AI IELTS Writing AI Correction
- Discussion
The government should impose a fee on drivers who use their vehicles during rush hour to help cut down on air pollution from exhaust fumes. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
스코어팩토리 AI가 에세이를 평가하였습니다.
Evaluation
Task Response: 8.5
The student addresses the question well, presenting a clear position throughout the response. They provided good supporting details and examples to support their opinion.
Coherence & Cohesion: 8
The essay is well-structured. Ideas and points are logically sequenced. Clear topic sentences begin each paragraph and the student takes time to conclude each point they make. However, some connectors could have been utilised more effectively to smooth transitions between points.
Lexical Resource: 8.5
The student uses a wide range of vocabulary which is used flexibly and precisely. They demonstrate good control of synonyms and paraphrase well. There are a few instances of less common lexical items which are used accurately.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy: 8.5
The student uses a variety of complex grammatical structures accurately. They make very few errors and show good control of punctuation.
Overall: 8.375
The student demonstrates an excellent response to the task addressing all parts of the question, with minor areas for improvement. They maintain a formal tone suitable for academic writing and demonstrate a wide vocabulary and good control of grammar. To enhance the coherence and cohesion, the student could include a few more connectors to link points within and between sentences. Overall, very well done.
(Note: The IELTS band scores are given in 0.5 increments. The overall band score needs to be rounded to the nearest half band. Therefore, the final overall band score would be 8.5.)
Task Response: 8.5
The student addresses the question well, presenting a clear position throughout the response. They provided good supporting details and examples to support their opinion.
Coherence & Cohesion: 8
The essay is well-structured. Ideas and points are logically sequenced. Clear topic sentences begin each paragraph and the student takes time to conclude each point they make. However, some connectors could have been utilised more effectively to smooth transitions between points.
Lexical Resource: 8.5
The student uses a wide range of vocabulary which is used flexibly and precisely. They demonstrate good control of synonyms and paraphrase well. There are a few instances of less common lexical items which are used accurately.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy: 8.5
The student uses a variety of complex grammatical structures accurately. They make very few errors and show good control of punctuation.
Overall: 8.375
The student demonstrates an excellent response to the task addressing all parts of the question, with minor areas for improvement. They maintain a formal tone suitable for academic writing and demonstrate a wide vocabulary and good control of grammar. To enhance the coherence and cohesion, the student could include a few more connectors to link points within and between sentences. Overall, very well done.
(Note: The IELTS band scores are given in 0.5 increments. The overall band score needs to be rounded to the nearest half band. Therefore, the final overall band score would be 8.5.)
스코어팩토리 AI가 작성한 모범답안입니다.
The government should impose a fee on drivers who use their vehicles during rush hour to help cut down on air pollution from exhaust fumes. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Essay:
Many folks argue against the imposition of a fee on drivers who use their vehicles during rush hour, despite the significant contribution this traffic makes to air pollution. However, in my viewpoint, such a charge could turn out to be a constructive step in lessening congestion and combating environmental degradation.
Firstly, the introduction of a rush hour fee could act as a catalyst in reducing the heavy traffic we witness during peak hours, consequently lessening harmful emissions into the air. Charging drivers may prompt them to consider alternatives such as carpooling or utilizing public transport. For instance, London saw significant positive changes after implementing a similar approach. The congestion charge they introduced encouraged people to abandon their cars for other means of transportation, resulting in less traffic and dwindling pollution levels.
Moreover, the income from the rush hour charges could be further invested in ecological enhancements. Such funds can help governments to take steps towards making their cities greener. Stockholm provides a fitting example, where the revenues from similar charges have been used to plant trees and flowers across the city, not only adding to the beauty but also significantly improving air quality.
In conclusion, by implementing a fee on peak-hour drivers, we can alleviate traffic issues and employ the collected funds for environmental preservation. Hence, in my view, this policy is worth considering for the welfare of our planet and society.
Word count: 258
Essay translated in Korean:
다수의 사람들은 저녁 시간에 차량을 사용하는 운전자에게 요금을 부과하는 것에 반대하고 있지만, 이렇게 통행량이 많은 시간에 발생하는 대기오염을 크게 감소시킬 수 있다는 점을 간과하고 있습니다. 그러나 제 견해에서는 이러한 요금 부과가 교통 체증을 완화하고 환경 파괴를 대처하는 데 있어서 건설적인 단계가 될 수 있다고 생각합니다.
먼저, 저녁시간 요금을 도입하면 최고 피크 시간 동안 우리가 목격하는 과도한 교통량을 줄이는 변화를 촉매 할 수 있고, 따라서 유해한 배출량을 감소시킵니다. 운전자에게 요금을 부과하는 것은 그들이 카풀 또는 공공 교통을 이용하는 대안을 고려하게 만들 수 있습니다. 예를 들어, 런던에서는 비슷한 접근 방식을 사용한 후 상당한 긍정적인 변화를 보았습니다. 그들이 도입한 혼잡 요금으로 사람들이 다른 교통 수단을 사용하여 자동차를 포기하는 것을 장려하였고 결국 교통 체증이 줄어들어 대기오염 수준이 내려갔습니다.
게다가, 저녁 시간 요금의 수입은 환경 보호에 투자 될 수 있습니다. 이러한 수익은 정부가 도시를 더 초록색으로 만들기 위해 노력하는데 도움이 될 수 있습니다. 스톡홀름은 적절한 예제로서, 수익이 도시 전체에 나무와 꽃을 심는 데 사용되어 아름다움을 더해줄 뿐만 아니라 대기 질을 크게 개선했습니다.
결론적으로, 피크 시간 운전자에게 요금을 부과함으로써, 우리는 교통 문제를 완화하고 보호된 환경을 위한 기금을 사용할 수 있습니다. 따라서 제 생각에는 이 정책은 우리 행성과 사회의 복지를 위해 고려할 만한 가치가 있다고 생각합니다.
Good expressions:
1. Act as a catalyst in - 일으키는데 촉매작용하다
2. Alleviate traffic issues - 교통 문제를 완화하다
3. Ecological enhancements - 생태적 개선
4. Employ the collected funds - 수집된 자금을 활용하다
5. for the welfare of our planet and society - 우리 행성과 사회의 복지를 위해
Many folks argue against the imposition of a fee on drivers who use their vehicles during rush hour, despite the significant contribution this traffic makes to air pollution. However, in my viewpoint, such a charge could turn out to be a constructive step in lessening congestion and combating environmental degradation.
Firstly, the introduction of a rush hour fee could act as a catalyst in reducing the heavy traffic we witness during peak hours, consequently lessening harmful emissions into the air. Charging drivers may prompt them to consider alternatives such as carpooling or utilizing public transport. For instance, London saw significant positive changes after implementing a similar approach. The congestion charge they introduced encouraged people to abandon their cars for other means of transportation, resulting in less traffic and dwindling pollution levels.
Moreover, the income from the rush hour charges could be further invested in ecological enhancements. Such funds can help governments to take steps towards making their cities greener. Stockholm provides a fitting example, where the revenues from similar charges have been used to plant trees and flowers across the city, not only adding to the beauty but also significantly improving air quality.
In conclusion, by implementing a fee on peak-hour drivers, we can alleviate traffic issues and employ the collected funds for environmental preservation. Hence, in my view, this policy is worth considering for the welfare of our planet and society.
Word count: 258
Essay translated in Korean:
다수의 사람들은 저녁 시간에 차량을 사용하는 운전자에게 요금을 부과하는 것에 반대하고 있지만, 이렇게 통행량이 많은 시간에 발생하는 대기오염을 크게 감소시킬 수 있다는 점을 간과하고 있습니다. 그러나 제 견해에서는 이러한 요금 부과가 교통 체증을 완화하고 환경 파괴를 대처하는 데 있어서 건설적인 단계가 될 수 있다고 생각합니다.
먼저, 저녁시간 요금을 도입하면 최고 피크 시간 동안 우리가 목격하는 과도한 교통량을 줄이는 변화를 촉매 할 수 있고, 따라서 유해한 배출량을 감소시킵니다. 운전자에게 요금을 부과하는 것은 그들이 카풀 또는 공공 교통을 이용하는 대안을 고려하게 만들 수 있습니다. 예를 들어, 런던에서는 비슷한 접근 방식을 사용한 후 상당한 긍정적인 변화를 보았습니다. 그들이 도입한 혼잡 요금으로 사람들이 다른 교통 수단을 사용하여 자동차를 포기하는 것을 장려하였고 결국 교통 체증이 줄어들어 대기오염 수준이 내려갔습니다.
게다가, 저녁 시간 요금의 수입은 환경 보호에 투자 될 수 있습니다. 이러한 수익은 정부가 도시를 더 초록색으로 만들기 위해 노력하는데 도움이 될 수 있습니다. 스톡홀름은 적절한 예제로서, 수익이 도시 전체에 나무와 꽃을 심는 데 사용되어 아름다움을 더해줄 뿐만 아니라 대기 질을 크게 개선했습니다.
결론적으로, 피크 시간 운전자에게 요금을 부과함으로써, 우리는 교통 문제를 완화하고 보호된 환경을 위한 기금을 사용할 수 있습니다. 따라서 제 생각에는 이 정책은 우리 행성과 사회의 복지를 위해 고려할 만한 가치가 있다고 생각합니다.
Good expressions:
1. Act as a catalyst in - 일으키는데 촉매작용하다
2. Alleviate traffic issues - 교통 문제를 완화하다
3. Ecological enhancements - 생태적 개선
4. Employ the collected funds - 수집된 자금을 활용하다
5. for the welfare of our planet and society - 우리 행성과 사회의 복지를 위해
제출한 라이팅
It is a common belief that drivers should not be charged for using their vehicles during rush hour, even though, it contributes to air pollution. However, I firmly believe that imposing a fee would do a lot of good because it could reduce traffic and help protect the environment.
To begin with, implementing a rush hour fee would ease traffic congestion, diminishing some of the pollution in the atmosphere. Charging people would make them less likely to drive to work. Instead, they would opt to use alternative means of transportation. This is important because being stuck in traffic also adds significantly to the emission of pollutants. Moreover, enforcing a fee is not only simple, but it works well. In London, for example, the government introduced a congestion fee several years ago. As a result, many people started to carpool, walk, or use public transportation rather than drive to work. Fewer cars on the road eased traffic congestion, and pollution levels have been going down ever since.
On top of that, the revenue from those charges can be used to fund environmentally friendly projects. Governments would be able to utilize the tax money to make their cities greener. In Stockholm, for instance, the city administration has been able to plant trees and flowers alongside roads with the funds from a rush hour regulation. This vegetation adds to the beauty of the landscape, but more importantly, it improves the air quality overall.
To sum up, a small fee for rush-hour motorists would lighten traffic and help cities maintain a healthy and clean environment. For these reasons, charging such drivers would be beneficial to the planet and to society.
To begin with, implementing a rush hour fee would ease traffic congestion, diminishing some of the pollution in the atmosphere. Charging people would make them less likely to drive to work. Instead, they would opt to use alternative means of transportation. This is important because being stuck in traffic also adds significantly to the emission of pollutants. Moreover, enforcing a fee is not only simple, but it works well. In London, for example, the government introduced a congestion fee several years ago. As a result, many people started to carpool, walk, or use public transportation rather than drive to work. Fewer cars on the road eased traffic congestion, and pollution levels have been going down ever since.
On top of that, the revenue from those charges can be used to fund environmentally friendly projects. Governments would be able to utilize the tax money to make their cities greener. In Stockholm, for instance, the city administration has been able to plant trees and flowers alongside roads with the funds from a rush hour regulation. This vegetation adds to the beauty of the landscape, but more importantly, it improves the air quality overall.
To sum up, a small fee for rush-hour motorists would lighten traffic and help cities maintain a healthy and clean environment. For these reasons, charging such drivers would be beneficial to the planet and to society.
공유
back to list 😎
