dim/essayforum_raw_writing_10k huggingface dataset:
*I would change the opening sentence as follows:*  
  
There are some individuals who believe mankind should invest more in exploring the possibilithy of life outside Earth**,** due to future challenges remaining on the planet. I disagree with this viewpoint.  
  
*I would change the opening sentence of the second paragraph as follows:*  
  
The first reason is that searching for life on other planets is waste of resources.  
  
*I would change the last sentence of the third paragraph as follows:*  
  
Moreover, if we can find other planets on which life is possible, but we continue destroying them through harmful activities, we will cease to exist in the end regardless.
IELTS Task 2. I hope anyone could check my writing Thank you so much  
  
**Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads. Do you agree or disagree?**  
  
## smart country with good transportation

  
  
In my country,some people agree with the growing up infrastructure such us adding more railways than roads but the other does not agree with that statement. In my thinking, build up the the railways are better than roads.  
  
First of all, people need a simple and safety way. In my region, using train as transportation is the best way to choose because it is very comfortable and saving time. For example, when the society need to go work fast , if they use private vehicle it will be spent their time because they will face the traffic jam even the roads are made more bigger or wide . Then , the society feel convenient using train because it has good facility such as led tv, music ,and nice seat . On the other hand , people has no sense of unsafe if they bring private vehicle or using public transportation on the roads. In the last week, 70% accident came from on the roads based on "MMS Highway Company" . This happen that people less of concentration ,not obey the law ,and do not care safety driving .  
  
The rail roads development will increase the economy sector in the rural area . All kind of needs will come quickly. For instance, the daily necessities are covered by train which is the time rate from one area to other areas that is not take much time . There is no traffic jam and also problem on the roads . Thus, it will reduce the accident also decrease the society to buy personal transportation.  
  
In conclusion, I believe that if government spent money for railroads construction, it will be more advantages for the society rather than government develop roads. There is a big chance the government to transform become smart country with good transportation .
Yoga, since this is your first ever task 2 essay at this forum, I will go easy on you and guide you towards the proper formatting first as that is what you have a problem with at the moment. Once you know what the format is, you will find it easier to write the upcoming practice tests. Before I go into that though, I have to ask you to please post the full original prompt with your next essay. I always require the full original prompt to serve as the basis of my scoring and advising in order to improve your work. Now, lets get started.  
  
Your opening statement indicates that you are already discussing the essay. That is not the purpose of the opening statement. The opening statement should only reflect your own presentation of the prompt for discussion, the reasons for the discussion, and what your discussion instructions are. In this case, you will lose major TA points due to the inaccuracy of your opening statement. If I were to base my version of the opening statement on the information you provided, it would be:  
  
*Some people believe that public funds should be spend on railways. Others, support the idea that the tax money should be spend on roads. In this essay, I will be presenting a discussion regarding which side of the discussion I support.*  
  
Note how I used a totally different presentation, along with synonyms for the keywords in order to indicated my understanding of the essay. Your paraphrase should be totally different from the original prompt, without discussing the essay immediately. Since it is impossible to properly discuss the reasons in the opening paragraph due to the sentence requirement, it is best that you do not fall into that habit.  
  
In the actual test setting, you will be unable to access the internet in order to use researched information. Don't begin that practice in your practice test. Instead, you should use common knowledge, assumptions, or personal experience to illustrate your essay discussion points.  
  
The concluding statement is not the place to discuss your personal opinion. Do not use closing paragraph phrases to start your opinion section because a continued discussion does not qualify as a concluding statement. Only a summary of the discussion passes for such.
Please give me some feebacks. Thanks so much.  
  
**Topic**: *Some people believe that people have the right to university education, and government should make it free no matter what their financial background. To what extent do you agree or disagree?*  
  
## free education will have a negative consequences

  
  
Many people argue that universities are available to everyone from all walks of life. While I believe that higher education is a human right, I disagree that governments should offer a free university education to all people.  
  
On the one hand, higher education will bring a lot of advantages to the young. Firstly, going to universities or colleges is a huge opportunity to learn and build a solid knowledge base. This will be useful and practical for those who want to become teachers or pursue a postgraduate degree. Secondly, universities give students an open environment to develop essential skills for the future. For example, they can make friends with other students coming from other countries, exchange languages, and learn about different cultures. As a result, their communication skills will be better, and they also have a deeper understanding of the world around them.  
  
However, I disagree with the idea that universities should be free to everyone. In Vietnam, if the government provided free university education, this would lead to low quality of education. When a student doesn't have to pay free tuition fees, he can consider learning as a hobby and show a lack of commitment. Meanwhile, people who are forced to pay for their education will attempt to achieve good results at universities because it's their investment for future. Furthermore, there are many other sectors which need the support of government funds. When tuition fees are shared, governments have extra money to provide for health care, environment, and public transportation.  
  
In conclusion, everyone has the right to access universities or colleges. However, I believe that free education is not affordable because this will have a negative effect on students, governments, and the whole society.
@scully\_vananh  
Hi, great essay, it is very coherent and flows smoothly! You structured your arguments well and have almost persuaded me. What you are missing are is the "Why?" "Why would the free education lead to low quality of education, in Vietnam?" When you claim something you must explain your statement, so the reader understands why you made that claim. Also do not use words as firstly and secondly, just state what you want to say in the first sentence. If you ask a teacher they call this a Topic Sentence, one sentence that gives the main idea of a paragraph. Overall good work! :)
Van, you did not accurately paraphrase your prompt topic and discussion instruction. So you will lose TA points for that. This is an extent essay and yet you did not reveal an extent in your discussion presentation. You turned this into a comparative essay when it is a single opinion essay. However, if you used the correct paraphrasing of the discussion instruction, you would have been able to continue using this comparative discussion for the essay. The proper prompt requirement, based upon your existing discussion is:  
  
*University education is a right according to some people. That is why the government should shoulder educational expenses for all students, even if that student happens to be from a wealthy family. I partially agree with this statement for a number of reasons.*  
  
While I realize that Vietnam is the most obvious reference point for examples for you, it should not be used as the example in IELTS essays. In fact, no specific country should be used in reference to examples in a discussion unless it is absolutely necessary or applicable to do so. That is because the examiner will not be a Vietnamese so he will not be conscious of the educational travails of the country. This renders your example weak. Relying in common information instead and examples that apply to any country is always the best way to go so that the reviewer doesn't need specialized knowledge when reading and assessing your essay.
**Increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve growing traffic and pollution problems.  
To what extent do you agree or disagree?  
What other measures do you think might effective?**  
  
## solving growing traffic and pollution

  
  
While there a lot of people who think the best way of both reducing the number of cars on the street and preserving the environment is to raise the value of the fuel, Others disagree. It is a controversial issue and shall be discussed. As a matter of fact, I completely disagree with this kind of thinking. I will provide examples from my own experience to support my reasons.  
  
Firstly, the public transportation system -like taxi and bus- use petrol. Therefore, If the government decides to raise the fuel price, taxis and buses also have to increase their fee. as a result, people prefer to use their own vehicles. For instance, I remember when the government raised the price of fuel, the public transportation became so expensive that more people started to use their own vehicles.  
  
On the other hand, if the government starts to invest in the public transportation like railways, it will be more persuasive for people to do not use their cars. The main reason is that the new transportation system would be faster and cheaper. Also, It makes taxi and bus owners reduce their fee to attract people. For example, I witnessed that building metro significantly dropped the number of cars on the street.  
  
One other crucial development would be to make special paths for people who want to use bicycle or motorcycle. They can also build places to rent them. I know many people that love to use a bicycle for transportation, but they either have to use street or sidewalk which are not safe.  
  
In conclusion, I believe that increasing the fuel price will have a negative effect because it will increase the cost of transportation in general. The only way for countries to overcome issues like traffic and air pollution is to invest in their infrastructure to get the desired result.  
  
(308 Words)
Hi just\_writer  
  
became so expensive that leads more people to use their own vehicles and increase the traffic congestion.  
  
Also, It makes taxi and bus owners reduce their fee to attract people...remove this sentence as it is not related to the topic. You could replace..  
  
Subsequently traffic jam and CO2 emissions will be reduced in the streets. As well the requests of buying petrol will be decreased leading to spontaneous decline in petrol prices.
I think there are numerous problems with your essay, so i think you should rewrite this one.Let me show you some. First, is the way you capitalize first letter like : "..., Other disagree and "....as a result, people prefer to use their own vehicles.".Second, you shouldn't use the word "controversial in your essay because the topic just asks you about your own opinion and the solution, "controversial" is too strong for this, but you can say this problem "shall be discussed".Finally, your ideas are good but the way you explain them are not persuasive enough.For ex, in the second para:"the government decides to raise the fuel price, taxis and buses also have to increase their fee. as a result, people prefer to use their own vehicles.".So what, does it affect the traffic problems or the pollution ?  
  
There are more than this, but you should read your essay again and rewrite it.
Please give any feedback! This is just casual 5 minute work! Don't worry about structure, just tell me if I persuaded you! :) Language advice would be great!  
  
Prompt: *Which would be cooler, a castle or a tree house?*  
  
## Castle or Tree house?

  
  
Castles are one of the most historic man made landmarks in the world. Imagine playing hide and seek in a place so wondrous! Why not pretend to be King Arthur without the fear of judgement. Castles are a place of magic, creativity and amusement. Who doesn't mind the medieval vibe! Tree houses do not compliment history. Neither do they bring out the fantasies of characters we love. Tree houses have no connectivity to the world, so high in trees and to see nothing for kilometres out into the land. It's just plain boring! A clump of wood in the trees. At least castles have proper materials for shelter in a storm!
Bobovikisan, you sold me. I can definitely recognize why you would prefer to live in a castle instead of in a tree. The comparisons you made between the two are right on the mark because you did your best to engage the imagination of the reader and the practicality of each structure. When you consider everything, we were all raised, in one way or another, on fairy tales that all took place in a castle, not a tree house. So the instant fascination that a person has with the castle is easy to understand and connect with. The tree house, not so much since that is mostly connected with horror stories and real life allergies in most cases. Good job. Grammar issues aside, this is a pretty good persuasive statement. I just wish you were able to write something longer. It feels like the statement abruptly ended. Any chance you can lengthen the discussion a bit?
*The internet is a great course of information and has opened up opprtunities for people to learn all over the world. Is all information reliable on the internet? What could be done to control information online?*  
  
## the quality of online information

  
  
As our information technology keeps advancing, a way of learning has moved to the digital world as it provides enormous resources and information to people across the globe. Which raised up some questions in remaining unanswered. Does all the information that on the internet can be trusted and how is it to regulate them? In this essay, I will answer each of the questions and provide two possible solutions below.  
  
To begin with, some unreliable resources are floating around on the internet to misguide people. In particular, some websites provide misleading educational resources to people who desire in learning, such as fake information of climate change, which in hope to affect people perspective in believing this false and untruthful information for its motive of self-interest.  
  
However, there is a number of ways to prevent them from harming people over the internet. Specifically, the government should establish a department to monitor these suspicious websites and take it down when necessary. Which resulting the potential in reducing the number of misleading information that on the internet.  
  
Another way to tackle this misguided information that is spread across the internet is all the nations of government incorporate one another to impose a law of penalisation to its owners of any website that providing false resources to its people. By doing this, it would not only be a deterrent but also increase the correct and accurate information for learning. Consequently, more educated people would emerge as the time goes by in every nation.  
  
To conclude, the development of the internet is up rasing and many people use it as a learning tool access. However, some created websites just to misguide people by offering inaccurate resources. Therefore, by having a department to scrutinise its suspicious activities and imposing penalty fee to the owners of its websites from every nation should be a way to maintain and protect the good quality information for people to learn on the internet.  
  
Words: 324  
  
Thanks!  
  
CJ
SG, your essay is very good but needs to be improved in terms of prompt responsiveness. Your format follows the 5 paragraph format, but contains too many words. Since this is a task 2 writing essay, writing a total of 275 words will more than ensure a passing score for your work, provided all the other scoring considerations are represented in the essay.  
  
Since this is a direct question essay, the format differs from the opinion essay. In this presentation, you must begin discussing the first question presented in the first paragraph. There is no need to withhold the opinion in this instance because this essay requires you to deliver your opinion first, then justify your opinion within the next 3 body paragraphs. Additionally, you are not supposed to pose a question in this essay. You offer the prompt paraphrase and responses to each question in each paragraph that you develop.  
  
I know that the formats can be confusing as it changes in every type of essay that you write. You will get used to writing this way for this essay too. The test is designed to verify that you are capable of using the English language in various facets of academic writing. So the changes in formats relate to academic writing requirements.  
  
You did a very good job on this essay but, because of the beginner mistakes that you made, I would rather not score this essay for now. I want to score you when I already begin to see improvements to your work. I am sure that you will have visible improvements with your next direct question essay. I look forward to reading it.
***The advocates of international aid believe that countries have a moral obligation to help each other, whilst the opponents consider it unnecessary because money is misspent by the authorities receiving it. Discuss both views and give your opinion.***  
  
international aid is beneficient only for governments  
  
Some people advocate international assistance in the belief that states are under a moral obligation to give aid to others. Yet it is deemed unnecessary by the opponents, who cite the reason that the authorities as recipients spend the money inappropriately. In this essay, I will discuss each point of view and proceed with my own opinion.  
  
The supporters contend that we should help foreign countries out of suffering for the sake of humanitarianism. Their citizens are as much human beings as us, and based on this unalterable fact, we simply cannot stand aloof. If we turn our attention inwards, leaving them to struggle with their miserable lives, our conscience will be bitten. We are all to be overwhelmed with remorse when we look back at our cruelty and selfishness. Such an argument does have its merits, but it is also called into question by others.  
  
They dispute the necessity of aid on the ground that our favor and kindness cannot extend to those who we are desperate to help. There are too many regimes that show callous indifference to the misery of their people. The only concern for them is to maintain their rule. Therefore they are certain to withhold oversea aid to support their agenda. As harsh as the claim sound, it is actually rational, and resonates with me.  
  
I echo the statement, since it has unfortunately come true. We have a perfect example right here and right now - that is North Korea. The rogue state holds its wretched nationals as pawns to appeal to sympathy. Once succeeding, it will not do anything but commit its gains to the nuclear weapon programmes and ballistic missile development. At that time, we ourselves will be under the growing menace of the sinister ruler - Kim Jong-un.  
  
The discussion I have provided points to the very conclusion that international aid is not necessary. It is disquietingly clear that the beneficiaries are not people in need but governments. More important, our generosity can be the bane of us ourselves.  
  
*This month, I have paid much mo attention to task 1 than task 2, so I tried to practice task 2 this time. I would more appreciate it if you score my essay.  
  
332 words, 45 minutes: It seems that I have a better time management for task 2.*
Gang, you did an extremely good job in the prompt paraphrasing, but the overall discussion was faulty because you did not clearly identify that you were discussion public opinion A, public opinion B, then your personal opinion in the paragraph discussions. You also made a conclusion regarding the topic when you were not required to do so. The job of the task 2 essay is not to make a decision for the reader but rather, to inform the reader based on 3 aspects in order to allow the reader to come to his own conclusion. The concluding statement was just for the summarized discussion as I taught you before. I'll have to break down the various aspects of the essay at this point because you had some strong points and some weak points.  
  
TA - 5 due to the lack of point of view representation and the improper format of the conclusion.  
C&C - 7 because of the logical presentation and clear discussion progression  
LR - 6 as some of your word choices are inappropriate for the discussion (e.g. stand aloof = be aloof, conscience will be bitten = conscience will be bothered, etc.)  
  
GRA - 7 based on mistakes that caused some errors in grammar. However, it did not create confusion for the reader so it scored well.  
  
Based on score averaging, your final outcome might be between a 5. 5 to a 7. I can't be sure of the actual score because the examiner may have some other concerns or considerations for your essay at this point that I am not privy to.
**Some people think that governments should do more to make their citizens have a healthy diet. Others, however, believe that individuals should be responsible for their own diet and health.  
  
Discuss both views and give our own opinions.**  
  
## healthy diet in peoples' bill of fare

  
  
Nowadays, people have different views about the health take care. Some think the health care is the government's responsibility, while others see this as personal diet affair. However, I believe both government and individuals should equally pay attention to this issue. This essay will discuss both notions with explanations involved.  
  
On the one hand, it is undeniable that the government have obligation to provide complete perception of healthy diet. The government can give some suggestion on organic agriculture, providing farmers to cultivate better crops. Besides, the government can also improve the sanity facilities, giving clean water for household use. For example, Taiwan government holds workshops for local farming and ranching, owners of farms and cattle ranch learn the modern measures which can grow corps without using pesticides. Subsequently,the citizens enjoy the organic food by following the government's instruction.  
  
On the other hand, it is indisputable that the individuals should take care their own diet. In order words, the health condition only is well known by ourselves. For stark instance, the patients who have high blood pressure know which food is much more proper for them. They cannot ingest too much fried food, meat and processed food. It is better for them to eat vegetables and fruits, such as onion, tomato, corn, apple and banana, etc. However, the patients with other disease have other diet list from nutritionists. As a result, individuals know their personal diet most, they should take care of their health by themselves.  
  
By way of conclusion, I once again reaffirm my position. I believe it is equally important for the government and individuals to response for paying attention on healthy diet. The government support to improve the food and environment quality while the individuals ingest the nutrient foods.  
  
<291 words>  
  
My IELTS test is coming, please help me!!