Some people think that the best way to increase road safety is to increase the

minimum legal age, for driving cars or riding motorbikes. To what extent do you agree
or disagree?

It is believed that raising the minimum legal age is an efficient way to improve the level of
road safety. While there are some benefits of this solution, I believe there are other better
ways to solve the road safety problem.

Increasing the minimum legal age might be beneficial to enhance road safety. Firstly, it can
reduce the number of traffic accidents, thus can improve the safety of roads. For example,
many traffic accidents are caused by young people, who are not mature enough to cognize
the seriousness of the problems that they cause. Moreover, they may not be responsible
after the law if they are not old enough. Secondly, it also helps people equip themselves
sufficiently for traffic laws and can make sure the youngest drivers are mature enough to
take driving seriously, thereby, it can protect their own lives and other’s lives when driving.
Therefore, increasing the minimum legal age helps reduce remarkably the number of bad
circumstances.

However, I still believe this is not the best way to ensure road safety due to the fact that
nowadays still has many youngsters driving cars or ride motorbikes without a driving license.
So, in my opinion, a more efficient way to enhance the level of traffic safety is to impose
more severe punishment on those who commit driving offenses. For example, a long prison
sentence could be implemented, or heavier financial penalties for people running light or
driving vehicles without a helmet. As a result, these punishments can help deter potential
offenders and prevent people from re-offending.

In conclusion, while increasing the minimum legal age can help improve road safety, there
are other better ways to raise the proportion of traffic safety, such as promulgating stringent
penalties.

Nâng cấp lập luận

Introduction: It is believed that raising the minimum legal age is an efficient way to improve
the level of road safety. While there are some benefits of this solution, I believe there are
other better ways to solve the road safety problem.

Feedback for Introduction:

Clear Position: The introduction effectively states your position by acknowledging the
benefits of raising the minimum legal age for driving but also suggesting that there are better
ways to address road safety. This sets a clear stance for the essay.

Relevance: The introduction is relevant to the essay question as it directly addresses the
topic of increasing the minimum legal age for driving and its potential impact on road safety.
It also hints at the argument that there may be alternative solutions, which aligns with the
essay prompt's focus on the effectiveness of this approach.

Brief Overview: The introduction could be improved by providing a brief overview of the
main arguments that will be discussed in the essay. For example, mentioning the specific
alternative solutions you will explore, such as stricter penalties for driving offenses, would
give the reader a clearer idea of what to expect in the essay. This would enhance the
introduction's effectiveness in guiding the reader through the essay's structure and
argument.
Improved Introduction: The debate over raising the minimum legal age for driving to
enhance road safety is ongoing. While some advocate for this approach, I contend that there
are more effective ways to address this issue. This essay will explore the potential benefits
of increasing the minimum legal age, but will also argue that stricter penalties for driving
offenses offer a more comprehensive solution to improving road safety.

Main Point 1: Increasing the minimum legal age might be beneficial to enhance road safety.
Firstly, it can reduce the number of traffic accidents, thus can improve the safety of roads.
For example, many traffic accidents are caused by young people, who are not mature
enough to cognize the seriousness of the problems that they cause. Moreover, they may not
be responsible after the law if they are not old enough. Secondly, it also helps people equip
themselves sufficiently for traffic laws and can make sure the youngest drivers are mature
enough to take driving seriously, thereby, it can protect their own lives and other’s lives when
driving. Therefore, increasing the minimum legal age helps reduce remarkably the number of
bad circumstances.

Feedback for Main Point 1:

Argumentative Logic: The argument that increasing the minimum legal age can enhance
road safety by reducing accidents and improving driver maturity is logically sound. It
effectively links the legal age with the level of maturity and responsibility required for safe
driving, which is a valid point in the context of road safety.

Overgeneralizations: The claim that increasing the minimum legal age will significantly
reduce traffic accidents might be an overgeneralization. While it's true that younger drivers
are more prone to accidents, the effectiveness of this measure in reducing accidents is not
universally applicable and may vary depending on other factors like driver education, road
conditions, and enforcement of traffic laws.

Relevance and Effectiveness of Supporting Ideas: The supporting ideas are relevant and
effectively illustrate the benefits of increasing the minimum legal age. However, the
argument could be strengthened by discussing specific examples of how this measure has
been implemented successfully in other countries or by providing a broader range of reasons
why it might be effective.

Unclear or Ambiguous Expressions: The expression "cognize the seriousness of the

problems that they cause" is somewhat awkward and could be clarified. A more precise
phrasing would be "understand the severity of the consequences of their actions."

Unwarranted Assumptions: The argument assumes that increasing the minimum legal age
will automatically lead to a reduction in accidents and improved driver maturity. This
overlooks the complexity of factors that contribute to road safety, such as driver training,
vehicle safety features, and road infrastructure.

Overly Assertive Language: The statement could benefit from qualifiers to acknowledge
that while increasing the minimum legal age may be beneficial, it is one of several measures
that can contribute to road safety. Phrases like "can help reduce" or "may contribute to"
would provide a more balanced perspective.

Overall Evaluation: Extended and Supported but Over-Generalized

Suggestions for Improvement:

Detail Specific Benefits and Challenges: Expand on how increasing the minimum legal
age specifically addresses the issues of driver maturity and responsibility. Discuss potential
challenges or limitations of this approach, such as the impact on young people's access to
education and employment.

Introduce Broader Solutions: While focusing on the benefits of increasing the minimum
legal age, also discuss other complementary measures that could enhance road safety, such
as stricter licensing requirements, improved driver education, and enhanced road
infrastructure.

Clarify and Refine Language: Improve the clarity of expressions to ensure that the
argument is easily understood and effectively communicates the intended message.

Task Response
Band Score for Task Response: 7

Answer All Parts of the Question:

Detailed explanation: The essay addresses the prompt by discussing both sides of the
argument regarding increasing the minimum legal age for drivers and riders. The writer
acknowledges the potential benefits of raising the age limit but ultimately argues that this is
not the most effective solution. This balanced approach demonstrates an understanding of
the complexity of the issue. However, the essay could have more explicitly stated the extent
of the writer's agreement or disagreement, which is a key aspect of the prompt.

How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer should clearly articulate their position
on the extent to which they agree or disagree with the statement. This could be done by
explicitly stating whether they fully disagree, partially agree, or have a nuanced view at the
beginning of the essay and reiterating this stance in the conclusion.

Present a Clear Position Throughout:

Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear position that increasing the minimum
legal age is not the best solution for improving road safety. However, the transition between
discussing the benefits of raising the age and the alternative solutions could be smoother.
The phrase "However, I still believe this is not the best way" introduces a contrasting
viewpoint but could be more effectively linked to the previous argument.

How to improve: To maintain a clear and consistent position, the writer should use
transitional phrases that explicitly connect the ideas. For example, after discussing the
benefits of raising the age, the writer could say, "Despite these potential benefits, I argue
that..." This would create a more cohesive argument throughout the essay.

Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas, such as the potential reduction in
traffic accidents and the need for stricter penalties. However, the supporting details for the
argument against raising the age could be more developed. The mention of young people
driving without licenses is relevant but lacks depth and specific examples that could
strengthen the argument.

How to improve: To improve the support for ideas, the writer should provide more detailed
examples and evidence. For instance, citing statistics on traffic accidents involving
unlicensed drivers or discussing successful case studies from regions that have
implemented stricter penalties could bolster the argument significantly.
Stay on Topic:

Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, focusing on road safety and the
implications of increasing the minimum legal age. However, there are moments where the
discussion could be more tightly focused. For example, the phrase "therefore, it can protect
their own lives and other’s lives when driving" could be seen as slightly tangential to the
main argument about age limits.

How to improve: To maintain focus, the writer should ensure that every sentence directly
supports the main argument. This can be achieved by regularly referring back to the prompt
and ensuring that all points made are relevant to the question of how to improve road safety.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a good understanding of the topic and presents a
clear argument, there are areas for improvement in clarity, depth of support, and focus on
the prompt. By addressing these aspects, the writer can enhance their score in the Task
Response criteria.

Coherence & Cohesion

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

Organize Information Logically:

Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear argument structure, beginning with an
introduction that outlines the topic and the writer's stance. The body paragraphs logically
follow, with the first paragraph discussing the potential benefits of raising the minimum legal
age, and the second paragraph presenting an alternative solution. However, the transition
between the two main ideas could be smoother. For instance, the shift from discussing age
restrictions to alternative measures feels abrupt, which slightly disrupts the overall flow.

How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using transitional phrases that
explicitly connect the ideas between paragraphs. For example, after discussing the benefits
of raising the minimum legal age, a sentence like "Nevertheless, while this approach has
merits, it is essential to consider other effective measures" could provide a clearer transition
to the next point.

Use Paragraphs:

Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas,
which aids in readability. Each paragraph has a clear main idea, and the writer maintains a
consistent focus within each section. However, the second body paragraph could benefit
from further development. It introduces a new idea but lacks sufficient elaboration and
examples to fully support the argument.

How to improve: Strengthen the second body paragraph by providing more detailed
examples or statistics to support the argument about imposing severe punishments. For
instance, discussing specific countries that have successfully implemented such measures
and their impact on road safety could enhance the paragraph's effectiveness. Additionally,
consider using topic sentences that clearly state the main idea of each paragraph to guide
the reader.

Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:

Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "Firstly,"
"Moreover," and "However," which help to connect ideas within and between paragraphs.
However, the range of cohesive devices used is somewhat limited, and some phrases are
repeated, which can detract from the overall cohesion of the essay. For example, the phrase
"can help" appears multiple times, which could be varied for better stylistic effect.

How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, consider incorporating a wider
range of linking words and phrases. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "can help,"
alternatives like "may contribute to," "is likely to," or "has the potential to" can enhance the
essay's sophistication. Additionally, using phrases such as "in addition," "on the other hand,"
and "consequently" can improve the flow and connection between ideas.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of coherence and cohesion,
implementing these suggestions can help elevate the writing to a higher level of clarity and
sophistication.

Lexical Resource
Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:

Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a reasonable range of vocabulary, with

terms like "efficient," "enhance," "mature," and "promulgating." However, the vocabulary is
somewhat repetitive, particularly in phrases like "road safety" and "minimum legal age,"
which appear frequently without variation. For instance, the phrase "improve the level of
road safety" could be varied with synonyms such as "enhance road safety" or "increase
traffic safety."

How to improve: To enhance lexical variety, the writer should incorporate synonyms and
related terms throughout the essay. For example, instead of repeatedly using "improve,"
alternatives like "boost," "enhance," or "strengthen" could be employed. Additionally,
exploring phrases like "traffic regulations" or "road safety measures" can diversify the
vocabulary used.

Use Vocabulary Precisely:

Detailed explanation: The essay contains instances of imprecise vocabulary usage. For
example, the phrase "cognize the seriousness of the problems" is awkward; "cognize" is not
commonly used in everyday English and may confuse readers. A more precise term would
be "understand" or "appreciate." Additionally, the phrase "responsible after the law" is
unclear and could be better articulated as "responsible under the law."

How to improve: To improve precision, the writer should focus on using commonly
understood vocabulary and phrases. It is advisable to replace less familiar terms with clearer
alternatives. For instance, instead of "cognize," using "understand" would convey the
intended meaning more effectively. Furthermore, reviewing phrases for clarity and ensuring
they accurately convey the intended message will enhance precision.

Use Correct Spelling:

Detailed explanation: The essay generally displays good spelling, with few errors.
However, there are minor issues, such as "youngest drivers" which could be more
appropriately phrased as "young drivers." The phrase "running light" is also unclear and may
be a misspelling or misuse of "running a red light."

How to improve: To enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should proofread the essay
carefully, focusing on commonly confused words and phrases. Utilizing spelling and
grammar checking tools can also help identify errors. Additionally, practicing writing and
revising essays can improve overall spelling skills. It may also be beneficial to create a list of
commonly misspelled words and review them regularly.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a satisfactory level of lexical resource,

improvements can be made in vocabulary range, precision, and spelling accuracy. By
diversifying vocabulary, using precise language, and ensuring correct spelling, the writer can
enhance the overall quality of their writing, potentially achieving a higher band score in future
assessments.

Grammatical Range & Accuracy

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7

Use a Wide Range of Structures:

Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable variety of sentence

structures, including simple, compound, and complex sentences. For instance, phrases like
"While there are some benefits of this solution" and "Secondly, it also helps people equip
themselves sufficiently for traffic laws" showcase the use of subordinate clauses and
transitional phrases effectively. However, there are instances of repetitive structures,
particularly in the use of "it can" and "thereby," which can detract from the overall variety.

How to improve: To enhance the diversity of sentence structures, the writer could
incorporate more varied introductory phrases or clauses. For example, instead of repeatedly
starting sentences with "it can," the writer might use participial phrases or adverbial clauses,
such as "By raising the minimum legal age, one could argue that..." or "Given the evidence
of young drivers' recklessness, it is clear that...". This would not only diversify the sentence
structures but also improve the flow of the essay.

Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

Detailed explanation: The essay generally maintains a good level of grammatical accuracy,
but there are notable errors that affect clarity and coherence. For example, the phrase "they
may not be responsible after the law if they are not old enough" is awkwardly constructed
and could be clearer. Additionally, the sentence "therefore, increasing the minimum legal
age helps reduce remarkably the number of bad circumstances" misplaces the adverb
"remarkably," which should precede the verb it modifies. Punctuation is mostly correct, but
there are occasional missing commas that could enhance readability, such as before "for
example" in the second paragraph.

How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on sentence
clarity and structure. Revising awkward phrases for clarity is essential; for instance,
rephrasing the problematic sentence to "they may not take the law seriously if they are not
mature enough" would enhance understanding. Furthermore, the writer should practice
proper placement of adverbs and ensure that commas are used correctly to separate
clauses and introductory phrases. Regularly reviewing grammar rules and seeking feedback
on drafts can also help in identifying and correcting these issues.
Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and presents
coherent arguments, focusing on diversifying sentence structures and refining grammatical
accuracy will help elevate the writing to a higher band score.

Bài chữa tham khảo

It is widely acknowledged that raising the minimum legal age is an effective method to
improve the level of road safety. While there are some benefits to this solution, I believe
there are better ways to solve the road safety problem.

Increasing the minimum legal age might be beneficial to enhance road safety. Firstly, it can
reduce the number of traffic accidents, thus improving the safety of roads. For example,
many traffic accidents are caused by young people who are not mature enough to
understand the seriousness of the problems that they cause. Moreover, they may not be
responsible under the law if they are not old enough. Secondly, it also helps people equip
themselves sufficiently with traffic laws and can ensure that the youngest drivers are mature
enough to take driving seriously; thereby, it can protect their own lives and the lives of others
when driving. Therefore, increasing the minimum legal age helps significantly reduce the
incidence of adverse circumstances.

However, I still believe this is not the best way to ensure road safety due to the fact that
currently, many young people drive cars or operate motorbikes without a driving license. So,
in my opinion, a more efficient way to enhance the level of traffic safety is to administer more
stringent penalties on those who commit driving offenses. For example, an extended prison
term could be implemented, or more substantial financial penalties for people running red
lights or driving vehicles without a helmet. As a result, these punishments can help deter
potential offenders and prevent people from re-offending.

In conclusion, while increasing the minimum legal age can help improve road safety, there
are better ways to enhance traffic safety, such as enacting stringent regulations.