Some people think an international car-free day is an effective way to reduce air pollution. Others think there are more effective ways do to this. Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

Some people claim that an international non-motoried day make a great contribution to reduce air pollution. Whereas, many people believe that there are more effective ways to protect the air. Although both views hold merit, I agree more with the latter perspective.
On the one hand, an international car-free day is obviously essential for the decrease in air pollution. It is apparent that a day without cars and motorbikes can help to reduce the amount of exhaust from these that has negative impact on human health. During this day, people will be encouraged to use public transports such as bikes or go on foot, which can diminish the air pollutants and assist them to keep fit and have a good health. Not only is a day for people to stay away vehicles, it is also a campaigne that support people to use less cars and motorbikes for the air’s improvement. In addition, this project can aslo build a habit for everybody to get accustomed to utilizing bikes as daily vehicle to move for work or study.
On the other hand, a day is not enough for everybody to protect the air surrounded us. We can have more pratical ways. First of all, air pollutants do not emerge from only vehicles. There are many sources of air pollution including industry, factories, forest fires,… We need to pay attention to these sources as well. We have to fine businesses who discharge toxic smoke that polluted the air. We can also plant more tree to recover the forest caught fire. Secondly, household activities also lead to air pollution. The government can require residents not to burn garbage, they can learn how to classify wastes and put trash in the right place for garbage being treated properly. People also need to substitute from coal-powered engines to electric and hand-powered lawn equipment.
In conclusion, air pollution is one of the most serious issues nowadays, all the ways mentioned here contribute to the process of making the air clearer and fresher. We need to protect our atmosphere at all costs.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"an international non-motoried day" -> "an international non-motorized day"
Explanation: The correct term is "non-motorized," which refers to the absence of motorized vehicles, aligning with the context of the essay.
"make a great contribution to reduce" -> "significantly contribute to reducing"
Explanation: "Significantly contribute to reducing" is more precise and formal, enhancing the academic tone of the sentence.
"more effective ways to protect the air" -> "more effective methods for air protection"
Explanation: "Methods for air protection" is more specific and formal, fitting the academic style better than the vague "ways to protect the air."
"a day without cars and motorbikes" -> "a day without motorized vehicles"
Explanation: "Motorized vehicles" is a more precise term that encompasses both cars and motorbikes, improving the clarity and formality of the statement.
"that has negative impact on human health" -> "that negatively impacts human health"
Explanation: "Negatively impacts" is grammatically correct and more formal than "has negative impact," which is awkwardly phrased.
"go on foot" -> "walk"
Explanation: "Walk" is a more direct and formal term than "go on foot," which is somewhat informal and vague.
"diminish the air pollutants" -> "reduce air pollutants"
Explanation: "Reduce air pollutants" is a more direct and formal way to express the intended meaning.
"assist them to keep fit and have a good health" -> "help them maintain their fitness and health"
Explanation: "Help them maintain their fitness and health" is more formal and precise, avoiding the awkward phrasing of the original.
"Not only is a day for people to stay away vehicles" -> "Not only is this a day for people to avoid vehicles"
Explanation: "Avoid vehicles" is grammatically correct and more formal than "stay away vehicles."
"campaigne" -> "campaign"
Explanation: "Campaign" is the correct spelling, enhancing the professionalism of the text.
"aslo" -> "also"
Explanation: Corrects a typographical error, ensuring the text maintains its academic integrity.
"pratical" -> "practical"
Explanation: Corrects a spelling error, ensuring the text is free of typographical mistakes.
"surrounded us" -> "surrounding us"
Explanation: "Surrounding us" is grammatically correct and more formal than "surrounded us."
"We can have more pratical ways" -> "We can adopt more practical measures"
Explanation: "Adopt more practical measures" is a more formal and precise expression than "have more practical ways."
"We have to fine businesses" -> "We must fine businesses"
Explanation: "Must" is more formal than "have to," and "fine" should be "fine" (impose a fine on), correcting a grammatical error.
"put trash in the right place for garbage being treated properly" -> "properly dispose of waste"
Explanation: "Properly dispose of waste" is a more concise and formal way to express the intended meaning.
"substitute from coal-powered engines to electric and hand-powered lawn equipment" -> "switch from coal-powered engines to electric and hand-powered lawn equipment"
Explanation: "Switch" is a more precise verb for the context of replacing one type of equipment with another, enhancing the formality and clarity of the sentence.

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 the effectiveness of an international car-free day in reducing air pollution. The first paragraph discusses the benefits of such a day, highlighting its potential to reduce exhaust emissions and promote healthier transportation methods. The second paragraph presents the counterargument, emphasizing that a single day is insufficient and that other sources of pollution must also be addressed. However, while both perspectives are acknowledged, the discussion could be more balanced, as the argument in favor of alternative methods is more developed than the support for the car-free day.
- How to improve: To enhance the balance between the two sides, the writer could provide more specific examples or data supporting the effectiveness of an international car-free day. Additionally, integrating a few counterpoints to the alternative methods could strengthen the argument and provide a more nuanced discussion.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The writer states their opinion clearly in the introduction, indicating a preference for the view that there are more effective ways to reduce air pollution. However, this position is somewhat diluted by the extensive focus on the benefits of the car-free day, which may confuse readers about the writer’s primary stance. The conclusion reiterates the importance of addressing air pollution but does not explicitly reaffirm the writer’s position.
- How to improve: To maintain a clear position, the writer should consistently refer back to their opinion throughout the essay. This can be achieved by explicitly linking back to their stance after discussing each point, ensuring that the reader understands the writer’s perspective at all times.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas regarding both the car-free day and alternative methods to combat air pollution. However, some ideas lack sufficient support or elaboration. For example, while the essay mentions the need for stricter regulations on industries, it does not provide examples of how these regulations could be implemented or their potential impact. Similarly, the suggestion to plant more trees is mentioned but not elaborated upon.
- How to improve: To strengthen the support for ideas, the writer should aim to provide more detailed explanations and examples for each point made. This could include statistics, case studies, or real-world examples that illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed solutions.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on air pollution and the effectiveness of an international car-free day versus other methods. However, some sentences are slightly off-topic or unclear, such as the mention of “household activities” leading to air pollution without a clear connection to the main argument. Additionally, the phrase "the air surrounded us" is vague and could be more precise.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that every point made directly relates back to the prompt. Clarifying vague phrases and ensuring that all examples are relevant to the discussion of air pollution will help keep the essay on track. Regularly revisiting the prompt during the writing process can also help maintain relevance.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the task and presents relevant arguments. By addressing the points above, the writer can enhance the clarity, balance, and depth of their response, potentially achieving a higher band score.

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, two body paragraphs discussing opposing views, and a conclusion. The arguments for the international car-free day are presented first, followed by the counterarguments. This logical progression helps the reader understand the contrasting perspectives. However, the transition between the two sides could be smoother. For example, the phrase "On the one hand" is effective, but the transition to "On the other hand" could be more explicitly linked to the previous argument to enhance clarity.
- How to improve: To enhance logical flow, consider using transitional phrases that explicitly indicate the relationship between ideas. For instance, after discussing the benefits of a car-free day, you might say, "However, while this initiative has its advantages, it is important to recognize that it is not a comprehensive solution." This would create a clearer connection between the two sides of the argument.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which is crucial for readability. Each paragraph focuses on a specific aspect of the discussion. However, the first body paragraph could be more focused; it mixes several ideas about the benefits of a car-free day without clear topic sentences or transitions between points. Additionally, the conclusion, while summarizing the main points, could benefit from a more definitive statement regarding the author’s opinion.
- How to improve: Ensure that each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence that summarizes the main idea of the paragraph. For example, in the first body paragraph, you could start with, "One significant advantage of an international car-free day is its immediate impact on reducing vehicle emissions." This would help guide the reader through your argument more effectively. Moreover, in the conclusion, restate your opinion more assertively to reinforce your stance.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "first of all," "not only… but also," and "in addition," which help to connect ideas within paragraphs. However, there are instances of awkward phrasing and grammatical errors that hinder cohesion, such as "a campaigne that support people" (should be "campaign that supports people") and "the air’s improvement" (which could be more clearly stated as "improving air quality"). Additionally, the use of cohesive devices is somewhat repetitive, relying heavily on basic connectors.
- How to improve: To diversify the range of cohesive devices, consider incorporating a variety of linking words and phrases, such as "furthermore," "consequently," and "in contrast." This will not only enhance the flow of ideas but also demonstrate a higher level of language proficiency. Additionally, proofreading for grammatical accuracy will improve the overall coherence of your writing.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents coherent arguments. By focusing on the logical flow of ideas, refining paragraph structure, and diversifying cohesive devices, the essay could achieve an even higher 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 reasonable range of vocabulary, with phrases such as "international car-free day," "air pollutants," and "toxic smoke." However, the use of vocabulary is somewhat limited and repetitive. For instance, the term "air pollution" is used multiple times without variation, which detracts from the overall lexical richness. Additionally, phrases like "great contribution" and "protect the air" are somewhat generic and could be enhanced with more specific or sophisticated vocabulary.
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, the writer should consider using synonyms or related terms. For example, instead of repeating "air pollution," alternatives like "atmospheric contamination" or "airborne pollutants" could be employed. Furthermore, incorporating more varied expressions, such as "mitigate" instead of "reduce," would elevate the essay’s lexical quality.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: There are instances of imprecise vocabulary usage, such as "non-motoried day," which is awkward and not commonly used. The phrase "great contribution to reduce air pollution" could be more accurately expressed as "significant impact on reducing air pollution." Additionally, "household activities also lead to air pollution" could be clearer if specified, such as "domestic practices contribute to air pollution."
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on using vocabulary that accurately conveys the intended meaning. This can be achieved by selecting words that are more commonly accepted in academic discourse. For example, instead of "make a great contribution," the writer could say "play a crucial role." Additionally, reviewing vocabulary in context and ensuring that it aligns with standard usage will enhance clarity.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors, such as "non-motoried" (should be "non-motorized"), "campaigne" (should be "campaign"), "aslo" (should be "also"), and "pratical" (should be "practical"). These errors detract from the overall professionalism of the writing and can confuse the reader.
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, the writer should implement a proofreading strategy, such as reading the essay aloud or using spell-check tools. Additionally, practicing spelling through writing exercises and focusing on commonly misspelled words can help reinforce correct spelling habits. Regularly reviewing vocabulary lists and their correct spellings will also contribute to improved accuracy in future essays.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents a clear argument, enhancing vocabulary range, precision, and spelling accuracy will significantly improve the Lexical Resource score.

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 moderate range of sentence structures. For instance, simple sentences are used effectively, such as "Some people claim that an international non-motoried day make a great contribution to reduce air pollution." However, there is a noticeable reliance on basic sentence forms, with limited use of complex or compound sentences. For example, the sentence "Not only is a day for people to stay away vehicles, it is also a campaigne that support people to use less cars and motorbikes for the air’s improvement." attempts a more complex structure but fails due to grammatical inaccuracies and awkward phrasing.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, the writer should practice combining sentences using conjunctions (e.g., "and," "but," "although") and employing relative clauses (e.g., "which," "that"). For example, instead of saying "We can also plant more tree to recover the forest caught fire," the writer could say, "In addition to addressing vehicle emissions, we can also plant more trees to help recover forests that have been affected by fires." This not only adds variety but also enhances clarity.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues that detract from its overall clarity and effectiveness. For example, "make a great contribution to reduce air pollution" should be "makes a great contribution to reducing air pollution." Additionally, the phrase "a campaigne that support people" should be corrected to "a campaign that supports people." There are also instances of incorrect article usage, such as "a day is not enough for everybody to protect the air surrounded us," which could be more clearly stated as "a day is not enough for everyone to protect the air around us." Furthermore, punctuation errors, such as missing commas, can lead to run-on sentences and confusion.
- How to improve: To enhance grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on subject-verb agreement, verb forms, and the correct use of articles. Regular practice with grammar exercises and seeking feedback on writing can help identify and correct these issues. Additionally, proofreading the essay for punctuation errors, such as ensuring that commas are used to separate clauses appropriately, will improve clarity. For instance, revising "We can have more pratical ways." to "We can explore more practical ways," would not only correct the spelling but also enhance the sentence’s fluency.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a basic understanding of the topic and presents both sides of the argument, improvements in grammatical range and accuracy are necessary to achieve a higher band score. Focusing on sentence variety, grammatical correctness, and punctuation will significantly enhance the overall quality of the writing.

Bài sửa mẫu

Some people claim that an international non-motorized day makes a great contribution to reducing air pollution. Whereas many people believe that there are more effective ways to protect the air. Although both views hold merit, I agree more with the latter perspective.

On the one hand, an international car-free day is obviously essential for the decrease in air pollution. It is apparent that a day without cars and motorbikes can help to reduce the amount of exhaust from these vehicles that negatively impacts human health. During this day, people will be encouraged to use public transport such as bikes or walk, which can diminish air pollutants and help them maintain their fitness and health. Not only is this a day for people to avoid vehicles, but it is also a campaign that supports people in using fewer cars and motorbikes for the improvement of air quality. In addition, this project can also build a habit for everybody to get accustomed to utilizing bikes as a daily means of transport for work or study.

On the other hand, a single day is not enough for everybody to protect the air surrounding us. We can adopt more practical measures. First of all, air pollutants do not emerge from only vehicles. There are many sources of air pollution, including industry, factories, and forest fires. We need to pay attention to these sources as well. We must fine businesses that discharge toxic smoke that pollutes the air. We can also plant more trees to recover forests that have caught fire. Secondly, household activities also lead to air pollution. The government can require residents not to burn garbage; they can learn how to classify waste and put trash in the right place for it to be treated properly. People also need to switch from coal-powered engines to electric and hand-powered lawn equipment.

In conclusion, air pollution is one of the most serious issues nowadays. All the ways mentioned here contribute to the process of making the air clearer and fresher. We need to protect our atmosphere at all costs.