Some people believe that car-free days are effective ways to reduce air-pollution. However, others argue that there are other ways that are more effective. Discuss both views and give your own opinion
Some people believe that car-free days are effective ways to reduce air-pollution. However, others argue that there are other ways that are more effective. Discuss both views and give your own opinion
Some people think that car-free days are effectively reduce the air toxicity level while the others believe there are other alternatives also effective . In this essay, I will discuss both views and suggest my personal opinion.
It is often pointed out that car-free days, reducing the private vehicles’ emissions are effective. The purposes of these days are prone to utilize the using of public transports which generates fewer fumes and less detrimental dust. Moreover, car-free days would able to deter the driving temporarily. This definitely leads drivers stay at home, as a result, the emissions and toxic gases would be reduced into the atmosphere
On the other hand, many people believe that there are a lot of alternatives that can be implemented. For instance, toxic air gases mostly generated from factories, which can be reduced by governments’ stricter laws. The severer regulations of emissions in industrial factories can be a key to improve the quality of the atmosphere. Additionally, government can carry out campaigns to encourage citizens to plant more trees. Moreover, educational programs are practical to raise people’s consciousness of the plants’ significance so that reduce the level of toxic gases
In conclusion, I firmly believe that other methods are much more crucial and practical. This serious problem should be solved with different approaches that require both government and individuals shoulder the responsibility
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
-
"car-free days are effectively reduce" -> "car-free days can effectively reduce"
Explanation: Adding "can" corrects the grammatical error and makes the sentence more formal and conditional, aligning with academic style. -
"the others believe there are other alternatives also effective" -> "others argue that other alternatives are also effective"
Explanation: "argue" is more precise and formal than "believe," and the phrase "are also effective" corrects the grammatical structure. -
"I will discuss both views and suggest my personal opinion" -> "I will discuss both perspectives and present my personal viewpoint"
Explanation: "perspectives" and "viewpoint" are more formal and precise terms than "views" and "opinion," enhancing the academic tone. -
"car-free days, reducing the private vehicles’ emissions are effective" -> "car-free days, which reduce private vehicle emissions, are effective"
Explanation: The revised phrase clarifies the relationship between the car-free days and their effectiveness, improving readability and formality. -
"prone to utilize the using of public transports" -> "prone to utilize public transportation"
Explanation: "public transportation" is the correct term, and removing "the using of" corrects the awkward and incorrect phrasing. -
"generates fewer fumes and less detrimental dust" -> "emits fewer fumes and less detrimental particles"
Explanation: "emits" is more precise than "generates" for describing emissions, and "particles" is a more specific term than "dust." -
"would able to deter the driving temporarily" -> "could temporarily deter driving"
Explanation: "could" is grammatically correct, and removing "the" before "driving" simplifies the sentence without losing meaning. -
"drivers stay at home" -> "drivers remain at home"
Explanation: "remain" is more formal and precise than "stay" in this context. -
"the emissions and toxic gases would be reduced into the atmosphere" -> "emissions and toxic gases are reduced in the atmosphere"
Explanation: "are reduced" corrects the tense to match the present context, and "in the atmosphere" is more precise than "into the atmosphere." -
"there are a lot of alternatives that can be implemented" -> "there are numerous alternatives that can be implemented"
Explanation: "numerous" is more formal and precise than "a lot," which is too colloquial for academic writing. -
"toxic air gases mostly generated from factories" -> "toxic gases primarily emanate from factories"
Explanation: "emanate" is more precise and formal than "generated," and "primarily" is more specific than "mostly." -
"The severer regulations of emissions in industrial factories" -> "Stricter regulations on emissions in industrial factories"
Explanation: "Stricter" is the correct adjective form, and "on" is the correct preposition for regulations. -
"government can carry out campaigns" -> "governments can conduct campaigns"
Explanation: "governments" is plural to match the generalization, and "conduct" is more formal than "carry out." -
"educational programs are practical to raise people’s consciousness" -> "educational programs are effective in raising public awareness"
Explanation: "effective in raising public awareness" is more precise and formal than "practical to raise people’s consciousness." -
"so that reduce the level of toxic gases" -> "thus reducing the level of toxic gases"
Explanation: "thus" is more formal and appropriate for connecting the cause and effect, and "reducing" corrects the verb tense. -
"other methods are much more crucial and practical" -> "other methods are significantly more crucial and practical"
Explanation: "significantly" adds emphasis and formality to the comparison.
Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 5
Band Score for Task Response: 5 – UNDER WORD
-
Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to address both views regarding car-free days and alternative methods to reduce air pollution. However, it lacks depth in discussing the effectiveness of car-free days compared to other methods. For instance, while it mentions that car-free days can reduce emissions, it does not provide sufficient evidence or examples to support this claim. Additionally, the discussion on alternative methods is somewhat vague and lacks specific examples or data to illustrate their effectiveness.
- How to improve: To comprehensively address all elements of the question, the essay should include more detailed examples and evidence for both car-free days and alternative methods. For instance, citing specific studies or statistics on the impact of car-free days in various cities could strengthen the argument. Furthermore, a more balanced discussion that weighs the pros and cons of each approach would enhance the response.
-
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay states a clear opinion in the conclusion, asserting that other methods are more crucial. However, this position is not consistently reinforced throughout the essay. The introduction suggests a discussion of both views, but the support for the opinion is weak and not clearly articulated in the body paragraphs.
- How to improve: To maintain a clear and consistent position, the writer should explicitly state their opinion in the introduction and refer back to it throughout the essay. Each paragraph should link back to this central argument, with clear transitions that guide the reader through the reasoning. For example, after discussing car-free days, the writer could explicitly state how this relates to their overall opinion.
-
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents some ideas regarding car-free days and alternatives, but these ideas are not well-developed or supported. For example, the statement about car-free days leading to reduced emissions is not backed by any data or examples. Similarly, while the discussion on stricter regulations and tree planting is relevant, it lacks elaboration and concrete examples.
- How to improve: To effectively present, extend, and substantiate ideas, the writer should aim to develop each point more thoroughly. This could involve providing specific examples, such as successful case studies of car-free days in cities like Paris or Bogotá, or discussing the impact of tree planting initiatives in urban areas. Each idea should be clearly linked to the overall argument and supported by evidence.
-
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, addressing air pollution and methods to reduce it. However, some sentences are slightly off-topic or unclear, such as the mention of "detrimental dust" without explaining its relevance to the discussion. Additionally, the phrase "shoulder the responsibility" in the conclusion is somewhat vague and does not directly relate to the main discussion.
- How to improve: To maintain focus and relevance, the writer should ensure that each sentence directly contributes to the main argument. Avoiding vague language and ensuring that all points are clearly tied back to the topic will help keep the essay on track. It may also be helpful to outline the main points before writing to ensure coherence and relevance throughout the essay.
In summary, to improve the score for Task Response, the writer should focus on providing more detailed examples and evidence, maintaining a clear and consistent position, thoroughly developing ideas, and ensuring that all content is directly relevant to the topic. Additionally, addressing the word count issue is crucial, as being under the required word limit can significantly impact the overall score.
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 views, and a conclusion. However, the logical flow could be improved. For instance, the transition between discussing car-free days and alternative methods is somewhat abrupt. The first body paragraph focuses on car-free days but lacks a clear connection to the second paragraph, which discusses alternatives. The ideas within paragraphs are generally coherent, but the overall organization could benefit from clearer linking phrases to guide the reader through the argument.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using transitional phrases such as "In addition," "Conversely," or "Furthermore" to better connect ideas between paragraphs. Additionally, outlining the main points in the introduction can help set expectations for the reader, making it easier to follow the argument.
-
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs effectively, separating different ideas into distinct sections. However, the first paragraph could be more focused. The sentence structure is somewhat convoluted, which may confuse the reader. For example, the phrase "the purposes of these days are prone to utilize the using of public transports" is unclear and could be simplified. The second paragraph is clearer but could benefit from more explicit topic sentences that summarize the main idea of each paragraph.
- How to improve: Ensure that each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence that encapsulates the main idea. This will help guide the reader and improve clarity. Additionally, consider breaking down complex sentences into simpler ones to enhance readability. For instance, rephrase the first paragraph to clearly state that car-free days encourage public transport use and reduce emissions.
-
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "on the other hand" and "moreover," which help in linking ideas. However, the range of cohesive devices is limited, and some sentences lack clear connections. For example, the phrase "This definitely leads drivers stay at home" could be better connected to the previous sentence to clarify how it relates to the argument about emissions reduction.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider variety of linking words and phrases, such as "as a result," "for example," and "in contrast." Additionally, ensure that each cohesive device is used correctly and enhances the clarity of the argument. For instance, when introducing a contrasting idea, phrases like "in contrast" or "however" can more effectively signal a shift in perspective.
By addressing these areas for improvement, the essay can achieve a higher level of coherence and cohesion, ultimately enhancing the overall clarity and effectiveness of the argument presented.
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 "air toxicity," "emissions," and "detrimental dust." However, the usage is somewhat limited and repetitive, particularly in phrases like "effective" and "toxic gases." The phrase "the purposes of these days are prone to utilize" is awkward and suggests a lack of variety in expression.
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, consider using synonyms and varying expressions. For example, instead of repeatedly using "effective," alternatives like "beneficial," "advantageous," or "impactful" could be employed. Additionally, phrases like "encourage the use of public transport" instead of "utilize the using of public transports" would improve clarity and variety.
-
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: There are instances of imprecise vocabulary usage, such as "effectively reduce" which should be "effectively reducing," and "would able to deter" which is grammatically incorrect. The phrase "the emissions and toxic gases would be reduced into the atmosphere" is also misleading; emissions are released into the atmosphere rather than reduced into it.
- How to improve: Focus on grammatical accuracy and clarity. For instance, revise "would able to deter" to "would be able to deter." Additionally, ensure that phrases accurately convey the intended meaning, such as changing "reduced into the atmosphere" to "reduced in the atmosphere."
-
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains a few spelling errors, such as "transport" (should be "transportation" for clarity) and "government can carry out campaigns" (should be "government can carry out campaigns"). While these errors do not significantly impede understanding, they do detract from the overall professionalism of the writing.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, consider implementing a proofreading strategy. After writing, take a moment to review the essay for spelling errors, or use digital tools like spell checkers. Additionally, practicing spelling of commonly used academic vocabulary can help improve overall accuracy.
By addressing these areas—expanding vocabulary range, improving precision in word choice, and enhancing spelling accuracy—the essay can achieve a higher band score in the Lexical Resource criterion.
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 like "Some people think that car-free days are effectively reduce the air toxicity level" and "This definitely leads drivers stay at home" are prevalent. The use of complex sentences is minimal, with only a few instances of dependent clauses, such as "which generates fewer fumes and less detrimental dust." The overall sentence variety does not effectively convey nuanced ideas, which is essential for higher band scores.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, the writer should practice incorporating more complex and compound sentences. For example, instead of saying "This definitely leads drivers stay at home," a more complex structure could be "This definitely leads drivers to stay at home, which in turn reduces emissions." Additionally, using introductory phrases or clauses can enhance the flow of ideas, such as "While car-free days can be beneficial, other measures may prove more effective."
-
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors that hinder clarity. For instance, "effectively reduce" should be "effective in reducing," and "would able to deter" should be "would be able to deter." There are also punctuation issues, such as the lack of commas in compound sentences, which can confuse readers. The phrase "the emissions and toxic gases would be reduced into the atmosphere" is awkward and could be more clearly expressed as "the emissions and toxic gases would be reduced in the atmosphere."
- How to improve: To enhance grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on subject-verb agreement and verb forms. Regular practice with grammar exercises, particularly on verb tenses and sentence construction, can be beneficial. Additionally, proofreading the essay for punctuation errors and ensuring that commas are used correctly in complex sentences would improve clarity. For example, revising "Moreover, car-free days would able to deter the driving temporarily" to "Moreover, car-free days would be able to temporarily deter driving" would enhance grammatical accuracy.
By addressing these areas of improvement, the writer can work towards achieving a higher band score in Grammatical Range and Accuracy.
Bài sửa mẫu
Some people think that car-free days can effectively reduce the level of air toxicity, while others argue that there are other alternatives that are also effective. In this essay, I will discuss both perspectives and present my personal viewpoint.
It is often pointed out that car-free days, which reduce private vehicle emissions, are effective. The purpose of these days is to encourage the use of public transportation, which emits fewer fumes and less detrimental particles. Moreover, car-free days could temporarily deter driving, leading drivers to remain at home. As a result, emissions and toxic gases are reduced in the atmosphere.
On the other hand, many people believe that there are numerous alternatives that can be implemented. For instance, toxic gases primarily emanate from factories, and these can be mitigated by stricter regulations on emissions in industrial facilities. Stricter laws can be key to improving air quality. Additionally, governments can conduct campaigns to encourage citizens to plant more trees. Furthermore, educational programs are effective in raising public awareness about the significance of plants, thus reducing the level of toxic gases.
In conclusion, I firmly believe that other methods are significantly more crucial and practical. This serious problem should be addressed through various approaches that require both government and individuals to shoulder the responsibility.