Question: The most important aim of science should be to improve people’s lives.
To what extent do...
Marking Generated by Free AI Models
You are on the free tier, which uses free AI models. They can occasionally be slow, unstable, or temporarily unavailable. Balang Plus uses premium models for faster, more reliable, and higher-quality marking.
Click on red question marks (?) to see an explanation for each change. Some changes are only suggestions and don't mean the original is necessarily wrong.
While most people advocate for using science only for enhancing our welfare, and improving our surroundings;, there are a few groups that tend to use science for their particular benefits in order to harm other individuals or creatures. Meanwhile, I believe that using scienescience in any way that menaces our invironmetenvironment should be banned and forbidden.On one hand, science is already being used in various of beneficial ways. To begin with, the advancements made onin the field of medical sciences, have been significant, and numerous diseases that could profoundly harm us one day, or lead us to our demise, have been compeletlycompletely cured or made preventable. Next, the development of technology has abledenabled us to travel by airplanes, or even go to the moon, just by initiating new vehicles which someday, can lead us to our future lives on a different planet. Those scientists thatwho devoted their lives to their studies and research made all offof these progressesprogress possible. Although not all of them were meant for human beings, in the past few decades, scientists have payed an paidespecial heed to our nature and environment, and have provided plans to preserve them atin the best possible way. For example, keeping indangeredendangered animals like pandas, in exclusive centerscentres in order to save them from extinction.
On the other hand, although science often works well in the users' favour, sometimes it just harmharms other people and creatures. Some would claim that they pay a small price for a gratergreater good. For instance, in the world war twoWorld War Two, when the USA used the Atomic Bombsatomic bombs on Japan, just to finish a long-lasting war and bring up piece peaceto many countries. It is true that this harsh action ended the war, but it also ruined two cities, multitudes, and environments for decades. Besides that, there were other times thatwhen humans thought they were making progress, but they were only destroying their surroundings, like expanding cities into forrestsforests, which destroyed other creatures' habitats.In conclusion, I firmly believe that the only key to our existence is keeping up with technology throughout utlizingthrough utilising science; however, as I have metionedmentioned above, the outcomes would depend on your sides, whenside. When you choose a side, the other ones get hurt. So, the best possible approach might be focusing on a way that would not be detrimental to any creature or environmetenvironment.
While we are confident in our score estimation, you are not guaranteed to receive the same score in an official test.
Feedback
Task Achievement
Response to the Prompt: The essay addresses the prompt by discussing both the positive and negative impacts of science on people's lives and the environment. However, the response could be more directly aligned with the prompt by explicitly stating the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement.
Ideas and Examples: The essay provides relevant examples, such as advancements in medical science and the use of atomic bombs, to support the arguments. However, the examples could be more detailed to strengthen the points made.
Coherence and Cohesion
Organization: The essay is organized into clear paragraphs, each focusing on a specific aspect of the argument. However, the transition between ideas could be smoother. For instance, the shift from discussing the benefits of science to its potential harms could be more clearly signposted.
Cohesion: Use of cohesive devices is present but could be improved. Phrases like "On one hand" and "On the other hand" are used, but additional linking words and phrases could enhance the flow of the essay.
Lexical Resource
Vocabulary: The essay demonstrates a good range of vocabulary, but there are some spelling errors (e.g., "sciene" should be "science," "invironmet" should be "environment," "abled" should be "enabled," "compeletly" should be "completely," "payed" should be "paid," "especial" should be "special," "indangered" should be "endangered," "grater" should be "greater," "piece" should be "peace," "forrests" should be "forests," "utlizing" should be "utilizing," "metioned" should be "mentioned," "environmet" should be "environment").
Precision: Some word choices could be more precise. For example, "multitudes" could be replaced with "populations" for clarity.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
Sentence Structure: The essay uses a variety of sentence structures, but there are some grammatical errors that need attention. For example, "science is already being used in various of beneficial ways" should be "science is already being used in various beneficial ways."
Grammar: There are several grammatical errors, such as subject-verb agreement issues and incorrect verb forms. For example, "have abled us" should be "have enabled us," and "keeping indangered animals" should be "keeping endangered animals."
Suggestions for Improvement
Clarify Your Position: Clearly state your position on the prompt in the introduction and conclusion to ensure the essay directly addresses the task.
Enhance Cohesion: Use more linking words and phrases to improve the flow between paragraphs and ideas.
Proofread for Errors: Carefully proofread the essay to correct spelling and grammatical errors.
Expand Examples: Provide more detailed examples to support your arguments and make them more convincing.
Improve Precision: Use more precise vocabulary to convey your ideas clearly and accurately.
By addressing these areas, the essay can be improved to better meet the IELTS writing criteria.