Organized tours to remote places and communities is increasingly popular.
Is it a positive or negative development for the local people and environment?
It is true that the prevalence of tourism in remote areas has been expanded over that past few years. While I accept that it may exert detrimental impacts, I believe that this trend also bring about several advantages.
On the one hand, there are two major minuses when tourists wander off the beaten tracks. Regarding to local people, cultural clashes, happening when visitors lack respects for tradition and regulations, stand out as the most discernible inconvenience. Indeed, if foreigners behave inappropriately and violate destinations’ codes of conduct, this will not only pose an unprecedented threat to social orders and tranquility, but also cause a loss of moral and religious values. Regarding to the environment, such types of travel as ecotourism or wildlife safaris make attraction thronged with tourists, and this is believed to create an excessive pressure on limited resources and infrastructures. Consequently, scenery depletion and ecological crisis are predicted to occupy remote areas due to mass tourism.
On the other hand, travel to isolated regions is also recognized to be advantageous because of several benefits. Firstly, the more visitors experience local natural and cultural heritage, the more likely their images and identity of locals are to go viral. Therefore, this may help citizens raise public awareness of their importance, as well as stimulate interests and involvement in conservation, which has puzzled authorities for years. Secondly, another gain stems from financial values. In particular, in order to have the holiday of a lifetime, travelers often do not hesitate to break the bank, so their expense is thought to contribute to a massive influx of money for the destination.
In brief, it seems to me that traveling to remote areas has a double-edged impact on both residents and the society.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-05-16 | trikhung777 | 73 | view |
| 2022-08-09 | nguyenhnil | 73 | view |
| 2021-12-01 | Revivo Tulaseket | 78 | view |
| 2021-12-01 | Revivo Tulaseket | 67 | view |
| 2020-08-20 | minh HUP | 89 | view |
- The use of social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, is replacing face-to-face contact in this century. Do you think the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages? 89
- The range of technology available to people is increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. Others think it has an opposite effect. Discuss both views and give your opinions. 89
- The diagram below shows how solar panels can be used to provide electricity for domestic use.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 61
- Some people think that it is good for a country’s culture to import foreign movies and TV programmes. Others think that it is better to produce these locally. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. 84
- The charts below show changes in the proportion of the energy produced from different resources in a country in 1985 and 2003.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, firstly, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, in brief, in particular, as well as, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 7.85571142285 38% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1575.0 1615.20841683 98% => OK
No of words: 289.0 315.596192385 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.44982698962 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12146784374 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 176.041082164 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.664359861592 0.561755894193 118% => OK
syllable_count: 504.0 506.74238477 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.7971692814 49.4020404114 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.153846154 106.682146367 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2307692308 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.3076923077 7.06120827912 188% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0775583503197 0.244688304435 32% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0244820043148 0.084324248473 29% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0248878147828 0.0667982634062 37% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0432754695842 0.151304729494 29% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0116593556809 0.056905535591 20% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.63 12.4159519038 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.3 8.58950901804 120% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.