Some people said that giving aid to poorer countries has more negative effects than positive effect. To what extend do you agree or disagree?

Some people believe that providing support to underdeveloped countries has more detrimental impacts than beneficial effects. While there might be some supposing this arguments, I still agree with this view because of more convincing reasons.
On the one hand, this opinion seems to be unreasonable due to two reasons. Firstly, it brings many benefits to both side. For instance, many countries which experience to the labour shortage will import workers in the poorer countries. As a consequence, it could reduce unemployment rate and improve the living standard families. Secondly, giving aid is the ideal way to address the global problems. For example, many parts of world have experience on disasters such as drought and flooding and result from the global warming. As a result, rich countries might not be slove this problem alone while poor countries need to support and reduce CO2 emissions
In spite of the arguments above, I highly support this view for the following reasons. The first argument is that it is a waste money. A good example is that corruption will common all national bodies. For this reason, people should use financial aid from the foreign countries with wrong purposes. In addition, it causes political instability parts of world. Taking many countries like China, the USA and Russia will offer aid to improve the political influence on regions. Consequently, it causes social divisions and lead to internal warfare.
In conclusion, although I recognize possible arguments to reject the discussed view, there are more convincing reasons to believe that this idea is resonable.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"detrimental impacts" -> "negative impacts"
Explanation: Replacing "detrimental" with "negative" simplifies the term while maintaining the intended meaning, making it more suitable for academic writing where precision is key without unnecessary complexity.
"supposing this arguments" -> "supposing this argument"
Explanation: Correcting the grammatical error from plural to singular ("arguments" to "argument") ensures grammatical accuracy and clarity in the sentence structure.
"I still agree with this view because of more convincing reasons" -> "I still support this view for more compelling reasons"
Explanation: Replacing "agree with this view because of" with "support this view for" uses more formal language and "compelling" instead of "convincing" to enhance the academic tone.
"it brings many benefits to both side" -> "it brings numerous benefits to both parties"
Explanation: Replacing "many" with "numerous" and "side" with "parties" refines the language to be more precise and formal, suitable for academic writing.
"experience to the labour shortage" -> "experience labor shortages"
Explanation: Correcting "experience to the labour shortage" to "experience labor shortages" fixes the grammatical error and uses the correct term "labor" for formal American English.
"improve the living standard families" -> "improve the living standards of families"
Explanation: Adding "of" and changing "standard" to "standards" corrects the grammatical structure and clarifies the intended meaning, enhancing readability and formality.
"giving aid is the ideal way to address the global problems" -> "providing aid is an effective means of addressing global issues"
Explanation: Replacing "giving aid" with "providing aid" and "the global problems" with "global issues" uses more precise and formal vocabulary, and "an effective means of addressing" is a more academically appropriate phraseology.
"many parts of world have experience on disasters" -> "many parts of the world have experienced disasters"
Explanation: Correcting "have experience on" to "have experienced" fixes the prepositional error and grammatical structure, making the sentence more accurate and formal.
"slove this problem" -> "solve this problem"
Explanation: Correcting the typo "slove" to "solve" ensures the text is free of errors and maintains professionalism.
"it is a waste money" -> "it is a waste of money"
Explanation: Adding "of" corrects the prepositional error, making the phrase grammatically correct and more formal.
"corruption will common all national bodies" -> "corruption will occur in all national bodies"
Explanation: Replacing "will common" with "will occur" corrects the verb choice and adds clarity to the sentence, aligning with formal academic language.
"people should use financial aid from the foreign countries with wrong purposes" -> "people should use financial aid from foreign countries for improper purposes"
Explanation: Replacing "with wrong purposes" with "for improper purposes" corrects the preposition and adverb usage, enhancing the formality and precision of the statement.
"it causes social divisions and lead to internal warfare" -> "it causes social divisions and leads to internal warfare"
Explanation: Correcting "lead" to "leads" fixes the verb tense consistency, ensuring grammatical correctness and maintaining the formal tone.
"there are more convincing reasons to believe that this idea is resonable" -> "there are more compelling reasons to believe that this idea is reasonable"
Explanation: Replacing "convincing" with "compelling" and "resonable" with "reasonable" refines the language to be more precise and appropriate for 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 the prompt by discussing both the negative and positive aspects of giving aid to poorer countries. The writer acknowledges that some people believe aid has benefits, but ultimately supports the view that the negative effects outweigh the positives. However, the exploration of the positive effects is somewhat superficial and lacks depth. For instance, the mention of labor shortages and the importation of workers is relevant but not sufficiently elaborated upon.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer should aim to provide a more balanced analysis by offering specific examples and details for both sides of the argument. This could involve discussing more thoroughly how aid can lead to improvements in education or health care in poorer countries, alongside the negatives.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear position that aligns with the writer’s agreement with the negative view of aid. However, the transition between acknowledging the opposing view and asserting the writer’s stance could be smoother. The phrase "While there might be some supposing this arguments" is awkward and detracts from clarity.
- How to improve: The writer should work on refining their thesis statement and ensuring that each paragraph clearly supports their main argument. Using transitional phrases can help maintain clarity and coherence throughout the essay.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas, such as the issues of corruption and political instability related to aid. However, these ideas are not fully developed or supported with sufficient evidence. For example, the claim about corruption is made, but it lacks specific examples or data to substantiate it.
- How to improve: To strengthen the essay, the writer should aim to provide more detailed explanations and examples for each point made. This could include statistics on corruption levels in aid-receiving countries or historical examples of political instability resulting from foreign aid.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the effects of aid to poorer countries. However, there are moments where the relevance of certain points could be questioned, such as the mention of CO2 emissions without a clear connection to the main argument about aid.
- How to improve: The writer should ensure that every point made directly relates back to the central thesis. It may be helpful to outline the main arguments before writing to maintain focus and relevance throughout the essay.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a good understanding of the topic and presents a clear position, it would benefit from deeper analysis, more robust support for claims, and improved coherence in argumentation.

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, and a conclusion. However, the logical flow could be improved. For instance, the transition from discussing the benefits of aid to the negative impacts is somewhat abrupt. The first body paragraph outlines benefits, but the second body paragraph does not clearly connect to the first, which can confuse the reader about the overall argument.
- How to improve: To enhance the logical flow, consider using transitional phrases at the beginning of each paragraph that signal a shift in perspective. For example, phrases like "On the contrary" or "Conversely" can help clarify that you are moving from discussing benefits to addressing drawbacks. Additionally, ensuring that each point logically follows from the previous one will strengthen the overall coherence.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs effectively to separate different ideas, which is a strength. However, the paragraphs could be more developed and focused. The first body paragraph contains two distinct points about benefits, which could be elaborated further. The second body paragraph also introduces multiple ideas (corruption and political instability) without sufficient depth, making it harder for the reader to follow the argument.
- How to improve: Aim to have one main idea per paragraph, supported by examples and explanations. For instance, you could separate the points about corruption and political instability into two distinct paragraphs. This would allow for a more thorough exploration of each issue, enhancing clarity and depth.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "Firstly," "Secondly," and "In addition," which help to organize ideas. However, the range of cohesive devices is limited, and some sentences lack clear connections. For example, the phrase "As a result" is used, but it does not always clearly link the cause and effect, particularly in the discussion about global warming and aid.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider variety of linking words and phrases, such as "Furthermore," "Moreover," "Consequently," and "Nevertheless." Additionally, ensure that each cohesive device is used appropriately to clarify the relationship between ideas. For example, when discussing the consequences of aid, explicitly state how one idea leads to another to strengthen the connections.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a good understanding of the topic and presents a coherent argument, enhancing the logical flow, refining paragraph structure, and diversifying cohesive devices will help achieve 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 moderate range of vocabulary, with some effective word choices such as "detrimental impacts," "beneficial effects," and "political instability." However, the vocabulary is somewhat repetitive and lacks variation. For instance, the phrases "giving aid" and "support" are used multiple times without synonyms or alternative expressions, which limits the lexical diversity. Additionally, terms like "underdeveloped countries" could be replaced with "developing countries" for more common usage.
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, the writer should incorporate synonyms and varied expressions. For example, instead of repeatedly using "aid," alternatives such as "assistance," "support," or "donations" could be employed. Furthermore, the writer could benefit from using more advanced vocabulary related to the topic, such as "economic disparity," "humanitarian assistance," or "geopolitical influence."
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: There are instances of imprecise vocabulary usage in the essay. For example, the phrase "supposing this arguments" is awkward and unclear; it would be better expressed as "supporting this argument." Additionally, "slove this problem" is a misspelling of "solve," which affects clarity. The phrase "waste money" is also vague and could be more precisely articulated as "a misallocation of funds."
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on using vocabulary that accurately conveys their intended meaning. This can be achieved by revising unclear phrases and ensuring that the chosen words fit the context. For example, instead of saying "waste money," the writer could specify "misuse of financial resources." Regular practice with vocabulary exercises and reading academic texts can help in selecting more precise language.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors that detract from its overall quality. For example, "slove" should be "solve," "resonable" should be "reasonable," and "common all national bodies" is awkward and unclear. These errors can confuse the reader and undermine the writer’s credibility.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should engage in regular proofreading of their work. Utilizing spell-check tools and reading the essay aloud can help identify errors. Additionally, maintaining a personal list of commonly misspelled words and practicing them can significantly improve spelling skills. Consistent practice and attention to detail will lead to greater accuracy in spelling.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a basic understanding of vocabulary related to the topic, there is significant room for improvement in terms of range, precision, and spelling accuracy. By focusing on these areas, the writer can enhance their lexical resource and potentially achieve a higher band score in future essays.

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 sentences ("Some people believe that providing support to underdeveloped countries has more detrimental impacts than beneficial effects.") and compound sentences ("In addition, it causes political instability parts of world."). However, the range is limited, and many sentences are either overly simplistic or poorly constructed, which detracts from the overall effectiveness. For example, the phrase "this opinion seems to be unreasonable due to two reasons" could be restructured for clarity and sophistication.
- How to improve: To enhance the variety of sentence structures, the writer should incorporate more complex and compound-complex sentences. For instance, instead of saying "it brings many benefits to both side," the writer could say, "Not only does it bring benefits to both sides, but it also fosters a sense of global solidarity." Additionally, using a mix of active and passive voice can add variety. Practicing sentence combining exercises and reading a range of academic texts can help in developing a more diverse grammatical range.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues that hinder clarity. For example, the phrase "this arguments" should be "this argument," and "the ideal way to address the global problems" could be more effectively stated as "an ideal way to address global problems." Furthermore, there are punctuation errors, such as missing commas in complex sentences and run-on sentences that lack proper conjunctions. The sentence "As a result, rich countries might not be slove this problem alone while poor countries need to support and reduce CO2 emissions" contains multiple errors, including "slove" instead of "solve" and a lack of clarity in the second clause.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on proofreading for common errors, such as subject-verb agreement and verb forms. It is also advisable to review punctuation rules, particularly for complex sentences and lists. Utilizing grammar-checking tools and seeking feedback from peers or instructors can help identify and correct mistakes. Additionally, practicing writing with a focus on clarity and coherence will enhance overall grammatical proficiency.

By addressing these areas, the writer can work towards achieving a higher band score in Grammatical Range and Accuracy for future IELTS essays.

Bài sửa mẫu

Some people believe that providing support to underdeveloped countries has more negative impacts than positive effects. While there might be some merit to this argument, I still support this view for more compelling reasons.

On the one hand, this opinion seems to be unreasonable for two reasons. Firstly, it brings numerous benefits to both parties. For instance, many countries that experience labor shortages will import workers from poorer countries. As a consequence, this could reduce the unemployment rate and improve the living standards of families. Secondly, providing aid is an effective means of addressing global issues. For example, many parts of the world have experienced disasters such as droughts and flooding as a result of global warming. Rich countries might not be able to solve this problem alone, while poorer countries need support to reduce CO2 emissions.

In spite of the arguments above, I highly support the view that giving aid has negative effects for the following reasons. The first argument is that it is a waste of money. A good example is that corruption occurs in all national bodies. For this reason, people may use financial aid from foreign countries for improper purposes. In addition, it causes political instability in various parts of the world. For instance, countries like China, the USA, and Russia often offer aid to enhance their political influence in certain regions. Consequently, this can lead to social divisions and internal warfare.

In conclusion, although I recognize possible arguments against the discussed view, there are more compelling reasons to believe that this idea is reasonable.