The lecturer argues that imposing congestion fee is good solutions for reducing traffic congestion. This goes against the reading passage's claim that congestion fee is not a good solution.
First of all,the lecturer asserts that congestion fee would not hurt business. In fact, London case was economic recession when after economy restored the selling was boosted. This contradicts the reading passage's claim that congestion fee would hurt businesses. ( body에 살을 좀 더 붙혀 주세요 London example을 좀 더 자세히 )
On top of that, the lecturer claims that congestion fee would not burden on people with low incomes. The lecturer points out that low-income people already take public transportation. Because they have low-income then they can't pay parking fee or oil fee. These points contradict the reading passage's claim that congestion fee put financial burden with low-income. ( 역시 좀 더 detail을 붙여서 supporitng해주세요 )
Finally, the lecturer says that congestion fee would not increase delivery expense. In fact, it makes small businesses delivery quicker and they consolidate deliver and it makes less traffic so truck get more destination with speed. This contradicts the reading passage's claim that congestion fee would increase delivery expenses and small businesses will suffer the consequences.
-conclsuion부분으로 body에 썻던 내용들을 정리해 주세요
그래서 글의 완성도를 높여 주세요
-body 부분에서 핵심된 내용을 정리해서 글을 전개 시키는 연습해주세요
주요 채점기준 (항목별 5-4-3-2-1점수로 30점 만점 자가채점)
논제 파악 effectiveness in addressing the task
적절한 설명 appropriate explanation
적절한 예증, 구체적 설명 appropriate exemplification, details
일관성, 단계적 구성, 주제와의 연관성 unity, progression, coherence
다양한 단어 구사 syntactic variety
적절한 단어 선택, 관용적 표현 word choice, idiomaticity
Writing 0–30 score scale
Fair (17–22)