▶ Your Answer :
Opinions are divided as to whether governments should spend money
for the more accessible Internet rather than for more useful public
transportation. People of various ages and from different walks of life may
take diverse positions on this controversial issue. Personally, I believe that
governments have to spend more budgets enhancing to enhance public transportation than to
create creating better accessibility of the Internet for the following reasons.
To begin with, governments should use more money for developing public
transportation than for the easier Internet accessibility because it is much
more economical. To be specific, if the governments spend money improving to improve
public transport options, there is a higher possibility of creating more
opportunities for the governments to save money for the future and to boost
economic growth. This is due to the fact that the Internet accessibility has
been already developed. 인터넷 접근성이 이미 높아서 대중교통에 투자하는 게 경제적이라는 연결은 좀 어색해요. Actually, people can get valuable and useful
information very easily on the Internet without much effort. This means that if
you go on the Internet, you can get any desired information regardless of time
and places. For example, when I looked for some information about my science
projects through Google, it took only a few minutes to find out all the details
of what I wanted to know. Like this, people have already accessed information
easily on the Internet. For the sake of economic aspects, governments should
invest money to make more on convenient public transportation than the Internet
more easily accessible. 인터넷이 이미 잘 발달해있다는 점과 public transportation에 투자하는 게 경제적으로 더 이득이라는 점을 연결하는 건 좀 어려울 것 같아요. 인터넷에 대한 설명도 '이미 접근성이 높다'는 점을 보여주기보다는 인터넷을 활용해서 정보를 얻기 좋다는 내용에만 그쳐있어서 오히려 position이 애매해보일 수 있어요. public transportation에 투자하는 게 더 경제적으로 좋다는 점에 초점을 두고 풀어주는 게 나을 것 같아요.
Second, developed public transportation can enable people to enjoy a
better quality of life. Beyond my personal experience, there are many articles
which can support my argument. They expressed doubts that are similar to my
point of view. A few weeks ago, I had a chance to read an op-ed piece from the
Dong-A Daily News that is related to the topic. An eminent renowned professor in the
field added in an interview that people felt the happiest when they could use comfortable
and convenient public transport options. He went on to say that people nowadays
are too busy with their life juggling with responsibility and privacy.
Therefore, they deserve to enjoy a better quality of life. Out of many opinions
from him, the part of an effective government policy to improve a quality of
life was noteworthy. The interview clearly proves that enhancing public
transportation makes people feel happy so governments should make advanced
public transport options rather than make the Internet more accessible.
As mentioned above, based on the examples related to economy and a
quality of life, I can conclude that governments have use much money to develop
public transportation than to create the Internet more easily accessible.
Comment : 경제적인 이유와 사람들의 삶의 질의 측면에서 입장을 뒷받침하는 것은 충분히 reasonable하지만, 좀 더 논리적인 단계가 분명해지면 좋을 것 같아요. 이미 인터넷이 잘 발달돼있는데 거기에 돈을 투자하는 것은 '낭비다'라는 식으로 명확히 내가 반대하는 부분을 강조하거나, 인터넷은 쓰지 않는 세대도 많은데 대중교통은 여러 세대가 두루 이용하니까 투자대비 더 많은 사람이 이익을 본다는 점에서 대중교통에 투자하는 것이 더 '경제적이다'하는 식으로 명확한 근거로 정리해서 한 부분에만 초점을 두고 내용을 풀어주는 게 좋으니 참고해주세요~ 수고 많으셨습니다~!
Independent Writing Rubrics Score 3.5/5 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)
- May display accurate but limited range of syntactic structures and vocabulary (답안의 내용은 주제에 부합하지만 제한된 문장구조나 어휘를 사용함) |