The speaker claims that zoos are effective ways to protect and study
animals. This goes against the reading passage's claim that zoos are not beneficial to both humans
and animals. (인트로 간략하고 좋아요)
To begin with, the
speaker states that zoos are effective tools to protect endangered animal
species. The speaker takes an example of Californian condors. In the early
twentieth century, Californian condors were almost at the point of extinction.
So experts tried to thrive breed them in zoos.
Fortunately, experts succeeded in breeding them and condors could return to
their natural habitats. It means that there is no problem with breeding in
captivity. This casts doubt on the reading passage's claim that zoos
have had very little success in saving animals, as many animals do
not breed cannot be bred in zoos.
On top of that, the
speaker predicates that modern zoos are trying to set up living
places that are similar to their real habitats. For instance, a zoo in
North Carolina tried to mimick African plains for animals and
had good responses from zookeepers. This example suggests that
if zoos provide animals with habitats that are similar to their natural
habitats, animals can be safer. This refutes the reading passage's claim that as
artificial habitats are not similar to natural habitats, animals would behave
abnormally or could be depressed.
Finally, the speaker
argues that zoos are the best way to study animals directly. Although there are
many books about animals, we cannot usually see animals them with our own
eyes. On the other hand, we can see many animals, including endangered species, in zoos. (너무 comma를 많이 사용하는 건 좋지 않아요. 차라리 In
zoos on the other hand, we can see many animals including endangered species. 라고 해주세요) Thus zoos are the
best place to research animals and get more precise information about them.
This challenges the reading passage's claim that because there are a score of
books already, we can study animals with them, and in addition, we
can just observe them in the wild.
Writing 0-30 Score Scale
Score: Good (25)
Overall comment: 잘 쓰셨습니다. 두 본문의 내용을 잘 비교해 주셨고, 근거도 잘 대주셨습니다. 흐름이 매우 매끄럽고요. 다만 위에 지적한 것과 마찬가지로 철자 오류를 조금 조심해주세요. (against, mimic) 또한 comma를 너무 자주 사용하는 건 좋지 않습니다. 수고하셨어요.