Would be grateful to have this essay reviewed. Thanks.
Topic:Increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve growing traffic and pollution problems.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is believed by some people that the traffic congestion and air pollution problem can be solved by increasing the price of fossil fuels for cars. I do not agree with this opinion because there are several other effective ways we can take to deal with those problems.
Advocate argued that price increases can reduce the use of private cars and relief the pollution problem for two reasons. The price-sensitive drivers tend to give up using cars as their choice of vehicle to commute or travel around. As the number of cars decreased, the traffic jam would be relived as well. Additionally, the fume comes from private cars, which using fossil-fuel as power, is the major source of air pollution in modern cities. Reduce the use of them can improve the quality of the environment.
However, I believe that there are other ways we can promote to achieve the goal mentioned above. Firstly, the government can invest more money in providing more effective traffic system by designing bus only lines and encouraging people to use public transportation by giving a discount on fees. Secondly, the innovation and invention on vehicles that powered by new energy, such as wind, sun and water energy should be promoted and encouraged. For example, authorities can issue a tax refund to those companies. Finally, society is equally responsible to launch campaigns to raise the awareness of people for protecting the environment.
In occlusion, increasing the cost of driving private cars is a possible way to reduce the using of them thus protects the environment and relief the traffic problem. But I do not agree that it is the best way to do so because we have much better ways to do so, such as promoting new energy cars and investing in better traffic systems.
Words: 296
Holt Educational Consultant - / 14,835 
4783 Paimar, your response to the "extent" portion of the essay only lacks the degree of measurement in order to create the proper response statement. You could have said that you "totally agree", "wholeheartedly (dis)agree". "fully (dis)agree", "(dis)agree to the highest extent", "(dis)agree without question", and other variations thereof that show the measurement of your belief in the given statement. Without that reference your response is only partially correct as you would have converted this from a single point of view measured response essay to a simple single point of view response essay. Those are two different essay response formats. You need the "extent response" for this one.
Now, in this type of essay, you are not being asked a direct question, therefore a direct response is not required. You are required to only paraphrase the prompt and respond to the given question, without any reasoning provided due to the lack of discussion space. The discussion subjects must be presented in the next 2-3 reasoning paragraphs. The number of reasons presented (2 or 3) will depend upon the extent of your knowledge of the discussion topic.
You have a problem with singular / plural references in this essay. You mention "advocate" but then use plural references throughout the paragraph, which means you are referring to the plural form "advocates", not the singular reference. Along with this problem, you also present a lack of understanding as to when to use the present form of a discussion as opposed to a part form of presentation. For this essay, I am unsure as to whether you wanted to stick to a present or past time frame. These problems all have a direct effect on your GRA score due to grammatical problems and sentence structure problems.
There is also the LR problem in your essay. Occlusion means any one of the following:
-the blockage or closing of a blood vessel or hollow organ.
-the momentary closure of the passage of breath during the articulation of a consonant.
-a process in which the cold front of a rotating low-pressure system overtakes the warm front, forcing the warm air upward above a wedge of cold air.
-the position of the teeth when the jaws are closed.
None of the above definitions apply to what you were trying to say in that phrase. You used the wrong word / term / vocabulary in this instance. You meant to use the word "conclusion" which means:
-the end or finish of an event or process.
-a judgment or decision reached by reasoning.
Both of the above definitions apply to what you were trying to say and do in that paragraph which was, to end the essay discussion. Mistakes like these will have a direct effect on the lowering of your LR score. Be careful. Don't just use words because "it sounds right" to use it. Make sure the word you are using has the meaning you wish to convey. Don't risk points deductions based on avoidable reasons. I urge you to build up your English vocabulary and also, develop an understanding of the most common words used in essay writing to avoid a repeat of this mistaken word usage in the future.
Hi, I think the main problem of your essay is the essay structure. In specific, you did not fully satisfy the requirements of TA criteria. The question is "To what extent do you agree or disagree" but what you did is a direct response. In this type of question, you have to show "how much" you agree or disagree. Based on the body paragraphs, I can see that you partly agree with the question. Make sure that you have to give a clear and correct thesis statement in the introduction paragraph.
