▶ Your Answer :
The lecture’s argument contradicts with three major points expressed in the reading passage. They both talk about _______________ (whether meerkats have altruistic behavior or not).
First, the reading passage states that meerkats exhibit altruistic behavior when a standing guard keeps on watching for danger without eating for the sake of the safety of others. However, the listening passage refutes the idea by saying that the guard eats to the until it is full before it stands standing for guard. Thus such , so that behavior of meerkats is not altruistic at all.
Lecturer의 point가 좀 약해요. 분명 lecturer가 반박하면서 supporting detail도 더 말해주었을텐데 그것을 좀 더 강조하셔야 해요. 그리고 마지막 문장에 “at all” 쓰면서 강조하는 것도 좋을 것 같아요^^
Second, according to the reading, sentinel gives an alarm so that other meerkats can immediately flee, and when it’s it is doing so, it puts itself in danger because while others run as a group, the guard runs away alone attracting in order to attract the predator’s attention. The lecture contradicts the reading by arguing that actually, the sentinel actually has the better chance of escaping impending predators because it is the first to detect the presence of predators and fleeing in group attracts more attention from predators.
Third, the reading suggests that altruism can be seen in human behaviors when some people donate their organs to others. Contrary to the argument in the reading passage, the professor says that those who donate their organs are not true altruistic altruism because they gain something that is more valuable that than materialistic things such as respect from others.
Point는 좋았는데 intro에서 reading과 lecturer가 무엇에 대해 이야기하는지 써주셔야 해요. 저는 meerkats’ altruistic behavior에 관한 것인 줄 알았지만 마지막 문단에서 humans’ donation of organs 이야기가 나와서 통합형 문제가 무엇에 관한 것인지 도통 감을 못 잡겠네요. 마찬가지로 에세이가 채점자에게도 주제를 상기시켜줘야 해요.
그리고 중간중간에 사소한 grammar mistake있는데 보통 통합형을 쓰면 시간이 남으니 꼭 double check해주시길 바랄게요. |