Task 2: Some cities create housing for their growing population by providing taller buildings. Other cities create housing by building on wider areas of land. Which solution is better?
These days, it is true that national and local authorities are imposing different policies to cope with adequate housing stocks in urban areas. While there is a widespread belief that the expansion of city areas can be an appropriate measure, other people also argue that it is better to build more high-rise buildings. As far as I am concerned, I firmly believe that the best solution is to allocate resources to the construction of tower blocks.
On the one hand, widening areas for urban areas can possess both advantages and disadvantages. Firstly, the expansion of the city can provide a decent and healthy environment for the inhabitants, in which the speculation of more recreational and modern public transport infrastructure is also promoted. Such amenities can be also considered indispensable aspects for the sustainable development of the economy as well as the well-being of the citizens. However, despite the aforementioned benefits, extending urban areas outwards also means the destruction of natural habitats is inevitable. In such circumstances, deforestation and mineral extraction are also stimulated to meet the demands for construction materials and transport, which can eventually lead to several environmental consequences, including the emission of greenhouse gases and the extinction of numerous species.
On the other hand, promoting the construction of towering skyscrapers is probably a better measure to cope with the explosion of population density. From the economic perspective, living in apartment blocks tends to be more affordable, especially for young people, who find several difficulties in shouldering the ever-growing financial burden stemming from accommodation and running the family home. In terms of living standards, thanks to the implementation of several policies regarding property planning and construction programs, the citizens now still receive acceptable life quality even when living in apartments, which possess adequate necessary facilities including healthcare, educational, and recreational establishments. Therefore, although some people still have to endure a narrower living conditions, such development is one of the most optimal stopgap measures to provide accommodations for humans without jeopardizing the environment and endangered species.
In conclusion, although both solutions can bring notable benefits and drawbacks, I would argue that constructing tower blocks is a more suitable solution to meet the need for housing stocks for the citizens.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-17 | Phuong1810 | 73 | view |
| 2023-09-17 | Phuong1810 | 73 | view |
| 2023-09-17 | Phuong1810 | 67 | view |
| 2023-09-17 | Phuong1810 | 67 | view |
| 2023-09-17 | Phuong1810 | 67 | view |
- In some countries young people have become richer healthier and live longer but they are less happy What are the causes What can be done to address this situation 89
- Task 2 As well as making money businesses also have social responsibilities Do you agree or disagree 89
- Task 1 The chart shows the percentage of males and females who were overweight in Australia from 1980 to 2010
- Task 2 Many people believe that it is easier to have a healthy lifestyle in the countryside Others believe that there are health benefits of living in the cities Discuss both views and give your own opinion 78
- Task 2 Crimes committed by young people are increasing in major cities throughout the world Discuss the causes and how to solve this problem 80
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, however, if, regarding, so, still, therefore, well, while, as for, in conclusion, 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 : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.3376753507 228% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2153.0 1615.20841683 133% => OK
No of words: 369.0 315.596192385 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.83468834688 5.12529762239 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38284983912 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.34473560432 2.80592935109 119% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 176.041082164 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.560975609756 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 675.0 506.74238477 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => 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: 28.0 20.2975951904 138% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 67.1159025768 49.4020404114 136% => OK
Chars per sentence: 165.615384615 106.682146367 155% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.3846153846 20.7667163134 137% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.1538461538 7.06120827912 158% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.190965338154 0.244688304435 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0629001538203 0.084324248473 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0436710126696 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.114190678695 0.151304729494 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0279156116078 0.056905535591 49% => 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: 20.2 13.0946893788 154% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 26.14 50.2224549098 52% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 11.3001002004 147% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.83 12.4159519038 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.55 8.58950901804 123% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 78.4519038076 164% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.1190380762 130% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, however, if, regarding, so, still, therefore, well, while, as for, in conclusion, 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 : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.3376753507 228% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2153.0 1615.20841683 133% => OK
No of words: 369.0 315.596192385 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.83468834688 5.12529762239 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38284983912 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.34473560432 2.80592935109 119% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 176.041082164 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.560975609756 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 675.0 506.74238477 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => 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: 28.0 20.2975951904 138% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 67.1159025768 49.4020404114 136% => OK
Chars per sentence: 165.615384615 106.682146367 155% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.3846153846 20.7667163134 137% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.1538461538 7.06120827912 158% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.190965338154 0.244688304435 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0629001538203 0.084324248473 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0436710126696 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.114190678695 0.151304729494 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0279156116078 0.056905535591 49% => 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: 20.2 13.0946893788 154% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 26.14 50.2224549098 52% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 11.3001002004 147% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.83 12.4159519038 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.55 8.58950901804 123% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 78.4519038076 164% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.1190380762 130% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.