同样是 Central Plaza

w2williamUID: 2551182

The letter which recommends the city to prohibit skateboarding in the Central Plaza places seems reasonable at the first glance. But after a second thought, one may easily find that the recommendation needs reevaluation throughout. Since the skateboarding potentially has no relation with the decrease of population if the Central plaza at all.


First of all, what is wrong with doing sports in public places? Shouldn't the government encourage its citizen to get involved in those sports like street basketball, dance, or skateboarding, all of which consist of contemporary culture? The Central plaza, which is a typical public places for shopping, entrainments, would undoubtedly advocate people to participate in such kinds of sports as well. Would it be ridiculous to prohibit that skateboarding?


Meanwhile, the statistic as cited in the letter is completely unconvincing as well. To some extent, mere two years of time is insufficient to determine the relation between skateboarding and population of Central plaza. And, even more importantly, other factors shall be considered prospectively seriously. For instance, usually, if possible, a regression brought out by economic crisis may last for several years, which may strike remarkably upon the shopping market. Besides, the government policy, or the investigation strategy would also bring down the shopping population as well. Possibly the city construction tend to create a CBD (Central Business District) in outskirt. That would draw the shopping flow or attention away from existing Central plaza as well.


What's more, given the overall decrease of shopping population, it doesn't imply the major Central plaza's decrease. As we are in a society full of completion, factors such as innovation, efficient management play important roles in business operation. Some Central plaza's predicament of decrease of shopping population may due to their own problems, but not the skateboarding. Another possibility may explain that is, since nowadays, more and more citizen would like to do the shopping online rather than going to the plaza. So there is no wonder the population would decreases.


Surprisingly, the author is trying to indicate that the skateboarding people shall be responsible for the litter and vandalism, for which, he or she has no evidences at all. On the contrary, rather than light on the skaters' commitment of inappropriate behaviors, this has just reflected the inability of the Central plaza's management. If adequate infrastructure and proper management have been arranged, the litter and vandalism would be tackled readily. For instance, the plaza may settle more litter bins or replace facilities with high quality new ones to solve or alleviate the condition.


To sum up, the letter failed to recognize the relevant factors which may influence the Central plaza's shopping population. To simply blame on skateboarding and prohibit it is completely ridiculous. More analysis and efforts would be necessary to look into this problem.

panmingming2008UID: 2535351

1# w2william
这几天在GRE作文版看了数十篇习作，这一篇是唯一（没错，是唯一）我看着肠子没有打结的习作。

整体上，该文语言清晰流畅。用词上，没有频繁使用所谓“GRE或高级”词汇；造句上，也没有故作高深造些生硬长句（有些同学写的不是正常人类交流的句子，而是出现在错误位置的一串字符：）

根据GRE官方指南，AW任务的评分标准主要在两个方面，一是分析，二是表达。要上4分，那么分析要深入（thoughtful analysis/examination）；表达要清晰（convey meaning clearly）。只要一项不达标，就要打入3分行列。

该文展现了作者较扎实的语言基本功：简明、直接，容易理解（understandable，很体贴读者），这也是学术写作的基本要求。而作者需要提高的地方是：

1. 第一点理由有些莫名其妙。请作者自己再思考下（算是留给你的作业：）。

2.第二、三点理由较充分，符合4分标准，有理由，有展开。要上5分，最好在展开后加上具体例子（be specific , 具体到能给对方一幅“实景图”。一例胜过十句来来回回的道理）。比如展开时提到其他经营方式给商厦带来的竞争--比如网购。（问自己一个问题“Can I explain fully with an example?” ）就举个例子，该商厦原有客流量可能主要来自几家书店，而现在许多顾客直接从amazon或 "dangdang, a clone of amazon in China "购买，方便又便宜：对方送货上门且有较大折扣。


谢谢该文作者。
-------
另外给各位跟贴同学的建议，请到nytimes.com的评论版上找一篇editorial[社论]文章认真研读下，看看作者怎样用几百个并不“高级”、并不“GRE”的单词来分析一个争议性议题，并且有条理地用理由、恰当例子来清晰表达观点。提一个问题：为什么仅仅泡gter、背几篇文章、写几篇提纲、习作，还是很难逃脱3.5分以下的结局？

请大家仔细思考。
然后作出自己的书面回答。

w2williamUID: 2551182

2# panmingming2008
Appreciate your advisable suggestion!

pizymisaUID: 3106370

能写社论的那是记者啊- -
作家和优秀记者都不好当就是这个道理。