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 Task fulfillment: 4 Organization: 3 Coherence and Cohesion: 3 Language Use: 3

2.预估分数 Estimated Score: 22

3.任务完成度 从任务完成度的角度来看，文章基本上回答了问题，总结了听力中的观点，并解释了它们是如何挑战阅读材料中的论点的。但是，文章在解释听力观点时缺乏详细性和准确性。为了提高任务完成度，你需要更仔细地听取讲座中的信息，并在你的文章中提供更详细、准确的解释。

Example 1: Instead of "the airships usually stay at 40 kilometers height over the surface of the earth," write "the types of airships currently in use can only rise to heights of about 14 kilometers above the surface."

Example 2: Instead of "How to balance the safety and easy the gas energy for airship is still a question under adressed," write "Finding a truly economical solution for lifting gases, one that balances safety and cost, is not an easy matter."

4.文章结构与组织 The essay has a basic structure with an introduction, body, and conclusion. However, it could be improved in terms of organization and coherence. To enhance the organization, make sure each paragraph focuses on one specific point from the lecture and directly challenges a point from the reading passage. Also, use clear transitions between ideas and paragraphs to improve coherence.

Example 1: In your first paragraph, focus on discussing only one challenge to the reading passage's argument about fuel efficiency. Begin the paragraph with a clear topic sentence, such as "The lecturer challenges the claim that airships are more fuel-efficient by discussing the difficulties in finding an economical and safe lifting gas."

Example 2: Improve coherence by using clear transitions between ideas. For example, instead of "However, the lecturer argues that the choice of gas energy for airships is a question," write "However, the lecturer counters this argument by pointing out the challenges in finding an economical and safe lifting gas for airships."

5. 语法批改

The passage suggest that airshipsuggests that airships would be widely used in the future considering itstheir benefits over helicopteorshelicopters and airplanes. However, the lecturer refutes the passage and points out all theories in the passagespassage are not reasonable. Firstly, the article thinks airships use less energy than helicoptorshelicopters or airplanes, because they lift by balloon and move back orand forth by engineengine, while helicoptorshelicopters or airplaneairplanes all depend on engine energy. However, the lecturer argues that the choice of gas energy for airships is a question. The common choicechoices are hydrogon and heliom,hydrogen and helium; the former is dangerous by causingbecause it causes accidents, laterand the latter is difficult to abtainobtain and expensive. How to balance the safety and easy theease of gas energy for airshipairships is still a question under adressed addressed. Secondly, the article suggests that the airships can reach places hard to reach since they do not need long way to take off. The professor in the lesteninglistening material disagrees with this point because the balloon is difficult to control. Imagine such a situation, people use the airships to transport loglogs to the forests and moving the logmove the logs off. How to keep the airship steady during the unloading process if there is strong wind to blow the huge ballon.balloon. It is dangerous if we can't keep the airship steady enough. Thirdly, according to the passage, the airshipairships would replace satellites someday due to itstheir ability to stay long time in the sky with little fuels, they arefuel, which makes them much cheaper. Nevertheless, the lecturer argues that the airships usually stay at 40 kilometers height over the surface of the earth, and there are always strong windwinds there. Therefore, the airships need more energy to keep themself stay in thethemselves in a certain position to support telecommunication functionfunctions for certain covering places. As a result, people need sentto send fuel to support the airshipairship, which will be much expensive.

Section Title: 6.文章修订

The passage suggests that airships could be widely used in the future due to their advantages over helicopters and airplanes. However, the lecturer refutes these claims and highlights several issues that challenge the arguments presented in the reading.

Firstly, the article posits that airships are more energy-efficient than helicopters or airplanes, as they rely on a balloon for lift and an engine solely for horizontal movement. In contrast, the lecturer contends that selecting an appropriate lifting gas for airships remains problematic. The two common choices are hydrogen and helium; however, hydrogen is highly flammable and has caused numerous accidents, while helium is scarce and expensive. Balancing safety and cost concerns for lifting gases is still an unresolved issue.

Secondly, the passage asserts that airships can access hard-to-reach locations since they do not require lengthy runways for takeoff or landing. The professor in the listening material disputes this point, emphasizing that controlling an airship's balloon can be challenging. For instance, when using airships to transport logs from forests, maintaining stability during loading or unloading processes becomes difficult if strong winds are present. Failing to keep the airship steady could result in dangerous situations.

Lastly, according to the passage, airships may eventually replace satellites due to their ability to remain airborne for extended periods with minimal fuel consumption at a lower cost. Nevertheless, the lecturer argues that airships typically operate at altitudes of around 40 kilometers above Earth's surface where strong winds prevail. Consequently, maintaining a fixed position to support telecommunications functions requires additional energy consumption. This necessitates frequent refueling which ultimately increases operational expenses.

In summary, despite potential advantages of airships mentioned in the reading passage, the lecturer presents compelling counterarguments that challenge their feasibility as a widespread mode of transportation or satellite replacement in the future. (299 words)

The passage suggest that airship would suggests that airships could be widely used in the future considering due to their advantages over helicopters and airplanes (changed "considering its benefits over helicopteors and airplanes. benefits" to "due to their advantages" for better clarity and flow). However, the lecturer refutes the passage and points out all theories in the passages are not reasonable. these claims and highlights several issues that challenge the arguments presented in the reading (rephrased for clarity).

Firstly, the article thinks airships use less energy posits that airships are more energy-efficient than helicoptors helicopters or airplanes, because as they rely on a balloon for lift by balloon and move back or forth by and an engine solely for horizontal movement (rephrased for clarity). In contrast, the lecturer contends that selecting an appropriate lifting gas for airships remains problematic (changed "is a question" to "remains problematic" for better expression). The two common choices are hydrogen and helium; however, hydrogen is highly flammable and has caused numerous accidents, while helicoptors or airplane all depend on engine energy. However, the lecturer argues that the choice of gas energy for airships helium is a question. The common choice are hydrogon and heliom, former is dangerous by causing accidents, later is difficult to abtain scarce and expensive. How to balance the Balancing safety and easy the gas energy for airship cost concerns for lifting gases is still a question under adressed an unresolved issue (rephrased for better flow).

Secondly, the article suggests that the passage asserts that airships can reach places hard to reach access hard-to-reach locations since they do not need long way to take off. require lengthy runways for takeoff or landing (rephrased for clarity). The professor in the lestening listening material disagrees with disputes this point because the point, emphasizing that controlling an airship's balloon is can be challenging (rephrased to improve expression). For instance, when using airships to transport logs from forests, maintaining stability during loading or unloading processes becomes difficult to control. Imagine such a situation, people use the airships to transport log to the forests and moving the log off. How if strong winds are present. Failing to keep the airship steady during the unloading process if there is strong wind to blow the huge ballon. It is could result in dangerous if we can't keep the airship steady enough. situations (rephrased for better flow).

Thirdly, Lastly, according to the passage, the airship would airships may eventually replace satellites someday due to its their ability to stay long time in the sky remain airborne for extended periods with little fuels, they are much cheaper. minimal fuel consumption at a lower cost (rephrased for clarity). Nevertheless, the lecturer argues that the airships usually stay airships typically operate at altitudes of around 40 kilometers height over the above Earth's surface where strong winds prevail. Consequently, maintaining a fixed position to support telecommunications functions requires additional energy consumption (rephrased for better expression). This necessitates frequent refueling which ultimately increases operational expenses (rephrased for better flow).

In summary, despite potential advantages of the earth, and there are always strong wind there. Therefore, the airships need more energy to keep themself stay in the certain position to support telecommunication function for certain covering places. As a result, people need sent fuel to support the airship which will be much expensive.airships mentioned in the reading passage, the lecturer presents compelling counterarguments that challenge their feasibility as a widespread mode of transportation or satellite replacement in the future (rephrased for clarity and better expression).

8. Mind Map

- Introduction
  - Airships' potential future use
  - Advantages over helicopters and airplanes

- Energy Efficiency
  - Reading: Airships more efficient than helicopters/airplanes
  - Lecture: Lifting gas issue (hydrogen vs. helium)

- Access to Remote Locations
  - Reading: No need for runways, can reach difficult areas
  - Lecture: Balloon control challenges, stability issues in strong winds

- Satellite Replacement
  - Reading: Longer airborne time, minimal fuel consumption, lower cost
  - Lecture: High altitude wind issues, additional energy consumption, increased operational expenses

- Conclusion
  - Lecturer's counterarguments challenge airships' feasibility as widespread transportation or satellite replacement 

9. Keywords