Some people believe that the biggest problem facing cities is the increasing number of cars. Others say there are more serious problems. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Some people believe that the biggest problem facing cities is the increasing number of cars. Others say there are more serious problems.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.

In recent years, it is consideration that the most serious problem that government has to cope with is the soar of cars in cities, while others say that there are numerous of issue that are more sereve . From my own perspective, i agree with the later opinion
On the one hand, municipal authorities have to solve cars problem because its demirits, it can lead to many kind of pollutions such as air or noise pollution that can be detrimental to both residents's physical and mental health.Futhermore when the number of cars has been risen significantly and the city infrastructure cannot meet the demand for space of traffic so that a enormous quantity of accidents and traffic congestions will happen lead to the lost of time, money or even lifes
On the other hand, athough the rising in the number of vehicles is a serious issue, this problem just is the result of the biggest problem nowadays espeacially in some metropolitans,overpopulation.This serious puzzle can not only attribute to cars problem but also many others hazardous problems.For examples,due to high population density, Mumbai's hospitals cannot meet the needs of residents so that many people have died because they cannot access heath care system.In addition overpopulation can also lead to crime and smuggling because government cannot satifiy resident's needs.Hence,citizens have to find illegal way to save their life
In conclusion, in order to cope with cars problem, government has to solve its reason,overpopulation

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"In recent years, it is consideration" -> "In recent years, it is considered"
Explanation: "Consideration" is not the appropriate noun here; "considered" is more suitable to convey the idea that something is being thought about or regarded as important.
"soar of cars" -> "proliferation of cars"
Explanation: "Soar" implies sudden upward movement, which may not accurately depict the gradual increase in the number of cars. "Proliferation" better conveys the idea of a rapid and widespread increase.
"numerous of issue" -> "numerous issues"
Explanation: "Numerous of" is redundant; "numerous issues" is a more concise and grammatically correct phrase.
"sereve" -> "severe"
Explanation: "Sereve" is a misspelling; "severe" is the correct spelling of the adjective meaning serious or intense.
"the later opinion" -> "the latter opinion"
Explanation: "Later" refers to time, while "latter" refers to the second of two mentioned things. "Latter" is the appropriate term here to refer to the second opinion mentioned.
"its demirits" -> "its drawbacks"
Explanation: "Demerits" is less commonly used in academic writing; "drawbacks" is a more appropriate term to describe the negative aspects of something.
"can lead to many kind of pollutions" -> "can lead to various types of pollution"
Explanation: "Many kind of" is grammatically incorrect; "various types of" is a more precise and formal expression.
"residents’s" -> "residents’"
Explanation: The possessive form of "residents" should be "residents’" to indicate that something belongs to multiple residents.
"Futhermore" -> "Furthermore"
Explanation: "Futhermore" is a misspelling; "Furthermore" is the correct term to introduce additional points or reasons.
"has been risen significantly" -> "has significantly risen"
Explanation: "Has been risen" is awkward phrasing; "has significantly risen" is a smoother and more grammatically correct expression.
"a enormous quantity of accidents" -> "a significant number of accidents"
Explanation: "A enormous quantity of" is less precise and awkward; "a significant number of" is a more formal and appropriate phrase.
"traffic congestions" -> "traffic congestion"
Explanation: "Congestions" should be singular to match the singular noun "traffic"; "traffic congestion" is the correct term.
"lead to the lost of time, money or even lifes" -> "result in the loss of time, money, or even lives"
Explanation: "Lost of" is grammatically incorrect; "loss of" is the correct phrase. Also, "lifes" should be "lives" to match the plural noun.
"athough" -> "although"
Explanation: "Athough" is a misspelling; "although" is the correct conjunction to introduce contrast.
"the rising in the number of vehicles" -> "the increase in the number of vehicles"
Explanation: "The rising in" is awkward phrasing; "the increase in" is a more natural and formal expression.
"just is the result of" -> "is merely the result of"
Explanation: "Just is" is informal; "merely" adds a tone of understatement, enhancing the formality of the statement.
"nowadays espeacially in some metropolitans" -> "currently, especially in certain metropolitan areas"
Explanation: "Nowadays" is informal; "currently" is more appropriate for academic writing. "Metropolitans" should be "metropolitan areas" for clarity and correctness.
"overpopulation.This" -> "overpopulation. This"
Explanation: A space is needed between "overpopulation" and "This" for proper punctuation.
"serious puzzle" -> "serious issue"
Explanation: "Puzzle" is an informal term; "issue" is more formal and commonly used in academic writing.
"cannot only attribute to" -> "cannot solely be attributed to"
Explanation: "Cannot only attribute to" is grammatically incorrect; "cannot solely be attributed to" is a more precise and formal expression.
"hazardous problems" -> "hazardous issues"
Explanation: "Hazardous problems" is redundant; "hazardous issues" is a more concise and appropriate term.
"For examples" -> "For example"
Explanation: "For examples" is grammatically incorrect; "For example" is the correct phrase to introduce a single example.
"due to high population density" -> "owing to high population density"
Explanation: "Due to" is less formal; "owing to" is a more formal alternative to express causality.
"cannot meet the needs of residents so that" -> "cannot meet the needs of residents, leading to"
Explanation: "So that" implies purpose, which is not the intended meaning here; "leading to" indicates a consequence, which is more appropriate in this context.
"access heath care system" -> "access the healthcare system"
Explanation: "Heath care system" is a misspelling; "the healthcare system" is the correct term.
"can also lead to crime and smuggling because" -> "can also contribute to crime and smuggling, as"
Explanation: "Lead to" is less precise than "contribute to" in this context, and "because" should be replaced with "as" for clearer expression of causality.
"satifiy" -> "satisfy"
Explanation: "Satifiy" is a misspelling; "satisfy" is the correct spelling of the verb.
"resident’s needs" -> "residents’ needs"
Explanation: "Resident’s" should be plural possessive to indicate that the needs belong to multiple residents.
"Hence" -> "Therefore"
Explanation: "Hence" is less formal than "therefore" and is more commonly used in informal writing.
"find illegal way to save their life" -> "resort to illegal means to preserve their lives"
Explanation: "Find illegal way to save their life" is awkward phrasing; "resort to illegal means to preserve their lives" is a more formal and precise expression.
"In conclusion" -> "To conclude"
Explanation: "In conclusion" is a common phrase but "To conclude" is slightly more formal and equally appropriate for signaling the end of an essay.
"has to solve its reason" -> "must address its root cause"
Explanation: "Has to solve its reason" is awkward and imprecise; "must address its root cause" is a clearer and more formal way to express the idea.
"overpopulation" -> "the issue of overpopulation"
Explanation: Specifying "the issue of" clarifies that overpopulation is being referred to as a problem that needs addressing.
"solved the reason,overpopulation" -> "addressed the root cause, namely, overpopulation"
Explanation: "Solved the reason,overpopulation" lacks clarity and precision; "addressed the root

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Task Response: 6 – UNDER WORD

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to discuss both views presented in the prompt, acknowledging the perspective that increasing numbers of cars are a significant issue in cities, while also considering the viewpoint that there are more serious problems. However, the discussion is somewhat brief and lacks depth. The essay primarily focuses on the argument that overpopulation is the root cause of urban issues, such as traffic congestion and pollution, while only briefly addressing the opposing view.
- How to improve: To improve this aspect, it’s essential to thoroughly address all parts of the prompt. This includes providing a more balanced discussion of both perspectives. The essay should dedicate sufficient attention to the argument that increasing car numbers are a significant problem, discussing its implications and potential solutions alongside the perspective on other serious urban issues.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear position that overpopulation is the primary issue facing cities, rather than the increasing number of cars. This stance is maintained consistently throughout the essay. However, the clarity of expression could be improved with better organization and articulation of ideas.
- How to improve: To enhance clarity, ensure that each paragraph is focused on a specific point or argument, and transitions between ideas are smooth and logical. Additionally, clearly state the main thesis or argument in the introduction and reinforce it throughout the essay to maintain coherence.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas but lacks adequate development and support. While it briefly mentions the negative impacts of increasing car numbers, such as pollution and traffic congestion, it primarily focuses on the argument that overpopulation is the underlying cause of urban issues. However, the supporting evidence and examples provided to bolster this argument are limited and lack depth.
- How to improve: To improve the presentation of ideas, the essay should provide more detailed explanations and examples to support each argument. This could involve citing relevant statistics, studies, or real-life examples to strengthen the analysis and make the essay more persuasive and convincing.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay mostly stays on topic by discussing urban problems, including the increasing number of cars and overpopulation. However, it tends to prioritize the discussion of overpopulation as the main issue, which somewhat detracts from a balanced exploration of the prompt.
- How to improve: To maintain focus on the topic, ensure that each paragraph directly relates to the prompt and contributes to the overall argument. Avoid tangential discussions that do not directly address the central theme. Additionally, strive for equal attention to both sides of the argument to ensure a balanced and comprehensive analysis.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates some understanding of the prompt and presents a clear argument, there is room for improvement in addressing all parts of the question, providing more thorough development and support for ideas, and maintaining focus on the topic. By incorporating these suggestions, the essay can enhance its coherence, persuasiveness, and overall effectiveness.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a generally logical organization of ideas, with a clear introduction, body paragraphs discussing both views, and a conclusion. However, there are instances where the logical flow is disrupted, such as in the transition between discussing the problems of cars in cities and shifting to the broader issue of overpopulation. This abrupt transition affects the coherence of the essay.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, ensure smoother transitions between ideas. In this case, a clearer link between the problems posed by cars and the overarching issue of overpopulation would improve coherence. Consider using transitional phrases or sentences to connect the discussion more seamlessly.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, but the structure and effectiveness of paragraphing could be improved. Each paragraph should ideally focus on one main idea or aspect of the argument. However, some paragraphs in this essay contain multiple ideas without clear separation, which can confuse the reader.
- How to improve: Aim for clearer topic sentences at the beginning of each paragraph to indicate the main idea. Additionally, ensure that each paragraph focuses on developing one specific point, avoiding the inclusion of unrelated ideas within the same paragraph. For instance, in the second paragraph, separate discussions on the negative impacts of cars and the inadequacy of city infrastructure could be organized into distinct paragraphs for better clarity.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as transition words like "on the one hand" and "on the other hand," to connect ideas within paragraphs. However, there is limited variety in cohesive devices used throughout the essay. Additionally, some sentences lack coherence due to awkward phrasing or unclear pronoun references.
- How to improve: Increase the variety of cohesive devices used, including pronouns, conjunctions, and transitional phrases, to create smoother transitions between sentences and paragraphs. Ensure that pronoun references are clear and unambiguous to maintain coherence. For example, in the sentence "this problem just is the result of the biggest problem nowadays," clarifying the referent of "this problem" would enhance coherence and readability.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a basic level of coherence and cohesion, there is room for improvement in organizing ideas more logically, refining paragraph structure, and diversifying the use of cohesive devices to enhance clarity and coherence.

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 moderate range of vocabulary, but it could benefit from more variety and sophistication. For instance, there are repetitions of phrases such as "serious problem" and "government has to cope with," which could be replaced with synonyms or alternative expressions to enhance lexical diversity. Additionally, some vocabulary choices, such as "soar" instead of "surge" or "escalation," and "demirits" instead of "drawbacks" or "disadvantages," appear non-standard and hinder clarity.
- How to improve: To enhance lexical resource, strive for more varied vocabulary choices. Consider using synonyms, idiomatic expressions, and academic vocabulary relevant to the topic. For example, instead of repeatedly using "serious problem," you could employ terms like "pressing issue," "major concern," or "significant challenge." Aim for precision and clarity in word choice to convey your ideas effectively.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits instances of imprecise vocabulary usage, which can occasionally obscure meaning. For example, the phrase "it is consideration" lacks clarity and precision. Additionally, there are grammatical errors and awkward phrasings throughout the essay, such as "the soar of cars," "numerous of issue," and "enormous quantity of accidents," which detract from the overall precision of expression.
- How to improve: To enhance precision in vocabulary usage, focus on using words accurately and appropriately. Proofreading for grammatical errors and refining sentence structures can contribute to clearer communication. Consider using more formal language and paying attention to word choice to convey your ideas with precision and clarity.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors, such as "demirits" instead of "demerits," "sereve" instead of "severe," "futhermore" instead of "furthermore," "enormous" instead of "enormous," and "satifiy" instead of "satisfy." These errors detract from the overall effectiveness of the essay and may impact reader comprehension.
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, consider utilizing spell-checking tools and proofreading your work carefully before submission. Developing a habit of reviewing your writing for spelling errors and practicing spelling challenging words can help enhance accuracy. Additionally, familiarizing yourself with common spelling patterns and rules can contribute to improved spelling proficiency.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a reasonably wide range of sentence structures, which contributes to achieving a band score of 7. The use of complex sentence forms, such as conditional phrases and relative clauses ("…if the number of cars has been risen significantly and the city infrastructure cannot meet the demand…"), is noticeable. However, the essay sometimes struggles with the correct formation of these structures, leading to clarity issues.
- How to improve: To further enhance the score, the writer should focus on consistently applying complex grammatical structures correctly. Practicing compound and complex sentences, and particularly ensuring that dependent and independent clauses are correctly formed and punctuated, will be beneficial. Additionally, experimenting with inversions and cleft sentences could add stylistic variety and sophistication.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a fair command of grammar and punctuation, as expected at band 7. However, there are noticeable errors that slightly hinder the clarity and professionalism of the writing. Issues such as the misuse of apostrophes ("residents’s"), article errors ("the lost of time, money or even lifes"), and some spelling errors ("sereve", "Futhermore") detract from the overall quality. Sentence fragments and run-on sentences also occasionally disrupt the flow of ideas.
- How to improve: Attention to detail in proofreading could greatly improve grammatical accuracy and punctuation. The writer should focus on reviewing the rules of apostrophe usage and pluralization ("lifes" should be "lives"). Regular practice with editing exercises that focus on spotting and correcting common grammatical mistakes could be very helpful. Furthermore, using a grammar checker as an additional review tool might also assist in identifying less obvious errors.

Overall, the essay shows potential in grammatical range and accuracy but requires further refinement and attention to detail to consistently reach or exceed a band 7. Regular practice, alongside targeted exercises focusing on error correction and complex sentence construction, would be advisable for improvement.

Bài sửa mẫu

In recent years, it is considered that the proliferation of cars in cities poses a significant challenge for governments, while others argue that numerous issues are more severe. From my own perspective, I agree with the latter opinion.

On the one hand, municipal authorities must address the issue of cars due to its drawbacks. The increasing number of cars can lead to various types of pollution, such as air or noise pollution, which can adversely affect residents’ physical and mental health. Furthermore, when the number of cars has significantly risen and the city infrastructure cannot keep up with the traffic demand, a significant number of accidents and traffic congestion can result, leading to the loss of time, money, or even lives.

On the other hand, although the increase in the number of vehicles is indeed a serious issue, it is merely the result of a more pressing problem, especially in certain metropolitan areas: overpopulation. This serious issue cannot solely be attributed to the problem of cars but also to other hazardous issues. For example, owing to high population density, hospitals in cities like Mumbai cannot meet the needs of residents, leading to difficulties in accessing the healthcare system. Moreover, overpopulation can also contribute to crime and smuggling, as governments struggle to satisfy residents’ needs. Therefore, residents may resort to illegal means to preserve their lives.

To conclude, in order to address the problem of cars in cities, governments must tackle its root cause, namely, overpopulation. By addressing the root cause, governments can effectively mitigate the issues associated with the proliferation of cars and other related challenges.