11月17日托福獨(dú)立口語(yǔ)寫作解析

本月最后一場(chǎng)考試也結(jié)束了，越往后感覺題目重復(fù)的頻率越高。本次考試口語(yǔ)和寫作難度中等，有很多類似的真題，日常練習(xí)相信大家都能見到。話不多說，來看詳細(xì)示例~

口語(yǔ)部分

Task 1

Do you agree or disagree with the statement that it is a great idea to select government leaders from the ordinary people?

參考答案：

I am all for this idea! First, I firmly believe that government leaders with ordinary backgrounds as hundreds of thousands of people are more likely to create policies benefiting the public. I cannot help thinking about President Obama who was born in a normal family and raised by a single mom has witnessed how people from working class families and underserved communities suffered from diseases and expensive medical cares. His down-to-earth experience motivated him to push the Obamacare, a health care policy benefiting millions of people.  Besides, I believe that, unlike elites, government leaders with normal backgrounds are more capable of communicating with the ordinary people, since they have similar backgrounds, speak similar languages, and have stronger empathies to each other. 

寫作部分

綜合寫作

（重復(fù)2015年10月24日/2017年9月16日真題）

考古學(xué)家在墓穴里發(fā)現(xiàn)了一個(gè)面具Schliemann’s discovery of gold mask

閱讀：其他學(xué)者認(rèn)為黃金面具是假的

1. 該考古學(xué)家有過學(xué)術(shù)造假的歷史；

2. 該國(guó)王面具跟同時(shí)期other tombs’ discovery在嘴唇和胡子的地方不一樣；

3. 在挖掘到這個(gè)面具后，他立刻close the site很令人懷疑，因?yàn)橐话惆l(fā)現(xiàn)了這么重要的文物都會(huì)繼續(xù)去探究這個(gè)地方還有什么其他更有價(jià)值的東西

聽力：反駁

1. 雖然有不誠(chéng)實(shí)的紀(jì)錄，但挖掘這個(gè)面具時(shí)身邊有人很近距離地跟他一起在工作；政府同時(shí)派出一個(gè)supervisor會(huì)監(jiān)督他的工作，所以他不太可能冒著被抓的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)去造假；

2. 在另一個(gè)早一點(diǎn)的墓穴里，挖掘出來一個(gè)authentic lion mask出土，獅子毛發(fā)上嘴唇和胡子的形狀跟國(guó)王面具非常相似；

3，該考古學(xué)家比起考古他更多的是在尋寶，所以比起這個(gè)東西有什么文化歷史的價(jià)值，他更關(guān)注值多少錢；他很有經(jīng)驗(yàn)，在挖出這個(gè)面具之后就可以判斷出這個(gè)里面也沒有什么別的特別有價(jià)值的東西，就關(guān)掉了那個(gè)考古點(diǎn)

參考范文：

The reading proposes reasons why scholars think Schliemann’s discovery of gold mask might be a fake. However, the professor maintains that the discovery is real.

Challenging the reason indicated in the reading that Schliemann faked archeological findings before, the professor argues that because of his academic faking history, government exerted supervisor to closely watch his work. Also, there were people working closely with him everyday. So he wouldn’t have gotten the chance and risked being caught by the government to fake archeological findings again.

The professor refutes that the mask looked different in mouth and beard part from other tombs’ discovery by pointing out that another previous tomb unearthed an authentic lion mask before, the mouth and beard part of which looked exactly the same as those of the gold mask.

In terms of his immediate closure of the archeological site, the professor contends that Schliemann cared more of financial worth than of cultural value of the mask; being extremely experienced, he closed the site fairly quickly because he was sure that nothing valuable had been left there, leaving no need to assert further focus to the site.

獨(dú)立寫作

Which choice do you prefer: younger students (aged 5-10) should focus on lessons for less than one hour, or they should take longer classes in order to train their capability for focusing longer? 

話題分類：教育類

解題思路：

優(yōu)劣對(duì)比類本質(zhì)是利弊分析，一定要注意對(duì)比關(guān)系的體現(xiàn)；

建議解題思路：

要休息；

理由1: 為了他們的學(xué)習(xí)更高效

理由2：為了培養(yǎng)他們對(duì)知識(shí)的興趣

反駁段: 有些人覺得需要鍛煉專注力為以后做鋪墊，但和天性對(duì)抗只會(huì)適得其反

參考范文：

Children aged 5-10 are deemed at best age of creativity and curiosity. Despite many benefits brought about by longer study hours, I do believe that young kids should enjoy shorter period of study chunk so that they can study much more effectively without losing interest, and develop study habits in line with their age.  

For one thing, focusing on lessons for no more than one hour would enhance their study efficiency. Of course, teachers always regard longer study hours as richer study content. Conversely, spending excessive time continuously on one subject can easily discrete young kids’ study goal. Suppose a “highly responsible” teacher has been teaching a class of 6-year-old kids for unintentionally 2 hours. One kid is messing with the other sitting closely; one kid close to window is fascinated by an outdoor dog fight; several baby “nerds” are extremely hard-working at fighting off sleepy feelings. Do you regard such scene as good way of teaching? It is like a torture against young students’ nature. Instead, an opening of each new class would attract kids’ attention; an intensive activity design would engage them in the class; a short break after a heavy workload would refresh students’ mind. All these arrangements would better ready their little brains to next school task and mind challenge. Finally, they can come back home energetically and efficiently recite what they learnt during the whole day rather than fall asleep after days of exhausting rot learning.

For another, avoiding burning out children too early is a protection of their interests to learn. In other words, if they are deprived of a break after a brainstorming, their enthusiasm in learning might fade considerably, exerting much more negative impact than short-time concentration. I still remember learning English as a kid. In normal school class of 45 minutes, the thing I look forward most everyday was to talk in English loudly in class. Even though every Friday afternoon we had three English classes in a row, despite lasting for more than two hours all together, we were assigned to have group discussions in one class, take on performance in the second, and make presentations and peer reviews during the last. Every 10-minute break asserting between two classes was like a message, indicating shift of theme and class topic. And I believed that it is the reason why our minds could keep refreshed, restart easily, and keep on moving smoothly. In comparison, I took English training course every weekends, during which we were required to sit still for two hours each class. I bet that period time was the sleepiest of my entire life, and I had never hated to study English grammar so much. Finally, I kept on my English study habit and interest thanks to wavering goodbye to intense long-hour learning. I even enjoy more when studying in fragment time to keep on a daily routine.

Some opponent, however, hold concerns that students should get training to have longer-time concentration as early as possible, and taking on courses without break is a good way to do so. But good study habit should be built upon study interest and be in accordance with age limit. Compared with adolescents and adults, students aged 5-10 do lack firm concentration expense. But they can also unwaveringly stick to things that bear their interests and passion. Thus, stretching longer hours of concentration should come naturally and be achieved on the premise of cultivating interests.  

In a nutshell, promoting study concentration should not sacrifice young kids’ study goal and passion. Therefore, I am fully against exaggerating each class’s time.