AI IELTS Writing AI Correction
- Discussion
Some people think that zoos are cruel and all the zoos should be closed. However, other people think that zoos are useful to protect the rare animals. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
스코어팩토리 AI가 에세이를 평가하였습니다.
Evaluation
Task Response: 5
The essay does touch on the question asked and presents both views as well as an opinion, which meets the schema of the task response, however, the arguments are not detailed and well developed. The examples given are limited and there is a noticeable imbalance in supporting arguments for both perspectives which affects the score.
Coherence & Cohesion: 4
The essay is quite difficult to follow due to disconnection of sentences and paragraphs. Although it is divided into an introduction, 2 body paragraphs and a conclusion, the coherence is weak because of erratic logic and vague expressions.
Lexical Resource: 6
The vocabulary used in the essay is varied and does demonstrate an ability to use a range of language to discuss the topic. There are some collocations ("commercial intentions", "endangered species"), but there are misused words and expressions which occasionally make it difficult to understand the points being made.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy: 5
There are recurring grammar mistakes and frequent awkward sentence constructions throughout the essay. However, the student does show an understanding of complex structures and there are some instances of grammatically correct sentences.
Overall: 5
The essay partially fulfils the requirements of the task, shows some ability to organize ideas and arguments but struggles with coherence and cohesion due to erratic logic, vague expressions, and poor grammatical constructions. However, the essay does evidence satisfactory control over vocabulary, with occasional lapses regarding usage and spelling.
Task Response: 5
The essay does touch on the question asked and presents both views as well as an opinion, which meets the schema of the task response, however, the arguments are not detailed and well developed. The examples given are limited and there is a noticeable imbalance in supporting arguments for both perspectives which affects the score.
Coherence & Cohesion: 4
The essay is quite difficult to follow due to disconnection of sentences and paragraphs. Although it is divided into an introduction, 2 body paragraphs and a conclusion, the coherence is weak because of erratic logic and vague expressions.
Lexical Resource: 6
The vocabulary used in the essay is varied and does demonstrate an ability to use a range of language to discuss the topic. There are some collocations ("commercial intentions", "endangered species"), but there are misused words and expressions which occasionally make it difficult to understand the points being made.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy: 5
There are recurring grammar mistakes and frequent awkward sentence constructions throughout the essay. However, the student does show an understanding of complex structures and there are some instances of grammatically correct sentences.
Overall: 5
The essay partially fulfils the requirements of the task, shows some ability to organize ideas and arguments but struggles with coherence and cohesion due to erratic logic, vague expressions, and poor grammatical constructions. However, the essay does evidence satisfactory control over vocabulary, with occasional lapses regarding usage and spelling.
스코어팩토리 AI가 작성한 모범답안입니다.
Some people think that zoos are cruel and all the zoos should be closed. However, other people think that zoos are useful to protect the rare animals. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Essay:
The question of whether zoos serve a beneficial role for endangered species or if they are merely cruel institutions is a contentious one. While certain individuals decry zoos as being inherently harmful to animals, others argue their essential role in conserving fragile species.
The conviction that zoos inflict harm on animals arises from the belief that living conditions in these facilities are unnatural and inadequate. Animals are used to sprawling terrains in the wild; confining them to smaller, pseudo-habitats restricts their mobility. These man-made homes often cannot mirror the vast physical and social ecosystems found in the wild, leading to stunted development. Furthermore, commercial exploitation of animals in zoos can reduce them to merely tourist attractions.
Conversely, with the advent of modern technology and the resulting exploitation of natural habitats, zoos serve an urgent need for animal conservation. Disappearances of habitats due to human interference have resulted in a significant increase in endangered species worldwide. In this context, zoos represent safe havens providing shelter and medical care to vulnerable species, essentially serving as lifelines to survival.
Ultimately, while zoos may not offer the perfect living conditions, they hold the potential to act as bastions for the safeguard of endangered species. Provided they operate under ethically sound principals with a focus on conservation rather than commercial gain.
Word count: 205
Essay translated in Korean:
동물원이 멸종 위기에 처한 동물들에게 이점을 제공하거나 단지 잔인한 기관인지 여부에 대한 질문은 논쟁의 여지가 많습니다. 동물원이 기본적으로 동물에게 해를 끼친다는 믿음을 가진 사람들이 있지만, 다른 사람들은 유지하기 위협받는 종에 대한 중요한 역할을 주장합니다.
동물원이 동물에게 해를 끼친다는 확신은 이러한 시설에서의 생활 조건이 자연스럽지 못하고 부적충분하다는 믿음에서 비롯된다. 동물은 야생에서 넓게 펼쳐져 있는 지형에 익숙합니다. 이들에게 더 작은, 의사 서식지로 제한하는 것은 그들의 이동성을 제한합니다. 이들 인공적인 집들은 종종 야생에서 발견되는 광대한 물리적 및 사회적 생태계를 반영하지 못하며, 발달을 억제합니다. 또한 동물원에서 동물을 상업적으로 이용하는 것은 그들을 단지 관광 명소로 만들어 버릴 수 있습니다.
반면, 현대 기술의 출현과 자연 서식지의 악용으로 동물원은 동물 보호에 급한 필요성을 충족시킵니다. 사람들의 간섭으로 인해 서식지가 사라지는 현상은 이제 세계적으로 멸종 위기 종의 급증을 초래했습니다. 이러한 맥락에서 동물원은 취약한 종에게 보호와 의료 지원을 제공하는 안전한 중퇴를 제시하여 생존의 끈을 잡고 있습니다.
결국, 동물원이 완벽한 생활 조건을 제공하지는 못할 수 있지만, 멸종 위기에 처한 종의 보호를 위한 철요장 역할을 하기 위한 잠재력을 가지고 있습니다. 상업적 이익보다는 보존에 중점을 둔 윤리적인 원칙하에서 운영되어야 합니다.
Good expressions:
1. pseudo-habitats - 가짜 서식지
2. sprawling terrains - 넓게 펼쳐져 있는 지형
3. commercial exploitation - 상업적 이용
4. disappearances of habitats - 서식지의 소실
5. potential to act as bastions - 보호를 위한 요새 역할을 할 잠재력
6. upholding ethically sound principles - 윤리적인 원칙을 강조
The question of whether zoos serve a beneficial role for endangered species or if they are merely cruel institutions is a contentious one. While certain individuals decry zoos as being inherently harmful to animals, others argue their essential role in conserving fragile species.
The conviction that zoos inflict harm on animals arises from the belief that living conditions in these facilities are unnatural and inadequate. Animals are used to sprawling terrains in the wild; confining them to smaller, pseudo-habitats restricts their mobility. These man-made homes often cannot mirror the vast physical and social ecosystems found in the wild, leading to stunted development. Furthermore, commercial exploitation of animals in zoos can reduce them to merely tourist attractions.
Conversely, with the advent of modern technology and the resulting exploitation of natural habitats, zoos serve an urgent need for animal conservation. Disappearances of habitats due to human interference have resulted in a significant increase in endangered species worldwide. In this context, zoos represent safe havens providing shelter and medical care to vulnerable species, essentially serving as lifelines to survival.
Ultimately, while zoos may not offer the perfect living conditions, they hold the potential to act as bastions for the safeguard of endangered species. Provided they operate under ethically sound principals with a focus on conservation rather than commercial gain.
Word count: 205
Essay translated in Korean:
동물원이 멸종 위기에 처한 동물들에게 이점을 제공하거나 단지 잔인한 기관인지 여부에 대한 질문은 논쟁의 여지가 많습니다. 동물원이 기본적으로 동물에게 해를 끼친다는 믿음을 가진 사람들이 있지만, 다른 사람들은 유지하기 위협받는 종에 대한 중요한 역할을 주장합니다.
동물원이 동물에게 해를 끼친다는 확신은 이러한 시설에서의 생활 조건이 자연스럽지 못하고 부적충분하다는 믿음에서 비롯된다. 동물은 야생에서 넓게 펼쳐져 있는 지형에 익숙합니다. 이들에게 더 작은, 의사 서식지로 제한하는 것은 그들의 이동성을 제한합니다. 이들 인공적인 집들은 종종 야생에서 발견되는 광대한 물리적 및 사회적 생태계를 반영하지 못하며, 발달을 억제합니다. 또한 동물원에서 동물을 상업적으로 이용하는 것은 그들을 단지 관광 명소로 만들어 버릴 수 있습니다.
반면, 현대 기술의 출현과 자연 서식지의 악용으로 동물원은 동물 보호에 급한 필요성을 충족시킵니다. 사람들의 간섭으로 인해 서식지가 사라지는 현상은 이제 세계적으로 멸종 위기 종의 급증을 초래했습니다. 이러한 맥락에서 동물원은 취약한 종에게 보호와 의료 지원을 제공하는 안전한 중퇴를 제시하여 생존의 끈을 잡고 있습니다.
결국, 동물원이 완벽한 생활 조건을 제공하지는 못할 수 있지만, 멸종 위기에 처한 종의 보호를 위한 철요장 역할을 하기 위한 잠재력을 가지고 있습니다. 상업적 이익보다는 보존에 중점을 둔 윤리적인 원칙하에서 운영되어야 합니다.
Good expressions:
1. pseudo-habitats - 가짜 서식지
2. sprawling terrains - 넓게 펼쳐져 있는 지형
3. commercial exploitation - 상업적 이용
4. disappearances of habitats - 서식지의 소실
5. potential to act as bastions - 보호를 위한 요새 역할을 할 잠재력
6. upholding ethically sound principles - 윤리적인 원칙을 강조
제출한 라이팅
Some people argue that since zoos are harmful for animals, it should not be opened, while others contend that zoos have positive effects for the rare animals. Both views can be persuasive, but I partly agree the latter view.
To begin with, zoos are not appropriate to live animals due to it is small. Originally, animals have stayed in wildlife for long times ago. However, due to people’s commercial intentions, animals started to capture from wildlife. They lost freedom with feeding and sleeping in zoos that small spaces. It means that animals cannot find in natural, they just seen like pets in house. I believe that animals should grow up in proper environment such as natural and wildlife. If they arise a space, where made by human, they might be products that just suitable to tourist. Thus, zoos are cruel to animals’ growth.
However, by eras changed and technology developed, a lot of animals are suffering from those factors. Destroyed natural environment and animals lost their habitats due to desire of individuals’ convenience. Thus, spaces should be built to protect animals such as zoos. First of all, the reason of global warming and destroyed forests, there are a lot of endangered species in the world. Since current society destroyed habitats, I believe that people have to response this problem. Therefore, society should protect and care animals in zoos.
In conclusion, while zoos are inappropriate to live animals, their habitats in wildlife already significantly destroyed by people. Thus, society should make efforts to protect them, and zoos should set up the better environments.
To begin with, zoos are not appropriate to live animals due to it is small. Originally, animals have stayed in wildlife for long times ago. However, due to people’s commercial intentions, animals started to capture from wildlife. They lost freedom with feeding and sleeping in zoos that small spaces. It means that animals cannot find in natural, they just seen like pets in house. I believe that animals should grow up in proper environment such as natural and wildlife. If they arise a space, where made by human, they might be products that just suitable to tourist. Thus, zoos are cruel to animals’ growth.
However, by eras changed and technology developed, a lot of animals are suffering from those factors. Destroyed natural environment and animals lost their habitats due to desire of individuals’ convenience. Thus, spaces should be built to protect animals such as zoos. First of all, the reason of global warming and destroyed forests, there are a lot of endangered species in the world. Since current society destroyed habitats, I believe that people have to response this problem. Therefore, society should protect and care animals in zoos.
In conclusion, while zoos are inappropriate to live animals, their habitats in wildlife already significantly destroyed by people. Thus, society should make efforts to protect them, and zoos should set up the better environments.
공유
返回列表 😎
