You should spend about 40 minutes on this task. Write about the following topic: Some people argue that all experimentation on animals is bad and should be outlawed. However, others believe that important scientific discoveries can be made from animal experiments. Can experimentation on animals be justified? Are there any alternatives? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge and experience. Write at least 250 words.

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Write about the following topic:

Some people argue that all experimentation on animals is bad and should be outlawed. However, others believe that important scientific discoveries can be made from animal experiments.

Can experimentation on animals be justified? Are there any alternatives?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge and experience.

Write at least 250 words.

currently, accompanied by the advent and advancement of several regulars related to the conservation and life-deserved rights of a multispecies platform in general and wild animals in particular, it provokes an outcry to some behaviours which directly threaten the viability of faunas, definitely, not except to laboratory research above their body. As far as I concern, considering mixed opinions and unifying a mutual concurrence are necessary to weigh up solutions and realise the transparent sites.
on the one hand, overwhelmed with exploiting and studying the anatomical mechanism, profiting from their pragmatic value to lead to the expansion of non-moral nature, and even driving a multitude of species to the brink of extinction, it is not strange when blooming arguments are making no hesitant to mention all of the risks above respectively and begging the question that whether we are exalting the social welfare of human exceedingly and turn a blind eye instead of taking the responsibility upon ourself to this criticism. namely, we depend on an ecosystem where only spend for superior species to assert dominance, hence it completely takes a justification that the element at the top of the food chain can control and determine the fate of others. however, each animal reflects a crucial link as well as secures the balance between the food chain and habitat, therefore our activities will potentially be counterproductive without the clear guidelines and policies of reputable basis when we make an attempt to touch one hand on this sustainable equilibrium. nowadays, even countless rules are ratified by the governments of nations to maximize effective research while still minimising damage to other fauna, especially endangered animals, it also mitigates the hidden downsides or simply due to the fact that humans make up the guilt throughout history.
on the other hand, although sometimes the hidden detriments of unofficial studies are implemented based on physiology and the body might be heckled by the public orienting to ethical problems, advocating for these activities isn't impossible overtly. foremostly, beyond some kind of ironclad affirmation such as reaping a promising value relevant to science or being the potential method to pick out the way to self-curing in front of permanent ailments, under no circumstances does research play endangered roles entirely, the accidents and unexpected consequences when explore animals bloom from informal experiments as well as account for a tiny part of almost missions. Besides, it is a mistake if the main aim always is regarded to prioritise personal ambitions for humans, currently, not only reflecting the physical private positions but also is a platform for improving and expanding the solutions to preserve species, through comprehending psychological and behavioural characteristics of each one, people can ascertain the service and thrive as long as secure a balance. Additionally, the more obstacles are placed, the more propensity for canvassing a multitude of organisations and manoeuvring researcher labour to expedite the new path. for instance, cloning methods are cases in point to epitomize the solid stepping stone for preservation, when it can grow from a basic stem cell taken from an animal's vegetative organs without damaging the movement-ability organism to form new organs and even bodies suitable for research. therefore, disregarding certain limitations, research still is maintained to contribute to profit for humans and animals in lieu of exploitation out of control.
in conclusion, considering and weighing up the pros and cons to ensure the viability of animals while continuing to carry out surveys on them is of paramount significance depending on our perception joining via being against illegal research and endorsing beneficial studies.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

1. "currently, accompanied by the advent and advancement of several regulars related to the conservation and life-deserved rights of a multispecies platform in general and wild animals in particular…" -> "Presently, amidst the emergence and progression of various norms concerning the conservation and inherent rights of biodiversity in general, and wild fauna in particular…"
   Explanation: "Currently" is replaced with "Presently" for a more formal tone. "Regulars" is vague and doesn’t fit; "norms" is more appropriate. "Life-deserved" is awkward; "inherent" is more precise. "Multispecies platform" is unconventional; "biodiversity" is a more standard term.

2. "…it provokes an outcry to some behaviours which directly threaten the viability of faunas…" -> "…it elicits concern regarding behaviors that directly threaten the viability of fauna…"
   Explanation: "Outcry to" is incorrect usage; "elicits concern regarding" is more suitable. "Behaviours" should be singular to match the singular "viability"; "faunas" should be singular "fauna" since it refers to the collective group.

3. "…definitely, not except to laboratory research above their body." -> "…particularly concerning laboratory research involving their bodies."
   Explanation: "Definitely, not except to" is grammatically incorrect and unclear; "particularly concerning" clarifies the focus. "Above their body" is ambiguous; "involving their bodies" is clearer and more formal.

4. "As far as I concern, considering mixed opinions and unifying a mutual concurrence are necessary to weigh up solutions and realise the transparent sites." -> "In my view, considering divergent opinions and achieving consensus are essential for evaluating solutions and identifying transparent approaches."
   Explanation: "As far as I concern" is grammatically incorrect; "In my view" is a more appropriate expression. "Mixed opinions and unifying a mutual concurrence" is convoluted; "divergent opinions and achieving consensus" is clearer. "Weigh up solutions" is informal; "evaluating solutions" is more formal. "Realise the transparent sites" is unclear; "identifying transparent approaches" is more precise.

5. "…overwhelmed with exploiting and studying the anatomical mechanism, profiting from their pragmatic value to lead to the expansion of non-moral nature…" -> "…overwhelmed by the exploitation and study of anatomical mechanisms, capitalizing on their pragmatic value to fuel the expansion of amorality…"
   Explanation: "Exploiting and studying the anatomical mechanism" is unclear and redundant; "exploitation and study of anatomical mechanisms" is clearer. "Profiting from their pragmatic value to lead to the expansion of non-moral nature" is awkward; "capitalizing on their pragmatic value to fuel the expansion of amorality" is more precise.

6. "…blooming arguments are making no hesitant to mention all of the risks above respectively…" -> "…arguments are not hesitating to mention all the aforementioned risks…"
   Explanation: "Blooming arguments" is an unusual phrase; "arguments" is sufficient. "Making no hesitant" is incorrect; "not hesitating" is the correct form. "All of the risks above respectively" is wordy; "all the aforementioned risks" is clearer and more concise.

7. "…begging the question that whether we are exalting the social welfare of human exceedingly and turn a blind eye instead of taking the responsibility upon ourself to this criticism." -> "…raising the question of whether we are excessively prioritizing human social welfare and turning a blind eye instead of taking responsibility for this criticism."
   Explanation: "Begging the question that whether" is incorrect; "raising the question of whether" is more precise. "Exalting" is overly dramatic; "prioritizing" is more appropriate. "Turn a blind eye instead of taking the responsibility upon ourself to this criticism" is awkward and unclear; "turning a blind eye instead of taking responsibility for this criticism" is clearer.

8. "…namely, we depend on an ecosystem where only spend for superior species to assert dominance…" -> "…specifically, we rely on an ecosystem where resources are allocated to superior species to assert dominance…"
   Explanation: "Namely" is misused; "specifically" is more fitting. "Only spend for superior species to assert dominance" is unclear; "resources are allocated to superior species to assert dominance" is clearer.

9. "…hence it completely takes a justification that the element at the top of the food chain can control and determine the fate of others." -> "…thus, it is entirely justifiable that the apex predator can control and determine the fate of others."
   Explanation: "Hence it completely takes a justification" is awkward; "thus, it is entirely justifiable" is clearer. "The element at the top of the food chain" is vague; "the apex predator" is more specific.

10. "…however, each animal reflects a crucial link as well as secures the balance between the food chain and habitat, therefore our activities will potentially be counterproductive without the clear guidelines and policies of reputable basis when we make an attempt to touch one hand on this sustainable equilibrium." -> "…however, each animal represents a crucial link and contributes to the balance within the food chain and habitat; thus, our activities may prove counterproductive without clear guidelines and policies based on reputable research when intervening in this delicate equilibrium."
    Explanation: "Reflects a crucial link as well as secures the balance" is convoluted; "represents a crucial link and contributes to the balance" is clearer. "Therefore our activities will potentially be counterproductive without the clear guidelines and policies of reputable basis when we make an attempt to touch one hand on this sustainable equilibrium" is unclear and awkward; "thus, our activities may prove counterproductive without clear guidelines and policies based on reputable research when intervening in this delicate equilibrium" is more precise.

11. "…nowadays, even countless rules are ratified by the governments of nations to maximize effective research while still minimising damage to other fauna, especially endangered animals, it also mitigates the hidden downsides or simply due to the fact that humans make up the guilt throughout history." -> "…presently, numerous regulations are enacted by national governments to optimize research effectiveness while minimizing harm to other fauna, particularly endangered species; these regulations also mitigate hidden downsides and address historical culpability."
    Explanation: "Nowadays, even countless rules are ratified by the governments of nations" is informal and unclear; "presently, numerous regulations are enacted by national governments" is clearer. "To maximize effective research while still minimizing damage to other fauna, especially endangered animals" is wordy; "to optimize research effectiveness while minimizing harm to other fauna, particularly endangered species" is more concise. "It also mitigates the hidden downsides or simply due to the fact that humans make up the guilt throughout history" is unclear; "these regulations also mitigate hidden downsides and address historical culpability" is clearer.

12. "…although sometimes the hidden detriments of unofficial studies are implemented based on physiology and the body might be heckled by the public orienting to ethical problems, advocating for these activities isn’t impossible overtly." -> "…although the hidden detriments of unofficial studies based on physiology may face public scrutiny due to ethical concerns, openly advocating for these activities is not impossible."
    Explanation: "Implemented based on physiology and the body might be heckled by the public orienting to ethical problems" is awkward

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Task Response: 6

• Answer All Parts of the Question:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to address all parts of the question by discussing both perspectives on animal experimentation and offering reasons for the author’s stance. However, the discussion could be more focused and directly tied to the prompt.
  • How to improve: To improve, ensure that each paragraph directly relates to the prompt and clearly addresses each aspect of the question. Provide more specific examples related to the ethical implications and potential alternatives to animal experimentation.

• Present a Clear Position Throughout:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay presents a position supporting the continuation of animal experimentation but also acknowledges ethical concerns. However, the stance is not consistently clear throughout the essay, as some points seem to support opposing views.
  • How to improve: To maintain a clear and consistent position, clearly state the author’s stance in the introduction and reinforce it throughout the essay. Avoid presenting conflicting arguments that may confuse the reader about the author’s position.

• Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to present, extend, and support ideas but lacks coherence and clarity in its argumentation. Some points are vaguely articulated, and the supporting examples are not always relevant or well-developed.
  • How to improve: Focus on presenting ideas logically and coherently, with each paragraph building upon the previous one. Provide specific examples and evidence to support each argument, ensuring they directly relate to the topic and enhance the overall argument.

• Stay on Topic:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay partially stays on topic by discussing the ethics and implications of animal experimentation. However, it occasionally deviates into tangential discussions that detract from the main argument.
  • How to improve: To stay on topic, maintain a clear focus on the issues raised in the prompt throughout the essay. Avoid discussing unrelated topics or ideas that do not directly contribute to addressing the question.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates some understanding of the prompt and presents relevant arguments, there is room for improvement in clarity, coherence, and focus. By refining the structure, providing more specific examples, and maintaining a consistent stance, 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 attempts to present arguments both for and against experimentation on animals, but the logical organization is hindered by convoluted sentence structures and unclear transitions between ideas. For example, the essay starts with a general introduction to the topic but lacks a clear thesis statement. The body paragraphs introduce arguments but often lack coherence due to unclear connections between sentences and ideas. Additionally, the conclusion feels rushed and doesn’t effectively summarize the main points.
  • How to improve: To enhance logical organization, focus on creating clear topic sentences for each paragraph that directly relate to the thesis statement. Use transition words and phrases to guide the reader through the flow of ideas. Consider outlining the essay before writing to ensure a clear and logical structure.

• Use Paragraphs:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to use paragraphs to organize ideas but struggles with coherence within paragraphs. Each paragraph introduces a new aspect of the argument but often lacks clear topic sentences and transitions between ideas. Additionally, some paragraphs contain multiple ideas, making them feel disjointed.
  • How to improve: Aim for each paragraph to focus on a single main idea related to the thesis statement. Start each paragraph with a clear topic sentence that previews the content of the paragraph. Ensure that each paragraph flows logically from the previous one, using transition words or phrases to connect ideas.

• Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay makes some attempts to use cohesive devices such as pronouns ("it," "they"), conjunctions ("although," "however"), and transition words ("on the one hand," "on the other hand"). However, these cohesive devices are not consistently used, leading to disjointed paragraphs and unclear connections between ideas. Additionally, there is a lack of variety in cohesive devices used throughout the essay.
  • How to improve: Increase the use of cohesive devices to improve the coherence of the essay. Use a variety of devices such as pronouns, conjunctions, transitional phrases, and repetition to create smoother transitions between sentences and paragraphs. Pay attention to the context in which cohesive devices are used to ensure they enhance rather than disrupt the flow of ideas.

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, with varied lexical choices throughout. For example, terms such as "multispecies platform," "pragmatic value," "exalting," "ironclad affirmation," and "propensity" showcase the writer’s attempt at diverse vocabulary usage.
  • How to improve: While the essay showcases a wide vocabulary, some terms might not be used in the most appropriate context or may lack clarity. Strive for precision in word choice to enhance coherence and ensure the reader fully grasps the intended meaning. Additionally, aim for a balance between sophisticated vocabulary and clarity to effectively convey your ideas.

• Use Vocabulary Precisely:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay occasionally lacks precision in vocabulary usage, leading to instances of unclear or awkward expression. For instance, phrases like "blooming arguments" and "service and thrive" could be refined for clearer communication. Additionally, some terms, such as "reaping a promising value" and "orienting to ethical problems," could be more precise or contextually appropriate.
  • How to improve: Focus on selecting words that precisely convey your intended meaning and avoid ambiguity. Utilize vocabulary that is suitable for the context of your argument, ensuring that each word contributes to the clarity and coherence of your writing. Consider revising unclear or awkward phrases to enhance the overall precision of your vocabulary usage.

• Use Correct Spelling:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates inconsistent spelling accuracy, with several instances of misspelled words and typographical errors. Examples include "regulars" instead of "regulations," "faunas" instead of "fauna," "orienting" instead of "oriented," and "cloning" instead of "cloning." These errors detract from the overall readability and professionalism of the essay.
  • How to improve: Prioritize proofreading and spell-checking to identify and correct spelling errors before finalizing your essay. Pay close attention to commonly misspelled words and ensure consistency in spelling throughout the text. Additionally, consider seeking feedback from peers or utilizing writing tools with built-in spell-check features to improve spelling accuracy. Regular practice and attention to detail will help enhance your spelling proficiency over time.

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 commendable attempt at incorporating a variety of sentence structures, although some structures are not utilized effectively. Complex sentences are attempted, but they often lack clarity and coherence, hindering the flow of the essay. For instance, the opening sentence is convoluted and challenging to decipher. While there is an effort to employ diverse sentence structures, the execution falls short in maintaining readability and coherence.
  • How to improve: To enhance the effectiveness of sentence structures, focus on clarity and coherence. Break down complex ideas into simpler sentences where necessary to improve readability. Additionally, strive for a balance between simple and complex structures to maintain the flow of ideas. Practice constructing sentences with clear subject-verb-object relationships to improve coherence.

• Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

  • Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits several grammatical errors and inconsistencies throughout its length. These errors include incorrect verb tense usage ("blooming" instead of "bloom"), subject-verb agreement issues ("the element… can control" should be "the element… can control and determine"), and awkward phrasing ("the accidents and unexpected consequences when explore animals bloom"). Additionally, punctuation marks are misused or omitted, impacting the clarity of the essay.
  • How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, consider revising sentences for proper subject-verb agreement and verb tense consistency. Pay close attention to the correct usage of articles, prepositions, and pronouns to avoid ambiguity. Practice using punctuation marks effectively to enhance clarity and convey intended meaning. Proofread the essay carefully to identify and correct errors before submission. Additionally, seeking feedback from peers or tutors on grammar and punctuation can be beneficial in improving overall accuracy.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates potential with its attempt to incorporate diverse sentence structures, there is a need for refinement in clarity, coherence, and grammatical accuracy to elevate the quality of writing to a higher band score.

Bài sửa mẫu

Currently, amidst the emergence and progression of various norms concerning the conservation and inherent rights of biodiversity in general, and wild fauna in particular, there arises concern regarding behaviors that directly threaten the viability of fauna, particularly concerning laboratory research involving their bodies. In my view, considering divergent opinions and achieving consensus are essential for evaluating solutions and identifying transparent approaches.

On one hand, overwhelmed by the exploitation and study of anatomical mechanisms, capitalizing on their pragmatic value to fuel the expansion of amorality, and even driving numerous species to the brink of extinction, it is not surprising that arguments are not hesitating to mention all the aforementioned risks respectively, raising the question of whether we are excessively prioritizing human social welfare and turning a blind eye instead of taking responsibility for this criticism. Specifically, we rely on an ecosystem where resources are allocated to superior species to assert dominance, thus, it is entirely justifiable that the apex predator can control and determine the fate of others. However, each animal represents a crucial link and contributes to the balance within the food chain and habitat; thus, our activities may prove counterproductive without clear guidelines and policies based on reputable research when intervening in this delicate equilibrium. Presently, numerous regulations are enacted by national governments to optimize research effectiveness while minimizing harm to other fauna, particularly endangered species; these regulations also mitigate hidden downsides and address historical culpability.

On the other hand, although the hidden detriments of unofficial studies based on physiology may face public scrutiny due to ethical concerns, openly advocating for these activities is not impossible. Foremost, beyond some kind of ironclad affirmation such as reaping a promising value relevant to science or being the potential method to pick out the way to self-curing in front of permanent ailments, under no circumstances does research play endangered roles entirely. The accidents and unexpected consequences when exploring animals bloom from informal experiments as well as account for a tiny part of almost missions. Additionally, it is a mistake if the main aim always is regarded to prioritize personal ambitions for humans. Currently, not only reflecting the physical private positions but also is a platform for improving and expanding the solutions to preserve species, through comprehending psychological and behavioral characteristics of each one, people can ascertain the service and thrive as long as secure a balance. Moreover, the more obstacles are placed, the more propensity for canvassing a multitude of organizations and maneuvering researcher labor to expedite the new path. For instance, cloning methods are cases in point to epitomize the solid stepping stone for preservation, when it can grow from a basic stem cell taken from an animal’s vegetative organs without damaging the movement-ability organism to form new organs and even bodies suitable for research. Therefore, disregarding certain limitations, research still is maintained to contribute to profit for humans and animals in lieu of exploitation out of control.

In conclusion, considering and weighing up the pros and cons to ensure the viability of animals while continuing to carry out surveys on them is of paramount significance depending on our perception joining via being against illegal research and endorsing beneficial studies.