Some people suggest that the government should spend money putting more works of art like paintings and statues into towns and cities to make them attractive places. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many people assert that the authorities should spare no expense to erect monuments and sculptures to enhance aesthetic value in major cities. While it is undeniable that works of art contribute to a vibrant city and promote economic and tourism prospects, I totally disagree with this view due to concerns related to monetary allocation and unstable development.

One of the primary rationales is that the construction of artistic works is more likely to misallocate not only monetary investment but also substantial areas indeed despite stimulating the potentially tourist-based economy. In particular, the US has an array of renowned sculptures, typically, the Statue of Liberty, attracting an influx of visitors, contributing to a flourishing city. However, such considerable investments engender insufficient public funding for pragmatic concerns such as education, health, and transport systems in some countries, especially developing ones that should have a more emphasis on science and technology over erection of sculptures . Consequently, this may deteriorate the national economy together with the residents’ living standard.

Another contributing factor is that monuments and murals are primarily centered in megalopolises with numerous prospects while the others are probably ignored, resulting in a greater disparity among regions. This, consequently, creates undesirable social issues in less developed zones such as unemployment, poverty, and even crime, which is on account of unequal distribution of resources. With the disproportionate evolution, the government might be in charge of dealing with numerous issues arising apart from these aforementioned concerns associated with outsized budget share.

Admittedly, there are a great number of individuals who argue that the construction of monuments brings about a range of beneficial aspects. The building of statues of historical figures, for instance, not only instills senses of pride for younger generations but also boosts international friends' understanding via imparting knowledge about domestic history and culture, additionally, such masterpieces and sculptures also enhance aesthetic beauty for the regions. However, it is right to some extent due to the fact that they fail to consider the prodigality of such constructions possibly stems from frequent subsequent maintenance and refurbishments due to natural disaster impacts or vandalism. Therefore, the wastage to these constructions is unnecessarily redundant.

In conclusion, although many individuals advocate the demand to offer statues and murals aesthetically beautifying their surroundings, I contend that the prospective outcomes cannot outweigh the adverse implications. Therefore, the government should judiciously consider apportioning the national budgets into practical alternatives to ensure a balanced approach.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"Many people assert" -> "Many argue"
Explanation: Replacing "Many people assert" with "Many argue" removes the informality associated with the word "assert" and replaces it with a more neutral and academic term.
"totally disagree" -> "strongly disagree"
Explanation: Changing "totally disagree" to "strongly disagree" adds a degree of formality and emphasizes the strength of the disagreement in a more academic manner.
"array of renowned sculptures" -> "plethora of renowned sculptures"
Explanation: Substituting "array" with "plethora" adds sophistication to the expression, making it more suitable for formal writing.
"particularly, the US" -> "specifically, the United States"
Explanation: Replacing "particularly, the US" with "specifically, the United States" provides a more precise and formal reference to the country.
"engender insufficient public funding" -> "result in inadequate public funding"
Explanation: Changing "engender insufficient public funding" to "result in inadequate public funding" maintains the formal tone while conveying the idea more precisely.
"emphasis on science and technology over erection of sculptures" -> "priority on science and technology rather than the construction of sculptures"
Explanation: Substituting "emphasis on science and technology over erection of sculptures" with "priority on science and technology rather than the construction of sculptures" enhances clarity and formality.
"monuments and murals are primarily centered" -> "monuments and murals are predominantly concentrated"
Explanation: Replacing "primarily centered" with "predominantly concentrated" elevates the vocabulary, maintaining a formal style.
"creating undesirable social issues" -> "resulting in undesirable social issues"
Explanation: Changing "creating" to "resulting in" improves precision, making the sentence more academically sound.
"the others are probably ignored" -> "other areas may be overlooked"
Explanation: Substituting "the others are probably ignored" with "other areas may be overlooked" conveys the idea with greater certainty and formality.
"Admittedly, there are a great number of individuals who argue" -> "Admittedly, many argue"
Explanation: Simplifying "a great number of individuals" to "many" streamlines the expression without sacrificing formality.
"fails to consider the prodigality" -> "neglects the extravagance"
Explanation: Changing "fails to consider the prodigality" to "neglects the extravagance" introduces a more sophisticated term while maintaining clarity.
"prospective outcomes" -> "potential benefits"
Explanation: Replacing "prospective outcomes" with "potential benefits" offers a more precise and formal expression.
"judiciously consider apportioning" -> "carefully consider allocating"
Explanation: Substituting "judiciously consider apportioning" with "carefully consider allocating" maintains formality and improves the flow of the sentence.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Task Response: 6

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay adequately addresses all parts of the prompt by discussing both sides of the argument. It acknowledges the importance of art in enhancing cities while presenting a clear disagreement due to concerns about monetary allocation and regional disparities.
- How to improve: The essay could further strengthen its analysis by providing more specific examples or statistics related to monetary allocation and regional disparities. This would enhance the depth of the argument and provide a more convincing case against government spending on art.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position throughout, consistently disagreeing with the idea of government spending on art. The stance is evident in the introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion.
- How to improve: To enhance clarity, the essay could explicitly state the main points of each body paragraph in relation to the disagreement, reinforcing the overall position. This would provide a more structured and easily understandable argument.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas logically and supports them with examples, such as the Statue of Liberty in the U.S. However, there is room for improvement in extending ideas, especially regarding the negative consequences of art spending.
- How to improve: To extend ideas, the essay could delve deeper into the potential negative impacts on education, health, and transport systems, providing specific examples or scenarios. This would strengthen the argument and demonstrate a more comprehensive understanding of the issue.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, addressing the key points related to government spending on art and its potential drawbacks. However, there are moments when the focus shifts slightly, such as when discussing the benefits of historical statues.
- How to improve: To stay more focused, the essay should avoid introducing new elements that deviate from the main argument. If discussing the benefits of historical statues, it should be directly linked to the overall position against government spending on art.

Overall Comments:
The essay provides a well-structured response to the prompt, maintaining a consistent position throughout. It effectively uses examples to support its arguments. However, to improve, the essay could benefit from more specific details, deeper analysis, and a tighter focus on the main points. Additionally, explicitly stating the main points of each paragraph and avoiding minor deviations from the main argument would enhance the overall coherence and persuasiveness of the essay.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a generally logical organization of information. It begins with a clear introduction that presents the author’s stance. The body paragraphs follow a logical sequence, each addressing a specific aspect of the argument. The conclusion summarizes the main points effectively.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider refining the topic sentences of each body paragraph to more explicitly guide the reader on the upcoming discussion. Ensure a smooth transition between paragraphs by using cohesive devices to connect ideas.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs adequately, each containing a distinct idea or argument. There is a clear structure with an introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. However, some paragraphs could benefit from more varied sentence structures to maintain reader engagement.
- How to improve: Work on incorporating a mix of sentence structures within paragraphs to add variety and interest. Consider combining or separating sentences for better flow, and ensure each paragraph has a clear focus on a single idea.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs a variety of cohesive devices, including transitional phrases (e.g., "however," "consequently") and cohesive ties. These help in creating a coherent flow between sentences and ideas. However, there is room for improvement in the strategic use of cohesive devices for smoother transitions.
- How to improve: Increase the use of transitional phrases at the beginning of sentences to improve the overall flow. Additionally, consider using cohesive devices within sentences to establish stronger connections between ideas. This will contribute to a more seamless and cohesive essay structure.

Overall, the essay exhibits a solid foundation in coherence and cohesion, evident in its logical organization, effective use of paragraphs, and incorporation of cohesive devices. To elevate the score further, focus on refining sentence structures, enhancing the precision of topic sentences, and ensuring a more seamless connection between ideas.

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 commendable range of vocabulary, incorporating diverse words and expressions. For instance, it utilizes terms like "rationales," "engender," and "disproportionate evolution." However, there are moments where the vocabulary could be more nuanced and varied, especially in the introduction and conclusion sections.
- How to improve: Introduce more varied synonyms and expressions in the introductory and concluding paragraphs. For instance, consider alternative phrases for "spare no expense," "totally disagree," and "judiciously consider."
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary with precision, conveying the intended meanings effectively. However, there are instances where the language could be more concise. For example, in the phrase "engender insufficient public funding," a more succinct phrasing could enhance clarity.
- How to improve: Aim for greater conciseness without sacrificing clarity. In the example provided, consider rephrasing to "result in inadequate public funding," for a more direct expression.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: Spelling accuracy is generally good, with no major issues observed. However, there are minor typographical errors, such as "apart" instead of "apart from" and "constructions" instead of "constructed."
- How to improve: Pay careful attention to minor typographical errors. In particular, review the use of prepositions to ensure completeness and accuracy. Additionally, proofread the essay for any other potential typographical errors.

In summary, the essay exhibits a strong command of vocabulary, contributing to the overall coherence and cohesion of the response. To enhance the lexical resource further, consider incorporating more nuanced vocabulary in key sections and ensuring precision in expression. Additionally, meticulous proofreading can address minor spelling and typographical errors, ensuring a polished final product.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 6

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a fair variety of sentence structures. There is an attempt to incorporate complex structures, such as the use of dependent clauses and varied sentence lengths. However, there is room for improvement in terms of sophistication and diversity. For instance, the essay tends to rely on a standard structure, and more complex constructions, such as inversion or conditional sentences, could be incorporated to enhance variety.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, consider incorporating more complex sentence forms. For instance, experiment with inversion, use conditional sentences, or try rhetorical questions to add nuance and sophistication to your writing. Varying the length and structure of sentences can contribute to a more engaging and expressive writing style.
Use Grammar Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally maintains grammatical accuracy, with few notable errors. There is a commendable effort to use complex sentence structures and a range of grammatical features. However, some sentences may lack clarity due to ambiguous phrasing, and minor errors, such as subject-verb agreement issues, are present.
- How to improve: While overall grammar is strong, pay careful attention to sentence clarity. Review sentences that may be prone to ambiguity, ensuring that the intended meaning is conveyed clearly. Additionally, double-check for subject-verb agreement to eliminate minor grammatical errors that may affect the precision of your expression.
Use Correct Punctuation:
- Detailed explanation: Punctuation is generally used appropriately, aiding in the clarity of ideas. However, there are instances where the use of commas is either excessive or lacking, affecting the flow of sentences. Additionally, there are a few instances where punctuation could be employed more effectively for emphasis and to signal the structure of complex sentences.
- How to improve: Focus on refining your use of commas to strike a balance between clarity and pacing. Ensure that commas are used judiciously to avoid run-on sentences and to delineate ideas clearly. Experiment with other punctuation marks, such as em dashes or colons, to add emphasis and structure to your sentences where appropriate.

Overall, your essay demonstrates a solid command of grammatical structures and accuracy. To elevate your score, aim for greater variety in sentence structures, enhance sentence clarity, and fine-tune your punctuation usage for optimal impact.

Bài sửa mẫu

Many argue that governments should invest extensively in erecting monuments and sculptures to enhance the aesthetic appeal of major cities. While it is undeniable that works of art contribute to a vibrant city and promote economic and tourism prospects, I strongly disagree with this view due to concerns related to monetary allocation and unstable development.

One of the primary reasons is that the construction of artistic works is more likely to misallocate not only monetary investment but also substantial areas, despite stimulating the potentially tourist-based economy. Specifically, the United States has a plethora of renowned sculptures, such as the Statue of Liberty, attracting an influx of visitors and contributing to a flourishing city. However, such considerable investments result in inadequate public funding for pragmatic concerns such as education, health, and transportation systems, especially in developing countries that should prioritize science and technology over the erection of sculptures. Consequently, this may deteriorate the national economy and the residents’ living standards.

Another contributing factor is that monuments and murals are predominantly concentrated in megalopolises with numerous prospects, while other areas may be overlooked, resulting in a greater disparity among regions. This, consequently, creates undesirable social issues in less developed zones, such as unemployment, poverty, and even crime, which result from the unequal distribution of resources. With this disproportionate evolution, the government might be in charge of dealing with numerous issues, apart from those associated with an outsized budget share.

Admittedly, many argue that the construction of monuments brings about a range of potential benefits. The building of statues of historical figures, for instance, not only instills a sense of pride in younger generations but also boosts international understanding by imparting knowledge about domestic history and culture. Additionally, such masterpieces and sculptures enhance aesthetic beauty for the regions. However, it is important to carefully consider allocating funds to these constructions, as they may neglect the extravagance possibly stemming from frequent subsequent maintenance and refurbishments due to natural disasters or vandalism. Therefore, the wastage on these constructions is unnecessarily redundant.

In conclusion, although many individuals advocate for the demand to offer statues and murals that aesthetically beautify their surroundings, I contend that the prospective outcomes cannot outweigh the adverse implications. Therefore, the government should carefully consider allocating national budgets into practical alternatives to ensure a balanced approach.