从12.19起, Liz 回来了, 这次要求很低,作文只要30分! 不要29~ 求亲们狠批~

lizchang1990

25 December
Independent Writing: Should company use public recognition to reward hard working, not to use money.
Integrated Writing: TPO 20


Reward is like a corresponding consequent that a great many people have been expecting when they work hard for a long time in an institute. Now, here comes a thorny issue towards which way is efficient for a company to reward its employees? Different individuals from various backgrounds uphold totally different standpoints, such as public recognition or money. From my perspective, the latter one plays a pivotal role on this disputed topic.

To begin with, nowadays extrinsic objective element shapes individuals’ values, and residents are more likely to pursue something that is realistic. For them, the value of money outweighs over that of invisible spiritual reward. Public recognition can only been felt and efficient inside a small group or company, and it cannot expand its positive significance to a broad range because the impact of individual’s own achievements usually concentrates on his or her own personal networks. Of course, some great human beings can win the public’s recognition and respect from all citizens, but this case is fewer, we should put ourselves in the shoes of ordinary people. Meanwhile, it is an undeniable fact that money is really an important factor that affects our crucial decisions and boost staff’s enthusiasm and passion toward work.

Moreover, money is more concrete and touchable and can last longer; these ingredients can provide persons a sense of safety, hence they will be prone to accept high salary rather than public recognition. To make my argument more compelling, I would like to take a specific example to support my view. Jennifer Cook, who is a senior philanthropist, had been working in a NGO for almost 25 years, but she quit her job at the end. The reason why she was determinate to shift her career direction was that she couldn’t support herself any more only by lower salary. It is the reality that pushed her into another way. Even though she won others’ respects and recognition during her past decades of years, Jennifer eventually gave in to the ruthless material environment. From this case, we can see that no matter how much those cognition the public shows, residents still need to consider the inevitable real world then to move forward.

Admittedly, public cognition can increase our inner satisfaction or vanity, and I do believe that a large number of citizens are yearning to get this kind of intangible bonus. After all, according to the basic principle of Marlose, who is a famous psychologist, spiritual pursue is also a top priority we are seeking in our short life. However, when public cognition fades off and employees are sick of this type of reward, vicious cycle will appear, and personnel will express their negative emotions on their daily work. All in all, as long as the long term reward the company give, more studious the employees will work.

Given all these reasons I mentioned above, I firmly believe that money should be a primary consideration when a corporation want to pay off the staff’s efforts. Only when all employees’ personal needs are reached can they contribute more to their job and make huge profits to the whole organization. Such a win-win result, hasn’t each boss been expecting?

lizchang1990

TPO 20,
The listening and the reading uphold totally opposite opinions toward the policy "let it burn". The professor illustrates that forest fires cannot only cause damage but also are creative. Then she makes three pinpoints to support her perspective.

To begin with, the speaker contradicts directly the statement in the article, which indicates that Yellowstone fires caused tremendous damage to the park's trees and other vegetation. She demionstrates that after 1988 scorched areas were recovered by new plants and became more diverse. Meanwhile, this land provided more chances for small plants to grow. For example, the area where trees were blackended offered more space for small plants and they could obtain sunshine easily.  In addition, for some certain seeds, they needed a high level of heat to germinate, so the fire benefited them a lot.

Moreover, the lecturer casts light on the second reason in the passage, which suggests that park wildlife was affected as well. She points out that the forest fire in Yellowstone Park gives new opportunities for other creators an ideal habitat. For instance, rabbits and hares will thrive in the field. As a result, the predators who depend on rabbits and hares will increase correspondingly in the whole food chain. At the end, animals will become stronger in the wildlife.

Finally, the presenter completely disputes the author's viewpoint. She explains that the phenomenon in 1988 is the unusual combination of various factors, such as no rain fall, unusual strong wild and accumulations of dry undergrowth, so the fire was so massive. But the similar situation hasn't appeared since 1988. On the contrary, after the Yellowstone fire, visitor started to visit the place again and the number of tourists was increasing.

In sum, the instructor carefully discerns the drawbacks of the reading and takes one more step to reveal that the fallacies need a close scrutiny.

45573asdasd

大神~~~你是不是忘了答应我什么了？~~

vanessa923

Liz,我写完了呢，TPO19 我原来练过，嗯所以我就不写了哈。

今天先给你看tpo20和独立，明天再给你改TPO19哈！

45573asdasd

Reward is like a corresponding consequent that a great many people have been expecting when they work hard for a long time in an institute（其实它和company有差别的，这个大多是非盈利机构，是一个专门改ps老美说的）. Now, here comes a thorny issue towards which way is efficient for a company to reward its employees? Different individuals from various backgrounds uphold totally different standpoints, such as public recognition or money. From my perspective, the latter one plays a pivotal role on this disputed topic. （看了你好几篇，这个开头很成熟，不错）
To begin with, nowadays extrinsic objective element shapes individuals’ values（你的语言掌握真酷啊）, and residents are more likely to pursue something that is realistic. For them, the value of money outweighs over that of invisible spiritual reward. Public recognition can only been felt and efficient inside a small group or compan（也许是gmat的习惯，觉得形容词和被动平行起来不太美）y, and it cannot expand its positive significance to a broad range because the impact of individual’s own achievements usually concentrates on his or her own personal networks. Of course, some great human beings can win the public’s recognition and respect from all citizens, but this case is fewer（this case does not always happen会不会好点，case和few是不是不太搭）, we should put ourselves in the shoes of ordinary people. Meanwhile, it is an undeniable fact that money is really an important factor that affects our crucial decisions and boost staff’s enthusiasm and passion toward work.
Moreover, money is more concrete and touchable and can last longer; these ingredients can provide persons a sense of safety, hence they will be prone to accept high salary rather than public recognition. To make my argument more compelling, I would like to take a specific example to support my view. Jennifer Cook, who is a senior philanthropist, had been working in a NGO for almost 25 years, but she quit her job at the end. The reason why she was determinate to shift her career direction was that she couldn’t support herself any more only by lower salary. It is the reality that pushed her into another way. Even though she won others’ respects and recognition during her past decades of years, Jennifer eventually gave in to the ruthless material environment. From this case, we can see that no matter how much those cognition the public shows, residents still need to consider the inevitable real world then to move forward. （没什么错误，很华丽）
Admittedly, public cognition can increase our inner satisfaction or vanity, and I do believe that a large number of citizens are yearning to get this kind of intangible bonus. After all, according to the basic principle of Marlose, who is a famous psychologist, spiritual pursue is also a top priority we are seeking in our short life. However, when public cognition fades off and employees are sick of this type of reward, vicious cycle will appear（why？没有提到cycle 啊，你的字数已经非常到位了，不用每一句话都有这么长的修饰）, and personnel will express their negative emotions on their daily work. All in all, as long as the long term reward the company give, more studious the employees will work（病句吧）.
Given all these reasons I mentioned above, I firmly believe that money should be a primary consideration when a corporation want to pay off the staff’s efforts. Only when all employees’ personal needs are reached can they contribute more to their job and make huge profits to the whole organization. Such a win-win result, hasn’t each boss been expecting?
绝对上上成的好文，我想知道你如何练就的打字速度。你的一点小小的瑕疵是:通篇都是这长句，反倒让人看起来有点累。英语也讲求长短句交换。学习了~！

vanessa923

楼上同学，介个不是应该我来改么。。。？

vanessa923

改晚了，见谅！

Reward is like acorresponding consequent that a great many people have been expecting when they work hard for a long time in an institute. Now, here comes a thorny issue towards which way is efficient for a company to reward its employees?（个人觉得应该用句号）Different individuals from various backgrounds uphold totally different standpoints, such as public recognition or money. From my perspective, the latter one plays a pivotal role on this disputed topic.

To begin with, nowadays extrinsic objective element shapes individuals’ values, and residents are more likely to pursue something that is realistic. For them, the value of money outweighs over（删掉，outweigh是及物动词） that of invisible spiritual reward. Public recognition can only been felt and efficient inside a small group or company, and it cannot expand its positive significance to a broad range because the impact of individual’s own achievements usually concentrates on his or her own personal networks. （这里是想说个人的影响力只能影响小圈子么？那么concentrate on 用得就不是很地道了。）Of course, some great human beings can win the public’s recognition and respect from all citizens, but this case is fewer（few）, we should put ourselves in the shoes of ordinary people. Meanwhile, it is an undeniable fact that money is really an important factor that affects our crucial decisions and boost staff’s enthusiasm and passion toward work.

Moreover, money is more concrete and touchable and can last longer; these ingredients can provide persons a sense of safety（安全感用security）, hence they will be prone to accept high salary rather than public recognition. To make my argument more compelling, I would like to take a specific example to support my view. Jennifer Cook, who is a senior philanthropist, had been working in a NGO for almost 25 years, but she quit her job at the end. The reason why she was determinate to shift her career direction was that she couldn’t support herself any more only by lower salary. It is the reality that pushed her into another way. Even though she won others’ respects and recognition during her past decades of years, Jennifer eventually gave in to the ruthless material environment. From this case, we can see that no matter how much those cognition the public shows, residents（我觉得resident似乎不是很好。它着重强调居民啊什么的。介个可以讨论一下哈） still need to consider the inevitable real world then to move forward.

Admittedly, public cognition can increase our inner satisfaction or vanity（贬义词，不适合，用self-actualization吧！）, and I do believe that a large number of citizens are yearning to get this kind of intangible bonus. After all, according to the basic principle of Marlose（拼错了哈！）, who is a famous psychologist, spiritual pursue is also a top priority we are seeking in our short life. However, when public cognition fades off and employees are sick of this type of reward, vicious cycle will appear, and personnel will express their negative emotions on their daily work. All in all, as long as the long term reward the company give, more studious（ly） the employees will work.（这句话可以不用as long as 了，直接用the more....the more吧！）

Given all these reasons I mentioned above, I firmly believe that money should be a primary consideration when a corporation want to pay off the staff’s efforts. Only when all employees’ personal needs are reached（satisfied？） can they contribute more to their job and make huge profits to the whole organization. Such a win-win result, hasn’t each boss been expecting? （我懂你意思，可是这句子确实有点怪异，你看Isn't it such a win-win solution that each boss has been expecting?)

词汇还是很丰富。恩恩，我也很喜欢改你作文捏！嘿嘿！

vanessa923

TPO 20,
The listening and the reading uphold totally opposite opinions toward the policy "let it burn". The professor illustrates that forest fires cannot only cause damage but also are creative. Then she makes three pinpoints（介个直接用points吧！） to support her perspective.

To begin with, the speaker contradicts directly the statement in the article, which indicates that Yellowstone fires caused tremendous damage to the park's trees and other vegetation. She demionstrates（typo） that after 1988 scorched areas were recovered by new plants and became more diverse.（总结得很好，我就没跟上。。。哈哈） Meanwhile, this land provided more chances for small plants to grow. For example, the area where trees were blackended（不认识） offered more space for small plants and they could obtain sunshine easily. In addition, for some certain seeds, they needed a high level of heat to germinate, so the fire benefited them a lot.

Moreover, the lecturer casts light on the second reason in the passage, which suggests that park wildlife was affected as well. She points out that the forest fire in Yellowstone Park gives new opportunities for other creators （直接用animals吧）an ideal habitat. For instance, rabbits and hares will thrive in the field. As a result, the predators who depend on rabbits and hares will increase correspondingly in the whole food chain. At the end, animals will become stronger in the wildlife.（好膜拜这段！）

Finally, the presenter completely disputes the author's viewpoint. She explains that the phenomenon in 1988 is the unusual combination of various factors, such as no rain fall（rainfall）, unusual strong wild and accumulations of dry undergrowth, so the fire was so massive. But the similar situation hasn't appeared since 1988. On the contrary, after the Yellowstone fire, visitor started to visit the place again and the number of tourists was increasing.

In sum, the instructor carefully discerns the drawbacks of the reading and takes one more step to reveal that the fallacies need a close scrutiny. （最后一句我感觉像在看GRE的argu哈哈！）

嗯很不错，赞一个！

vanessa923

The listening and the reading uphold completely opposite perspectives towards a new marketing tactic -buzzing. The speaker, Bill, illustrates that the statement in the article about buzzer is incorrect. Then he points out three aspects from his experience to support his standpoints.

To begin with, the lecturer distracts the argument in the passage, which indicates that buzzer is paid to praise the product and give a person incorrect information about the buzzed product. He demonstrates that company usually hires those who have used their products and think the cellphone is good. In fact, they are not paid to tell a lie. On the contrary, people can get the true information from buzzer.

Moreover, the presenter casts light on the second claim in the reading, which suggests that consumers just listen to buzzers' endorsements less critically than they should. As a result, buzzers' lobbies will really harm consumers. However, Bill asserts that the opposite is true. Actually, people often ask a lot of questions about the products, such as the price, service and how long the buzzer has used it. If the buzzer cannot provide a satisfying answer, consumers will not but(buy) the cellphone.

Finally, the instructor regards the third point in the article as stupid, because the passage advocates that buzzing is likely to have a harmful effect on social relationships. Bill explains that if the product is bad, corporation will not hire buzzers to advertize their cellphone. It turns out that if consumers try to buy the product and get a good experience, then they will trust the buzzers more and boost a virtuous cycle in the society.

In sum, the speaker discerns the drawbacks of the reading passage and takes one more step to reveal that the fallacies need a close scrutiny.
流利顺畅。很不错！

lizchang1990

perfect君 ,  这次作文写得很没感觉,将就看看吧~~呵呵


Plight is an indispensible issue during our short life from time to time. Now, here comes a thorny issue towards who can handle our problems efficiently, does government outweigh family members? Different people from various backgrounds uphold totally opposite perspectives on it. From my view, the former one plays a more pivotal role on our troubles.

To begin with, people prone to need a timely help from a government in most disastrous natural threats. Since no matter how strong your relatives are, they still will be weak before the hazard. To make my viewpoint more compelling, I would like to take a really story as an example. In 2008, China suffered so much, including the ice disaster and earthquake. What they residents did at that time? Did they go outside to clear up the frozen roads? Or had the victims in Wenchuan rescued their neighbors or their family members by themselves? No, they were just shocked or beaten by the abrupt calamities. On the contrary, our government solved these events quickly and helped those out of the trouble easily. From this point, we may safely state that government’s power is beyond our imagination, meanwhile it is necessary for us to rely on its assistance.
Moreover, policy from our government has a great influence on our daily life, and we must depend on our government to achieve a better colorful life. It is an undeniable fact that a person or a family, which is a part of the communities, relies on the society and our government, we cannot exist another world without a government. I also want to raise some details to give a strong support for my standpoint. Every year, American government will provide a large number of food stamps to the poor. For those who cannot support himself or herself by working, the promptly fiscal subsidy really is a huge bonus. What’s more, America also creates a lot of jobs for citizens since the economy crisis in 2008. It is the right our powerful government that we can get rid of these worse situation easily.

Admittedly, sometimes the help from a government cannot concentrate on myriad aspects and it cannot pay attention to everything as well. Instead, aid from people or family can give us a hand in time. However, we must realize that individual or family is just a part of the society, at the end we still need to rest our interest on the bigger group. Especially in the globalized days, government establishes more beneficial policies for international business and helps a great many companies to obtain huge revenues and expands their market shares excessively.

Given all these reasons I mentioned above, I firmly believe that government is an indispensible ingredient for all residents in the society to pursue a satisfying material or mental life. This is a spontaneous trend and also is necessary for us to solve some tough problems with the assistance from the government.