Some people think that it is too late to rescue animal species that became extinct. Other believes that human activities may also help to maintain biodiversity and protect wildlife. Discuss these views and give your opinion

Wildlife have been long considered a companion of people's lives. Some people hold the view that the preservation of some of animals was be the belated action as there are some of them extinct. While, some are of he opinion that rational human make a great constribution to enhance biodiversity and ecosytem, even secure wildlife. This essay will examine these ideas in depth.
To begin with, the first view is justifed on the following grounds. It is without dispute that there are numerous species died ou completely. Hence, it makes no sense to bring them back into our life. Findings from scientists and animal conservationists give substance to argument that no matter how much we try or what cutting-edge technology equipments have applied, do some extinct animals in the past being back is and will be of invalid action. Taking dinosaurs and some kinds of elephants as examle, technological innovations used to be the best hope to reborn those animals's lives. In the end, the fact remains that those relentlesst efforts of human was be a hopeless and left scientist the question without answer. Nonetheless, it is undoubtedly that people still have a paramount importance of wildlife to protect in the verge of animals
With regards the second view, it is my firm belief that this view is rather convinced that it is evident that various human actions are still cherished impact on wildlife. It seems that many nations have more control over their biodiversity which leads that many species are preserved in the parts of the world. For instance, in some Africa countries tended to promote their animals safety policies which sets the foundation to rebuilt their animial world more diversity. From ân other observation, the governments have an legal action such as imposed stricter punishment against illegal hunters to secure animals life and limited the exploitaion to preserve species and animals habitats.
In conclusion, my contention is that the animals preservations which would rather happened lately than being non-actions. From my personal perspetive, people shoud aware of pivotal role of wildlife preservation as it may have an adverse impact on people's lives and well-being

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"Wildlife have been long considered a companion of people’s lives." -> "Wildlife has long been considered a companion to human existence."
Explanation: Changing "Wildlife have" to "Wildlife has" corrects the grammatical error. Additionally, "a companion of people’s lives" is awkward and vague; "a companion to human existence" is more precise and formal.
"the preservation of some of animals was be the belated action" -> "the preservation of some animals is considered a belated action"
Explanation: "was be" is grammatically incorrect; "is considered" corrects this. Also, "some of animals" should be "some animals" for grammatical accuracy.
"some are of he opinion" -> "some hold the opinion"
Explanation: "some are of he opinion" is grammatically incorrect; "some hold the opinion" is the correct form.
"rational human make a great constribution" -> "rational humans make a significant contribution"
Explanation: "rational human" should be "rational humans" for plural agreement, and "great" is replaced with "significant" for a more formal tone.
"enhance biodiversity and ecosytem" -> "enhance biodiversity and ecosystems"
Explanation: "ecosytem" is a typographical error; it should be "ecosystems."
"died ou completely" -> "have died out completely"
Explanation: "died ou" is incorrect; "have died out" is the correct phrase.
"Findings from scientists and animal conservationists give substance to argument" -> "Findings from scientists and animal conservationists substantiate the argument"
Explanation: "give substance to argument" is awkward and informal; "substantiate the argument" is more precise and formal.
"do some extinct animals in the past being back" -> "bringing back some extinct animals"
Explanation: "do some extinct animals in the past being back" is grammatically incorrect and awkward; "bringing back some extinct animals" is clearer and more direct.
"relentlesst efforts of human was be a hopeless" -> "relentless efforts by humans were futile"
Explanation: "relentlesst" is a typographical error; "relentless" is correct. "was be" is grammatically incorrect; "were" is the correct verb form. "a hopeless" is vague; "futile" is more precise.
"left scientist the question without answer" -> "left scientists with no answer"
Explanation: "left scientist the question without answer" is grammatically incorrect; "left scientists with no answer" corrects the grammatical structure and removes the awkward phrasing.
"With regards the second view" -> "Regarding the second view"
Explanation: "With regards" is a less formal expression; "Regarding" is more appropriate for academic writing.
"it is my firm belief that this view is rather convinced" -> "I firmly believe that this view is more convincing"
Explanation: "it is my firm belief" is redundant; "I firmly believe" is more direct. "rather convinced" is awkward; "more convincing" is clearer.
"have more control over their biodiversity which leads that many species are preserved" -> "have greater control over their biodiversity, which leads to the preservation of many species"
Explanation: "which leads that" is grammatically incorrect; "which leads to" is correct. Also, "are preserved" is awkwardly phrased; "the preservation of" is more formal.
"tended to promote their animals safety policies" -> "tended to promote animal safety policies"
Explanation: "their animals safety policies" is awkward and incorrect; "animal safety policies" is grammatically correct and more formal.
"sets the foundation to rebuilt their animial world more diversity" -> "sets the foundation for rebuilding their animal world with greater diversity"
Explanation: "to rebuilt" is grammatically incorrect; "for rebuilding" corrects this. "more diversity" is awkward; "with greater diversity" is more precise.
"From ân other observation" -> "From another observation"
Explanation: "ân" is a typographical error; it should be "an."
"imposed stricter punishment against illegal hunters" -> "imposed stricter penalties on illegal hunters"
Explanation: "punishment against" is less formal; "penalties on" is more precise and formal.
"limited the exploitaion" -> "limited exploitation"
Explanation: "exploitaion" is a typographical error; it should be "exploitation."
"the animals preservations which would rather happened lately than being non-actions" -> "the preservation of animals, which would rather have occurred recently than not at all"
Explanation: "the animals preservations" is grammatically incorrect; "the preservation of animals" is correct. "would rather happened lately than being non-actions" is awkward and incorrect; "would rather have occurred recently than not at all" is grammatically correct and clearer.
"people shoud aware of pivotal role" -> "people should be aware of the pivotal role"
Explanation: "shoud" is a typographical error; it should be "should." Adding "be" corrects the grammatical structure.

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 views regarding the extinction of animal species and the potential for human intervention to maintain biodiversity. The first view is discussed with a focus on the futility of trying to bring back extinct species, while the second view emphasizes the positive impact of human actions on wildlife conservation. However, the treatment of each view lacks depth and clarity, particularly in the first part, where the argument is somewhat convoluted and not fully developed. For instance, the mention of dinosaurs and elephants as examples could be better articulated to illustrate the point more effectively.
- How to improve: To improve, the essay should ensure that each part of the question is clearly and thoroughly addressed. This could involve providing more specific examples and evidence for both views. Additionally, a more structured approach, such as clearly delineating the arguments for each perspective, would enhance clarity and comprehensiveness.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a personal opinion in the conclusion, stating that wildlife preservation is crucial. However, the position is not consistently clear throughout the essay. The introduction suggests a balanced discussion, but the opinion is somewhat buried in the conclusion rather than being clearly stated in the introduction and reinforced throughout the body paragraphs.
- How to improve: To maintain a clear position, the writer should explicitly state their opinion in the introduction and refer back to it in each body paragraph. Using phrases like "In my opinion" or "I believe" at key points can help reinforce the stance taken. Additionally, summarizing the personal viewpoint in relation to the arguments presented would strengthen the overall coherence.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas related to both views, but the development of these ideas is inconsistent. Some points are made, such as the role of technology in conservation, but they are not fully elaborated or supported with adequate examples. For instance, the discussion about the legal actions taken against illegal hunting is a strong point but lacks specific examples of countries or policies that illustrate this success.
- How to improve: To enhance the support for ideas, the writer should include more detailed examples and explanations. Each point made should be followed by elaboration that connects back to the main argument. Using statistics, studies, or specific case studies can provide a stronger foundation for the claims made.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, discussing the views on wildlife preservation and human intervention. However, there are moments where the language becomes unclear or off-topic, such as in the first paragraph where the phrasing is awkward and detracts from the main argument. The use of phrases like "the fact remains that those relentless efforts of human was be a hopeless" can confuse the reader and obscure the main point.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that each sentence contributes directly to the argument being made. Simplifying language and avoiding overly complex structures can help keep the essay clear and on-topic. Additionally, proofreading for clarity and coherence before submission can help eliminate distracting errors.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a good understanding of the topic and presents relevant arguments, improvements in clarity, structure, and depth of analysis could elevate the score further.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents two main viewpoints regarding the extinction of animal species and the role of human activities in maintaining biodiversity. However, the organization of ideas could be clearer. For instance, the transition between the two views is somewhat abrupt, and the supporting arguments for each view are not distinctly separated. The introduction sets the stage for the discussion, but the body paragraphs could benefit from clearer topic sentences that outline the main point of each paragraph. The conclusion attempts to summarize the writer’s opinion but lacks a strong connection to the arguments presented.
- How to improve: To enhance logical flow, the writer should ensure that each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence that summarizes the main idea. Additionally, using transition phrases like "On one hand," "Conversely," or "In contrast" can help guide the reader through the argument. Structuring the essay with a clear introduction, body paragraphs dedicated to each viewpoint, and a well-defined conclusion will improve coherence.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs, but the structure within these paragraphs is inconsistent. The first paragraph combines multiple ideas without clear separation, making it difficult for the reader to follow the argument. The second paragraph, while slightly clearer, still lacks effective transitions between points. The conclusion is present but does not effectively summarize the key arguments made in the body.
- How to improve: The writer should ensure that each paragraph focuses on a single idea or argument. For example, the first paragraph could be split into two: one focusing on the argument against the possibility of bringing back extinct species and the other discussing the importance of wildlife preservation. Each paragraph should also end with a sentence that summarizes the main point or links to the next paragraph.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to use cohesive devices, but their application is inconsistent. Phrases like "To begin with," "With regards to," and "In conclusion" are present, but there are instances where the connections between sentences and ideas are weak. For example, the phrase "Nonetheless, it is undoubtedly that people still have a paramount importance of wildlife to protect in the verge of animals" lacks clarity and cohesion, making it difficult for the reader to grasp the intended meaning.
- How to improve: To improve the use of cohesive devices, the writer should incorporate a wider variety of linking words and phrases, such as "Furthermore," "Moreover," "Consequently," and "As a result." These can help clarify relationships between ideas and improve the overall flow of the essay. Additionally, ensuring that each cohesive device is used correctly and appropriately will enhance clarity. Practicing the use of cohesive devices in different contexts can help the writer become more proficient.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a good understanding of the topic and presents relevant arguments, improving the organization, paragraph structure, and use of cohesive devices will enhance coherence and cohesion, potentially raising the band score.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates an attempt to use a variety of vocabulary related to the topic of wildlife and biodiversity. Phrases such as "preservation of some of animals," "biodiversity," and "animal conservationists" indicate a reasonable range. However, the use of vocabulary is often limited and repetitive, with phrases like "animals safety policies" and "animals life" appearing without variation. Additionally, some expressions are awkward or incorrect, such as "the belated action" and "the fact remains that those relentlesst efforts."
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, the writer should incorporate synonyms and related terms. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "animals," alternatives like "species," "fauna," or "wildlife" could be employed. Furthermore, using more sophisticated phrases, such as "conservation efforts" instead of "animals safety policies," would elevate the lexical quality of the essay.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: There are several instances of imprecise vocabulary usage that detract from the clarity of the essay. For example, the phrase "was be the belated action" is grammatically incorrect and confusing. The term "reborn" is also misused; it would be more appropriate to say "to revive" or "to bring back." Additionally, "the verge of animals" is vague and does not convey a clear meaning.
- How to improve: The writer should focus on using vocabulary that accurately reflects the intended meaning. Reviewing phrases and ensuring they fit grammatically and contextually will help. For instance, instead of "the verge of animals," the writer could say "the brink of extinction." Engaging with vocabulary exercises or using a thesaurus can also aid in finding more precise terms.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains multiple spelling errors, such as "constribution," "examle," "relentlesst," "perspetive," and "shoud." These errors indicate a lack of attention to detail and can significantly impact the readability and professionalism of the writing.
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, the writer should incorporate proofreading strategies, such as reading the essay aloud or using spell-check tools. Additionally, maintaining a list of commonly misspelled words and practicing them can help reinforce correct spelling. Regular writing practice, along with feedback from peers or instructors, can also contribute to better spelling habits.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates an understanding of the topic and attempts to engage with relevant vocabulary, there are significant areas for improvement in range, precision, and spelling. By focusing on these aspects, the writer can enhance their lexical resource and overall writing quality.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 5

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates some attempt to use a variety of sentence structures, such as complex sentences ("It is without dispute that there are numerous species died out completely.") and simple sentences ("This essay will examine these ideas in depth."). However, the overall range is limited, and there are instances of awkward phrasing and incorrect structures that hinder clarity. For example, phrases like "was be the belated action" and "the fact remains that those relentless efforts of human was be a hopeless" are grammatically incorrect and disrupt the flow of the argument.
- How to improve: To enhance the variety of sentence structures, the writer should practice using more complex and compound sentences. Incorporating subordinate clauses and varying sentence beginnings can help. For instance, instead of saying "some are of the opinion," the writer could say, "While some believe that…" This not only varies the structure but also improves coherence.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues that detract from its overall quality. For example, "the preservation of some of animals was be the belated action" should be "the preservation of some animals is a belated action." Additionally, there are issues with subject-verb agreement ("species died ou completely" should be "species have died out completely") and incorrect word forms ("relentlesst" should be "relentless"). Punctuation errors, such as the incorrect use of commas and missing periods, further complicate readability.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on subject-verb agreement and correct verb forms. Regular practice with grammar exercises, particularly those focusing on common errors, can be beneficial. Additionally, proofreading the essay for punctuation errors before submission can help catch mistakes. Reading the essay aloud may also assist in identifying awkward phrasing and grammatical inconsistencies.

Overall, while the essay presents relevant ideas, the grammatical range and accuracy require significant improvement to achieve a higher band score. Focusing on sentence variety and grammatical correctness will enhance the clarity and effectiveness of the writing.

Bài sửa mẫu

Wildlife has long been considered a companion to human existence. Some people hold the opinion that the preservation of certain animals is a belated action, as many species have already become extinct. Meanwhile, others believe that rational humans can make a significant contribution to enhancing biodiversity and ecosystems, as well as securing wildlife. This essay will examine these ideas in depth.

To begin with, the first view is justified on the following grounds. It is without dispute that numerous species have died out completely. Hence, it makes little sense to attempt to bring them back into our lives. Findings from scientists and animal conservationists substantiate the argument that no matter how much we try or what cutting-edge technological equipment is applied, resurrecting some extinct animals from the past is an invalid action. Taking dinosaurs and certain types of elephants as examples, technological innovations were once seen as the best hope for reviving these species. In the end, the fact remains that these relentless efforts by humans have proven futile and have left scientists with no answers. Nonetheless, it is undoubtedly true that people still have a paramount importance in protecting wildlife on the verge of extinction.

Regarding the second view, I firmly believe that this perspective is more convincing, as it is evident that various human actions can still have a positive impact on wildlife. It seems that many nations have greater control over their biodiversity, which leads to the preservation of many species around the world. For instance, in some African countries, authorities have tended to promote animal safety policies, which set the foundation for rebuilding their animal world with greater diversity. From another observation, governments have taken legal actions, such as imposing stricter penalties on illegal hunters, to secure animal lives and limit exploitation, thereby preserving species and their habitats.

In conclusion, my contention is that the preservation of animals, which would rather have occurred recently than not at all, is crucial. From my personal perspective, people should be aware of the pivotal role of wildlife preservation, as it may have an adverse impact on human lives and well-being.