Hotline: 0901 384 171 
Tel: (028) 35 173 345 
- Bài viết dạng nêu quan điểm
Dạng chủ đề này yêu cầu bạn nêu quan điểm cá nhân cho một đề tài cụ thể.
Ví dụ:
The death sentence is an appropriate punishment for a convicted murderer. Discuss.
Cấu trúc bài viết hiệu quả cần có:
- Bài viết dạng thảo luận
Bài viết dạng thảo luận cũng tương tự như dạng nêu quan điểm cá nhân. Ví dụ:
Some people think you have to go to university to have any hope of success in your future career; others say that not everyone is suited to higher education and that it is possible to build a successful career without a degree on your CV. What is your viewpoint?
So với đề tài bài viết dạng nêu quan điểm chúng ta đã học trước:
The death sentence is an appropriate punishment for a convicted murderer. Discuss.
Đối với bài viết nêu quan điểm, bạn phải thể hiện ý kiến cá nhân về 1 quan điểm được thể hiện trong chủ đề. Nhưng trong bài viết thảo luận, cả 2 quan điểm sẽ được nêu trong chủ đề.
Trong dạng bài thảo luận, thay vì bạn trực tiếp nêu quan điểm cá nhân thì bạn phải thảo luận cả 2 mặt của vấn đề, sau đó mới nêu quan điểm của bạn. Cấu trúc một bài viết thảo luận hiệu quả như sau:
Bài mẫu:
These days, news channels and papers are regularly full of accounts of innocent people being killed by psychopaths, sociopaths and jealous lovers in fits of rage. Some people believe that only God has the right to take another’s life and that the justice system cannot order the death of such killers as punishment. However, my own opinion is very much at odds with this view, and, in this essay, I will set out to explain why.
First of all, I believe in like-for-like punishment for such serious crimes. Therefore, when a person has been murdered in cold blood, I believe their killer has to pay the ultimate price and forfeit his or her life as well. If, for example, a member of my family were killed in a random act of violence by a bloodthirsty madman, I would not be in favour of affording them the right to life or a chance of redemption, and I do not believe they deserve the same rights afforded to ordinary, decent members of society anyway. The person whose life they have taken did not get a second chance, so why should they?
Besides, the alternative – a prison sentence – is not an adequate deterrent to would-be killers. These days, prison life is quite comfortable. Sometimes, it is even better than life on the outside. Prisoners are, for example, given free food, housing and protection. They also get to enjoy all the comforts of home, such as television and access to a library and gym. This is not punishment, so why would a person thinking of taking another human being’s life worry about being sent to jail? It is clear to me that a stronger deterrent is needed.
On the other hand, there are occasional instances of wrongful conviction. In such cases, it would be a terrible injustice were an innocent person killed for a crime they were later cleared of. This is one of the major drawbacks of capital punishment – there is no room for error in the justice system.
In conclusion, although many people are against the idea of the death sentence for moral reasons and because the justice system is not foolproof, I believe capital punishment is the appropriate penalty for murder, as it acts as a strong deterrent to potential offenders. Personally, I believe all those convicted of murder should face the death penalty and should not be granted the second chance their victims were not afforded.