we would ban all forms of corporal punishment of children in vietnam

we would ban all forms of corporal punishment of children in vietnam

Firstly, the proposal aims to clarify how our policy would effectively eliminate corporal punishment. Specifically, our education policy, often overlooked, in combination with our financial policies, acts as a deterrent imposed on first-time offenders and general proponents of corporal punishment. This serves to discourage multiple relapses, thereby preventing prolonged financial burdens. Hence, individuals are motivated to precisely transition away from this form of corporal punishment and adopt more progressive and healthier disciplinary measures, all the while ensuring effectiveness in deterring corporal punishment, as previously discussed.

Secondly, our policy of separation entails a long-term trade-off that you appear to have overlooked. The temporary psychological damage and emotional separation are relatively inconsequential when contrasted with the enduring physical detriments of residing in a projected relationship with an abuser or within a household that fundamentally endorses violence as a solution to all issues. Another crucial benefit of separation is its capacity to break the vicious cycle of generational violence, preventing children from internalizing the message that violence is the solution and averting the transmission of such beliefs to subsequent generations. We would also like to emphasize that the new family into which children are reinstated offers a healthier framework for their development. Children, being the primary stakeholders in this context, deserve our focused attention.

Furthermore, your team has raised arguments that don't hold water, and you have failed to support the mechanisms and impacts behind those, such as the inevitable scenario of global punishment proliferating. You haven't provided adequate proof of that. In your worst-case scenario of parents resorting to other draconian methods of discipline, such as shouting, the child will at least be protected from the physical trauma and implications in the short and long run of being corporally abused. This is beneficial as it protects the fundamental right of the child to dignity and protection from violence. Moreover, you have provided inadequate proof that parents won't see this as a call to action and won't be incentivized to shift their behavior and tools to more progressive methods, instead of doubling down on corporally punishing their children.

We believe that the promulgation of these new policies in the media and elsewhere will act as a call to action for parents, urging them not to hit their children anymore but to consider and implement more progressive policies. Furthermore, you seem to have focused so much on escalation and discretion that you failed to realize the weigh-ins in this discussion. The ban not only affects the household but also schools, where teachers are currently shaming and physically subjugating their students to physical trauma and humiliation. The trade-off is definitive in that educational institutions cannot allow this type of punishment to go on. Furthermore, the scale of this particular facet is noticeable because all schools, especially primary and secondary schools, will be affected. What is more, parents are likely to observe a progressive change of mind and, as mentioned before, won't double down on their corporal punishment.

It also seems to hinge upon the idea that children won't recognize a policy change has taken place, even though we mentioned that the media will cover this, and children will be somehow exposed to this particular policy. Therefore, children will know their rights and stand up to fight them. In conclusion, our policy works because, as the second speaker has said before, it outlaws corporal punishment and provides incentives for parents to shift to more righteous and justifiable forms of discipline, which are more effective, in fact. Furthermore, your team hasn't provided any arguments against corporal punishment and our policy in general that hold water.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

1. "Firstly, the proposal aims to clarify how our policy would effectively eliminate corporal punishment. Specifically, our education policy, often overlooked, in combination with our financial policies, acts as a deterrent imposed on first-time offenders and general proponents of corporal punishment. This serves to discourage multiple relapses, thereby preventing prolonged financial burdens. Hence, individuals are motivated to precisely transition away from this form of corporal punishment and adopt more progressive and healthier disciplinary measures, all the while ensuring effectiveness in deterring corporal punishment, as previously discussed."

   -> "First, the proposal aims to elucidate how our policy would effectively eliminate corporal punishment. Specifically, our education policy, frequently overlooked, coupled with our financial strategies, serves as a deterrent for first-time offenders and advocates of corporal punishment. This discourages repeated offenses, preventing prolonged financial burdens. Consequently, individuals are incentivized to transition away from corporal punishment and embrace more progressive and healthier disciplinary measures, ensuring the efficacy in deterring corporal punishment, as discussed earlier."

   Explanation: Replacing "Firstly" with "First" and using more varied vocabulary throughout the paragraph enhances formality and clarity. The term "elucidate" is a more sophisticated alternative to "clarify," and the revised sentence structure improves overall readability.

2. "Secondly, our policy of separation entails a long-term trade-off that you appear to have overlooked. The temporary psychological damage and emotional separation are relatively inconsequential when contrasted with the enduring physical detriments of residing in a projected relationship with an abuser or within a household that fundamentally endorses violence as a solution to all issues. Another crucial benefit of separation is its capacity to break the vicious cycle of generational violence, preventing children from internalizing the message that violence is the solution and averting the transmission of such beliefs to subsequent generations. We would also like to emphasize that the new family into which children are reinstated offers a healthier framework for their development. Children, being the primary stakeholders in this context, deserve our focused attention."

   -> "Second, our policy of separation involves a long-term trade-off that you seem to have overlooked. The transient psychological distress and emotional detachment are comparatively inconsequential when juxtaposed with the lasting physical harms of residing in a projected relationship with an abuser or within a household that fundamentally advocates violence as a solution to all issues. Another pivotal advantage of separation is its potential to break the cycle of generational violence, preventing children from internalizing the message that violence is the solution and thwarting the transmission of such beliefs to subsequent generations. It’s essential to highlight that the new family into which children are reintegrated provides a healthier framework for their development. Children, as the primary stakeholders in this context, merit our focused attention."

   Explanation: Replacing "Secondly" with "Second" and refining the vocabulary throughout the paragraph enhances the formal tone. The term "involves" is more precise than "entails," and using varied expressions contributes to a more sophisticated and academic style.

3. "Furthermore, your team has raised arguments that don’t hold water, and you have failed to support the mechanisms and impacts behind those, such as the inevitable scenario of global punishment proliferating. You haven’t provided adequate proof of that. In your worst-case scenario of parents resorting to other draconian methods of discipline, such as shouting, the child will at least be protected from the physical trauma and implications in the short and long run of being corporally abused. This is beneficial as it protects the fundamental right of the child to dignity and protection from violence. Moreover, you have provided inadequate proof that parents won’t see this as a call to action and won’t be incentivized to shift their behavior and tools to more progressive methods, instead of doubling down on corporally punishing their children."

   -> "Moreover, your team has presented arguments that lack substantiation, and you have not provided sufficient support for the mechanisms and impacts, including the potential scenario of global punishment proliferating. There is insufficient evidence to validate this claim. In your worst-case scenario of parents resorting to other severe methods of discipline, such as shouting, the child will, at the very least, be shielded from the physical trauma and long-term implications of corporal abuse. This is advantageous as it safeguards the fundamental right of the child to dignity and protection from violence. Additionally, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim that parents won’t perceive this as a call to action and won’t be motivated to shift their behavior and tools towards more progressive methods, instead of persisting in corporal punishment."

   Explanation: Replacing "Furthermore" with "Moreover" and refining the vocabulary throughout the paragraph enhances formality. Using terms like "arguments that lack substantiation" and "insufficient evidence" strengthens the critique in a more academically appropriate manner. The revised sentences also contribute to a clearer and more precise expression of ideas.

4. "We believe that the promulgation of these new policies in the media and elsewhere will act as a call to action for parents, urging them not to hit their children anymore but to consider and implement more progressive policies. Furthermore, you seem to have focused so much on escalation and discretion that you failed to realize the weigh-ins in this discussion. The ban not only affects the household but also schools, where teachers are currently shaming and physically subjugating their students to physical trauma and humiliation. The trade-off is definitive in that educational institutions cannot allow this type of punishment to go on. Furthermore, the scale of this particular facet is noticeable because all schools, especially primary and secondary schools, will be affected. What is more, parents are likely to observe a progressive change of mind and, as mentioned before, won’t double down on their corporal punishment."

   -> "We contend that the dissemination of these new policies in the media and other forums will serve as a catalyst for parents, encouraging them to refrain from physically disciplining their children and, instead, contemplate and implement more progressive measures. Additionally, it appears that you have concentrated excessively on escalation and discretion, overlooking the nuances in this discourse. The prohibition not only impacts households but also extends to schools, where teachers are currently subjecting their students to physical trauma and humiliation. The trade-off is unequivocal, as educational institutions cannot permit this form of punishment to persist. Moreover, the magnitude of this particular aspect is conspicuous, affecting all schools, particularly primary and secondary schools. Furthermore, parents are likely to witness a gradual shift in mindset and, as mentioned earlier, are less likely to intensify their corporal punishment."

   Explanation: Replacing "We believe" with "We contend" and refining the vocabulary throughout the paragraph enhances the formality and academic tone. The term "serve as a catalyst" is more sophisticated than "act as a call to action," and the revised sentences contribute to a more precise and sophisticated expression of ideas.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Task Response: 6

• Answer All Parts of the Question:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay successfully addresses all parts of the prompt. It discusses the proposed ban on corporal punishment, explores the policies supporting it, and delves into the potential effects on various aspects of society, including families and schools. Relevant sections, such as the financial deterrent for first-time offenders and the impact on generational violence, are cited.
  • How to improve: While the essay is comprehensive, a clearer structure could enhance the reader’s understanding. Consider organizing the essay with distinct sections for each aspect discussed, providing a smoother flow.

• Present a Clear Position Throughout:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position in favor of banning corporal punishment. The stance is evident from the introduction to the conclusion, with a focus on the benefits of the proposed policy.
  • How to improve: To strengthen the clarity, explicitly state the position in the introduction and reiterate it in the conclusion. Additionally, avoid unnecessary repetition, ensuring that each paragraph contributes to reinforcing the central argument.

• Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

  • Detailed explanation: The ideas are presented logically, extended with detailed explanations, and supported by examples. Instances such as the psychological damage of staying in an abusive relationship and the potential shift in parents’ behavior are well-elaborated.
  • How to improve: To enhance coherence, consider using transitional phrases to guide the reader through the essay. Additionally, ensure that each supporting point is directly aligned with the main argument, avoiding tangential details.

• Stay on Topic:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, discussing the implications of banning corporal punishment. However, there are instances where the focus wavers, such as when addressing the opponent’s arguments about global punishment proliferation.
  • How to improve: Maintain a strict connection to the main topic throughout. When addressing opposing views, tie the discussion back to the central argument promptly to prevent any digression.

In summary, this essay effectively addresses the prompt, presents a clear stance, supports ideas with relevant details, and mostly stays on topic. To improve, consider refining the organization for better coherence and maintaining a more focused discussion throughout.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

• Organize Information Logically:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally organizes information logically, with a clear introduction and well-structured body paragraphs. The writer effectively introduces the proposal and follows a cohesive structure throughout the essay. For example, the discussion of education and financial policies is presented logically to support the discouragement of corporal punishment. However, there is a need for greater clarity in connecting ideas, especially in transitioning between paragraphs. Some sentences are overly complex, making it challenging for readers to follow the flow of arguments seamlessly.
  • How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider simplifying complex sentences for clarity. Clearly articulate the connection between ideas, ensuring smooth transitions between paragraphs. Use topic sentences to introduce the main point of each paragraph, providing a roadmap for the reader.

• Use Paragraphs:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses paragraphs effectively, each focusing on a specific aspect of the argument. However, there are instances where the essay could benefit from more effective paragraph breaks to create emphasis and improve overall readability. For instance, the transition between the second and third paragraphs could be clearer.
  • How to improve: Consider breaking down longer paragraphs into smaller, more focused ones. Each paragraph should have a clear central idea and relate closely to the overall argument. Ensure smooth transitions between paragraphs to maintain the coherence of ideas.

• Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay employs a variety of cohesive devices, such as linking words and phrases (e.g., "Firstly," "Secondly," "Furthermore," "Moreover," "In conclusion"). These help in signaling the organization of ideas. However, there is room for improvement in using more diverse and sophisticated cohesive devices within sentences to strengthen the connections between ideas. Additionally, some sentences lack explicit cohesive ties, making the progression of thought less smooth.
  • How to improve: Integrate a wider range of cohesive devices within sentences, such as pronouns, parallel structure, and transitional expressions. Ensure that each sentence flows logically from the previous one, reinforcing the overall coherence of the essay.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a generally logical organization and effective use of paragraphs, there is room for improvement in simplifying complex sentences, enhancing paragraph breaks, and diversifying cohesive devices. These improvements will contribute to a more coherent and cohesive presentation of ideas, ultimately elevating the overall quality of the essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 7

• Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable range of vocabulary, incorporating diverse terms such as "deterrent," "relapses," "progressive," "vicious cycle," "proliferating," "draconian," "escalation," and "discretion." These words contribute to a nuanced and sophisticated expression of ideas.
  • How to improve: To enhance the richness of vocabulary, consider introducing more specialized or context-specific terms. For instance, instead of using "new family," you might employ alternatives like "adoptive family" or "rehabilitative household" to convey a more precise meaning.

• Use Vocabulary Precisely:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay generally employs vocabulary with precision, as seen in phrases like "enduring physical detriments," "internalizing the message," and "fundamental right of the child." However, there are instances where the use of words such as "inconsequential" might be perceived as a bit strong or absolute.
  • How to improve: Ensure that strong words like "inconsequential" are used judiciously, especially when discussing complex issues. Consider nuanced alternatives, such as "comparatively minor," to avoid potential overstatement.

• Use Correct Spelling:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a high level of spelling accuracy. However, there is one instance where the word "weigh-ins" should be corrected to "considerations."
  • How to improve: Continue with the meticulous approach to spelling. To further enhance accuracy, consider proofreading the essay or using spelling-check tools for a final review.

In summary, the essay showcases a strong command of vocabulary, displaying both breadth and precision. To elevate the lexical resource to an even higher level, focus on incorporating nuanced and context-specific terms, using strong words judiciously, and maintaining the high standard of spelling accuracy demonstrated throughout the majority of the 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 exhibits a commendable range of sentence structures, including complex sentences with multiple clauses and effective transitions between ideas. For example, the author uses varied sentence structures to explain the proposal’s impact on corporal punishment, its deterrent effects, and the benefits of separation. However, there is room for improvement in introducing more sophisticated structures, such as inversion or conditional sentences, to enhance the overall variety and complexity.

  • How to improve: To elevate the grammatical range, consider incorporating inverted structures for emphasis and complexity. Additionally, experiment with conditional sentences to express hypothetical scenarios more effectively. For instance, instead of straightforwardly stating outcomes, employ conditional structures to add nuance and depth to the analysis.

• Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates generally accurate grammar and punctuation. However, there are instances where sentence construction could be refined for better clarity. For instance, in the sentence "Another crucial benefit of separation is its capacity to break the vicious cycle," the use of "is its" could be revised for a more concise expression. Additionally, there are minor punctuation issues, such as missing commas in certain places.

  • How to improve: To enhance grammatical accuracy, focus on simplifying complex constructions for clearer communication. Regarding punctuation, carefully review the use of commas to ensure they are appropriately placed for clarity and coherence. Consider employing shorter sentences where appropriate to avoid potential grammatical complexities.

Overall, the essay exhibits a strong command of grammar and a commendable range of sentence structures. To further elevate the score, continue refining sentence structures for increased complexity and clarity, and pay meticulous attention to punctuation for enhanced precision.

Bài sửa mẫu

The proposal to ban all forms of corporal punishment of children in Vietnam is a crucial step toward fostering a more nurturing environment for the younger generation. Let’s delve into how our policy aims to effectively eliminate corporal punishment without overlooking its potential drawbacks.

Firstly, our education policy, when combined with our financial policies, serves as a deterrent for first-time offenders and advocates of corporal punishment. This discourages repeated instances and prevents prolonged financial burdens. Consequently, individuals are encouraged to transition away from this form of punishment and adopt more progressive disciplinary measures, ensuring the effectiveness of our approach.

Secondly, the policy of separation involves a long-term trade-off. While there may be temporary psychological damage and emotional separation, these are relatively minor compared to the enduring physical detriments of residing in a relationship with an abuser or within a household endorsing violence. Separation also breaks the cycle of generational violence, preventing the transmission of such beliefs to subsequent generations. It’s important to note that the new family into which children are reinstated provides a healthier framework for their development.

Addressing concerns raised by opposing arguments, it is essential to emphasize that our policy aims to protect children from physical trauma and the long-term implications of corporal abuse. Even in the worst-case scenario of parents resorting to other discipline methods, such as shouting, the child is at least shielded from physical harm, safeguarding their fundamental right to dignity and protection from violence.

Furthermore, the promulgation of these policies in the media and other platforms serves as a call to action for parents, urging them to adopt more progressive methods of discipline. The impact extends beyond households to schools, where the ban on corporal punishment is definitive. Educational institutions cannot allow such practices to continue, affecting all schools, particularly primary and secondary schools.

Contrary to concerns about children not recognizing policy changes, the media coverage ensures that children are aware of their rights. This exposure empowers them to stand up against corporal punishment. In conclusion, our policy effectively outlaws corporal punishment, providing incentives for parents to shift to more righteous and justifiable forms of discipline, which are proven to be more effective. The opposition’s arguments against corporal punishment and our policy lack substantial evidence and fail to hold water.