Some people think that governments should spend money on railways, while others believe that there should be more investment in road infrastructure. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Some people think that governments should spend money on railways, while others believe that there should be more investment in road infrastructure. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
In the contemporary era, the topic of whether governments should allocate their spending on the railway system or road infrastructure has generated debate among residents. While some people believe that the authorities should focus their money on railways, others argue that road infrastructure deserves more investment. This essay will discuss both perspectives, but I firmly believe that rail lines are better because they are more environmentally friendly and can help prevent traffic congestion.
First, it cannot be denied that roads offer unparalleled convenience for vehicle users. To illustrate, research conducted by Forbes Advisor has shown that 91.7% of households had at least one vehicle in 2022. Additionally, accessibility in remote areas is also a factor to consider when investing in roads. For example, in some rural or mountainous areas, it is very impractical to rely on public transport.
On the other hand, railways have a higher capacity, which can carry many passengers in a shorter period of time. This solution is more time-efficient and less likely to cause traffic congestion compared to road infrastructure. Furthermore, investing in road infrastructure can stimulate economic growth by fostering exports and imports, creating more opportunities for employment. The more people choose to travel by train, the more revenue the country can generate for tourism.
To conclude, while roads provide convenience and accessibility, I would advocate for rail line improvements for the sake of sustainable development in the long run.
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
-
"In the contemporary era" -> "In the current era"
Explanation: "Contemporary" can sometimes imply a slightly more formal or dated tone. "Current" is more straightforward and maintains an academic tone without being overly formal. -
"generated debate among residents" -> "prompted debate among residents"
Explanation: "Generated" can be vague and less specific in this context. "Prompted" is more precise, indicating a direct cause-and-effect relationship between the topic and the debate. -
"the authorities should focus their money on" -> "authorities should allocate funds to"
Explanation: "Focus their money on" is informal and slightly vague. "Allocate funds to" is more precise and formal, suitable for academic writing. -
"rail lines" -> "railways"
Explanation: "Rail lines" is a less common and less formal term. "Railways" is the standard term used in formal and academic contexts. -
"unparalleled convenience" -> "unique convenience"
Explanation: "Unparalleled" implies something that cannot be matched, which may be overstating the case. "Unique" simply means one-of-a-kind, which is more accurate in this context. -
"vehicle users" -> "drivers"
Explanation: "Vehicle users" is too broad and vague. "Drivers" specifically refers to those operating vehicles, which is more precise in this context. -
"it is very impractical" -> "it is impractical"
Explanation: "Very" is redundant when "impractical" already conveys a strong degree of impracticality. Removing "very" maintains the strength of the statement without redundancy. -
"This solution is more time-efficient" -> "This option is more efficient"
Explanation: "Solution" can be misleading as it implies a complete solution to a problem, whereas "option" correctly refers to one possible choice among others. "Efficient" is also more general and appropriate for comparing modes of transportation. -
"less likely to cause traffic congestion" -> "less prone to causing traffic congestion"
Explanation: "Less likely to cause" is a bit informal and vague. "Less prone to causing" is more formal and precise, fitting the academic style better. -
"fostering exports and imports" -> "enhancing trade"
Explanation: "Fostering" is somewhat vague and less specific in this context. "Enhancing" is more direct and commonly used in economic discussions about trade. -
"more opportunities for employment" -> "more employment opportunities"
Explanation: "More opportunities for employment" is grammatically awkward. "More employment opportunities" is grammatically correct and flows better in formal writing. -
"the more people choose to travel by train" -> "the greater the number of people who choose to travel by train"
Explanation: "The more people choose" is informal and lacks precision. "The greater the number of people who choose" is more formal and quantifies the action. -
"for the sake of sustainable development" -> "for sustainable development"
Explanation: "For the sake of" is a bit informal and can be simplified to "for," which is more direct and maintains the formal tone.
Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 5
Band Score for Task Response: 5 – UNDER WORD
-
Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to address both perspectives regarding government spending on railways versus road infrastructure. However, it does not fully explore the arguments for road investment, which is a crucial part of the prompt. While it mentions the convenience and accessibility of roads, the discussion lacks depth and fails to present a balanced view. The essay leans more towards supporting railways without adequately representing the opposing viewpoint.
- How to improve: To improve, the essay should ensure that both sides are discussed equally. This could involve providing more detailed examples and arguments for road infrastructure, such as its role in daily commuting, economic impact, and potential for development in underserved areas. A more balanced approach would enhance the overall response to the prompt.
-
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay states a clear position in favor of railways, particularly in the introduction and conclusion. However, the body paragraphs contain mixed messages, particularly in the second paragraph, where the advantages of roads are discussed but not strongly linked back to the overall argument. This inconsistency can confuse readers about the author’s stance.
- How to improve: To maintain a clear position, the writer should consistently link back to their main argument after discussing each point. For instance, after presenting the advantages of roads, the writer could clarify how these points relate to the overall argument for prioritizing rail investment. Using transitional phrases that reinforce the main opinion can also help maintain clarity.
-
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents some ideas, such as the environmental benefits of railways and the convenience of roads. However, the support for these ideas is often superficial. For example, while the essay mentions statistics about vehicle ownership, it does not delve into how this impacts road usage or government spending decisions. The discussion lacks depth and fails to extend ideas with sufficient examples or reasoning.
- How to improve: To enhance the presentation and support of ideas, the writer should provide more detailed explanations and examples. For instance, when discussing the environmental benefits of railways, the essay could include specific data or studies that highlight the reduction in carbon emissions compared to road travel. Additionally, exploring the implications of each argument more thoroughly would strengthen the essay.
-
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, discussing the merits of both railways and roads. However, the focus tends to shift towards railways without adequately addressing the full scope of the prompt. The mention of economic growth related to road infrastructure is somewhat vague and does not tie back effectively to the overall discussion.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that each paragraph directly relates back to the prompt. This can be achieved by explicitly linking each point made about roads or railways to the question of government spending. Additionally, summarizing how each point contributes to the overall argument in the conclusion would reinforce the essay’s relevance to the topic.
In summary, to improve the essay’s score, the writer should aim for a more balanced discussion of both perspectives, maintain a consistent position throughout, provide deeper support for their ideas, and ensure that all points remain relevant to the prompt.
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 debate and the writer’s stance. The body paragraphs are organized to discuss the advantages of both railways and roads, which allows the reader to follow the argument easily. However, the transition between the discussion of roads and railways could be smoother. For instance, the phrase "On the other hand" is effective, but the preceding paragraph could better conclude its point before shifting focus.
- How to improve: To enhance logical flow, consider using transitional phrases that summarize the previous point before introducing the next. For example, after discussing the benefits of roads, a concluding sentence that encapsulates their importance could be added before transitioning to railways. This would create a more cohesive connection between the two perspectives.
-
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, with each paragraph focusing on either roads or railways. The introduction and conclusion are also distinct, which is crucial for clarity. However, the body paragraphs could benefit from clearer topic sentences that explicitly state the main idea of each paragraph. For instance, the paragraph discussing roads begins with a general statement but could be more impactful if it started with a clear assertion about the advantages of road infrastructure.
- How to improve: Strengthen paragraph structure by ensuring each one begins with a clear topic sentence that encapsulates the main idea. This will help guide the reader and reinforce the focus of each paragraph. Additionally, consider using a concluding sentence in each body paragraph that summarizes the key point before moving on to the next.
-
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs a variety of cohesive devices, such as "first," "on the other hand," and "to conclude," which effectively guide the reader through the argument. However, the use of cohesive devices could be more varied. For example, the essay relies heavily on basic connectors and could benefit from more sophisticated devices that indicate contrast, addition, or exemplification.
- How to improve: To diversify cohesive devices, incorporate phrases such as "in addition," "furthermore," "conversely," and "for instance" to enhance the richness of the text. Additionally, consider using pronouns or synonyms to refer back to previously mentioned ideas, which can help maintain cohesion without repetitive phrasing. For example, instead of repeating "road infrastructure," you could use "this mode of transport" in subsequent references.
By implementing these suggestions, the essay can achieve an even higher level of coherence and cohesion, further strengthening the overall argument and clarity of the writing.
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 such as "allocate," "infrastructure," "convenience," and "sustainable development." However, the vocabulary used is somewhat limited in variety and sophistication. For instance, phrases like "better because they are more environmentally friendly" could be enhanced by using synonyms or more complex expressions, such as "superior due to their environmental sustainability."
- How to improve: To enhance the range of vocabulary, the writer should incorporate more varied synonyms and phrases. For example, instead of repeating "investment," alternatives like "funding" or "financial commitment" could be used. Additionally, including more academic or technical terms related to transportation and infrastructure could elevate the lexical resource.
-
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary accurately, but there are instances of imprecision. For example, the phrase "unparalleled convenience for vehicle users" could be misleading, as it implies that no other mode of transport offers convenience, which is an overstatement. Additionally, the term "higher capacity" is vague; specifying that railways can transport "more passengers per trip" would be clearer.
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should aim to use vocabulary that accurately reflects the intended meaning. This could involve rephrasing vague terms and ensuring that comparisons are made clearly. For instance, instead of saying "more environmentally friendly," the writer could specify how railways reduce carbon emissions compared to road transport.
-
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The spelling in the essay is generally accurate, with no significant errors noted. Words like "contemporary," "infrastructure," and "convenience" are spelled correctly, which contributes positively to the overall impression of the essay.
- How to improve: To maintain and enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should continue to proofread their work carefully. Utilizing spell-check tools and practicing spelling through writing exercises can also help reinforce correct spelling habits. Additionally, familiarizing oneself with commonly misspelled words in academic writing can be beneficial.
In summary, while the essay demonstrates a competent use of vocabulary, there are opportunities for improvement in terms of range, precision, and maintaining spelling accuracy. By incorporating a broader variety of vocabulary, ensuring precise word choice, and continuing to practice spelling, the writer can aim for a higher band score in the Lexical Resource criterion.
Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 8
Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 8
-
Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable variety of sentence structures. For instance, the use of complex sentences such as “While some people believe that the authorities should focus their money on railways, others argue that road infrastructure deserves more investment” showcases an ability to connect ideas effectively. Additionally, the writer employs a mix of simple and compound sentences, which contributes to the overall fluency of the text. However, there are instances where the sentence structures could be further diversified. For example, the phrase “it cannot be denied that roads offer unparalleled convenience for vehicle users” could be rephrased to introduce a more varied structure, such as using an introductory participial phrase.
- How to improve: To enhance the variety of sentence structures, the writer could incorporate more conditional sentences (e.g., “If governments invest more in railways, they may reduce traffic congestion”) and use different sentence openings (e.g., starting with adverbial phrases or clauses). Additionally, varying the length and complexity of sentences throughout the essay can help maintain reader engagement and improve the overall flow.
-
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a high level of grammatical accuracy, with only minor errors that do not impede comprehension. For instance, the phrase “the more people choose to travel by train, the more revenue the country can generate for tourism” is grammatically correct and effectively communicates the idea. However, there are a few punctuation issues, such as the lack of a comma before “which can carry many passengers in a shorter period of time” in the sentence discussing railways. This omission can lead to confusion regarding the clause’s relationship to the main sentence.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy and punctuation skills, the writer should review the rules regarding the use of commas, particularly in complex sentences. Practicing the identification of independent and dependent clauses can help in determining where commas are necessary. Additionally, proofreading for minor errors before submission can enhance the overall quality of the essay.
Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong command of grammatical range and accuracy, achieving a band score of 8. By incorporating more varied sentence structures and refining punctuation use, the writer can further elevate their writing to achieve an even higher score.
Bài sửa mẫu
In the contemporary era, the topic of whether governments should allocate their spending on the railway system or road infrastructure has prompted debate among residents. While some people believe that the authorities should focus their money on railways, others argue that road infrastructure deserves more investment. This essay will discuss both perspectives, but I firmly believe that rail lines are better because they are more environmentally friendly and can help prevent traffic congestion.
First, it cannot be denied that roads offer unique convenience for vehicle users. To illustrate, research conducted by Forbes Advisor has shown that 91.7% of households had at least one vehicle in 2022. Additionally, accessibility in remote areas is also a factor to consider when investing in roads. For example, in some rural or mountainous areas, it is very impractical to rely on public transport.
On the other hand, railways have a higher capacity, which can carry many passengers in a shorter period of time. This option is more efficient and less prone to causing traffic congestion compared to road infrastructure. Furthermore, investing in railways can stimulate economic growth by enhancing trade, creating more employment opportunities. The greater the number of people who choose to travel by train, the more revenue the country can generate for tourism.
To conclude, while roads provide convenience and accessibility, I would advocate for rail line improvements for the sake of sustainable development in the long run.