Some people say that cycling is a healthy and environmentally friendly form of transport, while others argue that it is unsafe and time-consuming. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. In about 250 words, write an essay to express your opinion. Use reasons and relevant examples to support your writing.

Some people say that cycling is a healthy and environmentally friendly form of transport, while others argue that it is unsafe and time-consuming. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. In about 250 words, write an essay to express your opinion. Use reasons and relevant examples to support your writing.

Opinions are divided on whether pedaling a bike is full of risks and time-consuming or whether it exerts beneficial impacts on humans’ physical and mental health as well as being an eco-friendly means of transport. While I may acknowledge the logic behind the former view, I am still strongly in favour of the latter.
Those who are of the opinion that cycling is a waste of time and risky may have several arguments. They may well argue that it is time-consuming due to the low speed, most clearly portrayed on long trips where it may require cyclists more time investment. However, from my perspective, in some certain situations such as in congested urban areas, bikes may be an ideal means of transport because they can help cyclists take more direct routes and avoid traffic jams. Another possible argument is that bikes cannot protect human from environmental elements such as an unexpected downpour in which people can be drenched with rain and catch the flu. Furthermore, in almost all urban areas, there are not bike lanes; consequently, people are more likely to collide with other vehicles on the road.
Nevertheless, I still firmly agree that moving by bike can strengthen humans’ physical and mental health, in addition to being an eco-friendly way to commute for several reasons. Chief among these is that pedaling can make the heart stronger and increase the endurance and well-being. According to a survey on the health benefits of using bicycles, physically active people, those who move around by this means of transport, have their risk of depression and heart disease alleviated by a half. The second reason is that bikes are environmentally friendly in that not only do they emit no harmful gases, but they also make no contribution to traffic congestion. For instance, in comparison with an engine-powered vehicle such as a car, a bicycle takes up less space, decreasing the rate of traffic jams, and it does not release carbon footprint, helping slow down the phenomenon of global warming. This highlights the advantages of bicycles as a green mode of transportation.
In conclusion, it is understandable why some may argue that riding bikes is dangerous and takes great plenty of time. However, I would take the view that they benefit physical as well as mental health and result in no pollution to the environment given the aforementioned arguments.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

1. "Opinions are divided on whether pedaling a bike is full of risks and time-consuming" -> "Opinions are divided on whether cycling is fraught with risks and time-consuming"
   Explanation: Replacing "pedaling a bike" with "cycling" provides a more formal and concise term. "Fraught with risks" is a more precise and academically appropriate phrase than "full of risks," which is somewhat informal and vague.

2. "exerts beneficial impacts" -> "exerts beneficial effects"
   Explanation: "Effects" is more commonly used in academic contexts to describe the outcomes of actions, making it a more suitable choice than "impacts" in this context.

3. "humans’ physical and mental health" -> "individuals’ physical and mental health"
   Explanation: "Individuals" is a more formal and precise term than "humans," which can sound overly colloquial in academic writing.

4. "a waste of time and risky" -> "a waste of time and risky"
   Explanation: The phrase "and risky" should be "and risky" to maintain grammatical correctness and clarity.

5. "most clearly portrayed on long trips where it may require cyclists more time investment" -> "most evident on long trips, where it may necessitate a greater time investment from cyclists"
   Explanation: "Most evident" is more precise than "most clearly portrayed," and "necessitate a greater time investment" is more formal and accurate than "require more time investment."

6. "in some certain situations" -> "in certain situations"
   Explanation: "In some certain" is redundant; "in certain" is sufficient and more concise.

7. "can help cyclists take more direct routes and avoid traffic jams" -> "enables cyclists to take more direct routes and avoid traffic jams"
   Explanation: "Enables" is a more formal and precise verb than "can help," which is somewhat vague and informal.

8. "protect human from environmental elements" -> "protect individuals from environmental elements"
   Explanation: "Individuals" is more appropriate than "human" in formal writing, and "protect from" is grammatically correct.

9. "catch the flu" -> "contract the flu"
   Explanation: "Contract" is the medically precise term for acquiring an illness, whereas "catch" is more colloquial and less formal.

10. "there are not bike lanes" -> "there are no bike lanes"
    Explanation: "There are not" is grammatically incorrect; "there are no" is the correct form.

11. "more likely to collide with other vehicles" -> "more susceptible to collisions with other vehicles"
    Explanation: "More susceptible to collisions" is a more precise and formal way to express the likelihood of accidents.

12. "make the heart stronger and increase the endurance and well-being" -> "strengthen the heart and enhance endurance and well-being"
    Explanation: "Strengthen" and "enhance" are more precise and formal verbs than "make," which is somewhat vague and informal in this context.

13. "have their risk of depression and heart disease alleviated by a half" -> "experience a reduction in their risk of depression and heart disease by half"
    Explanation: "Experience a reduction in their risk" is more formal and precise than "have their risk alleviated by a half," which is awkwardly phrased and informal.

14. "not only do they emit no harmful gases, but they also make no contribution to traffic congestion" -> "not only do they emit no harmful gases, but they also do not contribute to traffic congestion"
    Explanation: "Do not contribute" is more formal and precise than "make no contribution," which is slightly informal and less direct.

15. "takes great plenty of time" -> "requires a significant amount of time"
    Explanation: "Requires a significant amount of time" is more formal and precise than "takes great plenty of time," which is colloquial and awkwardly phrased.

These changes enhance the formality, 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 cycling, presenting arguments for both the perceived risks and time-consuming nature of cycling, as well as its health benefits and environmental advantages. The introduction clearly outlines the two perspectives, and the body paragraphs provide supporting arguments for each side. However, the discussion of the opposing view could be more balanced, as it leans slightly towards the author’s opinion without fully exploring the counterarguments.
  • How to improve: To enhance the balance of the discussion, the author could include more detailed examples or statistics that support the opposing view. Additionally, explicitly acknowledging the validity of the concerns raised about safety and time could strengthen the overall argument.

• Present a Clear Position Throughout:

  • Detailed explanation: The author presents a clear position in favor of cycling as a healthy and eco-friendly mode of transport. This stance is consistent throughout the essay, particularly in the conclusion, where the author reiterates their opinion. However, the transition between discussing the opposing view and the author’s stance could be smoother to reinforce the clarity of the position.
  • How to improve: To maintain a clearer position, the author could use transitional phrases that explicitly indicate a shift from discussing the opposing view to presenting their own opinion. For example, phrases like "Despite these concerns, I believe…" could help clarify the author’s stance.

• Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas supporting the benefits of cycling, such as health improvements and environmental advantages. The use of a survey to back the health claims adds credibility. However, some ideas, particularly regarding the risks of cycling, could be further developed with more specific examples or evidence.
  • How to improve: The author should aim to provide more detailed examples or statistics for both sides of the argument. For instance, when discussing the risks, including specific data on cycling accidents or studies on the effectiveness of bike lanes could strengthen the argument. Additionally, elaborating on the mental health benefits with more specific examples would enhance the support for the author’s claims.

• Stay on Topic:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the discussion of cycling as a mode of transport. However, there are moments where the discussion could be more tightly focused, particularly in the paragraph discussing the risks, where the mention of environmental elements feels slightly tangential.
  • How to improve: To maintain focus, the author should ensure that each point made directly relates to the central argument of cycling as a mode of transport. Avoiding extraneous details that do not directly support the main argument will help keep the essay concise and relevant.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the task and presents a well-structured argument. With some adjustments to balance the discussion, clarify the position, and provide more detailed support for ideas, 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, beginning with an introduction that outlines the two opposing views on cycling. Each viewpoint is discussed in separate paragraphs, which helps in maintaining a logical flow. For instance, the first body paragraph effectively presents the arguments against cycling, while the second body paragraph focuses on the benefits. The conclusion succinctly summarizes the writer’s stance. However, the transition between the two perspectives could be smoother, as the shift from the opposing view to the author’s opinion feels somewhat abrupt.
  • How to improve: To enhance logical flow, consider using transitional phrases that explicitly indicate a shift in perspective. For example, phrases like "On the other hand" or "Conversely" can help guide the reader through the argument more seamlessly. Additionally, ensuring that each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence can further clarify the main idea being discussed.

• Use Paragraphs:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which is crucial for coherence. Each paragraph has a clear focus: the first discusses the drawbacks of cycling, while the second highlights its benefits. However, the second body paragraph could benefit from more explicit connections between the points made, as the flow of ideas feels slightly disjointed at times.
  • How to improve: To improve paragraph structure, ensure that each point within a paragraph is linked logically. Using linking words or phrases at the beginning of each new point can help maintain coherence. For instance, instead of starting a new sentence abruptly, phrases like "Additionally," or "Moreover," can create a smoother transition between ideas.

• Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good use of cohesive devices, such as "however," "for instance," and "in conclusion." These devices help to connect ideas and guide the reader through the argument. However, the range of cohesive devices could be expanded. Some sentences feel slightly repetitive in their structure, which can detract from the overall flow.
  • How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, consider incorporating a wider variety of linking words and phrases. For example, using "furthermore," "in contrast," or "as a result" can enhance the richness of the writing. Additionally, varying sentence structures can help maintain reader interest and improve cohesion. For instance, instead of starting multiple sentences with "bikes," consider rephrasing to avoid redundancy and enhance fluidity.

Overall, the essay is well-structured and presents a balanced view on the topic. With some adjustments to transitions, paragraph connections, and the variety of cohesive devices, the coherence and cohesion can be further strengthened, potentially leading to an even higher band score.

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 related to the topic of cycling and its implications. Phrases such as "eco-friendly means of transport," "beneficial impacts," and "collide with other vehicles" show an ability to use varied language. However, some expressions, such as "full of risks," could be more sophisticated; alternatives like "fraught with risks" would enhance the lexical range.
  • How to improve: To elevate the vocabulary range, consider incorporating more advanced synonyms and phrases. For instance, instead of "waste of time," you might use "inefficient use of time." Additionally, using idiomatic expressions or collocations related to transportation and health could further enrich the essay.

• Use Vocabulary Precisely:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary accurately, but there are instances of imprecision. For example, the phrase "catch the flu" is somewhat informal and could be replaced with "become ill" or "contract illness." Additionally, "great plenty of time" is awkward; "significant amount of time" would be more precise.
  • How to improve: Focus on refining word choice for clarity and formality. When discussing health impacts, use terms like "health risks" or "adverse health effects" instead of more casual phrases. Always consider the context and aim for vocabulary that aligns with academic writing standards.

• Use Correct Spelling:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay displays a high level of spelling accuracy, with no noticeable errors. Words such as "environmentally," "congested," and "contribution" are spelled correctly, reflecting a strong command of spelling conventions.
  • How to improve: To maintain and further enhance spelling accuracy, regular practice through writing exercises and proofreading can be beneficial. Utilizing tools like spell checkers or engaging in vocabulary quizzes can also help reinforce correct spelling habits. Additionally, reading extensively can expose you to correct spelling in context, aiding retention.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid command of lexical resource, there are opportunities for improvement in vocabulary range, precision, and continued attention to spelling. By incorporating more sophisticated vocabulary and refining word choices, the essay can achieve a higher level of lexical sophistication.

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 demonstrates a good variety of sentence structures, including complex sentences and conditional clauses. For example, phrases like “While I may acknowledge the logic behind the former view” and “in some certain situations such as in congested urban areas” show an attempt to use more sophisticated structures. However, there are instances of awkward phrasing, such as “moving by bike can strengthen humans’ physical and mental health,” which could be more fluidly expressed.
  • How to improve: To enhance the variety and effectiveness of sentence structures, consider incorporating more varied sentence beginnings and transitions. For instance, using participial phrases or relative clauses can add complexity. Additionally, aim to reduce redundancy in phrases like “in some certain situations” by simply using “in certain situations.” Practicing the use of different conjunctions and transitional phrases will also help in creating smoother connections between ideas.

• Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally maintains a good level of grammatical accuracy, but there are a few notable errors. For example, “bikes cannot protect human from environmental elements” should be “bikes cannot protect humans from environmental elements.” Additionally, the phrase “great plenty of time” is awkward and should be revised to “a great deal of time.” Punctuation is mostly correct, but the use of commas could be improved for clarity, especially in longer sentences.
  • How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, focus on subject-verb agreement and pluralization. Regular practice with grammar exercises can help solidify these concepts. For punctuation, consider reviewing rules regarding comma usage, particularly in complex sentences. Reading aloud can also help identify areas where punctuation may be lacking or where sentence structure could be clearer. Lastly, proofreading for common errors before submission will enhance overall accuracy.

By addressing these areas, the essay can achieve a higher band score in Grammatical Range and Accuracy.

Bài sửa mẫu

Opinions are divided on whether cycling is fraught with risks and time-consuming or whether it exerts beneficial effects on individuals’ physical and mental health, as well as being an environmentally friendly means of transport. While I acknowledge the logic behind the former view, I am still strongly in favor of the latter.

Those who believe that cycling is a waste of time and risky may present several arguments. They might argue that it is time-consuming due to its relatively low speed, most evident on long trips, where it may necessitate a greater time investment from cyclists. However, in certain situations, such as in congested urban areas, bikes can be an ideal means of transport because they enable cyclists to take more direct routes and avoid traffic jams. Another possible argument is that bicycles cannot protect individuals from environmental elements, such as an unexpected downpour, which can leave riders drenched and more susceptible to illnesses like the flu. Furthermore, in many urban areas, there are no bike lanes; consequently, cyclists are more vulnerable to collisions with other vehicles on the road.

Nevertheless, I firmly believe that cycling can strengthen individuals’ physical and mental health, in addition to being an eco-friendly way to commute for several reasons. Chief among these is that pedaling can enhance heart health and improve endurance and overall well-being. According to a survey on the health benefits of cycling, physically active individuals who use bicycles experience a reduction in their risk of depression and heart disease by half. Additionally, bikes are environmentally friendly in that they not only emit no harmful gases but also do not contribute to traffic congestion. For instance, compared to engine-powered vehicles such as cars, bicycles take up less space, decreasing the likelihood of traffic jams, and they do not release carbon emissions, helping to mitigate global warming. This highlights the advantages of bicycles as a green mode of transportation.

In conclusion, while it is understandable why some may argue that cycling is dangerous and time-consuming, I maintain that it significantly benefits both physical and mental health and contributes to a cleaner environment, as outlined in the arguments above.