TOEFL TPO 60 Writing Task 1 Sample: Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific theories mentions in the reading passage.

1.子项得分 任务完成度: 4 组织: 3 连贯与衔接: 3 语言使用: 3

2.预估分数

22. 3.任务完成度

整体来说，你的文章回答了题目要求的问题，但在某些方面还有待改进。首先，在引述听力部分时，需要更详细地解释讲座中提到的观点。其次，在对比阅读和听力材料时，可以使用更明确的连接词来突出对比关系。

示例1： 原文：“Firstly, the reading passage claims that removing the horn form rhinocerors by the medical equipment, without hurting them.” 改进后：“Firstly, the reading passage claims that removing the horn from rhinoceroses using medical equipment can be done without hurting them.”

示例2： 原文：“Furthermore, the passage asserts that educating consumers, such as the rhinoceroses’ horns didn’t have health advantage,can reducing public’s demand for horns.” 改进后：“Furthermore, the passage asserts that educating consumers about the lack of health benefits in rhinoceros horns can reduce public demand for them.”

4.文章结构与组织 你的文章结构基本清晰，但在段落划分和过渡句方面还有待加强。首先，建议将每个主要观点都放在一个单独的段落中，并使用恰当的过渡词或短语来连接各个段落。此外，可以在文章开头和结尾加入总结性的句子，使文章更加完整。

示例1： 原文：“The lecture and passage discuss the issue for the way of protecting rhinoceroses, by preventing sale of rhinoceros horns.” 改进后：“The lecture and passage discuss various ways to protect rhinoceroses by preventing the sale of their horns. While the reading suggests three potential solutions, the listening casts doubt on each of them.”

示例2： 原文：“In short, this again casts doubt on the overall validity of stoping people to buy the rhino’s horn.” 改进后：“In conclusion, the lecture effectively challenges each of the proposed solutions in the reading passage, casting doubt on their effectiveness in stopping people from buying rhino horns and ultimately protecting rhinoceroses.”

5. 语法批改

The lecture and passage discuss the issue for the way of protecting rhinoceroses, by preventing sale of rhinoceros horns. The reading provides three potential solutions, while the listening challenges each point presented in the reading by provides their weakness. Firstly, the reading passage claims that removing the horn form rhinocerorsrhinoceros(misspelling) by the medical equipment, without hurting them. Nevertheless, the speaker rebuts it by stating that might be harmful for rhincerosesrhinoceroses(misspelling) living. In fact, although with the enough time and moenymoney(misspelling), dehorning might reduce their survival possibility. BecasueBecause(misspelling) their horn have many advantages, such as digging water and guiding youngsyoung(misspelling). In short, considering their life in the wild, it’s differs from the solution mentioned in the reading. Furthermore, the passage asserts that educating consumers, such as the rhinoceroses’ horns didn’t have health advantage,can, can(Use of whitespace before comma and before/after parentheses) reducingreduce(Non-infinitive verb after modal verbs) public’s demand for horns. In contrast, the speaker refutes it by stating that it not be effective. In fact, people have this believebelief(believe (belief)) from their own culture, which have thousanda thousand(Numeral (dozen, hundred, thousand, million) without a determiner or a number) years history formfrom(Detects potentially wrong usage of "form" instead of "from") ancient time. There forTherefore(there for (therefore)), educating harldyhardly(misspelling) to change their strong mind, contridictingcontradicting(misspelling) to the argument presented in the reading. Lastly, the reading passage argues that makes horns salingsaying(misspelling) legal to reduce their profit might stop killing rhino. In contrast, the speaker asserts that many people want a rhino’s horn but didn’t buy it because it’s not legal currently. So if govermentgovernment(misspelling) makes the new law that the rhino’s horn become accessible, it will widen the horn market. In short, this again casts doubt on the overall validity of stopingstopping(misspelling) people to buy the rhino’s horn.

Section Title: 6.文章修订

The lecture and passage discuss the issue of protecting rhinoceroses by preventing the sale of rhinoceros horns. The reading provides three potential solutions, while the listening challenges each point presented in the reading by providing their weaknesses.

Firstly, the reading passage claims that dehorning rhinoceroses using medical equipment without hurting them is a viable solution. Nevertheless, the speaker rebuts this by stating that it might be harmful to their survival in the wild. In fact, even with enough time and money, dehorning might reduce their chances of survival because their horns have many advantages, such as digging for water and guiding young ones. In short, considering their life in the wild, this solution differs from what is mentioned in the reading.

Furthermore, the passage asserts that educating consumers about the lack of health benefits from rhinoceros horns can reduce public demand for them. In contrast, the speaker refutes this by stating that it may not be effective. In fact, people have held this belief for thousands of years due to cultural reasons dating back to ancient times. Therefore, education is unlikely to change their strong mindset, contradicting the argument presented in the reading.

Lastly, the reading passage argues that legalizing horn sales to reduce profit might stop rhino poaching. In contrast, the speaker asserts that many people want a rhino's horn but do not buy it because it is currently illegal. If governments make new laws making rhino horns accessible, it will widen the horn market instead of reducing demand as suggested in the reading passage. In short, this again casts doubt on the overall validity of stopping people from buying rhino horns through legalization efforts. (279 words)

The lecture and passage discuss the issue for the way of protecting rhinoceroses, rhinoceroses by preventing the sale of rhinoceros horns. horns (changed "for the way of" to "of" for clarity and conciseness). The reading provides three potential solutions, while the listening challenges each point presented in the reading by provides their weakness. providing their weaknesses (corrected "provides their weakness" to "providing their weaknesses" for grammatical accuracy).

Firstly, the reading passage claims that removing the horn form rhinocerors by the dehorning rhinoceroses using medical equipment, equipment without hurting them. them is a viable solution (rephrased for clarity and correctness). Nevertheless, the speaker rebuts it this by stating that it might be harmful for rhinceroses living. to their survival in the wild. In fact, although even with the enough time and moeny, money, dehorning might reduce their chances of survival possibility. Becasue their horn because their horns have many advantages, such as digging for water and guiding youngs. young ones (corrected grammar and phrasing). In short, considering their life in the wild, it’s this solution differs from the solution what is mentioned in the reading.

Furthermore, the passage asserts that educating consumers, such as the rhinoceroses’ horns didn’t have consumers about the lack of health advantage,can reducing public’s benefits from rhinoceros horns can reduce public demand for horns. them (rephrased for clarity). In contrast, the speaker refutes it this by stating that it may not be effective. In fact, people have this believe from their own culture, which have thousand held this belief for thousands of years history form due to cultural reasons dating back to ancient time. There for, educating harldy times (corrected grammar and phrasing). Therefore, education is unlikely to change their strong mind, contridicting to mindset, contradicting the argument presented in the reading.

Lastly, the reading passage argues that makes horns saling legal legalizing horn sales to reduce their profit might stop killing rhino. rhino poaching (rephrased for clarity). In contrast, the speaker asserts that many people want a rhino’s rhino's horn but didn’t do not buy it because it’s not legal currently. So if goverment makes the it is currently illegal. If governments make new law that the rhino’s horn become laws making rhino horns accessible, it will widen the horn market. market instead of reducing demand as suggested in the reading passage (corrected grammar and phrasing). In short, this again casts doubt on the overall validity of stoping stopping people to buy the rhino’s horn.from buying rhino horns through legalization efforts (rephrased for clarity).

8. Mind Map

Mind Map:

- Introduction
  - Issue: Protecting rhinoceroses
  - Reading: Three potential solutions
  - Listening: Challenges to each solution

- Dehorning Rhinoceroses
  - Reading: Viable solution, medical equipment, no harm
  - Listening: Harmful to survival, horns have advantages, life in the wild

- Educating Consumers
  - Reading: Reduce demand, lack of health benefits
  - Listening: Ineffective, cultural beliefs, strong mindset

- Legalizing Horn Sales
  - Reading: Reduce profit, stop poaching
  - Listening: Widen market, increase demand, legalization efforts doubtful

9. Keywords

1.子项得分 任务完成度: 4 组织: 3 连贯与衔接: 3 语言使用: 3

2.预估分数

22. 3.任务完成度

你的文章在任务完成度方面做得不错，概括了听力材料中的观点，并对阅读材料提出的理论进行了质疑。但是，你可以更深入地讨论听力材料中提到的问题，以便更全面地回应任务要求。此外，你还可以更详细地解释听力材料如何具体质疑阅读材料中的观点。

改进建议：

• 更深入地讨论听力材料中提到的问题。

• 更详细地解释听力材料如何具体质疑阅读材料中的观点。

示例：

1. "Although the strategy has been used in the early 1990s, it seems to be not realistic that we can attract and remove the Rhinos remaining nowadays because the number of the Rhinos are extremely few." 改为 "The professor argues that dehorning rhinos is not practical because it requires finding them in the wild, preparing them for surgery, and removing their horns, which is time-consuming and expensive."

2. "With the few horns the government can supply, the price of horns will increase further and attract the poachers to kill more Rhinos, which leads to a worse result." 改为 "The professor believes that legalizing government sales of rhino horn might create a larger market for the horn, increasing demand and prices, which would in turn attract poachers."

4.文章结构与组织 文章的结构可以进一步改进。虽然你的文章包括了引言、正文和结论，但每个段落的主题和支持细节可以更清晰。此外，你可以使用更明确的过渡词和短语来连接不同的观点和段落。

改进建议：

• 每个段落都应有一个明确的主题，并提供支持细节。

• 使用明确的过渡词和短语来连接不同的观点和段落。

示例：

1. 在第二段中，添加过渡词：“然而，教授认为这些假设都是错误的。” 改为 “然而，在听力材料中，教授认为这些假设都是错误的。”

2. 在第三段开头添加过渡词：“关于去角化，教授表示……” 改为 “首先，关于去角化，教授表示……”

5. 语法批改

How to save the rhinos in danger with the excessive killing by the poachers is the focus of both the writer and the professor. In the writing, three methods, including dehorn Rhinos living in the wild, educating consumers and legalizing government sales of rhino horn. The professor, however, claims that all such assumptions are incorrect.

As opposed to the writer's first idea asof(This rule identifies wrong preposition usage.) dehorning, the professor claims that the government has no enough money and time to dehorn Rhinos which are in the wild. Although the strategy has been used in the early 1990s, it seems to be not realistic that we can attract and remove the Rhinos remaining nowadays because the number of the Rhinos are extremely few. Additionally, none of the government would like to pay for the dehorning that they all want toto,(This rule identifies whether commas are missing in a sentence.) the other governments affordto afford(This rule identifies whether the preposition 'to' is missing in a sentence.) it.

The professor continues to discredit the writer's assertion that the concepts deeply in the ancient culture can not be easily influenced and changed by the scientific research. When people believe that the KaratinKeratin(misspelling) has the health benefits and the horns can be used in medicines, they will still demand for the horns for a long time, until they ultimately realize it is useless.

It is the professor's third argument that the demand will increase with the legalizing of the sales of Rhino horn by government. It will cause that the ones who rejectsreject(Agreement of relative pronoun 'who' and verb) to utilize the horns because it is illegal to change their mind and decide to purchase it. With the few horns the government can supply, the price of horns will increase further and attract the poachers to kill more Rhinos, which leads to a worse result.

An apparent divide exists between the writer and the professor on the ways protectingof protecting(This rule identifies whether the preposition 'of' is missing in a sentence.) the Rhinos from its extinction.

Section Title: 6.文章修订

The dilemma of saving rhinoceroses from the brink of extinction due to excessive poaching is addressed by both the author and the lecturer. The author proposes three potential solutions: dehorning rhinos in the wild, educating consumers, and legalizing government sales of rhino horn. However, the lecturer contends that these proposals are fundamentally flawed.

Contrary to the author's suggestion of dehorning, the lecturer argues that governments lack sufficient resources and time to locate and dehorn rhinos in their natural habitats. Although this strategy was employed in the early 1990s, it is unrealistic to assume that we can effectively remove horns from the remaining rhinos today due to their dwindling numbers. Furthermore, no government is willing to bear the financial burden of dehorning; each expects others to shoulder this responsibility.

The lecturer also disputes the author's claim that scientific research can change deeply ingrained cultural beliefs about rhino horn's health benefits. As these beliefs have persisted for thousands of years, it is unlikely that people will easily abandon them based on new evidence. Consequently, demand for rhino horn will remain high until consumers eventually realize its ineffectiveness.

Lastly, the lecturer challenges the author's assertion that legalizing government sales of rhino horn would curb demand. On the contrary, such a move could lead those who previously rejected using horns due to their illegality to change their stance and purchase them. Given governments' limited supply of horns, prices would likely soar even higher, incentivizing poachers to kill more rhinos – an outcome that would only exacerbate the problem.

A clear divide exists between the author and lecturer regarding effective strategies for preventing rhinoceros extinction. (273 words)

How to save the Revised essay: Section Title: 7.文章批改

The challenge of saving rhinoceroses from the brink of extinction due to excessive poaching is addressed by both the author and the lecturer. The author proposes three potential solutions: dehorning rhinos in danger with the excessive killing by the poachers is the focus of both the writer and the professor. In the writing, three methods, including dehorn Rhinos living in the wild, educating consumers consumers, and legalizing government sales of rhino horn. The professor, however, claims that all such assumptions However, the lecturer contends that these proposals are incorrect. ¶ As opposed to the writer's first idea as dehorning, the professor claims that the government has no enough money fundamentally flawed.

Contrary to the author's suggestion of dehorning (revised for clarity), the lecturer argues that governments lack sufficient resources and time to (revised for natural tone) to locate and dehorn Rhinos which are rhinos in the wild. their natural habitats. Although the this strategy has been used was employed in the early 1990s, it seems to be not realistic is unrealistic to assume that we can attract and effectively remove the Rhinos horns from the remaining nowadays because the number of the Rhinos are extremely few. Additionally, none of the rhinos today due to their dwindling numbers (revised for clarity). Furthermore, no government would like to pay for the dehorning that they all want to the other governments afford it. is willing to bear the financial burden of dehorning; each expects others to shoulder this responsibility (revised for natural tone).

The professor continues to discredit the writer's assertion that the concepts lecturer also disputes the author's claim that scientific research can change deeply in the ancient culture can not be easily influenced and changed by the scientific research. When people believe that the Karatin has the ingrained cultural beliefs about rhino horn's health benefits and the horns can be used in medicines, they will still demand for the horns for a long time, until they ultimately realize (revised for clarity). As these beliefs have persisted for thousands of years, it is useless. ¶ It is the professor's third argument that the unlikely that people will easily abandon them based on new evidence (revised for natural tone). Consequently, demand for rhino horn will increase with the remain high until consumers eventually realize its ineffectiveness.

Lastly, the lecturer challenges the author's assertion that legalizing of the government sales of Rhino rhino horn by government. It will cause that the ones would curb demand (revised for clarity). On the contrary, such a move could lead those who rejects to utilize the previously rejected using horns because it is illegal due to their illegality to change their mind and decide to stance and purchase it. With the few horns the government can supply, the price of horns will increase further and attract the them (revised for natural tone). Given governments' limited supply of horns, prices would likely soar even higher, incentivizing poachers to kill more Rhinos, which leads to a worse result. ¶ An apparent rhinos – an outcome that would only exacerbate the problem (revised for clarity).

A clear divide exists between the writer and the professor on the ways protecting the Rhinos from its extinction.author and lecturer regarding effective strategies for preventing rhinoceros extinction (revised for natural tone).

8. Mind Map

9. Keywords

Section Title: 6. Article Revision

The dilemma of saving rhinoceroses from the brink of extinction due to excessive poaching is addressed by both the author and the lecturer. The author proposes three potential solutions: dehorning rhinos in the wild, educating consumers, and legalizing government sales of rhino horn. However, the lecturer contends that these proposals are fundamentally flawed.

Contrary to the author's suggestion of dehorning, the lecturer argues that governments lack sufficient resources and time to locate and dehorn rhinos in their natural habitats. Although this strategy was employed in the early 1990s, it is unrealistic to assume that we can effectively remove horns from the remaining rhinos today due to their dwindling numbers. Furthermore, no government is willing to bear the financial burden of dehorning; each expects others to shoulder this responsibility.

The lecturer also disputes the author's claim that scientific research can change deeply ingrained cultural beliefs about rhino horn's health benefits. As these beliefs have persisted for thousands of years, it is unlikely that people will easily abandon them based on new evidence. Consequently, demand for rhino horn will remain high until consumers eventually realize its ineffectiveness.

Lastly, the lecturer challenges the author's assertion that legalizing government sales of rhino horn would curb demand. On the contrary, such a move could lead those who previously rejected using horns due to their illegality to change their stance and purchase them. Given governments' limited supply of horns, prices would likely soar even higher, incentivizing poachers to kill more rhinos – an outcome that would only exacerbate the problem.

A clear divide exists between the author and lecturer regarding effective strategies for preventing rhinoceros extinction.