While the author of the reading passage
argues that three methods for decimating the rootworms, the lecturer opposes reading
passage's assertion with different views.
Firstly, the professor points out that the assertion
regarding use of strong peticides is useless.
If famers use the peticides, of course it
is harmful, it also doesn't work completely because some pests are small, and
resistant to the pesticides. They can survive, then reproduce. They will poplulate
again quickly. This calls into question the reading
passage's argument that the pesticides kill the larvae effectively.
Secondly, the professor contends that the
opinion concerning planting corn earlier than normal is not helpful. The rootworm larvae cannot eat matured
thick roots, it is effective in this regard. The corn, however, will be killed
by the weather. The cold weather frost them.
This goes against the reading passage's
argument that the farmer should plant corn earlier than normal.
Finally, the professor argues that the claim
about alternating in the planting of crops is mistaken. If farmers once plant corn and they plant
soy next year, the bugs will adapt to this cycle. They will delay hatching when
there are only soy in the farm. This contradicts the idea presented in the
reading passage that farmer can alternate in the planting of crops.
점수: 27
지적할 부분이 없는 통합형 에세이입니다. 통합형 에세이에서 가장 중요한 부분을 차지하는 것은 한 주제에 대하여서 서로 다른 정보를 가지고 있는 리딩과 리스닝이 어떻게 비교하고 반박을 하는 것인지를 보는 것 입니다. 지금 이 에세이 같은 경우는 리딩이나 리스닝 둘 다 서로 구체적으로 자신의 주장을 보여주기 때문에 한 주제에 대하여서 서로의 페시지가 어떤 견해를 가지고 있는 지를 잘 파악 할 수 있었습니다. 수고많으셨습니다.