dim/essayforum_raw_writing_10k huggingface dataset:
@Maria  
(\*^▽^\*)You gave me a very detailed line of thought，it's really useful to my writing,Thank you very much!  
@coke  
Thanks for your comment！  
I still have big problem in wirting.By your suggestion,I will reorganize my article structure.ヾ(๑╹◡╹)ﾉ"  
@Maria  
(\*^▽^\*)You gave me a very detailed line of thought，it's really useful to my writing,Thank you very much!
## Agree/Disagree essay - education and finance

  
  
Can someone read my essay and give me your feedback> Thanks!!!  
  
**Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?  
Students should take out student loans to avoid working while studying.  
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.**  
  
Personally, I really disagree with the statement. Students shouldn't take out student loans to avoid working while studying. Why students should have a balance in red before graduates? In my opinion, I am not considered this option as acceptable.  
  
On the one hand, taking a loan to pay college instead of working helps the student to have more time to study and graduate sooner than someone who is working. But I do not think that having an enormous debt before graduates it could be paid soon. It is going to take time to pay that loan. As a result, there are going to be year after year of economical struggles. I think that before of taking a loan, students should try to talk with families and friends to give them that money. Family is not going to add any interest and it is better to owe money to family and friends who are better off the bank. For example, in case the student is late to pay the loan, the bank is still adding more fee to the debt. On the contrary, the student's family know the student better and can push the student for paying the debt but remains the same.  
  
On the other hand, I consider that working while study is a better option. Even tough students have less time to study, in general students who work organize better their time. Another advantage for these students are that they gain work experience before graduation. In general, companies give more value to people who have previous experience. They prefer to hire someone with experience rather than someone without any work experience. What is more, students who are working in the same field of their studies, can apply all the learned knowledge in field. Apart from gaining knowledge, they meet people who can recommend them in future jobs. And what is more, they are not struggling economically as someone who takes college loans.  
  
In conclusion, I consider that is better option working while studying rather than having a high debt for taking a college loan. As I mention, the student while working can gain more knowledge and meet people for future job and gain a time management skill which are going to be worth it for future employers.
@Phoebe789  
I do not suggest starting your essay with a personal statement. Instead, opt for making an introduction that can assist the flow of your narrative. For instance, you may briefly talk about the figures and the statistics regarding the usage of student loans in countries that highly use them (think of the United States). This can create a stronger and more substantial introduction.  
  
You can perhaps use this as a template:  
*In the United States, [xxx quantity of adults] of young adults struggle paying off roughly [xxx amount of debt accumulated in range] over [xxx number of years it takes on average of pay off the debt]. This is why I disagree with the usage of loans in the educational system.*  
  
If you quantify your figures, the better it will be to add more content to your essay.  
Watch out for your usage of participles, verbs, and fundamental grammar-related parts of speech. For instance, it is "I do not consider" instead of "I am not considered". Remember that you are not directly referencing to yourself - rather, you are referencing to something external to you. Reread your essay out loud multiple times when you're reviewing it to avoid this from happening.  
  
I also suggest looking into better ways to transition your paragraphs from one to the next. I noticed that it is quite common for ESL learners to use *"on the one hand"* and *"on the other hand"*. However, there are *better*ways to do this. You can omit the "on the one hand" of the second paragraph and simply start your essay. This can avoid redundant language that only put *unnecessary*weight to your essay.  
  
Aside from that, your essay has substantial and structured content. Just watch out for your grammar, and you'll be fine.
## chicken, beef, lamb and fish consumed in Europe

  
  
The line graph illustrated the amount of fish and three kinds of meat, namely: chicken, beef and lamb consumed by a European country over the course of 25 years starting in 1979.  
  
Looking at the graph, it is immediately obvious that the amount of chicken consumption experienced an upward trend while the overall figures decreased. Throughout the period, the consumption of chicken registered the highest figure out of 4 products studied.  
  
In 1979, the amount of chicken eaten by a person every week stood at approximately 140 grams before rocketing at around 250 grams at the end of the period. An opposite pattern was seen in the fish consumption, which experienced a slightly decline from about 65 grams to below 40 grams in 2004.  
  
At the beginning of the period, the consumption of beef was about 220 grams each person a week, this figures also showed a significant decrease to nearly 120 grams between 1984 and 2004 after sharply fluctuating before 1984.There was a similar development in the amount of lamb consumed, which gradually fell from 150 grams to 70 grams per person per week.
*If you could provide the graph that you are referring to, it would help with providing more substantial feedback on your essay.*  
Speaking of writing technicalities, I would suggest revising a few of your lines to ensure that the delivery of your message is clear.  
For instance, I could revise your first paragraph/sentence as:  
This line graph illustrates the amount of fish and meat consumed by a European country over 25 years beginning from 1979. The meat types included here are: chicken, beef, and lamb.  
  
Please take note of three things I have done here:  
Ensured that I used present tense because I am describing a graph that is present in front of the reader. This makes the text appear more interactive - and is the formal way of approaching language.  
  
I used "from 1979" instead of "in 1979" because you're referring to a point in time onwards rather than a single point. Please review prepositions' usage regarding this.  
  
I created more clarity in the structure by not confusing readers with introducing the three meat types before finishing the initial thought of the message.  
  
Keep in mind these points and apply the entirety of your essay.  
I would suggest revising your last paragraph. There were instances wherein you were dragging the sentences, creating run-on phrases instead of articulating clearly what you want to relay. Moreover, using technical terms such as "base year" can help your essay be more academically and professionally proficient.  
  
For instance, I would revise your first line here as:  
The beginning of the period had a weekly consumption of 220 grams of beef per person. This fluctuated into a significant decrease of consumption between 1984 and 2004, following a fluctuation prior to the base year.  
  
Best of luck to your essay.
## which investments contribute to the well-being of a society more?

  
  
*Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is a waste of money. Governments must invest the money in public, services instead. To that extent do you agree with this statement?*  
  
There has been a growing debate on whether or not the government should spend money in the arts. Some people believe that art brings no value to the society; therefore, does not worth investment from the government. However, others, included myself agree that government should provide more fund to promote art.  
  
First and foremost, art serves as an outlet for expression that allows artists to communicate with their feelings. It offers artists a way to deal with depression. For instances, dancers can express their sadness through movements. It allows them to be able confront their depression and feel much more relieved later on. Moreover, art works can also reflect individuals' desires for a better society. Through those artworks, government can collect information on expectations of citizens and take suitable initiatives to improve the society.  
  
Secondly, the thrive of art brings a myriad of advantages to the society in term of finance. There are a considerable number of artworks that worth million US dollars. Take the artwork of Pablo Picasso for example. Some of his invaluable paintings have been sold for several million US dollar on charity purpose. This gives a cut on government's expense in helping under-privileged communities. Additionally, international art exhibitions pave a way for government to introduce their rich cultures and heritages to people all around the world. Therefore, it provides a great help in attracting more tourists coming to visit the country. As tourism is boosted, the government can enjoy the significant financial benefits.  
  
From the aforementioned reasons, I am strongly convicted that art produces a remarkable contribution to the well-being of a society. Therefore, the government should take the idea of investing more money to support art activities into consideration.  
  
I have the following question: Does my answer achieve the task assignment? Do I need to write about government invests money in public, services?
Let's look through your essay carefully.  
In your first paragraph, you can see a lack of substantiation on your introduction.  
Why is there a discrepancy regarding the perspective on whether or not the government should financially invest in the arts?  
Why do some governments believe that it is worthless to spend money here?  
Where do they believe that money should be invested in instead?  
If you could briefly analyze status quo, then it would better the flow and content of your essay. Discuss why these perspectives exist, and make your argument in accordance to that. Also, keep in mind that paragraphs should be at least 4 to 6 sentences long. Anything less could be indicative of a lack of content and weight to your essay.  
  
I would also watch out for instances wherein you drag your sentences. If you could package your sentence in a shorter and lighter manner, then it would improve your essay's overall flow.  
  
For instance, the second sentence of your first paragraph can be:  
There are a few who argue that art has no valuable contribution, therefore making the government believe that it should not financially invest to it.  
  
Finding your flow to better the essay takes time, however it is worth it. Try rereading your essay multiple times to ensure that you are on the right track.  
  
Regarding your first point about art's contribution to society's expressionism, you should create a stronger correlation. Most of the examples you gave were individual displays of how art helps people. However, it would be helpful to the reader if you could elaborate on an instance wherein art was able to truly shape the world. Discuss an artwork, for instance, that has helped revolutionize people's perceptions towards an event. Discuss how art contributes to shaping a wider scope of people. A good example could be the usage of effigies in protests.  
  
I think that your essay superficially touches on the question that is given. I would, however, suggest that you look into discussing more about the government's current investment to social services. How do you think the government should prioritize budgeting in social services versus allocating money to, for instance, the arts sector? Where should the government draw the line?  
  
While these questions may seem to be shallow or common sense, it is appreciated if your essay can accomomdate to fundamental queries such as this.
**Question : Some people believe that nowadays we have too many choices. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?**  
  
## many choices, however many options too

  
  
Answer:  
  
It is believed that we are presented with an overwhelming number of choices by modern life. From my perspective, I completely agree with that idea.  
  
Firstly, nowadays there is a dramatic expansion in the number of choices in buying things or using services. We are living a consumer society, because abundance of products are being produced in order to attract consumers' attention and encourage them to spend more money. Smartphones are an example. Twenty years ago, we had no idea of a mobile phone connected to the Internet, but now millions of smartphones are being produced daily. Another example is that I had a choice of just 5 TV channels when I was a child, whereas I now have access to thousands of movies or videos offered by services like Netflix.  
  
Secondly, we are faced with a world of options in education. People nowadays have a huge number of opportunities to further their higher education by entering university domestically or overseas. For instance, after socializing education in 2008, a huge number of private universities and establishments are being opened in our country. In addition, public universities and colleges are introducing more and more new majors to compete with private ones. As a consequence of this, high school students no longer have the limited but simple choices of their parents' generation and they are confused about which university and profession to choose after finishing their high school program. For example, my younger brother wants to study economics, but now he is confused about where to go.  
  
In conclusion, it seems to me that we are faced with a huge number of options, and this is more bewildering than beneficial.
Hello frankly  
  
IMO this prompt is a little too broad. However, your essay has covered everything asked and that would be enough to have a good band score.  
  
I like the way you put both simple and complex sentences together, which makes your writing very natural, concise and easy to comprehend.  
Here are some of my suggestions:  
- You could briefly give your 2 reasons in the introduction. I have the same tendency to only answer the question as you but many people have advised to also deliver some detail to outline what you're going to writing next.  
  
- Your example in paragraph 3 could be clearer. 'For example, my (...) economics, however, the flood of advertisements from multiple institutions is now making it extremely hard for him to decide the school to go with.'  
  
Hope to read your next work.
## **IS SPACE RESEARCHING WORTH BIGGER INVESTMENT?**

  
  
***In the future, it seems more difficult to live on Earth. Some people think more money should be spent on researching other planets to live, such as Mars. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?***  
  
It is argued that more money should be allocated to the searching of life on other planets in the future due to the predicted degradation of the surface and atmosphere of the Earth. I am strongly opposed to this idea.  
  
First, there is little reason to spend more money on finding a new home for mankind in the universe when the Earth's condition can be improved by many viable solutions. For the water, the establishment of filtering systems will stop the spreading of garbage and toxic chemicals. Take Singapore for example, since the application of such systems in factories, the quality of water of this country has incredibly become cleaner. For the atmosphere, protecting and growing trees in large scales will help reduce air pollution. Likewise, Singaporeans are benefitted with fresh air thanks to the government's campaign to preserve a huge national forest.  
  
Moreover, the possibility of finding evidence of life on other planets still remains a complete uncertainty. So far, numerous attempts by the scientists have failed to identify the existence of oxygen on the closest planet, Mars. The latest project of SpaceX confirms that there is no source of air available on Mars. Therefore, investing in this searching mission is quite impractical at this moment and even in the future.  
  
Lastly, the amount of money required to relocate the entire mankind to another planet would be unimaginable if such a desirable place was discovered. The spaceship which carried only two pilots to Mars in 2012 cost almost 1 billion USD. If a planet with survivability was found, the cost of transporting human would be thousands of times multiplied.  
  
In conclusion, I believe that money should not be spent on researching other planets as the ambition to send human away from Earth is far from reach. Instead, saving the Earth from future degradation is still possible.
The flow and structure of the essay is sufficient. There are, however, a couple of small revisions that I suggest you do.  
Your first introductory paragraph is quite lacking. I would suggest adding more details to have a better flow. You can, for instance, introduce why institutions, agencies, or organizations are doing this. Tackle their motive, and then you can briefly discuss why you disagree with it. When you make mention that you are opposed to it, you should give a brief description as to why. You do not need to mention all the points in the essay, however you should tap onto why it is necessary.  
  
On a small note, I also suggest revising the statement line by saying instead:  
I strongly oppose this because \_\_\_\_\_\_\_.  
This is a more straightforward approach.  
Moreover, I also suggest rereading your essay and looking into your usage of preposition and punctuation. There were instances wherein the misuse affected the quality of the essay. In addition, looking into synonyms that could be perfect substitutes to make the text look more put-together can also help.  
  
Let's look at your second paragraph. The first line can be rewritten as:  
First, there is little reason to financially invest in finding a new home outside Earth; this money can instead be utilized for finding sustainable solutions.  
  
You should avoid making vague statements. What do you mean by "such systems" that Singapore applied to its factories? How exactly does the national forest preservation work in the country's case? Discussing specifics can add substance to your essay to strengthen it.  
  
The second to the last paragraph has to reviewed as well. Which criteria have you utilized to conclude that it isn't worth it to have 1B USD as a form of investment for the spaceship? If you could provide more quantitative data on it, it would contribute to your essay.  
  
I would also suggest looking into revising your conclusion. Why exactly do you think that these ambitions are out of reach? How negative is the impact of having these ambitions? The more specific and direct you are, the better.
*Topic: In modern society, fashion is becoming more highly valued in people's choice of clothes. Why? Do you think it is a positive or negative development?*  
  
## fashion boom in the developing world

  
  
My essay:  
  
Many years ago, our ancestor that underwent the situation of stablising the world that occured countless war to invade or self - defend. In this situation, hardly we could conceive that fashion would be more precise in the future. In my view, it is a great expression to reflect the society progressing.  
  
First, while the basic human needs were met like food, water, they would begin to consider the less basic and fundamental needs like clothings. This means that we could realise the great progress without incredibly regarding what people would digest in the next days. It is a signal that make society more progressive and have access to the more valuable things.  
  
I believe that it is a positive development to live in a society that everyone have their self - expression to reflect their own characters, taste, likes. For example, without saying any word, we could still catch surrounding people's attention by individual clothing styles which in turn creat the great sympathy from people around. While your appearance is actually polite, this also express your respect to the others.  
  
To conclude, the value of how fashionable they wear is increasingly more important to human race that is a signal of the pace of development. The popularity of thinking would let people seek themselves through what they want to put on their body.
Tran, I know that you put a great effort into working ont his essay. Unfortunately, your efforts were all for naught because you failed to provide a proper prompt para[hrase for this essay. You changed the discussion from the original one provided to one that you chose to discuss, hence the automatic failing TA score, which always leads to a failed Task 2 test. Here is the point where your essay automatically failed:  
  
*Original prompt: In modern .... Why? Do ...positive or negative development?*  
*Response: Many years ago, our ancestor that underwent the situation of stablising the world that occured countless war to invade or self - defend. In this situation, hardly we could conceive that fashion would be more precise in the future. In my view, it is a great expression to reflect the society progressing.*  
  
War and our ancestors have nothing to do with the topic to be discussed. The time frame referred to in the essay is "modern times", which means present day. Aside from that, you are not provided a response (positive or negative) to the direct question. Instead, you are saying that fashion is reflects social progress. That is not a positive or negative response. The correct paraphrase is:  
  
*Our current social structure places more emphasis on the way that people choose their look through a particular dress style. I believe that this is happening because social media constantly promotes the idea of the #OOTD (Outfit Of The Day). As a result, society has been negatively affected by the modern fashion movement.*  
  
Your prompt paraphrase must always remain aligned with the original presentation. You should never create your own discussion topic or requirements that runs counter to the original set of discussion instructions.
***## Today, the younger and older generations are in the same workplace

.  
Is this more an advantage or more disadvantage?***  
  
Seeing young generations sharing the same working environment with the older ones have become more common these days. This essay will argue that such development brings huge advantages to the workplace.  
  
The increase in productivity is the prime reason to let people from different generations work together. While the creativity of the young blows new air to any business projects, the rich experiences of older workers help solve any problems or difficulties occurred. Their coordination, therefore, will significantly reduce the time required to finish the company's project while maintaining a high level of product quality. For example, thanks to the cooperation of the senior and the junior workers in the software department, my company has successfully delivered the final product to our customer two weeks before the deadline.  
  
Moreover, the co-existence of workers of different ages will make the atmosphere in the office less boring and dull. Many people admit that they tend to avoid conversations with their colleagues in the same age group because the topics to discuss quickly runs out. This tendency will eventually turn an active and lively office into a silent retirement home where no one talks unless it is about work. Hence, a multigenerational office will be able to promote communication between co-workers as there are always things to talk about. For instance, junior workers can share their modern lifestyles while the seniors can remind the young generation of how peaceful and tranquil life was in the past, and the list of topics goes on.  
  
In conclusion, putting workers of different ages together is definitely beneficial to any office as this development improves productivity and working atmosphere.