The most important aim of science should be to improve people's lives. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Whether improving human life is the most crucial goal of science has sparked a heated debate. While I accept scientific products play an important role in daily life, I also believe that they also have some negative effects on humans.
On the one hand, there are a couple of vital reasons why I agree that development science makes our lives better. First and foremost, the state-of-the-art society with scientific study is extremely convenient because scientists take their time to research new items which results in helping inhabitants to save time to do some things. For example, mobile phones are the most successful in technological science, which helps people to search for information rapidly. Secondly, scientific research plays a crucial role in medicine since more and more cures have been investigated. As a result, a large amount of the population has been saved.
On the other hand, I am convinced that excepting the improvement of people’s lives, science also has disadvantages. First, researching science is the way to create the weapon of war. As a result, there is a nuclear bomb that can destroy and kill people in the blink of an eye. Secondly, humans tend to be lazy due to modern life with many products from scientific explorations which is considered convenient for our daily life. Consequently, a lot of inhabitants are affected negatively by science.
In conclusion, although the drawback in the aim of science still exists, it seems to me that our lives are much better if we utilize researching scientific products in the right way.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"improving human life" -> "the enhancement of human life"
Explanation: The phrase "the enhancement of human life" offers a more formal and precise way of expressing the improvement of human conditions, aligning better with academic style.
"crucial goal" -> "paramount objective"
Explanation: "Paramount objective" elevates the formality of the phrase, making it more suitable for an academic essay by using more sophisticated vocabulary.
"sparked a heated debate" -> "ignited considerable debate"
Explanation: Replacing "sparked a heated debate" with "ignited considerable debate" maintains the intended meaning while adopting a more formal tone that is appropriate for academic writing.
"scientific products" -> "scientific innovations"
Explanation: "Scientific innovations" is a more precise term that encompasses a broader range of scientific outcomes, including theories, methods, and tangible products, thereby enhancing the academic tone.
"a couple of vital reasons" -> "several compelling reasons"
Explanation: "Several compelling reasons" sounds more formal and provides a sense of stronger justification than "a couple of vital reasons," which is somewhat informal and vague.
"state-of-the-art society" -> "technologically advanced society"
Explanation: "Technologically advanced society" is a more precise and formal description, avoiding the colloquial tone of "state-of-the-art society."
"inhabitants" -> "individuals"
Explanation: While "inhabitants" can be correct in some contexts, "individuals" is more appropriate here as it directly refers to people benefiting from scientific advancements, without the geographical connotation of "inhabitants."
"the most successful in technological science" -> "among the most significant technological advancements"
Explanation: The phrase "among the most significant technological advancements" is more specific and academically formal, accurately reflecting the impact of mobile phones.
"a large amount of the population" -> "a significant portion of the population"
Explanation: "A significant portion of the population" is more accurate and formal than "a large amount," which is typically used for uncountable nouns.
"researching science" -> "scientific research"
Explanation: "Scientific research" is the correct and formal term, whereas "researching science" is awkward and not standard in academic writing.
"weapon of war" -> "instruments of warfare"
Explanation: "Instruments of warfare" is a more formal and encompassing term that includes a wide range of military tools and strategies, not just weapons.
"in the blink of an eye" -> "instantaneously"
Explanation: "Instantaneously" is a more formal and academically appropriate term than the idiomatic "in the blink of an eye."
"tend to be lazy" -> "tend towards lethargy"
Explanation: "Tend towards lethargy" uses more formal language to describe the inclination towards laziness, fitting better in an academic context.
"modern life with many products" -> "contemporary life enriched by numerous scientific innovations"
Explanation: "Contemporary life enriched by numerous scientific innovations" provides a more detailed and formal description of modern life’s benefits from science.
"drawback in the aim of science" -> "limitations in the objectives of scientific pursuit"
Explanation: "Limitations in the objectives of scientific pursuit" is a more precise and formal way to discuss the shortcomings or negative aspects related to the goals of science.
"our lives are much better" -> "our lives are significantly improved"
Explanation: "Our lives are significantly improved" is more formal and precise, effectively conveying the positive impact on human life.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Task Response: 6

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay partially addresses all parts of the question. It acknowledges both the positive and negative impacts of scientific advancements on human life, which is required to fully engage with the prompt. However, the discussion lacks depth in analyzing the extent to which improving human life should be the primary aim of science. The response primarily focuses on the effects of science rather than the prioritization of its goals.
- How to improve: To enhance task response, consider delving deeper into the extent to which science should prioritize improving human lives. This could involve discussing the ethical considerations, societal implications, and potential trade-offs associated with different aims of science.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position throughout, expressing agreement with the idea that improving human lives is a crucial aim of science. The stance is evident in statements such as "although the drawback in the aim of science still exists, it seems to me that our lives are much better if we utilize researching scientific products in the right way."
- How to improve: To further enhance clarity, ensure that the introduction clearly states the writer’s position on the issue and that each paragraph consistently supports this stance with relevant examples and arguments.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas but lacks thorough development and support. While it briefly mentions examples such as mobile phones and medical cures to support the positive impacts of science, these examples are not elaborated upon sufficiently to strengthen the argument. Additionally, the examples provided for the negative impacts of science, such as weapons of war and laziness, lack depth and specificity.
- How to improve: To improve, provide more detailed explanations and examples to support each argument. For instance, instead of simply stating that science creates weapons of war, delve into specific historical or contemporary examples to illustrate this point effectively.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic by discussing the extent to which improving human lives should be the aim of science. However, there are instances where the discussion veers slightly off track, such as the brief mention of laziness as a negative impact of science without clear relevance to the central argument.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, ensure that each point made directly relates to the central argument and thesis statement. Avoid tangential discussions that do not contribute substantially to the overall analysis of the prompt.

Overall, while the essay effectively presents a clear position and addresses some aspects of the prompt, it would benefit from deeper analysis, more thorough development of ideas, and closer adherence to the central theme. By providing more detailed explanations, specific examples, and maintaining focus on the prompt, the essay could achieve a higher band score for task response.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a clear attempt at organization by presenting both sides of the argument. However, the structure lacks consistency, resulting in occasional jumps between ideas. For instance, the transition between discussing the benefits of science to its drawbacks could be smoother, with clearer signposting of shifts in focus.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider employing a more structured approach such as the traditional essay format with distinct introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. Each paragraph should focus on one main idea, and transitions between paragraphs should be seamless to guide the reader through your argument effectively.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to use paragraphs, but they are not consistently structured or effectively utilized. Each paragraph should ideally contain a single main idea supported by relevant examples or evidence. However, some paragraphs in this essay cover multiple ideas without clear delineation.
- How to improve: Aim for clear topic sentences at the beginning of each paragraph to introduce the main idea, followed by supporting details and examples. Ensure each paragraph focuses on a specific aspect of the argument and transitions smoothly to the next. Consider breaking longer paragraphs into shorter ones to improve readability and coherence.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as transition words and phrases (‘on the one hand’, ‘on the other hand’, ‘in conclusion’). However, the use is limited, and there is room for improvement in the variety and effectiveness of cohesive devices.
- How to improve: Incorporate a wider range of cohesive devices throughout the essay to improve coherence and cohesion. This could include pronouns for reference (‘this’, ‘these’), conjunctions (‘however’, ‘therefore’), and repetition of key terms or ideas for emphasis. Ensure these devices are used appropriately to connect ideas logically and guide the reader through your argument. Additionally, pay attention to parallel structure and consistency in sentence construction to further enhance 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 varied word choices evident throughout. For instance, terms like "state-of-the-art," "inhabitants," "cures," and "explorations" are used to convey ideas effectively.
- How to improve: To enhance lexical variety further, consider incorporating more sophisticated synonyms and idiomatic expressions where appropriate. Additionally, strive to use vocabulary in context to strengthen the overall coherence and fluency of the essay.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: While the essay generally utilizes vocabulary effectively, there are instances where word choices could be more precise. For example, the phrase "the state-of-the-art society with scientific study" could be more succinctly expressed as "modern society driven by scientific research." Similarly, the term "investigated" may not be the most precise choice in the context of medical research.
- How to improve: Aim for greater precision by selecting words that precisely convey the intended meaning. This can involve using specific terminology related to the topic and ensuring that each word contributes directly to the clarity and depth of your argument.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: Overall, the spelling accuracy in the essay is satisfactory, with most words spelled correctly. However, there are a few instances of minor spelling errors, such as "excepting" instead of "besides," "explorations" instead of "exploration," and "habitants" instead of "inhabitants."
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, consider proofreading the essay carefully or using spell-checking tools to identify and correct errors. Additionally, practicing spelling through regular writing exercises can help reinforce correct spelling patterns.

Overall, the essay demonstrates a solid grasp of vocabulary and spelling, contributing to a coherent and reasonably well-developed argument. By focusing on enhancing lexical variety, precision, and spelling accuracy, the writer can further refine their language skills and potentially elevate the overall quality of their writing.

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 exhibits a fair variety of sentence structures, incorporating both simple and complex constructions. Simple sentences such as "While I accept scientific products play an important role in daily life" are interspersed with more complex ones like "First and foremost, the state-of-the-art society with scientific study is extremely convenient because scientists take their time to research new items which results in helping inhabitants to save time to do some things."
- How to improve: To further enhance the essay’s sophistication, strive for greater diversity in sentence structures. Incorporating compound and compound-complex sentences can add depth and coherence to your ideas. For instance, consider combining related ideas into compound sentences or incorporating dependent clauses to provide additional context or explanation.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: Overall, the essay demonstrates a reasonably strong command of grammar and punctuation. However, there are instances of grammatical errors and punctuation inaccuracies throughout the essay. For example, the sentence "While I accept scientific products play an important role in daily life, I also believe that they also have some negative effects on humans" contains redundant phrasing ("also" is repeated) and could be streamlined for clarity. Additionally, there are minor punctuation errors such as missing commas after introductory phrases ("First and foremost," "Secondly,") and inconsistent capitalization ("medicine since more and more cures").
- How to improve: Pay close attention to sentence structure and ensure clarity by eliminating unnecessary repetition. Review your use of punctuation, particularly commas, to ensure consistency and accuracy. Proofreading your work carefully can help identify and rectify such errors. Additionally, consider seeking feedback from peers or utilizing grammar-checking tools to refine your writing further.

Bài sửa mẫu

The paramount objective of science, whether it should primarily focus on enhancing human life, has ignited considerable debate. While I acknowledge that scientific innovations play a crucial role in enriching contemporary life, I also recognize that they entail certain drawbacks.

On one hand, there are several compelling reasons why I agree with the notion that scientific advancements significantly improve our lives. Firstly, in our technologically advanced society, scientific research leads to the creation of various tools and gadgets that simplify tasks and save time for individuals. For instance, mobile phones, among the most significant technological advancements, enable people to access information instantaneously, enhancing efficiency in daily activities. Secondly, scientific research in medicine has led to the development of numerous cures, thereby saving a significant portion of the population from various ailments and diseases.

On the other hand, I am mindful of the limitations in the objectives of scientific pursuit, as it can also result in negative consequences. Primarily, scientific research aimed at enhancing weaponry has led to the creation of instruments of warfare, such as nuclear bombs, posing grave threats to humanity. Additionally, the convenience provided by scientific innovations may lead individuals to tend towards lethargy, as modern life offers numerous products that cater to comfort and ease, potentially hindering personal productivity and physical well-being.

In conclusion, while acknowledging the drawbacks associated with the pursuit of scientific advancement, I firmly believe that when utilized responsibly, scientific innovations contribute significantly to improving human life. Therefore, it is imperative to strive for a balanced approach, ensuring that scientific progress aligns with the overarching goal of enhancing the quality of life for all individuals.

The most important aim of science should be to improve people’s lives. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?