▶ Your Answer :
In the lecture, the speaker contends that
the three methods in reading passage are groundless, which contradicts the
reading passage's assertion that there are several ways to solve the emerald
ash borers' problem.
To begin with, the speaker maintains that
removing trees is not an effective way. This is because it takes at least one to
two years to check the affected trees. Also, unlike urban area, it doesn't work
in the forest because there are too many trees to check one by one. This is in
contradictory to the reading passage's claim that it is the easiest way to
simply remove the affected trees.
The second argument the lecturer makes is
that a chemical treatment is not a that good idea to deal with the emerald ash
borers. He points out that insecticides often cause ground water pollution. This
view is in direct opposition to the reading's opinion that using insecticides
is a good to deal with these beetles.
Lastly, the lecturer asserts that releasing
parasitic wasps is not effective way. This is because the length of their life
time is dependent on the region. They will die when they are in cold area. 이 부분 흐름 더 명확하게 정리하면 좋을 것 같아요. 지역이나 기온에 따라 수명이 다르다는 점이 '어떤' 문제가 되어서 효과적이지 않다고 보는지를 지적하는 편이 좋을 것 같습니다. And, they might kill other types of insects,
so they are likely to ruin eco-system in North America. This refutes the reading passage's
insistence that biological pest control can be a solution.
Comment : 대부분의 내용들이 개연성있게 연결되어 있고, 핵심 내용도 잘 파악해주신 것 같습니다. 실제 지문을 정확히 모르는 상태에서 맥락만을 가지고 체크한 내용이니 실제 문제와 대조하면서 잘못 파악된 내용이나 빠진 내용은 없는지를 한 번 더 검토해주세요~ 전체적으로 요약문을 깔끔하게 잘 써 주셨습니다. 수고 많으셨습니다~!
Integrated Writing Rubrics Score 4.5/5 A response at this level is generally good in selecting the important information from the lecture and in coherently and accurately presenting this information in relation to the relevant information in the reading, but it may have minor omission, inaccuracy, vagueness, or imprecision of some content from the lecture or in connection to points made in the reading. A response is also scored at this level if it has more frequent or noticeable minor language errors, as long as such usage and grammatical structures do not result in anything more than an occasional lapse of clarity or in the connection of ideas.
|