Some people think that mobile phones should be banned in public places/community areas like libraries, shops and on public transport. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

There exists a viewpoint of whether or not the inhibition of mobile phones should be implemented in community areas, such as libraries, shops, and public means of transport. Despite acknowledging the rationale behind this rule, I personally disagree with this perspective.

On the one hand, advocates of introducing this prohibition for mobile phone users argue that phone usage can be an intrusive violation of privacy. Should are these phones used to capture photos and record videos without permission in community spaces, it is feasible that these illegal captures and recordings can be abused for commercial or insulting purposes with negative deliberation, such as sexual assaults or school violence. Consequently, such an unlawful invasion of personal privacy has a detrimental influence on individuals' self-confidence and societal integration. Another explanation worth considering is the reduction in cheating at schools. This is due to the fact that to satisfy the needs and ambitions of individuals and families with the highest outcomes, they are likely to rely on their phones to cheat in academic examinations, hence gradually deceiving themselves about virtual achievements. Consequently, the prohibition of cell phone usage can effectively encourage students to rely on their intellect and resourcefulness.

Nonetheless, it is important to consider certain circumstances where imposing banned rules and regulations on the use of mobile phones may not be justifiable. One such scenario involves instances of health-related emergent situations. For instance, the location of a heart stroke victim can be determined through a GPS on their smartphone even in public spaces, thus the medical team and ambulance directly get to them. In such an extreme case, imposing the burden of this regulation may increase potential risks to people's well-being. Another reason to ponder is the breakthrough invention of cell phones. This is because this device can access a wide range of recreational and educational resources, as long as it is connected to the internet. To illustrate, such an entertaining tool provides users with meaningful podcasts or ridiculous videos on social media platforms when traveling on tedious journeys, particularly on public transportation.

In conclusion, although the introduction of the cellphone ban can be conducive to the protection of personal privacy and the educational performance of children, I hold the belief that the banned regulation should be imposed more practically for particular circumstances.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"There exists a viewpoint of whether or not" -> "There is a viewpoint on whether or not"
Explanation: Simplifying "There exists a viewpoint of" to "There is a viewpoint on" streamlines the sentence and maintains a more formal tone appropriate for academic writing.
"inhibition of mobile phones" -> "prohibition of mobile phone use"
Explanation: "Inhibition" is not typically used in this context; "prohibition" is the correct term for laws or rules restricting something. Additionally, "mobile phone use" is more precise than "mobile phones."
"Should are these phones used" -> "If these phones are used"
Explanation: Corrects the grammatical error "Should are" to "If these phones are," ensuring proper subject-verb agreement and clarity.
"can be an intrusive violation of privacy" -> "can constitute an intrusive violation of privacy"
Explanation: "Constitute" is more formal and precise than "be," enhancing the academic tone of the sentence.
"negative deliberation" -> "malicious intent"
Explanation: "Malicious intent" is a more specific and appropriate term than "negative deliberation," which is vague and not commonly used in this context.
"unlawful invasion of personal privacy" -> "unlawful invasion of privacy"
Explanation: Removing "personal" avoids redundancy and maintains the formal tone.
"to satisfy the needs and ambitions of individuals and families with the highest outcomes" -> "to achieve the highest academic outcomes"
Explanation: Simplifies and clarifies the phrase, focusing on the specific context of academic achievement.
"to cheat in academic examinations" -> "to cheat on academic exams"
Explanation: "On" is more commonly used in this context than "in" when referring to cheating on exams.
"imposing banned rules and regulations" -> "imposing bans on rules and regulations"
Explanation: "Bans on" is a more precise and formal way to express restrictions, improving the academic tone.
"imposing the burden of this regulation" -> "imposing this regulation"
Explanation: Simplifies and clarifies the phrase, removing unnecessary words for a more direct and formal expression.
"increase potential risks to people’s well-being" -> "pose potential risks to individuals’ well-being"
Explanation: "Pose" is more appropriate than "increase" in this context, and "individuals’" is more formal than "people’s."
"breakthrough invention of cell phones" -> "innovative development of mobile phones"
Explanation: "Innovative development" is a more precise and formal term than "breakthrough invention," which is somewhat colloquial.
"ridiculous videos" -> "entertaining videos"
Explanation: "Ridiculous" is too informal and subjective; "entertaining" is neutral and more appropriate for academic writing.
"meaningful podcasts" -> "informative podcasts"
Explanation: "Informative" is a more precise adjective than "meaningful" in this context, focusing on the educational value of the content.

These changes enhance the precision, formality, and clarity of the essay, aligning it more closely with academic writing standards.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Task Response: 7

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay addresses the prompt by presenting both sides of the argument regarding the banning of mobile phones in public spaces. The author acknowledges the rationale behind the ban, such as privacy concerns and academic integrity, while also providing counterarguments that highlight the importance of mobile phones in emergency situations and their educational value. However, the essay could benefit from a clearer delineation of the extent to which the author agrees or disagrees with the statement, as the conclusion is somewhat ambiguous.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the author should explicitly state their position regarding the extent of their agreement or disagreement in the introduction and conclusion. This could involve clarifying whether they believe the ban should be entirely implemented, partially, or under specific conditions.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a personal stance against the complete ban on mobile phones, but this position is not consistently reinforced throughout the essay. While the author provides valid points against the ban, the introduction suggests a general disagreement without a strong emphasis on the nuances of their position. The conclusion reiterates the idea of practicality but lacks a definitive statement about the author’s overall stance.
- How to improve: To maintain a clear position, the author should ensure that their viewpoint is consistently articulated in each paragraph. Using phrases like "I firmly believe" or "In my opinion" can help reinforce their stance. Additionally, summarizing their position explicitly in the conclusion would provide clarity.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas, such as privacy concerns and the potential for cheating, but some points lack depth and clear support. For instance, the argument about privacy violations could be strengthened with specific examples or statistics to illustrate the impact of such violations. Similarly, the point about mobile phones aiding in emergencies is valid but could be expanded with more detail on how this has been beneficial in real-life scenarios.
- How to improve: To improve the development of ideas, the author should aim to provide more detailed explanations and examples for each point made. This could involve incorporating relevant data, anecdotes, or case studies that illustrate the arguments more vividly. Additionally, ensuring that each idea is logically connected to the overall argument will enhance coherence.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, discussing the implications of mobile phone usage in public spaces. However, there are moments where the discussion becomes slightly convoluted, particularly in the section discussing cheating in schools, which could be more directly tied to the topic of public phone usage. The transition between points could be smoother to maintain focus.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the author should ensure that each paragraph clearly relates back to the central question of whether mobile phones should be banned in public spaces. Using topic sentences that directly reference the prompt can help keep the discussion aligned with the main argument. Additionally, avoiding tangential points that do not directly support the thesis will strengthen the overall coherence of the essay.

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, body paragraphs discussing both sides of the argument, and a conclusion. The introduction effectively sets the stage for the discussion, while the body paragraphs are organized to present opposing viewpoints. For example, the first body paragraph discusses the arguments in favor of banning mobile phones, while the second body paragraph addresses the counterarguments. However, the logical flow could be improved as some points feel slightly disjointed, particularly in the transition between ideas within paragraphs.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using clearer topic sentences that summarize the main idea of each paragraph. Additionally, ensure that each point flows naturally into the next. For instance, when transitioning from discussing privacy concerns to academic cheating, a linking sentence could help clarify how both points relate to the broader argument about the necessity of a ban.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which aids readability. Each paragraph focuses on a specific aspect of the argument, maintaining a clear structure. However, the paragraphs could benefit from more uniformity in length and depth. For example, the first body paragraph is quite lengthy and covers multiple points, which may overwhelm the reader.
- How to improve: Aim for more balanced paragraphs by ensuring that each one contains a single main idea supported by relevant examples. Consider breaking down longer paragraphs into smaller ones to enhance clarity. For instance, the first body paragraph could be split into two: one focusing on privacy violations and the other on academic cheating.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs a variety of cohesive devices, such as "On the one hand," "Nonetheless," and "For instance," which help guide the reader through the argument. However, the use of cohesive devices is somewhat repetitive, and some transitions could be more varied. For example, the phrase "Another reason to ponder" is used, but alternatives could enhance the richness of the text.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider range of linking words and phrases. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "Another reason," consider alternatives like "Additionally," "Furthermore," or "Moreover." Additionally, ensure that cohesive devices are used appropriately to clarify relationships between ideas, particularly when contrasting viewpoints.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of coherence and cohesion, there are areas for improvement in logical organization, paragraph structure, and the variety of cohesive devices used. By implementing these suggestions, the overall clarity and effectiveness of the argument can be enhanced, potentially leading to a higher band score.

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 good range of vocabulary, with terms such as "inhibition," "intrusive violation," "detrimental influence," and "breakthrough invention." These words contribute to a more sophisticated tone and show the writer’s ability to use varied vocabulary. However, there are instances where more common synonyms could have been used to enhance clarity, such as "ban" instead of "inhibition," which may confuse some readers.
- How to improve: To enhance the range of vocabulary, the writer could incorporate more synonyms and less formal expressions when appropriate. For instance, instead of "inhibition," using "ban" would be clearer and more accessible. Additionally, the writer could explore using idiomatic expressions or collocations related to the topic, such as "public etiquette" or "digital distractions."
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: While the essay includes some precise vocabulary, there are instances of imprecise usage. For example, the phrase "should are these phones used" is grammatically incorrect and confusing. The term "negative deliberation" is also vague and could be replaced with a clearer phrase like "negative consequences." Furthermore, "the burden of this regulation" could be more clearly articulated as "the burden of such a ban."
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on grammatical accuracy and clarity in phrasing. Revising sentences for grammatical correctness and ensuring that vocabulary accurately conveys the intended meaning will enhance the overall quality. For example, rephrasing "should are these phones used" to "if these phones are used" would clarify the statement.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The spelling in the essay is generally accurate, with no glaring errors that impede understanding. However, the phrase "heart stroke" should be corrected to "heart attack," which is the more commonly used term. Additionally, "cell phone" is used interchangeably with "mobile phone," which is acceptable but could be standardized for consistency.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should proofread the essay carefully to catch any minor errors or inconsistencies. Utilizing spell-check tools and reading the essay aloud can help identify awkward phrasing or incorrect terminology. Moreover, maintaining consistency in terminology (choosing either "cell phone" or "mobile phone") throughout the essay will improve clarity and professionalism.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid command of vocabulary, but there is room for improvement in precision and clarity. By focusing on grammatical accuracy, enhancing the range of vocabulary, and ensuring consistent spelling, the writer can elevate their Lexical Resource score in future essays.

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 reasonable variety of sentence structures, including complex sentences and conditional clauses. For instance, phrases like "Should are these phones used to capture photos and record videos without permission" and "it is feasible that these illegal captures and recordings can be abused" show attempts at complex structures. However, there are instances of awkward phrasing and grammatical errors that detract from the overall effectiveness of the sentence variety. The use of "Should are these phones" is particularly problematic and may confuse readers.
- How to improve: To enhance the variety and effectiveness of sentence structures, the writer should practice using different forms of complex sentences, such as relative clauses and participial phrases. For example, instead of "Should are these phones used," a clearer structure would be "If these phones are used." Additionally, incorporating more varied sentence beginnings and lengths can help maintain reader interest and improve flow.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical inaccuracies that affect clarity and coherence. For example, the phrase "the rationale behind this rule" is vague and could be more specific. Additionally, the sentence "Consequently, such an unlawful invasion of personal privacy has a detrimental influence on individuals’ self-confidence and societal integration" is grammatically correct but could be simplified for better readability. Punctuation is generally used correctly, but there are some run-on sentences that could benefit from clearer separation.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on proofreading for common errors, such as subject-verb agreement and sentence fragments. It would be beneficial to break down complex sentences into simpler ones to enhance clarity. For instance, the sentence about health-related emergencies could be split into two sentences for better understanding: "In such extreme cases, the regulation may increase potential risks. For example, a heart stroke victim’s location can be determined through GPS." Regular practice with grammar exercises and seeking feedback on written work can also help identify and rectify recurring mistakes.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a commendable attempt at using a range of grammatical structures and maintaining a generally accurate use of grammar and punctuation, there are specific areas for improvement that, if addressed, could elevate the overall quality and clarity of the writing.

Bài sửa mẫu

There exists a viewpoint on whether or not the prohibition of mobile phone use should be implemented in community areas, such as libraries, shops, and public transport. Despite acknowledging the rationale behind this rule, I personally disagree with this perspective.

On the one hand, advocates of introducing this prohibition for mobile phone users argue that phone usage can constitute an intrusive violation of privacy. If these phones are used to capture photos and record videos without permission in community spaces, it is feasible that these illegal captures and recordings can be abused for commercial or insulting purposes with negative consequences, such as sexual assaults or school violence. Consequently, such an unlawful invasion of personal privacy has a detrimental influence on individuals’ self-confidence and societal integration. Another explanation worth considering is the reduction in cheating at schools. This is due to the fact that to achieve the highest academic outcomes, individuals and families are likely to rely on their phones to cheat on academic exams, hence gradually deceiving themselves about virtual achievements. Consequently, the prohibition of cell phone usage can effectively encourage students to rely on their intellect and resourcefulness.

Nonetheless, it is important to consider certain circumstances where imposing bans on rules and regulations on the use of mobile phones may not be justifiable. One such scenario involves instances of health-related emergencies. For instance, the location of a heart attack victim can be determined through a GPS on their smartphone even in public spaces, thus allowing the medical team and ambulance to reach them directly. In such an extreme case, imposing this regulation may pose potential risks to individuals’ well-being. Another reason to ponder is the innovative development of mobile phones. This is because this device can access a wide range of recreational and educational resources, as long as it is connected to the internet. To illustrate, such an entertaining tool provides users with informative podcasts or entertaining videos on social media platforms when traveling on tedious journeys, particularly on public transportation.

In conclusion, although the introduction of the cellphone ban can be conducive to the protection of personal privacy and the educational performance of children, I hold the belief that this regulation should be imposed more practically for particular circumstances.