express your view on the transportation problem
In a number of countries, some people thinks it's necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport. Discuss both these views and give your opinion.
In many parts of the world, some people support spending a huge amount of money on building new railway line for fast trains between cities while others would rather invest that money on enhancing existing public transport. This essay will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of both procedures.
On the one hand, constructing new railway lines will make the city more attractive for tourists from all around the world. As they will use the fast trains to reach the city which will eventually help the economy of the country. Moreover, railway lines are more sustainable than public transport as they don't require as much fixing. Finally, they will increase productivity and promote efficiency by saving a lot of time for students and employees. Simply, railway lines will make people's life much easier.
On the other hand, public transport is extremely important for people as they believe that it should be improved regularly to keep offering its services properly. Public transport provides citizens with good service for cheap prices. It is the main why most people depend on it for commuting. Thus, the government should invest a great sums of money on developing public transport. Simply, many people believe that we can live without advanced railway lines but we can't survive without public transportation.
Finally, I believe that as world is changing we need to keep abreast of all the technology and advancement that occur in the world around us. Hence, we should invest in building advanced railway lines for fast trains to facilitate our movements.
There are quite a few grammar mistakes so try running it through Grammarly and learn from them!
For the first sentence: don't use "some", the sentence already implies that it doesn't include everyone, therefore the word isn't needed.
You're also using the same transitions (simply, finally) over and over, so it gets repetitive.
Holt Educational Consultant - / 15463 The essay you have written changed the prompt discussion parameters as indicated in the original. I am not sure why you decided to do that. Perhaps you did not understand the instructions very well.
OP: Discuss both these views and give your opinion.
YP: This essay will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of both procedures.
The topic for discussion is not advantages over disadvantages, the essay is all about giving your opinion of the 2 public opinions by doing the following:
1. Explain what you understand of the two points of views based on provided information from the original prompt. Complete the discussions within 2 separate paragraphs.
2. Deliver your opinion based on the comparative discussion provided of the given opinions from the original prompt.
This essay will definitely receive low marks in the TA section due to the oversight you had regarding the discussion instructions and topics for discussion. In addition to that, you practically cut and paste full sentence sections from the original prompt, which would result in lower LR scores since you showed you are not capable of paraphrasing or expressing the same thoughts as the original post in a new manner. I am worried that due to the marked mistakes in this essay, you may not be able to get a passing score for the test.
Hi, I think you need to look deeper into the prompt beyond what is written and see if you can view it from different perspectives. The arguments are railway lines for fast trains between cities vs public transportation. For example, the first paragraph, you mentioned that it will attract tourists, but then later state it will promote productivity and efficiency for students and employees. In reality, most high speed railways tickets tend to be very expensive and not meant as a tourist attraction, so the passengers are not regular commuters but people who want to travel in short amount of time as possible and willing to pay more for it.
The second paragraph on the other hand, has many groundless assumptions, such as "They believe it should be improved regularly" or "many people believe we can live without advanced railways." Don't assume any other opinion except what is given in the prompt and your own. Try to connect your ideas in more logical way rather than conjecture.
