dim/essayforum_raw_writing_10k huggingface dataset:
Barbara, when you write a memoir, it is normally a hindshight look at a previous experience or set of experiences. For example, if I were to write about coming to Canada with my family, I would start the paragraph by explaining why my family decided to move. Then I would narrate the negative and positive experiences I had during this time. From the heartbreak of leaving all that was familiar to me all the way to the unfamiliarity that I had when I arrived and the difficulties of blending into a new culture. I would end the paragraph by saying what it is that I believe made the whole ordeal worthwhile.  
  
What you wrote is less of a memoir and more of an IELTS task 2 essay introduction. Those are not the same kinds of essay. You are too dry, unimaginative, and basically boring in this essay. It does not reflect the sense of a person whose past has just been affected by a major upheaval and is now in the healing and immersion process.
## Deforestation

  
  
Hello! Please give me some advice to improve my writing skills, thank you!  
  
**Deforestation caused by human activity is happening in many parts of the world, with serious results for the environment. What do you think can be done to solve this problem?  
  
Support your opinion with reasons and examples from your own knowledge and experience.**  
  
Essay  
  
Human are responsible for a variety of environmental problems, including deforestation. Forests play a vital role in human's life but people, all over the world, have connived at the felling of trees. Governments and individuals, however, can take steps to reduce this damage that we are causing to the planet.  
  
Logging companies fell trees to make useful products like houses, bags and boxes, writing paper, furniture, etc. we all use these things in our daily lives and would not want to give them up. Yet we can be less wasteful in the way we use these things by reusing, reducing, recycling and also through authorities' policies.  
  
Governments could certainly take more effort to curb deforestation by introducing a series of rules and laws to govern it. This might force companies and residents to lessen the usage of trees. For example, they could impose green taxes on companies where they consume a large amount of wood in their production. In addition, cutting must be replaced by planting young trees to replace the older ones that were cut. In this way, enterprises would be encouraged to use materials which are more environmentally sustainable.  
  
Individuals should also take responsibility for their impact. We can reuse bags instead of throwing the bag away after using only once and take the bag with us on our next shopping trip. Besides, when it really has enough life, we can bring the bag to a recycling center as paper is so easy to recycle. Last but not least, reducing might be also an effective action. For instance, reading online news articles instead of newspaper, as the advantage of technology, and using cloth napkins instead of paper ones.  
  
In conclusion, both national governments and individuals must play their part in eliminating logging trees. Through policies and daily habits, we can really make a difference in this serious problem.
Hello, if you don't mind, I would like to point out some grammar corrections for you.  
  
1. "but people, all over ..." => I am confused by this sentence. I think you what you mean by this sentence is that People all over the world collectively take advantages from cutting down the trees. If that's so, I think you should use another word instead of 'felling'.  
  
2. I think paragraph 2 is better if you rewrite it to something like this:  
"Logging companies **cut** trees to make ...  
**But** we can be less ..."  
  
In the last sentence, I think the usage of word 'yet' is not suitable because 'yet' has a slightly different meaning than 'but', like it has a more shocking effect in contradicting the previous sentence. Hence it is better to use 'but'.  
  
3. Paragraph 3  
"... taxes on companies **that** consume a ...  
... by planting **sapling** to replace ...  
**This way**, enterprises would be ..."  
  
4. I am not really convinced that paragraph 4 is appropriate to answer the prompt. The prompt asks about solutions to prevent deforestation and I don't think plastic bags is relevant to the problem. The second point about newspaper and cloth napkins is fine I guess.  
  
Perhaps you can replace the first point by discussing about how individuals can help to push the creation of deforestation law by actively advising their government.  
  
I think that's all. Best of luck!
Nguyen, please remember that there is a 3 sentence minimum requirement for each paragraph written in a Task 2 essay. That is required in order to help you improve your sentence structure and grammatical presentation in relation to the coherence and cohesiveness of your essay. There are several paragraphs in this presentation that are overly long or sentences that can be considered as run-on sentences. Always present only one topic per sentence, never try to connect two separate discussion sentences by using commas. That creates run-ons and also blurs the discussion being presented.  
  
Good work on responding to the direct question in the prompt paraphrase. This shows that you understood what type of discussion was required for the topic. However, you still came short of the minimum sentence requirement. Also, you mentioned in the first sentence that humans are responsible for environmental problems. That is a discussion deviation. It changed the subject of the paragraph. What you should have said instead was :  
  
*Man is responsible for deforestation because of his activities. These deforestation activities happen worldwide.*  
  
Try to use as little of the original keywords in your essay to show your LR skills. That is why I used the term "worldwide" rather than "all over the world". That phrase is still too similar to the original which was "many parts of the world."
## generosity between nations

  
  
Present a written argument or case to an educated reader with no specialist knowledge of the following topic.  
  
**Should wealthy nations be required to share their wealth among poorer nations by providing such.....**  
  
You should write at least 250 words.  
  
Use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and with relevant evidence.  
  
The situation of world nations is different, some countries developed while most of them are poor, although they have the same resource. The wealthy nations, however, utilized their resources efficiency. They characterize law unemployment, higher saving, agricultural improvement and higher level of education, its vice versa to the poor nations. In spite there is a food security in the world, the least developed nations are the most ones, further illiteracy is high.  
  
Therefore, on the one hand, it's the responsibility of the government of poor nations to invest their education and cultivate their farms to get food. One other hand, in my view as there a high saving in the wealth nations, they afford to support the poor nations, to eliminate the illiteracy in the word and to get a sufficient food, it would be very good to support.  
  
The aid can be through the world organizations, particularly the UN agencies or any other international agency. This will lead to encourage the hospitality among nations. Helping and supporting each other in the difficult times will make the world best, because a friend indeed is a friend need.  
  
This support from the wealth nations to the poor nations, whether its food or education or any other support will likely to lower the number of immigrants flee from their countries to seek food, shelter and education.  
  
Finally I encourage the governments of poor nations to stop the corruption, allocate their resources efficiency, unlike their counter part of wealthy nations. One time in the future, they may be those giving the Aid.
Hello! Please give me some advice to improve my writing skills, thank you!  
  
## the number of criminal cases in England and Wales

  
  
The chart below shows three different crimes and the number of cases committed between 1970 and 2005 in England and Wales.  
  
ESSAY  
  
The given line chart provides information about three different crimes happened between 1970-2005 in England and Wales.  
  
Generally, the two countries had the most car theft committed in 1970 to 2005, while there were few street robberies caused in the 35 years. Besides, the amount of car theft met a tremendous change after 1990.  
  
Firstly, car theft gradually increased from 0.4 million to 1 million between 1970 to 1990 which was the highest amount in the three criminals. Placed in the second role, house burgling boost from 0.2 million 0.6 million through the same 20 years. Instead of increasing, barely did street robbery caused from 1970 to 1990.  
  
There was a huge change in 1995 for the selected criminals in England and Wales, the amount of car theft expanded to 1.6 million which is the highest point of the 35 years, then declined rapidly back to 1 million until 2005. House burgling also climbed to the top point which is roughly 0.7 million and slowly back to 0.5 million in 2005. Street robbery, on the other hand, remained stable and changed became slightly higher at 0.2 million in the last five years.  
  
*
Ronia, the summary overview is incomplete due to 2 missing information, the 3 types o crimes and the measurement reference for the numbers (millions). Other than that, the summary you presented plus the trending statement is acceptable. Again, you need to properly summarize the information because that will help you outline the discussion you will be presenting. So make that part as accurate as possible. It is something designed to first help you figure out how to write the essay and second, help the reader understand what you wrote.  
  
Some grammar issues exist in your essay:  
- "changed became" which should be referred to as "and changed slightly".  
- "Instead of increasing, barely did street..." must be presented as "Rather than increasing there was a decline in street robberies from..."  
  
You must learn when the connecting word "the" must be used. In the phrase "highest point of the 35 years", "the" was not a required connecting word since this is a complete phrase rather than a sentence.
I think you should combine the first two graphs together. In addition, the sentence "Besides, the amount of car theft met a tremendous change after 1990." should be put at the later graphs not the introduction. The introduction should only give sketchy references of the chart.  
  
Besides, I think "Instead of increasing" is not the suitable one that you want to use to express the contrast, you should use "In contrast,..." or "On the contrary,...."  
  
These are only my opinions and they might not be totally indispensable, I am glad if you have a glance
## energy used for different kinds of purpose

  
  
Given are two figures providing a comparison of the percentage of energy used for different kinds of purpose in per Austrailan family and the prevalance of greenhouse gas emission from these activities  
  
It is evident from the information provided that almost people spent the largest proportion of their using on heating while water heating was the area receiving the second share of consuming and it is also the cause of greenhouse gas emissions the most.  
  
The percentage of spending on heating was highest in Austrailian household at 42% while they allocated just 7% of their using energy for refrigeration.In terms of water heating , the figure was double as much as other appliances , at 30% and 15% respectively.Lighting and cooling were the two least outstanding groups in the amount of consumed energy with 2% and 4% in total.  
  
It is also interesting to note that the popularity of greenhouse is far more common in water heating than in any other factor revealed at approxiamately 32%, which was twice as much as that of heating. An amount of 28% of other appliances was seen in causing greenhouse gas emission effect , which was followed by refrigeration with only 14%. Lighting accounted for 8% in comparision with only a negligeble 3% of cooling in Austrailian families greenhouse gas emissions.
Firstly, I don't see any chart attached so I cannot examine how exactly you describe those charts. But I recognized some of your mistakes.  
  
~~Given are two figures ...~~ -> The pie charts provide information/ give breakdowns of/ show the distributions of/  
  
~~al~~most people  
~~it is also the cause of ...~~: Actually I don't know what you mean because you didn't upload the charts. but on this essay, you use the simple present so it would be "was" and ~~"the most"~~  
  
The percentage of energy spending ... while ~~they allocated ... for refrigeration~~ This figure for refrigeration took up/ made up/ accounted for around 7%  
  
... the figure ~~was double ... 15% respectively~~ (I don't know what took up 30% and 15% and you had to show the reader what that number represented for) -> doubled proportions of A and B, which are 30% and 15% respectively.  
  
~~It is also interesting to note~~ You are not allowed to show your personal opinion in the chart description.  
  
To be honest, you should upload your charts so we are able to help you thoroughly.
*Question : In today's competitive world, many families find it important for both parents to go out to work. While some say that children in these families benefit from the additional income, others feel they lack support because of their parents' absence.  
  
Discuss both views and give your own opinions (write at least 250 words in 40 minutes)*  
  
## parents without profit from work and their kids

  
  
In the era of technology, it is gradually become more competitive to make money. Hence, in many families both parents decide to go out for work in order to earn more money. This trend has sparked a heated argument. While many people believe that the extra income resulting from that will be advantageous for these families' children, others concede that they are likely to have insufficient parental support. Both views will be clarified hereafter in this essay and I will propose my perspective as well.  
  
It is comprehensible to say that additional earnings profit these children due to some reasons.  
The most obvious excuse is that money plays a tremendous role in people's lives. Both parents take up working means that more money are made and they will be able to provide their children with advanced facilities and a better environment. In addition, having higher income also enable children in these family to acquire better education. In fact, a lot of prestigious schools which apply foreign curriculum and provide suitable environment to keep up students' talent often require high intuition fee. Take my village as an example, only one out of the people was able to obtain universities because of the fees required to afford university learnings such as accommodation fees, electric bills.  
  
On the other hand, that both parents go out to work also causes a lack of parental assistance and possibly make children feel isolated. Initially, children in these families will have to learn to live and manage their doings independently since they were young. Additionally, these children are likely to be influenced by the inappropriate contents from TV or peer pressure due to the lack of parental orientation. Parents play an integral role in a child growth, they teach children to distinguish between wrong and right and bring up their moral conscience. Reports show that most perpetrators causing young crimes live in families in which both parents immerse themselves in work and have little time with their children.  
  
In conclusion, the additional earnings made when parents both go out to work provide children many advantages of advanced environment and prestigious education However, the lack of parental orientation may also result in isolation and depravation in moral conscience.
this is my suggestions :  
1. Overall, i think you may have to deliver your idea by using complex or compound sentence to make the flow of your sentence running smoothly. it may can improve the coherence of your essay.  
  
2.  ~~"Both parents take up ...~~" = both parents believe that the more they earn money, the more they can advance the facilities of their children.  
  
3. Just give one idea in your body and then give supporting explanations to develop your idea. i just saw that the idea did not develop well.  
  
Spirit and keep writing
Hai, according to your prompt paraphrase, which correctly explained the original prompt, you are going to be clarifying the two public points of view and then propose your perspective regarding the discussion. Your prompt paraphrase is proper and correct. However, the discussion that you presented is incorrect. Right from the first reasoning paragraph, you already used a personal point of view. You never once referred this discussion as being from the first public point of view by indicating "As per the first group's belief..." which tells the reader whose point of view is being discussed. The second set should have said something like "In opposition to that belief, there are people who argue that..." to show that another public pov is referred to. Only after these two references could you have said "After careful consideration, I believe that..." to indicate your own point of view. The example about your village could have only been presented appropriately within your personal pov paragraph, not anywhere else within the essay.  
  
You seem to have a fixation on using an apostrophe when referring to plural forms. That is incorrect. The plural form never requires an apostrophe. However, an apostrophe S is required when referring to ownership. So it is correct to say "families" but not "families'", "students" not "students'". Also, since only person went to college in your town, you should have said "obtained a university degree". One cannot "obtain universities" unless he is extremely rich because your phrase refers to a person buying universities instead of attending a university for higher studies. Be careful of your word presentations as it alters the meaning of a word or phrase.
## Live in a horizontal or vertical city?

  
  
Please help me by checking thí essay. Thank you.  
  
*TOPIC:Some people think that it is best to live in a vertical city (mean that people work and live in high buildings) while others think a horizontal city is better. Discuss both views and give your opinion*  
  
ESSAY:  
Choosing to live in a horizontal or vertical city has been a headache dilemma to city dwellers. While some people are in favor of settling in those cities which develop with high-rise buildings, I support that large cities planned to develop towards the suburb would bring more benefits.  
  
On the one hand, in the urbanisation age less and less area available, horizontal cities have gained a wide popularity and attracted a lot of migrant workers with a variety of reasons. The initial reason is that in horizontal cities, residents usually live in multi-storey buildings which offer a lot of conveniences such as quickly having access to commercial centres, coffee shops or various services right in those low stores in the building. Another reason is that as almost all people living in skyscraper buildings, a large area would be saved for other public purposes. For example, to meet the huge demand of transport, local authorities would allocate resource to construct modern road systems with large lanes, which, therefore, facilitate the flow of traffic and avoid traffic congestion.  
  
On the other hand, there are several advantages of living in cities developed vertically. Firstly, it is clear that in vertical cities, residents are less likely to suffer from the hustle and bustle of overcrowded places and have their private spaces in their houses. For instance, in a house accompanied by a garden, a greener lifestyle would be promoted as they plant trees and vegetables for themselves. Secondly, unlike flats or apartments, living in small houses does not require any services charges such as parking fees or fees to reconstruct the building.  
  
In conclusion, living in a horizontal or vertical city would have its own merits and choosing where to live certainly depends on people's conditions.
Nguyen, I will not continue to review your essay based on the grammatical mistakes, sentence structure errors, or even coherence and cohesiveness because you made a big mistake at the very start of this essay. The mistake was that your prompt paraphrase turned a 5 paragraph tri point of view essay into a single opinion /point of view discussion. This shows that you do not have the appropriate English comprehension skills with which to accomplish the test requirements. You decided to issue a direct question response when it was not necessary to do so. A direct question response is only required when being asked a direct question in the prompt, which was not the situation with this particular presentation. This essay instructed:  
  
*Original Instruction: Discuss both views and give your opinion.  
  
Paraphrased Instruction: I support that large cities planned to develop towards the suburbs would bring more benefits.  
  
Correct Instruction Paraphrase: It is important that I understand the basis for both opinions for the discussion before I develop my opinion about this subject.*  
  
In addition to that mistake, you also said that the topic is a "headache dilemma", this is a mistake. the points of view are neither a headache nor a dilemma. What is being offered here is a discussion of opposing ideas. Avoid exaggerating your comments because that will not help increase your score, but it could lower your C&C as well as LR scores due to incoherent use of terms and wrong vocabulary understanding.  
  
Each point of view must be presented as such, individual public opinions rather than implying that the two points of view are based on a personal opinion. That is not the only basis of the discussion. There are 3 discussion considerations: the pro, the con, and the personal opinion. Each should be clear in the essay with two being of public knowledge and one being of personal knowledge and experience.  
  
Due to the marked errors in this essay, there is no chance that this can qualify for a passing score. Since your essay is tangential in response, you will only be partially scored for the part of the essay that you do respond to. Since that will mean that the essay will be coming in under the required minimum word count, then you cannot be considered for a passing score.