TOEFL TPO 66 Writing Task 1 Sample: Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific arguments made in the reading passage.

1.子项得分 任务完成度: 4 组织: 4 连贯性和衔接: 4 语言使用: 4

2.预估分数

25. 3.任务完成度

你的文章基本上完成了任务要求，对阅读和听力材料中的观点进行了总结，并解释了听力材料是如何挑战阅读材料中的论点的。但是，有些地方可以进一步改进。例如，在提到反驳论点时，可以更具体地描述听力材料中提到的细节。

示例1（原文）：Therefore, replacing airplanes and helicopters by airships is not practical from an economic perspective. 示例1（修改后）：Therefore, the lecturer argues that replacing airplanes and helicopters with airships may not be as economically practical as the reading suggests due to the costs and challenges associated with lifting gases.

示例2（原文）：This is because, airships could only rise to 14 km in the sky where there are always with strong winds, leading the fast consuming of their fuels. 示例2（修改后）：This is because airships can only rise to 14 km in altitude, where strong winds are present, causing them to consume fuel rapidly in order to maintain their position for telecommunications or surveying functions.

4.文章结构与组织 你的文章结构清晰，包括引言、正文和结论。每个段落都集中讨论了一个特定的观点，并提供了支持细节。然而，在段落之间加入更明确的过渡词或短语可以使文章更连贯。

建议1：在段落开头使用过渡词或短语，以便更清楚地引导读者从一个观点过渡到另一个观点。 示例1（原文）：Secondly, the author claims that airships could both takeoff and lift off vertically... 示例1（修改后）：On the other hand, the author claims that airships could both takeoff and lift off vertically...

建议2：在提到听力材料中的反驳论点时，使用适当的衔接词来强调对比。 示例2（原文）：In contrast, the professor refutes this assertion by stating that it is not the case. 示例2（修改后）：However, the professor refutes this assertion by stating that it is not the case.

5. 语法批改

The reading passage and the lecture both discuss airship, an important air transportation way that was popular before the 1940s. The author of the article presents three possible reasons to support that airship could be used widely in the future. However, the lecturer challenges each reason and provides detailed counterarguments.

Firstly, the writer notes that airships are economic because they use less fuel than airplanes and helicopters. According to the article, engines on airships are only used to change the way horizontally, which are different from those on airplanes and helicopters to be used on both vertical and horizontal ways. Nevertheless, the speaker questions this claim, arguing that gases like hydrogen gases and helium gases are primarily used to maintain airships afloat would cost a lot. Since hydrogen gases are easy getting fire, leading unexpectedto unexpected(This rule identifies whether the preposition 'to' is missing in a sentence.) accidents. Also, it is hard and expensive to produce helium and store it. Therefore, replacing airplanes and helicopters by airships is not practical from an economic perspective.

Secondly, the author claims that airships could both takeoff and lift off vertically, indicating that they could get to some terrain difficult for airplanes. Moreover, the writer states that airships could easily transport a large amount of cargoes which helicopters could not. In contrast, the professor refutes this assertion by stating that it is not the case. For instance, controlling airships to lift off and land on forests area is especially difficult under windy weather. In this case, much time would be wasted for landing safely and slowly without causing damage.

Finally, the reading suggests that airships could replace satellites for telecommunication and military function because they could float and stay at very high altitudes. Besides, without the needs of refueling, airships would cost much less than satellites. On the other hand, the lecturer rebuts by saying that actually airships would cost more. This is because, airships could only rise to 14 km in the sky where there are always with strong winds, leading theto the(This rule identifies whether the preposition 'to' is missing in a sentence.) fast consuming of their fuels. Therefore, airships need to be constantly refueled while floating at high altitudes, which would be quite expensive.

Section Title: 6.文章修订

The reading passage and the lecture both discuss airships, an important air transportation method that was popular before the 1940s. The author of the article presents three possible reasons to support that airships could be used widely in the future. However, the lecturer challenges each reason and provides detailed counterarguments.

Firstly, the writer notes that airships are economical because they use less fuel than airplanes and helicopters. According to the article, engines on airships are only used for horizontal movement, which is different from those on airplanes and helicopters that are used for both vertical and horizontal movement. Nevertheless, the speaker questions this claim, arguing that gases like hydrogen and helium, which are primarily used to maintain airships afloat, would incur significant costs. Since hydrogen is highly flammable, it can lead to unexpected accidents. Also, it is difficult and expensive to produce and store helium. Therefore, replacing airplanes and helicopters with airships is not practical from an economic perspective.

Secondly, the author claims that airships can take off and land vertically, indicating that they could access terrain difficult for airplanes. Moreover, the writer states that airships can easily transport large amounts of cargo which helicopters cannot handle. In contrast, the professor refutes this assertion by stating that it is not as simple as it seems. For instance, controlling airships during takeoff and landing in forested areas is especially difficult under windy weather conditions. In such cases, much time would be wasted for landing safely and slowly without causing damage.

Finally, the reading suggests that airships could replace satellites for telecommunication and military functions because they can float at very high altitudes without needing refueling frequently. This would make them more cost-effective than satellites. On the other hand, the lecturer rebuts this argument by saying that actually airships might end up costing more due to their limitations in altitude capability. Airships can only rise to 14 km in the sky, where strong winds are prevalent, leading to rapid fuel consumption. Therefore, airships need to be constantly refueled while floating at high altitudes, which would be quite expensive. (349 words)

The reading passage and the lecture both discuss airship, airships, an important air transportation way method that was popular before the 1940s. 1940s (changed "way" to "method" for better word choice). The author of the article presents three possible reasons to support that airship airships could be used widely in the future. However, the lecturer challenges each reason and provides detailed counterarguments.

Firstly, the writer notes that airships are economic economical because they use less fuel than airplanes and helicopters. helicopters (changed "economic" to "economical" for proper word usage). According to the article, engines on airships are only used to change for horizontal movement (changed "change the way horizontally, horizontally" to "horizontal movement" for clarity), which are is different from those on airplanes and helicopters to be that are used on for both vertical and horizontal ways. movement. Nevertheless, the speaker questions this claim, arguing that gases like hydrogen gases and helium gases and helium, which are primarily used to maintain airships afloat afloat, would cost a lot. incur significant costs (rephrased sentence for clarity). Since hydrogen gases are easy getting fire, leading is highly flammable, it can lead to unexpected accidents. Also, it is hard difficult and expensive to produce helium and store it. helium. Therefore, replacing airplanes and helicopters by with airships is not practical from an economic perspective.

Secondly, the author claims that airships could both takeoff and lift can take off vertically, and land vertically (changed "lift off" to "land" for proper terminology), indicating that they could get to some access terrain difficult for airplanes. Moreover, the writer states that airships could can easily transport a large amount amounts of cargoes cargo which helicopters could not. cannot handle (changed "cargoes" to "cargo" for correct plural form). In contrast, the professor refutes this assertion by stating that it is not the case. as simple as it seems. For instance, controlling airships to lift off and land on forests area during takeoff and landing in forested areas is especially difficult under windy weather. weather conditions (rephrased sentence for clarity). In this case, such cases, much time would be wasted for landing safely and slowly without causing damage.

Finally, the reading suggests that airships could replace satellites for telecommunication and military function functions because they could can float and stay at very high altitudes. Besides, altitudes without the needs of refueling, airships needing refueling frequently (rephrased sentence for clarity). This would cost much less make them more cost-effective than satellites. On the other hand, the lecturer rebuts this argument by saying that actually airships would cost more. This is because, airships could might end up costing more due to their limitations in altitude capability (rephrased sentence for clarity). Airships can only rise to 14 km in the sky sky, where there strong winds are always with strong winds, prevalent, leading the fast consuming of their fuels. to rapid fuel consumption. Therefore, airships need to be constantly refueled while floating at high altitudes, which would be quite expensive.

8. Mind Map

• Introduction

  • Airships: air transportation method
  • Reading: three reasons for future use
  • Lecture: challenges each reason

• Reason 1: Economical

  • Reading: less fuel consumption than airplanes and helicopters
  • Lecture: hydrogen and helium costs, safety concerns

• Reason 2: Vertical Takeoff and Landing

  • Reading: access difficult terrain, transport large cargo
  • Lecture: challenges in controlling airships, time-consuming

• Reason 3: Replacing Satellites

  • Reading: high altitude floating, cost-effective alternative to satellites
  • Lecture: limitations in altitude capability, increased fuel consumption

9. Keywords

Section Title: 6. Article Revision

The reading passage and the lecture both discuss airships, an important air transportation method that was popular before the 1940s. The author of the article presents three possible reasons to support that airships could be used widely in the future. However, the lecturer challenges each reason and provides detailed counterarguments.

Firstly, the writer notes that airships are economical because they use less fuel than airplanes and helicopters. According to the article, engines on airships are only used for horizontal movement, which is different from those on airplanes and helicopters that are used for both vertical and horizontal movement. Nevertheless, the speaker questions this claim, arguing that gases like hydrogen and helium, which are primarily used to maintain airships afloat, would incur significant costs. Since hydrogen is highly flammable, it can lead to unexpected accidents. Also, it is difficult and expensive to produce and store helium. Therefore, replacing airplanes and helicopters with airships is not practical from an economic perspective.

Secondly, the author claims that airships can take off and land vertically, indicating that they could access terrain difficult for airplanes. Moreover, the writer states that airships can easily transport large amounts of cargo which helicopters cannot handle. In contrast, the professor refutes this assertion by stating that it is not as simple as it seems. For instance, controlling airships during takeoff and landing in forested areas is especially difficult under windy weather conditions. In such cases, much time would be wasted for landing safely and slowly without causing damage.

Finally, the reading suggests that airships could replace satellites for telecommunication and military functions because they can float at very high altitudes without needing refueling frequently. This would make them more cost-effective than satellites. On the other hand, the lecturer rebuts this argument by saying that actually airships might end up costing more due to their limitations in altitude capability. Airships can only rise to 14 km in the sky where strong winds are prevalent, leading to rapid fuel consumption. Therefore, airships need to be constantly refueled while floating at high altitudes, which would be quite expensive.

1.Sub Scores

• Task fulfillment: 3

• Organization: 3

• Coherence and Cohesion: 3

• Language Use: 3

2.Estimated Scores

• Estimated Score: 20

3.Task completeness The essay addresses the main points from the listening passage and how they challenge the reading passage. However, there is room for improvement in terms of providing more specific details and examples from both passages. To improve task fulfillment, the writer should focus on elaborating on each point and providing more accurate information.

Example 1: Original sentence: "The professor acknowledge that airships cost less fuel but spend more gas." Improved sentence: "The professor acknowledges that airships may use less fuel for propulsion, but they require large amounts of lighter-than-air gases like hydrogen or helium for lift, which can be expensive and have safety concerns."

Example 2: Original sentence: "Airships stay at fourteen kilometers from the ground, where the wind is too strong for the airship to stay in one place." Improved sentence: "Airships can only rise to about 14 kilometers above the surface, where strong winds make it difficult for them to remain stationary, causing them to consume more fuel and requiring frequent refueling."

4.Essay structure and organization The essay has a basic structure with an introduction, body paragraphs addressing each point, and a conclusion. However, it could benefit from clearer transitions between ideas and paragraphs. Additionally, some sentences are not well-constructed or lack clarity.

Example 1: Original sentence: "Firstly, the reading material states that airships use engines only for horizontal direction, which makes it cost less fuel." Improved sentence with transition: "To begin with, the reading passage claims that airships are more fuel-efficient than other aircraft because their engines are used solely for horizontal movement."

Example 2: Original sentence: "Finally, the material says that airships can take the place of satellites, which is disagreed by the professor." Improved sentence with transition: "Lastly, the reading passage suggests that airships could replace satellites for certain tasks; however, the professor disputes this idea by explaining the limitations of airships in terms of altitude and fuel consumption."

5. Grammar

Both the reading and listening materials argue about whether airship can be widely used. Firstly, the reading material states that airships use engines only for horizontal direction, which makes it cost less fuel. The professor acknowledge that airships cost less fuel but spend more gas. Two main kinds of gases that used by airship are hitrogennitrogen(misspelling) and helium. HitrogenNitrogen(misspelling) is easy to cause fire, which is less safe. While helium is difficult to obtain and can not bring enough power. Secondly, the reading material mentions that airships can be used in hard-to-reach area like forest and carry heavier loads than helicopter. The professor controdictscontradicts(misspelling) this statement that airships need to lift off and come down slowly and very steadily to aviodavoid(misspelling) being damaged from the branches of the tree, which is difficult to realize in the windy weather. Finally, the material says that airships can take the place of satellites, which is disagreed by the professor. Airships stay at fourteen kilometers from the ground, where the wind is totoo(Detects potentially wrong usage of "to") strong for the airship to stay in one place. It makes airships hard to conduct the teletell(misspelling) functionfunction,(This rule identifies whether commas are missing in a sentence.) and the feulfell(misspelling) and refeulrefuel(misspelling) work are difficult.

Section Title: 6. Revised Essay

The reading and listening materials present contrasting views on the potential for widespread use of airships. The reading passage highlights the advantages of airships, while the lecture challenges these points by discussing the practical limitations and drawbacks.

Firstly, the reading material emphasizes that airships use engines solely for horizontal movement, resulting in lower fuel consumption compared to airplanes and helicopters. However, the professor acknowledges this point but argues that airships require significant amounts of lifting gases, such as hydrogen and helium. Hydrogen is highly flammable and has caused numerous accidents in the past, while helium is scarce, expensive, and provides less lifting power than hydrogen. Thus, finding an economical solution for lifting gases that balances safety and cost remains a challenge.

Secondly, the reading passage asserts that airships can access hard-to-reach areas like forests and carry heavier loads than helicopters. In contrast, the professor contends that airships must ascend and descend slowly while maintaining a steady position to avoid damage from tree branches – a difficult task in windy conditions. This limitation makes it challenging for airships to operate safely in such environments.

Lastly, the reading material suggests that airships could replace satellites due to their ability to hover at high altitudes for extended periods without refueling. The professor disputes this claim by explaining that current airship technology only allows them to reach heights of approximately 14 kilometers above ground level where strong winds prevail. Consequently, airships must expend considerable fuel to maintain their position against these winds, hindering their ability to provide continuous telecommunications or surveying services comparable to satellites.

In light of these counterarguments presented by the professor in the lecture, it appears that several practical challenges need to be addressed before airships can be considered a viable alternative for widespread use in transportation or communication sectors. (304 words)

Both the The reading and listening materials argue about whether airship can be widely used. present contrasting views on the potential for widespread use of airships (revised for clarity). The reading passage highlights the advantages of airships, while the lecture challenges these points by discussing the practical limitations and drawbacks.

Firstly, the reading material states emphasizes that airships use engines only solely for horizontal direction, which makes it cost less fuel. The movement (revised for clarity), resulting in lower fuel consumption compared to airplanes and helicopters. However, the professor acknowledge that airships cost less fuel acknowledges this point but spend more gas. Two main kinds of gases that used by airship are hitrogen and helium. Hitrogen argues that airships require significant amounts of lifting gases, such as hydrogen and helium (revised for accuracy). Hydrogen is easy to cause fire, which is less safe. While highly flammable and has caused numerous accidents in the past (added explanation), while helium is difficult to obtain and can not bring enough power. scarce, expensive, and provides less lifting power than hydrogen (added explanation). Thus, finding an economical solution for lifting gases that balances safety and cost remains a challenge.

Secondly, the reading material mentions passage asserts that airships can be used in access hard-to-reach area areas like forest forests and carry heavier loads than helicopter. helicopters. In contrast, the professor contends that airships must ascend and descend slowly while maintaining a steady position to avoid damage from tree branches – a difficult task in windy conditions (revised for clarity). This limitation makes it challenging for airships to operate safely in such environments.

Lastly, the reading material suggests that airships could replace satellites due to their ability to hover at high altitudes for extended periods without refueling. The professor controdicts disputes this statement that airships claim by explaining that current airship technology only allows them to reach heights of approximately 14 kilometers above ground level where strong winds prevail (revised for accuracy). Consequently, airships must expend considerable fuel to maintain their position against these winds (added explanation), hindering their ability to provide continuous telecommunications or surveying services comparable to satellites.

In light of these counterarguments presented by the professor in the lecture, it appears that several practical challenges need to lift off and come down slowly and very steadily to aviod being damaged from the branches of the tree, which is difficult to realize in the windy weather. ¶ Finally, the material says that be addressed before airships can take the place of satellites, which is disagreed by the professor. Airships stay at fourteen kilometers from the ground, where the wind is to strong for the airship to stay in one place. It makes airships hard to conduct the tele function and the feul and refeul work are difficult.be considered a viable alternative for widespread use in transportation or communication sectors (revised for clarity).

8. Mind Map

1. Introduction
   - Reading: advantages of airships
   - Lecture: challenges and limitations

2. Fuel consumption
   - Reading: lower fuel consumption than airplanes and helicopters
   - Lecture: lifting gases (hydrogen, helium) are problematic

3. Access to hard-to-reach areas
   - Reading: airships can reach remote locations and carry heavy loads
   - Lecture: slow ascent/descent, difficulty in windy conditions

4. Replacing satellites
   - Reading: hover at high altitudes without refueling
   - Lecture: limited altitude, strong winds, fuel expenditure

5. Conclusion
   - Practical challenges need to be addressed for widespread use of airships

9. Key Words