Please help correct my essay!

Question

Some people prefer to help or support directly in the local community for people who need it; however, others prefer to give money to the national or private charities. Discuss both views and give your own opinions.

Opinions are divided as to whether charitable funding should be directly earmarked for helping the needy in the locality or diverted to the government and philanthropic organizations. Personally, though support directly in the local seems somehow more controllable and a more obvious display of altruistic behaviors, I firmly believe that these budgets ought to be channeled into the authorities or private charities to address large-scale issues efficiently and comprehensively.

On the one hand, advocates of the former viewpoint may claim that this enables them to see the direct outcomes of their assistance. Undoubtedly, once their financial aid is spent on helping unprivileged members of the local community, these generous benefactors can decide and control the flow of these resources, which will ensure that these provisions won’t be misspent. Moreover, allocating financial aid directly to the need also allows benefactors to instill a sense of altruism and benevolence into the whole locality, potentially promulgating this positive message throughout society. Thus, this can raise social conscience and garner even more assistance to all impoverished individuals of society in the long run.

On the other hand, proponents of the idea that it is more efficient and proper for charitable funding to be donated to the national or private charities may argue that this can generate more significant benefits to needful individuals. This is because when the government or charitable organizations receive donations from the public, they can initiate large-scale projects and campaigns to solve urgent issues still existing in financially distressed areas namely protracted starvation and poverty. For example, they can construct bridges and roads to make it easier for children at several remote areas to gain access to schools, or build rest homes and hospitals to care infirm patients and the elderly. Therefore, donating money to these major organizations can result in more worthwhile outcomes.

In conclusion, although support directly in the local community is easier to control and possibly helps raise more funds in the future, I strongly state that donating money to the authorities and private charitable organizations is more advantageous in terms of tackling several burning social issues.

AlpheccaStars · Accepted Answer

You wrote about 350 words. The minimum is 250. You will not lose points for writing more; however, longer essays generally do not get high band scores. And there are many reasons for this.

First, the longer the essay, the more chances you have to make errors, and you will lose points for each of those errors.

Second, your writing may be repetitious and wordy. This will cost you points in task response or coherence and cohesion.

Third, you will likely stray off-topic, and examiners will deduct points if you are not focused on the topic. Do not write about things that are not specifically given in the task. You will also be tempted to use weak or unsound arguments or even lose your direction and contradict yourself. Develop just two or three argument points with examples and personal experiences. It is much better to have two well-developed and fleshed-out argument points than to have four which are just individual separate statements.

Fourth, you will spend a lot of time writing, and not have sufficient time left over to proofread your essay. You will miss the silly mistakes, which everyone makes, and that lowers your score.

Fifth, you will not have enough time for Task 1, and get a lower score there. You should allow 40 minutes for task and 20 minutes for Task 1. The word counts are designed so that you have ample time for brainstorming and then writing the two parts.

Aim to write 270-290 words for Task 2. Practice writing a lot of essays so you get a feeling for the length.
You can use this word counter: https://www.ieltsscore.com/word-counter/

AlpheccaStars · Answer

Opinions are divided (This seems like a memorized response. Examiners prefer writing that is specific to the task, rather than a memorized pattern.) as to whether charitable funding should be directly given to help ~~earmarked for helpin~~g the needy in the locality or diverted to the government (Off-topic. It is not about paying taxes to the government. Read the task carefully.) and philanthropic organizations. Personally, though support directly in the local (wrong usage. Local is an adjective.) seems somehow more controllable and a more obvious display of altruism, ~~altruistic behaviors~~, I firmly believe that these budgets (wrong word. A budget is a plan or record of spending in categories. It is not money.) ought to be channeled into the authorities or private charities (Off topic.) to address large-scale issues efficiently and comprehensively.

The contrast is to support charitable organizations that serve your local city or community, or those that serve the entire country or even the entire world. You did not express this distinction effectively. Also, "support" in not only money; it is also volunteering your time.

e.g. Here is an example opening paragraph:

People often have some extra money after paying their bills and want to give it to less fortunate people, or to help the country solve some intractable problem. They have the choice to give it locally, for example, to a homeless shelter, or alternatively to a national or international charity devoted to world hunger or tackling climate change. Personally, I would give my donations to an organization that serves the whole country.

On the one hand, advocates of local charities ~~the former viewpoint~~ may claim that this enables donors ~~them~~ to see the direct outcomes of their assistance. Undoubtedly, ~~once~~ when their ~~financial aid~~ money is spent on helping unprivileged members of the local community, these generous benefactors can decide and control the flow of these resources, which will ensure that these provisions won’t (Do not use contractions in formal writing) be misspent. Moreover, allocating their donations ~~financial aid~~ directly to the need also allows benefactors to instill a sense of altruism and benevolence into the whole locality, potentially promulgating this positive message throughout society. (The topic is not about major donors who give millions; it is about ordinary people who give very small sums.) Thus, this can raise social conscience and garner even more assistance to all impoverished individuals of society in the long run.

On the other hand, proponents of the idea that it is more efficient and proper for charitable funding to be donated to the national ~~or private~~ charities may argue that this can generate more significant benefits to needful individuals. This is because when ~~the government or~~ national charitable organizations receive donations from the public, they can initiate large-scale projects and campaigns to solve urgent issues ~~still existing~~ in financially distressed areas namely ~~protracted~~ starvation and poverty. For example, they can construct bridges and roads (Charities do not usually construct infrastructure. This is under government control and paid for by taxes.) to make it easier for children at several remote areas to gain access to schools, or build rest homes and hospitals to care infirm patients and the elderly. Therefore, donating money to these major organizations can result in more worthwhile outcomes.

In conclusion, although ~~support~~ directly in supporting the local community is easier to control and possibly helps raise more funds in the future, I strongly believe ~~state~~ that donating money to the ~~authorities and~~ ~~private~~ national charitable organizations is more advantageous in terms of tackling several burning social issues.

This is a budget.

Please help correct my essay!

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions