▶ Your Answer :
The reading passage covers three major
points concerning the infeasible use of bacteria for removing oil spills in
oceans. The speaker, however, clearly states why these points are debatable. (GOOD)
The first point made by the author is that
it takes long to clean the oil-contaminated ocean using bacteria. However, the
speaker challenges (핵심주장이 맨 앞으로 와야 합니다) this by mentioning that bacteria can consume small particles more
easily since people break up the oil spills into small droplets using techniques, thereby accelerating the cleaning process. Hence, the time it takes leads to the point where it may
not be effective to consider using the bacteria impractical.
Another point made by the writer is that the excessive fertilizer that is used to grow bacteria causes algae blooms because
an increased number of bacteria will deplete the oxygen. On the contrary, the
lecturer asserts that this is not true due to the fact that scientists not only
calculate the necessary amounts of fertilizers but also compute limits to
prevent the bloom, so the environmental effect is controlled under a cautious
examination. Thus, the algae blooms might not be a persuasive reason to claim
that utilizing bacteria is inefficient.
Lastly, the reading claims that the use of bacteria
does not work well at certain depths because those organisms does not prosper
at low temperatures. The professor debunks this by saying that this technique
is the only way to clean the deep water. Even if the deep-sea temperature is
cold, bacteria will get the job done eventually. Therefore, cold temperature is
probably not a viable reason to regard the use of bacteria as implausible.
Writing 0–30 score scale: Limited (1-16) / Fair (17-23) / Good (24–30)
ADDRESSING TOPIC
|
ORGANIZATION
|
PROGRESSION AND COHERENCE
|
LANGUAGE USE
|
GRAMMAR
|
GOOD
|
GOOD
|
FAIR
|
GOOD
|
GOOD
|
각 카테고리별 SCORE: LIMITED / FAIR / GOOD
|
- Lecture/Reading 내용이 각각 잘 정리되었습니다. 수고하셨습니다. |