dim/essayforum_raw_writing_10k huggingface dataset:
SOME SAY THAT BECAUSE MANY PEOPLE LIVE MUCH LONGER, THE AGE AT WHICH PEOPLE RETIRE FROM WORK SHOULD BE RAISED CONSIDERABLY. TO WHAT EXTENT DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE?  
  
## the idea of retirement in the longevity era

  
  
In contemporary society, that the longer retirement should be taken into consideration due to the longer life expectancy has generated a hotly debated. I partly agree with that statement for the following reasons.  
  
The longer life expectancy is a consequence of a better welfare, medical condition,etc. Thus, working for some more years is expected by many people, however, simultaneously it raises various concerns in this day and age. Firstly, senior citizens may face to several heatlthy problems such as heart attack, dementia, ... which may harm their productivity in terms of company's benefits. Moreover, healthy problems such as these in elderly people are extremely dangerous and none of us expect that just because of working. In addition, a longer retirement generates job-hunting burdens on graduates. To clarify that, according to previous studies, a huge workforce who had finished their 4 years education could not find a job since the full of employee in firms.  
  
However, retirement does not mean that older people are suppose to stay at home without any contributing to society. As a former skilled labour, their culmulative experiences are valuable and very helpful to young generation. It is undeniable that many experts in some areas such as profession teachers or doctors are old but they still play a key role with a huge impact in their fields. Besides, regarding in the countries which have to face with population aging, increasing limit of retirement might also considered as a solution to deal with allocated workforce.  
  
In conclusion, in light of afore- mentioned factors, I am more convinced that increase the retirement age will do more harm than good. It is recommended that the negative influences of that tendency should be taken into serious consideration before be conducted.  
  
please evalute and give the possible band score for my essay.
@kimese  
Hi! I'm here to welcome you to the forum and provide you with writing feedback on your essay.  
  
I agree with the prior comment that you've committed quite a number of fundamental mistakes. No worries. These are all easily to be adjusted to if you can focus more on enhancing your writing style from the core. If you can grasp these basic details, you'll be able to fortify your writing style a lot more.  
  
Try to take it step by step. One of the primary things you can do is, of course, try to utilize simpler sentence structures that follow the subject-predicate patterns. Simplification will trim down unnecessary phrases, making your writing more efficient in relaying information.  
  
Take smaller chunks of text instead of the larger ones you already have now.
## Similarities Between the Parent Functions

  
  
**In some countries, the role of a mother differs in some ways from the role of a father. Why do you think these differences exist? How might parental roles develop in the future?**  
  
It is argued in several nations that moms act whole differently as opposed to dads. While several reasons contribute to this kind of difference between parents, I believe that the roles fathers and mothers would function more similarly.  
  
There are several reasons why parents act so differently in the context of kids. Firstly, fathers spent little time with kids than mothers do because his character in a family is to work and earn money. Therefore, dads tend not to get familiar with children' daily lives, while moms take care of almost everything related to them such as their birthday and school's name. Secondly, the ways parents talk to their offspring also differed in certain aspects. Fathers often speak straightforward to children, while mothers choose their words wisely to prevent hurting children' heart.  
  
However, the difference between the parents' role is narrowing due to some cultural factors. Since the 1990s, women have begun to participate more in the work field instead of staying at home fostering son and daughter, making the time parents spent with children come closer. Furthermore, the advocate of gender equality would encourage dads to do a task which moms have been doing for the past century. For example, my mother was always the one making sure I finished homework when I was little, while recently my dad started to ask about my scores of midterm test.  
  
In conclusion, although several factors contribute to the difference in parents' teaching to children, I strongly believe that the gap will become much less apparent in the future.
"I believe that the roles ... function more similarly." The meaning of this sentence is not clear. Do you means that the functions of mother and father will become more and more similar in the future? "in the context of" seems awkward to me (dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/context) . I recommend "when dealing with a kid-related issue". "Character" - "role"; "tend not to" - "doesn't tend to; differed - differs; aspect - way; work field - workforce; task - tasks
@s410377088  
Hello. Thanks for coming back! I hope you're doing good. I'll give you feedback on this essay.  
  
The first paragraph needs a bit more work. While the first sentence is straightforward, it still lacks being more specific with what the direction of your essay is supposed to be. It is unnecessary for you to mention that these differentiations exist because of national perceptions. Rather, try to mention that these are gender-based notions as this appears to be a firmer approach than what you currently have at the moment.  
  
Try to be more direct with language usage. For example, the first lines of the second paragraph could have been phrased in a simpler manner. If you do this, you'll be able to focus on more important details.
## compulsory unpaid community service

  
  
It's arguably that nonprofit community services should be added to highschool curriculum. Personally, I strongly agree with this opinion. The essay will discuss about how voluntary work could help student to develop soft skill and benefit the society  
  
First, volunteer community service will benefit both the young and the community. If a large number of students doing unpaid work. By helping the elder, the sick or participating in certain public services like raising fund or environmental activities, et cetra. The young will gain a lot of valuable experience and become more socialble while the welfare burden on the state budget will be reduced.  
  
More over, the student who has participated in community services often have the advantage over the student who don t have any experience. For example, when it comes to standard university or company often prefer student who has attend social service than those who don't.  
  
However, there still some disadvantages if the young provide free serivec for society. For instance, it may bring a lot of conflict with there education routine. This may result in many undesirable effects like students couldn't keep up the school requirement in their education since the student have to spend a large amount of time to helping the community. Another vital point is that school is already causing significant stress and student need time to do other activities to relax and regain there strength and health.
@hikigay  
Hi. Seeing as you are new to the forum, I personally welcome you here! I hope you can become an active member in the forum.  
  
Firstly, be cautious of your usage of preposition or other forms of connecting words. For instance, in your first paragraph's last line, it should have been phrased as: "*essay will discuss how voluntary work*". Notice how necessary (despite how minute) these details are.  
  
Don't deprive your readers of details, especially in your body paragraphs. Your second paragraph, for example, answer more in-depth questions here. How can the young truly benefit in these situations? How will the state budget be reduced here?  
  
Try to not make bold statements without any firm details to back your information (ie. observe the third paragraph).  
  
You need to balance out your conclusion with a short summation and a personal note on the topic.
## education for morality or logical reasoning foundation

  
  
Some people believe that teaching morality should be the foundation of education. Others believe that teaching a foundation of logical reasoning would do more to produce a moral society.  
  
Education is imperative to create a well-rounded individual capable of formulating his or her own ideas. It provdies a person with the tools to succeed in life. Hence, it is important that the foundation of education promulgate ideas necessary for a happy and successful life. While both logical reasoning and morals are indispensable factors for establishing a foundation for education, I believe that education without the abilitiy to reason logically is redundant and that morals naturally follow with the ability to reason logically.  
  
Education in the twenty-first century has been more focused on facts and figures rather than understanding the meaning behind those facts and figures. This will lead to a society where individuals are not innovative, and follow whatever instructions that are handed over to them. In this era, individuals who are creative are the ones who will move forward, as innovative solutions are required to solve the modern problems plaguing humanity such as climate change, poverty, inequality, economic recession and so on. If the youth of today is not taught with a foundation of logical reasoning, they will just be re-learning the past and not be able to move into the future. For instance, learning about the nuclear disasters of the past such as the Chernobyl disaster is definitely eye-opening, but if students are not taught how to dissect what went wrong or what to avoid in the future, the knowledge will be useless.  
  
It is not to say that moral values are any less important than logical reasoning. But it is quite natural for moral values to follow with logical reasoning. Logical reasoning is a method whereby every decision, every step, is taken by thinking about a problem logically and rationally. Suppose, if a person is thinking about earning more money, they will think of logical means such as working extra hours, or opening a side business, not about robbing a bank to get rich because they know that the consequences of doing so are not beneficial. Moreover, morality comes from many sources such as teachers, parents, friends, extended family and the general environment. Morality is already embedded in the foundation of logical reasoning. Hence, to prioritize morality over logical reasoning would be redundant and would deprive students of the chance of learning to reason.  
  
Hence, teaching a foundation of logical reasoning would do more to produce a moral society by providing the students the tools to distinguish between right and wrong. A more logical society would come up with better solutions for the problems plaguing the mankind, naturally leading to a society that is more moral.
@wayfarer13  
Hello. I hope you're doing well. As you're new here, I hope you can keep joining us for more substantive learning discussions on essay writing.  
  
Generally, I have observed that your writing style is immensely put-together. You have quite a balanced writing approach wherein you are able to smoothly substantiate in order to reiterate how you'll be able to nurture your writing. I would only suggest trying to compose with intent and a straightforward writing approach. Take a look at, for instance, the second paragraph's last lines. These portions require that you focus primarily on logically expanding your opinion in order to lead the readers into your last sentence.  
  
As I always tell others, if you can divide a sentence into two lines, opt to do this. Apply this heavily to your third to fourth paragraph as you have quite heavy sentences because of unnecessary weight.
## fewer cars in the future?

  
  
In current society, with the development of life standard, an increasing number of people could afford the private cars. And also, because of the convenience of private transportation, there are more and more cars in roads. Nevertheless, this situation is incurring many negative effects, which causes some people predict that the use of cars will be reduced in twenty years. In my opinion, it is highly likely to happen.  
  
First of all, people's awareness about protecting environment will definitely raise in the future. As a result, they will not tend to choose this transportation method which is considered as the major course of air pollution. It's true that in some countries, especially developing and undeveloped countries, people pay more attention on rapid economic growth, and they do not hesitate to develop it at the expense of environment. For instance, these countries do not care the exhausted gases released by cars, even those gases have lead severe air pollution. By contrast, in twenty years, people living in those regions, even in whole of the world will suffer from the consequence of environment damage such as air pollution leading to chronic respiratory diseases. In order to build a safe and environment-friendly society, it's possible that people have a tendency to use fewer cars.  
  
In addition, the various kinds of transportation methods also give a variety of choices to meet people's daily life. Specifically, with the development of science and technology, governments have made efforts to develop environment-friendly transportation methods and to construct public transportation network which help public transportation methods to be more reasonable. Compared with the cost of flue, maintaining and repair for cars, people are inclined to choose cost-efficient ways, like subways, trains and airplanes. Because of the convenient public transportation systems, the use of cars would be reduced.  
  
Admittedly, people have more individualized need which cars can more suitably meet than relatively rigid public transportation. Nevertheless, advantages of reducing the use of cars far overweigh the benefit of not limiting.  
  
In a nutshell, I'm convinced that with the raise of environment awareness and the more preferable transportation system, people will use fewer cars in twenty years.
@Yunyu Zhang  
Hi. Hopefully I'll provide you with writing feedback that you will be able to learn from. Please do keep coming back to us for more!  
  
I suggest omitting unnecessary lines and words throughout your essay. If you do this, you'll be able to focus on curating substantive details because it would allow you to focus on more essential information and prioritize these portions. Having said that, I recommend applying this specifically to your first paragraph. When transitioning, for instance, to your second sentence, try to omit the first lines and go straightforward. Remember that a straightforward writing approach will immensely assist you in writing efficiently.  
  
Your second paragraph as well can be enhanced by simplifying details. If you can separate a line into two sentences, opt to do it as this will help you have more of a logical approach.
## animals products are no longer necessities

  
  
**In the modern world, people are no longer necessary to use food from animals or products from animals such as medicine and clothing. Agree or disagree?**  
  
It is often argued that thanks to the amazing advancements and breakthroughs in technology, there is no need to exploit animals in food, fashion and medical industry. I myself completely agree with this view.  
  
There are several justifications for not using animals as a source of human food. Firstly, vegetarian food is increasingly attested to offer equal nutritious quality as meat and fish. For example, many types of nuts such as soya, beans, almonds, and etc. provide not only valuable fibre but also protein and lipid. Secondly, consuming a plant-based diet would significantly reduce the risk of life-threatening diseases such as obesity, diabetes, and etc. As a result, people's overall physical health would be greatly improved.  
  
Moreover, people have recently invented efficient and powerful alternatives for animals in clothing and pharmaceutical industry. With regard to manufacturing garment products, instead of using skins and fur from animals, a myriad ranges of artificial fabrics have been created with even better quality. Clothing items made of these synthetic materials are cheaper to produce and easier to preserve than ones made of animals' skins. In terms of medical perspective, sophisticated and modern computer simulation software is increasingly applied in order to test the effects of certain types of treatment and medicine with better accuracy for a shorter period of time. As a result, it is no longer necessary to use animals in medicine or treatment testing.  
  
In conclusion, food, fashion and medical products made of animals are no longer necessities due to the fact that they can be replaced by plant-based diets, synthesized fabrics and computer simulation programs.
Hi, @hanhdth83  
I have read your essay and I would like to have some comments on it.  
  
1. You have addressed all parts of the task and presented a clear position throughout the response. Your ideas are OK and you know how to present, extend and support them with various examples. Keep up the good work!  
  
Despite there being two paragraphs in the body, they both point at the same idea: *There are better alternatives that can replace the use of animals.* So you may need to work on some new ideas in order to make your essay more persuasive. Below are some links to other relevant ideas to this topic that you can refer to:  
  
+ Animal testing: Pros and Cons: animal-testing.procon.org/  
+ Should people become vegetarian?: vegetarian.procon.org/  
  
2. As for Cohesion and Coherence, you know how to logically organise your ideas and use a range of connectors. The introduction is straightforward and covers the issue you are going to discuss. There are clear topic sentences at the beginning of each paragraph, which are well-supported by the following ones. You also have a concluding sentence at the end of each paragraph, which is a great thing to do. The content is quite convincing and you are able to lead the readers to the point you want to make.  
  
3. With regard to grammar, you are able to flexibly use of a variety of complex structures, although there are some inaccuracies. As for lexical resource, you know how to use a sufficient range of vocabulary to express your points of view clearly. Some collocations and uncommon words are also appropriately used in your response. However, there is still room for improvement and below are some suggested alternatives and corrections to the phrases/structures used in your prompt:  
  
'It is often argued that thanks to **technological advancements and breakthroughs**, there is ... in **the** food, ...'  
  
'... using animals as **human food source**'  
  
'Firstly, ... increasingly **proven/proved** to **offer equal nutritional value to/ offer as much nutritional value as** meat and fish.'  
  
'...l alternatives **to** animal use in **the** clothing and ...'  
==> I suggest another way to improve this sentence: 'Moreover, there have recently been innovative non-animal alternatives/more effective alternatives that exclude/does not involve the use of animals in the clothing and pharmaceutical industry.'  
  
'With regard to manufacturing **garments**, instead..., a myriad **range** of ...'  
  
'... to preserve than **the ones/those** (made) of **animal skins**.'  
  
'~~In terms of...~~ **From a medical perspective,** sophisticated and modern ...'
@hanhdth83  
Hi there! Given that you're new here, I welcome you to the forum! I hope you find all this feedback to be beneficial for your writing endeavors.  
  
Firstly, be cautious of your usage of pauses (or lack thereof). Without these pauses, you end up having rather chunky run-on sentences that do not benefit your writing style's clarity. For instance, your first paragraph's last sentence should have had commas before and after the word *myself* to trigger an appropriate pause.  
  
Try to also implement better and smoother transitions for your body paragraphs. You jumped from the manufacturing of garments to the medical perspective without having at least a linking line in between. Doing so would have helped readers to fully fathom why it's necessary to chunk both beside each other.
Question: In some countries, few people earn an extremely high salary. Some think it is good for the country, while others think the government should control and limit the amount that people can earn. Discuss both views and give your opinion.  
  
**My essay:**  
In a particular countries, some people receive an extraordinary income. Few people believe this is beneficial for that nation, while others think the authorities ought to restrain the money that residents can obtain. This passage will discuss both perspectives and give a commentary.  
  
It is undeniably right to claim that the government should limit resident's salary. In fact, when the government does that, they will have a bigger fund, which means they can use that money to build amenities for citizens, such as hospitals, schools, parks, and swimming pools. Likewise, if the government can do so many good deeds as stated, more jobs will be created, and people will never fear of lacking of jobs. ( stonks :) )  
  
On the other hand, permitting some people gain a gigantic salary also has some advantages. Many countries are well-known for its corrupted administration, North Korea for example. Thus, imagine that allow those politicians take the people money and spend it on their own purpose, their economy will stink certainly. As a result, instead of giving money into the greedy, let's give those money for the smart entrepreneurs. Due to their experiences in business, they can make the economy greatly rises. Besides, there are some people work very hard and diligent, but only attain same salary as the others because of the greedy authorities, this will cause brain drain. Thousands of skilled and smart people will move into a better-condition country to live. Leaving the older one plummet and stay at the bottom of poverty.  
  
In conclusion, both views has strong points, however, giving high salary to some people must depend on the moral of the government.(275 words)  
  
*I would be appreciate to people comment to this essay. If you have so much free time and found a mistake, please indicate it out, I confuse that am I doing this kind of prompt right? Because they said discuss both views and give your opinion should be 2 paragraphs about 2 views and 1 paragraph about my view-my teacher teaches me that. And I also will be really grateful who give this essay a band :). Thank you so much for reading this and hope you have a good day!*  
  
*   
*this too :)*