Economic Development Versus Loss of Social Values

The question is addressed with a relevant clear position that advantages outweigh disadvantages, but supporting ideas are unevenly developed and the argument about social values in developed versus developing nations is asserted without convincing elaboration.

The essay is organized into logical paragraphs with a conclusion, but cohesion is often mechanical and progression within paragraphs is weakened by repetition rather than clear linkage of ideas.

Vocabulary is adequate for the topic but noticeably repetitive, relying heavily on phrases like economic development, living standards, and social value, with limited precision in expressions such as do not suffer from social moral.

A mix of simple and complex sentence forms is attempted, but there are recurring grammatical errors, including the social life will cut off and comes in result of, which are mostly non-impeding yet frequent enough to limit the score.

The response addresses the question with a clear position and relevant main ideas on health and education, but development is somewhat thin and the delinquency example is tangential and weakly explained.

The ideas follow a broadly logical order, but the entire essay is one paragraph, so the introduction, opposing arguments and conclusion are not visually separated. Linking is sometimes mechanical, and the historical example is weakly connected to the argument.

Vocabulary is adequate for the task with some appropriate collocations, but there are noticeable inaccuracies such as 'losing of social values' and 'in my knowledge' alongside limited precision.

A mix of simple and complex structures conveys generally clear meaning, but errors such as “involve to an antisocial activity”, “losing of social values” and the unclear “through developing national economy, it” construction reduce accuracy.

The response maintains a clear position and develops relevant arguments about educational access, material wellbeing and community ties. Some historical claims are broad, and the reasons why social losses outweigh material gains remain insufficiently explicit.

Ideas are logically organised in clear paragraphs with effective linking devices, though progression is occasionally slightly mechanical, as in the repeated 'furthermore' placement.

A sufficient range of vocabulary is used with some flexibility and less common items such as 'archaic', 'cohesion', and 'propelling', despite occasional imprecision and stray spacing before punctuation.

A variety of complex structures is used with generally good control, and most sentences are error-free. Minor weaknesses include the construction “might be compensated by” for a loss and stray spaces before punctuation.

A clear position is sustained, with relevant ideas about pollution, social responsibility and public services. The main limitation is that the essay lists costs and benefits without explaining why the costs carry greater weight.

Ideas progress logically across well-managed paragraphs with appropriate cohesive devices, though occasional phrasing such as the transition into the advantages paragraph is slightly awkward.

Vocabulary shows range, including profit-oriented, exploit and infrastructure, but occasional combinations such as “altered to a place” and “radically cured” lack naturalness or precision.

A variety of complex structures, including relative clauses and subjunctive forms, is used with generally good control, though some constructions are wordy or slightly strained.

The response discusses relevant benefits and social costs and consistently prioritizes social values. However, whether the disadvantages outweigh the advantages remains implicit, and the body describes the two sides more than comparing their importance; the culturally specific example also needs narrower support.

Ideas are organized into logical paragraphs with clear progression and a range of cohesive devices used naturally, with only minor mechanical linking in places.

Vocabulary is sufficiently flexible and precise, featuring less common items such as engenders, erosion, and exacerbating, with only occasional slightly unnatural collocation.

A variety of complex structures, including concessive clauses and relative constructions, are used with good control and errors are rare and non-impeding.