dim/essayforum_raw_writing_10k huggingface dataset:
Viet, always time yourself when writing your essay. You have only 20 minutes for this task. That means you should leave at least 5 minutes towards the end for proper editing and finalization of your essay before submission. Writing 287 words indicates that you are not leaving any time at all for essay correction on your end. That can spell a disaster for you in the actual test. Write no more than 200 words for this type of essay in order to give you editing time. Believe me, in the actual test, you will not have the time to write 287 words like you did in this essay.  
  
As I reviewed your essay for content, I noticed that you did a good job in presenting the chart information except for a few sections. You did not properly identify the image provided, there is no trending statement, and you placed pertinent information in a parenthesis. These all add up to create some major errors on your part.  
  
The trending statement is located at the end of the opening summary. This sentence indicates the concluding result of the illustration(s) provided. This is meant to show the development of the countries and who used the most water in terms of percentage in the chart. Since this sentence can be placed anywhere in the essay, even at the end of the presentation in the form of a concluding paragraph, I was hoping that you would have presented it somewhere here. I guess you were focused so much on just typing in English that you neglected to remember the importance of presenting all of the required elements in the essay.  
  
While there were 6 charts presented in the essay, you failed to identify the kind of chart that was presented. This is part of the TA consideration of your essay so when you just say "chart" as opposed to "pie chart", which was the chart presented, you will lose points for inaccuracy. There are several types of charts, so you need to be specific about what chart was presented in your report. It helps to create the analytical thought process that can help with your C&C increased scoring.  
  
The countries indicated should not be placed in a parenthesis. That is because these countries are a major part of the discussion and yet, you placed it in what is known as an optional format. The parenthesis means it is not part of the discussion but is worth mentioning anyway. Since the 6 countries are an integral part of the discussion, you should have simply listed these countries as part of the paragraph presentation.  
  
Due to the problems that I indicated above, I do not feel that it would be fair to score you on this essay. It's imperfections will not bring in an acceptable score for you. So I will instead, give you another chance to write a Task 1 essay in a proper manner and then I will score that one for you.
## authorities should not pay for building tracks but motorways

  
  
***Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?  
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.  
Write at least 250 words.***  
  
It is generally acknowledged that figures of authority need not pay for building tracks but motorways. Actually, there are plenty of youths considering roads as the priority when it comes to driving for work or going to school owing to countless reasons. Personally, I completely agree with this statement since railways own a great deal of advantages.  
  
In my opinion, rail service can give people a productivity boost in life. First, our timing would be guaranteed by express trains. Fast trains stop less to save us time and preclude our press for minutes in traffic jams before work. Second, subways would be much more preferred than roads as they can give us a greater sense of satisfaction. Lately, trains have been supplemented with advanced technologies, which lets people enjoy their moments. For example, I could read books online and have a drink without spilling it on a smooth-running Japanese express train.  
  
The alternatives to railways such as roads would be further less productive. Firstly, developing more roads will be followed by the massive congestion. In terms of overpopulation, I doubt that joining the traffic in rush hours would certainly be everyone's biggest nuisance. Secondly, due to increasing use of roads, we will all have to pay a larger amount of tax and this is an insufficient funding for the constructions of more highways, overpasses and parking lots. That is why I believe, however, rail service price is simple and convenient. Eventually, our health would be at risk by emissions of CO2 from various vehicles on the roads, but this problem will be mitigated as for the fact that trains are fewer and environmentally friendly.  
  
In conclusion, while driving on roads may be preferred by a number of people, it appears to me that road building is not a pressing need for the government to budget for. However, as long as nation invests smartly in railroads, our greater future prosperity will certainly be secured.  
  
**I'd be truly grateful if you do estimate my IELTS band score on this writing task 2 essay.**
Hi there,  
  
I have taken IELTS before. I think you will get solid 6.5 or more. Every paragraph is well made. You got your opinion, counterpart, examples and a conclusion. This is what the IELTS would want for a task 2 essay.  
  
Here are some things I would do on first paragraph:  
... figures of authority do not need to pay for building ..  
... driving for work, going to school or other countless reasons. However, I, personally, would...  
  
1st and 2nd sentences are disagreements for the topic. 3rd sentence is your opinion which agrees with the topic. I think you should put a transition word for your 3rd sentence. It will be more logical.  
  
The rests are good. Good luck with your test.
## tuition-free education?

  
  
**Topic: Everybody deserves to be educated. It's unfair that intelligent people are not admitted to universities because of their financial background. University education should be free for everyone. To what extent do you agree or disagree?**  
  
In recent years, the opinion on free education has largely been divided due to its controversy. Although many policymakers and education planners are convinced of the downsides of the tuition-free system, the positive impacts of it on young generations and societies cannot be taken lightly.  
  
On the one hand, a free education system could be greatly beneficial for each individual. First, since the opportunity for higher education is distributed evenly irrespective of students' financial background, everybody would have an equal chance to enhance their life skills and background knowledge. As a result, he or she would enter the job market with confidence and have a secured future. Second, free education is not an indication that students don't pay for tuition. In facts, as governments fund education by using taxes, students have already paid the college tuition in the form of taxes.  
  
On the other hand, governments would be rewarded in the long run with the implementation of the free education policy. A significant number of educated citizens greatly contributes to the development and prosperity of a country. As one can perceive, any bachelor and master degree holder can be the next Stephen Hawking or Bill Gates who likely to pave the way for innovations in technology and science for his or her own country. In addition, free education promotes equality. Since everybody has equal rights to pursue higher education, the social equality is restored, thereby preventing potential social unrest stirred by poor and uneducated communities.  
  
In conclusion. the question of a tuition-free education system is open to debate. Given the advantages of an open and equal education system that admits students without considering their financial background, the necessity of free education is undeniable.  
  
Thank you very much!
Phuong, this is an extent essay that relies on your opinion of the given topic. This is not a comparison essay as you have it presented at the moment. Although you could have done a comparison essay discussion for this essay, you could have only successfully done that if you had properly formatted your discussion thesis based on the original instructions. That is the main reason why your essay comes across as an essay that does not appropriately discuss the given prompt statement. In this essay, you haven't really made a decision regarding which opinion you support, which is the whole point of the essay. If I were the one who had written the prompt paraphrase, I would have said the following:  
  
*There is a growing discussion as to whether the government should provide intelligent people with a free college education. There are people who believe that universities should not prevent bright students from attending college just because they cannot afford to pay for it. I completely agree that college education should be free for intelligent people based upon a number of considerations.*  
  
This is the sort of prompt that does not have a middle ground in the discussion. You need to either agree or disagree. If you agree then explain why based upon specific information. If you disagree, you need to have compelling reasons to oppose the original discussion. Your essay does neither of these effectively. It is weak because it does not take a true side in the discussion and it doesn't make sense because you refused to present your personal opinion in the essay.  
  
Your summary conclusion creates a prompt deviation because you are discussing the necessity of a free education instead of the right of a student to a free education. Those are two different topics which means you did not conclude the essay in the proper manner. Rather, you have an essay that is open ended, which means your essay will not receive a passing score in the actual test.
## The aim of study at an University

  
  
**Some people think that universities should provide graduates with the knowledge and skills needed in the workplace. Others think that the true function of a university should be to give access to knowledge for its own sake, regardless of whether the course is useful to an employer.  
  
What, in your opinion, should be the main function of a university?**  
  
Many people believe that students should be equipped with both knowledge and practical skills during their time at schools. However, others claim that universities should only perform their traditional function which is providing knowledge. This essay sheds light on both point of views and presents my own opinion.  
  
Obviously, practical courses are of tremendous benefits to both graduates and universities. From a personal perspective, students who are well equipped with practical skills have more job opportunities. Undergraduates would have no worries about what to do after graduation. Also, it takes companies and institutions that hire skillful employees no extra time to train them. Consequently, this acts as a precursor to building up the university's reputation in the labor market.  
  
Still, there are some reasons to argue that knowledge is the only necessary thing to be taught at schools. Firstly, undergraduates would have more time to acquire mastery in their academic fields once they do not have to spend time participating in practical courses. Teaching would be more effective and students' knowledge would be dramatically improved. Obviously, education quality would be raised and the universities could also acquire reputations, yet in the academic fields.  
  
In my opinion, undergraduates should be provided with both knowledge and practical skills. This would facilitate students' building careers after graduation. Although strong background means that one can produce work of outstanding quality, practical skills are of the same importance once he happens to deal with problems in work.  
  
To summary, while the benefits of teaching students knowledge allow them to build strong backgrounds in academic fields, some still feel that universities should provide skills that might be necessary in work. However, as long as we keep in mind the importance of practical skills in work contexts, the benefits of teaching them in schools are clearly positive.
Mu, this is a direct opinion essay. You should have indicated your personal opinion as part of the thesis statement at the end of your prompt paraphrase. In addition to that, being a direct opinion essay, you are being asked to make a decision within the discussion. This seems to be your main weakness when you work with direct opinion / answer essays. You cannot make a decision about which side to support. I keep reminding you that all IELTS Task 2 essays are single opinion essays unless you are asked to discuss both sides. In this instance, you failed to recognize that you are being asked to pick just one side to strongly defend within the body of paragraphs discussions.  
  
Since you agree that undergraduates should be equipped with both knowledge and skills, then that should have bene your thesis statement, with the second paragraph introducing your first reason for your belief, with an additional 1 or 2 paragraphs that can offer a solid example or extra supporting evidence or data for the stand you support. Remember, your C&C score depends on the complete explanation of your stance on an issue, your TA score depends upon how well you executed the instruction you were provided. Your GRA will improve if you focus on just discussing one topic. I believe I reminded you about how to improve your TA and GRA score based on a single opinion discussion and you said you were going to try it next time. I think you forgot about it :-)  
  
In this type of essay, your personal opinion goes to the top, the second paragraph, the remaining 2 body paragraphs should support your claims through explanation and examples. Do the next direct question essay in that manner and you should be able to get a better score for the practice test.
*please give me an IELTS score for this essay. Thanks!*  
  
## making people recycle more of their waste

  
  
**Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled. They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement. To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste?** Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. Write at least 250 words.  
  
*My answer:*  
  
It is increasingly concerned that the recycling of household garbage is inadequate. Some suggest that legislation should be introduced to make recycling an obligation. I am in total agreement with this perspective for a number of reasons.  
  
First, legal requirements can urge everyone to protect ourselves by recycling waste. As a matter of fact, human have always had an ingrained bond to the habitat we are thriving on for centuries. Thereby, our eating, breathing, working and waste can have an immediate impact on the environment negatively and vice versa. People can sustain their lives only if they are required by laws to understand the urgency of preserving nature through recycling practices.  
  
Second, making recycling a civic duty would minimise our environmental tax payments. It seems logical that the priority of any individual should be to cover his daily expenses, for instance, payments for provisions and services. Certainly, people would sooner contribute positively to society through waste recycling obligations than burden themselves with additional taxes on low recycling.  
  
Lastly, I suggest that enforcing laws on waste recycling unite people. It is no longer a compulsion but a healthy lifestyle bonding with us. For example, in my high school, we created a game app to promote recycling. That a team of students posted achievements on it and received a star when they recycled something also boosted our competitiveness and solidarity.  
  
Briefly, nobody can deny the household recycling is mandatory but in fact has not become a social habit. However, I believe owing to the law enforcement, more waste will be processed to ensure our future prosperity.
Greetings, thuhuyen461!  
Honestly, I found your essay interesting, but there are some details which you could improve:  
  
Introduction - in the first lines of your introduction, you rephrased the first phrase of the essays prompt ("Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled"). In this case, I would recommend you, instead of simply making that statement, write an initial phrase to contextualize the reader on the subject you will talk about. You could, for instance, state the need for recycling in today's society.  
  
Development - in the second paragraph, you could clarify about which "legal requirements" you are talking about, so as to avoid a too vague argument, and don't forget the dot in end of the last phrase.  
  
Conclusion - you could mix your last two paragraphs into one so as to write your conclusion. In this case, you may want to start talking about the benefits of recycling - but, please, keep it brief, as you may have already stated them at the beginning of your text - and, then, reinforce the need of law enforcement to increase recycling in the cities.  
  
Spelling: "minimize", not "minimise".  
  
Arguments: this is a personal view, but I would recommend you suggest giving "prizes" (lower taxes, for instance) for those who recycle, additionally to punishing those who don't. This would give of essays a less "authoritarian" look.  
  
I hope these tips help you in your essays, and, please, remember that practicing is the key for acing your tests (sorry for the clichè).
Huyen, your TA score will be adversely affected by your mistake in paraphrasing the prompt with regards to your response to the instructions. You changed the prompt response and that could have very well led you to go totally off the mark and discuss something irrelevant to the prompt. Luckily, your discussion paragraphs remained in track so the reasoning is correct and help to pull your TA consideration a bit. Your scoring, per bracket, I think could be well within the following ranges:  
  
TA - 5 - your biggest mistake in the development of the essay was the wrong response. Let me outline it here for you:  
  
Original Question: To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste?  
  
Your Response: Some suggest that legislation should be introduced to make recycling an obligation. I am in total agreement with this perspective for a number of reasons. (Wrong Response)  
  
Correct Response: *I partially support the need for legislation to encourage people to reuse their trash whenever possible. I will explain a number of reasons in relation to my point of view in the following paragraphs.*  
  
The partial approval of legislation that I wrote about is based upon how you explained the need for civic duty as well. A civic duty does not need to be legislated. It is not a law but rather more of a sense of fairness, decency, and what is proper in terms of actions to be taken in a given instance such whether or not to recycle and why.  
  
C&C - 5 - The paragraphs could use more development in terms of explanations. All of your paragraphs should have at least a transition sentence at the end to help make the paragraph feel complete rather than being under developed.. The writing feels incomplete most of the time.  
  
LR - 5 - you are using words that are simple enough and you are spelling certain terms, such as "mimimise" properly because you are taking a British English exam and the word is spelled that way in British English. You show a definite grasp of the differences between word use in British and American English representations. However, your grammar is still too simple to be considered advanced in terms of British English usage.  
  
GRA - 5 - Your sentences need work in terms of structure and complexity. You have more simple sentences than complex sentence presentations. You may want to work on your complex sentence presentations in your next essay. Create a balance between simple and complex sentences per paragraph, but don't create run-on sentences.  
  
Based on my observations, I believe your final score will be anywhere from a 5 to a 5.50 for this particular essay.
## COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY FEES

  
  
\**Topic: In some countries, students have to pay their own college and university fees while in others, government pays. Do the advantages of government spending their money on college and university fees for students outweigh the disadvantages?*  
  
The tuition in tertiary education is a controversial topic. While some people say that it is advantageous if governments pay university fees, I am in favor of the idea that students have to pay on their own.  
  
There are several reasons why it is thought to be more beneficial when tuition is paid by governments. Firstly, this may reduce the economic burden on families and students. People earning low incomes might be afraid of education fees; however, with the support of governments, their children have more opportunities to expand their knowledge and to be more skilled. Secondly, the equality between the poor and the rich is enhanced since everyone can study in colleges and universities for free. For this reason, the literacy standard may increase as well as we might have a more well-educated public.  
  
On the other hand, it seems to me that governments should not spend money on students' tuition for some following reasons. To begin, the government's budget might be reduced, and its investment on improving infrastructure, products and other fields declines. As a consequence, tax rises significantly whereas living standards can decrease, leading to a slow development of the economy. Furthermore, if university fees are free, students tend to be less respectful. They may not appreciate the value of money spent by the government. Therefore, perhaps not all of them attend classes frequently, resulting in low quality education.  
  
In conclusion, there are various conflicting views about whether the government should pay tuition for college and university students. Nevertheless, I am convinced that its drawbacks outweigh its benefits.
Thanh, there is a mistake in your interpretation of the prompt. You are being asked to reason out as to whether there are advantages to having the government spend on college and university fees over the disadvantages of the same. Look at the reason why your prompt paraphrase is incorrect based on the outline of the discussion below:  
  
Original Question: Do the advantages of government spending their money on college and university fees for students outweigh the disadvantages?  
  
Your Response: I am in favor of the idea that students have to pay on their own.  
  
The response that you developed is not in line with the original prompt response instructions. The keywords that need to be read in your response should pertain to: government spending money, college and university fees, advantage, disadvantage. These keywords must be paraphrased in your response. Instead, you changed the prompt discussion by saying you are in favor of having students pay their own fees. You are no longer discussing the correct prompt topic and instructions in this instance.  
  
Rather than discussing and advantage / disadvantage essay, your actual presentation is a comparison essay instead, which does not carry the same discussion points as the former essay type. In a comparison essay, you do not have to take sides in the essay presentation. In an advantage/disadvantage discussion, you should discuss both sides but, you must pick a side to support in order to present the implied personal opinion as the 3rd body paragraph in the essay. This creates a more prompt adherent response.