TOEFL Writing Task 1 Sample: Directions: You have 20 minutes to plan and write your response. Your response will be judged on the basis of the quality of your writing and on how well your response presents the points in the lecture and their relationship to the reading passage. Typically an effective response will be 150 to 225 words. Question: Ouestion: Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific theories presented in the reading passage.

1.子项得分 Task fulfillment: 3 Organization: 2 Coherence and Cohesion: 2 Language Use: 2

2.预估分数 Estimated Score: 17 (out of 30)

3.任务完成度 在文章中，你确实提到了阅读和听力材料中的观点，但是对于听力部分的反驳论据没有详细解释。为了提高任务完成度，你需要更详细地解释听力材料中的论点以及它们如何反驳阅读材料中的理论。

示例1（改进前）：However, the lecture argues that they are too large to become arrows. 示例1（改进后）：However, the lecture argues that the large hole in the perforated baton makes it fragile and weak, which would cause it to break when used for straightening arrows.

示例2（改进前）：Nevertheless, the lecture suggests that batons need to add hock on them. 示例2（改进后）：Nevertheless, the lecture points out that the researcher added a hook to his experimental model, which is not present on any prehistoric perforated batons, making this theory unconvincing.

4.文章结构与组织 Your essay lacks a clear structure and organization. It would be helpful to have an introduction that briefly summarizes the main points of both reading and listening materials before diving into each theory's rebuttal. Additionally, each paragraph should focus on one specific point with supporting details from both reading and listening materials.

Suggestions for improvement:

• Start with an introduction that briefly summarizes the main points of both reading and listening materials.

• Divide your essay into separate paragraphs, each focusing on one specific point with supporting details from both reading and listening materials.

• Use clear transitions between ideas and paragraphs.

Example 1 (Before): The lecture challeges the several theories about what perforated batons were used for in the reading. Example 1 (After): The lecture challenges the three theories presented in the reading passage about the function of perforated batons.

Example 2 (Before): They have got rufe surface. Example 2 (After): This rough surface suggests that perforated batons were more likely to be practical tools rather than ceremonial objects, as argued by the listening passage.

5. 语法批改

The lecture challeges thechallenges several theories about what perforated batons were used for in the reading. Firstly, the theory makes clear that using perforated batons to make manufacture arrows-weapons is a way to huntmethod that has been used for hunting since prehistoric times. However, the lecture argues that they are too large to become arrows. Removing the bends of them will cause too much pressure, which havehas the ability to brokebreak them into picieces.pieces. Secondly, the theory illustrates that they arewere used to be made into throw spears, which are the long hunting weapons ,eventhat can be thrown farther and more forcefully than human hand alone. Nevertheless, the lecture suggests that batons need to add hock onhave hooks added to them. Lastly, the theory claims that batons were not practical tools but instead purely ceremonial or symbolic objects. In contrast, the lecture casts doubt on thatthe statement that batons are carving,merely carvings, not for drcorations.decorations. They have got rufe surface.rough surfaces.

Section Title: 6.文章修订

The lecture challenges several theories about the function of perforated batons presented in the reading passage. Firstly, the reading suggests that these batons were used to manufacture arrows for hunting purposes in prehistoric times. However, the lecture argues that the holes in perforated batons are too large and fragile for straightening arrows. Applying pressure to remove bends would likely cause them to break into pieces.

Secondly, the reading posits that perforated batons were used as spear throwers, allowing for longer and more forceful throws than could be achieved by hand alone. Nevertheless, the lecture points out a flaw in this theory: the experimental model created by a researcher included a hook not found on any prehistoric perforated batons. Without this added hook, the model would not have been able to throw spears effectively.

Lastly, the reading claims that perforated batons served as ceremonial or symbolic objects rather than practical tools. In contrast, the lecture casts doubt on this assertion by highlighting that many of these batons feature simple cuts and scratches rather than elaborate carvings or decorations. These rough surfaces may have been intentionally created to provide a better grip for users, which is characteristic of practical tools rather than symbolic objects. (205 words)

The lecture challeges the challenges several theories about what perforated the function of perforated batons presented in the reading passage (revised for clarity and to better introduce the topic). Firstly, the reading suggests that these batons were used for in the reading. Firstly, the theory makes clear that using perforated batons to make to manufacture arrows-weapons is a way to hunt since arrows for hunting purposes in prehistoric times. times (corrected grammar and sentence structure). However, the lecture argues that they the holes in perforated batons are too large to become arrows. Removing the and fragile for straightening arrows (clarified argument). Applying pressure to remove bends of would likely cause them will cause too much pressure, which to break into pieces (corrected grammar and phrasing).

Secondly, the reading posits that perforated batons were used as spear throwers, allowing for longer and more forceful throws than could be achieved by hand alone (corrected grammar and sentence structure). Nevertheless, the lecture points out a flaw in this theory: the experimental model created by a researcher included a hook not found on any prehistoric perforated batons (clarified argument and corrected grammar). Without this added hook, the model would not have the ability to broke them into picieces. Secondly, the theory illustrates that they are used to be made into been able to throw spears, which are the long hunting weapons ,even farther and more forcefully than human hand alone. Nevertheless, the lecture suggests that batons need to add hock on them. spears effectively (corrected grammar).

Lastly, the theory reading claims that batons were not practical tools but instead purely perforated batons served as ceremonial or symbolic objects. objects rather than practical tools (corrected grammar and sentence structure). In contrast, the lecture casts doubt on that statement that batons are carving, not for drcorations. They this assertion by highlighting that many of these batons feature simple cuts and scratches rather than elaborate carvings or decorations (clarified argument and corrected grammar). These rough surfaces may have got rufe surface.been intentionally created to provide a better grip for users, which is characteristic of practical tools rather than symbolic objects (corrected grammar and phrasing).

8. Mind Map

• Introduction

  • Essay structure
  • Lecture points

• Function of Perforated Batons

  • Reading passage theories
  • Lecture challenges

• Arrows for Hunting

  • Reading suggestion
  • Lecture argument: holes too large and fragile

• Spear Throwers

  • Reading theory: longer, forceful throws
  • Lecture flaw: missing hook in experimental model

• Ceremonial or Symbolic Objects

  • Reading claim: not practical tools
  • Lecture doubt: simple cuts and scratches for grip

9. Keywords

Section Title: 6. Article Revision

The lecture challenges several theories about the function of perforated batons presented in the reading passage. Firstly, the reading suggests that these batons were used to manufacture arrows for hunting purposes in prehistoric times. However, the lecture argues that the holes in perforated batons are too large and fragile for straightening arrows. Applying pressure to remove bends would likely cause them to break into pieces.

Secondly, the reading posits that perforated batons were used as spear throwers, allowing for longer and more forceful throws than could be achieved by hand alone. Nevertheless, the lecture points out a flaw in this theory: the experimental model created by a researcher included a hook not found on any prehistoric perforated batons. Without this added hook, the model would not have been able to throw spears effectively.

Lastly, the reading claims that perforated batons served as ceremonial or symbolic objects rather than practical tools. In contrast, the lecture casts doubt on this assertion by highlighting that many of these batons feature simple cuts and scratches rather than elaborate carvings or decorations. These rough surfaces may have been intentionally created to provide a better grip for users, which is characteristic of practical tools rather than symbolic objects.

1.子项得分 Task fulfillment: 4 Organization: 4 Coherence and Cohesion: 4 Language Use: 3

2.预估分数 Estimated Score: 25

3.任务完成度 整体来说，文章回答了题目要求的问题，对阅读和听力材料中的观点进行了总结和对比。但在论述过程中，有些表述不够准确，例如“there just one type of trees live in shelter forests”应该是“shelter forests mainly consist of a single type of fast-growing tree”。为了提高任务完成度，建议在论述时更加关注细节的准确性，并尝试使用更多的同义词或短语来避免重复。

Example 1: Original: "Planting the trees in temperate area needs significant ground water and this method will cause great pressure on water in that area." Improved: "Establishing shelter forests in temperate regions requires substantial groundwater, which could lead to increased water scarcity for local farmers."

Example 2: Original: "But in shelter forests, there were small types of trees." Improved: "However, shelter forests primarily consist of a single type of fast-growing tree."

4.文章结构与组织 文章的结构和组织方面基本符合要求，包括引言、正文和结论。每段都集中讨论一个特定的观点，并提供支持细节。但在某些地方缺乏清晰的过渡词或短语。为了提高文章结构和组织，建议在段落之间使用更多的过渡词或短语，并确保每个段落都有一个明确的主题句。

Example 1: Original: "Firstly, the reading passage states that shelter forests benefit the farmers by protecting farmland from desertification." Improved: "To begin with, the reading passage claims that shelter forests provide advantages to farmers by safeguarding agricultural land from desertification."

Example 2: Original: "Secondly, the author suggests that the shelter forests can provide habitat for animals which can not live on open plains or grasslands." Improved: "Furthermore, the author posits that shelter forests serve as a suitable habitat for animal species unable to thrive in open plains or grasslands."

5. 语法批改

The author of the article argues that trees can be planted in temperate area and shelter forests can form by planting the trees which have benefits for environment and humans. While the lecturer disputes the claims mentioned in the article. His position is that planting trees in temperate area is not a good idea and has many drawbacks.

Firstly, the reading passage states that shelter forests benefit the farmers by protecting farmland from desertification. The windstorm can blow the fertile top soiltopsoil(Hyphenated words: top soil) awayaway,(This rule identifies whether commas are missing in a sentence.) then the soil become less suitable for agriculture. The trees can block the windstorms and prevent the root from erosion. The lecturer challenges the argument by stating that the benefits of shelter forests isare(Detects potentially wrong usage of "is") not clear. Planting the trees in temperatea temperate(This rule identifies whether the article 'a' is missing in a sentence.) area needs significant ground watergroundwater(Hyphenated words: ground water) and this method will cause great pressure on water in that area.

Secondly, the author suggests that the shelter forests can provide habitat for animals which can not live on open plains or grasslands. The lecturer, however, asserts that the there just one type of trees live in shelter forests. In other forests, some trees live faster than others. But in shelter forests, there were small types of trees. Consequently, the small diversity of trees just provide limited habitat for animals.

Lastly, the author puts forth the idea that planting more trees in shelter forests in temperate area can reduce the carbon dioxide in atmosphere and relieve the global warming. In contrast, the lecturer argues that actually the trees contribute to global warming because trees catch more heat than grass land due to forests absorb more heat from sun than grass land.

Section Title: 6.文章修订

The article posits that planting trees in temperate areas to create shelter forests can provide environmental and human benefits. However, the lecturer disputes these claims, arguing that such an approach has more drawbacks than advantages.

Firstly, the reading passage asserts that shelter forests protect farmland from desertification by blocking windstorms and preventing soil erosion. In contrast, the lecturer contends that the benefits of shelter forests are unclear. He explains that planting trees in temperate areas requires significant groundwater, which could put immense pressure on water resources in those regions.

Secondly, the author suggests that shelter forests can offer habitats for animals unable to survive on open plains or grasslands. The lecturer, however, points out that only one type of tree typically grows in shelter forests. Unlike natural forests with diverse tree species growing at different rates, shelter forests have limited tree diversity. As a result, they can only provide a restricted range of habitats for animals.

Lastly, the author proposes that planting more trees in temperate zones could reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and alleviate global warming. Conversely, the lecturer maintains that trees may actually contribute to global warming since they absorb more heat from the sun than grasslands do. (203 words)

Section Title: 7. Essay Revision

The author of the article argues that trees can be planted in temperate area areas, and shelter forests can form by planting the trees these trees, which have benefits for the environment and humans. While On the other hand, the lecturer disputes the claims mentioned in the article. His position is that planting trees in temperate area article, asserting that planting trees in temperate areas is not a good idea and has many drawbacks.

Firstly, the reading passage states that shelter forests benefit the farmers by protecting farmland from desertification. The windstorm Windstorms can blow the away fertile top soil away then the soil become topsoil, making it less suitable for agriculture. The agriculture; however, trees can block the windstorms and prevent the root from soil erosion. The lecturer challenges the this argument by stating that the benefits of shelter forests is are not clear. Planting the trees in temperate area needs clear-cut. He explains that planting trees in temperate areas requires significant ground water and this method will cause great groundwater resources, which could put considerable pressure on water in that area. supplies in those regions.

Secondly, the author suggests that the shelter forests can provide habitat habitats for animals which can not unable to live on open plains or grasslands. The lecturer, however, asserts that the there just lecturer counters this claim by pointing out that only one type of trees live tree typically thrives in shelter forests. In Unlike other forests, some trees live faster than others. But in shelter forests, there were small types of trees. forests where various tree species grow at different rates, shelter forests have limited tree diversity. Consequently, the small diversity of trees just provide limited habitat they offer a restricted range of habitats for animals.

Lastly, the author puts forth the idea posits that planting more trees in shelter forests in temperate area can temperate areas could reduce the atmospheric carbon dioxide in atmosphere and relieve the levels and alleviate global warming. In contrast, the lecturer argues that trees may actually the trees contribute to global warming because trees catch more heat than grass land due to forests they absorb more heat from the sun than grass land.grasslands do.

8. Mind Map

Mind Map:

- Introduction
  - Shelter forests
  - Environmental and human benefits
  - Lecturer's counterarguments

- Point 1: Protection from desertification
  - Reading passage: Blocks windstorms, prevents soil erosion
  - Lecturer: Unclear benefits, groundwater pressure on water resources

- Point 2: Habitats for animals
  - Author: Offers habitats for animals in open plains or grasslands
  - Lecturer: Limited tree diversity, restricted range of habitats

- Point 3: Reduction of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and global warming
  - Author: Planting trees in temperate zones reduces CO2 levels and global warming
  - Lecturer: Trees may contribute to global warming by absorbing more heat than grasslands

9. Keywords

1.子项得分 Task fulfillment: 4 Organization: 4 Coherence and Cohesion: 4 Language Use: 3

2.预估分数

25. 3.任务完成度

整体来说，这篇文章在任务完成度方面表现较好，成功地概括了听力材料中的观点，并与阅读材料中的理论进行了对比。但是，有一些细节可以改进。首先，在引述听力材料时，尽量使用同义词或其他表达方式，以避免重复原文中的词汇。其次，在解释听力材料中的观点时，可以更详细地说明为什么这些观点对阅读材料提出的理论产生质疑。

示例1： 原文：The lecturer challenges the claims by stating that the acid rain did not follow the impact since if the rain was acidic, it is also harmful for frogs which live in the water. 改进：The lecturer refutes this claim by pointing out that if the rain had been acidic enough to harm ammonites, it would have also been detrimental to frogs and other water-dwelling organisms, which did not go extinct at that time.

示例2： 原文：Based on just one group ammonites is not convincing. 改进：Drawing conclusions about all ammonites based on evidence from only one group is insufficient and unconvincing.

4.文章结构与组织 本篇文章在结构和组织方面表现良好，包括引言、正文和结论。每段都集中讨论了一个特定的观点，并提供了支持细节。然而，可以改进的地方是在段落之间增加更明确的过渡词或短语，以帮助读者更好地理解文章的逻辑顺序。

示例1： 原文：Firstly, the reading passage states that acid rain follow the meteorite impact which damage the newly hatched ammonite young floated on the ocean's surface. 改进：To begin with, the reading passage asserts that acid rain following the meteorite impact damaged the newly hatched ammonites floating on the ocean's surface.

示例2： 原文：Secondly, the author suggests that the ammonites had jaws designed specifically for catch and eating zooplankton. 改进：Furthermore, the author posits that ammonites possessed specialized jaws for catching and consuming zooplankton.

5. 语法批改

The author of the article argues that several theories about ammonite extinction have proposed. While the lecturer disputes the claims mentioned in the article. Her position is that none of the theories can provide detail about how it happened.

Firstly, the reading passage states that acid rain follow the meteorite impact which damage the newly hatched ammonite young floated on the ocean's surface. Their tissue will be broken down by the extremely acidic rain. The lecturer challenges the claims by stating that the acid rain did not follow the impact since if the rain was acidic, it is also harmful for frogs which live in the water. The frogs are vulnerable to the acid rain which can kill them off.

Secondly, the author suggests that the ammonites had jaws designed specifically for catch and eating zooplankton. The meteorite impact caused a dramatic cooling that killed the zooplanktonzooplankton,(This rule identifies whether commas are missing in a sentence.) which is the food source of the ammonites. When the ammonites lost their main food resources, they will become extinct. The lecturer, however, asserts that not all ammonites dependent on zooplankton. One group of ammonites can not represent for all ammonites and scientist can not find fossil evidence. Based on just one group ammonites is not convincing.

Lastly, the author puts forth the idea that meteorite impact decreased the photosynthetic activity of small marine plants. With the decrease of the small marine plants, less oxygen be produced by them. This low oxygen seawater is not suitable for ammonites. In contrast, the lecturer argues that the ammonites can tolerate the low oxygen environment because they have efficient breath organ. So they can survive in low oxygen conditions.

Section Title: 6.文章修订

The author of the article presents several theories regarding the extinction of ammonites, while the lecturer disputes these claims, arguing that none of the theories convincingly explain how the extinction occurred.

Firstly, the reading passage suggests that acid rain following the meteorite impact damaged newly hatched ammonite young floating on the ocean's surface, as their tissue would be broken down by the extremely acidic rain. The lecturer challenges this claim by stating that if the rain had been acidic enough to harm ammonites, it would have also been harmful to frogs and other water-dwelling organisms that are vulnerable to acidic waters. Since these organisms did not go extinct 65 million years ago, it is unlikely that acid rain was responsible for killing off ammonites.

Secondly, the author posits that ammonites had jaws specifically designed for catching and eating zooplankton. The meteorite impact caused a dramatic cooling event that killed off much of the zooplankton population, which was a primary food source for ammonites. Consequently, they became extinct due to lack of sustenance. However, the lecturer asserts that not all ammonites were dependent on zooplankton as a food source. The fossil evidence mentioned in the reading passage pertains to only one group of ammonites; there is no evidence to suggest that other groups had similar feeding habits. Thus, it is unconvincing to conclude that a zooplankton die-off led to the extinction of all ammonites.

Lastly, according to the author, decreased photosynthetic activity in small marine plants due to meteorite impact led to oxygen-deprived seawater conditions unsuitable for ammonite survival. In contrast, the lecturer argues that ammonites were likely able to tolerate low-oxygen environments because they possessed efficient breathing organs. This adaptation would have allowed them to survive in such conditions and casts doubt on this theory as a plausible explanation for their extinction. (305 words)

Revised essay: Section Title: 7.文章批改

The author of the article argues that presents several theories about ammonite regarding the extinction have proposed. While of ammonites, while the lecturer disputes the claims mentioned in the article. Her position is these claims, arguing that none of the theories can provide detail about convincingly explain how it happened. the extinction occurred (changed for clarity and natural tone).

Firstly, the reading passage states suggests that acid rain follow following the meteorite impact which damage the damaged newly hatched ammonite young floated floating on the ocean's surface. Their surface, as their tissue will would be broken down by the extremely acidic rain. The lecturer challenges the claims this claim by stating that the if the rain had been acidic enough to harm ammonites, it would have also been harmful to frogs and other water-dwelling organisms that are vulnerable to acidic waters (rephrased for clarity). Since these organisms did not go extinct 65 million years ago, it is unlikely that acid rain did not follow the impact since if the rain was acidic, it is also harmful for frogs which live in the water. The frogs are vulnerable to the acid rain which can kill them off. responsible for killing off ammonites (added context).

Secondly, the author suggests that the posits that ammonites had jaws specifically designed specifically for catch for catching and eating zooplankton. The meteorite impact caused a dramatic cooling event that killed off much of the zooplankton population, which is the was a primary food source of the for ammonites. When the ammonites lost their main food resources, Consequently, they will become extinct. The lecturer, however, became extinct due to lack of sustenance (rephrased for clarity). However, the lecturer asserts that not all ammonites were dependent on zooplankton. One group of ammonites can not represent for all ammonites and scientist can not find zooplankton as a food source. The fossil evidence. Based on just evidence mentioned in the reading passage pertains to only one group ammonites of ammonites; there is not convincing. no evidence to suggest that other groups had similar feeding habits (clarified argument). Thus, it is unconvincing to conclude that a zooplankton die-off led to the extinction of all ammonites (summarized point).

Lastly, the author puts forth the idea that according to the author, decreased photosynthetic activity in small marine plants due to meteorite impact decreased the photosynthetic activity of small marine plants. With the decrease of the small marine plants, less oxygen be produced by them. This low oxygen led to oxygen-deprived seawater is not suitable for ammonites. conditions unsuitable for ammonite survival. In contrast, the lecturer argues that the ammonites can ammonites were likely able to tolerate the low oxygen environment low-oxygen environments because they possessed efficient breathing organs (rephrased for clarity). This adaptation would have efficient breath organ. So they can allowed them to survive in low oxygen conditions.such conditions and casts doubt on this theory as a plausible explanation for their extinction (summarized point).

---

8. Mind Map

1. Introduction

   • Extinction of ammonites
   • Theories presented in the reading passage
   • Lecturer's counterarguments

2. Acid Rain Theory

   • Reading passage: Acid rain from meteorite impact harmed ammonite young
   • Lecturer: Other vulnerable organisms did not go extinct, so acid rain is unlikely

3. Zooplankton Die-Off Theory

   • Reading passage: Ammonites relied on zooplankton, which died off due to cooling event
   • Lecturer: Not all ammonites depended on zooplankton, fossil evidence limited

4. Oxygen-Deprived Seawater Theory

   • Reading passage: Decreased photosynthesis led to low-oxygen conditions unsuitable for ammonites
   • Lecturer: Ammonites had efficient breathing organs, could tolerate low-oxygen environments

5. Conclusion

   • None of the theories convincingly explain ammonite extinction

9. Keywords