The best way to solve traffic and transportation problems is to encourage people to live in cities rather than suburbs and the countryside. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is sometimes believed that the most effective way to alleviate traffic and transportation issues is to inspirit citizens to reside in the cities in stead of other areas. While I acknowledge living in the city can produce less accidents, I still firmly disagree this is the best way due to the fact that improving the streets in suburbs and rural places can result to more benefits in comparison to the former.

It is no doubt that cities is safer than other places when it comes to the fewer accidents. This is because the infrastructure in these areas, especially in big cities, is invested with a huge of money with it in mind to improve the local face. That is why there are few potholes appearing on the streets, which help to reduce the number of accidents causing when drivers losing their control when suddenly hitting them. Furthermore, combined with the traffic light system and traffic coordination by police, traveling on city roads also becomes safer.

However, I still believe that amending the quality of the roads in other areas can help to alleviate both traffic problems and the burden of the city. Regarding the former, when the government share the fund for the outskirts and countryside, the infrastructure there can also be meliorated and achieve the same effectiveness as those in the city. Concerning the latter, if everybody move to the cities, they will become overcrowded, Additionally, more people can put weight on the road surface, causing it to quickly deteriorate. As a result, improving road quality in other areas such as suburbs or rural regions helps residents not need to move into the city but can still participate in traffic safely, thereby helping to reduce the burden on the cities.

In conclusion, the moving of citizens from other areas to cities can be helpful in some certain aspects to help to solve traffic problems. Nevertheless, I still strongly disagree it is the best way because various issues are alleviated by improving roads in outskirts and countryside regions.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"inspirit citizens" -> "encourage residents"
Explanation: The term "inspirit citizens" is informal and lacks the formality expected in academic writing. "Encourage residents" is a more suitable alternative that maintains a formal tone.
"stead of" -> "instead of"
Explanation: "Stead of" is an informal and incorrect usage. The correct term is "instead of," which is more formal and appropriate for academic writing.
"due to the fact that" -> "because"
Explanation: "Due to the fact that" is considered wordy in academic writing. "Because" is a more concise and formal alternative.
"less accidents" -> "fewer accidents"
Explanation: The use of "less" with countable nouns like "accidents" is inappropriate. "Fewer accidents" is the correct phrase, maintaining accuracy and formality.
"big cities" -> "large urban centers"
Explanation: "Big cities" is somewhat informal. "Large urban centers" is a more formal and precise term for academic writing.
"huge of money" -> "significant funds"
Explanation: "Huge of money" is colloquial. "Significant funds" is a more formal and appropriate expression for academic writing.
"causing when drivers losing their control" -> "resulting from drivers losing control"
Explanation: The original phrase is awkward and lacks clarity. The suggested alternative provides a more concise and formal expression.
"amending" -> "improving"
Explanation: "Amending" is less formal. "Improving" is a more suitable term for academic writing.
"meliorated" -> "enhanced"
Explanation: "Meliorated" is less common and more formal. "Enhanced" serves as a suitable alternative, maintaining formality.
"put weight on" -> "exert pressure on"
Explanation: "Put weight on" is informal. "Exert pressure on" is a more formal and precise alternative.
"helps residents not need to move into the city" -> "enables residents to remain in their current locations"
Explanation: The original phrase is awkward. The suggested alternative provides a clearer and more formal expression.
"Nevertheless, I still strongly disagree it is the best way" -> "However, I firmly contend that it is not the optimal solution"
Explanation: The suggested alternative enhances formality and clarity, providing a more precise expression for academic writing.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Task Response: 7

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay acknowledges the viewpoint advocating for city living to mitigate traffic problems while firmly disagreeing with it. It addresses the proposal to encourage city residency versus living in suburbs and countryside. The writer discusses safety benefits in cities but argues for improving infrastructure outside cities for broader advantages.
- How to improve: The essay effectively addresses the prompt by presenting both perspectives. To enhance, consider offering more nuanced reasons against city-centric solutions, such as economic or environmental impacts, to present a comprehensive argument.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The stance against city-centric solutions remains consistent throughout the essay. The writer maintains a clear position by supporting the idea of improving infrastructure in non-urban areas for mitigating traffic issues.
- How to improve: To bolster clarity, ensure each paragraph emphasizes the chosen stance against city living, providing strong reasoning and examples consistently.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay offers supporting details for both sides, discussing safety in cities and advocating for infrastructure improvements in suburbs and rural areas. However, some points lack depth and development, requiring more elaboration.
- How to improve: Strengthen the essay by expanding on the benefits of improving infrastructure outside cities. Consider elaborating on how these enhancements can specifically address traffic and transportation issues.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay predominantly focuses on contrasting city living’s safety with the advantages of improving infrastructure in non-urban areas. However, it slightly deviates when discussing potential overcrowding in cities due to increased population.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, ensure all arguments directly relate to the core idea of addressing traffic and transportation issues, avoiding tangential discussions about population-related concerns unless directly tied to the prompt.

Overall, the essay effectively presents a counterargument against the notion of city-centric solutions for traffic problems. To improve, consider broadening the depth of ideas and maintaining a more consistent focus on addressing transportation issues specifically. Providing additional examples and specific instances could further reinforce the argument for improving infrastructure outside cities as an effective solution.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay begins with a clear introduction that presents the writer’s stance. However, there’s a need for more cohesive progression in ideas throughout the essay. There’s an attempt at presenting contrasting views but lacks a clear structure to highlight these differences effectively.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider a more structured approach. Separate paragraphs for each main point will help. For instance, devote one paragraph to discuss the advantages of cities for traffic safety and another to elaborate on the drawbacks of solely promoting city living. Utilize transitions to smoothly move from one idea to the next.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs but needs improvement in their structure and coherence. There’s an attempt to delineate ideas but lacks clarity in separating arguments, making the flow slightly confusing.
- How to improve: Ensure each paragraph focuses on a specific point. Start a new paragraph when shifting to a new argument or viewpoint. For instance, create distinct paragraphs for discussing the safety of cities and the drawbacks of overcrowding.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: Cohesive devices are sparsely used, affecting the essay’s flow and coherence. While some linking words are present, they are not consistently utilized to connect ideas.
- How to improve: Incorporate a variety of cohesive devices such as conjunctions (however, therefore, consequently), transitional phrases (for instance, in conclusion), and pronouns (this, that) to link sentences and ideas more effectively. Use them consistently to maintain coherence and guide the reader through your arguments.

Overall, the essay presents a clear standpoint but lacks a structured development of ideas and effective use of cohesive devices. Focus on organizing thoughts into clear paragraphs and use a wider range of cohesive devices to strengthen the essay’s 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 moderate range of vocabulary. There is an attempt to use a variety of words and phrases, but it lacks consistency and often relies on basic vocabulary. For instance, the repeated use of phrases like "improve the roads" and "traffic problems" could be diversified for a richer expression.
- How to improve: To enhance the range of vocabulary, the writer should explore more synonyms and varied expressions. For example, instead of consistently using "improve," consider alternatives such as enhance, upgrade, or optimize. Introduce specialized terms related to urban planning, transportation, and infrastructure to showcase a broader lexicon.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits imprecise vocabulary usage in several instances. For example, the phrase "inspirit citizens" is unclear and could be replaced with more precise language like "encourage residents." Additionally, the phrase "invested with a huge of money" lacks precision and could be revised for clarity.
- How to improve: To enhance precision, strive for clarity in expression. Replace ambiguous terms with specific and concise alternatives. Instead of "huge of money," use "significant funding" or a similar precise term. Ensure that each word conveys the intended meaning without leaving room for misinterpretation.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay contains multiple spelling errors, such as "stead" instead of "instead," "inspirit" instead of "inspire," and "meliorated" instead of "improved." These errors detract from the overall quality of the writing.
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, proofread the essay carefully, paying attention to commonly misspelled words. Utilize spell-check tools and, if possible, seek feedback from others. Creating a list of personal spelling challenges and actively working to correct them can be a proactive approach to enhancing spelling accuracy.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a moderate vocabulary range, there is room for improvement in both precision and spelling accuracy. Diversifying vocabulary, using words more precisely, and addressing spelling errors will contribute to a more polished and effective essay.

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 employs a mix of sentence structures, from simple to complex. There’s an attempt at varied sentence beginnings and structures, although it lacks consistency. Instances of compound and complex sentences are used, yet with limited sophistication.
- How to improve: To enhance variety, incorporate more complex sentence structures like compound-complex sentences. Aim for a consistent blend of simple, compound, complex, and compound-complex sentences. Consider using introductory phrases, subordinate clauses, or appositives to enrich sentence structure.
Use Grammar Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits notable grammatical errors, such as subject-verb agreement ("is invested" should be "are invested"), word choice ("inspirit" should be "encourage"), article usage ("huge of money" should be "a large amount of money"), and improper preposition placement ("with it in mind" should be "with the intent of"). Some sentences lack parallelism ("ameliorated and achieve" should be "ameliorated and achieve").
- How to improve: Work on subject-verb agreement, appropriate word selection, and maintaining parallel structures. Review articles, prepositions, and conjunctions to ensure accurate usage. Practicing sentence construction with proper grammar in mind would be beneficial.
Use Correct Punctuation:
- Detailed explanation: Punctuation is generally applied, but there are inconsistencies. Commas are sporadically used, resulting in run-on sentences ("Additionally, more people… deteriorate"). Misplaced commas affect readability and meaning, like after introductory phrases ("Regarding the former, when the government…").
- How to improve: Focus on consistent comma usage after introductory elements and within complex sentences for clarity. Review comma rules related to introductory phrases, coordinating conjunctions, and clauses to enhance precision and readability.

Overall, the essay demonstrates an attempt at varied sentence structures and adequate grammar use. To improve, concentrate on refining sentence complexity, addressing grammatical errors by reviewing basic rules, and practicing punctuation to enhance readability and coherence. These enhancements will bolster the essay’s clarity and coherence, potentially elevating the band score.

Bài sửa mẫu

It is often suggested that the most effective means to ease traffic and transportation issues is by encouraging people to live in cities rather than other areas. While I acknowledge that living in cities can lead to fewer accidents, I firmly disagree that this is the optimal solution because improving the streets in suburbs and rural areas can bring about greater benefits.

Undoubtedly, cities boast safer conditions compared to other locales due to the substantial investment in their infrastructure, especially in large urban centers. This significant funding aimed at enhancing the local infrastructure results in fewer occurrences of potholes on city streets, subsequently reducing accidents caused by drivers losing control after hitting them. Additionally, the implementation of efficient traffic light systems and police-coordinated traffic control further enhances safety on city roads.

However, I firmly contend that it is not the optimal solution to encourage migration solely to cities. Instead, improving the quality of roads in other areas can alleviate both traffic problems and the strain on cities. Allocating government funds to the outskirts and countryside can elevate their infrastructure to match the effectiveness seen in cities. Moreover, the overpopulation of cities due to migration can exert pressure on roads, leading to rapid deterioration. Therefore, enhancing road quality in suburbs and rural regions enables residents to remain in their current locations while ensuring safe traffic flow, thereby alleviating the burden on cities.

In conclusion, while relocating citizens to cities may assist in addressing certain aspects of traffic problems, I firmly disagree that it is the best solution. The improvement of roads in suburban and rural regions addresses various issues and offers a more comprehensive approach to easing traffic congestion.