fbpx

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

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

While some maintain that the government should fundraise to seek survival on other planets, others argue that investing money in that plan is wasteful since a variety of imperative issues on Earth need to use money with the aim of tackling. This essay will examine both viewpoints and conclude that I agree with later.
On the one hand, it is understandable why many people believe that the government ought to utilize refunds to look for the existence of other planets. The foremost reason is that they would discover other accommodations for humans if the Earth vanished. This is because our planet is suffering the destruction of human beings. For example, air pollution impact profoundly on human’s lives since the air not only is an indispensable stuff but also maintains our survival as well as our health. hence this effect directly on the environment around human’s settlement. As a result, they invest money to seek other planets that have appropriate accommodations for humans.
On the other hand, I agree with those who claim that using refunds in dealing with several problems on the Earth. Firstly, spending money finding life on other planets is exorbitant. As investing money in satellites which comprise various costly components such as wave detectors and cameras contributing to explore other counterparts. This argument is bolstered by the fact that they are less likely to discover life in space successfully owing to the long distance among planets and thus raising funds on this plan is not only thriftless but also not receiving any results. Therefore, investing a large amount of money to recoup our environment is a viable remedy since the sum of money spent on breakthroughs for coping with environmental issues is able to be more affordable than some cutting-edge technologies for exploring the existence of other planets.
in conclusion, While many people reckon that governments should spend an amount of money to discover life on other planets, I am firmly convinced that we should invest money in resolving environmental issues.


Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

  1. "fundraise" -> "raise funds"
    Explanation: "Fundraise" is a verb that typically refers to the act of collecting funds, usually in a non-governmental context. In this context, "raise funds" is more appropriate as it is the correct term for government initiatives to collect money for a specific purpose.

  2. "seek survival" -> "seek to ensure survival"
    Explanation: "Seek survival" is somewhat vague and informal. "Seek to ensure survival" clarifies the purpose of the action and aligns better with formal academic language.

  3. "wasteful" -> "inefficient"
    Explanation: "Wasteful" can imply a moral judgment, which is less suitable in academic writing. "Inefficient" is a neutral term that simply describes the lack of effectiveness without moral connotation.

  4. "imperative issues" -> "critical issues"
    Explanation: "Imperative" is often used to describe something that is necessary or urgent, but in this context, "critical" better conveys the severity and importance of the issues.

  5. "use money with the aim of tackling" -> "utilize funds to address"
    Explanation: "Use money with the aim of tackling" is awkward and verbose. "Utilize funds to address" is more concise and formal.

  6. "I agree with later" -> "I concur with this view"
    Explanation: "I agree with later" is grammatically incorrect and informal. "I concur with this view" is grammatically correct and maintains a formal tone.

  7. "utilize refunds" -> "utilize funds"
    Explanation: "Refunds" is incorrect in this context as it refers to money returned to individuals, not government funds. "Funds" is the correct term for government monies.

  8. "accommodations for humans" -> "habitats for human habitation"
    Explanation: "Accommodations for humans" is vague and informal. "Habitats for human habitation" is more precise and formal, emphasizing the suitability of the environment for human settlement.

  9. "suffering the destruction of human beings" -> "suffering from human-induced destruction"
    Explanation: "Suffering the destruction of human beings" is awkward and unclear. "Suffering from human-induced destruction" clarifies the cause of the destruction and is more formal.

  10. "impact profoundly on human’s lives" -> "significantly impact human lives"
    Explanation: "Impact profoundly on human’s lives" is grammatically incorrect and awkward. "Significantly impact human lives" corrects the grammar and enhances clarity.

  11. "not only is an indispensable stuff but also maintains our survival as well as our health" -> "not only is it an indispensable substance but also essential for our survival and health"
    Explanation: The original phrase is grammatically incorrect and awkward. The revised version corrects these issues and uses more precise language.

  12. "spending money finding life on other planets" -> "expending funds on the search for life on other planets"
    Explanation: "Spending money finding life" is informal and lacks specificity. "Expending funds on the search for life" is more formal and precise.

  13. "raising funds on this plan" -> "funding this endeavor"
    Explanation: "Raising funds on this plan" is awkward and informal. "Funding this endeavor" is more formal and appropriate for academic writing.

  14. "not only thriftless but also not receiving any results" -> "not only impractical but also yielding no results"
    Explanation: "Thriftless" is not commonly used and is unclear. "Impractical" is more widely understood and appropriate in this context. "Yielding no results" is clearer than "not receiving any results."

  15. "investing a large amount of money to recoup our environment" -> "investing substantial funds to restore our environment"
    Explanation: "Recoup our environment" is incorrect and unclear. "Restore our environment" is the correct term and is more formal.

  16. "sum of money spent on breakthroughs for coping with environmental issues" -> "amount of funds allocated to breakthroughs addressing environmental issues"
    Explanation: "Sum of money" is informal and vague. "Amount of funds allocated" is more precise and formal, and "addressing" is more appropriate than "coping with" in this context.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Task Response: 7

  • Answer All Parts of the Question:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay addresses both views regarding government spending on extraterrestrial life exploration versus addressing issues on Earth. The first paragraph outlines the perspective that funding should be allocated to search for life on other planets, citing the potential need for alternative habitats for humanity. The second paragraph presents the opposing view, emphasizing the importance of addressing pressing Earthly problems. However, the discussion of the first viewpoint lacks depth, and the reasons provided for supporting the search for life are somewhat vague and underdeveloped.
    • How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer should provide more specific examples and details regarding the potential benefits of exploring other planets. This could include discussing technological advancements that might arise from such research or the philosophical implications of finding extraterrestrial life. Additionally, ensuring that both perspectives are equally developed will strengthen the overall argument.
  • Present a Clear Position Throughout:

    • Detailed explanation: The writer clearly states their opinion in the introduction and conclusion, favoring the investment in solving Earth’s problems. However, the transition between discussing both viewpoints could be smoother, as the shift to the writer’s position feels abrupt. The phrase "I agree with later" is unclear and could confuse the reader regarding which viewpoint is being supported.
    • How to improve: To maintain a clear position, the writer should explicitly restate their stance at the beginning of the second body paragraph. Using phrases like "From my perspective" or "I believe that" can help clarify the writer’s position. Additionally, ensuring that the conclusion succinctly summarizes the main arguments while reinforcing the writer’s opinion will enhance clarity.
  • Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay presents some ideas but lacks sufficient elaboration and support. For instance, the argument regarding the cost of exploring other planets is mentioned but not adequately explained. The mention of "exorbitant" costs and "cutting-edge technologies" is vague and could benefit from more concrete examples or statistics to strengthen the argument.
    • How to improve: The writer should aim to provide more detailed explanations and examples for each point made. For instance, when discussing the costs associated with space exploration, including specific figures or comparisons to funding for Earth-based issues could provide a clearer picture. Additionally, using real-world examples of environmental projects that have yielded positive results can help substantiate the argument for focusing on Earth.
  • Stay on Topic:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, addressing the prompt’s requirement to discuss both views. However, there are moments where the focus drifts, particularly in the first body paragraph where the discussion of "human survival" and "air pollution" becomes somewhat convoluted and less relevant to the main argument about government spending priorities.
    • How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that each point directly relates to the prompt. It may help to outline the main ideas before writing to ensure that each paragraph serves a clear purpose in supporting the overall argument. Additionally, avoiding overly complex sentences can help maintain clarity and relevance to the topic.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a good understanding of the task and presents a clear opinion, improvements in depth of argumentation, clarity of position, and focus on the topic will enhance the overall quality and coherence of the response.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

  • Organize Information Logically:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a logical organization of ideas, presenting both viewpoints clearly. The introduction sets the stage for the discussion, and each paragraph addresses a distinct perspective. However, the transition between the two viewpoints could be smoother. For instance, the shift from discussing the benefits of searching for life on other planets to the argument against it lacks a clear connective statement that would guide the reader more effectively.
    • How to improve: To enhance logical flow, consider using transitional phrases such as "Conversely" or "On the other hand" at the beginning of the second viewpoint paragraph. Additionally, summarizing the key points of each argument before transitioning to the next can help reinforce the structure and guide the reader through the essay.
  • Use Paragraphs:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs effectively, with each paragraph focusing on a specific aspect of the argument. The first paragraph introduces the topic and outlines the two perspectives, while the subsequent paragraphs delve into each viewpoint. However, the conclusion could be more clearly delineated, as it currently feels somewhat abrupt and lacks a strong summary of the arguments presented.
    • How to improve: Ensure that the conclusion is clearly marked and provides a brief recap of the main arguments discussed. This can be achieved by restating the key points from both sides before presenting your opinion, which will reinforce the overall structure and coherence of the essay.
  • 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," to indicate contrasting viewpoints. However, the use of cohesive devices is somewhat limited, and there are instances where the connections between sentences and ideas could be strengthened. For example, phrases like "This is because" and "As a result" are used, but the essay could benefit from a wider variety of linking words and phrases to enhance the flow of ideas.
    • How to improve: To diversify cohesive devices, consider incorporating words and phrases such as "Furthermore," "Moreover," "In addition," and "Consequently." This will not only improve the flow of the essay but also demonstrate a greater range of vocabulary and grammatical structures. Additionally, ensuring that each sentence logically follows from the previous one will enhance overall coherence.

In summary, while the essay achieves a solid Band 7 for Coherence and Cohesion, improvements can be made in the areas of logical organization, paragraph structure, and the use of cohesive devices. By focusing on these aspects, the writer can enhance the clarity and effectiveness of their argumentation in future essays.

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 "fundraise," "imperative issues," "exorbitant," and "cutting-edge technologies." However, the vocabulary is somewhat limited and repetitive, particularly in phrases like "investing money" and "seek survival." The use of "refunds" is also incorrect in this context, which detracts from the overall lexical variety.
    • How to improve: To enhance the range of vocabulary, the writer should incorporate synonyms and varied expressions. For example, instead of repeatedly using "investing money," alternatives like "allocate funds," "expend resources," or "financially support" could be employed. Additionally, exploring more advanced vocabulary related to the topic, such as "exoplanets," "extraterrestrial," or "sustainability," would enrich the essay.
  • Use Vocabulary Precisely:

    • Detailed explanation: There are instances of imprecise vocabulary usage, such as "fundraise" (which typically refers to raising money rather than government funding) and "refunds" (which implies returning money rather than allocating it for a purpose). The phrase "the destruction of human beings" is also vague and misleading, as it suggests humans are being destroyed rather than the environment being harmed by human actions.
    • How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should ensure that the vocabulary accurately reflects the intended meaning. For instance, replacing "fundraise" with "fund" or "finance" would clarify the government’s role in resource allocation. Additionally, the phrase "the destruction of human beings" could be revised to "the degradation of the environment caused by human activity" to convey a clearer message.
  • Use Correct Spelling:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors, such as "hence this effect directly on the environment around human’s settlement" (should be "affects" instead of "effect") and "thriftless" (which is not commonly used and may confuse readers). The incorrect use of apostrophes in "human’s" (should be "humans") also detracts from the overall quality.
    • How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should proofread the essay carefully or use spell-check tools. Additionally, practicing spelling through writing exercises or vocabulary quizzes can help reinforce correct spelling. Familiarizing oneself with commonly misspelled words and their correct forms will also be beneficial.

In summary, while the essay achieves a Band 6 for Lexical Resource, there is significant room for improvement in vocabulary range, precision, and spelling accuracy. By incorporating a broader vocabulary, ensuring precise word choice, and focusing on correct spelling, the writer can enhance their lexical resource score in future essays.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 5

  • Use a Wide Range of Structures:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates some variety in sentence structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. For example, the phrase "while some maintain that the government should fundraise to seek survival on other planets" is a complex sentence that effectively introduces the topic. However, the overall range is limited, with many sentences following a similar structure, such as starting with "this is because" or "the foremost reason is." Additionally, there are instances of awkward phrasing, such as "the destruction of human beings," which could be more clearly expressed.
    • How to improve: To enhance the variety of sentence structures, the writer should practice using different types of clauses and varying the order of information presented. For instance, instead of frequently starting sentences with "the foremost reason is," consider using introductory phrases or clauses. Incorporating more complex sentences with subordinate clauses can also add depth. For example, "Although some argue for the exploration of other planets, many believe that addressing Earth’s issues should take precedence" would demonstrate a more sophisticated structure.
  • Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

    • Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues that hinder clarity. For example, the phrase "investing money in that plan is wasteful since a variety of imperative issues on Earth need to use money with the aim of tackling" is awkward and unclear. The use of "refunds" instead of "funds" is incorrect, and there are several instances of subject-verb agreement errors, such as "air pollution impact profoundly" (should be "impacts"). Additionally, punctuation errors, including missing capital letters at the beginning of sentences and improper use of commas, detract from the overall readability.
    • How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on subject-verb agreement and ensure that verbs are correctly conjugated. Practicing sentence construction and reviewing basic grammar rules can help address these issues. For punctuation, the writer should pay attention to the beginning of sentences and the use of commas to separate clauses and ideas. Reading the essay aloud can also help identify awkward phrasing and grammatical errors, allowing for revisions that enhance clarity and correctness.

Overall, while the essay presents a relevant discussion of the topic, addressing the identified weaknesses in grammatical range and accuracy will significantly improve the overall quality and coherence of the writing.

Bài sửa mẫu

While some maintain that the government should raise funds to seek life on other planets, others argue that investing money in that plan is wasteful since a variety of critical issues on Earth need funding to tackle. This essay will examine both viewpoints and conclude that I concur with the latter.

On the one hand, it is understandable why many people believe that the government ought to utilize funds to look for the existence of life on other planets. The foremost reason is that they would discover other habitats for human habitation if the Earth vanished. This is because our planet is suffering from human-induced destruction. For example, air pollution significantly impacts human lives since the air is not only an indispensable substance but also essential for our survival and health. Hence, this effect directly impacts the environment around human settlements. As a result, some advocate for investing money to seek other planets that have appropriate habitats for humans.

On the other hand, I agree with those who claim that using funds to address several problems on Earth is more important. Firstly, spending money to find life on other planets is exorbitant. Investing money in satellites, which comprise various costly components such as wave detectors and cameras, contributes to exploring other planets. This argument is bolstered by the fact that they are less likely to successfully discover life in space due to the long distances between planets; thus, raising funds for this plan is not only inefficient but also yields no results. Therefore, investing a large amount of money to restore our environment is a viable remedy since the amount of funds allocated to breakthroughs addressing environmental issues can be more affordable than some cutting-edge technologies for exploring the existence of other planets.

In conclusion, while many people reckon that governments should spend money to discover life on other planets, I am firmly convinced that we should invest funds in resolving environmental issues.

Bài viết liên quan

IELTS Writify

Chấm IELTS Writing Free x GPT

Lưu ý

Sắp bảo trì server

Để đảm bảo tính ổn định của web, web sẽ thực hiện backup dữ liệu hàng ngày từ 3h-3h30 sáng

Rất mong quý thầy cô và học viên thông cảm vì bất tiện này