- 最后登录
- 2016-3-30
- 在线时间
- 756 小时
- 寄托币
- 487
- 声望
- 102
- 注册时间
- 2015-1-20
- 阅读权限
- 20
- 帖子
- 58
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 276
- UID
- 3590105
 
- 声望
- 102
- 寄托币
- 487
- 注册时间
- 2015-1-20
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 58
|
本帖最后由 cchen2014 于 2015-5-25 22:49 编辑
Issue 12. Governments should offer a free university education to any student who has been admitted to a university but who cannot afford the tuition.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
Issue 25. Governments should offer college and university education free of charge to all students.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
可否介绍下花了多长时间 写之前的思路 写的过程有何困难等等
(写的是12 )
The spiraling college tuition is making the public panic. People are worried that those students who counld not afford the tuition fee would be bereft of the chance to go to college, even if they are qualified. Thus, some proposed that any government should proffer those students a chance to go to college free of charge. However, for many underdeveloped countries, who are still struggling to feed their citizens, they are incapable of following the above suggestion. For them, the priority of fundings should go to healthcare and infrastructure , etc.. This is no to deny that developed countries with abundance fundings should implement the advice. From my point it view, the policy would not be beneficial to the students who are granted the free education, to the students who still need to pay tuition by themselves, and to the universities who do need fundings to prosper.
would be bereft of ? deprived of?
This is no to deny that?
如果你在后面不打算讲 underdeveloped countries 那么你在第一段也没必要提这个
感觉你第一段写得太多了 可以早点提观点 前面的铺垫不要太多
To start with, let's take an eye on those students who are not able to afford the tuition. They might seem to be the group who benefit the most from this policy. However, if a student is in financial stake, he will be encouraged to work harder. Once a student go to school in loan, he will feel pushed to study hard, because a better performance promises a better job with higher pay, which is finally the source of fund to cover his debt. Vice versa, free tuition releases this group of students from the finical pressure which might cause a slacken in study. The aim of the policy is to help those who are qualified but less wealthy students to get into a fair competition with their wealthier peers. A more effective way might instead be university offering students a chance to win a descent amount of scholarship or the government providing loans free of interest.
题目要求you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
主题句最好直接说明这个政策对于你所关注的群体有什么后果 不要只是提出要关注这个群体 你只有30分钟 考官可能只有30秒 没有时间游花园
if a student is in financial stake 不懂你的意思
这个however之前应该有一句话来概括你要讨论的观点
Vice versa, 这个很少用在开头 你可以说Similarly
cause a slacken?
The aim of the policy is这里对于政策的目的只是你的猜测 或许用if开头会好些
A more effective way might instead be university offering改写
Meanwhile, the policy is not fair for the students whose families feel no burden to cover their tuition. If the government is urging universities to offer free education to some of the students, it would probably subsidize the school with part of the nation’s tax income. Tax is gather from people and it aims at providing a better social welfare to all its citizen. Gratuitous education uses taxes collected from everyone to benefit only a tiny fraction of the society, which obviously breach the norm. This policy indirectly impairs those students who families paid their tuition but receive identical education with students who are granted free education.
你的这一段的推理逻辑没问题 但是基本的前提错了 税收的本质其实是劫富济贫 纳税人未必一定直接受益于税收所资助的项目 但是可以间接受益 比如说税收资助教育 让穷人读了书之后 就不会去拦路抢劫或偷东西 而偷、抢的对象很可能是纳税人
It is seemingly helpful that the college could matriculate more potential students under the aid of this policy, 断句 however, this might do no good for a college to thrive. College education is elite education, which makes it a relatively scare source compared to obligatory education, like K12. A higher enrollment would cut down the average school resource among each student. An efficient machine would not perform well while overburdened, 断句 it is the same to colleges. A better college-level instruction requires more money in the recruitment of skilled and experienced teachers and professors, in the investment of advanced laboratory, and in funding the scientific research. If the government could offer appropriations to school-development, colleges would have chance to grow better. In this way, colleges could render their students a higher education quality, and could even offer scholarship to stimulate a better performance.
which makes it a relatively scare source (source?)
这段讲了两个不同的问题 一个是政策会导致人数增加 对学校资源有压力 这可以写一段 资源可以细分为人力资源和基础设施资源
另一个问题是政府的经费本来可以用作大学的发展 包括科研经费等等 而这个政策将会分薄这部分资源 这是机会成本的视角
你的中间三段每段都有不同的问题 需要在以后的写作中注意
首先是主题句要概括观点
第二是立论的基础要符合常识
第三是不要在一段里写两个独立的点
To sum up, in spite of the good intention of the policy, once implemented, it would bring more negative effects then expected positives ones. However, students, society, and colleges could indeed benefit from the government funding, but in a wiser and more appropriate way.
======================================================
按老师要求先介绍一下:
时间:55分钟TT
写之前的思路:受老师的3+1和issue理论必杀技的影响,想将any student分个类,但自身思路太局限,脑洞不够大。。只能分成被免费的学费和没免费的学生,于是最后凑了一段对学校的影响。
写的过程有何困难:三个角度觉得不够连贯,写起来有点东瓶西凑感
The spiraling college tuition is making the public panic. People are worried that those students who counld not afford the tuition fee would be deprived of the chance to go to college, even if they are qualified. Thus, some proposed that any government should proffer those students a chance to go to college free of charge. From my point it view, the policy would not be beneficial to the students who are granted the free education, to the students who still need to pay tuition by themselves, and to the universities who do need fundings to prosper.
按照老师要求,将开头做了精简。
To start with, to offer free education to students who cannot afford it might impair their motivation in learning. Once student is in education debt, he will feel pushed to study hard, because a better performance promises a better job with higher pay, which is finally the source of fund to cover his debt. Similarly, since free tuition releases this group of students from the finical pressure, a student will feel less motivated to pay effort into his field of study. If the aim of the policy is to help those who are qualified but less wealthy students to get into a fair competition with their wealthier peers,a more effective way might instead be university offering students a chance to win a descent amount of scholarship or the government providing loans free of interest.
主题句增加了后果,改了一些不规范的语句,就是不知道表达到位了没。。。
Meanwhile, the policy is not fair for the students whose families feel no burden to cover their tuition. If the government is urging universities to offer free education to some of the students, it would probably subsidize the school with part of the nation’s tax income. Tax is gather from people and it aims at providing a better social welfare to all its citizen. Gratuitous education uses taxes collected from everyone to benefit only a tiny fraction of the society, which obviously breach the norm. This policy indirectly impairs those students who families paid their tuition but receive identical education with students who are granted free education.
你的这一段的推理逻辑没问题 但是基本的前提错了 税收的本质其实是劫富济贫 纳税人未必一定直接受益于税收所资助的项目 但是可以间接受益 比如说税收资助教育 让穷人读了书之后 就不会去拦路抢劫或偷东西 而偷、抢的对象很可能是纳税人
It is seemingly helpful that the college could matriculate more potential students under the aid of this policy, 断句 however, this might do no good for a college to thrive. College education is elite education, which makes it a relatively scare source compared to obligatory education, like K12. A higher enrollment would cut down the average school resource among each student. An efficient machine would not perform well while overburdened, 断句 it is the same to colleges. A better college-level instruction requires more money in the recruitment of skilled and experienced teachers and professors, in the investment of advanced laboratory, and in funding the scientific research. If the government could offer appropriations to school-development, colleges would have chance to grow better. In this way, colleges could render their students a higher education quality, and could even offer scholarship to stimulate a better performance.
which makes it a relatively scare source (source?)
这段讲了两个不同的问题 一个是政策会导致人数增加 对学校资源有压力 这可以写一段 资源可以细分为人力资源和基础设施资源
另一个问题是政府的经费本来可以用作大学的发展 包括科研经费等等 而这个政策将会分薄这部分资源 这是机会成本的视角
你的中间三段每段都有不同的问题 需要在以后的写作中注意
首先是主题句要概括观点
第二是立论的基础要符合常识
第三是不要在一段里写两个独立的点
To sum up, in spite of the good intention of the policy, once implemented, it would bring more negative effects then expected positives ones. However, students, society, and colleges could indeed benefit from the government funding, but in a wiser and more appropriate way.
|
|