TOEFL TPO 28 Writing Task 1 Sample: Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific points mentioned in the reading passage.

1.Sub Scores

• Task fulfillment: 4

• Organization: 4

• Coherence and Cohesion: 4

• Language Use: 3

2.Estimated Scores

• Score: 25

3.Task completeness The essay does a good job of summarizing the points made in the lecture and explaining how they challenge the specific points mentioned in the reading passage. However, there is room for improvement in terms of language use and clarity. To enhance task fulfillment, try to use more precise language and avoid repetition.

Example 1: Original: "So it is not a trust-worthy evidence." Improved: "Thus, the committee's conclusions are not reliable evidence."

Example 2: Original: "In this way, he can move faster than Robert did, which further disproves the authenticity of Robert's exploration." Improved: "These factors allowed Avery to travel faster than Peary, casting doubt on the validity of Peary's claims."

4.Essay structure and organization The essay has a clear structure with an introduction, body paragraphs addressing each point from the lecture, and a conclusion. However, some transitions between ideas could be improved for better coherence and cohesion.

Example 1: Original: "Seemingly convening, however, the professor refutes this statement by emphasizing that..." Improved: "Although this seems convincing at first glance, the professor counters this argument by emphasizing that..."

Example 2: Original: "The lecture, nonetheless, argues it by saying that Robert and Tom were not having the exploration under same conditions." Improved: "However, the lecture challenges this point by stating that Peary and Avery did not undertake their expeditions under identical conditions."

5. Grammar

Both of the reading and listening material discussed the authenticity of PobertRobert(misspelling) E. Peary's journey to the North Pole. However, the passage and the lecture hold different perspectives. Firstly, the article believes Robert did reach the North Pole by giving the result of an investigation and recording by National Geographic Society. Seemingly convening, however, the professor refutes this statement by emphasizing that the meeting was not purely objective, for Roberts and the committee members are close friends. Additionally, the professor also stresses that the invinvestigationinvestigation(misspelling) only lasted for two days and the record was neither done carefully. So it is not a trust-worthy evidence. Secondly, the passage suggested that indeed Robert reached North Pole and, and(comma between independent clauses) it was in only 37 days bacausebecause(misspelling) the later exploerexplore(misspelling) Tom Avery did the same thing with even less than 37 days. The lecture, nonetheless, argues it by saying that Robert and Tom were not having the exploration under same conditions. Tom, the later explorer, finishing his research with more easiereasier(No 'more' or 'most' before comparatives) access, both because his luggage weight is lighter and his food resources were dropped by airplane. In this way, he can move faster than Robert did, which further disproves the authenticity of Robert's exploration. Thirdly, the passage describes that the photo brought by Robert from North Polefrom the North Pole(Determiners preceding geographical terms) can be an effiectiveeffective(misspelling) evidence of his adventure, because the photo provides detail and correct information of the site of the Sun in that day. Nevertheless, the profssorprofessor(misspelling) thinks that the photo took at that time can not prove the fact. This is because the accurate position of Sun needs to be located with shadow, and only a precise photo can prove it. But the photo Robert took was faded and bluredblurred(misspelling).

Section Title: 6. Revised Essay

The reading and listening materials discuss the authenticity of Robert E. Peary's journey to the North Pole, presenting contrasting perspectives. The passage supports Peary's claim by providing three arguments, while the lecture challenges each of these points.

Firstly, the article cites an investigation by the National Geographic Society as evidence that Peary reached the North Pole. However, the professor contends that this investigation was not objective, as the committee members were close friends of Peary who had funded his trip. Moreover, she highlights that the investigation lasted only two days and Peary's records were not examined carefully, rendering their conclusions untrustworthy.

Secondly, the passage suggests that Peary's claim of reaching the North Pole in 37 days is plausible because Tom Avery completed a similar journey in less time. Nevertheless, the lecture disputes this comparison by emphasizing significant differences between their expeditions. Avery carried less weight on his sled and had food supplies dropped by airplane along his route, which allowed him to travel faster than Peary could have under his conditions.

Lastly, the passage asserts that photographs taken by Peary at the North Pole provide strong evidence for his claim due to their accurate depiction of the Sun's position on that day. Contrarily, the professor argues that these photos cannot be used to determine the Sun's exact position with certainty because they were taken with a primitive camera and have become faded and blurred over time. Consequently, she concludes that these photographs do not offer conclusive proof of Peary's achievement.

In summary, while both sources address Robert E. Peary's journey to the North Pole, they differ significantly in their evaluation of its authenticity. The lecture systematically challenges each argument presented in support of Peary's claim within the reading passage. (294 words)

Both of the The reading and listening material discussed materials discuss the authenticity of Pobert Robert E. Peary's journey to the North Pole. However, the Pole, presenting contrasting perspectives. The passage and supports Peary's claim by providing three arguments, while the lecture hold different perspectives. challenges each of these points.

Firstly, the article believes Robert did reach cites an investigation by the National Geographic Society as evidence that Peary reached the North Pole by giving the result of an (I revised this sentence to improve clarity and conciseness). However, the professor contends that this investigation and recording by National Geographic Society. Seemingly convening, however, the professor refutes this statement was not objective, as the committee members were close friends of Peary who had funded his trip (I rephrased this sentence to clarify that it was Peary's friends who funded his trip). Moreover, she highlights that the investigation lasted only two days and Peary's records were not examined carefully, rendering their conclusions untrustworthy (I revised this sentence for better flow).

Secondly, the passage suggests that Peary's claim of reaching the North Pole in 37 days is plausible because Tom Avery completed a similar journey in less time (I rephrased this sentence for clarity). Nevertheless, the lecture disputes this comparison by emphasizing that the meeting was not purely objective, for Roberts and the committee members are close friends. Additionally, the professor also stresses that the invinvestigation only lasted for two days and the record was neither done carefully. So it is not a trust-worthy evidence. Secondly, significant differences between their expeditions (I revised this sentence for better flow). Avery carried less weight on his sled and had food supplies dropped by airplane along his route, which allowed him to travel faster than Peary could have under his conditions (I rephrased this sentence for clarity and conciseness).

Lastly, the passage suggested that indeed Robert reached asserts that photographs taken by Peary at the North Pole and it was provide strong evidence for his claim due to their accurate depiction of the Sun's position on that day (I revised this sentence for better flow). Contrarily, the professor argues that these photos cannot be used to determine the Sun's exact position with certainty because they were taken with a primitive camera and have become faded and blurred over time (I rephrased this sentence for clarity). Consequently, she concludes that these photographs do not offer conclusive proof of Peary's achievement (I revised this sentence for better flow).

In summary, while both sources address Robert E. Peary's journey to the North Pole, they differ significantly in only 37 days bacause the later exploer Tom Avery did the same thing with even less than 37 days. their evaluation of its authenticity (I rephrased this sentence for clarity). The lecture, nonetheless, argues it by saying that Robert and Tom were not having the exploration under same conditions. Tom, the later explorer, finishing his research with more easier access, both because his luggage weight is lighter and his food resources were dropped by airplane. In this way, he can move faster than Robert did, which further disproves the authenticity of Robert's exploration. Thirdly, the lecture systematically challenges each argument presented in support of Peary's claim within the reading passage describes that the photo brought by Robert from North Pole can be an effiective evidence of his adventure, because the photo provides detail and correct information of the site of the Sun in that day. Nevertheless, the profssor thinks that the photo took at that time can not prove the fact. This is because the accurate position of Sun needs to be located with shadow, and only a precise photo can prove it. But the photo Robert took was faded and blured.(I revised this sentence for better flow).

8. Mind Map

1. Introduction
   - Reading: Supports Peary's claim
   - Listening: Challenges Peary's claim

2. National Geographic Society Investigation
   - Reading: Validates Peary's journey
   - Listening: Questions objectivity and thoroughness

3. Comparison to Tom Avery's Journey
   - Reading: Supports plausibility of Peary's claim
   - Listening: Highlights differences in expeditions

4. Photographs as Evidence
   - Reading: Accurate depiction of Sun's position
   - Listening: Questions reliability of photos

5. Conclusion
   - Differences in evaluation of authenticity

9. Key Words