Some cities create housing areas by providing taller buildings. Others create housing by building houses on a wider area of land. What solution is better?

Improving the residental areas requires a wide range of intelligent strategies as a way to develop the city sufficiently. It is claimed that in some regions, government prefer more on creating housing areas by building taller landscapes, while in other cities witness a different way of creating housing by constructing houses on an expansive land. From my perspective, I firmly side with the second measure because tall buildings are inconvenient to live in some extent.
On the one hand, it is understandable why some cities are keen on erecting residental areas with lots of tall buildings. First and foremost, it is due to the fact that constructing high apartments allow government to extend the area land for planning other architectures. Hence, there were more public places are built to serve citizens' demand in a convenient way. Take New York as an example, where observes a plethora of high landscapes instead of buildings which occupied a large dimension. By doing that, this city has more free land to erect many public places to accommodate New York's residents such as park, shopping mall, restaurant, making them become a convenient city with diverse ammenities.
On the other hand, I strongly suppose that it is greater to create housing areas by constructing houses on a wider land. One of the primary reasons to support my view is that tall buildings such as apartments where have lots of floors that take a lot of time of people who live there to move between their rooms and the street. Therefore, if residents are need to access the street quickly for some purposes, they could not do it because of waiting for the lift or walking in the long staircases. However, the opposite is true for houses, which build with the expansive land instead of making it taller. Thus, people can easily go to the street and face their demands conveniently. As an illustration, in Vietnam, many individuals who live in high apartments get a long time to go to work or school. This results in being late for work, and school, compared to those who live in houses, who conveniently go to the street whenever necessary. Hence, it takes a short period of time for them to go to work or school.
In conclusion, despite acknowledging that constructing taller buildings might offer more lands for government to plan other architectures, I strongly hold the belife that the other solution is better and it is essential for countries to build houses on a wider area of land since it is convinient for citizens who live there can access between their living places and the street quickly.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"residental areas" -> "residential areas"
Explanation: The correct term is "residential," which refers to areas designed for human habitation, whereas "residental" is a non-existent word in English.
"intelligent strategies" -> "strategic approaches"
Explanation: "Strategic approaches" is a more precise and formal term that better fits the context of urban planning and development, emphasizing thoughtful and deliberate planning.
"government prefer more on" -> "governments tend to prioritize"
Explanation: "Governments tend to prioritize" is more formal and accurate, avoiding the awkward and informal construction "prefer more on."
"building taller landscapes" -> "constructing taller buildings"
Explanation: "Building taller landscapes" is unclear and incorrect. "Constructing taller buildings" is the correct term, as landscapes are not typically built vertically.
"witness a different way of creating housing" -> "adopt a different approach to housing"
Explanation: "Witness a different way of creating housing" is vague and informal. "Adopt a different approach to housing" is more precise and formal, suitable for academic writing.
"in some extent" -> "to some extent"
Explanation: "To some extent" is the correct prepositional phrase, used to indicate partial or limited extent.
"it is understandable why" -> "it is understandable that"
Explanation: "It is understandable that" is grammatically correct and more formal, fitting the academic style better.
"constructing high apartments allow government to" -> "constructing high-rise apartments enables governments to"
Explanation: "High-rise apartments" is the correct term, and "enables governments" is more formal and precise than "allow government."
"there were more public places are built" -> "more public places are built"
Explanation: The phrase "there were more" is unnecessary and awkward; "more public places are built" is direct and clear.
"observes a plethora of high landscapes" -> "features numerous high-rise buildings"
Explanation: "Features numerous high-rise buildings" is more accurate and formal than "observes a plethora of high landscapes," which is incorrect and unclear.
"occupied a large dimension" -> "occupy a large area"
Explanation: "Occupied a large dimension" is incorrect; "occupy a large area" is the correct phrase for describing the size of buildings.
"suppose" -> "believe"
Explanation: "Suppose" is less formal and can imply a hypothetical scenario, whereas "believe" is more direct and appropriate for expressing a personal opinion.
"where have lots of floors" -> "which have many floors"
Explanation: "Where have lots of floors" is grammatically incorrect and informal. "Which have many floors" is grammatically correct and more formal.
"take a lot of time of people" -> "take a considerable amount of time for people"
Explanation: "Take a lot of time of people" is awkward and incorrect. "Take a considerable amount of time for people" is grammatically correct and clearer.
"if residents are need to access" -> "if residents need to access"
Explanation: "Are need" is grammatically incorrect; "need" should not be repeated. The correct form is "need to access."
"face their demands conveniently" -> "meet their needs conveniently"
Explanation: "Face their demands" is incorrect; "meet their needs" is the correct phrase for describing the fulfillment of requirements.
"it is convinient for citizens" -> "it is convenient for citizens"
Explanation: "Convinient" is a spelling error; "convenient" is the correct spelling.
"can access between their living places and the street quickly" -> "can easily access their living places and the street"
Explanation: "Access between" is awkward and incorrect; "easily access" is more natural and clear in this context.

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 prompt, discussing the advantages of taller buildings and the benefits of houses on wider land. However, while it mentions the benefits of both approaches, it leans more towards supporting the second option. The argument for taller buildings is somewhat underdeveloped, lacking depth and specific examples that could strengthen the analysis. For instance, the mention of New York is brief and does not fully explore the potential benefits of high-rise living.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer should provide a more balanced discussion of both options. Including more detailed examples and elaborating on the advantages of taller buildings could create a more comprehensive answer. Additionally, addressing potential counterarguments to the preferred solution would demonstrate a deeper understanding of the topic.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear position favoring houses on wider land, which is maintained throughout the text. However, the introduction could be clearer in stating this position more definitively. The phrase "I firmly side with the second measure" could be more assertively placed at the beginning of the essay to set the tone for the argument.
- How to improve: To improve clarity, the writer should explicitly state their position in the introduction and reiterate it in the conclusion. Using transitional phrases to guide the reader through the argument can also help maintain a clear stance.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas supporting the preference for wider land housing, such as convenience and accessibility. However, the support for these ideas could be more robust. For example, while the essay mentions the inconvenience of tall buildings, it does not provide sufficient evidence or examples to substantiate this claim. The argument about the time taken to access the street from high apartments is relevant but could be further developed with more specific statistics or studies.
- How to improve: To strengthen the presentation and support of ideas, the writer should include more detailed examples, statistics, or studies that back up their claims. Additionally, expanding on the implications of these points would provide greater depth to the argument.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the housing strategies discussed in the prompt. However, there are moments where the argument could be more tightly focused. For instance, the discussion about New York could be more directly linked to the advantages of taller buildings rather than merely stating that they exist.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that each point made directly relates back to the prompt. Avoiding tangential information and ensuring that each example clearly supports the main argument will help keep the essay on topic.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the task and presents a clear argument, but it could benefit from more balanced analysis, stronger support for ideas, and tighter focus on the topic.

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 structure, with an introduction, body paragraphs discussing both sides of the issue, and a conclusion. The points made in each paragraph are relevant to the main argument. For instance, the first body paragraph outlines the benefits of tall buildings, while the second body paragraph provides counterarguments supporting wider land housing. However, the logical flow between ideas could be improved; some transitions between sentences and paragraphs feel abrupt, which can disrupt the reader’s understanding.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using clearer topic sentences that outline the main idea of each paragraph. Additionally, employing transitional phrases such as "In contrast," "Furthermore," or "Moreover" can help guide the reader through the argument more smoothly.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which is essential for clarity. Each paragraph focuses on a specific aspect of the argument. However, the paragraphs could be more balanced in length and depth. The first body paragraph is longer and more detailed than the second, which may lead to an imbalance in the argument’s presentation.
- How to improve: Aim for more balanced paragraphs by ensuring that each point is developed with similar depth and detail. Consider breaking down longer paragraphs into smaller ones if they contain multiple ideas, and ensure that each paragraph has a clear focus that directly supports the thesis.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates some use of cohesive devices, such as "On the one hand" and "On the other hand," which help to contrast the two viewpoints. However, the range of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and there are instances where the connections between sentences could be clearer. For example, phrases like "this results in being late for work" could be better linked to the preceding argument to clarify the cause-and-effect relationship.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider range of linking words and phrases, such as "Additionally," "Consequently," and "For instance." This will help to clarify relationships between ideas and improve the overall flow of the essay. Additionally, ensure that each cohesive device is used appropriately to maintain coherence.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents a clear argument, focusing on improving logical flow, balancing paragraph structure, and diversifying cohesive devices will enhance the overall coherence and cohesion of the writing.

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 "residential areas," "intelligent strategies," and "expansive land." However, there are instances of repetition and limited variation in word choice, such as the repeated use of "tall buildings" and "houses." The phrase "high apartments" could be more varied with alternatives like "high-rise apartments" or "multi-story buildings."
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, the writer should incorporate synonyms and related terms throughout the essay. For example, instead of repeating "tall buildings," they could use "skyscrapers," "high-rise structures," or "vertical housing." Additionally, exploring more descriptive adjectives and adverbs can enrich the text, such as "spacious houses" or "convenient access."
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: While the essay includes some precise vocabulary, there are notable inaccuracies. For instance, the phrase "the fact that constructing high apartments allow government" should be "allows the government" to maintain subject-verb agreement. The term "landscapes" is also used incorrectly; it should refer to "buildings" or "structures" in this context. Furthermore, "the opposite is true for houses, which build with the expansive land" should be rephrased for clarity, as it suggests an incorrect grammatical structure.
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on grammatical accuracy and context-appropriate word choices. Reviewing subject-verb agreement and ensuring that terms are used in the correct context will help. For example, instead of saying "houses, which build with the expansive land," it should be "houses, which are built on expansive land." Regular practice with vocabulary exercises and grammar reviews can aid in this area.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors that detract from its overall quality. Words like "residental" should be "residential," "belife" should be "belief," and "convinient" should be "convenient." These errors indicate a lack of attention to detail and can negatively impact the reader’s perception of the writer’s proficiency.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should implement proofreading strategies, such as reading the essay aloud or using spell-check tools. Additionally, creating a list of commonly misspelled words and practicing them can be beneficial. Regular writing practice, combined with feedback from others, can also help identify and correct spelling mistakes more effectively.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents a coherent argument, improvements in vocabulary range, precision, and spelling are necessary to achieve a higher band score in Lexical Resource. Focusing on these areas will enhance the overall clarity and professionalism of the writing.

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 variety in sentence structures, such as simple, compound, and complex sentences. For instance, phrases like "it is claimed that in some regions, government prefer more on creating housing areas" and "one of the primary reasons to support my view is that tall buildings such as apartments where have lots of floors" show attempts at complexity. However, the overall range is limited, with many sentences following a similar structure, which can lead to a monotonous reading experience.
- How to improve: To enhance the variety of sentence structures, the writer should incorporate more complex sentences that include subordinate clauses and varied sentence beginnings. For example, instead of starting multiple sentences with "it is," the writer could use participial phrases or adverbial clauses to introduce ideas. Practice using a mix of sentence types, such as starting with an adverbial clause (e.g., "Although tall buildings can maximize space, they often lead to inconveniences for residents") to create more engaging and varied writing.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues that detract from clarity. For example, "government prefer more on creating housing areas" should be "the government prefers to create housing areas," and "there were more public places are built" is incorrect; it should be "more public places are built." Additionally, punctuation errors, such as missing commas in compound sentences and incorrect use of articles (e.g., "the expansive land" instead of "expansive land"), hinder readability and grammatical accuracy.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on subject-verb agreement, proper verb forms, and the correct use of articles. Regular practice with grammar exercises, especially focusing on common errors, can help. Additionally, proofreading the essay for punctuation errors and ensuring that commas are used correctly in compound and complex sentences will enhance clarity. Reading more academic essays can also help the writer internalize correct grammatical structures and punctuation usage.

Overall, while the essay presents a clear argument, enhancing the variety of sentence structures and improving grammatical accuracy will significantly raise the band score in the Grammatical Range and Accuracy criterion.

Bài sửa mẫu

Improving the residential areas requires a wide range of intelligent strategies as a way to develop the city sufficiently. It is claimed that in some regions, governments tend to prioritize creating housing areas by building taller buildings, while in other cities, there is a different approach of creating housing by constructing houses on a wider area of land. From my perspective, I firmly side with the second measure because tall buildings can be inconvenient to live in to some extent.

On the one hand, it is understandable why some cities are keen on erecting residential areas with many tall buildings. First and foremost, this is because constructing high apartments allows the government to extend the land area for planning other structures. Hence, more public places can be built to serve citizens’ demands conveniently. Take New York as an example, where there are a plethora of high buildings instead of structures that occupy a large area. By doing this, the city has more free land to erect many public places to accommodate New York’s residents, such as parks, shopping malls, and restaurants, making it a convenient city with diverse amenities.

On the other hand, I strongly believe that it is better to create housing areas by constructing houses on wider land. One of the primary reasons to support my view is that tall buildings, such as apartments with many floors, require a lot of time for people who live there to move between their rooms and the street. Therefore, if residents need to access the street quickly for some purposes, they cannot do so because they have to wait for the lift or walk down long staircases. However, the opposite is true for houses built on expansive land instead of being tall. Thus, people can easily go to the street and meet their demands conveniently. For instance, in Vietnam, many individuals who live in high apartments take a long time to get to work or school. This results in being late for work and school, compared to those who live in houses, who can conveniently go to the street whenever necessary. Hence, it takes them a shorter period to reach their destinations.

In conclusion, despite acknowledging that constructing taller buildings might offer more land for the government to plan other structures, I strongly believe that the other solution is better. It is essential for countries to build houses on a wider area of land since it is convenient for citizens to access the street quickly from their living places.