*진하게 표시한 부분은 제가 파악한 문단의 주요 내용이니 참고하세요^^
Both the lecture and the reading discuss with doing compulsory community service. The lecture asserts that doing mandatory community service is good for students. This explanation contradicts the reading passage’s claim that schools should not make students do mandatory community service. topic과 두 지문의 반대되는 입장을 간결하게 잘 소개한 서론입니다.
To begin with, in response to the reading, the professor says that schools can evaluate a student’s community service accurately. The lecturer asserts that schools already have been fair programs of community service and criteria to assess students’ result of community service. Also, supervisors can just fill out the form to assess and they can contact with when they have questions about assessment. This explanation refutes the reading passage’s claim that it is hard for schools to assess a student’s community service fairly because there is no method to evaluate. 대립되는 두 지문의 내용을 잘 정리한 문단입니다.
In addition, the lecturer rebuts the reading passage by stating that doing community service can provide students the chance to inspire. The professor gives an example that when students do volunteer work at hospital, they can be inspired by the works to be a doctor or teacher. This is very helpful for students to decide their jobs. This find effectively challenges the reading passage’s argument that students may obtain distorted perspectives about community service. 내용 정리에 필요한 요소들을 잘 요약해주셨습니다.
Lastly, the lecturer opposes the reading passage’s position by saying that doing compulsory community service doesn’t (does not으로 풀어주는 것이 더 좋습니다. is not, cannot 등도 마찬가지입니다. 단어수에도 보탬이 되겠지요^^) infringe on students’ right. This is attributed to the fact that According to the professor, students have to do their homework as a student. Also, as they should do mandatory community service as a student. 숙제를 해야 하기 "때문"에 봉사활동이 권리침해가 아니다, 라는 인과관계를 가진 내용이라기보다 학생으로서 숙제를 하듯 봉사활동을 하는 것도 학습의 일부이자 학생의 의무에 해당한다, 는 내용을 설명하고 있으므로 단순 부연설명으로 풀어내는 것이 더 자연스러울 것 같습니다. This finding directly casts doubt on the reading passage’s argument that it is an abuse of students’ right to require them to work against their will.
전반적으로 내용 정리에 필요한 부분을 잘 노트테이킹해주신 것 같습니다. 두 지문이 다루고 있는 소주제에 대해 일목요연한 정리도 잘 되어 있습니다. 문제지의 답안과 직접 확인하셔서 노트테이킹에서 빠진 부분이나 잘못 이해된 부분은 없는지 다시 한 번 내용 체크해주세요. 수고 많으셨습니다^^