There is no complete consensus that has been reached on this topic, yet I would like to take a stance and make my agreement with the given thesis that it is more beneficial for people to spend more money from governments to spend enhancing to enhance accessibility of the Internet than improving to improve public transportation. vehicles. In order to substantiate my central focal points, I will provide specific reasons and explore the given topic in great detail in this essay.
To start with, I firmly believe that since nowadays, the Internet is necessary for everyone nowadays, government must spend more money on for the Internet. It is not just small problem, if the Internet is not accessible at specific time that someone has to work on their tasks by using the internet. Opponents of my perspective claims that public transportation is more necessary than the Internet for people in their daily lives. Proponents of this view They have several points as the rationales for their argument and their argument might have some validity. But after closer look, there exists an abundance of examples that calling into question what they claim. Among such claims, an instance that I am going to describe here can elucidate their incorrect viewpoint. When my family visited one of the cities in the Philippines to take a rest, my father suddenly got an urgent phone call from his company, so he needed to work on some documents and upload them it in on the Internet as soon as possible. However, in the city, even in hotel, it was almost impossible to use the Internet. As a result, my family had no choice but to give up all the schedule, and go to the public place where which offered offers free Internet. This validates my earlier contention that government should put more money to making make the Internet more easily accessible. 다른 나라에서 인터넷이 잘 안 돼서 불편을 겪은 사례는 인터넷이 안 되면 불편하다는 정도로만 설명될 뿐이기 때문에 '정부가 인터넷의 접근성을 높이는 데 투자해야 하는 이유'와 직접적인 관련이 없어요. 특히 대중교통보다 인터넷 접근성에 투자하는 것이 더 중요하다는 점을 appeal해야 하기 때문에 더 설득력있는 구체적인 근거가 필요합니다.
The account of mine that I illustrated above is not the only evidence to support my view. A recent survey conducted by one of the leading educational consulting firms in Korea endorsed my opinion when the survey respondents were asked whether they sided with the argument that governments must make more budget in the part of Internet accessibility for people’s convenience or not. A leading education expert claims that in modern society city, the Internet has been adopted in many parts. Most of people feel inconvenience when they cannot access to the Internet when they really need it. Moreover, many affairs have been done online. On the other hand hands, it means nowadays without accessing the Internet, many affairs will be in trouble, and many people will feel kind of annoyed, because they use the Internet many times in their everyday lives. 본론1의 주장과 크게 다르지 않고, '불편하다'정도로만 근거가 정리되기 때문에 설득력이 약합니다.
In conclusion, despite of the fact that there may be some opinions that governments should spend more money to improve public transportation. However, from the reasons that I described above, we may reach to the conclusion that governments must make more budget to make the Internet more easily accessible.
Comment :
'인터넷 접속이 잘 안 되면 불편하니까 인터넷 접근성을 높이는 데 돈을 투자하는 것이 대중교통에 투자하는 것보다 중요하다'라는 주장은 설득력이 약한 편이에요. 특히 두 가지 사례로 본론을 제시하는 데 있어서 두 내용 모두 인터넷이 잘 안돼서 불편한 사례 정도에 그쳐 있기 때문에 설득력을 갖기 어렵습니다. 대중교통보다 인터넷 접근성이 더 중요하다는 점을 명확히 보여줄 수 있는 주장을 제시해서 내용을 발전시켜보시면 좋을 것 같아요. 수량표현과 주술호응 관련한 문법오류가 종종 있으니 체크해주세요~ 수고 많으셨습니다~!
Independent Writing Rubrics Score 3/5
An essay at this level is marked by one or more of the following :
- Addresses the topic and task using somewhat developed explanations, exemplifications and/or details
(일정 수준의 설명과 예시를 활용하여 문제의 요구사항을 해결함)
- Displays unity, progression and coherence, though connection of ideas may be occasionally obscured
(문맥이 모호한 부분들이 있을 수 있으나 통일성, 연속성, 일관성이 어느 정도 드러남)
- May demonstrate inconsistent facility in sentence formation and word choice that may result in lack of clarity and occasionally obscure meaning
(문장의 구성 또는 어휘의 선택에서 내용의 명확성이 떨어지거나 의미 전달이 불분명한 부분들이 있음)
- Displays facility in the use of language, demonstrating syntactic variety and range of vocabulary, though it will probably have occasional noticeable minor errors in structure, word form or use of idiomatic language that do not interfere with meaning
(글의 의미를 손상시키지 않는 범위 내에서 사소한 문장구조, 단어 형태 오류를 보일 수 있으나, 전반적으로 어휘・통사적 다양성을 갖춘 유창한 언어 사용을 보임)