Balang
  • Home
  • Speaking
  • Blog
lemon logo
Balang is committed to revolutionizing language learning, empowering individuals worldwide to achieve their aspirations through innovative technology and personalized education.
Terms of ServicePrivacy PolicyRefund Policy
Contact
Email
telegram logo
Telegram

Question: The most important aim of science should be to improve people’s lives. To what extent do...

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 paid especial 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 peace to 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.
This section presents vocabulary suggestions. Highlighted words are either too simple or are repeated more than 3 times . Please note that some suggested alternatives might require changes to other parts of the sentence.
This section presents a professionally wirtten variation of your essay and highlights the differences.
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 sciene in any way that menaces our invironmet should be banned and forbidden.
While most people advocate for using science solely to enhance our welfare and improve our surroundings, there are a few groups that tend to exploit science for their own benefit, often at the expense of others, including individuals and animals. I firmly believe that any use of science that threatens our environment should be banned and prohibited.
On one hand, science is already being used in various of beneficial ways. To begin with, the advancements made on 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 compeletly cured or preventable. Next, development of technology has abled 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 that devoted their lives to their studies and research made all off these progresses possible. Although not all of them were meant for human beings, in the past few decades, scientists have payed an especial heed to our nature and environment, and have provided plans to preserve them at the best possible way. For example, keeping indangered animals like pandas, in exclusive centers in order to save them from extinction.
On one hand, science is already being utilized in various beneficial ways. To begin with, the advancements made in the field of medical science have been significant, with numerous diseases that could profoundly harm us or lead to our demise now being completely curable or preventable. Furthermore, the development of technology has enabled us to travel by airplane and even reach the moon, paving the way for potential future lives on other planets. The scientists who have devoted their lives to research and study have made all of these advancements possible. Although not all scientific endeavors have been aimed at benefiting humanity, in recent decades, scientists have paid special attention to our nature and environment, providing plans to preserve them in the best possible way. For example, efforts to protect endangered animals, such as pandas, by placing them in exclusive centers to save them from extinction.
On the other hand, although science often works well in the users' favour, sometimes it just harm other people and creatures. Some would claim that they pay a small price for a grater good. For instance, in the world war two, when the USA used the Atomic Bombs on Japan, just to finish a long-lasting war and bring up piece to many countries. It is true that harsh action ended the war, but it also ruined two cities multitudes and environments for decades. Besides that, there were other times that humans thought they were making progress, but they were only destroying their surroundings, like expanding cities into forrests, which destroyed other creatures' habitats.
On the other hand, while science often works in favor of its users, it can also harm other people and creatures. Some may argue that they pay a small price for a greater good. For instance, during World War II, the USA used atomic bombs on Japan to bring a long-lasting war to an end and restore peace to many countries. While it is true that this drastic action ended the war, it also devastated two cities and their environments for decades. Additionally, there have been instances where humans believed they were making progress, only to find that they were destroying their surroundings, such as when cities expand into forests, obliterating the habitats of countless creatures.
In conclusion, I firmly believe that the only key to our existence is keeping up with technology throughout utlizing science; however, as I have metioned above, the outcomes would depend on your sides, 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 environmet.
In conclusion, I firmly believe that the key to our existence lies in keeping pace with technology through the responsible use of science. However, as I have mentioned above, the outcomes depend on the perspective one chooses; when one side benefits, another may suffer. Therefore, the best possible approach is to focus on methods that do not harm any creature or the environment.
See more samples for this topic
Check your essay for this topic
Overall Band Score
6
Overview
Vocabulary Range
Loading
Linking Words
Loading
Spelling
Loading
Grammar Accuracy
Loading
Grammar Range
Loading
Cohesion
Loading
Paragraph Structure
Loading
Task Response
Loading
Word Count
sufficient
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

  1. Clarify Your Position: Clearly state your position on the prompt in the introduction and conclusion to ensure the essay directly addresses the task.
  2. Enhance Cohesion: Use more linking words and phrases to improve the flow between paragraphs and ideas.
  3. Proofread for Errors: Carefully proofread the essay to correct spelling and grammatical errors.
  4. Expand Examples: Provide more detailed examples to support your arguments and make them more convincing.
  5. 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.