아이엘츠 라이팅 AI 첨삭
- Discussion
Some people think that the government is wasting money on the arts and this money could be better spent elsewhere. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
스코어팩토리 AI가 에세이를 평가하였습니다.
Evaluation
Task Response: 7
The writer addresses the task fully, providing a balanced discussion and expanding points thoroughly. The position is clear throughout the essay.
Coherence & Cohesion: 7
The information and ideas are arranged logically, and the essay is easy to follow. There is good consistency in the usage of cohesive devices and referencing techniques.
Lexical Resource: 7
There is a strong variety of vocabulary used accurately. There are also some good attempts to use less common vocabulary, although not always successful.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy: 7
There is a variety of complex structures used with a good level of accuracy. However, errors still exist, like "If the society put more resources in science fields, rather than the arts," where an auxiliary verb is missing.
Overall: 7
The essay demonstrates a clear understanding of the task, well-organised arguments, an effective use of language, and a good range of grammar. However, there are still minor errors and inconsistencies in grammar and vocabulary.
Task Response: 7
The writer addresses the task fully, providing a balanced discussion and expanding points thoroughly. The position is clear throughout the essay.
Coherence & Cohesion: 7
The information and ideas are arranged logically, and the essay is easy to follow. There is good consistency in the usage of cohesive devices and referencing techniques.
Lexical Resource: 7
There is a strong variety of vocabulary used accurately. There are also some good attempts to use less common vocabulary, although not always successful.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy: 7
There is a variety of complex structures used with a good level of accuracy. However, errors still exist, like "If the society put more resources in science fields, rather than the arts," where an auxiliary verb is missing.
Overall: 7
The essay demonstrates a clear understanding of the task, well-organised arguments, an effective use of language, and a good range of grammar. However, there are still minor errors and inconsistencies in grammar and vocabulary.
스코어팩토리 AI가 작성한 모범답안입니다.
Some people think that the government is wasting money on the arts and this money could be better spent elsewhere.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Essay:
Recently, there has been a growing debate about the allocation of government funding towards the arts. While some suggest this money would yield greater benefits in other sectors, I firmly disagree, believing that it significantly contributes to the enrichment of society.
Investing in the arts holds numerous benefits, primarily fostering creativity and imaginative thinking among the populace. As government grants aid in upgrading facilities like art galleries, the public are provided greater access to appreciate and understand artworks, stimulating their creative thinking abilities. This skill is critically essential today, and combined with academic competence, could enhance an individual's competitiveness. Further, art serves as a significant stress reducer for many people. In nations with robust art sectors, it's observed that citizens frequently alleviate tension through this medium, consequently improving efficiency in tasks.
However, critics argue that the government's financial support is more required in other sectors, such as science. The scenario where promising research is abandoned due to insufficient funding certainly paints a compelling picture for reallocating resources. But, it is important to remember that advancing technology and economic growth are not the sole contributors to a society's progress.
In conclusion, while other fields undeniably require funding, I maintain that directing resources towards the arts isn’t wasteful. Mainly because it fosters citizens' creativity and favours stress relief.
Word count: 261
Essay translated in Korean:
최근에는 정부가 예술 분야에 자금을 지원하는 것에 대한 논쟁이 늘어나고 있습니다. 이 돈이 다른 분야에서 더 큰 이익을 가져올 수 있을 것이라는 주장이 있지만, 저는 그것이 사회를 더욱 풍요롭게 하는 데 상당한 기여를 한다고 강하게 반대합니다.
예술에 투자하는 것은 수많은 이점을 가지고 있으며, 주로 국민들 사이에서 창의성과 상상력을 불러일으키는 데 있습니다. 정부의 보조금은 예술 갤러리와 같은 시설을 업그레이드하는 데 도움이 되므로, 공공은 예술 작품을 사랑하고 이해하는 데 더 큰 접근성을 제공받게 되어, 그들의 창의적 사고 능력을 자극합니다. 이 기술은 오늘날 매우 필수적이며, 학문적 역량과 결합하면 개인의 경쟁력을 향상시킬 수 있습니다.
그러나, 비판가들은 정부의 재정 지원이 과학과 같은 다른 섹터에서 더 필요하다고 주장합니다.
Good expressions:
1. growing debate - 늘어나는 논쟁
2. yield greater benefits - 더 큰 이익을 가져오다
3. critically essential - 비판적으로 필수적
4. robust art sectors - 강인한 예술 부문
5. reallocating resources - 리소스를 재분배하다
6. it fosters citizens' creativity - 시민들의 창의성을 촉진한다
7. favours stress relief - 스트레스 해소를 돕다
Recently, there has been a growing debate about the allocation of government funding towards the arts. While some suggest this money would yield greater benefits in other sectors, I firmly disagree, believing that it significantly contributes to the enrichment of society.
Investing in the arts holds numerous benefits, primarily fostering creativity and imaginative thinking among the populace. As government grants aid in upgrading facilities like art galleries, the public are provided greater access to appreciate and understand artworks, stimulating their creative thinking abilities. This skill is critically essential today, and combined with academic competence, could enhance an individual's competitiveness. Further, art serves as a significant stress reducer for many people. In nations with robust art sectors, it's observed that citizens frequently alleviate tension through this medium, consequently improving efficiency in tasks.
However, critics argue that the government's financial support is more required in other sectors, such as science. The scenario where promising research is abandoned due to insufficient funding certainly paints a compelling picture for reallocating resources. But, it is important to remember that advancing technology and economic growth are not the sole contributors to a society's progress.
In conclusion, while other fields undeniably require funding, I maintain that directing resources towards the arts isn’t wasteful. Mainly because it fosters citizens' creativity and favours stress relief.
Word count: 261
Essay translated in Korean:
최근에는 정부가 예술 분야에 자금을 지원하는 것에 대한 논쟁이 늘어나고 있습니다. 이 돈이 다른 분야에서 더 큰 이익을 가져올 수 있을 것이라는 주장이 있지만, 저는 그것이 사회를 더욱 풍요롭게 하는 데 상당한 기여를 한다고 강하게 반대합니다.
예술에 투자하는 것은 수많은 이점을 가지고 있으며, 주로 국민들 사이에서 창의성과 상상력을 불러일으키는 데 있습니다. 정부의 보조금은 예술 갤러리와 같은 시설을 업그레이드하는 데 도움이 되므로, 공공은 예술 작품을 사랑하고 이해하는 데 더 큰 접근성을 제공받게 되어, 그들의 창의적 사고 능력을 자극합니다. 이 기술은 오늘날 매우 필수적이며, 학문적 역량과 결합하면 개인의 경쟁력을 향상시킬 수 있습니다.
그러나, 비판가들은 정부의 재정 지원이 과학과 같은 다른 섹터에서 더 필요하다고 주장합니다.
Good expressions:
1. growing debate - 늘어나는 논쟁
2. yield greater benefits - 더 큰 이익을 가져오다
3. critically essential - 비판적으로 필수적
4. robust art sectors - 강인한 예술 부문
5. reallocating resources - 리소스를 재분배하다
6. it fosters citizens' creativity - 시민들의 창의성을 촉진한다
7. favours stress relief - 스트레스 해소를 돕다
제출한 라이팅
Nowadays, due to rising awareness of academic backgrounds, some individuals insist that the government should take the lead in spending their budgets in other sectors, rather than in the arts. I strongly disagree with this point of view, and in this essay, I will elucidate my opinion with examples.
There are several advantages of putting more resources into the arts. I believe that the main one is that it can enable the people to cultivate their creativity and imagination. What I mean by this is that the more money the government invests in, such as refurbishing art galleries, the more people can appreciate the artworks and by understanding the meaning of them, they can cultivate their creative thinking ability, which is one of the crucial capabilities in our life. As a result, people can be more competitive, with creativity as well as academic ability. Furthermore, it is inevitable that people can relieve their stress. People in many countries that have developed the arts are inclined to relieve their stress by appreciating their masterpieces and they can focus on their tasks efficiently. However, in my country, the government does not invest money in the arts, so some people cannot find the way how to relieve their stress. In this circumstance, if the society takes the lead in putting money aside for improving their qualities of the arts, such as building public art events or facilities, people can lower their stress by engaging them.
Despite these benefits, some people also assert that the government should redirect their budget allocation, rather than using them in the arts. This is because there are numerous fields required the government’s supports. For example, many scientists are giving up their much research due to the lack of subsidy. If the society put more resources in science fields, rather than the arts. In that case, it can lead the advancement of scientific technologies, which in turn enable the countries to accomplish their economic growth.
In conclusion, although it is unavoidable that there are still a whole range of fields that need subsidy, such as science fields, I strongly argue that investing money in the arts is not a wasting of money, particularly in terms of cultivating citizens’ creativity and relieving their stress.
There are several advantages of putting more resources into the arts. I believe that the main one is that it can enable the people to cultivate their creativity and imagination. What I mean by this is that the more money the government invests in, such as refurbishing art galleries, the more people can appreciate the artworks and by understanding the meaning of them, they can cultivate their creative thinking ability, which is one of the crucial capabilities in our life. As a result, people can be more competitive, with creativity as well as academic ability. Furthermore, it is inevitable that people can relieve their stress. People in many countries that have developed the arts are inclined to relieve their stress by appreciating their masterpieces and they can focus on their tasks efficiently. However, in my country, the government does not invest money in the arts, so some people cannot find the way how to relieve their stress. In this circumstance, if the society takes the lead in putting money aside for improving their qualities of the arts, such as building public art events or facilities, people can lower their stress by engaging them.
Despite these benefits, some people also assert that the government should redirect their budget allocation, rather than using them in the arts. This is because there are numerous fields required the government’s supports. For example, many scientists are giving up their much research due to the lack of subsidy. If the society put more resources in science fields, rather than the arts. In that case, it can lead the advancement of scientific technologies, which in turn enable the countries to accomplish their economic growth.
In conclusion, although it is unavoidable that there are still a whole range of fields that need subsidy, such as science fields, I strongly argue that investing money in the arts is not a wasting of money, particularly in terms of cultivating citizens’ creativity and relieving their stress.
공유
목록으로 돌아가기 😎
