TOEFL TPO 60 Writing Task 1 Sample: Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific theories mentions in the reading passage.

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

你的文章基本上完成了任务要求，但是在对听力部分的总结方面还有待提高。建议你更详细地阐述听力中的观点，并解释这些观点是如何对阅读中的理论产生质疑的。此外，注意避免重复提及阅读材料中的信息。

例1： 原文：Furthermore, the reading passage asserts that we should educate consumers about the function of Keratin. Contrary to this assertion, the professor thinks that this kind of idea is too ancient. 改进：Furthermore, the reading passage asserts that we should educate consumers about the function of Keratin. However, the professor argues that educating consumers is unlikely to be effective due to their strong cultural beliefs and ancient traditions regarding the healing powers of rhino horn.

例2： 原文：Lastly, despite the reading passage condemns that government should legalize their sales of rhino horn, the professor holds an opposing ideas. 改进：Lastly, although the reading passage suggests legalizing government sales of rhino horn as a solution, the professor opposes this idea by explaining its potential negative consequences.

4.文章结构与组织 文章的结构需要改进。虽然你包括了引言、正文和结论，但是正文部分缺乏清晰的段落划分。建议将每个观点单独成段，并使用恰当的过渡词来衔接段落。此外，注意在引言和结论中避免重复提及阅读材料中的信息。

例1： 原文：To begin with, although the reading passage states that we could dehorn the rhinoceros to make them less attractive, the professor disproves it. 改进：Firstly, the professor challenges the idea of dehorning rhinos as a solution to protect them from poachers.

例2： 原文：In conclusion, through the arguments against each ideas presented in the reading passage, the professor highlights their weaknesses and casts doubt on the validity of the three ideas. 改进：In conclusion, the lecture effectively casts doubt on each of the proposed solutions in the reading passage by presenting counterarguments and highlighting their weaknesses.

5. 语法批改

The reading passage presents (Two consecutive spaces)three ideas to explain the measures to save rhinoceros. However, the professor in the lectures challenges each of the idea by specific point.

To begin with, although the reading passage states that we could dehorn the rhinoceros to make them less attractive, the professor disproves it. Firstly, it will cost a lot of time and money to find them in the wild, prepare the drugs and remove the horn. What’s more, it will also reduce the chances frofor(fro (for)) rhinoceros to survive in the wild. They need horns to dig water, find food and guide predators. If we remove their horns, they are not likely to survive.

Furthermore, the reading passage asserts that we should educate consumers about the function of Keratin. Contrary to this assertion, the professor thinks that this kind of idea is too ancient. What’s more, if there are some old people stronlystrongly(misspelling) believe this idea, it is not easy to change their mind.

Lastly, despite the reading passage condemns that government should legalize their sales of rhino horn, the professor holds an opposing ideasan opposing idea(Agreement: 'a' + plural word). That is because currently, people who don’t buy horns due to it is illegal. However, if government makes buying horns acceptable, people will start to buy them and the demand offor(This rule identifies wrong preposition usage.) horns will increase dramatically. As a result, the priseprice(the + verb) of horns will be higher and attract more poachers to kill rhinoceros consistently because government makes the marker larger and more lucrative.

In conclusion, through the arguments against each ideasall ideas('each' or 'every' with plural nouns) presented in the reading passage, the professor highlights their weaknesses and casts doubt on the validity of the three ideas.

Section Title: 6.文章修订

The reading passage presents three ideas to explain the measures to save rhinoceroses. However, the professor in the lecture challenges each of these ideas with specific points.

To begin with, although the reading passage states that we could dehorn rhinoceroses to make them less attractive to poachers, the professor disputes this claim. Firstly, it would require a significant amount of time and money to locate them in the wild, prepare the necessary drugs, and remove their horns. Moreover, dehorning would reduce the chances of rhinoceroses surviving in the wild. They need their horns for various purposes such as digging for water, finding food, and protecting themselves from predators. Removing their horns would likely hinder their ability to survive.

Furthermore, the reading passage asserts that we should educate consumers about the function of keratin found in rhino horns. Contrary to this assertion, the professor believes that changing people's ancient beliefs about rhino horn's healing powers is challenging. Educating consumers works best when they do not already have strong preconceived notions about something. However, when consumers hold deeply ingrained beliefs based on centuries-old traditions, new scientific evidence is unlikely to easily change their minds.

Lastly, despite the reading passage suggesting that governments should legalize sales of rhino horn, the professor holds an opposing view. This is because currently, many people who might want rhino horn do not buy it due to its illegality. If governments were to make buying horns acceptable by legalizing sales, demand for horns could increase dramatically. Consequently, prices would rise and attract more poachers who would continue killing rhinoceroses because government sales might create a larger and more lucrative market.

Through these counterarguments against each idea presented in the reading passage, the professor highlights their weaknesses and casts doubt on the validity of all three proposals. (301 words)

Revised essay: The reading passage presents presents three ideas to explain the measures to save rhinoceros. rhinoceroses. However, the professor in the lectures lecture challenges each of the idea by these ideas with specific point. points (Changed "idea" to "ideas" and "point" to "points" for grammatical accuracy).

To begin with, although the reading passage states that we could dehorn the rhinoceros rhinoceroses to make them less attractive, attractive to poachers, the professor disproves it. disputes this claim (Changed "disproves it" to "disputes this claim" for a more accurate description). Firstly, it will cost would require a lot significant amount of time and money to find locate them in the wild, prepare the drugs necessary drugs, and remove the horn. What’s more, it will also their horns. Moreover, dehorning would reduce the chances fro rhinoceros to survive of rhinoceroses surviving in the wild. They need their horns to dig for various purposes such as digging for water, find food and guide finding food, and protecting themselves from predators. If we remove their horns, they are not Removing their horns would likely to survive. hinder their ability to survive (Clarified that removing horns would hinder survival).

Furthermore, the reading passage asserts that we should educate consumers about the function of Keratin. keratin found in rhino horns. Contrary to this assertion, the professor thinks believes that this changing people's ancient beliefs about rhino horn's healing powers is challenging (Changed "this kind of idea is too ancient. What’s more, if there are some old people stronly believe this idea, it ancient" to better convey what is challenging). Educating consumers works best when they do not easy to already have strong preconceived notions about something. However, when consumers hold deeply ingrained beliefs based on centuries-old traditions, new scientific evidence is unlikely to easily change their mind. minds (Clarified why changing minds might be difficult).

Lastly, despite the reading passage condemns suggesting that government governments should legalize their sales of rhino horn, the professor holds an opposing ideas. That view (Changed "condemns" to "suggesting" for clarity). This is because currently, many people who don’t might want rhino horn do not buy horns it due to it is illegal. However, if government makes its illegality. If governments were to make buying horns acceptable, people will start to buy them and the acceptable by legalizing sales, demand of for horns will could increase dramatically. As a result, the prise of horns will be higher Consequently, prices would rise and attract more poachers to kill rhinoceros consistently who would continue killing rhinoceroses because government makes the marker sales might create a larger and more lucrative. lucrative market (Clarified the potential consequences of legalizing sales).

In conclusion, through the arguments Through these counterarguments against each ideas idea presented in the reading passage, the professor highlights their weaknesses and casts doubt on the validity of the all three ideas.proposals (Changed "ideas" to "proposals" for better word choice).

8. Mind Map

1. Introduction
   - Reading passage ideas
   - Professor's challenge

2. Dehorning Rhinoceroses
   - Time and money required
   - Reduced survival chances

3. Educating Consumers
   - Difficulty in changing ancient beliefs
   - Ineffectiveness with strong preconceived notions

4. Legalizing Rhino Horn Sales
   - Increased demand and prices
   - Attracting more poachers

5. Conclusion
   - Counterarguments against reading passage ideas

9. Keywords

Section Title: 6. Article Revision

The reading passage presents three ideas to explain the measures to save rhinoceroses. However, the professor in the lecture challenges each of these ideas with specific points.

To begin with, although the reading passage states that we could dehorn rhinoceroses to make them less attractive to poachers, the professor disputes this claim. Firstly, it would require a significant amount of time and money to locate them in the wild, prepare the necessary drugs, and remove their horns. Moreover, dehorning would reduce the chances of rhinoceroses surviving in the wild. They need their horns for various purposes such as digging for water, finding food, and protecting themselves from predators. Removing their horns would likely hinder their ability to survive.

Furthermore, the reading passage asserts that we should educate consumers about the function of keratin found in rhino horns. Contrary to this assertion, the professor believes that changing people's ancient beliefs about rhino horn's healing powers is challenging. Educating consumers works best when they do not already have strong preconceived notions about something. However, when consumers hold deeply ingrained beliefs based on centuries-old traditions, new scientific evidence is unlikely to easily change their minds.

Lastly, despite the reading passage suggesting that governments should legalize sales of rhino horn, the professor holds an opposing view. This is because currently, many people who might want rhino horn do not buy it due to its illegality. If governments were to make buying horns acceptable by legalizing sales, demand for horns could increase dramatically. Consequently, prices would rise and attract more poachers who would continue killing rhinoceroses because government sales might create a larger and more lucrative market.

Through these counterarguments against each idea presented in the reading passage, the professor highlights their weaknesses and casts doubt on the validity of all three proposals.