TOEFL TPO 26 Academic Discussion Writing Sample: Your professor is teaching a class on economics. Write a post responding to the professor’s question.

1. 子项得分

• Relevance and Contribution to Discussion: 4.5

• Clarity and Elaboration of Viewpoint: 4.0

• Language Use and Grammar: 4.0

2. 预估分数

• 27

3. 任务完成度

这篇文章在任务完成度方面表现较好，你成功地表达了自己的观点，并对讨论做出了贡献。但是，你可以进一步完善论据，使观点更具说服力。此外，尝试提供更多具体的例子来支持你的观点。

改进示例1： 原文：I'd add that the poisonous chemicals these industries probably release will not only affect the animals but also have bad influence on human. 修改：I'd add that the poisonous chemicals these industries release, such as mercury and lead, not only affect animals but also have detrimental effects on human health, causing respiratory issues and neurological damage.

改进示例2： 原文：he fails to mention that these actions will not benefit human based on the fact that polluted areas can not be brought back to their primary use. 修改：Paul fails to mention that these actions may ultimately harm humans, as polluted areas often become uninhabitable or unsuitable for agriculture, leading to food scarcity and displacement of communities.

4. 文章结构与组织

文章的结构和组织方面还有待提高。虽然你的文章包含了引言、主体和结论，但是段落之间的过渡不够明显。建议使用过渡词和短语来帮助读者更好地理解你的观点。

改进示例1： 原文：Firstly, I concur with Kelly that we should restrict a large amount of industries who are doing harm to the environment. 修改：To begin with, I concur with Kelly that we should restrict a large number of industries that are causing harm to the environment.

改进示例2： 原文：On the other hand, while Paul's relevant point seems convincing, he fails to mention that these actions will not benefit human based on the fact that polluted areas can not be brought back to their primary use. 修改：However, while Paul's point may seem convincing at first glance, he fails to mention the long-term consequences of these actions on humans, as polluted areas often cannot be restored to their original state.

5. 语法批改

The debate surrounding whether there will be an economic success at the expense of environmental contamination is indeed complex, but in my opinion, the success will never come if our earth is polluted. Firstly, I concur with Kelly that we should restrict a large amount of industries who are doing harm to the environment. I'd add that the poisonous chemicals these industries probably release will not only affect the animals but also have bad influence on human. On the other hand, while Paul's relevant point seems convincing, he fails to mention that these actions will not benefit human based on the fact that polluted areas can not be brought back to their primary use.

Section Title: Balancing Economic Success and Environmental Protection

The intricate debate concerning economic success at the expense of environmental degradation is one that requires careful consideration. In my view, genuine prosperity cannot be achieved if our planet suffers from pollution. I agree with Kelly that industries causing significant harm to the environment should be regulated and limited. Furthermore, it is crucial to acknowledge that the toxic substances released by these industries not only impact wildlife but also have detrimental effects on human health. While Paul raises a valid concern about job creation and human welfare, he overlooks the long-term consequences of environmental damage. The irreversible nature of pollution in certain areas ultimately negates any perceived benefits for humanity, as it renders these regions unsuitable for their original purposes. (128 words)

Section Title: Balancing Economic Success and Environmental Protection (Changed the title to better reflect the content of the paragraph and maintain proper English formatting)

The intricate debate surrounding whether (replaced "complex" with "intricate" for better word choice) concerning economic success at the expense of environmental degradation (rephrased "whether there will be an economic success at the expense of environmental contamination contamination" for clarity) is indeed complex, but in one that requires careful consideration. In my opinion, the view, genuine prosperity (rephrased "the success will never come come" for a more natural tone) cannot be achieved if our earth is polluted. Firstly, planet suffers from pollution. I concur agree with Kelly that we industries causing significant harm to the environment should be regulated and limited (rephrased "we should restrict a large amount of industries who are doing harm to the environment. I'd add that the environment" for clarity and conciseness). Furthermore, it is crucial to acknowledge that the toxic substances released by these industries not only impact wildlife but also have detrimental effects on human health (rephrased "the poisonous chemicals these industries probably release will not only affect the animals but also have bad influence on human. On the other hand, while Paul's human" for accuracy and a more natural tone). While Paul raises a valid concern about job creation and human welfare (rephrased "Paul's relevant point seems convincing, convincing" for clarity), he fails to mention that overlooks the long-term consequences of environmental damage. The irreversible nature of pollution in certain areas ultimately negates any perceived benefits for humanity, as it renders these regions unsuitable for their original purposes (rephrased "these actions will not benefit human based on the fact that polluted areas can not be brought back to their primary use.use" for clarity and conciseness).

8 思维导图

- Balancing Economic Success and Environmental Protection
  - Debate on economic success vs. environmental degradation
  - Genuine prosperity requires a healthy planet
  - Industries causing harm should be regulated and limited
    - Toxic substances impact wildlife and human health
  - Job creation and human welfare concerns
    - Long-term consequences of environmental damage
      - Irreversible nature of pollution negates benefits for humanity

9 关键词