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

It is true that individuals should be given the right to utilise freshwater as they want, while others argue that the authorities and governments should implement strict forces in controlling human’s use of freshwater. From my point of view, I believe that it is crucial for governments to balance the use of freshwater among nationals without the restriction of this.

On the one hand, those who emphasise the principle of individual freedom in accessing freshwater. This is because water is a human's basic necessitate, they can use the amount of water as they like for activities such as agriculture, domestic purposes or leisure activities. They also mention that in some regions where there is an abundance of freshwater, the restricted water law is unnecessary and can lead to inconvenience and ineffeciencies. For example, farmers in water-rich areas might face unnecessary challenges in irritation, impacting agricultural productivity.

On the other hand, others advocate that the governments should introduce strict laws in using freshwater resources. Because nowadays, in many countries, the amount of freshwater has become limited due to climate change and the human’s overuse of freshwater. For example, because of global warming and melting polar ice, sea levels have been rising which exacerbated delta’s freshwater aquifers. Therefore, following this view, this way can allow individuals to ensure their freshwater in daily life and have enough freshwater for all regions in the world.

In my opinion, although the benefits of introducing strict forces in using freshwater are understandable, I believe that it should not be completely restricted. It is crucial for the goverments and authorities to balance individual freedom with the need of freshwater management by propagating the importance of freshwater and the significant freshwater shortages in many countries around the world and proposing some days in a month or year when strict control of freshwater is implemented. By this way, individuals would have awareness of using economical freshwater and protect their freshwater in daily life.

In conclusion, while the perspective of unrestricted access to freshwater appeals to many advocates, others support the idea of the tough control of authorities in using freshwater. However, I believe that the most effective solution is that the government should regulate water use and ensuring sustainablity while respecting the individual’s basic needs.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"utilise freshwater as they want" -> "utilize freshwater as they see fit"
Explanation: "As they see fit" is a more formal and precise phrase that conveys the idea of individual freedom in a more academic tone.
"strict forces in controlling" -> "stringent measures to control"
Explanation: "Stringent measures" is a more precise and formal term than "strict forces," which is vague and less commonly used in formal writing.
"human’s use of freshwater" -> "human use of freshwater"
Explanation: Removing the possessive form "human’s" corrects the grammatical error and maintains the formal tone.
"balance the use of freshwater among nationals" -> "balance the use of freshwater among citizens"
Explanation: "Citizens" is a more specific and formal term than "nationals," which is less commonly used in this context.
"without the restriction of this" -> "without imposing restrictions"
Explanation: "Without imposing restrictions" is clearer and more direct, avoiding the vague and awkward phrasing of "without the restriction of this."
"basic necessitate" -> "basic necessity"
Explanation: "Necessity" is the correct noun form, not "necessitate," which is a verb.
"as they like" -> "as they deem appropriate"
Explanation: "As they deem appropriate" is more formal and precise than "as they like," which is too informal for academic writing.
"irritation" -> "irritation" (typo correction)
Explanation: Corrects a typo to maintain accuracy.
"ineffeciencies" -> "inefficiencies"
Explanation: Corrects a spelling error to maintain professionalism.
"introduce strict laws in using" -> "enact strict laws regarding the use of"
Explanation: "Enact" is more precise and formal than "introduce," and "regarding the use of" clarifies the subject matter.
"Because nowadays, in many countries, the amount of freshwater has become limited" -> "Given the current scarcity of freshwater in many countries"
Explanation: "Given the current scarcity" is a more formal and concise way to introduce the reason, avoiding the informal "because nowadays."
"human’s overuse of freshwater" -> "human overuse of freshwater"
Explanation: Similar to earlier, removing the possessive form corrects the grammar and maintains formality.
"propagating the importance of freshwater" -> "emphasizing the importance of freshwater"
Explanation: "Emphasizing" is a more precise verb than "propagating," which is less commonly used in this context.
"proposing some days in a month or year" -> "designating specific days each month or year"
Explanation: "Designating specific days" is more precise and formal than "proposing some days," which is vague and informal.
"using economical freshwater" -> "using freshwater efficiently"
Explanation: "Efficiently" is the correct adverb to describe the manner of using freshwater, not "economical," which is incorrectly used here.
"ensuring sustainablity" -> "ensuring sustainability"
Explanation: Corrects a typographical error and maintains the formal tone.
"respecting the individual’s basic needs" -> "respecting the basic needs of individuals"
Explanation: "Respecting the basic needs of individuals" is grammatically correct and more formal than "respecting the individual’s basic needs."

These changes enhance the academic tone and precision of the essay, aligning it with formal writing standards.

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 views regarding the use of freshwater. The first part discusses the argument for individual freedom in using water, highlighting the basic necessity of water and the potential inefficiencies of strict regulations, particularly in water-rich areas. The second part presents the opposing view, emphasizing the need for government control due to the scarcity of freshwater exacerbated by climate change. The essay concludes with a personal opinion that advocates for a balanced approach. However, the argument could benefit from a more explicit acknowledgment of the implications of each viewpoint.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer could provide more specific examples or statistics to illustrate the consequences of unrestricted water use and the effectiveness of government regulations. Additionally, a clearer distinction between the two views in the conclusion would strengthen the overall argument.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position that supports a balanced approach to freshwater management. The writer states their belief early on and reiterates this stance throughout the essay. However, the phrasing in some areas, such as "without the restriction of this," could be clearer. The position is somewhat diluted by the complexity of the argument, which may confuse readers about the writer’s ultimate stance.
- How to improve: To improve clarity, the writer should ensure that their position is consistently articulated in straightforward language. Using clear transitional phrases to reinforce their viewpoint throughout the essay can help maintain focus and coherence.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a variety of ideas related to both perspectives on water use. It effectively extends these ideas with examples, such as the impact of regulations on farmers in water-rich areas and the consequences of climate change on freshwater availability. However, some points could be elaborated further. For instance, the mention of "tough control" lacks specific details on what such controls might entail.
- How to improve: To enhance the development of ideas, the writer should aim to provide more detailed examples and explanations. This could include specific policies that governments might implement or case studies of regions where water management has been successful or problematic.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay largely stays on topic, discussing both views and the writer’s opinion on freshwater use. However, there are moments where the argument could stray slightly, such as when discussing the "significant freshwater shortages" without directly tying it back to the implications for individual rights or government control.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that every point made directly relates back to the central question of whether individuals should have unrestricted access to freshwater or if it should be controlled by the government. Regularly referencing the prompt throughout the essay can help keep the discussion relevant.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong understanding of the topic and effectively communicates the writer’s views. By refining clarity, providing more detailed examples, and maintaining a tighter focus on the prompt, the essay could achieve an even higher 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 introduction effectively sets up the debate, while each body paragraph addresses one side of the argument. However, the logical flow could be improved; for instance, the transition between the two body paragraphs could be smoother to enhance the overall coherence. The mention of specific examples, such as farmers in water-rich areas, supports the arguments but could be better integrated into the discussion to maintain a logical progression.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using transitional phrases at the beginning of each paragraph to signal shifts in perspective. Additionally, ensure that each example directly supports the main point of the paragraph. For example, when discussing the need for government control, explicitly connect the example of climate change to the argument about resource scarcity.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which is essential for clarity. Each paragraph focuses on a distinct viewpoint, which helps the reader follow the argument. However, the second body paragraph could benefit from clearer topic sentences that directly relate to the main argument of that paragraph. The conclusion summarizes the main points but could be more concise and directly tied back to the arguments presented.
- How to improve: Strengthen paragraph structure by starting each body paragraph with a clear topic sentence that encapsulates the main idea. For example, in the second body paragraph, a sentence like "Proponents of government regulation argue that strict laws are necessary due to the increasing scarcity of freshwater" would provide a clearer focus. Additionally, ensure that the conclusion succinctly reiterates the main arguments without introducing new ideas.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "On the one hand" and "On the other hand," which help to differentiate between the two viewpoints. However, the use of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and there are instances where the connections between ideas could be more explicit. For example, phrases like "For example" are used, but there could be more variety in the types of cohesive devices employed to enhance the flow of ideas.
- How to improve: To diversify cohesive devices, incorporate a wider range of linking words and phrases. For instance, use "Furthermore," "In addition," or "Conversely" to connect ideas within and between paragraphs. Additionally, consider using pronouns or synonyms to avoid repetition and create smoother transitions. For example, instead of repeatedly using "freshwater," you could refer to it as "this resource" or "water supply" in subsequent mentions.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents a balanced view, focusing on enhancing logical flow, refining paragraph structure, and diversifying cohesive devices will help elevate the coherence and cohesion to a higher level.

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 like "utilise," "necessitate," "abundance," and "exacerbated." However, there are instances where the vocabulary is somewhat repetitive or lacks variation, such as the repeated use of "freshwater" and "governments." This limits the overall lexical richness of the essay.
- How to improve: To enhance lexical variety, the writer could use synonyms or related terms. For example, instead of repeatedly using "freshwater," alternatives like "water resources," "potable water," or "aquatic resources" could be employed. Additionally, varying the phrases used to describe government actions (e.g., "implement regulations," "enforce laws," "establish guidelines") would contribute to a more dynamic vocabulary.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: There are several instances of imprecise vocabulary usage. For example, the phrase "strict forces in controlling human’s use of freshwater" is awkward and unclear. The term "necessitate" is also misused; it should be "necessity." Furthermore, "irritation" is likely a typographical error for "irrigation," which changes the intended meaning significantly.
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should ensure that vocabulary is used in its correct context. A careful proofreading process can help catch typographical errors and misused words. Additionally, using a thesaurus to find more accurate terms can enhance clarity. For example, replacing "strict forces" with "strict regulations" would convey the intended meaning more effectively.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors, such as "ineffeciencies" (should be "inefficiencies"), "goverments" (should be "governments"), and "sustainablity" (should be "sustainability"). These errors detract from the overall professionalism of the writing.
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, the writer should engage in regular spelling practice and utilize tools such as spell checkers or grammar-checking software. Additionally, reading the essay aloud can help identify errors that may be overlooked during silent reading. Keeping a list of commonly misspelled words and reviewing them before writing can also be beneficial.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a foundational understanding of lexical resource, there is significant room for improvement in vocabulary range, precision, and spelling accuracy. By focusing on these areas, the writer can enhance their lexical resource and potentially achieve a higher band 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 good variety of sentence structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. For instance, the use of complex sentences is evident in phrases such as "although the benefits of introducing strict forces in using freshwater are understandable," which effectively conveys nuanced ideas. However, there are instances of repetitive sentence beginnings and a lack of more sophisticated structures, such as varied subordinate clauses or conditional sentences.
- How to improve: To enhance the range of structures, the writer could incorporate more conditional sentences (e.g., "If individuals are allowed unrestricted access to freshwater, then…") and more varied introductory phrases (e.g., "In addition to this," "Furthermore," "Conversely"). Additionally, experimenting with inversion for emphasis (e.g., "Never before have we seen such a scarcity of freshwater") could add sophistication to the writing.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a generally good command of grammar, but there are notable errors that detract from clarity and professionalism. For example, phrases like "implement strict forces in controlling human’s use of freshwater" are awkwardly constructed; "forces" should be replaced with "measures" or "regulations." The use of punctuation is mostly correct, but there are missing commas that could enhance readability, such as before "while" in the first sentence. Additionally, there are grammatical inaccuracies, such as "human’s basic necessitate," where "necessitate" should be "necessity."
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should review subject-verb agreement and ensure that possessive forms are used correctly. Regular practice with grammar exercises focusing on common errors, such as article usage and noun forms, would be beneficial. Furthermore, proofreading for punctuation errors, especially in complex sentences, can help clarify meaning and improve overall coherence.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a commendable level of grammatical range and accuracy, there are specific areas for improvement. By diversifying sentence structures and enhancing grammatical precision, the writer can aim for a higher band score in future essays.

Bài sửa mẫu

It is true that individuals should be given the right to utilize freshwater as they see fit, while others argue that authorities and governments should enact stringent measures to control human use of freshwater. From my point of view, I believe that it is crucial for governments to balance the use of freshwater among citizens without imposing restrictions.

On the one hand, those who emphasize the principle of individual freedom in accessing freshwater argue that water is a basic necessity for humans. They believe that individuals should be able to use the amount of water they deem appropriate for activities such as agriculture, domestic purposes, or leisure. They also mention that in some regions where there is an abundance of freshwater, strict regulations can be unnecessary and may lead to irritation and inefficiencies. For example, farmers in water-rich areas might face unnecessary challenges, impacting agricultural productivity.

On the other hand, others advocate that governments should introduce strict laws regarding the use of freshwater resources. Given the current scarcity of freshwater in many countries, this perspective is increasingly relevant. Climate change and human overuse of freshwater have contributed to this issue. For instance, global warming and melting polar ice have caused rising sea levels, which exacerbate the depletion of freshwater aquifers in delta regions. Therefore, proponents of this view argue that such measures can ensure that individuals have adequate access to freshwater in their daily lives and that all regions of the world can meet their freshwater needs.

In my opinion, although the benefits of implementing strict controls on freshwater use are understandable, I believe that it should not be completely restricted. It is crucial for governments and authorities to balance individual freedom with the need for effective freshwater management by emphasizing the importance of freshwater and the significant shortages many countries face. They could propose designating specific days each month or year when stringent controls on freshwater use are enacted. This approach would raise awareness about using freshwater efficiently and encourage individuals to protect this vital resource in their daily lives.

In conclusion, while the perspective of unrestricted access to freshwater appeals to many advocates, others support the idea of tough control by authorities over its use. However, I believe that the most effective solution is for governments to regulate water use while ensuring sustainability and respecting the basic needs of individuals.