吕蕾的写作经验一：推荐慎小嶷老师的作文
<P >直到今天，我还没有见过<st1:PersonName w:st="on" ProductID="慎小嶷">慎小嶷</st1:PersonName>老师，但是在<FONT face=Tahoma>msn</FONT>上我们已经是老朋友了。作为一名曾经在国外生活多年的雅思教师，他在写作上颇有独到之处。这里是<st1:PersonName w:st="on" ProductID="慎">慎</st1:PersonName>老师专门为本工作室提供的<FONT face=Tahoma>7</FONT>月考试的两篇范文。如需转载请注明作者姓名和出处。</P><P >从这两篇范文里面，学生首先要学的就是如何提出观点。一个好的开头是完成题目要求的重要基础。在这两篇范文里，作者在提出观点的时候先对题目进行简要分析，这种分析不是简单的重复，也不是想当然地添加条件，而是客观地介绍背景情况，这样提出的观点才能够满足题目要求。</P>
<P >其次就是要懂得怎样进行遣词造句。文采飞扬并不意味着难词、怪词，而是要使用词汇准确到位，语言的表现形式多样，上下文衔接自然流畅。同样表达“赞同。。。观点”，<FONT face=Tahoma>Speaking from myself,I cannot agree more with their view.</FONT>和<FONT face=Tahoma>Personally,I cannot go along with their view.</FONT>却是不同的表达方式。<FONT face=Tahoma>Yet</FONT>、<FONT face=Tahoma>Consequently</FONT>等让上下文衔接更为紧密，插入语的自然使用让句式多样。</P>
<P >更重要的是，<st1:PersonName w:st="on" ProductID="慎">慎</st1:PersonName>老师上课一直强调论证部分。事实上所谓的“完成任务”也体现在论证上。可以看到这两篇论文的每一个分论点下都有严密的推理和完整的论证。</P>
<P >这都是同学平日里在阅读范文的时候需要特别注意的地方。</P>
<P ><p><FONT face=Tahoma> </FONT></p></P>
<P >吕蕾</P>
<P > </P>
<P > </P>
<P > </P>
<P > </P>
<P > </P>
<P > </P>
<P align=center><I>7/23 Essay question </I><p></p></P>
<P ><I>Some people think the media should not report details of crimes to the public.To what extent do you agree or disagree? <p></p></I></P>
<P >With the crime rate hovering at high levels, the print as well as the broadcast media thrive on detailed crime coverage. They dedicate large proportions of their space or airtime to ghastly crime stories and this trend is showing no sign of abating.Whether the media should publicise detailed accounts of criminal acts has triggered spirited debate.Many assert that the news media should refrain from revealing details of crimes.Speaking from myself,I cannot agree more with their view. <p></p></P>
<P >In the first place,given the mercenary motives behind most detailed crime coverage,it is advisable for us to discredit and discourage this practice.Today,most news outlets have their own crime reporters covering the police beat.Yet the principal purpose of such assignment is,in most instances,not to uphold the criminal justice system or to alarm the citizenry over some very real criminal threats,but to jack up newspaper circulations or television ratings. Consequently, much detailed crime coverage is biased, magnified, misrepresented,deliberately titillating or fraudulent.It only serves to terrorise communities and leave a multitude of law-abiding citizens constantly apprehensive, if not paranoid,about crime.<p></p></P>
<P >In the second place,detailed reports of crimes by the press afford the potential criminals very instructive learning materials,which are hard to obtain otherwise. Recounting premeditated crimes in graphic detail in the public domain helps those who are in the process of planning some criminal act perfect their schemes.Drawing on the well-documented crime stories in the media,would-be criminals learn how to avoid the pitfalls in their crime,thereby making themselves harder to identify and track down after the crime is actually carried out.And this in turn,may aggravate the already soaring crime rate. <p></p></P>
<P >Thirdly,detailed reports of heinous crimes may permanently traumatise the victims of the reported crimes.Without the victims’ consent,glaringly vivid and graphic accounts of flagitious crimes may constitute recurring nightmares to the individuals who have been victimised by these crimes.And given the pressure to “scoop” their rivals,to expedite things news outlets rarely consult the victims before they depict lurid details of horrific crimes to the public,in an attempt to satisfy the base curiosity of some crime-obssessed readers and viewers. <p></p></P>
<P >In sum,detailed crime coverage in the media is,more often than not,sensationalised so as to boost their market penetration.Even when some crime reporters wish to play the role of an objective chronicler, the divulged details can serve to facilitate future crimes and force crime victims to relive the horrible moments they experienced during the crime.And I am convinced if detailed crime coverage goes unchecked,it will continue to exert baneful influence on individuals,communities and societies. <p></p></P>
<P align=center><p> </p></P>
<P align=center><EM>7/16 essay question</EM><p></p></P>
<P ><EM>Many people work at home using modern technology today.Some people think only workers benefit from it,not the employers.To what extent do you agree or disagree?</EM><p></p></P>
<P >Progressions in telecommunications technology have enabled the practice of telecommuting,which means workers can conduct their assigned tasks without having to commute back and forth to work regularly.This emerging working pattern has profound implications on our work and life.Some assert that only workers,not the employers,can be beneficiaries of telecommuting.Personally,I cannot go along with their view.<p></p></P>
<P >Granted,telecommuting can bestow numerous benefits upon the employees.To begin with,employees do not have to live with the constant fear that their boss may look over their shoulders,as their work is supervised from far away and in more laissez faire fashions.There is no need for them to get super well-groomed and they can "slack off" a bit when the work-induced stress is too intense to bear.They can even do aerobics or take showers to refresh themselves provided they can meet the deadline set by their bosses.Furthermore,telecommuting can spare workers the everyday chore of traveling back and forth to work.And this,in turn,helps them to cut down on costs of bus fare,fuel or extravagant work clothes.Lastly,telecommuters can dedicate far more time to their spouse and offspring than office-bound workers.This can,doubtless,strengthen their family ties or may even salvage dysfunctional households.<p></p></P>
<P >Yet it would be erroneous if we fail to acknowledge the advantages telecommuting can confer on the employers.In the first place,less constraints,less peer pressure at work,no office politics and more flexible schedules can boost employee morale and enhance productivity.Empirical evidence abounds in this respect that more occupational freedom can,more often than not,lead to stronger vocational motivation and more innovative ideas.Hence,employers may well be better off not keeping tabs on their workers nine to five every weekday.In the second place telecommuting work force can help business-owners substantially curtail the overhead costs,such as the costs of rent and utilities.Thirdly,the fact that workers can telecommute via the worldwide communications network allows employers to recruit people from remote locations or even half way around the globe,thereby markedly augmenting the labor pool of businesses.Last but not least,employers will not be plagued by petty concerns suchas absenteeism and excessive sick leaves anymore if workers telecommute.<p></p></P>
<P >To conclude,I concede that telecommuting can bring about a variety of boons to employees.However,it would be unjustifiable if we overlooked the advantages telecommuting can spawn on the employers' side.And we should strive to seek out the most effective approach to exploit this win-win situation.<p></p></P>
<P ><p><FONT face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></p></P>
<P > </P> :victory: :time: :) :lol
页:
[1]