TOEFL TPO 28 Writing Task 1 Sample: Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific points mentioned in the reading passage.

1.Sub Scores

• Task fulfillment: 4

• Organization: 4

• Coherence and Cohesion: 4

• Language Use: 3

2.Estimated Scores

• Estimated Score: 25

3.Task completeness The essay does a good job of summarizing the points made in the lecture and explaining how they challenge the specific points mentioned in the reading passage. However, there is room for improvement in language use, particularly in terms of grammar and sentence structure. To improve task fulfillment, consider refining your language skills and ensuring that your sentences are clear and concise.

Example 1: Original sentence: "However the professor believes the reasons given are not convincing." Improved sentence: "However, the professor argues that the reasons provided are unconvincing."

Example 2: Original sentence: "So, it would be impossible for Peary to make the trip within 37 days." Improved sentence: "Therefore, it seems unlikely that Peary could have completed his journey within 37 days."

4.Essay structure and organization The essay has a clear structure with an introduction, body paragraphs addressing each point from the lecture, and a conclusion. However, some transitions between ideas could be improved to enhance coherence and cohesion. Additionally, consider using topic sentences at the beginning of each body paragraph to clearly state what each paragraph will discuss.

Example 1: Original transition: "Firstly, although the committee investigated..." Improved transition: "Firstly, while it is true that a committee investigated..."

Example 2: Original topic sentence (paragraph two): "Secondly, the reading asserts that Peary could finish his trip..." Improved topic sentence (paragraph two): "Secondly, although the reading suggests that Peary's journey was feasible based on Avery's similar expedition..."

5. Grammar

The reading passage gives three reasons to support the claim that Peary actually reached the North Pole in 1909. HoweverHowever, the professor believes the reasons given are not convincing. Firstly, although the committee investigated the expedition and said it wasdeclared it to be true, it was not objective. The committee were made upfriends of Peary's friendsPeary who funded the expedition, and the time it took to investigate the whole thingmatter was only two days, thus,days. Therefore, it was not a careful investigation and could not substantiate the claim that Peary reached the North Pole. Secondly, the reading asserts that Peary could finish acomplete his trip to the North Pole within 37 days based on a similar trip made by Avery who used a similar dogsled. However, the professor notes that Avery's sled did not carry much weight since the supplies were dropped from an airplane. Besides,Furthermore, the weather condition where Avery did his trip was a lot nicer than Peary's. So,Therefore, it would be impossible for Peary to make the trip within 37 days. Thirdly, the reading contends that sun's position calculated from the shadows in Peary's photograph was the evidence that he made the trip. However, the lecturer points out that the camera used to take the photo was primitiveprimitive, and the photo was not in focus, plusfocus. Additionally, this photo has faded and worn so that it wasworn, making it too blurred to make precise calculation. So we cannot becalculations. Therefore, the professor is not confident with the result.

6. Revised Essay

The reading passage presents three arguments supporting the claim that Peary reached the North Pole in 1909. However, the professor in the lecture contends that these reasons are unconvincing and insufficient.

Firstly, the reading mentions that a committee from the National Geographic Society investigated Peary's expedition and concluded he had reached the North Pole. The professor, however, argues that this investigation was not objective, as the committee members were Peary's friends who had financially supported his journey. Furthermore, the investigation only lasted two days, which casts doubt on its thoroughness and reliability.

Secondly, the passage asserts that Peary's 37-day journey to the North Pole is plausible based on Tom Avery's similar expedition using a comparable dogsled. The lecturer disputes this claim by highlighting significant differences between their journeys: Avery carried less weight on his sled due to aerial food drops and experienced more favorable weather conditions than Peary. These factors make it improbable for Peary to have completed his trip within 37 days.

Lastly, while the reading posits that shadows in Peary's photographs provide evidence of his presence at the North Pole through calculations of the Sun's position, the professor challenges this assertion. He explains that Peary used a primitive camera resulting in unfocused images and notes that these photographs have deteriorated over time. Consequently, it is impossible to accurately measure shadows and determine the Sun's position with confidence.

In light of these counterarguments presented by the professor, it becomes evident that there is insufficient evidence to conclusively prove Peary reached the North Pole in 1909. (259 words)

The reading passage gives presents three arguments supporting the claim that Peary reached the North Pole in 1909. However, the professor in the lecture contends that these reasons to support the claim that Peary actually reached the North Pole in 1909. However the professor believes the reasons given are not convincing. unconvincing and insufficient (changed "believes" to "contends" for a stronger assertion).

Firstly, although the the reading mentions that a committee from the National Geographic Society investigated the Peary's expedition and said it was true, it concluded he had reached the North Pole. The professor, however, argues that this investigation was not objective. The objective (added "not" for clarity), as the committee members were made up of Peary's friends who funded the expedition, and the time it took to investigate the whole thing was had financially supported his journey. Furthermore, the investigation only lasted two days, thus, it was not a careful investigation and could not substantiate the claim that Peary reached the North Pole. which casts doubt on its thoroughness and reliability (rephrased for better flow).

Secondly, the reading passage asserts that Peary's 37-day journey to the North Pole is plausible based on Tom Avery's similar expedition using a comparable dogsled. The lecturer disputes this claim by highlighting significant differences between their journeys: Avery carried less weight on his sled due to aerial food drops and experienced more favorable weather conditions than Peary. These factors make it improbable for Peary could finish a to have completed his trip to the North Pole within 37 days based on a similar trip made by Avery who (rephrased for better flow).

Lastly, while the reading posits that shadows in Peary's photographs provide evidence of his presence at the North Pole through calculations of the Sun's position, the professor challenges this assertion. He explains that Peary used a similar dogsled. However, the professor primitive camera resulting in unfocused images and notes that Avery's sled did not carry much weight since the supplies were dropped from an airplane. Besides, the weather condition where Avery did his trip was a lot nicer than Peary's. So, these photographs have deteriorated over time (rephrased for better flow). Consequently, it would be is impossible for to accurately measure shadows and determine the Sun's position with confidence.

In light of these counterarguments presented by the professor, it becomes evident that there is insufficient evidence to conclusively prove Peary to make the trip within 37 days. ¶ Thirdly, the reading contends that sun's position calculated from the shadows in Peary's photograph was the evidence that he made the trip. However, the lecturer points out that the camera used to take the photo was primitive and the photo was not in focus, plus this photo has faded and worn so that it was too blurred to make precise calculation. So we cannot be confident with the result.reached the North Pole in 1909 (rephrased for better flow).

8. Mind Map

- Introduction
  - Reading passage: Peary reached North Pole in 1909
  - Lecture: Reasons are unconvincing and insufficient

- Argument 1: National Geographic Society investigation
  - Reading: Committee concluded Peary reached North Pole
  - Lecture: Investigation not objective, committee members were friends, only lasted two days

- Argument 2: Plausibility of Peary's 37-day journey
  - Reading: Tom Avery's similar expedition supports claim
  - Lecture: Significant differences between journeys (weight, weather), improbable for Peary to complete trip in time

- Argument 3: Shadows in photographs as evidence
  - Reading: Shadows indicate presence at North Pole through Sun's position calculations
  - Lecture: Primitive camera, unfocused images, deterioration over time, impossible to accurately measure shadows

- Conclusion
  - Insufficient evidence to conclusively prove Peary reached North Pole in 1909

9. Key Words

1.子项得分 任务完成度：4 组织：3 连贯性和衔接：3 语言使用：3

2.预估分数

22. 3.任务完成度

你的文章基本上完成了任务要求，总结了听力中的观点并指出了它们是如何挑战阅读中的观点。但是，你可以更详细地解释听力中的论据，以便更清楚地展示它们是如何反驳阅读文章的。此外，尝试使用更多具体的例子来支持你的观点。

示例1： 原文：“The professor states that this conclusion is bias and without careful examination.” 改进：“The professor argues that the National Geographic Society committee's conclusion is biased and lacks a thorough examination, as it was composed of Peary's close friends who had funded his expedition, and the investigation only lasted for two days.”

示例2： 原文：“To explore deeper, the professor contends that the old photos are faded and blur, by which the sun's position can hardly be calculated.” 改进：“The professor further explains that due to the age and poor quality of Peary's photographs, which are faded and blurry, it is impossible to accurately measure the shadows needed to calculate the Sun's position.”

4.文章结构与组织 文章结构方面有待改进。虽然你有一个简短的介绍和结论，但它们可以更明确地表达主题和文章的目标。此外，在正文段落中，尝试使用更清晰的主题句来引导每个段落的内容，并确保每个段落都集中在一个特定的观点上。同时，使用更多的过渡词和短语来帮助连接段落和观点。

示例1： 原文：“An apparent divide exists between the writer and the professor on the truth of Peary's North Pole travelling.” 改进：“In conclusion, there is a significant disagreement between the writer and the professor regarding the validity of Peary's claim to have reached the North Pole, as the professor effectively challenges each piece of evidence presented in the reading passage.”

示例2： 原文：“As opposed to the writer's idea that the report of the committee can be trustful,…” 改进：“Contrary to the writer's belief in the credibility of the committee's report, the professor presents several reasons why their conclusion may not be reliable. First, he explains that…”

5. 语法批改

Peary's travel to the North Pole is a focus of both the writer and the professor. In the writing, three evidences, including the judgement by a committee of National Geographic Society, a recent expedition and photos taken by Peary have been elabroatedelaborated(misspelling). The professor, however, claims all such evidences are not convincing.

As opposed to the writer's idea that the report of the committee can be trustful, the professor states that this conclusion is bias and without careful examination. In detail, he piontspoints(misspelling) that the members of the committee are Peary's friends and had fundfunded(Agreement: 'have' + past/present tense) his programmeprogram(misspelling), and the examination only last for 2 days, thus the conclusion can not be convincing.

The professor continue to discredit the writing's assertion that a recent expedition can prove the success of Peary's trip, by examingexamine(misspelling) the fact that the way of (Two consecutive spaces)Ellesmere's travelling is quite different with Peary's. Citing the instance of Ellesmere's sitiuationsituation(misspelling), he advances the theory by saying that Ellesmere used airplanean airplane(This rule identifies whether the article 'an' is missing in a sentence.) to bring food which can reduce the weight, and his weather condition was better than Peary's, leading to the fast arrival. As a result, this expedition has no reference value.

It is the professor's third argument that the pohotosphotos(misspelling) can not prove Peary's arrival at the North Pole, which contradicts the view of the writer that the sun's position feflectedreflected(misspelling) by the shadows in the photos can tell the truth. To explore deeper, the professor contends that the old photos are faded and blur, by which the sun's posotionposition(misspelling) can hardly be caculatedcalculated(misspelling).

An apparent divide exists between the writer and the professor on the truth of (Two consecutive spaces)Peary's North Pole travelling.

Section Title: 6.文章修订

The debate surrounding Peary's journey to the North Pole is addressed by both the author and the lecturer. The author presents three pieces of evidence in support of Peary's claim, including a National Geographic Society committee's judgment, a recent expedition, and photographs taken by Peary. However, the lecturer contends that all these pieces of evidence are unconvincing.

Contrary to the author's belief that the committee's report is trustworthy, the lecturer argues that this conclusion is biased and lacks thorough examination. Specifically, he points out that the committee members were Peary's friends who had funded his expedition, and their investigation only lasted for two days. Consequently, their conclusion cannot be deemed reliable.

Furthermore, the lecturer disputes the author's assertion that a recent expedition supports Peary's claim by examining how Ellesmere's journey significantly differed from Peary's. He cites Ellesmere's situation as an example and elaborates on how Ellesmere used airplanes to transport food, reducing sled weight, and experienced better weather conditions than Peary did. As a result, this expedition lacks comparative value.

Lastly, the lecturer challenges the author's view that photographs can confirm Peary's arrival at the North Pole based on shadows revealing the Sun's position. Delving deeper into this argument, he contends that these century-old photos are faded and blurry; thus, accurately calculating the Sun's position becomes nearly impossible.

A clear divide exists between the author and lecturer regarding whether or not Peary truly reached the North Pole. (240 words)

Peary's travel Revised essay: Section Title: 7.文章批改

The debate surrounding Peary's journey to the North Pole is addressed by both the author and the lecturer (change "writer" and "professor" to "author" and "lecturer" for consistency). The author presents three pieces of evidence in support of Peary's claim, including a focus of both the writer and the professor. In the writing, three evidences, including the judgement by a committee of National Geographic Society, Society committee's judgment, a recent expedition, and photographs taken by Peary (rephrase for clarity). However, the lecturer contends that all these pieces of evidence are unconvincing.

Contrary to the author's belief that the committee's report is trustworthy, the lecturer argues that this conclusion is biased and lacks thorough examination (rephrase for clarity). Specifically, he points out that the committee members were Peary's friends who had funded his expedition, and their investigation only lasted for two days (corrected grammar). Consequently, their conclusion cannot be deemed reliable.

Furthermore, the lecturer disputes the author's assertion that a recent expedition and photos taken supports Peary's claim by Peary have been elabroated. The professor, however, claims all such evidences are not convincing. ¶ As opposed to the writer's idea that the report of the committee can be trustful, the professor states that this conclusion is bias and without careful examination. In detail, he pionts that the members of the committee are Peary's friends and had fund his programme, and the examination only last for 2 days, thus the conclusion can not be convincing. ¶ The professor continue to discredit the writing's assertion that a recent expedition can prove the success of Peary's trip, by examing the fact that the way of examining how Ellesmere's travelling is quite different with Peary's. Citing the instance of journey significantly differed from Peary's (rephrase for clarity). He cites Ellesmere's sitiuation, he advances the theory by saying that situation as an example and elaborates on how Ellesmere used airplane airplanes to bring food which can reduce the transport food, reducing sled weight, and his experienced better weather condition was better conditions than Peary's, leading to the fast arrival. Peary did (corrected grammar). As a result, this expedition has no reference lacks comparative value.

It is the professor's third argument that the pohotos Lastly, the lecturer challenges the author's view that photographs can not prove confirm Peary's arrival at the North Pole, which contradicts the view of the writer that the sun's Pole based on shadows revealing the Sun's position feflected by the shadows in the photos can tell the truth. To explore deeper, the professor (rephrase for clarity). Delving deeper into this argument, he contends that the old these century-old photos are faded and blur, by which the sun's posotion can hardly be caculated. ¶ An apparent blurry; thus, accurately calculating the Sun's position becomes nearly impossible (corrected grammar).

A clear divide exists between the writer and the professor on the truth of Peary's author and lecturer regarding whether or not Peary truly reached the North Pole travelling.(rephrased for clarity).

8. Mind Map

- Introduction
  - Debate surrounding Peary's journey to the North Pole
  - Author's support vs. lecturer's skepticism

- Committee's Judgment
  - Author: Trustworthy report from National Geographic Society committee
  - Lecturer: Biased conclusion, members were Peary's friends, insufficient investigation time

- Recent Expedition
  - Author: Supports Peary's claim, similar journey to the North Pole
  - Lecturer: Ellesmere's expedition not comparable, used airplanes and experienced better weather conditions

- Photographs as Evidence
  - Author: Photos confirm Peary's arrival based on Sun's position revealed by shadows
  - Lecturer: Century-old photos are faded and blurry, accurate calculation of Sun's position is impossible 

- Conclusion 
  - Clear divide between author and lecturer regarding Peary's achievement 

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

总体来说，你的文章在回应问题方面做得不错，你概述了听力中提到的观点，并说明了它们是如何挑战阅读材料中的观点。然而，为了更好地完成任务，建议你在引用听力和阅读材料时更加具体。例如，在描述教授对于照片证据的质疑时，可以详细解释为什么影子无法准确测量太阳位置。

示例1： 原文：And the camera cannot focus one thing, so they is not able to use shadow to verify the Sun’s location. 修改后：The camera's inability to focus clearly and the faded nature of the photographs make it impossible to accurately measure the shadows, which are crucial for determining the Sun's position.

示例2： 原文：Also, when Tom go there, the weather is favorable, but when Peary go there, the weather is not. 修改后：Moreover, Avery encountered highly favorable weather conditions during his journey, unlike Peary who faced unfavorable conditions. This difference in weather could have significantly impacted their travel speeds.

4.文章结构与组织 你的文章结构基本上是清晰的，但可以通过改进段落划分和使用过渡词汇来提高组织性。首先，在引入听力和阅读材料的观点时，尝试使用更明确的过渡词汇。其次，将每个主要观点分为单独的段落，以便更清晰地组织内容。

示例1： 原文：However, the professor assert that there are Pearts friends in the committee, and they only use two days to invest, they also didn’t invest carefully, so the result is not persuasive. 修改后：However, the professor asserts that the committee members were Peary's friends and they only spent two days on the investigation. Furthermore, they did not examine his records carefully. As a result, their conclusion is not persuasive.

示例2： 原文：By contrast, the professor maintains that Tom used different ways from Peary... 修改后：In contrast to the reading passage's claim, the professor maintains that Avery's journey differed significantly from Peary's...

5. 语法批改

In the lecture, the professor casts doubt on the reading passage’s idea that there are three strong evidence to support Peary’s claim. The author claims that the evidence presented in the passage is untenable.

Firstly, according to the reading passage, some people made a committee to invest the truth, after that they declare the Peary’s claims isare(Detects potentially wrong usage of "is") real. However, the professor assertasserts(punctuation + singular noun + plural verb) that there are Pearts friends in the committee, and they only use two days to invest, they also didn’t invest carefully, so the result is not persuasive.

Secondly, as can be seen from the reading passage, the British explorer Tom said he useuses(Agreement error: Non-third person/past tense verb with 'he/she/it' or a pronoun) same equipment to reach the North Pole, and he even useuses(Agreement error: Non-third person/past tense verb with 'he/she/it' or a pronoun) less time than Peary. By contrast, the professor maintains that Tom used different ways from Peary, and although they sue similar equipment, his food is taken by airplane, so the slat is lighter than PearysPeary's(misspelling). Also, when Tom go there, the weather is favorable, but when Peary go there, the weather is not. As a result, it is differentis a different(missing article) situation for Peary.

Thirdly, the reading passage indicates that because Peary take photos when he reached the North Pole, so professional people can locate the Sun’s position. And the conclusion is that the Peary’s claims isare(Detects potentially wrong usage of "is") true. Nevertheless, the professor rebuts the reading passage, claiming that the primitive camera is so old, and it is fuzzy to take photos. And the camera cannot focus one thing, so they isare(Detects potentially wrong usage of "is") not able to use shadow to verify the Sun’s location.

Section Title: 6.文章修订

The lecture challenges the reading passage's assertion that there are three strong pieces of evidence supporting Peary's claim to have reached the North Pole. The professor argues that the evidence presented in the passage is not convincing.

Firstly, the reading passage states that a committee was formed to investigate Peary's claims, and they ultimately declared his accounts to be accurate. However, the professor contends that this committee consisted of Peary's friends who had financially supported his expedition. Furthermore, their investigation only lasted two days and was not conducted thoroughly, rendering their conclusion unreliable.

Secondly, the reading passage cites British explorer Tom Avery's successful replication of Peary's journey using similar equipment and even completing it in less time as evidence supporting Peary's claim. In contrast, the professor points out significant differences between their expeditions: Avery had a lighter sled due to air-dropped food supplies and experienced more favorable weather conditions than Peary. These disparities undermine the validity of comparing their journeys as proof for Peary's accomplishment.

Lastly, while the reading passage suggests that photographs taken by Peary at the North Pole can be used by experts to determine the Sun's position and verify his claim, the professor refutes this argument. He explains that Peary used a primitive camera with limited focus capabilities which produced fuzzy images. Additionally, these photos have become faded over time, making it impossible to accurately measure shadows and calculate the Sun's position with certainty.

In conclusion, the professor effectively challenges each piece of evidence presented in the reading passage and casts doubt on whether Robert E. Peary truly reached the North Pole as he claimed. (271 words)

In the lecture, the professor casts doubt on the reading passage’s idea that there are three strong evidence to support Peary’s claim. The author claims that the evidence presented in the passage is untenable.

Firstly, according to the reading passage, some people made a committee to invest invest(igate) the truth, after that they declare declare(d) the Peary’s claims is (as) real. However, the professor assert assert(s) that there are Pearts Pearts(Peary's) friends in the committee, and they only use use(d) two days to invest, invest(igate), they also didn’t invest invest(igate) carefully, so the result is not persuasive.

Secondly, as can be seen from the reading passage, the British explorer Tom said he use use(d) same equipment to reach the North Pole, and he even use use(d) less time than Peary. By contrast, the professor maintains that Tom used different ways from Peary, and although they sue sue(similar equipment, equipment), his food is taken by airplane, so the slat is airplane(delivered via air drop), so (his sled was lighter than Pearys. Peary's). Also, when Tom go go(went) there, the weather is is(was)favorable, but when Peary go go(went) there, the (he faced harsher weather is not. conditions). As a result, it is different situation result,(these differences create distinct situations for Peary. each explorer).

Thirdly, the reading passage indicates that because Peary take take(took) photos when he reached reached(reaching)the North Pole, Pole,(it allowed experts to analyze them for accuracy). so professional people can locate locate(determine if it showed a correct position of )the Sun’s position. And (Thus,)the conclusion is(that )the Peary’s claims(is that the Peary’s claims is true. Nevertheless, true). Nevertheless,(However,)the professor rebuts the reading passage, claiming that rebuts(refutes)this claim , stating that(claiming)(,)the primitive camera is so old, camera(is)(was )so old,(and produced unclear images due to its limited focus capabilities.)and it is is(was)fuzzy to take photos. And the camera cannot focus one thing, so they is thing,(As a result,)so they is(are) not able to use shadow to verify the Sun’s location.

8. Mind Map

9. Keywords

Section Title: 6. Article Revision

The lecture challenges the reading passage's assertion that there are three strong pieces of evidence supporting Peary's claim to have reached the North Pole. The professor argues that the evidence presented in the passage is not convincing.

Firstly, the reading passage states that a committee was formed to investigate Peary's claims, and they ultimately declared his accounts to be accurate. However, the professor contends that this committee consisted of Peary's friends who had financially supported his expedition. Furthermore, their investigation only lasted two days and was not conducted thoroughly, rendering their conclusion unreliable.

Secondly, the reading passage cites British explorer Tom Avery's successful replication of Peary's journey using similar equipment and even completing it in less time as evidence supporting Peary's claim. In contrast, the professor points out significant differences between their expeditions: Avery had a lighter sled due to air-dropped food supplies and experienced more favorable weather conditions than Peary. These disparities undermine the validity of comparing their journeys as proof for Peary's accomplishment.

Lastly, while the reading passage suggests that photographs taken by Peary at the North Pole can be used by experts to determine the Sun's position and verify his claim, the professor refutes this argument. He explains that Peary used a primitive camera with limited focus capabilities which produced fuzzy images. Additionally, these photos have become faded over time, making it impossible to accurately measure shadows and calculate the Sun's position with certainty.

In conclusion, the professor effectively challenges each piece of evidence presented in the reading passage and casts doubt on whether Robert E. Peary truly reached the North Pole as he claimed.