
Explanation: "Developing specialized skills" is grammatically correct and more formal than "shaping expertised skills."
"For the illustration, I contain that" -> "For example, I argue that"
Explanation: "For example" is the correct transitional phrase, and "argue" is more appropriate than "contain" in this context, which is incorrect and unclear.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Task Response: 8

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses the prompt by presenting a clear opinion that subjects like maths and philosophy should remain compulsory. The introduction outlines the debate and the author’s stance, while the body paragraphs provide supporting arguments for this position. However, the essay could benefit from a more explicit acknowledgment of the opposing viewpoint, as the counter-argument is somewhat underdeveloped and lacks depth.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer should consider elaborating on the reasons why some believe these subjects should be optional. This could involve discussing potential benefits of optional subjects, which would provide a more balanced view and strengthen the overall argument.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position that compulsory subjects are essential for students. The author consistently supports this view throughout the essay, particularly in the first and second body paragraphs. However, the transition to discussing the opposing view is somewhat abrupt, and the rebuttal could be clearer in reinforcing the main argument.
- How to improve: To improve clarity and consistency, the writer should ensure that the rebuttal to the opposing view is more explicitly linked back to the main argument. Using transitional phrases that relate back to the thesis can help maintain a cohesive narrative throughout the essay.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several strong ideas, particularly regarding the benefits of compulsory subjects for cognitive development and career readiness. The examples provided, such as the importance of problem-solving skills, are relevant and well-articulated. However, some ideas could be further extended with more specific examples or data to enhance their persuasive power.
- How to improve: The writer should aim to include more concrete examples or statistics that illustrate the benefits of compulsory subjects. For instance, citing studies that show improved career outcomes for students who engage with challenging subjects could provide stronger support for the claims made.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the debate surrounding the compulsory nature of difficult subjects. However, there are moments where the language becomes convoluted, which can distract from the main argument. For example, phrases like "barrage of thorny cases" could be simplified for clarity.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should strive for clearer and more straightforward language. Simplifying complex phrases and ensuring that each sentence directly contributes to the argument can help keep the essay focused and easier to follow.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong understanding of the topic and presents a well-reasoned argument. With some adjustments in addressing counter-arguments, enhancing the clarity of the position, and providing more detailed support for ideas, the essay could achieve an even higher score in Task Response.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear argument in favor of making subjects like maths and philosophy compulsory. The introduction sets the stage for the debate, and the body paragraphs provide reasons supporting the author’s viewpoint. However, the logical flow could be improved. For instance, the transition from the first body paragraph to the second is somewhat abrupt, as the connection between enhancing analytical skills and career preparation is not explicitly stated. Additionally, the counterargument is introduced but not fully developed, which can confuse the reader regarding the overall structure of the argument.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using clearer topic sentences that outline the main idea of each paragraph. Additionally, ensure that each paragraph flows smoothly into the next by using transitional phrases that link ideas. For example, after discussing the benefits of analytical skills, explicitly state how these skills relate to career readiness before moving to the counterargument.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which is a strength. Each paragraph addresses a distinct aspect of the argument. However, the paragraphs could be more effectively structured. The first body paragraph contains multiple ideas that could be split into two separate paragraphs for clarity. The counterargument is also somewhat underdeveloped and could benefit from a more robust exploration.
- How to improve: Aim for each paragraph to focus on a single main idea, supported by relevant examples. For instance, the first body paragraph could be divided into two: one focusing on the cognitive benefits of difficult subjects and the other on their impact on career readiness. This would allow for deeper exploration of each point and improve overall clarity.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "Firstly," "In addition," and "On the other side of the debate." These help to signal the progression of ideas. However, the use of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and there are instances where the connections between sentences and ideas could be clearer. For example, the phrase "this is exemplified that education is not just about adapt individuals’ preference" lacks clarity and could benefit from a more precise cohesive device to link it to the previous discussion.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider range of linking words and phrases, such as "Furthermore," "Moreover," "Conversely," and "Consequently." Additionally, ensure that each cohesive device is used correctly and enhances the clarity of the argument. For example, instead of saying "this is exemplified that," consider rephrasing to "This exemplifies the idea that…" to improve readability.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents a coherent argument, enhancing the logical flow, paragraph structure, and use of cohesive devices will elevate the overall quality and clarity of the writing.

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, with terms like "sophisticated," "problem-solving," "analytical skills," and "critical thinking" effectively used to convey complex ideas. However, there are instances where the vocabulary could be more varied or nuanced. For example, the phrase "difficult subjects" is repeated multiple times, which could be replaced with synonyms such as "challenging subjects" or "arduous disciplines" to enhance lexical variety.
- How to improve: To improve, the writer should aim to incorporate a broader range of synonyms and expressions. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "difficult subjects," consider using phrases like "challenging courses" or "intellectually demanding subjects." Additionally, integrating more academic vocabulary related to education and cognitive development could elevate the essay’s sophistication.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: While the essay includes some precise vocabulary, there are instances of imprecise usage that can lead to confusion. For example, the phrase "irrefutably means continuous improvement of the brain" is awkward and unclear. A more precise expression could be "irrefutably contributes to cognitive development." Furthermore, the term "logicalizing" is not commonly used and may confuse readers; "analyzing" or "reasoning" would be more appropriate.
- How to improve: To enhance precision, the writer should focus on using established academic terms and phrases. Reviewing vocabulary in context can help identify more suitable alternatives. For instance, instead of "logicalizing," consider using "developing logical reasoning skills." Additionally, ensuring that phrases clearly convey the intended meaning will improve overall clarity.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors, such as "caculations" (should be "calculations") and "examplified" (should be "exemplified"). These errors detract from the overall professionalism of the writing and may affect the reader’s comprehension.
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, the writer should implement a proofreading strategy, such as reading the essay aloud or using spell-check tools. Additionally, practicing commonly misspelled words and familiarizing oneself with academic vocabulary can help reduce errors. Creating a list of frequently used terms and their correct spellings may also be beneficial.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid command of vocabulary suitable for a Band 7 score, there are areas for improvement in lexical variety, precision, and spelling accuracy. By focusing on these aspects, the writer can enhance the overall quality of their writing and potentially achieve a higher band score in the future.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 6

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a moderate range of sentence structures, including simple, compound, and some complex sentences. For example, the use of phrases like "not only do difficult subjects enhance analytical skills but also they might pave the way for their career" shows an attempt at complexity. However, many sentences are awkwardly constructed, such as "the question as to whether to make theoretical subjects such as maths or philosophy mandatory or not has long been hitted by many a debate," which contains errors and could be more fluid. The overall variety is limited, and the effectiveness of some structures is diminished by grammatical inaccuracies.
- How to improve: To enhance the range of structures, the writer should practice incorporating more complex sentences that effectively combine clauses. For example, using relative clauses (e.g., "subjects that challenge students’ thinking") or participial phrases (e.g., "Having mastered these skills, students are better prepared for their careers") can add depth. Additionally, varying the sentence beginnings and lengths can create a more engaging flow.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues that hinder clarity. For instance, "the question as to whether to make theoretical subjects such as maths or philosophy mandatory or not has long been hitted by many a debate" contains the incorrect form "hitted" (should be "hit"). Additionally, the phrase "requires professional competence sharpen their skills and thinking" is missing a conjunction or preposition, leading to confusion. Punctuation errors include missing commas that could clarify sentence structure, such as in "this is examplified that education is not just about adapt individuals’ preference" where a comma after "exemplified" would improve readability.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on proofreading for common errors, such as verb forms and sentence fragments. Utilizing grammar-checking tools can help identify mistakes. Additionally, practicing punctuation rules—especially for complex sentences—will enhance clarity. For example, ensuring that clauses are properly separated with commas can prevent run-on sentences and improve overall readability. Engaging in targeted grammar exercises can also reinforce understanding of sentence structure and verb conjugation.

Overall, while the essay presents a clear opinion and some relevant arguments, addressing these grammatical range and accuracy issues will significantly enhance the quality and coherence of the writing.

Bài sửa mẫu

With the growing concern regarding several difficult subjects that are compulsory in the school curriculum, the question of whether to make theoretical subjects such as maths or philosophy mandatory has been the subject of much debate. Although many hold the idea that these subjects should be a choice for students to learn, I firmly believe that it is essential for them to study these logical subjects.

Firstly, it undoubtedly means continuous improvement of the brain for schoolchildren when it comes to sophisticated and unexpected situations. It stands to reason that problem-solving skills that can be developed through mathematics or philosophy assist students in analyzing problems and offering feasible solutions. Schoolchildren undergo a barrage of thorny cases which require professional competence to sharpen their skills and thinking.

In addition, not only do challenging subjects enhance analytical skills, but they can also facilitate career advancement. This is substantially owing to the fact that challenging subjects often require students to engage in complex problem-solving, critical thinking, and advanced reasoning. These skills are highly valued in many professional fields, making individuals who have mastered them more competitive in the job market. For instance, some basic calculations and theorems in the school curriculum provide a profound foundation for persuasive and technical systems in companies. As a result, students who excel in demanding academic areas may find themselves better prepared for the rigors of their chosen careers, with a solid foundation of skills and experiences that can set them apart from others.

On the other side of the debate, however, many argue that these difficult subjects should be optional for schoolchildren rather than mandatory. Although it may sound legitimate, I contend that making these topics optional might undermine the integrity of the educational foundation that education has to provide. This illustrates that education is not just about adapting to individual preferences but about equipping students with a well-rounded understanding, so there might be gaps in cognitive processes and the development of specialized skills.

In conclusion, despite several setbacks that offering choices for challenging subjects may cause for educational programs, I argue that maintaining the value of mandatory subjects like maths or philosophy as an indispensable part of the school curriculum is essential in the end.