5/26三战 加入小分队 作文练起来

gobelieve

5/26 这是三战了，希望和大家互改作文共同进步，欢迎各位战友批评指导！谢谢！！

4月9日 独立写作
写了45min，超时了。我把拼错的词都自己改了方便批改的同学。很久没有写了希望大家多多拍砖，谢谢。

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement:

The government should support the scientific research even there’s no practical use.

==========================================================

思路：disagree

1) waste of money

2) waste of time and energy

3) may cause damage

==========================================================

With the development of science and technology, government has paid more and more attention in support of a great amount of scientific research, which contributes a lot to our society. Though most of these scientific research is beneficial to human beings and has significant influence on our society, however, several research is of little practical use. From my point of view, the government should not support the development of the research which has little practical use because it is a waste of money and time, and may cause potential damage to our society.

In the first place, the government spending much on doing scientific research is actually a waste of money because it requires a large amount of fundings given by the government. That is to say, doing a scientific research without practical use would gain little but cost much in previous researching procedures, thus the spendings far outweigh the fundings supported by the government. Just imagine, if the government continues setting aside some fundings to support such scientific research which brings no good, it surely has to spare little concentration on governing or operating other parts of affairs in the country, such as constructions, transportations, economics and so on. Lacking a well-functioned system, a governement(government) would not be spoken highly of even if it devotes much on doing researches.

Besides, supporting the development of scientific research with no practical use cost too much time and energy of scientists. As we all know, it sometimes takes one or more scientists more than 20 years to focus on doing a research regardless of its practical use. Hence, it is not worthwhile for the government to encourage famous scientists to do some research with little practical use. Not only will this action cause less benefit to the country, but it is also a disasterous(disastrous) sacrafice(sacrifice) of human resource.  If a scientist could choose a proper field which owns a bright future or advances the society and then fix his attention to such an essential scientific research instead of a research with no practical use, it would be a fital (fatal) contribution to the reputation of the government.

Consequently, some scientific research has no factual use but cause possible damage to the society. Since doing scientific research is full of risk and unsureness, a government which is in favor of supporting the development of science and technology blindly tends to lead a horrible disaster to the whole society. What if the fruit of research produces great pollution to the environment? What if a research leads to a panic of local residents of the country? Before supporting these researches, the government necessarily needs take all the possible consequences into consideration and measures whether the research has practical benefits.

To conclude, without analyzing the cost and benefit of doing such scientific researches, the government should not support the development of all the scientific research since several researches have little practical use. Not funding too much on researches without practical use is a wise way for government to operate the country in a right order and finally benefit its people.

gobelieve

这个地方记一些从其他同学那里借鉴来的好词佳句吧。需要自己积累一些，有输入才有输出。

gobelieve

kao154 发表于 2013-4-10 22:54
红色的看不出来了。。。改的详见附件。。。高手啊，，写这么多

谢谢你的批改！我明天再把修改过的文章发上来！
meaningly那个是不对，我是想写namely那个意思，脑残了……

kao154

红色的看不出来了。。。改的详见附件。。。高手啊，，写这么多

kao154

No one could deny that children are regarded as the only hope of their parents. Currently, a number of parents intend to limit the hours of their children in watching television programs or movis(movies) for the purpose of improving children's academic performance at school. Plausible it seems to be, however, I don't think it is an effective way for the following reasons.

To begin with, children are clever enough to come up with many other ways to watch their favorite programs even though parents limit their time. For example, if the parents don't allow me watching movies after class, a child(I 这个人称问题) is able to play the movies via his ipod in class and thus never focus on his lessons. As children have a sense of defensive against their parents, the more strict parents pose a limit on their wacthing(watching) programs, the less concentration children would devote to study. In this case, parents limitting(limiting) the hours of children wacthing(watching) （改成limited……by parents 看起来舒服）television programs or movies does no good to help children's study.

Subsequently, does entertainment like watching television programs or movies harmful to children's academic performace(performance)? The answer might be "No". On the one hand, some television programs are specially selected for children for its contents are likely to get children interested in their studys(study)（是不是想make the children get more interests in their study,怎么看原句很别扭，但不知道错哪了） and cultivate their curiosity for exploring an unknown world. On the other hand, watching television programs like news could keep kids informed of what's going on all around the world and thus form a good habit of caring important affairs of our country. Meaningly(后面可以加LY么，有个MEANLY), no strict limit should they set on their children in watching such programs if parents expect their children to perform well in school.

Additionally, as students grow up naturally, it is necessary for them to cultivate the ability of self-controling(self-controlling) instead of being underwatched by their parents day by day. Even though children could have their academic performance improved to some extent by their parents posing restrictions to the hours they watch television, the phenomenon would only be temporary. For instance, if a child is permitted to watch television only half an hour a day under parents' supervision, he probably gets himself involved in watching television for more than half a day without parents' limitations. Oppositely, since parents help foster children's self-controlling, a child may only watch television programs for half an hour as usual and then go on his study.(改后半句 a child may only watch tv in an appropriate time ..感觉跟上面重复了)

To sum up, in order to boost children's performance at school, it is wise for parents to permit children watching television programs properly and foster their ability of self-controlling. Since setting restrictions to the time children spend on watching movies or other programs may lead to some negative effects, such method is not effective enough to influence children's study in a long term（加个view?）

第一次改。。水平有限，见谅.

gobelieve

4月10日 独立写作

今天写了47min，字数还没有昨天多，速度还是不行，拼写错误也很多。

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement:

If childs want to do well in school,parents should limit the hours of watching TV programs or movies.

====================================================

思路：disagree

1) other method to watch tv, × focus on study

2) watch tv is good to study

3) children should improve self-control

====================================================

No one could deny that children are regarded as the only hope of their parents. Currently, a number of parents intend to limit the hours of their children in watching television programs or movis(movies) for the purpose of improving children's academic performance at school. Plausible it seems to be, however, I don't think it is an effective way for the following reasons.

To begin with, children are clever enough to come up with many other ways to watch their favorite programs even though parents limit their time. For example, if the parents don't allow me watching movies after class, a child is able to play the movies via his ipod in class and thus never focus on his lessons. As children have a sense of defensive against their parents, the more strict parents pose a limit on their wacthing(watching) programs, the less concentration children would devote to study. In this case, parents limitting(limiting) the hours of children wacthing(watching) television programs or movies does no good to help children's study.

Subsequently, does entertainment like watching television programs or movies harmful to children's academic performace(performance)? The answer might be "No". On the one hand, some television programs are specially selected for children for its contents are likely to get children interested in their studys(study) and cultivate their curiosity for exploring an unknown world. On the other hand, watching television programs like news could keep kids informed of what's going on all around the world and thus form a good habit of caring important affairs of our country. Meaningly, no strict limit should they set on their children in watching such programs if parents expect their children to perform well in school.

Additionally, as students grow up naturally, it is necessary for them to cultivate the ability of self-controling(self-controlling) instead of being underwatched by their parents day by day. Even though children could have their academic performance improved to some extent by their parents posing restrictions to the hours they watch television, the phenomenon would only be temporary. For instance, if a child is permitted to watch television only half an hour a day under parents' supervision, he probably gets himself involved in watching television for more than half a day without parents' limitations. Oppositely, since parents help foster children's self-controlling, a child may only watch television programs for half an hour as usual and then go on his study.

To sum up, in order to boost children's performance at school, it is wise for parents to permit children watching television programs properly and foster their ability of self-controlling. Since setting restrictions to the time children spend on watching movies or other programs may lead to some negative effects, such method is not effective enough to influence children's study in a long term.

460 words

gobelieve

4月9日独立写作修改
我不知道怎么把带格式的复制上来 试了好几次颜色也变了 很多都不显示
所以只能传附件了 技术太弱了……o(╯□╰)o

gobelieve

山禾璟 发表于 2013-4-10 14:51
With the development of science and technology, government has paid more and more attention to the s ...

谢谢你的细心修改！我看你之前的文章都有重新再改，我今天晚上也再稍微改一下发上来。很佩服你的认真，一定会取得好成绩的！

山禾璟

With the development of science and technology, government has paid more and more attention to the support of a great amount of scientific research, which contributes a lot to our society. Though most of these scientific research is beneficial to human beings and has significant influence on our society, however, several research is of little practical use. From my point of view, the government should not support the development of the research which has little practical use because it is a waste of money and time, and may cause potential damage to our society.

In the first place, the government spending much on doing scientific research is actually a waste of money because it requires a large amount of fundings given by the government. That is to say, doing a scientific research without practical use would gain little but cost much in previous researching procedures, thus the spendings far outweigh the fundings supported by the government. Just imagine, if the government continues setting aside some fundings to support such scientific research which brings no good, it surely has to spare little concentration on governing or operating other parts of affairs in the country, such as constructions, transportations, economics and so on. Lacking a well-functioned system, a governement(government) would not be spoken highly of even if it devotes much on doing researches.

Besides, supporting the development of scientific research with no practical use costs too much time and energy of scientists. As we all know, it sometimes takes one or more scientists more than 20 years to focus on doing(可以去掉) a research regardless of its practical use. Hence, it is not worthwhile for the government to encourage famous scientists to do some research with little practical use. Not only will this action cause less benefit to the country, but it is also a disasterous(disastrous) sacrafice(sacrifice) of human resource.  If a scientist could choose a proper field which owns a bright future or advances（不恰当，可以换成别的词，比如benefits） the society and then fix his attention to such an essential scientific research instead of a research with no practical use, it would be a fital (fatal) contribution to the reputation of the government.（有关科学家自己的职业规划突然讲到政府声望，需要有一个搭桥）

Consequently, some scientific research has no factual use but cause possible damage to the society. Since doing scientific research is full of risk and unsureness, a government which is in favor of supporting the development of science and technology blindly tends to lead a horrible disaster to the whole society. What if the fruit of research produces great pollution to the environment? What if a research leads to a panic of local residents of the country? Before supporting these researches, the government necessarily needs to take all the possible consequences into consideration and measure whether the research has practical benefits.

To conclude, without analyzing the cost and benefit of doing such scientific researches, the government should not support the development of all the scientific research since several researches have little practical use. Not funding too much on researches without practical use is a wise way for government to operate the country in a right order and finally benefit its people.(结尾可以再重复一下前几段的论点）