TOEFL TPO -1 Academic Discussion Writing Sample: In class this week, we are looking at how markets work, particularly in regard to energy costs. Petroleum, also known simply as oil, is one of the mostimportantinternational commodities.When the global market price of oil goes up, fuels such as gasoline(petrol) also become more expensive.Many people think governments should step in to  protect consumers fromincreases in fuel prices. What is your view? Do you think governments should actively keep fuel prices low for energy costs?

1. 子项得分

• Relevance and Contribution to Discussion: 4.5

• Clarity and Elaboration of Viewpoint: 4.0

• Language Use and Grammar: 4.0

2. 预估分数

• Estimated Score: 26

3. 任务完成度

这篇文章的任务完成度较高，但仍有改进的空间。首先，你可以更具体地说明政府不应干预燃料价格的原因，例如环境问题和市场自由。此外，你可以提供更多具体的例子来支持你的观点。

示例1（改进前）：To be specific, if the fuel prices is low, more and more citizens may choose to drive when they go out such as working and shopping. 示例1（改进后）：To be specific, if the fuel prices are low, more citizens may choose to drive when they go out for work or shopping, which can lead to increased air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.

示例2（改进前）：For instance, a few years ago, the price of fuel was pretty low then a lot of people decided driving the car instead of taking the subway or bus when they go out. 示例2（改进后）：For instance, a few years ago, when the price of fuel was significantly lower, many people chose to drive their cars instead of taking public transportation like subways or buses, resulting in increased traffic congestion and longer commute times.

4. 文章结构与组织

文章结构方面，整体上还算清晰。但是，在引入和总结部分可以加强。在引言中，建议简要介绍文章的主题和你的观点。在结论部分，可以总结你的论点并重申你的观点。

示例3（改进前）：Kelly mentions that keeping fuel prices low is a good idea. However, I personally believe that the government should not keep fuel prices low because this strategy may cause traffic jam in city. 示例3（改进后）：In this essay, I will discuss the debate on whether governments should keep fuel prices low. While Kelly believes it is a good idea, I argue that the government should not intervene in fuel pricing due to its potential negative consequences, such as increased traffic congestion.

示例4（改进前）：In conclusion, I personally believe that the government should not keep the fuel prices low. 示例4（改进后）：In conclusion, although some people argue that keeping fuel prices low can benefit consumers, I firmly believe that the government should not intervene in this matter due to its potential negative impact on traffic congestion and environmental issues.

5. 语法批改

Kelly mentions that keeping fuel prices low is a good idea. However, I personally believe that the government should not keep fuel prices low because this strategy may cause traffic jam in city. To be specific, if the fuel prices isare(punctuation + plural noun + singular verb) low, more and more citizens may choose to drive when they go out such as working and shopping. Furthermore, more cars in the city may have more possibility to cause traffic jam and accident on the road. For instance, a few years ago, the price of fuel was pretty low then a lot of people decided driving the car instead of taking the subway or bus when they go out. So, in these few years, more traffic jams were caused, and more accidents were happened. All of these caused a troubletrouble(In a trouble) of the city. In conclusion, I personally believe that the government should not keep the fuel prices low.

Section Title: 6 Article Revision

In response to the discussion on whether governments should keep fuel prices low, I would like to argue against this notion. Although Kelly posits that low fuel prices benefit consumers, particularly those who rely on personal or public transportation for work, I contend that artificially maintaining low fuel prices could lead to negative consequences such as increased traffic congestion and road accidents. Specifically, when fuel prices are reduced, more individuals may opt to drive their vehicles for various purposes, including work and leisure activities. This surge in vehicular usage can exacerbate traffic congestion and elevate the risk of accidents. For example, during a period of low fuel prices in recent years, many people chose to drive rather than utilize public transportation options like subways or buses. Consequently, there was a noticeable increase in traffic jams and road accidents during that time. Therefore, I firmly believe that governments should not intervene to keep fuel prices artificially low. (161 words)

In response to the discussion on whether governments should keep fuel prices low (changed "7 文章批改" to a more relevant title), I would like to argue against this notion. Although Kelly mentions that keeping fuel prices low is posits that low fuel prices benefit consumers, particularly those who rely on personal or public transportation for work (clarified Kelly's position), I contend that artificially maintaining low fuel prices could lead to negative consequences such as increased traffic congestion and road accidents (improved sentence structure). Specifically, when fuel prices are reduced, more individuals may opt to drive their vehicles for various purposes, including work and leisure activities (rephrased for clarity). This surge in vehicular usage can exacerbate traffic congestion and elevate the risk of accidents (improved sentence structure). For example, during a good idea. However, period of low fuel prices in recent years (added context), many people chose to drive rather than utilize public transportation options like subways or buses (clarified comparison). Consequently, there was a noticeable increase in traffic jams and road accidents during that time (improved sentence structure). Therefore, I personally firmly believe that the government governments should not intervene to keep fuel prices low because this strategy may cause traffic jam in city. To be specific, if the fuel prices is low, more and more citizens may choose to drive when they go out such as working and shopping. Furthermore, more cars in the city may have more possibility to cause traffic jam and accident on the road. For instance, a few years ago, the price of fuel was pretty low then a lot of people decided driving the car instead of taking the subway or bus when they go out. So, in these few years, more traffic jams were caused, and more accidents were happened. All of these caused a trouble of the city. In conclusion, I personally believe that the government should not keep the fuel prices low.artificially low (strengthened concluding statement).

Display title: 8 思维导图

1. Introduction
   - Government intervention in fuel prices
   - Argument against keeping fuel prices low

2. Negative consequences of low fuel prices
   a. Increased traffic congestion
   b. Elevated risk of road accidents

3. Example: Period of low fuel prices
   - More people choosing to drive
   - Increased traffic jams and accidents

4. Public transportation alternatives
   - Subways, buses, etc.

5. Conclusion
   - Governments should not keep fuel prices artificially low

Display title: 9 关键词