TOEFL TPO -1 Academic Discussion Writing Sample: Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on specific points made in the reading passage.
真实用户提交的答案，配合AI智能评估与反馈
共有 1 份用户提交的样本
开始免费练习题目概览
Article
Critics say that current voting systems used in the United States are inefficient and often lead to the inaccurate counting of votes. Miscounts can be especially damaging if an election is closely contested. Those critics would like the traditional systems to be replaced with far more efficient and trustworthy computerized voting systems. In traditional voting, one major source of inaccuracy is that people accidentally vote for the wrong candidate. Voters usually have to find the name of their candidate on a large sheet of paper containing many names—the ballot—and make a small mark next to that name. People with poor eyesight can easily mark the wrong name. The computerized voting machines have an easy-to-use touch screen technology: to cast a vote, a voter needs only to touch the candidate’s name on the screen to record a vote for that candidate; voters can even have the computer magnify the name for easier viewing. Another major problem with old voting systems is that they rely heavily on people to count the votes. Officials must often count up the votes one by one, going through every ballot and recording the vote. Since they have to deal with thousands of ballots, it is almost inevitable that they will make mistakes. If an error is detected, a long and expensive recount has to take place. In contrast, computerized systems remove the possibility of human error, since all the vote counting is done quickly and automatically by the computers. Finally some people say it is too risky to implement complicated voting technology nationwide. But without giving it a thought, governments and individuals alike trust other complex computer technology every day to be perfectly accurate in banking transactions as well as in the communication of highly sensitive information.
Lecturer
While traditional voting systems have some problems, it’s doubtful that computerized voting will make the situation any better. Computerized voting may seem easy for people who are used to computers. But what about people who aren’t? People who can’t afford computers, people who don’t use them on a regular basis—these people will have trouble using. computerized voting machines. These voters can easily cast the wrong vote or be discouraged from voting altogether because of fear of technology. Furthermore, it’s true that humans make mistakes when they count up ballots by hand. But are we sure that computers will do a better job? After all, computers are programmed by humans, so “human error” can show up in mistakes in their programs. And the errors caused by these defective programs may be far more serious. The worst a human official can do is miss a few ballots. But an error in a computer program can result in thousands of votes being miscounted or even permanently. removed from the record. And in many voting systems, there is no physical record of the votes, so a computer recount in the case of a suspected error is impossible! As for our trust of computer technology for banking and communications, remember one thing: these systems are used daily and they are used heavily. They didn’t work flawlessly when they were first introduced. They had to be improved on and improved on until they got as reliable as they are today. But voting happens only once every two years nationally in the United States and not much more than twice a year in many local areas. This is hardly sufficient for us to develop confidence that computerized voting can be fully trusted.
用户样本与评估结果
用户样本
The article and the lecture are both examining the idea of traditional voting systems and Computerized voting systems. The article outlines three reasons why computerized voting systems would be beneficial. The lecturer casts doubt on the article and instead proposes a problem for each of the benefits. Firstly, The article suggests that the main issue with traditional voting is that people can vote for the wrong person. It states how ‘people accidentally vote for the wrong candidate. Voters usually have to find the name of their candidate on a large sheet of paper containing many names.’ This is because a sheet of paper with lots of names on it can become unclear and confusing. Moreover, it is not accessible to those who have a disability as ‘people with poor eyesight can easily mark the wrong name.’ This indicates how errors are being made before votes are counted. In contrast to this, the lecturer casts doubt on this. He gives the idea that computerized voting is now still problematic. It demonstrates how ‘Computerized voting may seem easy for people who are used to computers. But what about people who aren’t?’ This illustrates that not everyone is used to using computers. In addition, the lecturer states that ‘People who can’t afford computers, people who don’t use them on a regular basis.’ This highlights how not all of them can not afford to have them in their home. It could therefore be argued that errors made by traditional voting can be more severe and occur easily by humans. Secondly, the traditional voting can be one of the worst systems in which people have to count votes manually. When the article says ‘Officials must often count up the votes one by one, going through every ballot and recording the vote.’ This outlines how counting ballots is monotonous and very time consuming. Furthermore, it is not worth investing in human resources as ‘Since [people] have to deal with thousands of ballots, it is almost inevitable that they will make mistakes. If an error is detected, a long and expensive recount has to take place.’ This states that we are only human and mistakes are natural and because of this, a mistake is inevitable. On the other hand, the lecturer suggests that because of human error, there could be mistakes made by computer programming. It is expressed how ’computers are programmed by humans, so “human error” can show up in mistakes in their programs. And the errors caused by these defective programs may be far more serious.’ This highlights that mistakes made by a computer overall would be far more detrimental than mistakes made by a human. In conclusion, the traditional voting would be more time consuming in repetitive counting if compared to the computerized voting system. Finally, some modern technology, such as computerized voting systems, could be not fully reliable. It states how ‘people say it is too risky to implement complicated voting technology nationwide.’ This illustrates that people are apprehensive to trust modern technology. However, all technology has to be new at some point, we have to start somewhere with a new system. When the article says ‘But without giving it a thought, governments and individuals alike trust other complex computer technology every day’ This highlights how people will fully trust computerized voting systems in the future someday. In contrast to this, the lecturer shows that computerized voting systems are not like other modern technology. When the lecturer declares that ‘these systems are used daily and they are used heavily. They didn’t work flawlessly when they were first introduced.’ This outlines how other systems, such as banking, are used daily and by large quantities of people. They did not work flawlessly when they were first introduced and have had time to work on errors and issues. Nevertheless, computerized voting systems are likely to be used less. It states that ‘But voting happens only once every two years nationally in the United States and not much more than twice a year in many local areas.’ This highlights how computerized voting systems would not be given the same amount of time to be perfected. Furthermore, the lecturer suggests that computerized voting systems need time to be improved or developed. This is evident when the lecturer states ‘This is hardly sufficient for us to develop confidence that computerized voting can be fully trusted’ This also outlines how the computerized voting systems would need time to be improved and then be able to work perfectly. It is clear that computerized voting systems will be more efficient and beneficial in the future if there is enough time to develop them to work with no defects.
评估结果
1. Sub Scores
Relevance and Contribution to Discussion: 4.5 Clarity and Elaboration of Viewpoint: 4.0 Language Use and Grammar: 4.0
2. Estimated Scores
Estimated Score: 27 (based on the average of Sub Scores)
3. Task completeness
The essay does a good job of summarizing the points made in the lecture and explaining how they cast doubt on specific points made in the reading passage. However, there is room for improvement in terms of clarity and elaboration of viewpoints. The essay could benefit from providing more concise summaries of the arguments presented in both the article and lecture, as well as more clearly contrasting these viewpoints.
Example 1: Instead of writing "This is because a sheet of paper with lots of names on it can become unclear and confusing.", you could write "The article argues that traditional ballots are confusing due to their layout, leading to accidental votes for the wrong candidate."
Example 2: Rather than saying "This highlights how not all of them can not afford to have them in their home.", try writing "The lecturer points out that not everyone has access to computers or is familiar with using them, which could lead to difficulties when using computerized voting machines."
4. Essay structure and organization
The essay has a clear structure with an introduction, body, and conclusion. Each paragraph focuses on a specific point from the article or lecture, along with supporting details. However, there is room for improvement in terms of transitions between ideas and paragraphs.
Example 1: To improve transitions between ideas within a paragraph, you could use phrases like "Furthermore" or "In addition". For example: "Furthermore, it’s true that humans make mistakes when they count up ballots by hand. But are we sure that computers will do a better job?"
Example 2: To enhance transitions between paragraphs, consider using phrases like "On the other hand" or "However". For instance: "On the other hand, the lecturer suggests that because of human error, there could be mistakes made by computer programming."
5. Grammar
The article and the lecture are both examiningexamine the idea of traditional voting systems and Computerizedcomputerized voting systems. The article outlines three reasons why computerized voting systems would be beneficial. TheHowever, the lecturer casts doubt on the article and instead proposes a problem for each of the benefits.
Firstly, Thethe article suggests that the main issue with traditional voting is that people can vote for the wrong person. It states how ‘peoplethat 'people accidentally vote for the wrong candidate. Voters usually have to find the name of their candidate on a large sheet of paper containing many names.' This is because a sheet of paper with lots of names on it can become unclear and confusing. Moreover, it is not accessible to those who have a disability as ‘people'people with poor eyesight can easily mark the wrong name.' This indicates howthat errors are being made before votes are counted. In contrast to this, the lecturer casts doubt on this. He gives the idea that computerized voting is now still problematic. Itnot without its problems. He demonstrates how ‘Computerizedthat 'Computerized voting may seem easy for people who are used to computers. But what about people who aren't?' This illustrates that not everyone is used to using computers. In addition, the lecturer states that ‘People'People who can't afford computers, people who don't use them on a regular basis.' This highlights how not all of them can not afford to have them in their home. It could therefore be argued that errors made by traditional voting can be more severe and occur easily by humans.
Secondly, the traditional voting can be one of the worst systems in which people have to count votes manually. When the article says ‘Officials'Officials must often count up the votes one by one, going through every ballot and recording the vote.' This outlines how counting ballots is monotonous and very time consuming.time-consuming. Furthermore, it is not worth investing in human resources as ‘Since'Since [people] have to deal with thousands of ballots, it is almost inevitable that they will make mistakes. If an error is detected, a long and expensive recount has to take place.' This states that we are only human and mistakes are natural and because of this, a mistake is inevitable. On the other hand, the lecturer suggests that because of human error, there could be mistakes made by computer programming. It is expressed how 'computers are programmed by humans, so “human error” can show up in mistakes in their programs. And the errors caused by these defective programs may be far more serious.' This highlights that mistakes made by a computer overall would be far more detrimental than mistakes made by a human. In conclusion, the traditional voting would be more time consumingtime-consuming in repetitive counting if compared to the computerized voting system.
Finally, some modern technology, such as computerized voting systems, could be not fully reliable. It states how ‘people'people say it is too risky to implement complicated voting technology nationwide.' This illustrates that people are apprehensive to trust modern technology. However, all technology has to be new at some point, we have to start somewhere with a new system. When the article says ‘But'But without giving it a thought, governments and individuals alike trust other complex computer technology every day' This highlights how people will fully trust computerized voting systems in the future someday. In contrast to this, the lecturer shows that computerized voting systems are not like other modern technology. When the lecturer declares that ‘these'these systems are used daily and they are used heavily. They didn't work flawlessly when they were first introduced.' This outlines how other systems, such as banking, are used daily and by large quantities of people. They did not work flawlessly when they were first introduced and have had time to work on errors and issues. Nevertheless, computerized voting systems are likely to be used less. It states that ‘But'But voting happens only once every two years nationally in the United States and not much more than twice a year in many local areas.' This highlights how computerized voting systems would not be given the same amount of time to be perfected. Furthermore, the lecturer suggests that computerized voting systems need time to be improved or developed. This is evident when the lecturer states ‘This'This is hardly sufficient for us to develop confidence that computerized voting can be fully trusted' This also outlines how the computerized voting systems would need time to be improved and then be able to work perfectly. It is clear that computerized voting systems will be more efficient and beneficial in the future if there is enough time to develop them to work with no defects.
Display title: 6 Revised Essay
The article and the lecture both discuss the topic of traditional voting systems versus computerized voting systems. The article presents three reasons why computerized voting systems would be advantageous, while the lecturer casts doubt on these claims and proposes potential problems for each of the supposed benefits.
Firstly, the article asserts that a primary issue with traditional voting is that people can inadvertently vote for the wrong candidate due to the confusing layout of ballots and difficulty in reading small print. In contrast, the lecturer contends that computerized voting may still be problematic, as not everyone is familiar with or has access to computers. This could lead to errors or discourage some individuals from participating in elections altogether.
Secondly, the article highlights the inefficiency of manual vote counting in traditional voting systems, which can result in mistakes and necessitate time-consuming recounts. However, the lecturer argues that errors could also occur in computer programming due to human involvement in their creation. These errors might have more severe consequences than those made by humans during manual counting processes.
Finally, while acknowledging initial apprehension towards implementing computerized voting technology nationwide, the article suggests that people will eventually trust it as they do with other complex technologies used daily. The lecturer counters this point by emphasizing that other technological systems had time to improve and become reliable through frequent use, whereas computerized voting systems would not have this advantage due to infrequent elections.
In conclusion, both traditional and computerized voting systems have their respective strengths and weaknesses. It is essential to consider these factors carefully before implementing any changes to ensure a fair and efficient electoral process. (278 words)
The article and the lecture are both examining the idea discuss the topic of traditional voting systems and Computerized voting systems. versus computerized voting systems (revised for clarity). The article outlines presents three reasons why computerized voting systems would be beneficial. The advantageous, while the lecturer casts doubt on the article and instead these claims and proposes a problem potential problems for each of the benefits. supposed benefits (revised for coherence).
Firstly, The article suggests that the main the article asserts that a primary issue with traditional voting is that people can inadvertently vote for the wrong person. It states how ‘people accidentally vote for the wrong candidate. Voters usually have to find the name candidate due to the confusing layout of their candidate on a large sheet of paper containing many names.’ This is because a sheet of paper with lots of names on it can become unclear and confusing. Moreover, it is not accessible to those who have a disability ballots and difficulty in reading small print (rephrased for clarity). In contrast, the lecturer contends that computerized voting may still be problematic, as ‘people with poor eyesight can easily mark the wrong name.’ This indicates how errors are being made before votes are counted. In contrast to this, the lecturer casts doubt on this. He gives the idea that computerized voting is now still problematic. It demonstrates how ‘Computerized voting may seem easy for people who are used to computers. But what about people who aren’t?’ This illustrates that not everyone is used to using computers. In addition, familiar with or has access to computers (rephrased for conciseness). This could lead to errors or discourage some individuals from participating in elections altogether (added to provide context).
Secondly, the article highlights the inefficiency of manual vote counting in traditional voting systems, which can result in mistakes and necessitate time-consuming recounts (rephrased for clarity). However, the lecturer states that ‘People who can’t afford computers, people who don’t use them on a regular basis.’ This highlights how not all of them can not afford to argues that errors could also occur in computer programming due to human involvement in their creation (rephrased for conciseness). These errors might have them in their home. It could therefore be argued that errors more severe consequences than those made by humans during manual counting processes (added to provide context).
Finally, while acknowledging initial apprehension towards implementing computerized voting technology nationwide, the article suggests that people will eventually trust it as they do with other complex technologies used daily (rephrased for clarity). The lecturer counters this point by emphasizing that other technological systems had time to improve and become reliable through frequent use, whereas computerized voting systems would not have this advantage due to infrequent elections (revised for coherence).
In conclusion, both traditional voting can be more severe and occur easily by humans. ¶ Secondly, the traditional voting can be one of the worst systems in which people and computerized voting systems have to count votes manually. When the article says ‘Officials must often count up the votes one by one, going through every ballot and recording the vote.’ This outlines how counting ballots is monotonous and very time consuming. Furthermore, it is not worth investing in human resources as ‘Since [people] have to deal with thousands of ballots, it is almost inevitable that they will make mistakes. If an error is detected, a long and expensive recount has to take place.’ This states that we are only human and mistakes are natural and because of this, a mistake is inevitable. On the other hand, the lecturer suggests that because of human error, there could be mistakes made by computer programming. their respective strengths and weaknesses. It is expressed how ’computers are programmed by humans, so “human error” can show up in mistakes in their programs. And the errors caused by essential to consider these defective programs may be far more serious.’ This highlights that mistakes made by factors carefully before implementing any changes to ensure a computer overall would be far more detrimental than mistakes made by a human. In conclusion, the traditional voting would be more time consuming in repetitive counting if compared to the computerized voting system. ¶ Finally, some modern technology, such as computerized voting systems, could be not fully reliable. It states how ‘people say it is too risky to implement complicated voting technology nationwide.’ This illustrates that people are apprehensive to trust modern technology. However, all technology has to be new at some point, we have to start somewhere with a new system. When the article says ‘But without giving it a thought, governments and individuals alike trust other complex computer technology every day’ This highlights how people will fully trust computerized voting systems in the future someday. In contrast to this, the lecturer shows that computerized voting systems are not like other modern technology. When the lecturer declares that ‘these systems are used daily and they are used heavily. They didn’t work flawlessly when they were first introduced.’ This outlines how other systems, such as banking, are used daily and by large quantities of people. They did not work flawlessly when they were first introduced and have had time to work on errors and issues. Nevertheless, computerized voting systems are likely to be used less. It states that ‘But voting happens only once every two years nationally in the United States and not much more than twice a year in many local areas.’ This highlights how computerized voting systems would not be given the same amount of time to be perfected. Furthermore, the lecturer suggests that computerized voting systems need time to be improved or developed. This is evident when the lecturer states ‘This is hardly sufficient for us to develop confidence that computerized voting can be fully trusted’ This also outlines how the computerized voting systems would need time to be improved and then be able to work perfectly. It is clear that computerized voting systems will be more fair and efficient and beneficial in the future if there is enough time to develop them to work with no defects.electoral process (added concluding sentence).
Display title: 8 Mind Map
1. Traditional vs. Computerized Voting
a. Article's arguments
i. Confusing ballot layout
ii. Inefficient manual counting
iii. Trust in technology over time
b. Lecturer's counterarguments
i. Limited computer access and familiarity
ii. Potential for programming errors
iii. Infrequent elections hinder reliability improvement
2. Conclusion
a. Weighing strengths and weaknesses of both systems
b. Importance of careful consideration before implementation
Display title: 9 Key Words
| Word | Phonetic Symbol | Part of Speech | English Definition | English Translation | Sample Sentence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| inadvertently | ˌɪnədˈvɜrtəntli | adverb | Without intention; accidentally | unintentionally | She inadvertently voted for the wrong candidate due to the confusing ballot layout. |
| apprehension | ˌæprɪˈhɛnʃən | noun | Anxiety or fear that something bad or unpleasant will happen | anxiety, fear | There is initial apprehension towards implementing computerized voting technology nationwide. |
| inefficiency | _ ɪnɪˈfɪʃənsi | _ noun | _ Lack of ability to do something well without wasting time, effort, or resources | _ ineffectiveness | _ The inefficiency of manual vote counting can result in mistakes and time-consuming recounts. |
| necessitate | _ nəˈsɛsɪteɪt | _ verb | _ To make something necessary or unavoidable | _ require | _ The errors in traditional voting systems necessitate a change to computerized systems. |
| recount | _ riˈkaʊnt | _ noun | _ An additional count, especially of votes in an election when the first count is not clear or conclusive | _ re-tally | _ The close election results led to a recount to ensure accuracy. |
| consequence | _ ˈkɒnsɪkwəns | _ noun | _ A result or effect of an action or condition | _ result, outcome | _ The consequence of programming errors in computerized voting systems could be severe. |
| implementation | _ ɪmpləmɛnˈteɪʃən | _ noun | _ The process of putting a decision or plan into effect; execution | _ execution, application | _ Careful consideration is needed before the implementation of computerized voting systems. |
| electoral | ɪˈlɛktərəl | adjective | Relating to elections or electors | election-related | Both traditional and computerized voting systems impact the electoral process. |
| reliability | rɪˌlaɪəˈbɪlɪti | noun | The quality of being trustworthy or performing consistently well | dependability | Computerized voting systems would not have the advantage of improved reliability through frequent use. |
学术讨论评分标准
托福学术讨论任务基于ETS官方评分标准进行评估。AI评估系统从多个维度分析每个回答。
相关性与贡献
回答是否针对问题并为讨论做出有意义的贡献？
语言运用
语法准确性、词汇丰富度和句式结构质量。
论述与支撑
观点是否充分展开，是否有具体例子和清晰推理支撑？
回答中的常见模式
基于对该题目用户提交内容的分析，以下是在学生回答中观察到的常见模式。
很多学生能清楚表达观点，但缺乏具体的论据支撑。
高分回答会直接引用阅读段落和其他发言者的观点。
更高分的回答使用多样化的句式结构和学术词汇。
时间管理是关键因素——匆忙完成的回答在论述发展方面得分较低。
学习建议
在开始写作前仔细阅读题目，理清问题的所有组成部分。
在回答中引用阅读段落和其他同学的观点。
使用具体例子来支持你的主要论点——避免笼统的表述。
目标字数120-150词。更长的回答不一定更好；清晰度和针对性更重要。
进行限时练习（10分钟），在考试条件下提升写作流畅度。
常见问题
什么是托福学术讨论任务？
学术讨论任务如何评分？
本页面上的用户样本是什么？
AI评估的准确度如何？
如何练习这道学术讨论题目？
学术讨论回答应该多长？
相关托福学术讨论题目
All TOEFL Writing Samples
Browse all user-submitted TOEFL writing samples with AI evaluation
TOEFL Academic Discussion Guide
Learn strategies and tips for the Academic Discussion writing task
TOEFL Writing Guide
Complete guide to all TOEFL writing task types and scoring
TOEFL Speaking Guide
Master all TOEFL speaking tasks with expert strategies
TOEFL Reading Guide
Strategies for TOEFL reading comprehension tasks
TOEFL Listening Guide
Tips and practice for TOEFL listening comprehension
