TOEFL TPO 48 Writing Task 1 Sample: Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific methods proposed 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

这篇文章在任务完成度方面表现不错，基本上涵盖了阅读和听力中的主要观点。但是，文章在对听力中的观点进行解释时，有些地方没有足够详细。建议在描述教授对阅读提案的质疑时，更具体地说明教授的观点和理由。

例1： 原文：“The professor continues to discredit the writing's assertion that antifungal treatment will be helpful in preventing infections to frog, by examining the fact that this method is complicated and expensive to reduce the harmful effects to frogs.” 改进：“The professor continues to discredit the writing's assertion that antifungal treatment will be helpful in preventing infections in frogs, by explaining that this method is complicated and expensive due to the need for individual treatment and continuous application for each generation.”

例2： 原文：“It is the professor's third argument that global warming is the biggest threat to frog habitats, water or wetland, instead of human activities…” 改进：“The professor's third argument is that global warming poses a greater threat to frog habitats, such as water and wetlands, than human activities like excessive water use and development…”

4.文章结构与组织 文章的结构方面需要改进。虽然有简介、正文和结论，但是段落之间缺乏明确的过渡。建议使用过渡词和短语来连接不同的观点和段落，使文章更加连贯。

例1： 原文：“As opposed to the writer's idea that prohibiting harmful pesticides use will decrease the harm to frogs, the professor states that this method is not economical-friendly.” 改进：“Contrary to the writer's idea that prohibiting harmful pesticides use will decrease the harm to frogs, the professor argues that this method is not economically viable. To support this claim, she explains that…”

例2： 原文：“Therefore, prevent human activities will not make any sense.” 改进：“Therefore, preventing human activities alone would not be sufficient to address the issue. In conclusion, while the reading passage suggests several methods for addressing frog population decline, the lecture casts doubt on their effectiveness and practicality.”

5. 语法批改

The way to deal with the problems caused by frog decrease is the focus of both the writer and the professor. In the writing, three methods, including limiting pesticides use, applying antifungal medication and protecting frog habitats, have been elaborated. The professor, however, claims that none of the measurement is practical and, and(comma between independent clauses) these methods causes lots of problems.

As opposed to the writer's idea that prohibiting harmful pesticides use will decrease the harm to frogs, the professor states that this method is not economical-friendly. She advances the theory by saying that limiting pesticide use will produce less crop and less yield, which make famersfarmers(misspelling) less competitive in the market. This disadvantage will be bad for farmers.

The professor continues to discredit the writing's assertion that antifungal treatment will be helpful in preventing infections to frog, by examining the fact that this method is complicated and expensive to reduce the harmful effects to frogs. In details, she points out that this antifungal treatment should be treated individually to frogs and, and(comma between independent clauses) it is difficult to do so on every frog; in addition, because the infection of fungus can be passed to the offsprings, new antifungal treatment need to be carried to the new generations. Therefore, this method is very difficult to handle and, and(comma between independent clauses) it costs lots of money.

It is the professor's third argument that global warming is the biggest threat to frog habitats, water or wetland, instead of human activities, which contradicts the view of the writer that restricting human activities on frog habitats will help recover frog. To explore deeper, the professor contends that global warming has deadly harm to frog habitats, leading frogto frog(This rule identifies whether the preposition 'to' is missing in a sentence.) extinction. Therefore, prevent human activities will not make any sense.

As apparent divide exists between the writer and the professor on the solutions to frog population declines.

Section Title: 6.文章修订

The decline of frog populations is the central issue discussed by both the author and the lecturer. In the reading passage, three potential solutions are proposed: limiting pesticide use, applying antifungal medication, and protecting frog habitats. However, the lecturer contends that none of these measures are practical and highlights several problems associated with each method.

Contrary to the author's suggestion that restricting harmful pesticide use would reduce harm to frogs, the lecturer argues that this approach is not economically viable. She explains that limiting pesticide use would result in lower crop yields and reduced competitiveness for farmers in the market. This disadvantage would negatively impact farmers.

The lecturer further disputes the reading passage's claim that antifungal treatments could effectively prevent infections in frogs by pointing out that this method is both complex and costly. Specifically, she notes that antifungal treatments must be applied individually to each frog, making large-scale implementation difficult. Additionally, since fungal infections can be passed on to offspring, new generations of frogs would also require treatment. Consequently, this approach is challenging to execute and financially burdensome.

Lastly, the lecturer argues that global warming poses a greater threat to frog habitats than human activities do, contradicting the author's view that restricting human activities around frog habitats would aid in their recovery. The lecturer elaborates on this point by asserting that global warming has caused significant damage to frog habitats and has led to numerous extinctions. Therefore, merely preventing human activities near these habitats would not be an effective solution.

In conclusion, there is a clear disagreement between the author and the lecturer regarding potential solutions for addressing declining frog populations. (275 words)

Section Title: 7.文章修订

The way to deal with the problems caused decline of frog populations is the central issue discussed by frog decrease is the focus of both the writer and the professor. author and the lecturer. In the writing, reading passage, three methods, including potential solutions are proposed: limiting pesticides pesticide use, applying antifungal medication medication, and protecting frog habitats, have been elaborated. The professor, however, claims habitats. However, the lecturer contends that none of the measurement is these measures are practical and these methods causes lots of problems. ¶ As opposed to the writer's idea that prohibiting highlights several problems associated with each method (Changed "measurement" to "measures" for correct terminology).

Contrary to the author's suggestion that restricting harmful pesticides pesticide use will decrease the would reduce harm to frogs, the professor states lecturer argues that this method approach is not economical-friendly. economically viable (Changed "economical-friendly" to "economically viable" for proper phrasing). She advances the theory by saying explains that limiting pesticide use will produce less would result in lower crop and less yield, which make famers less competitive yields and reduced competitiveness for farmers in the market. This disadvantage will be bad for farmers. would negatively impact farmers (Changed "bad for farmers" to "negatively impact farmers" for a more formal tone).

The professor continues to discredit the writing's assertion lecturer further disputes the reading passage's claim that antifungal treatment will be helpful in preventing treatments could effectively prevent infections to frog, in frogs by examining the fact pointing out that this method is complicated and expensive to reduce the harmful effects to frogs. In details, both complex and costly (Changed "complicated and expensive" to "complex and costly" for better word choice). Specifically, she points out that this notes that antifungal treatment should treatments must be treated applied individually to frogs and it is difficult to do so on every frog; in addition, because the infection of fungus each frog, making large-scale implementation difficult. Additionally, since fungal infections can be passed to the offsprings, on to offspring, new antifungal treatment need to be carried to the new generations. Therefore, generations of frogs would also require treatment. Consequently, this method is very difficult to handle and it approach is challenging to execute and financially burdensome (Changed "it costs lots of money. ¶ It is the professor's third argument money" to "financially burdensome" for a more formal tone).

Lastly, the lecturer argues that global warming is the biggest poses a greater threat to frog habitats, water or wetland, instead of human activities, which contradicts the habitats than human activities do, contradicting the author's view of the writer that restricting human activities around frog habitats would aid in their recovery (Changed "help recover frog" to "aid in their recovery"). The lecturer elaborates on frog habitats will help recover frog. To explore deeper, the professor contends this point by asserting that global warming has deadly harm to frog habitats, leading frog extinction. caused significant damage to frog habitats and has led to numerous extinctions. Therefore, prevent merely preventing human activities will near these habitats would not make any sense. ¶ As be an effective solution (Changed "prevent human activities" to "preventing human activities" for grammatical consistency).

In conclusion, there is a clear disagreement between the author and the lecturer regarding potential solutions for addressing declining frog populations (Changed "As apparent divide exists between the writer and the professor on the solutions to frog population declines.exists" to "there is a clear disagreement" for better phrasing).

8. Mind Map

- Essay Structure
    - Introduction
        - Decline of frog populations
        - Author's proposed solutions
        - Lecturer's disagreement
    - Limiting Pesticide Use
        - Author's view: beneficial for frogs
        - Lecturer's view: not economically viable, negative impact on farmers
    - Applying Antifungal Medication
        - Author's view: effective prevention of infections
        - Lecturer's view: complex, costly, difficult to implement on a large scale
    - Protecting Frog Habitats
        - Author's view: restricting human activities aids recovery
        - Lecturer's view: global warming is a greater threat, habitat protection insufficient

- Points of Lecture
    1. Economic viability of limiting pesticide use.
    2. Complexity and cost of antifungal treatments.
    3. Impact of global warming on frog habitats.

9. Keywords