Some people believe that employees should speak out if their colleagues act unethically, while others think it is better to stay silent. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

People have different views about whether staff members should become whistleblowers if their peers demonstrate professional misconduct or not. Although some individuals argue that we should ignore deliberately, I believe that it is better if we advocate for justice and hold accountable those who commit wrongdoing.

On the one hand, one of the main reasons why personel remain silent when they witness nonstandard behaviors of their colleagues is they want to remain workplace harmony. This means that some employees choose silence in an effort conflict avoidance, hoping to maintain workplace harmony without creating tension. Another reason is employees can carry risks from their co-workers. To be more clearly, employees may fear retaliation from colleagues or supervisors, which could result in job insecurity or strained relationships at work. For example, whistleblowers often face career setbacks or personal attacks, even when reporting for the right reasons. Thus, the fear of retaliation might discourage employees from reporting unethical behavior.

On the other hand, some argue that we should speak out to remain transparency in workplace. This is because it upholds fairness and prevents favoritism or corruption within the company. For instance, reporting cases of unfair promotions due to favoritism can ensure that opportunities are based on merit, not personal connections. Therefore, by promoting a culture of honesty, reporting unethical behavior leads to long-term trust and stability within the organization. The second thing is speaking up can protect the company and other employees. They believe this because it prevents unethical practices from escalating and harming the company or its employees. For instance, in the Volkswagen emissions scandal, if employees had reported unethical behavior early on, the company could have avoided severe financial penalties and reputational damage. Thus speaking up not only protects the organization but also encourages ethical behavior across the workforce.

In conclusion, although there are differing opinions on whether remain silent when witness wrongdoing of fellowsm or whistleblowing them, I strongly believe that speak up is better. In the future, it is essential for managers to focus on their employees to ensure the transparency of company.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"People have different views about whether staff members should become whistleblowers if their peers demonstrate professional misconduct or not." -> "Individuals hold varying opinions regarding whether colleagues should report professional misconduct or not."
Explanation: Replacing "People have different views about" with "Individuals hold varying opinions regarding" refines the language to be more formal and precise, suitable for an academic context.
"ignore deliberately" -> "intentionally ignore"
Explanation: "Intentionally ignore" is a more precise and formal way to express deliberate action, aligning better with academic style.
"personel" -> "personnel"
Explanation: Correcting the spelling error from "personel" to "personnel" ensures accuracy and professionalism in the text.
"nonstandard behaviors" -> "unprofessional behaviors"
Explanation: "Unprofessional behaviors" is a more specific and appropriate term in this context, clearly indicating behaviors that do not meet professional standards.
"they want to remain workplace harmony" -> "they seek to maintain workplace harmony"
Explanation: "Seek to maintain" is a more formal and precise expression than "want to remain," which is somewhat informal and vague.
"in an effort conflict avoidance" -> "to avoid conflict"
Explanation: Simplifying "in an effort conflict avoidance" to "to avoid conflict" streamlines the phrase and enhances clarity.
"employees can carry risks from their co-workers" -> "employees may face risks from their colleagues"
Explanation: "May face risks from their colleagues" is more precise and formal, replacing the awkward and unclear "can carry risks from their co-workers."
"To be more clearly" -> "To clarify"
Explanation: "To clarify" is a more concise and formal way to introduce additional explanation.
"speaking out to remain transparency in workplace" -> "speaking out to maintain transparency in the workplace"
Explanation: "Maintain transparency" is grammatically correct and more formal than "remain transparency," which is incorrect.
"speaking up can protect the company and other employees" -> "speaking up can safeguard the company and its employees"
Explanation: "Safeguard" is a more formal synonym for "protect," and "its employees" is grammatically correct compared to "other employees."
"They believe this because" -> "This is because"
Explanation: Removing "They believe" simplifies the sentence structure and enhances the formal tone.
"In the future, it is essential for managers to focus on their employees to ensure the transparency of company." -> "In the future, it is crucial for managers to prioritize employee engagement to ensure transparency within the company."
Explanation: "Prioritize employee engagement" is a more specific and formal way to express the importance of focusing on employees, and "within the company" is grammatically correct compared to "of company."

These changes enhance the formal tone, precision, and clarity of the essay, aligning it more closely with academic writing standards.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Task Response: 7

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses both views regarding whether employees should report unethical behavior or remain silent. The first part discusses the reasons for silence, such as maintaining workplace harmony and fear of retaliation, while the second part presents arguments for speaking out, including promoting transparency and protecting the organization. However, the essay could have provided a more balanced exploration of both perspectives, particularly by elaborating on the consequences of silence in greater detail.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer should aim to delve deeper into the implications of both viewpoints. For instance, they could discuss potential long-term effects of silence on workplace culture or the ethical dilemmas faced by employees. Including more examples or case studies for both sides would also strengthen the argument.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The writer clearly states their position in favor of speaking out in the introduction and conclusion. However, the transition between discussing both views and the writer’s opinion could be smoother. The phrase "I believe that it is better if we advocate for justice" could be more assertively linked to the arguments presented.
- How to improve: To maintain a clearer position, the writer should explicitly connect their opinion to the arguments made in the body paragraphs. Phrases like "This supports my view that…" can help reinforce their stance and guide the reader through the argument.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several valid points, such as the fear of retaliation and the importance of transparency. However, some ideas are not fully developed. For example, while the Volkswagen emissions scandal is mentioned, it could benefit from a more detailed explanation of the consequences that followed and how early reporting could have mitigated those issues.
- How to improve: The writer should aim to provide more detailed examples and explanations for each point made. This could involve elaborating on the consequences of unethical behavior or the benefits of a transparent workplace. Additionally, integrating statistics or expert opinions could lend further credibility to the arguments.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, addressing the prompt directly. However, there are instances where the language could be clearer, such as "nonstandard behaviors," which may confuse readers. Furthermore, the conclusion introduces the idea of managers focusing on employees, which, while relevant, feels slightly disconnected from the main discussion about whistleblowing.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that all language used is precise and directly related to the topic. The conclusion should summarize the main points more clearly and reiterate the writer’s opinion without introducing new ideas that could distract from the main argument.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents a clear opinion, it can be improved by providing more balanced arguments, developing ideas further, and ensuring clarity and focus throughout.

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, two body paragraphs discussing opposing views, and a conclusion. Each paragraph addresses a specific aspect of the topic, which aids in logical progression. For instance, the first body paragraph effectively outlines reasons for silence among employees, while the second paragraph presents arguments for whistleblowing. However, the transition between ideas could be smoother; for example, the shift from discussing silence to advocating for transparency could benefit from a clearer linking sentence.
- How to improve: To enhance logical flow, consider using transitional phrases at the beginning and end of paragraphs to connect ideas more explicitly. For example, phrases like "Conversely," or "On the contrary," can help signal shifts in perspective. Additionally, ensuring that each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence that encapsulates the main idea will strengthen the overall organization.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay utilizes paragraphs effectively, with each one focusing on a distinct viewpoint. The introduction sets the stage, while the body paragraphs are dedicated to exploring the arguments for both silence and whistleblowing. However, the conclusion could be more robust; it briefly summarizes the discussion but lacks a strong final statement that reinforces the writer’s opinion.
- How to improve: To improve paragraphing, ensure that each paragraph not only presents a clear idea but also includes a concluding sentence that ties back to the main argument. In the conclusion, reiterate the key points made in the body paragraphs and provide a strong, definitive statement about your stance on the issue.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "On the one hand," and "On the other hand," which help in contrasting the two views. However, the range of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and there are instances where the flow could be enhanced with additional linking words. For example, phrases like "Furthermore," or "In addition," could be used to connect ideas within paragraphs more fluidly.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider variety of linking words and phrases. This can include those that indicate cause and effect (e.g., "As a result," "Consequently"), examples (e.g., "For instance," "Such as"), and contrast (e.g., "However," "Nevertheless"). Additionally, ensure that cohesive devices are used appropriately to avoid redundancy and maintain clarity.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents coherent arguments, focusing on enhancing logical transitions, strengthening paragraph conclusions, and diversifying cohesive devices will contribute to a higher band score in Coherence and Cohesion.

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, such as "whistleblowers," "professional misconduct," and "workplace harmony." However, the use of synonyms and varied expressions is somewhat limited. For instance, the phrase "remain silent" is repeated multiple times without variation, which detracts from the overall lexical richness. Additionally, terms like "nonstandard behaviors" could be more effectively replaced with "unethical behaviors" to enhance clarity and appropriateness.
- How to improve: To improve lexical variety, the writer should practice using synonyms and related terms. For example, instead of consistently using "remain silent," alternatives like "stay quiet," "choose silence," or "refrain from reporting" could be employed. Engaging with a thesaurus or vocabulary-building exercises can help expand the range of vocabulary used in essays.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: While the essay includes some precise vocabulary, there are instances of imprecise usage. For example, "nonstandard behaviors" is vague and does not clearly convey the intended meaning of unethical actions. Additionally, the phrase "advocate for justice" may not fully capture the essence of the argument being made, which is more about accountability rather than advocacy.
- How to improve: To enhance precision, the writer should focus on using vocabulary that directly relates to the topic. For instance, replacing "nonstandard behaviors" with "unethical practices" would provide clearer meaning. Furthermore, ensuring that terms accurately reflect the nuances of the argument will strengthen the essay’s clarity and effectiveness.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors, such as "personel" (should be "personnel"), "fellowsm" (should be "fellows"), and "remain" (should be "remaining"). These errors can distract the reader and detract from the overall professionalism of the writing.
- 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 before submission. Additionally, maintaining a personal list of commonly misspelled words and practicing them can help reinforce correct spelling in future writing tasks.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a satisfactory level of lexical resource, there are clear areas for improvement in vocabulary range, precision, and spelling accuracy. By focusing on these aspects, the writer can enhance their overall performance in the Lexical Resource criteria for IELTS Task 2 essays.

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. For instance, it uses complex sentences such as "Although some individuals argue that we should ignore deliberately, I believe that it is better if we advocate for justice and hold accountable those who commit wrongdoing." However, there is a tendency to rely on simpler structures, particularly in the second paragraph where phrases like "one of the main reasons why personnel remain silent" and "this means that some employees choose silence" are repeated. The use of phrases like "the second thing is" also indicates a lack of variety in transitional phrases.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, consider incorporating more compound-complex sentences and varying the use of conjunctions. For example, instead of starting sentences with "This means" or "Another reason," you could use introductory clauses or phrases such as "In addition to this," or "Furthermore," to create more complex sentence structures. Practicing combining shorter sentences into longer, more sophisticated ones can also enhance the overall variety.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues that affect clarity. For instance, "personel" should be "personnel," and "nonstandard behaviors" could be more appropriately phrased as "unethical behaviors." Additionally, phrases like "remain workplace harmony" should be corrected to "maintain workplace harmony." There are also instances of missing articles, such as in "to remain transparency in workplace," which should be "to maintain transparency in the workplace." Punctuation errors include the lack of commas in complex sentences, which can lead to run-on sentences and confusion.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, it is essential to proofread the essay carefully. Focus on common grammatical issues such as subject-verb agreement, correct article usage, and ensuring that all sentences are complete. Additionally, practicing punctuation rules, particularly regarding the use of commas in complex sentences, can help clarify meaning. Utilizing grammar-checking tools or seeking feedback from peers can also provide insights into persistent errors.

Overall, while the essay presents a clear argument and addresses the prompt effectively, enhancing grammatical range and accuracy will significantly improve the overall quality and coherence of the writing.

Bài sửa mẫu

People hold varying opinions regarding whether staff members should become whistleblowers if their colleagues demonstrate professional misconduct. Although some individuals argue that we should intentionally ignore such behaviors, I believe that it is better to advocate for justice and hold accountable those who commit wrongdoing.

On the one hand, one of the main reasons why personnel remain silent when they witness unprofessional behaviors of their colleagues is that they seek to maintain workplace harmony. This means that some employees choose silence in an effort to avoid conflict, hoping to keep the workplace atmosphere positive without creating tension. Another reason is that employees may face risks from their colleagues. To clarify, employees may fear retaliation from coworkers or supervisors, which could result in job insecurity or strained relationships at work. For example, whistleblowers often encounter career setbacks or personal attacks, even when reporting for the right reasons. Thus, the fear of retaliation might discourage employees from reporting unethical behavior.

On the other hand, some argue that speaking out is crucial to maintain transparency in the workplace. This is because it upholds fairness and prevents favoritism or corruption within the company. For instance, reporting cases of unfair promotions due to favoritism can ensure that opportunities are based on merit, not personal connections. Therefore, by promoting a culture of honesty, reporting unethical behavior leads to long-term trust and stability within the organization. Additionally, speaking up can safeguard the company and its employees. This is because it prevents unethical practices from escalating and harming the company or its personnel. For instance, in the Volkswagen emissions scandal, if employees had reported unethical behavior early on, the company could have avoided severe financial penalties and reputational damage. Thus, speaking up not only protects the organization but also encourages ethical behavior across the workforce.

In conclusion, although there are differing opinions on whether to remain silent when witnessing the wrongdoing of colleagues or to blow the whistle, I strongly believe that speaking up is the better option. In the future, it is crucial for managers to prioritize employee engagement to ensure transparency within the company.