The use of mobile phones is as antisocial as smoking. Smoking is banned in certain places so mobile phones should be banned like smoking. To what extent do you agree or disagree

Many people enunciate the idea that the usage of smartphones can result in several detrimental implications on society as smoking does. For this reason, mobile phones should be prohibited in the same way as cigarette consumption has been. I partially concur with this opinion, as now will be discussed.

On the one hand, I advocate that both the utilization of personal phones and cigarettes in public engenders several downsides for community security. To begin with, many people would be forced to breathe the unpleasant odours root from those who have smoke nearby. This could contribute to numerous health issues such as lung cancer, and heart disease,… for second-hand smokers. Likewise, in many cases, personal phones have destructive impacts in which users are not responsible for the privacy of others . For instance, some students who use smartphones in classes, or libraries,…without permission could affect the concentration of other students with the a sound from their mobile phones .

On the other hand, I am an opponent of the smartphone’s prohibition policies for several reasons. Firstly, there is a wide range of practical alternative actions to alleviate the phone’s negative influences on surrounding people. For example, setting the phone in plane mode, wearing headphones, and answering phone calls with a lower voice could help users to reduce the risks of interrupting a lecture, or other tasks. Secondly, mobile phones often provide users them with many useful applications such as e-dictionaries, searching machines, or online games…. Thus, it is still beneficial for users to promote the work productivity, and kill time without necessarily bothering surrounding people.
In recapitulation, while I agree that mobile phones sometimes disturb people’s work or study, I believe they it should not be banned since many feasible actions can be taken to mitigate the downsides and the merits of its are far outweigh the disadvantages.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"enunciate the idea" -> "articulate the notion"
Explanation: "Enunciate" is more commonly used in the context of speech clarity rather than expressing ideas. "Articulate" is a more appropriate synonym in academic writing to convey expressing an idea clearly.
"detrimental implications" -> "negative consequences"
Explanation: "Implications" can imply indirect or suggestive outcomes, whereas "consequences" directly refers to results. "Negative consequences" is clearer and more direct in this context.
"partially concur with this opinion" -> "partially agree with this viewpoint"
Explanation: "Concur" is slightly formal but less commonly used compared to "agree" in academic writing. "Viewpoint" is a more precise term for expressing a stance or perspective.
"On the one hand, I advocate" -> "Firstly, I argue"
Explanation: "Advocate" implies strong support, whereas "argue" is more neutral and commonly used to present a point in academic discourse.
"engenders several downsides" -> "poses several disadvantages"
Explanation: "Engenders" is less commonly used in formal writing compared to "poses" when discussing negative effects or drawbacks.
"would be forced to breathe the unpleasant odours root from those who have smoke nearby" -> "might inhale unpleasant odors emanating from nearby smokers"
Explanation: The original sentence is awkward and unclear. "Emanating" is a more precise and formal word than "root from," enhancing clarity and formality.
"could contribute to numerous health issues such as lung cancer, and heart disease, … for second-hand smokers" -> "may lead to various health issues such as lung cancer and heart disease for bystanders"
Explanation: The list format and ellipsis are inappropriate in academic writing. "Bystanders" is a clearer term for those affected by second-hand smoke.
"destructive impacts in which users are not responsible for the privacy of others" -> "negative impacts where users disregard others’ privacy"
Explanation: "Destructive impacts" is overly dramatic and informal. "Disregard" is more precise than "are not responsible for."
"students who use smartphones in classes, or libraries, … without permission could affect the concentration of other students with the a sound from their mobile phones" -> "students using smartphones in classrooms or libraries without permission may disrupt others’ concentration with their ring tones"
Explanation: The original sentence is disjointed and unclear. Removing unnecessary ellipsis and specifying "ring tones" instead of "a sound" improves clarity.
"I am an opponent of the smartphone’s prohibition policies" -> "I oppose policies that prohibit smartphones"
Explanation: "Opponent" is less formal than "oppose" in academic writing. Using a direct verb enhances clarity and formality.
"practical alternative actions" -> "practical measures"
Explanation: "Alternative actions" is redundant. "Measures" is more concise and appropriate in this context.
"setting the phone in plane mode" -> "activating airplane mode on the phone"
Explanation: "Setting the phone in plane mode" is awkward. "Activating airplane mode" is the correct phrase.
"answering phone calls with a lower voice" -> "speaking softly during phone calls"
Explanation: "Lower voice" is less precise and formal. "Speaking softly" is clearer and more appropriate in academic writing.
"mobile phones often provide users them with many useful applications" -> "mobile phones often offer users a variety of useful applications"
Explanation: The original sentence is redundant and awkward. Simplifying and restructuring it improves clarity and formality.
"the merits of its are far outweigh the disadvantages" -> "the benefits far outweigh the drawbacks"
Explanation: "Merits of its" is grammatically incorrect. "Benefits" and "drawbacks" are clearer and more formal terms for discussing advantages and disadvantages.

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

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Task Response: 6

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay addresses both sides of the argument, discussing reasons for and against the proposition that mobile phones should be banned like smoking. It acknowledges the potential negative impacts of both mobile phones and smoking in public spaces.
- How to improve: The essay could improve by providing more specific examples and expanding on the consequences of mobile phone usage in public spaces. Additionally, it could elaborate more on why the writer only partially agrees with the idea rather than presenting a more nuanced perspective.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear position by stating that the writer partially agrees with the proposition. However, the position could be more strongly articulated and consistently maintained throughout the essay.
- How to improve: To enhance clarity, the writer should explicitly state their stance in the introduction and conclusion, and ensure that each body paragraph supports this position.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas but lacks depth and development. It briefly mentions the negative impacts of both mobile phones and smoking, but the examples provided are somewhat generic and could be further expanded upon.
- How to improve: To improve, the writer should provide more specific and detailed examples to support their arguments. Additionally, they should elaborate on the consequences of mobile phone usage and smoking in public spaces to strengthen their points.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay mostly stays on topic but could benefit from greater focus on the comparison between mobile phone usage and smoking in public spaces.
- How to improve: To stay more focused, the writer should avoid tangential discussions and ensure that each point directly relates to the comparison between mobile phone usage and smoking in public spaces. They should also consistently refer back to the prompt throughout the essay to maintain relevance.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a moderate level of logical organization. It begins with an introduction that presents the author’s stance and outlines the main points to be discussed. Each paragraph focuses on a specific aspect of the argument, with clear transitions between ideas. However, there are instances where the flow of ideas could be smoother, such as the abrupt transition between discussing the downsides of mobile phones and presenting counterarguments.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, ensure that each paragraph follows a clear structure: topic sentence, supporting details, and a concluding sentence. Additionally, strive for seamless transitions between paragraphs by using transitional phrases or sentences to guide the reader through the progression of ideas.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs paragraphs to separate distinct ideas, which aids readability. Each paragraph focuses on a specific point, such as the drawbacks of mobile phones in public spaces or the benefits of alternative actions. However, some paragraphs contain multiple ideas without clear delineation, leading to occasional confusion.
- How to improve: Improve paragraph structure by ensuring that each paragraph addresses only one main idea. Start each paragraph with a topic sentence that introduces the main point, followed by supporting details and examples. Consider breaking longer paragraphs into shorter ones to improve clarity and coherence.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay utilizes a range of cohesive devices to connect ideas and maintain coherence. Transition words and phrases such as "to begin with," "likewise," "on the other hand," and "in recapitulation" are used effectively to indicate shifts in argument or introduce new points. Additionally, pronouns and conjunctions are employed to link sentences within paragraphs.
- How to improve: While cohesive devices are used appropriately, diversifying the range of connectors could further enhance coherence. Introduce a variety of transition words and phrases to provide a smoother flow between ideas. Additionally, ensure that pronouns and conjunctions are used consistently throughout the essay to maintain coherence and clarity.

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 satisfactory range of vocabulary, incorporating terms such as "enunciate," "utilization," "downsides," "engenders," "practical alternative actions," "alleviate," "merits," and more. However, there are instances where vocabulary could be more varied and sophisticated, such as in the repetition of phrases like "For example," and "On the one hand…On the other hand." Additionally, some expressions are overly generalized, lacking specificity and depth.
- How to improve: To enhance vocabulary range, strive for more diverse synonyms and expressions. Instead of relying on common phrases like "For example," consider alternatives like "illustrating this point," "demonstrating this notion," or "to illustrate." Additionally, incorporate specialized vocabulary relevant to the topic to enrich the essay’s lexical resource.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates both precise and imprecise usage of vocabulary. For instance, the term "engenders" effectively conveys the idea of bringing about or causing, whereas phrases like "numerous health issues such as lung cancer, and heart disease" lack specificity and could be more precisely articulated. Furthermore, there are instances where vocabulary choices could be more nuanced and accurate to convey the intended meaning.
- How to improve: To improve precision, strive for clarity and specificity in word choice. Instead of using broad terms like "health issues," specify the exact ailments resulting from second-hand smoke exposure, such as "respiratory illnesses like asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease." Additionally, carefully consider the connotations and shades of meaning of chosen words to ensure they accurately convey the intended message.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a reasonable level of spelling accuracy, with most words spelled correctly. However, there are several instances of misspelled words, such as "root" instead of "arise," "recapitulation" instead of "recapitulating," and "merits of its" instead of "its merits." These errors slightly detract from the overall clarity and professionalism of the essay.
- How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, employ strategies such as proofreading carefully, utilizing spell-check tools, and expanding familiarity with commonly misspelled words. Additionally, consider reviewing spelling rules and patterns to strengthen spelling proficiency and minimize errors in future writing endeavors.

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 commendable attempt at utilizing a variety of sentence structures, including complex sentences and conditional constructions. However, there is a tendency towards repetitive sentence structures, particularly in the use of introductory phrases. For instance, the frequent use of "On the one hand" and "On the other hand" becomes predictable and diminishes the essay’s coherence. Additionally, some sentences lack clarity due to awkward phrasing or word choice, such as "many people enunciate the idea" which could be expressed more clearly.
- How to improve: To enhance the variety and effectiveness of sentence structures, try incorporating more diverse sentence patterns, such as inverted sentences, parallel structures, and rhetorical questions. Vary the use of transition phrases to maintain coherence while avoiding repetition. Also, focus on clarity and precision in expression, opting for simpler and more direct language where possible to convey ideas effectively.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good command of grammar and punctuation overall, with few errors that detract from understanding. However, there are several instances of grammatical mistakes and punctuation errors throughout the essay. For example, in the sentence "This could contribute to numerous health issues such as lung cancer, and heart disease,… for second-hand smokers," the ellipsis is incorrectly used, and there is a lack of parallelism in the list. Additionally, there are errors in subject-verb agreement ("users are not responsible for the privacy of others") and article usage ("the a sound from their mobile phones").
- How to improve: Focus on proofreading carefully to identify and correct grammatical errors and punctuation mistakes. Pay attention to parallelism in lists and consistency in verb tense and subject-verb agreement. Review the use of articles (definite and indefinite) and punctuation marks (commas, ellipses, etc.) to ensure clarity and accuracy in sentence structure. Consider seeking feedback from peers or utilizing grammar resources to refine grammar and punctuation skills further.

Bài sửa mẫu

Many individuals articulate the notion that the use of smartphones can have negative consequences on society similar to smoking. Accordingly, there is a suggestion that mobile phones should be banned in public spaces, akin to smoking bans. I partially agree with this viewpoint, as I will now discuss.

Firstly, I argue that both the use of personal phones and smoking in public places pose several disadvantages for community well-being. To begin with, individuals nearby might inhale unpleasant odors emanating from nearby smokers, which may lead to various health issues such as lung cancer and heart disease for bystanders. Similarly, the negative impacts where users disregard others’ privacy can be observed with smartphones. For instance, students using smartphones in classrooms or libraries without permission may disrupt others’ concentration with their ring tones.

However, I oppose policies that prohibit smartphones outright for several reasons. Firstly, there are practical measures that can be taken to mitigate the negative impacts of phone usage on others. For example, activating airplane mode on the phone or speaking softly during phone calls can help reduce disruptions in public spaces. Secondly, mobile phones often offer users a variety of useful applications that can enhance productivity and provide entertainment without necessarily bothering those around them.

In conclusion, while I agree that mobile phones can sometimes disturb others in public spaces, I believe that outright bans are not the solution. Instead, practical measures can be implemented to mitigate these disturbances, and the benefits of mobile phone usage far outweigh the drawbacks.