TOEFL TPO -1 Academic Discussion Writing Sample: In class this week, we are looking at how markets work, particularly in regard to energy costs. Petroleum, also known simply as oil, is one of the most important international commodities. When the global market price of oil goes up, fuels such as gasoline(petrol) also become more expensive. Many people think governments should step in to protect consumers from increases in fuel prices. What is your view? Do you think governments should actively keep fuel prices low for energy costs?

1. 子项得分

• Relevance and Contribution to Discussion: 4.5

• Clarity and Elaboration of Viewpoint: 4.0

• Language Use and Grammar: 3.5

2. 预估分数

25. 3 任务完成度

你的文章在完成任务方面做得不错，但还有一些可以改进的地方。首先，你可以更详细地解释为什么低油价会导致环境污染增加，例如，通过提供更多具体的例子或数据。其次，在论述观点时，尝试使用更多的连接词和短语来使文章更连贯。最后，注意检查语法错误和用词问题。

Example 1: Instead of "the low prices may lead more people drive cars," you can write "the low prices may encourage more people to drive cars, as they find it more affordable compared to using public transportation."

Example 2: Instead of "there is more frog in my city," you can write "there is increased smog in my city, resulting in poorer air quality than before."

4. 文章结构与组织

在文章结构和组织方面，你需要注意以下几点：首先，在引言部分简要介绍主题和你的观点；然后，在正文部分详细阐述观点，并提供支持论据；最后，在结论部分总结全文。此外，请确保每个段落都集中讨论一个特定的观点，并使用恰当的过渡词和短语连接不同的观点和段落。

Example 1: You can start your essay with an introduction like this: "The debate on whether governments should actively keep fuel prices low for energy costs has been a topic of discussion for years. While some argue that it is a good policy, I believe that it is not a sustainable strategy due to its negative impact on the environment."

Example 2: Improve transitions between ideas by using phrases like "On the one hand," "On the other hand," or "Furthermore." For example, you can write: "On the one hand, low fuel prices make driving more affordable for people. On the other hand, this affordability leads to increased car usage and consequently higher levels of air pollution."

5. 语法批改

Kelley mentioned that the government actively keep fuel price low for energy costs is a good policy. However, I personally believe that the government should not keep fuel prices low is not a good strategy because the low prices contribute to the increase of environment pollution. To be specific, the low prices may lead more people driveto drive(This rule identifies whether the preposition 'to' is missing in a sentence.) cars instead of taking bus and subway since driving doesn't cost too much. Furthermore, more carbon dioxide will be emitted, which caused global warming and shortage of natural resources. For instance, in my city, the gas prices keep low infor(This rule identifies wrong preposition usage.) a long period of time and many people choose driving when they go out. After a period of time, there is more frog in my city and the air is not clean than before. In conclusion, I am convinced that the low fuel price has a disadvantage of the environment.

Title: 6 文章修订

While Kelley argues that maintaining low fuel prices is a beneficial government policy, I contend that artificially suppressing fuel costs may exacerbate environmental issues. Specifically, lower fuel prices can incentivize individuals to drive their personal vehicles instead of utilizing public transportation, as the cost of driving becomes more affordable. Consequently, this increased vehicular usage leads to higher carbon dioxide emissions, contributing to global warming and the depletion of natural resources. For example, in my city, prolonged periods of low gas prices have resulted in a noticeable increase in private car usage. Over time, this has led to worsened air quality and increased smog levels. Thus, I firmly believe that the drawbacks of maintaining low fuel prices far outweigh any potential benefits for consumers. (126 words)

Revised essay: Title: 7 文章批改

While Kelley mentioned argues that the government actively keep maintaining low fuel price low for energy costs prices is a good policy. However, beneficial government policy (rephrased for clarity), I personally contend that artificially suppressing fuel costs may exacerbate environmental issues (rephrased for better flow). Specifically, lower fuel prices can incentivize individuals to drive their personal vehicles instead of utilizing public transportation (clarified the point), as the cost of driving becomes more affordable. Consequently, this increased vehicular usage leads to higher carbon dioxide emissions, contributing to global warming and the depletion of natural resources (added commas for better readability). For example, in my city, prolonged periods of low gas prices have resulted in a noticeable increase in private car usage (rephrased for clarity). Over time, this has led to worsened air quality and increased smog levels (corrected "frog" to "smog"). Thus, I firmly believe that the government should not keep drawbacks of maintaining low fuel prices low is not far outweigh any potential benefits for consumers (rephrased for a good strategy because the low prices contribute to the increase of environment pollution. To be specific, the low prices may lead more people drive cars instead of taking bus and subway since driving doesn't cost too much. Furthermore, more carbon dioxide will be emitted, which caused global warming and shortage of natural resources. For instance, in my city, the gas prices keep low in a long period of time and many people choose driving when they go out. After a period of time, there is more frog in my city and the air is not clean than before. In conclusion, I am convinced that the low fuel price has a disadvantage of the environment.stronger conclusion).

8 思维导图

- 主题: 低油价政策的负面影响
  - 环境问题
    - 增加私家车使用
      - 减少公共交通使用
    - 提高二氧化碳排放
      - 导致全球变暖
      - 耗尽自然资源
  - 城市案例
    - 持续低油价导致私家车增加
    - 恶化空气质量和雾霾水平
  - 结论: 负面影响大于潜在消费者利益

9 关键词