Task 2 : Some people think that companies and individuals should pay to clear up the pollution they produced and that the government should not pay for it. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

This is acknowledge that the companies or small bussiness group should self pay to deal with the contamination they turned out also the government should not pay for it. In my opinion, I totally agree with this statement.

To begin with, there are a lot of companies in the world that discharge into the environment a tons of dust and garbage, which will be cause the soil polution. For example, the soil in someplace in China were polluted by a plenty of the factories in nearby that create useless soil to grow and harvest. The farmers use chemical drug into soil that help the plants grow up quickly, which lead to the polution in nearby dirt, causes air infection and leads to numerous life risk diseases. They should pay for the solutions and find ways to deal with the polution which were created by them.

Moreover, the machines that the bussiness or companies that use in their purpose that cause loud noise and emit to the environment a tons of dust and poisionous gases which can cause noise polution and increase the risk of health diseases.for example, chimneys used in the plastic factories which leave smoke and extreme noise. It also has negative impact on worker which causes them lack of hearing diseases.

To put it in a nutshell, the private companies and individuals bussiness should pay for the polution waste caused by them. Also the government should make strict law which should be followed by all private companies and individuals that they will deal with the waste produced by them. Also, if they do not want to clean then they have to pay for the cleaning fee.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"This is acknowledge that" -> "It is acknowledged that"
Explanation: "This is acknowledge that" is grammatically incorrect. "It is acknowledged that" corrects the verb tense and aligns with formal academic style.
"small bussiness group" -> "small business groups"
Explanation: "Bussiness" is a typographical error and should be corrected to "business." Additionally, "groups" should be plural to match the context of multiple businesses.
"should self pay" -> "should pay"
Explanation: "Should self pay" is awkward and incorrect. "Should pay" is the correct form, making the sentence more natural and formal.
"turned out" -> "resulted"
Explanation: "Turned out" is informal and vague. "Resulted" is more precise and appropriate for academic writing.
"a tons of dust and garbage" -> "a significant amount of dust and waste"
Explanation: "A tons of" is incorrect; "a significant amount of" is grammatically correct and more formal. Also, "garbage" is too informal; "waste" is preferred in formal contexts.
"will be cause the soil polution" -> "will cause soil pollution"
Explanation: "Will be cause" is grammatically incorrect. "Will cause" is the correct verb form, and "soil pollution" should be a single word for consistency.
"a plenty of the factories" -> "numerous factories"
Explanation: "A plenty of" is an idiomatic expression that is too informal and vague. "Numerous" is more precise and formal.
"create useless soil to grow and harvest" -> "render the soil unusable for cultivation"
Explanation: "Create useless soil" is awkward and imprecise. "Render the soil unusable for cultivation" is more specific and formal.
"use chemical drug" -> "use chemical fertilizers"
Explanation: "Chemical drug" is incorrect and confusing. "Chemical fertilizers" is the correct term in this context.
"help the plants grow up quickly" -> "accelerate plant growth"
Explanation: "Grow up quickly" is informal and imprecise. "Accelerate plant growth" is more formal and scientifically accurate.
"polution in nearby dirt" -> "pollution in the nearby soil"
Explanation: "Polution" is a typographical error and should be corrected to "pollution." Also, "dirt" is informal; "soil" is the correct term in this context.
"causes air infection" -> "causes respiratory infections"
Explanation: "Air infection" is not a standard medical term. "Respiratory infections" is the correct medical terminology.
"bussiness or companies" -> "businesses or companies"
Explanation: "Bussiness" is a typographical error and should be corrected to "businesses."
"machines that the bussiness or companies" -> "machines used by businesses or companies"
Explanation: "The bussiness" is grammatically incorrect. "Used by" is the correct preposition for describing the relationship between the machines and the businesses.
"emit to the environment a tons of dust and poisionous gases" -> "emit large amounts of dust and toxic gases into the environment"
Explanation: "A tons of" is incorrect; "large amounts" is more precise. "Poisionous" is a typographical error and should be corrected to "toxic."
"cause noise polution" -> "cause noise pollution"
Explanation: "Polution" is a typographical error and should be corrected to "pollution."
"lack of hearing diseases" -> "hearing loss"
Explanation: "Lack of hearing diseases" is awkward and incorrect. "Hearing loss" is the standard medical term.
"private companies and individuals bussiness" -> "private companies and individual businesses"
Explanation: "Individuals bussiness" is grammatically incorrect. "Individual businesses" is the correct form.
"should pay for the polution waste" -> "should pay for the pollution waste"
Explanation: "Polution" is a typographical error and should be corrected to "pollution."
"make strict law" -> "enact strict laws"
Explanation: "Make strict law" is grammatically incorrect. "Enact strict laws" is the correct verb form and pluralization for formal writing.

These corrections and improvements enhance the clarity, precision, and formality of the essay, aligning it with academic writing standards.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 5

Band Score for Task Response: 5

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay addresses the prompt by stating that companies and individuals should pay for the pollution they produce, while the government should not be responsible for these costs. However, the response lacks depth in exploring the nuances of the argument. For instance, it does not consider counterarguments or the potential role of the government in regulating pollution. The examples provided, such as pollution from factories, are relevant but not sufficiently detailed or varied to fully represent the complexity of the issue.
- How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer should explicitly outline the different viewpoints regarding the government’s role in pollution management. Including a counterargument or discussing situations where government intervention might be necessary would provide a more balanced perspective. Additionally, using a wider range of examples could strengthen the argument.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear position in favor of the idea that companies should pay for pollution. However, the clarity of this position is somewhat undermined by grammatical errors and awkward phrasing, which can confuse the reader. For instance, phrases like "the contamination they turned out" and "the soil in someplace in China" detract from the overall clarity of the argument.
- How to improve: To maintain a clear position, the writer should focus on using straightforward language and well-structured sentences. It would also be beneficial to restate the main argument in the conclusion to reinforce the stance taken throughout the essay.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents some ideas regarding pollution and its impact, such as soil pollution and health risks from noise and air pollution. However, these ideas are not fully developed or supported with sufficient evidence. The examples provided are vague and lack statistical data or specific studies that could lend credibility to the claims made.
- How to improve: To effectively present and support ideas, the writer should aim to elaborate on each point with more detailed explanations and relevant examples. Incorporating data, case studies, or expert opinions would strengthen the arguments and provide a more compelling case for the position taken.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on the responsibility of companies and individuals for pollution. However, there are moments where the discussion veers slightly off course, such as when mentioning the negative impact on workers without directly linking it back to the main argument about financial responsibility for pollution.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that every point made directly supports the central argument. It may help to outline the main points before writing the essay to ensure that all content is relevant and contributes to the overall discussion.

In summary, to improve the essay’s band score, the writer should work on addressing all parts of the prompt more comprehensively, maintaining clarity in their position, developing ideas with more support and detail, and ensuring that all content remains focused on the topic at hand.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear stance on the issue, arguing that companies and individuals should bear the costs of pollution they create. The introduction effectively sets the stage for the argument, and the body paragraphs provide supporting details. However, the logical flow between ideas could be improved. For instance, the transition from discussing soil pollution to noise pollution is abrupt, which can confuse the reader about the connection between these points.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using clear topic sentences at the beginning of each paragraph that directly relate to the main argument. Additionally, employing transitional phrases (e.g., "Furthermore," "In addition," "On the other hand") can help guide the reader through the essay’s progression of ideas.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs to separate ideas, which is a positive aspect. However, the paragraphs could be more effectively structured. The first paragraph introduces the topic but lacks a clear focus, while the second paragraph discusses noise pollution without a strong connection to the previous point about soil pollution. The conclusion reiterates the main argument but could benefit from summarizing the key points discussed in the body.
- How to improve: Ensure each paragraph has a clear main idea that supports the overall argument. Start with a topic sentence that outlines what the paragraph will discuss. Additionally, consider summarizing the main points in the conclusion to reinforce the argument and provide closure.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "for example," to illustrate points. However, the range of cohesive devices is limited, and some transitions are missing or ineffective. For instance, the use of "Moreover" introduces the second point, but the connection to the previous paragraph could be clearer. Additionally, there are instances of awkward phrasing that disrupt the flow, such as "the contamination they turned out."
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a variety of linking words and phrases (e.g., "Additionally," "Consequently," "As a result") to connect ideas more smoothly. Also, review the essay for grammatical accuracy and clarity, as improving sentence structure will enhance overall cohesion.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents a clear argument, improvements in logical organization, paragraph structure, and the use of cohesive devices will enhance the overall coherence and cohesion, potentially raising the band score.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates an attempt to use a variety of vocabulary related to the topic of pollution and responsibility. Phrases like "discharge into the environment," "chemical drug," and "noise pollution" indicate some level of lexical variety. However, the range is limited, and there are instances where more sophisticated or varied vocabulary could enhance the clarity and impact of the arguments. For example, the phrase "a tons of dust and garbage" could be improved to "large quantities of waste and pollutants."
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, the writer should incorporate synonyms and more precise terms. For instance, instead of repeating "pollution," they could use "contamination," "environmental degradation," or "ecological harm." Additionally, using more academic language, such as "environmental responsibility" instead of "self pay," would elevate the essay’s tone.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several instances of imprecise vocabulary usage. For example, "the contamination they turned out" is vague and could be more clearly stated as "the pollution they generate." Moreover, "a plenty of the factories" is awkward; a more precise phrase would be "numerous factories." The use of "chemical drug" is also misleading, as it typically refers to pharmaceuticals rather than agricultural chemicals.
- How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on using terminology that accurately reflects the intended meaning. They could benefit from reviewing definitions and contexts of words before using them. For example, replacing "chemical drug" with "agricultural chemicals" or "fertilizers" would convey the intended meaning more accurately.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several spelling errors that detract from its overall quality. Words such as "bussiness" (business), "polution" (pollution), "poisionous" (poisonous), and "infection" (in the context of "air infection," which should be "air pollution") are misspelled. These errors can confuse readers and undermine the writer’s credibility.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should engage in regular practice, such as using spelling apps or tools, and proofreading their work carefully before submission. Keeping a list of commonly misspelled words and reviewing them can also be beneficial. Additionally, reading more academic texts can help reinforce correct spelling and usage in context.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a foundational understanding of the topic and attempts to use relevant vocabulary, there are significant areas for improvement in vocabulary range, precision, and spelling accuracy. By focusing on these aspects, the writer can enhance the overall quality of their writing and potentially achieve a higher band score in the Lexical Resource criterion.

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 a limited range of sentence structures. Most sentences are simple or compound, lacking the complexity that would enhance the writing. For example, the opening sentence, "This is acknowledge that the companies or small bussiness group should self pay to deal with the contamination they turned out also the government should not pay for it," is convoluted and could benefit from restructuring. The use of phrases like "to put it in a nutshell" is a good attempt at variety, but overall, the essay relies heavily on basic sentence forms.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, the writer should practice incorporating complex sentences that include subordinate clauses. For instance, instead of saying, "the companies or small business group should self pay," a more complex structure could be, "While it is essential for companies to take responsibility for their pollution, they must also consider the long-term environmental impacts of their actions." This not only adds variety but also depth to the argument.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains several grammatical errors and punctuation issues that detract from clarity. For example, "the contamination they turned out" is awkward and should be revised to "the contamination they produce." Additionally, there are issues with subject-verb agreement, as seen in "the soil in someplace in China were polluted," where "were" should be "was." Punctuation errors, such as missing commas and run-on sentences, also hinder readability. For instance, "which can cause noise polution and increase the risk of health diseases.for example," lacks proper punctuation before "for example."
- How to improve: To enhance grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on subject-verb agreement and the correct use of tenses. Regular practice with grammar exercises, particularly those focusing on common errors, would be beneficial. Furthermore, proofreading for punctuation errors and ensuring that sentences are not overly long or complex would improve clarity. Reading more academic essays can also help the writer understand proper sentence structure and punctuation usage.

In summary, while the essay presents a clear opinion, it requires significant improvement in both grammatical range and accuracy. By diversifying sentence structures and enhancing grammatical correctness, the writer can work towards achieving a higher band score in future essays.

Bài sửa mẫu

This is acknowledged that the companies or small business groups should pay to deal with the contamination they produced, and the government should not pay for it. In my opinion, I totally agree with this statement.

To begin with, there are a lot of companies in the world that discharge tons of dust and garbage into the environment, which will cause soil pollution. For example, the soil in some places in China has been polluted by numerous factories nearby that render the soil unusable for cultivation. The farmers use chemical fertilizers in the soil that help the plants grow quickly, which leads to pollution in the nearby soil, causes respiratory infections, and results in numerous life-threatening diseases. They should pay for the solutions and find ways to deal with the pollution that was created by them.

Moreover, the machines that businesses or companies use for their purposes cause loud noise and emit large amounts of dust and toxic gases into the environment, which can cause noise pollution and increase the risk of health diseases. For example, chimneys used in plastic factories release smoke and create extreme noise. It also has a negative impact on workers, which causes them to suffer from hearing loss.

To put it in a nutshell, private companies and individual businesses should pay for the pollution waste caused by them. Also, the government should enact strict laws that should be followed by all private companies and individuals to ensure they deal with the waste produced by them. If they do not want to clean up, then they have to pay for the cleaning fee.