▶ Your Answer :
While the author of the reading passage
argues that there are three ways to remove Asian carp from the Great Lake to
protect local species, the lecturer opposes the reading’s assertion with its counter
views.
First
of all, building underwater wall in the channel of the Great Lake seems
baseless. The ships of fishing factories tells a different story. Though the
gate in the wall would be useful to restrict Asian carp from entering the lake,
the fish can get through the barrier of the water passage by moving along the
vessels when they pass. 요약 내용이 너무 길어요. 반복적인 표현을 줄이고 paraphrasing해주세요. This casts doubt on the reading passage’s argument that
the setting the aquatic wall under the Great Lake is able to keep Asian carp
from accessing there.
Additionally,
using the electrical barrier in the Great Lake is mistaken. There is an opposing
argument regarding passing holes. Small Asian carps are highly likely to go
through the tiny holes on the fence. Thus, a school of calves can get into the
lake and reproduce when they are fully grown up. This rebuts the reading
passage’s assertion that another way to block the Asian carps is to make
electrical fences in the Great Lake.
Finally,
applying two-step method eliminating the Asian carp greatly becomes useless. A
theory related to using poison seems problematic. This is because depending on
toxicant to remove the fish is not only harmful for the environment, but also
dangerous for other fishes. Therefore, it might be polluting and hurting the
Great Lake more than before. This refutes the reading passage’s argument that it
is effective for people to remove reintroduce original species after the Asian carps
are removed from the Great Lake by toxic chemicals.
Writing 0–30 score scale Limited (1-16) Fair (17-23) ✓ Good (24–30)
전체적으로 대립되는 두 지문의 입장이나 detail들은 잘 파악하신 것 같은데, 아직 요약문이라 보기에는 분량이 너무 많습니다. 불필요한 표현을 다듬고 핵심만 남겨서 paraphrasing하는 데 신경쓰신다면 좋은 요약문이 될 것 같아요. 특히 반복되는 부분이 많으니 이 부분들 정리해주시면 좋을 것 같아요. 수고 많으셨습니다~! |