写作小分队，走起！

花露水6

写作小分队：6.6 综合写作作业-TPO 15

The reading passages contend that by taking measures such as building fences, caputring and destroying the toads and introducing a disease-causing virus can prevent a wider spread of cane toad in Australia. However, the professor in the listening part insists that such measures cannot get the country rid of the problem, either of the measures can be successful and they can even cause serious and unwanted environmental damages. To be specific, the professor offers three main reasons to refute the ideas in the reading part .

First, the professor considers that building a national offence can never stop the toads moving to other parts of Australia where they have not inhabitated because young toads and their eggs live in streams, which flow from one area to another and thus carry the toads to areas where they have not colonized. On the contrary, it is asserted in the reading passages that national fences can block the advance of the toads. Thus the lecture directly challenges the idea in thea reading part.

Second, it is presented in the reading part that governments can organize a campaign to appeal volunteers to capture and destroy the animals. Nevertheless, the lecturer holds that the measure will be unsuccessful because the volunteers are untrained and will destroy one type frog that is native to Australia and is going extinct. And the lecturer's idea directly contradicts its counterpart in the reading passages in terms of preventing the animal from wider spread.

Ultimately, the professor denounces the measure of developing a disease-causing virus to control the toad populations and thinks this will definitely arouse terrible consequences. Using the virus can harm king frogs, a native species in South America because king frogs are introduced to America by pet collecting. And if Australian native king frog is infected by the virus, the ecosystem in South American will be negatively affected because king frog is one part of  its ecosystem. From the perspectitve of ecological balance and safety, the measure of introducing virus mentioned in the reading passages can never, according to the professor, be applicable.

In conclusion, the professor pinpoints the flaws of the three measures to prevent the wider spread of cane toads in Australia and reaches to the final statement that the proposed actions in the reading cannot be successful.

花露水6

6.7 综合写作 TPO16
The reading passages contend that the past archaeological study and uncovering have faced a lot of problems in Britain. However, the professor in the listening passages insists that new rules and disciplines established in the 1990s have changed the field of archaeology in Britain and improved the situations. To be specific, the lecturer provides three reasons to validate his point of views and challenge the ideas in the reading part.

First, according to the reading part, construction projects destroyed so many valuable artifacts in Britain. But the lecturer considers that things have changed recently: any construction can never be started before the sites have been examined by archaeologists to determine whether the sites are valuable. If archaeologists show interest in the site, builders, governments and archaeologists will make a plan together before the construction. That means that the construction can be done around the site or done carefully, which will not hurt any valuable artifacts. From this perspective, the professor's idea directly contradicts with its counterpart in the reading passages.

Second, a new rule, according to the lecturer in the listening part, has been set that any work in the construction will be paid by constructors instead of governments. To be specific, the builders pay the costs of any research or other work conducted by archaeologists during the construction, which indicates that archaeologists have another resource of financial support. Nevertheless, it is held in the reading part that financial support for archaeological work was not enough. The professor shows that the funding to archaeological research is adequate, which challenges the idea in the reading.

Ultimately, it is difficult for archaeologists, according to the reading part, to find careers while the professor asserts that more works are being paid nowadays in Britain in the past. Archaeologists can be hired in all the stages of the work: examining the sites, preserving the artifacts, conducting researches, analyzing data and writing a report, which provides them more working opportunities and allows them to end up as paid professional archaeologists. Thus, the professor refutes the reading part.

In conclusion, the professor pinpoints the flaw of ideas shown in the reading and reaches to the conclusion that archaeological researches will not face a lot of problems in Britain.

Alisa3014

TPO15
红色表拼写错去，蓝色表建议，黄色表赞

The reading passages contend that by taking measures such as building fences, caputring and destroying the toads and introducing a disease-causing virus can prevent a wider spread of cane toad in Australia. However, the professor in the listening part insists that such measures cannot get the country rid of the problem, either of the measures can be successful and(or) they can even cause serious and unwanted environmental damages. To be specific, the professor offers three main reasons to refute the ideas in the reading part .

First, the professor considers that building a national offence can never stop the toads moving to other parts of Australia where they have not inhabitated because young toads and their eggs live in streams, which flow from one area to another and thus carry the toads to areas where they have not colonized. On the contrary, it is asserted in the reading passages that national fences can block the advance of the toads. Thus the lecture directly challenges the idea in thea reading part.

Second, it is presented in the reading part that governments can organize a campaign to appeal volunteers to capture and destroy the animals (cane toads). Nevertheless, the lecturer holds that the measure will be unsuccessful because the volunteers are untrained and will destroy one type frog that is native to Australia and (which) is going to extinct. And (Thus) the lecturer's idea directly contradicts its counterpart in the reading passages in terms of preventing the animal from wider spread.

Ultimately, the professor denounces the measure of developing a disease-causing virus to control the toad populations and thinks this will definitely arouse terrible consequences. Using the virus can harm king frogs, a native species in South America because king frogs are introduced to America by pet collecting ( researchers or pet collectors) . And if Australian native king frog is infected by the virus, the ecosystem in South American will be negatively affected because king frog is one part of its ecosystem. From the perspectitve of ecological balance and safety, the measure of introducing virus mentioned in the reading passages can never, according to the professor, be applicable.

In conclusion, the professor pinpoints the flaws of the three measures to prevent the wider spread of cane toads in Australia and reaches to the final statement that the proposed actions in the reading cannot be successful.

第一次改综合，觉得lz文笔甚好，阅读材料和lecture的对比也很全面，文章亮点很多。找不出什么严重不足的地方。

花露水6

TPO 17 综合写作
The reading passages contend that pesticide use in agriculture and human settlements will continually do harm to birds in the United states. But the professor insists that the argument in the reading is unconvincing. To validate her view, she offers three specific reasons as following.

First, the lecturer admits that urban expansion exerts certain bad influence on the birds. However, she considers that such urban expansion provides better and larger habitats for birds. To be specific, some citizens even complain about the increasing bird populations. From this perspective, the professor directly challenges the idea of uniform decline of birds population in the reading part and cites that the populations of some birds shrink and those of others grow.

Second, it is true, according to the lecture, increasing agricultural activities cause destruction to birds' habitats, yet this situation will not continue in the future.  The professor adds that it is assumed that less and lands have been served for agricultural use because of the introduction of a new type of crop that can productively provide crops as food resources. Thus, there is no further need fot humans to destroy wildness into agricultural lands to obtain more food resources, which contradicts with the idea in the reading part.

Ultimately, the professor confesses that human settlements hurted birds but she thinks history is not future because of two changes have bettered the situations. One change is that new pestisides that contain less poison have been applied. The other is that pest-resistant crops will be introduced and these crops are not vulnerable to pests genetically. As a result, less petisides will be used and this will not harm the birds at all.

In conclusion, the lecturer pinpoints flaws of the arguments in the reading parts and reaches to the conclusion that birds will not be negatively influenced by human settlements and agriculture in the future.