响应豆豆号召,综合写作投票(附题下载,像真题)

红颜祸水UID: 2242528

from XDF某老师推荐的一套综合写作练习

今天刚写的，就当试验品吧，看看豆豆提出的这个投票搞得怎样，hoho



In the lecture, the professor makes several points about employees’ work policy. The professor claims that there are many disadvantages to hire employees who work a four-day workweek and ask for 80 percent of their normal pay. This contradicts the point demonstrated in the reading that the policy does good to the country, company and workers.

The first point that the professor challenged the reading is that the policy will harm company’s profits because more workers are required, so that more training, health assurance, offices and computers are in need, which lead to a lot more additional costs. One the contrary, the reading passage contends that company will save money on those overworked and error-phone workers as a result of getting more profits.

The second point that the professor used to cast doubt on the reading is that no additional jobs will come out because company will weigh much more expectation on their workers and thus some employees can do five-day work in four days. This is very different from the reading, which states that unemployment rates will decrease because more positions will be in demand.

Finally, the author of the passage points out that employees will be willing to have more time with their family since they have one more holiday every week, while the lecture states that it will do harm their quality of life since they will have less chances of advancing career and will be not so welcome as five-day employees.

To sum up, the points asserted by the professor are totally different from what the reading notes.

[ 本帖最后由 红颜祸水 于 2007-10-17 23:12 编辑 ]

豆豆～UID: 2378384

我来投第一票哈～

我觉得写的不错。

但是，建议在陈述的时候把观点和例子分成两句话来写。不然容易让raters觉得你少了信息，会扣分的哦～

不错不错～鼓励！

5分～

红颜祸水UID: 2242528

。。。感激啊。。。

XDF那老师教的body paragraph 三－五句话搞定　于是我开始写这样的长句子了。。。。

唉　怎么办　到底怎样？

豆豆～UID: 2378384

这不是现实作文功底的地方。。。要以简洁准确为准。。。XDF的老师经常瞎扯

红颜祸水UID: 2242528

写长句子的确很费脑子呢　估计考场一紧张　脑子转不过弯来　全短句子的

破海沧澜UID: 2401581

我也来投一票，不过我觉得还是有些欠妥。
我自己都不知道为什么。。。。:funk:

kangkang0125UID: 2204300

我也写了一篇
献丑了，我觉得综合也不是很好写，因为不知道怎么概括，又怕概括的太简单了，还有就是用自己的意思改写而不是听到的句子要不要紧啊， 因为听力记不下来，总是忘。
这个语速和真题一样吗，这个语速还能胜任
ps：这个活动是不是指同主题写作？还是就是投票？



In this lecture, the professor made several points about the effects of the policy of shortened work hours. The professor argued that such a mandatory policy cannot bring positive effects on employees and society, which is totally different from the statement in the reading passage. The professor raised three reasons to chanllenge the views of reading passage.

In the first place, the professor claimed that shortened workweek would not increase the company profits as the reading passge expected. Since hiring more worker means providing more training, medical health benefits, office space and computers, this additional costs will indeed cut the profits. This point is entirely different from the reading passage which claimed that shortened workweek help employees redunce the errors in the work and as a result increas company profits.

Secondly, the professor argued that such a policy may not reduce unemployment rate. Because the employers has other options in face of the policy. The employers may raise their expectation or force the employees to work over time to guarantee the work efficiency and work load. In that case, there are no more jobs availble and as a result the unemployment rate cannot be improved.

Finally, the professor pointed out that shorten work week could not improve the quality of worker's lives. It is entirely possible that less work hours make employees decrease their work abilities and meawhile reduce the chance of advanced careers. As a result the works who work less time per week may become the first persons losing jobs in economic depression. If there is no finacial security, how can these employees to improve the quality of their lives?

In conclude, the professor strongly diagreed with the viewpoints of the reading passage and raised three reasons to contradict them.

tk2008UID: 2334349

楼上写这么多？

貌似独立作文了

豆豆～UID: 2378384

就是投票就好了^_^呵呵:-)

豆豆～UID: 2378384

我顶！顶！

potatoflyUID: 2366489

good job~

US-DreamerUID: 2402232

干凈利落！挺好的！
我們XDF的老師就要求我們這樣寫的！加油！

豆豆～UID: 2378384

谢谢大家支持^_^;d:

yhbhy2UID: 2312093

The lecture is mainly discussing that working for four days a week is not a good strategy at all, which is drastically challenging what is stated in the reading passage.

First of all, the professor states that such a policy would do harm to the company’s profits. Because the company should provide more training opportunities and medical insurance if they hire new employees. Furthermore, the heath-care fee is same no matter the current employers are working for four or five days per week. Moreover, new employees need more working space and computers to work. All of these mentioned above will definitely affect the company's profit. This point is totally contradicting with what is claimed in the reading that the shorten work time would increase the company’s benefit by having less error-prong workers.

Secondly, the professor also points out that there would not be any additional jobs. Companies would possibly force the employees to work overtime in order to make up the lost in their rest days. The employees might be expected to create more products than usual, and they may feel more unpleasant due to the overwork. This wholly differs from what the reading states that this policy would help to decrease the unemployment rate.

Finally, the professor mentions that the current employees may run a risk to lose jobs and finally can not pursue their dreamy lives. Because the employers would offer more jobs to the applicants who want to work for five days per week, and they are also glad to promote those kinds of workers. In the end, the four-day staff would probably lose good chances to advance their career. Hence, they would lose the ability to improve their qualities of lives. This point entirely contradicts what is provided in the reading about that this policy would help decrease the rate of unemployment and the employees could absolutely improve their lives.

To sum up, the points offered by the listening part totally disagree with what are indicated by the reading, which make the reading unpersuasive as it stands.

Word 341

[ 本帖最后由 yhbhy2 于 2007-10-25 13:30 编辑 ]

bobabolowooUID: 2365046

很不错
我写的倒是没问题 就是延了二三分钟