MORE FUNDS FOR RAILWAYS OR FOR PUBLIC ROADS?
In a number of countries, some people think it is 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 own opinion.
In a few countries, there has been a discussion on whether they should invest money on building new high-speed-trains or rather spend money on currents public transportation system to develop better functions. Overall. I believe the priority should be upgrading transportations that we already have. However, I think the answer depends on different situations of different countries.
Without a doubt, there are both advantages and disadvantages of constructing a new fast train system. First of all, it can considerably reduce the time of commuting between cities, which can bring up the development of various cities, resulting in the economic performance of one country. For example, in my country Taiwan, our High Speed Railway (HSR) system was launched about 15 years ago. It had lowered the cost of traveling between cities, and benefitted those who had to travel frequently. Secondly, however, constructing a new system takes up spaces and costs bigger amount of money comparing to upgrading the old one The HSR in Taiwan had caused conflicts in selecting the adequate location and also once appeared financial crisis due to expensive construction costs.
In my opinion, government should evaluate the possibility and compablity of improving existing systems. This can achieve a result of spending less money. Take my country for example, a new type of train using 100-years-old system was established 10 years ago, cutting half the time traveling among cities. With this approach, the government only needed to buy new trains and slightly altered the system. The best feature of this approach is that no new railway was needed.
To sum it up, building a fast train system with new railways or improving the old ones can both achieve better public transportation. I believe government should take upgrading old railways first since it costs less. In conclusion, whether constructing a new system or upgrading the old railway, we should evaluate according to the needs and circumstances of one country and also take cost-benefit analysis into consideration.
Hi Shih, there are several suggestions I would like to make.
Overall. I believe the priority....
Be careful with the punctuation. It would be very unfortunate to suffer a lower score from this mirror mistake.
The discussion essay is presented by discussing public points of view rather than your own opinion all the way. If you look again at the topic:
Discuss both these ...
Therefore, you should present two public views and your own opinion in logical orders regarding the topic.
... there are both advantages and disadvantages of constructing....
Since this is a discussion essay, the reader would assume this is a mistake that you misunderstood the question.
The best feature of this approach is that no new....
was
Holt Educational Consultant - / 15384 Shi, your essay falls short in terms of Task Accuracy and cannot get a passing score due to discussion inadequacies, among the other problems of your essay. You need to be more focused and concentrated when reading the original prompt so that you can clearly restate it in the prompt paraphrase. In this instance, you misinformed the reader, did not properly outline the discussion topics for the body of paragraphs, and only used a singular point of view throughout the presentation. These are the main reasons why your score will get a low TA consideration. Now, for the specific explanations of your problems.
For starters, let me show you the correct paraphrase for the instructions / thesis statement of the prompt since that is where your mistake lies in this paragraph:
My opinion regarding this discussion will be based on an understanding of the two points of view that need to be better understood by the public.
The above presentation clearly outlines what the discussion in the body paragraphs will be based upon the original set of instructions which are: 2 POV + Personal Opinion. To be clear, I'll outline the instructions for you so that you can see why you made a mistake:
Instruction: Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Paraphrase: I believe the priority should be upgrading transportations that we already have. However, I think the answer depends on different situations of different countries.
Your thesis paraphrase should never be different from the original prompt. Doing so clearly shows a lack of English comprehension skills and will cause the essay, as in this instance, to get a failing score. Once you make a mistake with the opening paraphrase, there is no hope of ever passing the test as the TA section is the biggest of the scoring considerations. Now, based on the fact that you did not discuss both points of view in this essay based on the original instruction, there are additional reasons as to why your essay will be unable to receive a passing score. One simple mistake, changing the manner of the discussion has led you to not pass this test.