Some people think that universities should offer places for young students with the highest marks. Some say that universities should offer places for people of any ages even if they do not do well at school. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

University admission achievers is an on going controversy, with some advocating for a focus on the highest achievers, while others argue that opportunities should be provided to those with lower academic marks as well. This essay will explore both viewpoints and ultimately contend that a more inclusive approach to admissions is beneficial for both students and society.

Supporters of the idea that universities should prioritize top-performing students assert that this approach ensures a high standard of education and fosters a competitive atmosphere that drives academic excellence. By admitting only the most capable students, universities can maintain their reputations and advertise their image. From that, universities may have right way to directly invest in the curriculum to maximize the potential inside their highly qualified students. For example, prestigious institutions such as Harvard or Oxford have been well-known to keep up rigorous admission standards, which contributes to their status as world-class universities. They might train them to strive for academic excellence with institutions of such a higher learning that helps their undergraduators be well-equipped.

It is undeniable that university education plays a vital role to student's professional life. Therefore, proponents of a more inclusive admission policy argue that focusing solely on academic performance overlooks the diverse talents and potential that students with lower marks may possess. In that, they maintain factors such as motivation, work ethic and resilience are essential for success in higher education and the workforce, and these qualities may not be reflected in a student's grades. Furthermore, providing opportunities for individuals with lower academic results can promote social mobility and help bridge socio-economic disparities. For instance, affirmative action policies in some countries, such as the United States, aim to level the playing field by considering factors other than academic performance in the admissions process.

In conclusion, while it is understandable that some advocate for universities to accept only students with the highest marks, a more inclusive admissions policy that considers a broader range of abilities and potential is arguably more beneficial by promoting educational equity.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"University admission achievers" -> "University admission applicants"
Explanation: The term "admission achievers" is unclear and awkward. "Admission applicants" is the standard term used in academic contexts, providing clarity and precision.
"on going controversy" -> "ongoing controversy"
Explanation: The correct phrase is "ongoing," which is the adjectival form needed to describe a continuous controversy.
"achievers" -> "students"
Explanation: The term "achievers" is vague and informal; "students" is the appropriate term for discussing university admissions.
"highest achievers" -> "highest-achieving students"
Explanation: "Highest-achieving students" is more specific and academically precise than "highest achievers," which is somewhat ambiguous.
"provided to those with lower academic marks" -> "admitted to those with lower academic grades"
Explanation: "Admitted" is more specific to the context of university admissions, and "grades" is the standard term used in academic settings.
"a more inclusive approach to admissions" -> "a more inclusive admissions policy"
Explanation: "Admissions policy" is a more specific and formal term than "approach to admissions," aligning better with academic language.
"have right way to directly invest" -> "have the right to directly invest"
Explanation: "Have right way to" is grammatically incorrect; "have the right to" is the correct phrase, ensuring grammatical accuracy and clarity.
"maximize the potential inside their highly qualified students" -> "maximize the potential of their highly qualified students"
Explanation: "Inside" is incorrectly used; "of" is the correct preposition for describing the relationship between the university and its students.
"well-equipped" -> "well-prepared"
Explanation: "Well-equipped" typically refers to physical preparation, whereas "well-prepared" is more appropriate for describing students’ academic readiness.
"undeniable" -> "undeniably"
Explanation: "Undeniably" is the adverb form needed to modify the verb "plays," enhancing grammatical correctness.
"plays a vital role to student’s professional life" -> "plays a vital role in students’ professional lives"
Explanation: "To" is incorrectly used; "in" is the correct preposition for describing the role of university education in students’ lives. Also, "students’" is the possessive form needed for plural nouns.
"proponents of a more inclusive admission policy argue that" -> "proponents of a more inclusive admissions policy argue that"
Explanation: "Admissions policy" should be used consistently throughout the essay for consistency and formality.
"factors such as motivation, work ethic and resilience" -> "factors such as motivation, work ethic, and resilience"
Explanation: A comma is needed after "ethic" to separate items in a list, improving readability and grammatical accuracy.
"affirmative action policies" -> "affirmative action initiatives"
Explanation: "Initiatives" is a more precise term in the context of policy implementation, enhancing the academic tone.
"arguably more beneficial" -> "arguably more beneficially"
Explanation: "Beneficially" is the adverb form needed to modify the verb "is," aligning with grammatical rules.

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 university admissions. It presents the viewpoint of those who support prioritizing high-achieving students, citing the benefits of maintaining educational standards and institutional reputation. The essay also discusses the opposing view that emphasizes inclusivity and the potential of students with lower marks, highlighting the importance of qualities like motivation and resilience. This balanced approach demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the prompt.
- How to improve: To enhance the response further, the essay could explicitly reference the prompt’s request for the writer’s own opinion earlier in the discussion. A clearer transition to the author’s stance after presenting both views would strengthen the overall coherence and ensure that the essay fully meets the requirements of the task.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position in favor of a more inclusive admissions policy, which is articulated in the introduction and conclusion. However, the position could be more consistently reinforced throughout the body paragraphs. While the arguments for both sides are well-developed, the author’s opinion could be more explicitly stated and reiterated to enhance clarity.
- How to improve: To improve clarity of position, the author should include a statement of their opinion in each body paragraph, linking back to the main argument. Phrases like "In my view" or "I believe that" can help signal the author’s stance more clearly and consistently.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents and supports ideas well, particularly in discussing the benefits of both admission policies. The use of examples, such as the mention of prestigious institutions and affirmative action policies, adds depth to the arguments. However, some points could be further elaborated to provide more substantial support. For instance, the mention of qualities like motivation and work ethic could be backed with specific examples or studies that demonstrate their impact on success in higher education.
- How to improve: To enhance the support for ideas, the author should aim to include more detailed examples or data that illustrate the points being made. Incorporating statistics, studies, or anecdotes can provide stronger evidence for the claims and make the arguments more persuasive.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, addressing the prompt directly and maintaining relevance throughout. However, there are moments where the discussion could be more tightly focused. For instance, the phrase "they might train them to strive for academic excellence" could be seen as slightly tangential to the main argument about admissions policies.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the author should ensure that every sentence contributes directly to the argument being made. Reviewing each paragraph for relevance and clarity can help eliminate any off-topic statements. Additionally, using topic sentences that clearly relate back to the thesis can help keep the discussion aligned with the main points.

Overall, this essay demonstrates a strong understanding of the task requirements and presents a well-structured argument. With some refinements in clarity of position, elaboration of ideas, and focus, the essay could achieve an even higher score in Task Response.

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 controversy surrounding university admissions. Each viewpoint is discussed in separate paragraphs, which helps in maintaining a logical flow. The first body paragraph effectively presents the argument for prioritizing high achievers, while the second body paragraph counters this with the perspective advocating for inclusivity. The conclusion succinctly summarizes the discussion and reinforces the author’s stance. However, the transition between the two viewpoints could be more explicit to enhance clarity.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using transitional phrases that explicitly indicate the shift from one viewpoint to another. For example, phrases like "On the other hand" or "Conversely" can help signal to the reader that a contrasting argument is being introduced. Additionally, ensuring that each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence can further clarify the main idea being discussed.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which is essential for readability and coherence. Each paragraph has a clear focus, with the first addressing the benefits of admitting high achievers and the second discussing the merits of inclusivity. However, the paragraphs could be enhanced by ensuring that they are not only focused but also balanced in terms of length and depth of discussion.
- How to improve: Aim for a more balanced development of ideas within each paragraph. For instance, the first paragraph could benefit from additional examples or elaboration on how high-achieving students contribute to the academic environment. Similarly, the second paragraph could include specific examples of how inclusive policies have positively impacted individuals or communities. This would not only strengthen the arguments but also provide a more comprehensive discussion.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good use of cohesive devices, such as "therefore," "for example," and "furthermore," which help to connect ideas and maintain the flow of the argument. However, the variety of cohesive devices could be expanded to enhance the overall cohesion of the essay. Some sentences could be more effectively linked to create a smoother reading experience.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, consider incorporating a wider range of linking words and phrases. For instance, using "in addition," "moreover," or "as a result" can help to connect ideas more fluidly. Additionally, varying the placement of cohesive devices within sentences can improve the rhythm and flow of the writing. For example, instead of starting sentences with cohesive devices repeatedly, try integrating them within the sentence structure to create a more natural flow.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates strong coherence and cohesion, there are areas for improvement, particularly in enhancing transitions between ideas, balancing paragraph development, and diversifying cohesive devices. By addressing these aspects, the essay can achieve an even higher level of clarity and sophistication in argumentation.

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, particularly in the context of discussing university admissions. Phrases such as "high standard of education," "competitive atmosphere," and "social mobility" show an ability to articulate complex ideas. However, there are instances where vocabulary could be more varied or sophisticated. For example, the repeated use of "students" and "universities" could be replaced with synonyms or more specific terms to enhance lexical variety.
- How to improve: To improve, consider incorporating a broader range of synonyms and expressions. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "students," you might use "learners," "scholars," or "candidates." Additionally, employing more advanced vocabulary related to education and social issues, such as "academic rigor" or "educational equity," could elevate the essay’s lexical range.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary accurately, but there are moments of imprecision that detract from clarity. For example, the phrase "may have right way to directly invest in the curriculum" is awkward and unclear. The intended meaning seems to be that universities can invest in their curriculum to benefit high-achieving students, but the phrasing does not convey this effectively. Additionally, "undergraduators" is not a standard term and should be replaced with "undergraduates."
- How to improve: Focus on clarity and precision in vocabulary usage. Instead of "may have right way," consider rephrasing to "have the opportunity to strategically invest." Always ensure that terms used are standard and widely accepted in academic writing. Reviewing commonly used academic phrases and their contexts can help in achieving this precision.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains a few spelling errors, such as "achievers" in the title, which should be "achievers’," and "on going," which should be hyphenated as "ongoing." These errors, while minor, can impact the overall impression of the essay and suggest a lack of attention to detail.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, it is advisable to proofread the essay carefully before submission. Utilizing spell-check tools and reading the essay out loud can help catch errors. Additionally, maintaining a list of commonly misspelled words and practicing them can be beneficial for long-term improvement.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid command of vocabulary, but there is room for improvement in variety, precision, and spelling accuracy. By focusing on these areas, the writer can enhance their lexical resource and potentially achieve a higher band score.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 8

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable variety of sentence structures. For instance, complex sentences are effectively utilized, such as "Supporters of the idea that universities should prioritize top-performing students assert that this approach ensures a high standard of education…" This showcases the writer’s ability to convey nuanced ideas. Additionally, the use of conditional structures, as seen in "if they do not do well at school," adds depth to the argument. However, there are instances of awkward phrasing, such as "may have right way to directly invest," which detracts from the overall fluency and coherence.
- How to improve: To further diversify sentence structures, the writer could incorporate more varied sentence openings and use passive voice where appropriate. For example, instead of starting sentences with the subject, the writer could begin with adverbial clauses (e.g., "While some argue for high achievers, others believe…"). Additionally, practicing the use of relative clauses could enhance complexity and fluidity.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally maintains a high level of grammatical accuracy, with only minor errors. For example, the phrase "University admission achievers is an on going controversy" contains a subject-verb agreement error ("achievers" should be singular). Furthermore, the term "on going" should be hyphenated as "ongoing." Punctuation is mostly correct, but there are instances where commas could enhance clarity, such as before "which contributes to their status as world-class universities."
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should pay closer attention to subject-verb agreement and ensure that compound adjectives are correctly formed. Regular practice with grammar exercises focusing on common errors can also be beneficial. Additionally, reviewing punctuation rules, particularly regarding clauses and lists, will help enhance clarity and readability.

Overall, the essay is well-structured and presents a balanced discussion of the topic. By addressing the identified weaknesses and implementing the suggested improvements, the writer can further elevate their grammatical range and accuracy.

Bài sửa mẫu

University admission is an ongoing controversy, with some advocating for a focus on the highest-achieving students, while others argue that opportunities should be provided to those with lower academic marks as well. This essay will explore both viewpoints and ultimately contend that a more inclusive approach to admissions is beneficial for both students and society.

Supporters of the idea that universities should prioritize top-performing students assert that this approach ensures a high standard of education and fosters a competitive atmosphere that drives academic excellence. By admitting only the most capable students, universities can maintain their reputations and enhance their image. From that, universities may have the right to directly invest in the curriculum to maximize the potential of their highly qualified students. For example, prestigious institutions such as Harvard or Oxford are well-known for keeping rigorous admission standards, which contributes to their status as world-class universities. They might train students to strive for academic excellence with institutions of such higher learning that help their undergraduates be well-prepared.

It is undeniable that university education plays a vital role in students’ professional lives. Therefore, proponents of a more inclusive admissions policy argue that focusing solely on academic performance overlooks the diverse talents and potential that students with lower marks may possess. They maintain that factors such as motivation, work ethic, and resilience are essential for success in higher education and the workforce, and these qualities may not be reflected in a student’s grades. Furthermore, providing opportunities for individuals with lower academic results can promote social mobility and help bridge socio-economic disparities. For instance, affirmative action initiatives in some countries, such as the United States, aim to level the playing field by considering factors other than academic performance in the admissions process.