Some people believe the government should pay for large pieces of art, like sculpture for display in public places. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

One school of thought holds that the government should allocate resources for major works of art for public display. While acknowledging the reasons for this perspective, I would contend that such investments are not viable for several governments.
On the one hand, there are several merits of the government investing in major works of art for public display. The first thing I should mention is that these constructions can uplift people's spirits by conveying important historical and cultural values. The result is that they enrich people’s understanding of art, culture and history. Additionally, large monuments can serve as tourist attractions, generating significant tourism revenues and creating job opportunities. For example, China’s major Buddha statues attract millions of tourists, resulting in substantial economic benefits for the locals.
On the other hand, I would contend that the investment in such constructions is simply not viable for several governments. The reason is that the building of such large pieces of art can incur colossal costs in construction and maintenance. This financial burden can put a strain on government coffers. For developing countries where education, healthcare and environmental pollution are still challenges, such budgets should be allocated to alleviate the pressing issues that the countries are facing, thereby improving people’ s living conditions. For instance, in Vietnam, where education and infrastructure in mountainous areas are still urgent problems, investing millions of dollars to the constructions of large monuments are unfeasible.
In conclusion, while dedicating money to major pieces of art for public display brings about various benefits, I am convinced that such constructions are not feasible for many countries.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"One school of thought holds" -> "One perspective suggests"
Explanation: "One perspective suggests" is a more precise and academically appropriate phrase, avoiding the colloquial tone of "school of thought."
"allocate resources for major works of art" -> "allocate funds for significant artistic projects"
Explanation: "Allocate funds for significant artistic projects" is more specific and formal, enhancing the academic tone by replacing the vague "works of art" with "artistic projects."
"not viable for several governments" -> "not feasible for several governments"
Explanation: "Not feasible" is a more precise term in academic contexts, indicating practical limitations rather than the more casual "not viable."
"The first thing I should mention is" -> "First, I would like to highlight"
Explanation: "First, I would like to highlight" is more formal and appropriate for academic writing, avoiding the conversational tone of "the first thing I should mention is."
"can uplift people’s spirits" -> "can elevate public morale"
Explanation: "Elevate public morale" is a more formal expression, replacing the colloquial "uplift people’s spirits."
"The result is that they enrich people’s understanding" -> "This leads to an enhancement of public understanding"
Explanation: "This leads to an enhancement of public understanding" is more formal and precise, avoiding the casual construction "The result is that."
"large monuments can serve as tourist attractions" -> "large monuments can function as tourist attractions"
Explanation: "Function as" is a more formal synonym for "serve as," aligning better with academic style.
"generating significant tourism revenues" -> "yielding substantial tourism revenue"
Explanation: "Yielding substantial tourism revenue" is more formal and precise, replacing the less formal "generating significant tourism revenues."
"The reason is that the building of such large pieces of art" -> "The reason is that the construction of such large artworks"
Explanation: "Construction of such large artworks" is more specific and formal, replacing the less precise "building of such large pieces of art."
"colossal costs" -> "substantial costs"
Explanation: "Substantial costs" is a more precise and formal term than "colossal," which can be seen as overly dramatic for academic writing.
"put a strain on government coffers" -> "exert a strain on government finances"
Explanation: "Exert a strain on government finances" is more formal and specific, replacing the colloquial "put a strain on government coffers."
"such budgets should be allocated" -> "such funds should be allocated"
Explanation: "Funds" is a more precise term in this context, replacing the less specific "budgets."
"investing millions of dollars to the constructions of large monuments" -> "investing millions of dollars in the construction of large monuments"
Explanation: "In the construction of large monuments" corrects the grammatical error and enhances clarity and formality.
"are unfeasible" -> "are impractical"
Explanation: "Are impractical" is a more formal and precise term than "are unfeasible," which is less commonly used in academic writing.

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 argument regarding government funding for large pieces of art. The introduction clearly states the writer’s position, acknowledging the merits of government investment while ultimately arguing against it. The essay discusses the benefits of public art, such as cultural enrichment and tourism, and counters this with the financial impracticality for many governments, particularly in developing nations. However, while the essay touches on both perspectives, it could benefit from a more explicit exploration of the extent to which the writer agrees or disagrees with the statement.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer should explicitly state their position on the extent of agreement or disagreement in the introduction and conclusion. Additionally, more nuanced discussion of the balance between the benefits and drawbacks could provide a clearer answer to the prompt.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position against government funding for large art pieces, which is consistent throughout the text. The writer effectively communicates their stance in the introduction and conclusion. However, the argument could be strengthened by more clearly delineating the reasons for their position, particularly in relation to the benefits mentioned.
- How to improve: To improve clarity, the writer should ensure that each paragraph explicitly ties back to their main argument. Adding transitional phrases that reinforce their stance can help maintain focus and coherence. For instance, after discussing the merits of public art, a sentence that explicitly contrasts these benefits with the financial burdens could enhance clarity.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several relevant ideas, such as the cultural and economic benefits of public art and the financial strains on governments. The examples provided, like the Buddha statues in China and the situation in Vietnam, are pertinent and help support the argument. However, the development of ideas could be more thorough; for instance, the discussion of tourism could be expanded to include potential downsides, such as the risk of over-reliance on tourism for economic stability.
- How to improve: To better support ideas, the writer should aim to elaborate on each point with more detailed examples or explanations. For instance, discussing how public art can lead to both positive and negative outcomes in tourism could provide a more balanced view. Additionally, integrating counterarguments and addressing them could further strengthen the essay.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the prompt regarding government funding for public art. Each paragraph relates back to the central theme, discussing both the benefits and drawbacks of such funding. However, there are moments where the discussion could be more tightly focused on the implications of government spending rather than broader societal issues.
- How to improve: To maintain tighter focus, the writer should ensure that every point made directly relates back to the prompt. Avoiding tangential discussions about broader societal issues, unless directly tied to the argument about public art funding, will help keep the essay on track. Using topic sentences that clearly relate to the prompt can also aid in maintaining focus.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the task and presents a coherent argument. With some adjustments to the clarity of position, depth of argumentation, and focus on the topic, the essay could achieve a higher band score.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 8

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear structure with a logical progression of ideas. The introduction effectively sets up the debate, and the body paragraphs are well-organized, with each paragraph focusing on a distinct viewpoint. For example, the first body paragraph discusses the benefits of government investment in art, while the second addresses the drawbacks. This clear separation aids the reader in following the argument. However, the transition between the two perspectives could be made more explicit to enhance clarity.
- How to improve: To enhance logical flow, consider using transitional phrases at the beginning of the second body paragraph, such as "Conversely" or "On the other hand," to signal a shift in perspective more clearly. Additionally, summarizing the key points at the end of each paragraph can reinforce the argument and guide the reader through the essay.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively utilizes paragraphs to separate ideas, with each paragraph containing a clear main idea supported by examples. The introduction and conclusion are also distinct, framing the discussion well. However, the second body paragraph could benefit from clearer topic sentences that explicitly state the main argument of that paragraph.
- How to improve: Strengthen the topic sentence of the second body paragraph to clearly indicate that it will discuss the limitations of government investment in art. For instance, starting with "Despite the potential benefits, there are significant financial constraints that make such investments impractical for many governments" would provide a clearer focus for the reader.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good use of cohesive devices, such as "On the one hand" and "On the other hand," which effectively signal contrasting viewpoints. Additionally, the use of examples, such as the reference to China’s Buddha statues and Vietnam’s educational challenges, helps to create cohesion within the argument. However, there is a reliance on a few cohesive devices, which can make the writing feel somewhat repetitive.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider range of linking words and phrases. For example, instead of repeating "the reason is that," consider using alternatives like "This is due to" or "This can be attributed to." Additionally, using phrases like "Furthermore" or "Moreover" can help to connect ideas more fluidly and enhance the overall cohesiveness of the essay.

By addressing these areas for improvement, the essay can achieve an even higher level of coherence and cohesion, further solidifying its argument and enhancing the reader’s understanding.

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, particularly in discussing the merits and drawbacks of government investment in public art. Phrases like "allocate resources," "uplift people’s spirits," and "financial burden" show an ability to use varied vocabulary appropriately. However, the vocabulary could be more diverse; for example, the repeated use of "large pieces of art" and "constructions" could be replaced with synonyms to enhance lexical variety.
- How to improve: To improve, consider incorporating synonyms and more varied expressions. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "large pieces of art," you might use "monumental artworks" or "grand sculptures." This will not only enhance the richness of your vocabulary but also demonstrate a broader lexical range.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary accurately, but there are instances where word choice could be more precise. For example, the phrase "the building of such large pieces of art" could be more effectively expressed as "the creation of monumental artworks." Additionally, the term "constructions" is somewhat vague and could be replaced with "installations" or "artworks" to clarify the context.
- How to improve: Focus on selecting words that convey your meaning more precisely. For example, instead of "incur colossal costs," you might say "entail significant financial investment." This specificity will enhance clarity and demonstrate a higher level of lexical resource.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The spelling in the essay is largely accurate, which contributes positively to the overall impression. However, there is a minor error in "people’ s living conditions," where an unnecessary space appears before the possessive apostrophe. Such errors can detract from the professionalism of the writing.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, consider proofreading your work carefully before submission. Utilizing tools like spell checkers or reading your essay aloud can help catch minor errors. Additionally, familiarizing yourself with commonly misspelled words can further improve your spelling skills.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid command of vocabulary, focusing on enhancing lexical variety, precision, and spelling accuracy will help elevate the score in the Lexical Resource criteria.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 8

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable variety of sentence structures, including complex sentences and a mix of simple and compound sentences. For instance, phrases like "One school of thought holds that the government should allocate resources for major works of art for public display" showcase a clear and sophisticated structure. Additionally, the use of subordinating clauses, such as "while acknowledging the reasons for this perspective," adds depth to the argument. However, there are instances where sentence structures could be more varied; for example, the repeated use of "the investment in such constructions is simply not viable" could be rephrased to avoid redundancy.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures further, consider employing more varied introductory phrases or clauses. For example, instead of repeatedly starting sentences with "the investment in," you could use alternatives like "Investing in such constructions" or "Allocating funds for these projects." Additionally, incorporating more rhetorical questions or conditional sentences could enhance engagement and complexity.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: Overall, the grammatical accuracy is strong, with only a few minor errors. For instance, the phrase "the constructions of large monuments are unfeasible" should be corrected to "the construction of large monuments is unfeasible" to ensure subject-verb agreement. Additionally, there are punctuation issues, such as the unnecessary space before the comma in "tourist attractions, generating significant tourism revenues." These small errors detract from the overall professionalism of the essay.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, it is essential to proofread the essay carefully, focusing on subject-verb agreement and ensuring that singular and plural forms are used correctly. For punctuation, practice the rules regarding commas, particularly in compound sentences and lists. Reading the essay aloud can also help identify awkward phrasing or punctuation errors that may be overlooked during silent reading.

By addressing these areas, the essay can achieve an even higher level of grammatical range and accuracy, potentially moving towards a Band 9 score.

Bài sửa mẫu

One perspective suggests that the government should allocate funds for significant artistic projects, such as sculptures for display in public places. While acknowledging the merits of this viewpoint, I would contend that such investments are impractical for several governments.

On the one hand, there are notable advantages to the government investing in major works of art for public display. First, I would like to highlight that these constructions can elevate public morale by conveying important historical and cultural values. This leads to an enhancement of public understanding of art, culture, and history. Additionally, large monuments can function as tourist attractions, yielding substantial tourism revenue and creating job opportunities. For example, China’s major Buddha statues attract millions of tourists, resulting in considerable economic benefits for local communities.

On the other hand, I would argue that the investment in such constructions is simply not feasible for several governments. The reason is that the construction of such large artworks can incur substantial costs in both construction and maintenance. This financial burden can exert a strain on government finances. For developing countries, where education, healthcare, and environmental pollution remain pressing challenges, such funds should be allocated to address these critical issues, thereby improving people’s living conditions. For instance, in Vietnam, where education and infrastructure in mountainous areas are still urgent problems, investing millions of dollars in the construction of large monuments is unfeasible.

In conclusion, while dedicating money to major pieces of art for public display brings about various benefits, I am convinced that such constructions are not practical for many countries.