Let’s compare two answers to a question.The topic is as follows:
International tourism has brought enormous benefit to many places. At the same time, there is concern about its impact on local inhabitants and the environment. Do the disadvantages of international tourism outweigh the disadvantages?
A Poor Essay - The following is a band 5 essay.
International tourism has brought enormous benefit to many places. At the same time, there is concern about its impact on local inhabitants and the environment. Do the disadvantages of international tourism outweigh the advantages?
In my opinion advantages outweight the disadvantages. Firstly, many countries like Egypt or Tailand live from tourism Lots of people work there as a seilsmens or tourist guides. These countries without support of tourists wouldn’t be able to funtcion properly.
Secondly, in countries visited by tourists are plenty of places where people just can’t pass because of rare animals or plants.
Another thing is that people like traveling and seeing new exotic places. They like lie on the beach or swim in ocean.
Furthermore, tourism is now more growing industry highering tousands of people. There are makeing new places to work and to have fun.
But on the other hand, people often forget that they aren’t the only beings on the planet.
Many tourists are living garbage just anywhere. Some of them wan’t an exotic souvenir so they pay for illegal things like dead or live animals or some sculpture.
To sum up I think international traveling is a good thing but people must realise that there is something else besides them. They need to know that flora and fauna needs to be protected. People have to enjoy their holidays but alsow protect environment.
Below is an analysis of this essay.
The essay question has been copied and used as the introduction (paragraph 1). Once these 34 words are taken off the word count, the response is underlength at 194 words and so loses marks. Nevertheless, the topic is addressed and a relevant position is expressed, although there are patches - as in the third paragraph - where the development is unclear. Other ideas are more relevant but are sometimes insufficiently developed.
Coherence and Cohesion.
The candidate’s ideas are clearly organised, and there is an overall progression within the response. There is some effective use of a range of cohesive devices (e.g. connectives like “Secondly” and “Furthermore”). Referencing is also sometimes used effectively (e.g. in paragraph 4, the use of “they” in the second sentence to refer to “people” in the first sentence). However, there is also some mechanical over-use of linkers in places (e.g. “But on the other hand,” paragraph 6). As well, paragraphs are sometimes rather too short and inappropriate.
A range of vocabulary is attempted, and this is adequate for a good response to the task. However, control of the vocabulary is weak, and there are frequent spelling errors which can cause some difficulties for the reader (e.g. “seilsmens” instead of “salesmen,”paragraph 2). This lowers the mark.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy.
The candidate uses a mix of simple and complex structures with frequent subordinate clauses. Control of complex structures is variable, and although errors are noticeable, they only rarely make it difficult to understand the message.