Some people think that the best way to reduce the time spent in traveling to work is to replace parks and gardens close to the city center with apartment b

It is a common belief that replacing parks and gardens close to the city center with apartment building to people easy to travel work and save time. However, there is more persuasive argument that developing public transport helps save more time.

On the one hand, when remove parks and garden, going between buildings wil be easy. Furthermore, buildings more just go in pavement not need transport

Nevertheless, I support the idea that we should develop public transport such as: subway, high speed train helps save more time. Damaging park and garden and replacing by buildings is a waste. First of all, loss park is loss of entertainment and recreation for adults and children. Plus, loss garden it cause pollution environment. For example, according to recent study indicate that people who living in urban areas have to breathe 5 times more dust than people living in suburban areas. Furthermore, broaden public transport help reduce traffic jam. Not only less dust pollution but also helps people move faster everywhere

To sum up, while it is apparent that replacing parks and garden close to the city center with apartment building to people easy to travel work and save time, it is undeniable that developing public transport helps save more time.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"replacing parks and gardens close to the city center with apartment building to people easy to travel work and save time." -> "replacing parks and gardens near the city center with apartment buildings to facilitate easier commutes and time-saving for residents."
Explanation: The original sentence is awkward and unclear. The suggested revision clarifies the intention behind replacing parks and gardens with apartment buildings and uses more formal language.
"there is more persuasive argument" -> "there exists a more compelling argument"
Explanation: "There exists a more compelling argument" is more formal and academically appropriate, enhancing the tone of the essay.
"when remove parks and garden, going between buildings wil be easy." -> "the removal of parks and gardens would simplify navigation between buildings."
Explanation: The original sentence is grammatically incorrect and too informal. The revision corrects these issues and employs a more formal structure.
"buildings more just go in pavement not need transport" -> "this approach emphasizes pedestrian access, reducing the reliance on transportation."
Explanation: The original phrase is unclear and informal. The suggested revision clarifies the meaning and adopts a more formal academic tone.
"Damaging park and garden and replacing by buildings is a waste." -> "The destruction of parks and gardens for the purpose of constructing buildings constitutes a significant loss."
Explanation: The revision provides a clearer and more formal expression of the idea, avoiding the informal term "waste."
"loss park is loss of entertainment and recreation for adults and children." -> "The loss of parks equates to a diminished availability of entertainment and recreational opportunities for both adults and children."
Explanation: The revision corrects grammatical errors and employs a more formal and precise expression.
"loss garden it cause pollution environment." -> "Furthermore, the elimination of gardens contributes to environmental pollution."
Explanation: The original sentence is grammatically incorrect and too informal. The suggested revision corrects these issues and employs more formal language.
"according to recent study indicate" -> "according to a recent study, it is indicated"
Explanation: The revision corrects grammatical errors and enhances the formality of the sentence.
"people who living in urban areas" -> "people living in urban areas"
Explanation: The original phrase contains a grammatical error. The suggested correction streamlines the sentence for clarity and formal tone.
"broaden public transport help reduce traffic jam." -> "the expansion of public transportation systems helps to reduce traffic congestion."
Explanation: The revision clarifies the meaning, corrects grammatical errors, and uses more precise and formal language.
"Not only less dust pollution but also helps people move faster everywhere" -> "This not only reduces dust pollution but also facilitates more efficient movement throughout the area."
Explanation: The original sentence is awkward and informal. The suggested revision corrects these issues and adopts a more formal academic tone.
"while it is apparent that replacing parks and garden close to the city center with apartment building to people easy to travel work and save time, it is undeniable that developing public transport helps save more time." -> "Although it may seem beneficial to replace parks and gardens near the city center with apartment buildings to ease commutes and save time, it is incontrovertible that the development of public transportation systems offers greater time-saving advantages."
Explanation: The original sentence is awkward and contains grammatical errors. The suggested revision clarifies the argument and employs a more formal and precise expression.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Task Response: 6 – UNDER WORD

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay partially addresses the prompt by discussing the idea of reducing travel time to work but fails to fully engage with the suggestion of replacing parks and gardens with apartment buildings. While it acknowledges the proposed solution, the focus shifts quickly to advocating for the development of public transport.
- How to improve: To improve, ensure that all parts of the prompt are thoroughly addressed. In this case, a more balanced discussion of both options (replacing parks with apartment buildings and improving public transport) would be beneficial. Providing examples and counterarguments for each option can enhance the depth of analysis.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position in favor of developing public transport throughout the response. However, the initial acknowledgment of the opposing viewpoint regarding replacing parks with apartment buildings lacks clarity.
- How to improve: To enhance clarity, clearly articulate the stance on both options from the outset and maintain consistency throughout the essay. This can be achieved by explicitly stating the position and supporting it with relevant arguments and evidence.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas but lacks sufficient development and support. While it briefly mentions the benefits of removing parks and gardens for easier travel and the advantages of public transport development, it lacks depth and elaboration.
- How to improve: To strengthen the essay, extend each idea by providing more detailed explanations, examples, and evidence. For instance, expanding on how public transport development reduces traffic congestion and pollution could bolster the argument.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay mostly stays on topic by discussing methods to reduce travel time to work, albeit with a shift towards advocating for public transport development. However, there are minor instances of deviation, such as the brief mention of pollution caused by loss of gardens.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, ensure that all points directly relate to the central theme of reducing travel time to work. Limit tangential discussions and prioritize relevance to the topic.

Overall, while the essay presents some relevant points and maintains coherence, there is room for improvement in addressing all parts of the prompt, maintaining clarity and consistency of position, extending ideas with adequate support, and staying strictly on topic. By implementing these suggestions, the essay can enhance its effectiveness and achieve a higher band score.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates some logical organization by presenting two contrasting viewpoints on the issue of reducing travel time. However, the transitions between these viewpoints could be smoother, and the development of each argument lacks depth and clarity. For instance, the essay begins by acknowledging the common belief of replacing parks and gardens with apartment buildings but then abruptly shifts to advocating for the development of public transport without adequately elaborating on the reasons for this shift.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, it would be beneficial to establish a clear structure from the outset. This can be achieved by introducing the main arguments in the introduction and then dedicating separate body paragraphs to each viewpoint, providing ample explanation and examples to support each argument. Additionally, using transition words and phrases (e.g., "on the one hand," "however," "nevertheless," "to sum up") can help signal shifts between ideas and improve coherence.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to use paragraphs, but their structure and effectiveness are limited. Each paragraph focuses on a different aspect of the argument, but the development within each paragraph is minimal. For instance, the second paragraph discusses the ease of travel between buildings but lacks elaboration and supporting details. Similarly, the third paragraph briefly mentions the advantages of developing public transport without providing concrete examples or explanations.
- How to improve: To improve paragraphing, it is essential to ensure that each paragraph has a clear topic sentence that introduces the main idea. Subsequent sentences should then provide supporting evidence, examples, and analysis to develop that idea further. In this essay, each paragraph could be expanded by providing specific examples, statistics, or anecdotes to strengthen the arguments and engage the reader more effectively.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay makes limited use of cohesive devices to connect ideas and create coherence. While some transition words and phrases are used (e.g., "however," "nevertheless," "to sum up"), their placement and usage are inconsistent. Additionally, there is a lack of cohesive devices within paragraphs, leading to disjointed and choppy writing.
- How to improve: To enhance cohesion, strive to use a wider range of cohesive devices throughout the essay, such as conjunctions (e.g., "furthermore," "in addition," "on the other hand"), pronouns (e.g., "this," "these," "such"), and transitional expressions (e.g., "as a result," "consequently," "therefore"). Focus on using these devices not only to connect sentences but also to establish logical relationships between ideas within paragraphs. Practice varying the placement and type of cohesive devices to create a smoother flow of ideas and improve overall coherence.

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 moderate range of vocabulary. There is evidence of some attempt to use varied vocabulary, such as "persuasive argument," "entertainment and recreation," and "breathe 5 times more dust." However, there is a lack of consistency in lexical choices, and some phrases are awkwardly constructed, affecting clarity and coherence.
- How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource, strive for more consistent and precise vocabulary usage throughout the essay. Instead of relying on basic vocabulary like "easy," "loss," and "helps," aim to incorporate a broader array of synonyms and idiomatic expressions. For instance, replacing "easy" with alternatives like "convenient" or "effortless" would enrich the vocabulary. Additionally, pay attention to collocations and word combinations to ensure natural language flow.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay occasionally employs vocabulary with precision, as seen in phrases like "developing public transport" and "entertainment and recreation." However, there are instances of imprecise word choices that detract from the overall clarity and effectiveness of communication. For instance, the phrase "going between buildings wil be easy" lacks specificity and could be improved for clearer articulation of ideas.
- How to improve: Focus on selecting vocabulary that accurately conveys the intended meaning. Avoid vague or ambiguous terms, and opt for more precise language whenever possible. In the case of the aforementioned phrase, consider replacing "easy" with a more specific descriptor such as "convenient" or "efficient." Additionally, proofread the essay carefully to identify and rectify any instances of imprecise vocabulary usage.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: Spelling accuracy in the essay is generally acceptable, with only minor errors observed. Examples such as "wil" instead of "will" and "Damaging park and garden" should be addressed for improvement.
- How to improve: Enhancing spelling accuracy can be achieved through consistent practice and attention to detail. It is recommended to proofread the essay thoroughly before submission to catch and correct any spelling errors. Additionally, utilizing spell-checking tools and seeking feedback from peers or educators can further aid in improving spelling proficiency. By developing a habit of meticulous proofreading and employing available resources, the writer can minimize spelling mistakes and enhance the overall quality of written work.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 6

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates some variety in sentence structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. For instance, simple sentences like "However, there is more persuasive argument that developing public transport helps save more time" are used alongside compound sentences such as "Not only less dust pollution but also helps people move faster everywhere." However, there is room for improvement in the variety and complexity of sentence structures.
- How to improve: To enhance the range of structures, consider incorporating more complex sentence structures, such as those with subordinate clauses or participial phrases. For example, instead of relying solely on simple sentences, try integrating sentences with introductory phrases or clauses to add depth and sophistication to the essay.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: Overall, the essay demonstrates a moderate level of grammatical accuracy. However, there are several instances of grammatical errors throughout the text. For instance, there are errors in subject-verb agreement ("when remove parks and garden") and article usage ("First of all, loss park is loss of entertainment"). Additionally, there are punctuation errors, such as missing commas in compound sentences ("Furthermore, buildings more just go in pavement not need transport").
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, pay close attention to subject-verb agreement and article usage. Proofreading the essay carefully can help identify and correct such errors. Additionally, practice using punctuation marks correctly, particularly commas in compound sentences. Reviewing grammar rules and seeking feedback on written work can also aid in improving grammatical accuracy.

Bài sửa mẫu

It is often suggested that replacing parks and gardens near the city center with apartment buildings would make commuting to work easier and save time for people. However, there exists a more compelling argument that developing public transportation systems is a better solution for time-saving.

On one hand, the removal of parks and gardens would simplify navigation between buildings. Moreover, this approach emphasizes pedestrian access, reducing the reliance on transportation.

Nevertheless, I support the idea that we should develop public transport such as subways and high-speed trains to save more time. The destruction of parks and gardens for the purpose of constructing buildings constitutes a significant loss. Firstly, the loss of parks equates to a diminished availability of entertainment and recreational opportunities for both adults and children. Furthermore, the elimination of gardens contributes to environmental pollution. For example, according to a recent study, it is indicated that people living in urban areas have to breathe five times more dust than people living in suburban areas. Additionally, the expansion of public transportation systems helps to reduce traffic congestion. This not only reduces dust pollution but also facilitates more efficient movement throughout the area.

To sum up, although it may seem beneficial to replace parks and gardens near the city center with apartment buildings to ease commutes and save time, it is incontrovertible that the development of public transportation systems offers greater time-saving advantages.