아이엘츠 라이팅 AI 첨삭
- Opinion
Some people believe that one of the best ways to solve environmental problem is to increase the cost of fuel for cars and other vehicles. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
스코어팩토리 AI가 에세이를 평가하였습니다.
Evaluation
Task Response: 6.0
The writer attempts to respond to the task by presenting arguments and counterarguments about the topic. However, much of the argument seems to be vague and somewhat irrelevant to the actual topic question. Although the concluding paragraph attempts to provide a response to the question, it is not properly integrated throughout the whole essay, and therefore only partially answers the task.
Coherence & Cohesion: 5.5
The essay follows a logical sequence of arguments and counterarguments. However, there is some lack of cohesive devices, and sometimes ideas seem to be randomly put together without coherent joins. The writer should have focused more on streamlining the arguments and refining the logical transition between statements.
Lexical Resource: 6.5
The writer demonstrates a good level of vocabulary, using a range of words and phrases. While they are able to utilize higher-level words effectively in some instances, in others it is done less effectively or with slight awkwardness. The candidate also occasionally uses repetitive phrases like 'the price of fuel', showing a lack of flexibility in language usage.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy: 6.5
There is a reasonable range of grammatical structures used, and the student has attempted to use complex sentences. There are some grammatical errors that obscure meaning, such as 'the influence of it has been limited'. However, many sentences are correct, and there is a clear command of basic grammar conventions overall.
Overall: 6.1
Task Response: 6.0
The writer attempts to respond to the task by presenting arguments and counterarguments about the topic. However, much of the argument seems to be vague and somewhat irrelevant to the actual topic question. Although the concluding paragraph attempts to provide a response to the question, it is not properly integrated throughout the whole essay, and therefore only partially answers the task.
Coherence & Cohesion: 5.5
The essay follows a logical sequence of arguments and counterarguments. However, there is some lack of cohesive devices, and sometimes ideas seem to be randomly put together without coherent joins. The writer should have focused more on streamlining the arguments and refining the logical transition between statements.
Lexical Resource: 6.5
The writer demonstrates a good level of vocabulary, using a range of words and phrases. While they are able to utilize higher-level words effectively in some instances, in others it is done less effectively or with slight awkwardness. The candidate also occasionally uses repetitive phrases like 'the price of fuel', showing a lack of flexibility in language usage.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy: 6.5
There is a reasonable range of grammatical structures used, and the student has attempted to use complex sentences. There are some grammatical errors that obscure meaning, such as 'the influence of it has been limited'. However, many sentences are correct, and there is a clear command of basic grammar conventions overall.
Overall: 6.1
스코어팩토리 AI가 작성한 모범답안입니다.
Some people believe that one of the best ways to solve environmental problem is to increase the cost of fuel for cars and other vehicles. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Essay:
The issue of adopting higher fuel costs as a solution to environmental concerns is a topic of considerable debate. I firmly stand on the notion that increased fuel prices can indeed play a significant role in mitigating environmental issues.
Increased fuel costs can directly impact driving behavior, thereby potentially alleviating environmental degradation. Most people are inclined to adjust their driving habits when faced with higher fuel prices, instead opting for public transportation such as buses or subways, which are more cost-effective and eco-friendly. For instance, this cost-induced change in behavior prompts those with budget constraints to consider alternative options for commuting, subsequently curbing pollution levels caused by the overuse of private vehicles.
Contrarily, some argue that high fuel prices have less influence over drivers due to the indispensable role vehicles play in our daily lives. They posit that regardless of cost, individuals will not forego their vehicles and will find ways to overcome the financial burden. While I acknowledge the validity of this argument, I believe that direct policies like mileage restrictions, vehicle emission standards, and additional fuel taxes should be implemented alongside to maximize the potential of high fuel prices as an environmental safeguard.
In conclusion, although the effectiveness of increased fuel cost as an environmental solution is disputed, it remains an influential tool in shaping people's driving habits. Therefore, it should be given significant consideration in the quest for environmental preservation.
Word count: 226
Essay translated in Korean:
환경 문제를 해결하기 위한 방법으로 높은 연료비를 도입하는 문제는 상당한 논쟁의 대상이다. 나는 연료비 증가가 환경 문제를 완화하는 데 중요한 역할을 할 수 있다는 주장을 확고히 지지한다.
높은 연료비는 운전 행동에 직접적인 영향을 미쳐서 환경 저하를 완화할 잠재력이 있다. 높은 연료비에 직면한 대부분의 사람들은 비용 효과적이고 친환경적인 버스나 지하철 같은 공공 교통을 선택하는 것으로 운전 습관을 바꾼다. 예를 들어, 이러한 비용 기반의 행동 변화는 예산 제약이 있는 사람들이 통근 방식에 대한 대안을 고려하게 함으로써 사설 차량의 과도한 사용으로 인한 오염 수준을 줄이게 된다.
Good expressions:
1. A topic of considerable debate - 상당한 논쟁의 대상
2. Directly impact - 직접적인 영향을 미치다
3. Cost-induced change in behavior - 비용 기반의 행동 변화
4. Overcome the financial burden - 재정 부담 극복
5. Environmental safeguard - 환경 보호 장치
6. Influential tool in shaping - 형성하는 데 영향력 있는 도구
7. Quest for environmental preservation - 환경 보존을 위한 탐구
The issue of adopting higher fuel costs as a solution to environmental concerns is a topic of considerable debate. I firmly stand on the notion that increased fuel prices can indeed play a significant role in mitigating environmental issues.
Increased fuel costs can directly impact driving behavior, thereby potentially alleviating environmental degradation. Most people are inclined to adjust their driving habits when faced with higher fuel prices, instead opting for public transportation such as buses or subways, which are more cost-effective and eco-friendly. For instance, this cost-induced change in behavior prompts those with budget constraints to consider alternative options for commuting, subsequently curbing pollution levels caused by the overuse of private vehicles.
Contrarily, some argue that high fuel prices have less influence over drivers due to the indispensable role vehicles play in our daily lives. They posit that regardless of cost, individuals will not forego their vehicles and will find ways to overcome the financial burden. While I acknowledge the validity of this argument, I believe that direct policies like mileage restrictions, vehicle emission standards, and additional fuel taxes should be implemented alongside to maximize the potential of high fuel prices as an environmental safeguard.
In conclusion, although the effectiveness of increased fuel cost as an environmental solution is disputed, it remains an influential tool in shaping people's driving habits. Therefore, it should be given significant consideration in the quest for environmental preservation.
Word count: 226
Essay translated in Korean:
환경 문제를 해결하기 위한 방법으로 높은 연료비를 도입하는 문제는 상당한 논쟁의 대상이다. 나는 연료비 증가가 환경 문제를 완화하는 데 중요한 역할을 할 수 있다는 주장을 확고히 지지한다.
높은 연료비는 운전 행동에 직접적인 영향을 미쳐서 환경 저하를 완화할 잠재력이 있다. 높은 연료비에 직면한 대부분의 사람들은 비용 효과적이고 친환경적인 버스나 지하철 같은 공공 교통을 선택하는 것으로 운전 습관을 바꾼다. 예를 들어, 이러한 비용 기반의 행동 변화는 예산 제약이 있는 사람들이 통근 방식에 대한 대안을 고려하게 함으로써 사설 차량의 과도한 사용으로 인한 오염 수준을 줄이게 된다.
Good expressions:
1. A topic of considerable debate - 상당한 논쟁의 대상
2. Directly impact - 직접적인 영향을 미치다
3. Cost-induced change in behavior - 비용 기반의 행동 변화
4. Overcome the financial burden - 재정 부담 극복
5. Environmental safeguard - 환경 보호 장치
6. Influential tool in shaping - 형성하는 데 영향력 있는 도구
7. Quest for environmental preservation - 환경 보존을 위한 탐구
제출한 라이팅
The effect on cost of fuel for vehicles is the subject of contentious debate. While some advocate the cost of fuel has been impacted the frequency of driving, others argue for the influence of it has been limited regardless of the diversity of vehicles. I definitely contend that the cost of fuel leads to environment preservation.
Most people agree that the higher price of fuel will be the big burden for their driving frequency, changing the driving habit. One of the primary reasons behind this argument is that as the price of it increases, most drivers choose to take the public transportation like bus and subway. For example, people sensitive for their budget are more exposed to other options, which means they get more opportunities to avoid driving the individual vehicle. It will be helpful to reduce the air pollution made by more cars.
Therefore, it could be argued that the cost burden is a way to ensure that environmental needs are met and that people can receive more immediate effectiveness than other policies.
On the contrary, others hold the view that the price of fuel seems to have affected people’s behavior. This is because the financial factor is the most powerful stimulation, which can change people’s purpose. However, the individual vehicle has already been changed to not an item of personal preference, but an essential method of our life. The price has limited impact on a diverse range of essential items. Moreover, even if the increased cost is to have strong influence on people’s limited budget, those people will find another solution to make up that financial loss. In order to solve environmental problem, it is essential for government to take polices with legal biding forces like the two-part vehicle system, driving millage, and driving tax. Direct policies should be established to get clear achievements especially in terms of environmental issues.
In conclusion, while some still argue that people do not respond to the fluctuation of price for fuel, maintaining their driving habit, I adamantly assert that the financial factor is the most influential method when we hope to get a definite effect. Ultimately the goal of solving environmental problems should be considered from the priority of people’s life.
Most people agree that the higher price of fuel will be the big burden for their driving frequency, changing the driving habit. One of the primary reasons behind this argument is that as the price of it increases, most drivers choose to take the public transportation like bus and subway. For example, people sensitive for their budget are more exposed to other options, which means they get more opportunities to avoid driving the individual vehicle. It will be helpful to reduce the air pollution made by more cars.
Therefore, it could be argued that the cost burden is a way to ensure that environmental needs are met and that people can receive more immediate effectiveness than other policies.
On the contrary, others hold the view that the price of fuel seems to have affected people’s behavior. This is because the financial factor is the most powerful stimulation, which can change people’s purpose. However, the individual vehicle has already been changed to not an item of personal preference, but an essential method of our life. The price has limited impact on a diverse range of essential items. Moreover, even if the increased cost is to have strong influence on people’s limited budget, those people will find another solution to make up that financial loss. In order to solve environmental problem, it is essential for government to take polices with legal biding forces like the two-part vehicle system, driving millage, and driving tax. Direct policies should be established to get clear achievements especially in terms of environmental issues.
In conclusion, while some still argue that people do not respond to the fluctuation of price for fuel, maintaining their driving habit, I adamantly assert that the financial factor is the most influential method when we hope to get a definite effect. Ultimately the goal of solving environmental problems should be considered from the priority of people’s life.
공유
목록으로 돌아가기 😎
