Some people say that the government should spend money without limit to enhance the technology, others say that this money can be spent for their basic needs.

Some individuals harbor the view that governments should have unrestricted investment in technological advancements, while others argue that their money should be saved for more basic needs. Personally, although the former idea is beneficial to some extent, I believe that the latter option is more reasonable.
To commence with, it is undeniable that investing money unrestrictedly in the field of technology can be advantageous to national development. With the substantial amount of money spent on this, authorities can enhance community services, which can enhance living conditions among citizens. The proliferation of digital taxis, which have been taking over the role of traditional rivals owing to the safety and convenience contributed by the invention of hand-out devices, can perfectly exemplify this case. However, these upgrades might not be capable of addressing many other social problems. The fact that this approach can overlook other aspects of life can create the shortage of funds for societal demands, causing detrimental effects to society.
On the other hand, it is important that the tax-payers’ money should be allocated wisely in order to tackle countless problems associated with residential well-being. Hunger, agricultural failures, catastrophic events and shortage of usable water are apparently damaging humanity, awaiting solutions. In the US, for example, countless homeless people without jobs and accommodations together with the lack of water sources in southern states have become unsolvable issues. Therefore, authorities should draw their attention to this by raising more money for more measures which can not only eventually support their people but also prevent these problems from doing more harm. This can offer a sustainable and prosperous country for those who live in it.
In conclusion, while investing without limit in technological development can be beneficial, I suppose that this money should also be carefully allocated for people’s basic needs.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"Some individuals harbor the view" -> "Some individuals hold the opinion"
Explanation: "Hold the opinion" is a more formal and precise phrase than "harbor the view," which is somewhat vague and less commonly used in academic writing.
"unrestricted investment" -> "unrestricted funding"
Explanation: "Funding" is more specific and commonly used in academic contexts when discussing financial support for projects or initiatives, whereas "investment" can imply a more active role in the investment process.
"more basic needs" -> "more fundamental needs"
Explanation: "Fundamental needs" is a more precise term that conveys a sense of essentiality and priority, which is more suitable for an academic discussion about resource allocation.
"To commence with" -> "To begin with"
Explanation: "To begin with" is a more standard and formal transitional phrase in academic writing, whereas "To commence with" can sound slightly archaic and less natural.
"investing money unrestrictedly" -> "investing funds without restriction"
Explanation: "Investing funds without restriction" is more formal and precise, avoiding the awkward construction of "unrestrictedly."
"authorities can enhance community services" -> "authorities can improve community services"
Explanation: "Improve" is a more specific and academically appropriate verb than "enhance," which can be vague and less precise in this context.
"hand-out devices" -> "handheld devices"
Explanation: "Handheld devices" is the correct term for devices that are designed to be held in the hand, whereas "hand-out devices" is a misnomer and unclear.
"can perfectly exemplify this case" -> "serve as a prime example of this"
Explanation: "Serve as a prime example of this" is more formal and academically appropriate than "can perfectly exemplify," which is overly emphatic and less formal.
"The fact that this approach can overlook other aspects of life" -> "This approach may overlook other aspects of life"
Explanation: "May overlook" is more tentative and academically cautious than "can," which implies certainty that is not supported by the context.
"create the shortage of funds" -> "result in a shortage of funds"
Explanation: "Result in" is a more precise and formal way to describe the causative relationship between actions and outcomes in academic writing.
"countless homeless people without jobs and accommodations" -> "numerous homeless individuals without employment or housing"
Explanation: "Numerous homeless individuals without employment or housing" is more precise and formal, avoiding the redundancy of "people" and "jobs and accommodations."
"have become unsolvable issues" -> "have become intractable issues"
Explanation: "Intractable" is a more formal and precise term that better fits the academic tone, implying that the problems are difficult to resolve.
"raising more money for more measures" -> "increasing funding for additional initiatives"
Explanation: "Increasing funding for additional initiatives" is more formal and specific, avoiding the repetition of "more" and using "initiatives" which is more appropriate in an academic context.
"can not only eventually support their people but also prevent these problems from doing more harm" -> "can not only support their citizens but also mitigate the harm caused by these problems"
Explanation: "Mitigate the harm caused by these problems" is more precise and formal, replacing the vague and awkward "prevent these problems from doing more harm."
"I suppose" -> "I believe"
Explanation: "I believe" is a stronger and more assertive statement, fitting the academic style better than the tentative "I suppose."

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Task Response: 8

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses both sides of the argument regarding government spending on technology versus basic needs. The introduction clearly outlines the two perspectives, and the body paragraphs provide arguments supporting both views. The author acknowledges the benefits of technological investment while ultimately advocating for prioritizing basic needs. However, the essay could benefit from a more explicit comparison of the two viewpoints in the conclusion to reinforce the argument.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer could include a more direct comparison of the consequences of each approach in the conclusion. For example, discussing the potential long-term benefits of investing in technology versus the immediate needs of the population could provide a more nuanced perspective.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position favoring the allocation of funds to basic needs, which is evident from the consistent use of phrases like "I believe" and "it is important." However, the initial acknowledgment of the benefits of technology could lead to some ambiguity about the author’s ultimate stance.
- How to improve: To strengthen the clarity of the position, the author could more explicitly state their preference in the introduction and reiterate it throughout the body paragraphs. Phrases that reinforce the importance of prioritizing basic needs could be integrated into the discussion of technological advancements.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas, such as the benefits of technology and the pressing issues of basic needs, and supports them with examples. The mention of digital taxis and homelessness in the U.S. provides concrete illustrations of the points made. However, some ideas could be further developed. For instance, the discussion on the impact of technology could include more examples or statistics to strengthen the argument.
- How to improve: To enhance the development of ideas, the writer could include additional examples or data to support claims, particularly in the discussion of technological benefits. Expanding on how technology can address basic needs, such as through innovations in agriculture or water purification, could create a more robust argument.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the debate over government spending priorities. However, there are moments where the discussion could be more tightly focused. For instance, the mention of "countless problems associated with residential well-being" could be more directly linked to the overall argument about prioritizing basic needs.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that each point made directly relates back to the central question of government spending priorities. Using topic sentences that clearly connect back to the prompt can help keep the discussion aligned with the main argument. Additionally, avoiding overly broad statements can help maintain clarity and relevance.

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, beginning with an introduction that outlines the two opposing views. The body paragraphs are logically organized, with the first paragraph discussing the benefits of unrestricted investment in technology and the second addressing the importance of allocating funds to basic needs. However, the transition between the two main ideas could be smoother. For instance, the shift from discussing technology to basic needs feels somewhat abrupt, which can disrupt the flow of ideas.
- How to improve: To enhance logical flow, consider using transitional phrases that explicitly connect the two ideas. For example, after discussing the benefits of technology, you could add a sentence like, "Despite these advantages, it is crucial to recognize that…" This would create a more seamless transition and reinforce the relationship between the two perspectives.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, with each paragraph focusing on a specific aspect of the argument. The introduction and conclusion are clearly defined, and the body paragraphs are distinct. However, the second body paragraph could be further divided to enhance clarity, especially since it covers multiple issues related to basic needs.
- How to improve: Consider breaking the second body paragraph into two separate paragraphs: one focusing on the importance of addressing homelessness and joblessness, and the other discussing issues like water shortages and agricultural failures. This would allow for a more in-depth exploration of each issue and improve readability.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good use of cohesive devices, such as "On the other hand" and "To commence with," which help guide the reader through the argument. However, the range of cohesive devices could be expanded. For example, while there are some linking words, the essay could benefit from more varied connectors to enhance cohesion between sentences and ideas.
- How to improve: Incorporate a wider variety of cohesive devices, such as "Furthermore," "In addition," or "Conversely," to create more nuanced connections between ideas. Additionally, using pronouns effectively can help maintain coherence; for instance, referring back to "this investment" or "these issues" can reinforce the subject matter and keep the reader engaged.

By addressing these areas for improvement, the essay can achieve a higher level of coherence and cohesion, ultimately enhancing its overall effectiveness.

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, with terms like "unrestricted investment," "technological advancements," and "residential well-being." However, the use of vocabulary is somewhat repetitive, particularly in phrases like "money should be allocated wisely" and "countless problems." This indicates a limited lexical variety, which can detract from the overall quality of the writing.
- How to improve: To enhance lexical variety, the writer should aim to incorporate synonyms and related terms. For instance, instead of repeating "money," alternatives like "funds," "resources," or "financial support" could be used. Additionally, varying sentence structures can help to showcase a broader vocabulary range.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains instances of imprecise vocabulary usage, such as "the shortage of funds for societal demands" and "countless homeless people without jobs." While the meaning is generally clear, phrases like "shortage of funds" could be more effectively expressed as "insufficient funding," which conveys a more accurate sense of the issue.
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on selecting words that convey exact meanings. For example, instead of "countless," which is vague, they could specify "thousands" or "a significant number." Using context-specific terminology can also enhance clarity and precision.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The spelling in the essay is generally accurate, with no major errors noted. Words like "unrestricted," "advancements," and "sustainable" are spelled correctly, which reflects a good command of spelling conventions.
- How to improve: To maintain and further improve spelling accuracy, the writer should engage in regular practice, such as using spelling quizzes or writing exercises. Additionally, proofreading the essay for any overlooked typos or errors before submission can help catch minor mistakes.

In summary, while the essay achieves a Band 6 for Lexical Resource, there are clear areas for improvement. Focusing on expanding vocabulary range, enhancing precision in word choice, and maintaining spelling accuracy will contribute to a higher score in future writing tasks.

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. For instance, complex sentences such as "Although the former idea is beneficial to some extent, I believe that the latter option is more reasonable" effectively convey nuanced opinions. Additionally, the use of conditional structures, as seen in "if the tax-payers’ money should be allocated wisely," adds depth to the argument. However, there are instances of repetitive sentence beginnings and a reliance on similar structures, such as "it is important that" and "on the other hand," which can detract from overall variety.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, consider using more varied introductory phrases or clauses. For example, instead of frequently starting sentences with "it is important that," you could use participial phrases or questions to engage the reader more effectively. Incorporating more compound-complex sentences could also enhance the essay’s complexity.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally maintains a good level of grammatical accuracy, with only minor errors. For instance, the phrase "the proliferation of digital taxis, which have been taking over the role of traditional rivals owing to the safety and convenience contributed by the invention of hand-out devices" is grammatically correct but could be more concise. Additionally, the use of commas is mostly appropriate, but there are places where clarity could be improved, such as in the list of societal issues ("Hunger, agricultural failures, catastrophic events and shortage of usable water"), which would benefit from a serial comma for clarity.
- How to improve: To enhance grammatical accuracy, focus on refining complex sentences for clarity and conciseness. For example, consider breaking down overly long sentences into shorter, clearer ones. Additionally, review punctuation rules, particularly regarding lists and clauses, to ensure that the intended meaning is conveyed without ambiguity. Practicing with punctuation exercises could also be beneficial.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid grasp of grammatical range and accuracy, focusing on diversifying sentence structures and refining grammatical precision will help elevate the score further.

Bài sửa mẫu

Some individuals hold the opinion that governments should have unrestricted funding for technological advancements, while others argue that this money should be reserved for more fundamental needs. Personally, although the former idea has its merits, I believe that the latter option is more reasonable.

To begin with, it is undeniable that investing funds without restriction in the field of technology can be advantageous to national development. With a substantial amount of money allocated to this area, authorities can improve community services, which can enhance living conditions for citizens. The proliferation of digital taxis, which have taken over the role of traditional rivals due to the safety and convenience provided by handheld devices, serves as a prime example of this. However, these upgrades may not adequately address many other pressing social issues. This approach may overlook other aspects of life, potentially resulting in a shortage of funds for societal demands and causing detrimental effects on the community.

On the other hand, it is crucial that taxpayers’ money be allocated wisely to tackle the numerous problems associated with residential well-being. Hunger, agricultural failures, catastrophic events, and a shortage of usable water are clearly damaging humanity and await solutions. In the US, for example, numerous homeless individuals without employment or housing, along with the lack of water sources in southern states, have become intractable issues. Therefore, authorities should focus their attention on increasing funding for additional initiatives that can not only support their citizens but also mitigate the harm caused by these problems. This can lead to a sustainable and prosperous country for all its residents.

In conclusion, while unrestricted investment in technological development can be beneficial, I believe that this money should also be carefully allocated to address people’s basic needs.