Some people think the government should pay for health care and education, but others believe it is not the government’s responsibility. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Opinions vary regarding whether authorities are responsible for the investment into medical and educational fields or not. While acknowledging the reasons why governmental officials should pay for those fields, I firmly believe that allocating funding to these fields is not the government’s responsibility.
Admittedly, proponents of the view that paying for health care and pedagogical functions is the responsibility of government might argue that these sections entail a substantial amount of money. This seems plausible as medical requirements include many professional machines and equipment such as PCI systems to maintain the residents’ health. These machines are manufactured through advanced technology and feature elaborate settings, thus leading to the exorbitant cost for production and improvement. However, this line of reasoning fails to consider the unity and cooperation of society. Specifically, an individual may not be purchase necessary equipment; Nonetheless, a community can afford. In other words, governments can deploy the taxes to invest, rather than using the national budget.
Of course, those championing the notion that the regulatory bodies are assigned with the obligation to devote money into medical care and education also emphasize that sustaining and enhancing the quality of life for residents is the obvious accountability of states. This may be because it lays the sustainable foundation for authorities to attain trust from residents, hence creating a good society. Nonetheless, this perspective overlooks the fact that maintaining a stable and civilized life is the shared duty of all citizens and they also have high awareness of what governments should be in charge of. As a result, it is not crucial for governmental officials doing that to maintain a good community. Moreover, there are many other factors including the economy and environment for the sustainability of the civilization. This is the testament to why paying for the medication and pedagogy is not necessarily the responsibility of governments.
In conclusion, although there are some reasonable rationales for why governments are under the responsibility of paying for medication and education, I assert that they are not necessarily accountable to these fields because of the capability of entire citizens to purchase essential equipment and the need focus to focus on other areas.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"Opinions vary regarding whether authorities are responsible for the investment into medical and educational fields or not." -> "Opinions differ regarding whether authorities are responsible for investing in medical and educational fields or not."
Explanation: Replacing "investment into" with "investing in" corrects the preposition usage, making the phrase more grammatically correct and formal.
"I firmly believe that allocating funding to these fields is not the government’s responsibility." -> "I firmly believe that allocating funding to these fields is not the responsibility of the government."
Explanation: Adding "of the" before "government" clarifies the possessive form, enhancing the sentence’s grammatical accuracy and formality.
"paying for health care and pedagogical functions" -> "funding healthcare and educational services"
Explanation: "Funding" is more precise and formal than "paying for," and "educational services" is a more specific term than "pedagogical functions."
"This seems plausible as medical requirements include many professional machines and equipment such as PCI systems" -> "This appears plausible, as medical requirements involve numerous professional machines and equipment, including PCI systems"
Explanation: "Appears plausible" is a more formal expression than "seems plausible," and "involve" is more precise than "include" in this context.
"These machines are manufactured through advanced technology and feature elaborate settings, thus leading to the exorbitant cost for production and improvement." -> "These machines, manufactured using advanced technology and featuring elaborate settings, incur exorbitant production and improvement costs."
Explanation: This revision clarifies the sentence structure and uses more precise language, improving readability and formality.
"an individual may not be purchase necessary equipment" -> "an individual may not purchase necessary equipment"
Explanation: Correcting the verb "be" to "purchase" fixes a grammatical error and enhances the sentence’s clarity.
"a community can afford" -> "a community can afford to purchase"
Explanation: Adding "to purchase" clarifies the meaning and provides a more formal tone.
"deploy the taxes to invest" -> "utilize tax revenue to invest"
Explanation: "Utilize tax revenue" is more precise and formal than "deploy the taxes," aligning better with academic style.
"the obvious accountability of states" -> "the obvious responsibility of governments"
Explanation: "Responsibility" is more specific and appropriate in this context than "accountability," and "governments" is more accurate than "states."
"it lays the sustainable foundation for authorities to attain trust from residents" -> "it establishes a sustainable foundation for authorities to earn the trust of residents"
Explanation: "Establishes" is more formal than "lays," and "earn the trust of" is a more precise and formal expression.
"they also have high awareness of what governments should be in charge of" -> "they also possess a high awareness of what governments should be responsible for"
Explanation: "Possess a high awareness" is more formal and precise than "have high awareness," and "responsible for" is more appropriate than "in charge of."
"it is not crucial for governmental officials doing that to maintain a good community" -> "it is not essential for governmental officials to focus on maintaining a good community"
Explanation: "Essential" is more formal than "crucial," and rephrasing "doing that" to "to focus on" clarifies the meaning and improves formality.
"the need focus to focus on other areas" -> "the need to focus on other areas"
Explanation: Removing the redundant "to" corrects the grammatical structure, enhancing clarity and formality.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Task Response: 7

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses both sides of the argument regarding whether the government should fund healthcare and education. The writer presents the viewpoint that the government has a responsibility to invest in these areas, acknowledging the financial implications and societal benefits. However, the essay leans more towards the author’s opinion that it is not the government’s responsibility, which is clearly stated. The discussion of both perspectives is somewhat balanced, but the depth of analysis for the opposing view could be improved.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the author should aim to provide a more thorough exploration of the arguments for government funding. This could include more specific examples or statistics that illustrate the benefits of government involvement in healthcare and education, thereby providing a more rounded discussion.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position that the government should not be responsible for funding healthcare and education. This stance is articulated in the introduction and reiterated in the conclusion. However, the argument could be more consistently reinforced throughout the body paragraphs. Some sentences, particularly in the discussion of the opposing view, could create ambiguity about the author’s stance.
- How to improve: To strengthen the clarity of the position, the author should consistently link back to their main argument after discussing the opposing view. Phrases like "While this is a valid point, it ultimately supports my argument that…" can help maintain a clear stance throughout the essay.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas supporting the author’s viewpoint, such as the community’s ability to fund healthcare collectively and the shared responsibility of citizens. However, the development of these ideas lacks depth. For instance, the mention of "advanced technology" in medical equipment is vague and could benefit from specific examples or elaboration on how this impacts funding.
- How to improve: The author should aim to provide more detailed explanations and examples to support their claims. This could involve discussing specific case studies or data that illustrate the effectiveness of community-funded healthcare or education systems, thereby extending the ideas presented.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the responsibilities of government versus individuals in funding healthcare and education. However, some sections introduce ideas that could be seen as tangential, such as the mention of "the economy and environment for the sustainability of civilization," which may distract from the main argument.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the author should ensure that every point made directly relates back to the central question of government responsibility. It may be helpful to outline the essay before writing to ensure that all points directly support the main argument and are relevant to the prompt.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the task and presents a coherent argument. With improvements in depth of analysis, clarity of position, and relevance of supporting ideas, the essay could achieve a higher band 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, beginning with an introduction that outlines the topic and the writer’s stance. Each paragraph addresses a specific viewpoint, with the first two paragraphs discussing the arguments in favor of government responsibility for healthcare and education. The final paragraph effectively summarizes the writer’s opinion. However, the logical flow between ideas could be improved. For instance, the transition from discussing the costs of healthcare to the idea of community responsibility feels abrupt and could benefit from clearer connections.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using clearer topic sentences that directly relate to the main argument of each paragraph. Additionally, employing transitional phrases such as "On the other hand," or "Conversely," can help guide the reader through the shifts in perspective more smoothly.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs effectively to separate different ideas, which is a strength. Each paragraph contains a distinct argument, and the conclusion succinctly wraps up the discussion. However, some paragraphs could be more balanced in length and content. For example, the second paragraph is quite dense and could be split into two to allow for a more thorough exploration of each point.
- How to improve: Aim for a more balanced distribution of ideas across paragraphs. Each paragraph should ideally contain a single main idea supported by examples or explanations. This can be achieved by breaking down complex arguments into smaller, more digestible parts, ensuring that each paragraph is focused and concise.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a reasonable use of cohesive devices, such as "however," "of course," and "in other words," which help to connect ideas. Nevertheless, the range of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and the essay occasionally relies on similar phrases, which can make the writing feel repetitive. For instance, the use of "nonetheless" and "however" appears multiple times without much variation.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, consider incorporating a wider range of linking words and phrases. For example, using "furthermore," "in addition," or "consequently" can help to create a more dynamic flow. Additionally, varying sentence structures can enhance cohesion; for instance, combining shorter sentences into more complex ones can improve the overall readability and coherence of the essay.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents coherent arguments, improvements in logical organization, paragraph structure, and the use of cohesive devices could elevate the overall quality and clarity of the writing.

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, with terms like "investment," "exorbitant," "sustaining," and "pedagogical functions" showcasing a good level of sophistication. However, there are instances where the vocabulary could be more varied or nuanced. For example, the repeated use of "government" and "responsibility" could be replaced with synonyms or paraphrased to enhance lexical diversity.
- How to improve: To improve, the writer should aim to incorporate a broader range of synonyms and related terms. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "government," alternatives like "authorities," "state," or "regulatory bodies" can be utilized. Additionally, varying phrases such as "financial obligation" or "fiscal responsibility" could replace "responsibility" to enrich the vocabulary.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains some precise vocabulary, such as "advanced technology" and "substantial amount of money." However, there are instances of imprecise usage that could lead to confusion. For example, the phrase "the unity and cooperation of society" is somewhat vague in this context and could benefit from clearer articulation. Additionally, the phrase "the capability of entire citizens to purchase essential equipment" could be interpreted differently, as it implies that all citizens have equal financial capability, which may not be the case.
- How to improve: To enhance precision, the writer should focus on clarifying ambiguous phrases. For example, instead of saying "the unity and cooperation of society," the writer could specify how collective funding or community initiatives can support healthcare and education. Furthermore, avoiding generalizations about citizens’ capabilities would improve clarity; instead, the writer could discuss varying socioeconomic statuses and their implications.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The spelling throughout the essay is largely accurate, with only minor errors present. For instance, "pedagogical" is correctly spelled, but the phrase "Nonetheless, a community can afford" should be "Nonetheless, a community can afford it," which indicates a slight grammatical oversight rather than a spelling issue.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should engage in regular proofreading practices. Utilizing tools like spell checkers or reading the essay aloud can help catch minor errors. Additionally, familiarizing oneself with commonly misspelled words in academic writing can further bolster spelling proficiency.

In summary, while the essay achieves a Band 7 for Lexical Resource, there are clear areas for improvement in vocabulary range, precision, and spelling accuracy. By incorporating a wider variety of terms, clarifying ambiguous phrases, and maintaining careful proofreading, the writer can enhance their lexical resource further and potentially achieve a higher band score.

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 complex and compound sentences. For instance, the use of phrases like "while acknowledging the reasons why governmental officials should pay for those fields" and "this line of reasoning fails to consider the unity and cooperation of society" showcases the ability to construct nuanced sentences. However, there are instances of awkward phrasing and unclear structures, such as "an individual may not be purchase necessary equipment; Nonetheless, a community can afford," which detracts from clarity and fluidity.
- How to improve: To enhance the variety and effectiveness of sentence structures, the writer could incorporate more varied introductory phrases and transition words to improve coherence. Additionally, revising awkward constructions for clarity, such as changing "an individual may not be purchase necessary equipment" to "an individual may not be able to purchase necessary equipment," would strengthen the overall readability.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues that affect its overall quality. For example, the phrase "the regulatory bodies are assigned with the obligation to devote money into medical care and education" could be more accurately expressed as "the regulatory bodies are obligated to devote money to medical care and education." Additionally, the use of a semicolon in "an individual may not be purchase necessary equipment; Nonetheless, a community can afford" is incorrect; it should be a comma instead, as "nonetheless" does not begin a new independent clause. There are also instances of missing articles and awkward word choices, such as "the capability of entire citizens" which would be clearer as "the capability of all citizens."
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on proofreading for common errors, particularly in verb forms and article usage. Practicing sentence restructuring and reviewing punctuation rules, especially regarding the use of commas and semicolons, will also be beneficial. Engaging in exercises that focus on these areas can help solidify understanding and application in future essays.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid command of grammatical range and accuracy, addressing the identified weaknesses will enhance clarity and coherence, potentially raising the band score in this criterion.

Bài sửa mẫu

Opinions vary regarding whether authorities are responsible for investing in medical and educational fields or not. While acknowledging the reasons why governmental officials should pay for these fields, I firmly believe that allocating funding to them is not the government’s responsibility.

Admittedly, proponents of the view that paying for health care and educational functions is the responsibility of the government might argue that these sectors entail a substantial amount of money. This seems plausible, as medical requirements include many professional machines and equipment, such as PCI systems, to maintain the residents’ health. These machines are manufactured using advanced technology and feature elaborate settings, thus leading to exorbitant production and improvement costs. However, this line of reasoning fails to consider the unity and cooperation of society. Specifically, an individual may not be able to purchase necessary equipment; nonetheless, a community can afford it. In other words, governments can utilize tax revenue to invest, rather than relying solely on the national budget.

Of course, those championing the notion that regulatory bodies are assigned the obligation to devote money to medical care and education also emphasize that sustaining and enhancing the quality of life for residents is the obvious responsibility of states. This may be because it establishes a sustainable foundation for authorities to earn the trust of residents, hence creating a good society. Nonetheless, this perspective overlooks the fact that maintaining a stable and civilized life is the shared duty of all citizens, and they also possess a high awareness of what governments should be responsible for. As a result, it is not crucial for governmental officials to focus solely on maintaining a good community. Moreover, there are many other factors, including the economy and environment, that contribute to the sustainability of civilization. This is a testament to why funding for healthcare and education is not necessarily the responsibility of governments.

In conclusion, although there are some reasonable arguments for why governments should be responsible for funding healthcare and education, I assert that they are not necessarily accountable for these fields due to the capability of all citizens to purchase essential equipment and the need to focus on other areas.