鲁西西作文贴 求批求批~~

LUCY小可

10 July
Independent Writing：
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
Compared with the people who live in cities, the people who live in rural areas can take better care of their families.

"Lifeis never easy" for every people. However, in the era, in which huge bubbles in real estate industry, high education fees for next generation and difficultiesto have an expert medical treatments for common folks are frustrate peopleliving in cities, life is harder. How many years could I buy a house and carfor my family? What kind of kindergarten my kid can study? What if my parentshave some diseases how can I afford by such limited salaries? Is the food myfamilies eat has been polluted? These problems are just small scale of the wholepicture. If you also live in cities or have been in cities for part of yourlife, you must stand in my side that people live in rural areas can take bettercare of their families. I will compare city life with rural life to illustratethat living in city cannot better care about families materialistically andpsychologically.

First,people living in cities have to burden higher living cost like housing,education, medical care. Take housing as an example, sharing a warm shelterwhich we own with beloved family members is a sound dream for everyone.However, the reality is always cruel. According a research from China Daily,normal People living in cities have to spend 10 to 15 years even longer toreturn the house loan. In cities like Tokyo and Seoul, many people cannot payoff the loans until they retired. Young graduates have to treat small rentalflats which are not inexpensive neither as their nest even a wedding nest. Someyoung people have to beg their parents for money which was supposed to reservefor parents' medical fees in the future. How people can take care of theirfamilies when they cannot take care of themselves independently. While, moreland resources in rural areas for people to build their nest. It is muchcheaper for people to get one apartment or build their own big houses forextended family members to live.  

Second, peopleliving in cities have less leisure time to communicate and accompany with theirfamilies than they living in rural areas. As usual, people living in cities shoulderhigher pressure to earn money, have more chance to be offered overtimeassignment and face fiercer job competition. Such things are easy to detractpeople's attention and time on their family members. However, money peopleearned cannot offset the absence of your warm accompany for your familymembers. Psychologist told us that children who lack  parents' accompany and communication areeasily to experience depression in their teenager age and marriage instabilitywhen they become adult. Compared with city residents, people living in ruralareas have less fierce competition to find a job. Even the salaries are not ashigh as ones in cities, they are enough for you to feed yourself and look afteryour family members.

Admittedly,fast economy development, modern community equipment and advanced culture areeye-catching factors attract more and more people to say good bye to ruralhometown and settle in cities. In terms of our discussion top about a betterplace for people to take care of families, I have to say, it's different picturefrom self-development which cities might be beneficial to.  Time, energy and love devoted to familiescannot be substituted with any above material advances in cities. Rural area isnot doubt a better place for you to manage a warm family relationship.

LUCY小可

11 July
Independent Writing：
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
To improve the quality of education, universities should spend more money paying salaries to professors.

" What money can buy and cannot buy?" is a  popular topic always attract people's discussion. Whether money incentive is justified in education  which is regarded as purity from commerce and whether improvement of professors' salaries is an efficient way to improve the quality of education are heat debate topic amoung aducators and authorities under the background that many universities reflect that a number of professors choose to work  in businesses and entrepreneurs rather than stay in campus. Therefore, some experts cite that university should also use money incentive to attract professors back to teaching field, in turn, to improve the quality of education. I agree professors play very important role in university education, however using money as incentives are not convincing. Three discrepancies in this superficial conclusion will be illustrated as follows.

First, tallent professors flowing away from univeristies is not necessary due to lesser salary. Admittedly, salary is an important factor to influence people's career planning. However, when the salary reach a certain level, for example, where you don't worry about your safety and basic needs, the salary will not be the only one facor you think about. You will want to achieve more diverse from your working, for instance, affection, good relationship, respectation, sense to achievement, self-value, and so on as the theory of Maslow. Also, your interest and ambition are also essencial facors in career design. Are the salaries in the univerisity as low as to fullfil the basic demand of those professors? Of course not.  According to statistic in China Daily, even in economic crises the salary level of public and private university are much higher than national average point. Whether those professors got enough humman care like freedom and support to academic research from universities and enough respectation from students are key issues the educators, universities and authoraties should pay more attention rather than simply using moeny to solve all the problems.     

Second, whether salary incentive is so big enough that is can drag professors back to campus is really doubted. Even some professors choose to leave campus because of materialistic reasons such as money, how much money you pay to professors can compete with entrepreneurs? It is never a fair competion in terms of profitablity between universities and businesses. Is is realistic to pay more salaries to professors than commercial organization just because some professors believe that moeny is very important or themselves deserve high salary as  businessmen. Government cannot afford such budget to invest an inefficient proposal when national budget also should  be distributed to other fields like military development, porverty elimination and environmental protection.

Third, even we use money attract more professors successfully, whether the quality of education can actually improve is still a big question. Some professors or you can say some businessmen back to university to teach because of high salary are not necessary  competent teachers.  It is very likely, some professors teach in schools just because of high salary and long vacations but not because their love and dadication to education and scientific research which are money cannot buy. The quality of teacher is the garrantee of education rather than the quantity. The money and energy should invest in the process of recruit and cultivate high qualified teachers and consecrated professors.

Above all, since the average salaries of professors are not low, professors' motiation and quality of education are determined by more factors. Simply using money incentives is not an efficent way to realize the goal. Giving more care, repectation, and teaching and research environment to professors, updating the labs equipment and libraries resources are more efficient to improve the quality of education.   

LUCY小可

我的字数是不是太多了？怎么老超时。。。《

LUCY小可

huajiali 发表于 2013-7-13 10:17
红色表示错误；蓝色表示建议；黄色表示精彩
To improve the quality of education, universiti ...

Huajiali 改得真棒！学习了！！快断网了，我明早起来去拜读你的作文。一起加油！

LUCY小可

19 July「Today」
Independent Writing：
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
Schools always collect information about teachers' teaching performance and give rewards to those teachers who perform well.Which way do you think is more useful?Evaluated by students or teachers

"Students are the best teacher of teacher" is one of fashionable educationable idea in educational field recently. Because teachers can adjust their teaching style and content from feedback of students, in turns, to make their teaching more efficient. Therefore, evaluating teachers' performances by students is regarded by some experts as best method. This superficial conclusion has three discrepancies which I cannot be convinced.

Admittedly, feedbacks from students can reflect some aspects of teaching perfomance. For example, in questionaire or electronic feedback forms, we can see how much a student love a teacher's teaching or whether student can understand well what teacher said according to the scores the student marks. Also, we can see some students' suggestions to teachers from electronic feedback form. However, the level of accuracy and reliability of students' feedbacks and some shortcomings should also be considered.

Firstly, we cannot garrantee the reliability and accuracy of students' feedback. It is very ideal that every students think carefully when they fill the feedback forms and reflect their true feelings on the forms sincerely. Very likely, students don't want to spend too much time on it. According to a statistic published by China Daily, nearly half of students believe that filling feedback form is time-consuming. For example, students in our school have to fill the feedback forms for all teachers before we log into our courses selection system.  Most of us just rate a same score for every  question and even every teacher without reading the questions carefully because we have to register the popular courses as early as possible.  The feedback forms is meaningless if respondents do not treat them seriousely.

Secondly, even students fill the feedback form coutiously. The objectivity of the access is still be seriously doubted. A lot of primary school kids and even high school students just cannot understand that teacher's critics is due to the intension to help them correct misbehaviours or high expectation to them, therefore, they pay out certain teachers by marking very low scores to their teachers. Since the schools combine the evaluation scores with the rewarding system, the unfair appraisal discourages a lot of responsible teachers. What's more, it is hard for students to give a fair scores without comparison with other teachers teach in the same course because students only have one teacher in one course.

Thirdly, the backlash of this evaluation way has threatened the education quality rather than has improved it. The biggest problem is the distorted relationship between students and teachers. Teaching-learning relationship became a selling-buying relationship. Many teachers start to focus on how to please children instead of how to improve teaching in order to get rewards. I even heard that some teacher give students A plus to beg them for good evaluation scores.  I don't think it is the progress of education quality. It is the lost of our education when the purity of education fall into the commercial dust and the dignity of teacher does no longer exist. .

Above all, I cannot agree that evaluation by students can promote the education quality if the reliabilty and objectivity of students feedback cannot garanteed and the commercialization of teacher-student relationship are not solved. By far, evaluation by teacher is still a more reliable way whithout above problems.

LUCY小可

21 July
Independent Writing：
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
To increase the economic growth, government can neglect environmental growth.

" To be or not to be, is a question."  Like the eternal delimma of human beings, " To increase economic growth or to increase environmental growth, is a question." Recently, some of ecologists strongly expresses the idea that economic growth seriously threatens the ecological growth in many environmental seminars like Copenhagen climate summit,  intending to awake authorities's awareness to pay more attention to environmental protection. In my opinion, these experts' appeals are very reasonable and  important.

eFirst, deterioration of environmental situation has already threaten life quality of poople and even economic development. It is evident that the increasing rate of lung cancer universally is due to air pollution. The outbreak of deadly and mystery diseases such as SARS and H1N1 are also as a result of human's undue invading to animal colonies. What human beings did to harm natural environments eventually harms human beings themselves. The economic growth, which was believed as the largest beneficiary, too suffer. For example, this past half a year, Beijing, the capital of PRC.China, has been in the foggy envelopment. It suffers from serious air pollutant "PM2.5" which are mainly from Beijing's more than five million motor vehicles, coal burning in neiboring regions, and sandstorm from the north and local construction dust. However, many foreign direct investments have been delayed and even have been canceled. Immeasurable potential tourists are draining. The economical loss from the echological detetiaration are very obvious. On the other hand, better environment can attract more inverstment. It is urgent and important for government to take measures.

Second, proper actions taken by governments to protect environments will not effect economic growth neggatively. For example, government can organize some public educations  in schools, communities, through newspapers, televisions and electrical medias and environmental  activities like planting activities in communities, to wake up the public awareness of the importance of environmental protection. These kinds of activities are not too expensive for goverments to promote environmental growth. What's more, goverments can give some preferencial policies about elimination of carbon emmision to green-tech industries. As we know green-tech industries have higher return ratio than traditional manufacturing industries. It is very likely, green-tech industries will become the next economical growth motor in the world stage.

Above all, to develope economic growth and to develope ecological growth are not muturally exclusive. But it indeed needs wise to balance both of them. Governments should pay attention to environmental protection and sustainable long term development when they enjoy the benefits of short-run econimic blooming.

艾米果果

21 July
Independent Writing：
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
To increase the economic growth, government can neglect environmental growth.

" To be or not to be, is a question."  Like the eternal delimma(dilemma) of human beings, " To increase economic growth or to increase environmental growth, is a question."(有轻微偏题的嫌疑，题干不是给的二选一的statement哦) Recently, some of ecologists strongly expresses（express） the idea that economic growth seriously threatens the ecological growth in many environmental seminars like Copenhagen climate summit,  intending to awake authorities's（authorities‘） awareness to pay more attention to environmental protection. In my opinion, these experts' appeals are very reasonable and  important.

First, deterioration of environmental situation has already threaten life quality of poople（people） and even economic development. It is evident that the increasing rate of lung cancer universally is due to air pollution. The outbreak of deadly and mystery diseases such as SARS and H1N1 are also as a result of human's undue invading to animal colonies.（good example） What human beings did to harm natural environments eventually harms human beings themselves. The economic growth, which was believed as the largest beneficiary, too suffer(这句话没读懂呢？). For example, this past half a year, Beijing, the capital of PRC.China, has been in the foggy envelopment. It suffers from serious air pollutant "PM2.5" which are mainly from Beijing's more than five million motor vehicles, coal burning in neiboring(neighbouring) regions, and sandstorm from the north and local construction dust. However, many foreign direct investments have been delayed and even have been canceled. Immeasurable potential tourists are draining.(我觉得这里应该跟前面的时态保持一致，危害要是一直存在的话就用一般现在时好了，现在完成时跟现在进行时都不是最优选项的说~~~)The economical loss from the echological detetiaration are（is） very obvious. On the other hand（这里应该用On the contrary吧， on the other hand 是将的另外一反面，但是没有“对立”的这层意思）, better environment can attract more inverstment. It is urgent and important for government to take measures. 这段例子很好很新颖

Second, proper actions taken by governments to protect environments will not effect economic growth neggatively（negatively）. For example, government can organize some public educations  in schools, communities, through newspapers, televisions and electrical medias（media已经是复数形式啦，medium是单数形式） and environmental  activities like planting activities in communities, to wake up the public awareness of the importance of environmental protection. These kinds of activities are not too expensive（表达不是一笔大花销用costly好些） for goverments（government） to promote environmental growth. What's more, goverments can give some preferencial policies about elimination of carbon emmision（emission） to green-tech industries. As we know green-tech industries have higher return ratio than traditional manufacturing industries. It is very likely, green-tech industries will become the next economical growth motor in the world stage. 这一段的论证没有扣题，topic是为了发展经济是不是就可以忽略环保。但是此段通篇在讲保护环境对经济发展不仅没有坏的影响，还有益处。但是完全可能是就算是保护环境可以带了经济利益政府不管environment growth啊，只要neglect environmental growth没害处就好。所以感觉这段最好写成ignore了就会对economy有不好的影响。始终要把点扣在是都ignore，论证才有说服力。

Above all, to develope（develop） economic growth and to develope ecological growth are not muturally exclusive（有偏题嫌疑）. But it indeed needs wise to balance both of them. Governments should pay attention to environmental protection and sustainable long term development when they enjoy the benefits of short-run econimic blooming.
1、楼主的词汇量很大啊，举的例子也很vivid
2、语法类跟拼写错误有点。。。要是在这上面被扣分了实在可惜了。。。可以先在写字板里面写，再粘贴到word看看有什么错误。
3、说实话文章我读起来感觉有点生涩（好吧，承认这是水平问题。。。）。但是好多写作书上面也说不一定通篇都用大词，influence也很重要
最后，以上仅个人观点，楼主轻怕

LUCY小可

艾米果果 发表于 2013-7-24 19:57
21 July
Independent Writing：
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

感谢感谢艾米果果的点评！！果果的建议好棒！！我的拼写错误好多。。辛苦果果了！！！ 感谢！一起加油！

LUCY小可

9.16 Independent writing Agree/disagree: The purpose of television should be all educative, not entertaining.

Hundreds years ago, when the idear of television was born in the earth, the inventor never imagined the power of it today. From newspaper, radio, to television even the Internet latter, the nature and the goal of mass media, which is examply for the power of information, never change. Through television, billions and millions of people witness the spacrcraft launching at the same time, observed and discussed 2012 USA presidential debate with people from different continents, share the more and more similar topic about taste of clothes fashion and popular singers amoung the world.However, today some people suggest that the purpose of television should be only educative not entertaining. I cannot agree that point because it disobey the original intention of invention of television and will be a lost to public it this proposal were approved.

Firstly, it is not justified to intervined the freedom of information and automony of media. The original purpose of invention of television is to share information. As a communication media, the television serve as a platform to present what the public have interested in and care about. Freedom of information should not be intervined easily. Public have right to decide what kind of television program they like and need most. The reasons why people watch television are diversified. Government cannot control people's freedom of choice. For example, some times I watch televison just because I am bored and want to kill time or just want to have a rest after work. At that time, my only prupose to watch television is to have a rest and entertainment. I will choose to watch TV show,cartoon or commic plays rather than ethic education program or cultural heritage lecture series. If I know I only can choose the educational program, I will even not choose to turn on the TV at that time. What's more,TV program operators are not nonprofit onganization. They care about rate of observation, interest and preference of mass audience. Without the support of public, it is really hard for TV program operators suvive.Sharing happiness and exemplified joy  are also the reason why media workers choose to join media industry. For example, people's love to Ophra' talkshow and popularity of Simpson's family are the motivation for television program creators and makers to drive media industry grow.

In addition, television program control cannot achieve the goal to influence the public positively. Admitedly, the power of television is very influencial. I can understand this proposal want to improve the quality of public in terms of moral standards and knowlege as well as decrease the crime rate. However, we cannot see any evidence to prove educational program can serve this goal and why it is a zerosum game and entertainment program cannot exist at the same time. Actually, depriving the opportunies of public to watch entertainment programs does not necessate public choice to watch educational programs and enjoy it. Students siting down on the class room not means students are learning. Similarly, only providing educational program not means people will watch and enjoy. Very possible,once public realize their freedom of chice and freedom of information are limitted, they might feel they are not respected enongh and might have adverse effect, like not to choose to watch educational program or not to choose to behave as what the ethic program taught. Poeple are not fool and do not like government to treat them as kids. The value of the program no matter they are entertainment program or educational program, should be judged by the audience and time not a certain authority.         

     

Inclusion, providing only educative-oriented tv program is not justifies in terms of freedom of information and autonomy of media, as well as not practical to achieve its intentional goal. Government can encourage media to make more insteresting educational program to attract public's attention and organize diverse educational activities like planting trees and reading sharing in community and invest more in basic education to improve the quality of citizens rather than limit people's choices.