Some people want governments to spend money looking for life on other planets. Others, however, many people think this is a waste of public money when there are so many problems on earth. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Allocation to explore extraterrestrial life is considered as a squandering activity despite some support. While there are some essential benefits, I would argue that it would be better to use the public budget for social development.
On the one hand, some believe supporting the ideas of seeking for life beyond earth could be because of the environment degradation. Since life on the earth might no longer be suitable for human beings, it is necessary to discover whether it is possible to establish new human settlements there. Additionally, the Earth's resources have been nearly depleted. Therefore, it is certainly hopeful that new resources could be found on other planets, namely fossil fuels, metal and substances, and especially water. By searching for extraterrestrial life, there would be sufficient resources to serve the increasing demands of the human population.
In a sharp contrast, I would argue that because of numerous reasons from available problems on the Earth that such an idea has received little support from the masses. First and foremost, life on other planets has been likely to be considered as a prediction with enormous funding needed. More specifically, in order to launch an extraterrestrial project, a huge amount of expenditure, mostly from the public budget, has been used for extravagant equipment and needs, namely space rockets, satellites, and space specialists. Although there could be slim likelihood that scientists and astronauts could find something significantly helpful in habitats and resources, most projects have failed. Secondly, there have been other critical issues requiring public finances, especially relief for victims who suffered from natural disasters. For instance, the Yagi typhoon has caused several damages to people and facilities, as well as lead to an increasing demand in healthcare and food resources. If the government budget was devoted to outer space projects instead of providing timely relief for victims suffering from this hurricane, it would negatively affect the economic development as well as the belief of citizens. Moreover, people who pay taxes generally wish to have their money used appropriately. Infrastructure requires much needed government investment since the taxes could be used to enhance convenience and safety for commuters and reduce the risks of accidents. Additionally, the more investments are allocated to medical treatment, the more benefits people get thanks to regular upgrades for hospitals and professionals. As a result, life on the Earth has been continually in the need of improvement, it would be better to process the projects of looking for outer space life in the more advanced future.
In conclusion, in spite of some advantages that people would have if an ideal place to live outside the Earth would be found out, it seems to me that the current issues are more urgent to fulfill.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"Allocation to explore extraterrestrial life" -> "Allocation for the exploration of extraterrestrial life"
Explanation: Adding "for the exploration of" clarifies the purpose of the allocation, enhancing the formal tone and precision of the sentence.
"is considered as a squandering activity" -> "is viewed as a wasteful endeavor"
Explanation: "Viewed as a wasteful endeavor" is more formal and precise, replacing the colloquial "squandering activity" with a term that is academically appropriate.
"some essential benefits" -> "certain significant benefits"
Explanation: "Certain significant benefits" is more formal and precise than "some essential benefits," aligning better with academic style.
"supporting the ideas of seeking for life" -> "supporting the pursuit of life beyond Earth"
Explanation: "Pursuit of life beyond Earth" is more formal and specific than "seeking for life," which is awkwardly phrased and informal.
"it is necessary to discover whether it is possible" -> "it is crucial to determine whether it is feasible"
Explanation: "Crucial to determine whether it is feasible" is more formal and precise, replacing "necessary to discover whether it is possible" which is somewhat vague and informal.
"the Earth’s resources have been nearly depleted" -> "Earth’s resources are nearly depleted"
Explanation: Changing "have been" to "are" corrects the tense to match the present context, enhancing the accuracy and formality of the statement.
"it is certainly hopeful that" -> "it is likely that"
Explanation: "It is likely that" is more appropriate in academic writing, as "certainly hopeful" is an awkward and informal expression.
"In a sharp contrast" -> "In sharp contrast"
Explanation: Removing the article "a" before "sharp contrast" corrects the grammatical error and maintains the formal tone.
"because of numerous reasons from available problems on the Earth" -> "due to numerous problems on Earth"
Explanation: "Due to numerous problems on Earth" simplifies and clarifies the phrase, removing redundancy and enhancing readability.
"has been likely to be considered as a prediction" -> "is likely to be considered a prediction"
Explanation: Changing "has been likely" to "is likely" corrects the tense to match the present context, and removing "as" before "a prediction" corrects the grammatical structure.
"a huge amount of expenditure, mostly from the public budget" -> "a significant amount of expenditure, primarily from the public budget"
Explanation: "Significant" is more precise than "huge," and "primarily" is more formal than "mostly," aligning better with academic style.
"slim likelihood" -> "slim chance"
Explanation: "Slim chance" is a more common and accepted phrase in formal English than "slim likelihood," which is less idiomatic.
"as well as lead to an increasing demand" -> "and leading to an increased demand"
Explanation: "And leading to an increased demand" corrects the grammatical structure and uses "increased" for a more formal tone.
"the more investments are allocated to medical treatment, the more benefits people get" -> "the greater the investment in medical treatment, the greater the benefits to people"
Explanation: "The greater the investment in medical treatment, the greater the benefits to people" is more formal and precise, improving clarity and flow.
"it would be better to process the projects of looking for outer space life" -> "it would be more prudent to delay the pursuit of extraterrestrial life"
Explanation: "More prudent to delay the pursuit of extraterrestrial life" is more formal and precise, replacing the awkward and informal "process the projects of looking for outer space life."

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Task Response: 7

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay successfully addresses both views regarding government spending on extraterrestrial life exploration and the counterargument about addressing pressing issues on Earth. The author presents the benefits of exploring other planets, such as potential new resources and the necessity for human settlement due to environmental degradation. However, the counterargument is more thoroughly developed, focusing on the immediate needs on Earth, such as disaster relief and healthcare. This balance demonstrates an understanding of the prompt, but the exploration of the first viewpoint could be more robust.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the author should provide more specific examples or evidence supporting the potential benefits of extraterrestrial exploration. This could include mentioning successful missions or scientific advancements that have resulted from space exploration, thereby strengthening the argument for the first viewpoint.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position against spending on extraterrestrial exploration, arguing that urgent issues on Earth should take precedence. The stance is consistent, particularly in the second half of the essay, where the author elaborates on various pressing needs. However, the introduction could be clearer in stating the author’s position, as it initially presents both sides without clearly indicating a preference.
- How to improve: The introduction should explicitly state the author’s opinion more clearly. A stronger thesis statement would help set the tone for the essay and guide the reader through the argument. Additionally, reiterating the position in the conclusion can reinforce the clarity of the stance.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: Ideas are presented logically, with the author providing reasons and examples to support the argument against extraterrestrial exploration. The discussion of the financial implications and the prioritization of Earth’s needs is well articulated. However, some points lack depth; for instance, the mention of the Yagi typhoon could be expanded with more details about its impact or statistics to strengthen the argument.
- How to improve: To improve, the author should aim to elaborate on key points with more detailed examples, statistics, or studies that illustrate the urgency of the issues discussed. This would provide a more compelling argument and demonstrate a deeper engagement with the topic.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the debate about government spending on extraterrestrial life versus addressing Earth’s problems. However, there are moments where the discussion could be more tightly focused, particularly in the transition between points. For example, the mention of infrastructure investment feels slightly detached from the main argument about prioritizing immediate needs.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the author should ensure that each point directly ties back to the central argument of the essay. Using clear topic sentences for each paragraph that relate back to the prompt can help keep the discussion relevant and coherent.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the task with a clear position and logical structure. By enhancing the depth of arguments, providing more specific examples, and ensuring tighter focus throughout, the author could aim for a higher band score in Task Response.

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 main body paragraphs discussing opposing views, and a conclusion. The introduction effectively sets the stage for the discussion by stating the two perspectives. Each body paragraph addresses one viewpoint, which helps in maintaining a logical flow. However, the transition between the two paragraphs could be smoother; for instance, the phrase "In a sharp contrast" could be replaced with a more fluid transition to enhance coherence.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using transitional phrases that better connect ideas between paragraphs. For example, instead of "In a sharp contrast," you might use "Conversely" or "On the other hand." Additionally, ensure that each paragraph begins with a clear topic sentence that outlines the main idea, which would help guide the reader through your argument.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay utilizes paragraphs effectively, with each paragraph focusing on a distinct aspect of the argument. The first paragraph discusses the potential benefits of exploring extraterrestrial life, while the second paragraph outlines the reasons against such spending. However, the second paragraph is somewhat lengthy and could be broken down into smaller sections to improve readability and focus.
- How to improve: To improve paragraphing, consider dividing the second body paragraph into two separate paragraphs: one that discusses the financial implications of space exploration and another that focuses on the urgent needs on Earth. This would allow for a more detailed exploration of each point and make it easier for the reader to follow your argument.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "first and foremost," "more specifically," and "as a result," which help to connect ideas within and between sentences. However, there is a reliance on a limited range of cohesive devices, and some sentences feel slightly disjointed, particularly when transitioning between ideas.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider variety of linking words and phrases. For instance, you could use "furthermore," "in addition," or "however" to introduce new points or contrast ideas. Additionally, ensure that pronouns and synonyms are used effectively to refer back to previously mentioned concepts, which can enhance the flow of the essay.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a good understanding of the topic and presents coherent arguments, enhancing the logical flow, refining paragraph structure, and diversifying cohesive devices will contribute to a stronger score in Coherence and Cohesion.

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 "extraterrestrial," "environment degradation," and "public budget." However, there are instances where the vocabulary could be more varied or sophisticated. For example, phrases like "squandering activity" and "essential benefits" are somewhat basic and could be replaced with more advanced synonyms or expressions. The use of "namely" is appropriate, but the overall lexical choices lack the depth expected at a higher band score.
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, the writer should incorporate more varied synonyms and expressions. For instance, instead of "squandering activity," consider using "misallocation of resources" or "inefficient expenditure." Additionally, employing more academic or technical terms related to space exploration and social issues could elevate the essay’s lexical sophistication.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: There are some instances of imprecise vocabulary usage that can lead to confusion. For example, the phrase "has been likely to be considered as a prediction" is awkward and unclear. The term "extravagant equipment" might not accurately convey the intended meaning, as "extravagant" implies excessive luxury rather than just high cost. Furthermore, "the belief of citizens" could be more accurately expressed as "public trust" or "citizens’ confidence."
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on clarity and appropriateness of word choice. Revising phrases for clearer meaning, such as changing "has been likely to be considered as a prediction" to "is often viewed as speculative," would enhance understanding. Additionally, using more contextually appropriate adjectives and nouns will help convey ideas more effectively.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains a few spelling errors, such as "Yagi typhoon," which should be "Yagi Typhoon" if referring to a specific event, and "lead" instead of "led" in the context of past tense. While the overall spelling is generally accurate, these errors can detract from the professionalism of the writing.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should proofread the essay carefully, focusing on commonly confused words and proper nouns. Utilizing spell-check tools and reading the essay aloud can help catch errors. Additionally, practicing spelling through targeted exercises or quizzes can reinforce correct spelling habits.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents coherent arguments, improvements in vocabulary range, precision, and spelling will help elevate the Lexical Resource 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 range of sentence structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. For example, the use of conditional phrases ("if the government budget was devoted…") and subordinate clauses ("although there could be slim likelihood…") indicates an ability to construct varied sentences. However, some sentences are overly complex or awkwardly phrased, which can hinder clarity. For instance, the phrase "the more investments are allocated to medical treatment, the more benefits people get thanks to regular upgrades for hospitals and professionals" could be simplified for better readability.
- How to improve: To enhance the variety and effectiveness of sentence structures, consider incorporating more varied sentence openings and reducing the complexity of some sentences. For example, breaking down longer sentences into shorter, clearer ones can improve readability. Additionally, using more transitional phrases can help guide the reader through the argument more smoothly.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a generally good command of grammar, but there are notable errors that detract from the overall quality. For example, the phrase "seeking for life beyond earth" should be "seeking life beyond Earth," as "seeking" does not require "for." Additionally, there are punctuation issues, such as the lack of commas in compound sentences, which can lead to run-on sentences. The phrase "the Yagi typhoon has caused several damages to people and facilities, as well as lead to an increasing demand in healthcare and food resources" could benefit from clearer punctuation to separate ideas.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, focus on common grammatical structures and their correct usage. Reviewing the rules for prepositions and conjunctions can help avoid errors like "seeking for." Additionally, practicing punctuation rules, especially regarding the use of commas in complex sentences, can enhance clarity. Reading the essay aloud may help identify awkward phrasing and punctuation errors that disrupt the flow of ideas.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of grammatical structures and punctuation, focusing on clarity and accuracy will help elevate the writing to a higher band score.

Bài sửa mẫu

**Allocation for the exploration of extraterrestrial life** is often viewed as a wasteful endeavor, despite some support for it. While there are certain significant benefits, I would argue that it would be more prudent to use the public budget for social development.

On the one hand, some believe that supporting the pursuit of life beyond Earth is essential due to environmental degradation. As conditions on Earth may no longer be suitable for human beings, it is crucial to determine whether it is feasible to establish new human settlements on other planets. Additionally, Earth’s resources are nearly depleted. Therefore, it is certainly hopeful that new resources could be found on other planets, such as fossil fuels, metals, and especially water. By searching for extraterrestrial life, there could be sufficient resources to meet the increasing demands of the human population.

In sharp contrast, I would argue that there are numerous problems on Earth that have led to little support for such an idea among the masses. First and foremost, life on other planets is likely to be considered a prediction that requires enormous funding. More specifically, to launch an extraterrestrial project, a significant amount of expenditure, primarily from the public budget, is needed for extravagant equipment and resources, such as space rockets, satellites, and space specialists. Although there is a slim chance that scientists and astronauts could find something significantly helpful in terms of habitats and resources, many projects have ultimately failed. Secondly, there are other critical issues requiring public finances, especially relief for victims of natural disasters. For instance, the Yagi typhoon has caused extensive damage to people and infrastructure, leading to an increased demand for healthcare and food resources. If the government budget were devoted to outer space projects instead of providing timely relief for victims of this hurricane, it would negatively affect economic development and the trust of citizens. Moreover, taxpayers generally wish to see their money used appropriately. Infrastructure requires much-needed government investment, as taxes could be used to enhance convenience and safety for commuters and reduce the risks of accidents. Additionally, the greater the investment in medical treatment, the greater the benefits to people, thanks to regular upgrades for hospitals and professionals. As a result, given that life on Earth is in continual need of improvement, it would be wiser to postpone the pursuit of extraterrestrial life until a more advanced future.

In conclusion, despite some advantages that could arise if an ideal place to live outside Earth were discovered, it seems to me that the current issues are more urgent and should take precedence.