Maggie‘s daily writing

PsMaggieUID：2861847

2.12独立
Do you agree with the following statement? Children should play sports only for fun, and should not attend competitions and contests.

It always catches parents or educators’ concerns that for what kind of intentions they choose an activity for children. For example parents take kids to attend piano classes to culture their perceptions of music, give kids pastels to let them catch the feelings of color. And sports play an significant role in this case. As children plays sports in their daily lives it can’t be ignored to think about the intentions of doing sports. Some emphasize that children should play sports just for fun and no competitions and contests for them. There is probably some truth to this argument, but I take opposite opinion which as far as I concerned, competitions and contests are truly important for children.

First, it should be noticed that sports without other playmates would hardly for children to accept. Companions make activities more fun and children need a growing-up environment full of companions. Just as it is a normal thing to see a group of kids playing football game but it is rare to see one child take a long-distance running as an outdoor sport. When there are people, there are competitions, it is competition that make sports more attractive and fun. For instance, image there are two groups of children playing football, since the opposing sides exist, competition cannot be avoided because a natural impulse of winning that the children all have. Thus scramble, sweat and whoop begin and all above bring exciting emotion. Higher scores make winning team excited, lower scores make losing team swear to fight back and what is the result is the next time of football game is decided. So if grown-ups don’t allow children attend sports with the factor of competition, I’m afraid it would induce a consequence that children no longer love sports.

Second, it would contribute children’s success in their futures to let them know what is failure and how to deal with failure. The earlier children face the failure----no matter big or small----the earlier they would get sober when failure happens again. When time comes they would appreciate their parents has already let them experience it. What’s more, it is widely known that the youngs are gaining more and more pressures, some of those pressures are brought by losing in daily lives. And as we all know that sooner or later these children have to integrate into the community, it would never be late to teach them how to survive under pressure. So it is a good and more accepted way to culture children the sense of failure through sports contests. In the long run, they would not being nerves, losing themselves in front of failure and would perform better in their stressed lives.

Some may argue that it would bring bad effects to let children be in touch with competitions so early, such as they may develop an ill attitude of treating matches or they may overplay the situation between winning and losing. However, winning is not the most vital thing in sports. The most significant thing children should learn is how to be with their companions and what kind of attitude they should hold to treat their competitors. There is no better way for one child to understand friendship than the way of putting them fighting for the same goal with his or her teammates. They work each other, help each other, laugh together and cry together and in the end they know what makes a friend and how to treasure friends. On the other hand, they would also see the efforts the other team has made which would let them know that they should respect their competitors as well because everyone tries their best to approach their goals.

bibby00888UID：2908529

In the lecture, the professor actually contradicts the statement made in the reading passage. She believes that dinosaurs are not endotherms i.e. they can't keep their bodies' temperature in a constant way.4 n/ S9 \6 Q2 n, a( r(感觉这句话是里面的一个分论点，在第一段出现有些不妥）: m& }5 J2 X4 T; r  qFirst, the professor points out that where polar dinosaurs fossils have been found, were so much warmer than today that could support not-endotherms animals to live. Thus the uncorrected evidence provides in reading passage cannot prove dinosaurs were endotherms.（还有一个点是，即使是极地寒冬恐龙也能迁徙到温暖的地方，很重要哦4 r# _- W/ G$ B, L+ R5 f4 Q" O- U7 H1 A3 \/ ]- D, v; x' T
Second, the professor cast doubt on the reason of the placement of dinosaurs' legs. She provides another explanation for having legs under the body that dinosaurs need their legs under their bodies to supports more weight in order to grow to a very large size.
$ q* G7 w/ [! ^5 Z, ~8 V) r$ q  Q5 t* X
What's more, talk about bone structure, the professor tells us another thing----gross（应该叫Growth rings吧！和生长有关哦！） rings---- existed in dinosaurs' bones which haven't been mentioned in reading passage. Gross rings, according to the professor, indicate periods of time when dinosaurs weren't rapidly growing. These gross rings are evidence that dinosaurs stop growing or grow more slowly during cooler periods. Because growth and then rapid growth again is characteristic of not-endotherms animals, and dinosaurs acted the opposite way, dinosaurs were not endotherms加强踩点！加油。。。。嘿嘿

ilovevickyUID：2937658

33# PsMaggie

2/23的改好咯，一起进步，加油~~~~

PsMaggieUID：2861847

谢谢angie和笑会计~！

笑会计UID：2872606

不好意思晚了
In terms of whether Rembrandt painted Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet, the reading and the listening are contradictory to each other.2 z2 I' Z( ~6 y% I% n- I

7 O( L$ l; O- I+ o1 d% fFirst, the professor in listening passage reveals that the fur color mentioned in reading passage isn't the part of the original painting. X-ray and pigments in the paint's analysis shown that the fur color was painted over the original painting about 100 years after. She presumes that is because people want to increase the value of the painting.2 c: p6 `) B/ r# v

# V; X1 r* `: y" }5 v& C; ~
Second, the professor points out that in the original painting which can be seen after added fur color removed, the face appears partially in shadow just as what people expect. The woman in original painting is wearing a simple color of lighted colored cloth which reflects light that illuminated parts of the woman's face.（可以加一句与原文对比的句子）. I/ U6 |: |; z3 g& G6 W

0 B1 x9 C% X3 v% I
Finally, the professor gives another truth（感觉用truth不是很贴切，fact比较好） which is also found after the fur color removed that the original paintings actually painted on the single piece of wood. People who enlarged the painting's size and tap with extra wood pieces glued may be desire to make the painting more grand and valuable. She also adds a proof that researchers have found that piece wood of the original paintings is from the very tree. Rembrandt has used the wood panel for another painting----his self-portrait---- from this same tree.

PsMaggieUID：2861847

2.23 综合  TPO4
In the lecture, the professor actually contradicts the statement made in the reading passage. She believes that dinosaurs are not endotherms i.e. they can't keep their bodies' temperature in a constant way.

First, the professor points out that where polar dinosaurs fossils have been found, were so much warmer than today that could support not-endotherms animals to live. Thus the uncorrected evidence provides in reading passage cannot prove dinosaurs were endotherms.

Second, the professor cast doubt on the reason of the placement of dinosaurs' legs. She provides another explanation for having legs under the body that dinosaurs need their legs under their bodies to supports more weight in order to grow to a very large size.

What's more, talk about bone structure, the professor tells us another thing----gross rings---- existed in dinosaurs' bones which haven't been mentioned in reading passage. Gross rings, according to the professor, indicate periods of time when dinosaurs weren't rapidly growing. These gross rings are evidence that dinosaurs stop growing or grow more slowly during cooler periods. Because growth and then rapid growth again is characteristic of not-endotherms animals, and dinosaurs acted the opposite way, dinosaurs were not endotherms.

PsMaggieUID：2861847

2.23 独立
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Students are more influenced from their teacher rather than their friends.

Nowadays, many people are wild about education problems. One of the hottest questions under debate is whether students are more influenced from their teacher rather than their friends or not. Some people hold the approval issue because they convince that students attending school is to get educated and teachers are full of life experiences. But I disagree with that. In my opinion, students are more influenced from their friends because of the following reasons.

First, see from the hours students spend with teachers, it is obviously that students spend more time with their friends than their teachers. In students daily lives, ordinarily they only meet their teachers in class. However, they can meet their friends both in and after class. For example, when I was in middle school, I spent 7 hours in class. But I continued hung around with my friends after class even include weekends. We studied together and shared our own ideas in order to acquire more information. In my experiences it seems that the influences from teachers are limited.

Second, for most of time the communications between teachers and students are monodirectional while between students and their friends are bidirectional. It is very seldom that a student would talk to his teacher as much as his teacher talks to him. In the conversation between teachers and students, students would just to receive but not to exchange. Thus the effects generating under this situation are not so effective since students would get tired of listening. But it would act opposite while communicating with their friends. They would talk to each other, transport their ideas to each other and do motions to each other. As a result, the influences among them double and go deep.

Somebody may argue that it can’t be ignored that there many good teachers who have endeavored to exercise influence on their students. Commonly their approach is to have the students who always get low grade talk in his office. However it doesn’t seem that influential on occasion that teachers don’t really understand their students’ thoughts and why problems come out. This function works, but influence from friends gets better.

So, I believe that students are more influenced from their friends who have similar perspective on life than from their teacher who have less time spending with them and don’t usually listen but just talk.

hdchangieUID：2402936

2.22独立
7 r9 `) k7 W/ J) f2 c: M: ADo you agree or disagree with the following statement? Nowadays, it is not important for families to eat meals together regularly.%
& n' K0 q1 @" `4 j( P& j: n( l; R9 A
& y2 S$ S. a0 h; V% `Some people declaim such as they are busy with their career development, they have no time or they are already independent adults that don’t need to eat with their parents loudly, I strongly disagree with them. Even though busy lifestyle make it difficult, eating together as a family is still very important and families who eat meals together benefit in a variety of ways.3 }; d( g" |" y: d- K- S, {2 i
& {- t/ L( ?2 s( ?: `$ P# K
First and foremost, eating dinner together as a family provides ample opportunities for communication. Mealtimes will create more chances for open discussions, and encourage all members to participate. Through this soft way, children, teenagers even adults would develop their ability of communicating in society by occasion that they have already trained a lot in the dinner table. By avoiding topic that might cause conflicts and allowing all family members express his or her ideas, people can find a good way to talk openly and get along with each other well. Finally, people especially children, learn to know how to behavior and communicate with their friends and colleagues. Thus family meals help provide a regular, consistent opportunity to create a shared experience which is meaningful and offers a sense of belonging to all.
) m  n) O* D2 K  F/ b+ f7 C; i1 F+ e
Second, eating together as a family is also a great way of easing their minds of spending a whole day. Family members share their days in the dinner table can spread their happiness to another（others） or eliminate their unhappy minds through speaking out. For someone like me, I sometimes spend a hard day during daytime, for example being scolded by teachers, I would like to talk to my parents in meals time because my parents would comfort me and we would figure out a better way of improving my school acting（performance）. What’s more, many will recall this time as some of their most cherished memories because people would leave plenty of laughs and sweet stories in dinner tables.
0 F1 n+ |! @. f  g5 c8 r# _, ^; m/ a* b1 y
What’s more（建议换个表达方式，与上段最后重复了）, eating meals together helps people improve nutrition especially children. Numerous studies have overwhelmingly point to the fact that families who eat together have better overall nutrition, on the ground that the people who always takes charge of preparing meals knows to consume more fruits and vegetables and fewer snack foods. For teenagers, not only have studies found that teenagers who have dinner with their families get better grades at school, but also they are less likely to get involved with negative behaviors like drinking alcohol, taking drugs or smoking. For young people who just get access to society, they would choose to eat in fast-food restaurants if they have meals single which is definitely have much less nutritious （nutrition） than having dinner with their families.
1 X) [1 r5 w! {" P# T3 L2 {3 m8 q  F2 U7 {: |1 A/ U; |9 ]
In sum, there is no doubt that it is important for families to eat meals together regularly for eating together helps families achieve better communication and build stronger relationship, children perform better at school, adult act better in community and the whole family members enjoy better nutritious meals.感觉三个better有点重复，最好能改变一下说法。

整体语言和思路都不错，字数很足哈~

PsMaggieUID：2861847

2.22独立
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Nowadays, it is not important for families to eat meals together regularly.%

Some people declaim such as they are busy with their career development, they have no time or they are already independent adults that don’t need to eat with their parents loudly, I strongly disagree with them. Even though busy lifestyle make it difficult, eating together as a family is still very important and families who eat meals together benefit in a variety of ways.

First and foremost, eating dinner together as a family provides ample opportunities for communication. Mealtimes will create more chances for open discussions, and encourage all members to participate. Through this soft way, children, teenagers even adults would develop their ability of communicating in society by occasion that they have already trained a lot in the dinner table. By avoid topic that might cause conflicts and allowing all family members express his or her ideas, people can find a good way to talk openly and get along with each other well. Finally, people especially children, learn to know how to behavior and communicate with their friends and colleagues. Thus family meals help provide a regular, consistent opportunity to create a shared experience which is meaningful and offers a sense of belonging to all.

Second, eating together as a family is also a great way of easing their minds of spending a whole day. Family members share their days in the dinner table can spread their happiness to another or eliminate their unhappy minds through speaking out. For someone like me, I sometimes spend a hard day during daytime, for example being scolded by teachers, I would like to talk to my parents in meals time because my parents would comfort me and we would figure out a better way of improving my school acting. What’s more, many will recall this time as some of their most cherished memories because people would leave plenty of laughs and sweet stories in dinner tables.

What’s more, eating meals together helps people improve nutrition especially children. Numerous studies have overwhelmingly point to the fact that families who eat together have better overall nutrition, on the ground that the people who always takes charge of preparing meals knows to consume more fruits and vegetables and fewer snack foods. For teenagers, not only have studies found that teenagers who have dinner with their families get better grades at school, but also they are less likely to get involved with negative behaviors like drinking alcohol, taking drugs or smoking. For young people who just access to society, they would choose to eat in fast-food restaurants if they have meals single which is definitely have much less nutritious than having dinner with their families.

In sum, there is no doubt that it is important for families to eat meals together regularly for eating together helps families achieve better communication and build stronger relationship, children perform better at school, adult act better in community and the whole family members enjoy better nutritious meals.

PsMaggieUID：2861847

2.22 综合  TPO3
In terms of whether Rembrandt painted Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet, the reading and the listening are contradictory to each other.

First, the professor in listening passage reveals that the fur color mentioned in reading passage isn't the part of the original painting. X-ray and pigments in the paint's analysis shown that the fur color was painted over the original painting about 100 years after. She presumes that is because people want to increase the value of the painting.

Second, the professor points out that in the original painting which can be seen after added fur color removed, the face appears partially in shadow just as what people expect. The woman in original painting is wearing a simple color of lighted colored cloth which reflects light that illuminated parts of the woman's face.

Finally, the professor gives another truth which is also found after the fur color removed that the original paintings actually painted on the single piece of wood. People who enlarged the painting's size and tap with extra wood pieces glued may be desire to make the painting more grand and valuable. She also adds a proof that researchers have found that piece wood of the original paintings is from the very tree. Rembrandt has used the wood panel for another painting----his self-portrait---- from this same tree.

sun3mayUID：2574771

2.21独立

改好了。请查收~

beangtUID：2691375

2.21综合  TPO2 Bean修改5 k; m" H
In the lecture, the professor refuses to support the statements made in reading passage. He believes that the disadvantages of approaching projects by team work outweigh the advantages. And he made his points by citing an example of one company.( A; m- `* L0 D4 C

& S" J, ]  @9 OThe company introduced by the professor, constituted a working team to accomplish a project and made them record their process of planning and getting done the work. While six months later, the company checked the team's performance, it turns out an opposite result as illustrated in reading passage.
# {6 w3 B  F8 y5 f/ e. a9 D% w# g: j6 m* X2 p
First, the professor tells that every team members didn't contribute much in the projects while all of them got the benefit when a whole team did a good job, no rewarding distinction among those who have contributed more and less. And also, those hard-working members couldn't have their names appeared in public.
+ P1 L# J- w4 W  g' S. G1 m1 D& S# P# f7 q4 X2 Q5 H
Second, questions of the time group spend (the time a group spend on debating questions) and contradictions within the team are numerated by the professor, too. By occasion that plenty of different opinions exiting in one team and everyone held his/hers, before they reached an agreement, they’ve already wasted (a) large (amount of) time. Even sometimes the compromise couldn’t be met because some members directed refused to take it. What’s more, the influencers in the group may be ignored by others when they (are) convinced that their ideas would be creative or tried to stop the group from going wrong. And finally, as the professor concludes, all members were blamed after the projects failed.

恩，写的很好，除了一些小错误。我觉得这篇综合写作本身的那个听力和阅读就有点乱，然后我写的就特别乱~

PsMaggieUID：2861847

2.21综合  TPO2
In the lecture, the professor refuses to support the statements made in reading passage. He believes that the disadvantages of approaching projects by team work outweigh the advantages. And he made his points by citing an example of one company.

The company introduced by the professor, constituted a working team to accomplish a project and made them record their process of planning and getting done the work. While six months later, the company checked the team's performance, it turns out an opposite result as illustrated in reading passage.

First, the professor tells that every team members didn't contribute much in the projects while all of them got the benefit when a whole team did a good job, no rewarding distinction among those who have contributed more and less. And also, those hard-working members couldn't have their names appeared in public.

Second, questions of the time group spend and contradictions within the team are numerated by the professor too. By occasion that plenty of different opinions exiting in one team and everyone held his/hers, before they reached an agreement, they’ve already wasted large time. Even sometimes the compromise couldn’t be met because some members directed refused to take it. What’s more, the influencers in the group may be ignored by others when they convinced that their ideas would be creative or tried to stop the group from going wrong. And finally, as the professor concludes, all members were blamed after the projects failed.

PsMaggieUID：2861847

2.21  独立
Movies and televisions should always show audience good people being rewarded and bad people being punished

When we watch a movie or television, there are always some good people and bad people in it. Most of us always want and the good people be rewarded and the bad people be punished and declare it. However, as far as I concerned, good or bad is a really subjective judgement, and movies and television are not so simple things as art forms.

First and foremost, there is no absolute standard to distinguish good or bad. I can back u this point with my personal experiences. My mother once told me a movie story about the War of Resistance against Japan. During that period, a 9-year-old Chinese cowboy met up with a team of Japanese soldiers. The cowboy noticed that these soldiers were enemies and going to attack his village so he lied to them and led them walked right into the trap. Finally, this cowboy was killed by Japanese soldiers and the Japanese soldiers were killed by Chinese Red Army. Of course in most people’s view this cowboy is good people in this story because hi protected his hometown from being attacked, however there are a few people especially Japanese think that the cowboy has been lying to others which is not a virtue. Thus every person has their own opinions, good or bad is a really subjective judgement depending on one’s own experience. So it is really hard for the producer to please all audiences.

Second, see from the professional views of professional directors, just let good people being rewarded and bad people being punished would hardly make a movie or television a good film. Consider that in the end of a movie, good people being rewarded and bad people being punished, that’s OK, everybody satisfied and it’s just over, then it would just be a so-so, no more discussions would last. However, if good people is killed by bad people in the end or both of them all die, then contradictions produced, audiences’ emotions aroused and this movie will never be common. What’s more, watching movies and televisions is a kind of good way for people to develop their own ability of judgement. Personally, I like the movies that leave some clues for audiences to imagine the following plots.

Somebody may argue that children need to see those programs contain good people being rewarded and bad people being punished in order to build them a standards of virtue and honesty. Of course it is true and it should be done. However, my point is not to say that movies and television cannot contain those contents above, my point is to say that movies and television should not always contain those contents above. Programs should be chosen for children to watch by their parents, but as to the adults who possess the ability to tell good from bad, they would get tired watching good people always be rewarded and bad people always be punished by occasion that some people do not end up as the public’s wish in the real word. We won’t feel the movies and television programs are all like fairy tales that appears so unrealistic.

In sum, movies and television don’t need to always tell a story about good people being rewarded and bad people being punished for getting better attractive, artistic and realistic.

PsMaggieUID：2861847

谢谢sun3may，静音，anan，sEven_zh和bibby~~撒花~~~