Some people think that people should be given the right to use fresh water as they like. Others believe governments should control toughly over the use of fresh water.Discuss both view and give your own opinion

While one school holds that individuals should have the right to use fresh water at will, others are of the opinion that the governments should regulate strict control over its usage. This essay will closely scrutinize both views before presenting my viewpoint.
On the one hand, advocates for the idea of using water freely, with the absence of government intervention, would argue that water is a natural resource that should be available to everyone, anytime given. This viewpoint is often predicated on the belief that even without the restriction the government placed on water, citizens will still be responsible and use it wisely. Supporters of this view are often associated with established freedom where human basic rights are on top of priorities, which manifests itself starkly in the United States, where many private wells are used to supply individuals’ homes with water, they own the right to use water from it as they see fit. However, this may contribute to the water crisis and insecurity that Americans are facing, causing groundwater exhaustion, as stated in many research.
On the other hand, proponents of the thought that governments should have authorities over water usage. Acknowledging water as a scarce resource that needs careful management, taking measures to ensure controlled water use and prevent overconsumption will minimize the possibility of resource shortage and environmental degradation. Government regulation can help to provide equitable distribution, conserve water quality and promote sustainable development.
While both perspectives have valid arguments, I believe there should be an alternative approach which balances both rights to address the complex problem that is fresh water usage, individuals should have reasonable access to fresh water for their basic needs and governments must also play a crucial role in regulating its use.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"at will" -> "as needed"
Explanation: "At will" can imply arbitrary or unrestricted use, which may not be the intended meaning. "As needed" is more precise and contextually appropriate, suggesting use in moderation and according to necessity.
"strict control" -> "stringent regulations"
Explanation: "Strict control" is somewhat vague and informal. "Stringent regulations" is more specific and formal, better fitting the academic tone of the essay.
"closely scrutinize" -> "thoroughly examine"
Explanation: "Closely scrutinize" is slightly informal and can imply a negative connotation. "Thoroughly examine" is neutral and maintains an academic tone, suggesting a detailed and systematic analysis.
"with the absence of government intervention" -> "without government intervention"
Explanation: "With the absence of" is a bit verbose and less direct. "Without" is more concise and straightforward, improving the clarity of the sentence.
"anytime given" -> "at any time"
Explanation: "Anytime given" is grammatically incorrect and awkward. "At any time" is grammatically correct and maintains a formal tone.
"often predicated on the belief" -> "often based on the assumption"
Explanation: "Predicated on" is correct but can be less common in academic writing. "Based on the assumption" is more straightforward and commonly used in academic discourse.
"established freedom" -> "established freedom"
Explanation: This phrase seems redundant and unclear. Removing "established" clarifies the meaning, as "freedom" is already established in the context of human rights.
"human basic rights" -> "basic human rights"
Explanation: "Human basic rights" is grammatically incorrect. "Basic human rights" is the correct phrase, emphasizing the fundamental nature of these rights.
"manifests itself starkly" -> "is starkly evident"
Explanation: "Manifests itself" is slightly awkward and less formal. "Is starkly evident" is more direct and maintains an academic tone.
"they own the right to use water from it as they see fit" -> "they have the right to use water from it as they deem appropriate"
Explanation: "Own the right" is informal and imprecise. "Have the right" is more formal and appropriate for academic writing, and "as they deem appropriate" is more precise than "as they see fit."
"may contribute to the water crisis and insecurity" -> "may exacerbate water scarcity and insecurity"
Explanation: "Contribute to the water crisis and insecurity" is vague and imprecise. "Exacerbate water scarcity and insecurity" is more specific and accurately describes the impact on water availability.
"taking measures to ensure controlled water use" -> "implementing measures to regulate water use"
Explanation: "Taking measures to ensure controlled water use" is verbose and less formal. "Implementing measures to regulate water use" is concise and maintains a formal tone suitable for academic writing.
"promote sustainable development" -> "foster sustainable development"
Explanation: "Promote" is a bit generic and less specific. "Foster" is more precise and commonly used in academic contexts to describe the nurturing of development.
"there should be an alternative approach" -> "an alternative approach should be considered"
Explanation: "There should be an alternative approach" is passive and less direct. "An alternative approach should be considered" is more assertive and active, fitting the academic style better.
"individuals should have reasonable access to fresh water" -> "individuals should have reasonable access to fresh water resources"
Explanation: Adding "resources" clarifies that the access is to the resource itself, enhancing specificity and precision in the statement.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Task Response: 8

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses both sides of the argument regarding the use of fresh water. The first paragraph presents the viewpoint advocating for individual rights to use water freely, while the second paragraph discusses the necessity of government regulation. The conclusion succinctly states the author’s opinion, suggesting a balanced approach. However, the discussion could benefit from more explicit connections to the prompt, particularly in detailing the implications of each viewpoint on fresh water usage.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer could incorporate more specific examples or statistics related to water usage and regulation. This would provide a clearer understanding of the consequences of each perspective and strengthen the argument.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position, particularly in the conclusion where the author advocates for a balanced approach. However, the transition between discussing both views and presenting the author’s opinion could be more seamless. The phrase "I believe there should be an alternative approach" introduces the opinion but could be more assertively stated.
- How to improve: To improve clarity, the writer should use stronger transitional phrases when moving from discussing the two perspectives to stating their own opinion. Phrases like "Ultimately, I contend that…" could help reinforce the author’s stance.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas clearly, particularly in the discussion of both viewpoints. The argument for individual rights is supported by the example of private wells in the United States, while the argument for government regulation is backed by the need for sustainable management of resources. However, some points, such as the potential consequences of unrestricted water use, could be further developed.
- How to improve: To strengthen the support for ideas, the writer could include more detailed examples or case studies that illustrate the outcomes of both perspectives. For instance, referencing specific instances of water crises or successful government regulations would enhance the essay’s persuasiveness.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay remains largely on topic, discussing the two perspectives on fresh water usage and the author’s opinion. However, there are moments where the focus could be sharper, particularly in the first paragraph where the discussion of individual rights could be more tightly linked to the implications of those rights on water scarcity.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that each point made directly relates back to the central theme of fresh water usage and its implications. This could involve explicitly stating how each argument affects the availability and sustainability of fresh water.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong understanding of the prompt and presents a well-structured argument. By enhancing the depth of examples, improving transitions, and tightening the focus on the topic, the writer could elevate their score even further.

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 two opposing views on fresh water usage. Each viewpoint is addressed in separate paragraphs, which helps in maintaining a logical flow. The arguments for both sides are presented coherently, with the first paragraph focusing on individual rights and the second on government regulation. However, the transition between discussing the two views could be smoother, particularly in the concluding paragraph where the author attempts to synthesize the arguments. For instance, the phrase "While both perspectives have valid arguments" could be more effectively linked to the preceding paragraphs.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using transitional phrases that explicitly connect the ideas between paragraphs. For example, after discussing individual rights, a sentence like "Conversely, the need for regulation becomes apparent when considering…" could strengthen the transition to the next viewpoint.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate distinct ideas, which is essential for clarity. Each paragraph has a clear focus: the first on individual rights and the second on government control. However, the conclusion could benefit from being more distinct and separate from the body paragraphs, as it currently feels somewhat tacked on. The conclusion should not only summarize but also reinforce the author’s stance.
- How to improve: Ensure that the conclusion is a standalone paragraph that encapsulates the main arguments and clearly states the author’s opinion. This could be achieved by explicitly restating the main points discussed and then summarizing the suggested balanced approach in a more structured manner.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs a variety of cohesive devices, such as "On the one hand," "On the other hand," and "however," which effectively guide the reader through the arguments. However, there are instances where the cohesive devices could be more varied to avoid repetition and enhance the essay’s fluidity. For example, the phrase "this viewpoint is often predicated on the belief" could be simplified or replaced with a more straightforward connector to improve readability.
- How to improve: To diversify cohesive devices, consider using synonyms or alternative phrases to connect ideas. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "however," you could use "nevertheless" or "on the contrary" to introduce contrasting ideas. Additionally, incorporating more complex cohesive devices, such as "in light of this" or "consequently," could further enrich the essay’s cohesion.

By addressing these areas, the essay can achieve an even higher level of coherence and cohesion, potentially moving towards a Band 9 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 commendable range of vocabulary. Phrases such as "natural resource," "government intervention," "water crisis," and "environmental degradation" indicate a solid grasp of relevant terminology. However, there are instances of repetition, such as the repeated use of "water" and "usage," which could be diversified. For example, instead of repeatedly using "water," synonyms like "H2O," "freshwater," or "this resource" could enhance variety.
- How to improve: To improve, the writer should aim to incorporate more synonyms and varied expressions. For instance, instead of saying "the right to use fresh water," alternatives like "access to freshwater" or "entitlement to utilize this resource" could be employed. Additionally, using phrases like "utilization" instead of "usage" can add sophistication to the vocabulary.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary accurately, but there are moments where precision could be enhanced. For instance, the phrase "the absence of government intervention" might be better expressed as "minimal government intervention," which conveys a more specific idea. Additionally, the term "authorities" in the context of government control could be more accurately stated as "authority" to reflect singular governance.
- How to improve: To enhance precision, the writer should focus on context and connotation. For example, instead of "the governments should regulate strict control," a more precise phrasing would be "governments should impose strict regulations." Furthermore, reviewing vocabulary choices for their exact meanings and implications can help ensure that the intended message is conveyed clearly.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a good level of spelling accuracy, with only minor errors. For example, the word "toughly" should be corrected to "tightly" to accurately convey the intended meaning of strict control. Additionally, "individuals’ homes" should be written as "individuals’ homes" to reflect proper possessive usage.
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, the writer should proofread the essay carefully, perhaps reading it aloud to catch any errors. Utilizing spell-check tools and maintaining a list of commonly misspelled words can also be beneficial. Regular practice with writing exercises focused on spelling can further enhance this skill.

In summary, while the essay achieves a Band 7 for Lexical Resource, focusing on vocabulary variety, precision, and spelling accuracy will help elevate the overall quality of the writing.

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 good range of sentence structures, including complex sentences and varied clauses. For instance, phrases like "While one school holds that individuals should have the right to use fresh water at will" and "On the one hand, advocates for the idea of using water freely" showcase the use of introductory clauses and contrasting structures effectively. However, there is a tendency to rely on similar sentence patterns, which can make the writing feel somewhat repetitive.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, consider incorporating more varied sentence beginnings and using different types of clauses. For example, using participial phrases or conditional sentences can add complexity. Additionally, practice combining shorter sentences to create more complex structures, which can enhance the overall flow of the essay.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally maintains a good level of grammatical accuracy, but there are some errors that detract from clarity. For instance, the phrase "the governments should regulate strict control over its usage" should be revised to "the government should strictly regulate its usage" for grammatical correctness. Additionally, punctuation issues arise, such as the comma splice in "which manifests itself starkly in the United States, where many private wells are used to supply individuals’ homes with water, they own the right to use water from it as they see fit." This should be split into two sentences or restructured for clarity.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, focus on subject-verb agreement and ensure that modifiers are placed correctly. Regular practice with grammar exercises can help identify common mistakes. For punctuation, review the rules for commas, especially in complex sentences, and consider using tools like grammar checkers to catch errors before finalizing the essay.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of grammatical range and accuracy, enhancing the variety of sentence structures and improving grammatical precision will contribute to achieving a higher band score. Regular practice and revision can significantly aid in this improvement.

Bài sửa mẫu

While one school of thought holds that individuals should have the right to use fresh water as they deem appropriate, others believe that governments should implement stringent regulations over its usage. This essay will thoroughly examine both views before presenting my own opinion.

On the one hand, advocates for the idea of using water freely, without government intervention, argue that water is a natural resource that should be available to everyone at any time. This viewpoint is often based on the assumption that even without restrictions imposed by the government, citizens will still act responsibly and use water wisely. Supporters of this perspective are frequently associated with established freedom, where basic human rights take precedence. This is starkly evident in the United States, where many private wells supply individuals’ homes with water, and they have the right to use water from these sources as they see fit. However, this approach may exacerbate water scarcity and insecurity, contributing to groundwater depletion, as highlighted in numerous studies.

On the other hand, proponents of government control argue that authorities should oversee water usage. Recognizing water as a scarce resource that requires careful management, implementing measures to regulate water use can minimize the risk of resource shortages and environmental degradation. Government regulation can help ensure equitable distribution, conserve water quality, and foster sustainable development.

While both perspectives present valid arguments, I believe that an alternative approach should be considered. This approach would balance individual rights with the need for regulation to address the complex issue of fresh water usage. Individuals should have reasonable access to fresh water resources for their basic needs, while governments must also play a crucial role in overseeing its use.