2015年3月托福独立写作预测及范文

 继3月7日打响3月的第一场托福战役后，托福都会以每月2-3场的频率来袭。今天新通外语为大家带来2015年3月托福独立写作预测及范文。

Writing

If you're going to make a big purchase (such as, a car or a house...), explain how the following three sources of information influence your decision.

1. Recommendations from friends or colleagues.

2. Recommendations from the media (for example, newspaper, TV,...)

3. Recommendations from a salesperson in a store.

When people are making purchases for "big ticket” items, such as cars or even houses, they must have so many factors that affect their final decision. Those factors may come from the influence of “word of mouth” from their friends or colleagues, or advertisements from newspaper or TV, or recommendations from a store salesperson and so forth. Each of the factors does influence people's finial decision since the big purchase is not something trivial.

Firstly, recommendations from friends or colleagues win my trust. As we all know that friends or colleagues are those people we socialize with, so we will place more trust on them since the big purchase should find trust source in order to make the final decision in an objective way.

Besides, for instance, when friends or colleagues recommend me, it usually means they have the experience using the same products and are able to provide their sincere opinions for moreconsiderations for my purchase. For instance, when I was planning to buy a car, my friend suggested me to locate my need first. I had no idea about it because I just wanted the feeling of owning a car like everybody did. After talking to him, he suggested me to buy a Toyota, which was not that expensive and durable. If I decided to sell it, it would not be too difficult since people love this type of car.

Trusting my friend, I bought the car and I made a right choice. Thus, recommendations from either friends or colleagues are more trustworthy and people believe them more.

Secondly, recommendations from the media enable people to create the opportunity of demand. Information sources from, for example, newspaper or TV actually all make attempts to catch people's eye in a short time trying to create the need for viewers.

To clarify, for big purchases, if I do not have the need, I would not pay much attention to it. If the newspaper or TV try to make people know they are selling houses, they either write down or say all the benefits and advantages in the shortest form possible, maybe with an exaggerating way. Buyers will be attracted at that moment due to the flashy punch lines or embellished facts about them and think about buying the item whether they really need it or not.

Another example is TV Shopping channels. The host acts as a friend of us or an inspector of the product for us in selling things. Sometimes we just do not need such big purchase, such as fancy cars or jewelries, but due to the benefits being overstated, we try to persuade ourselves to buy them. For example, maybe the big ticket items can increase the value over time or it is a must for a modern person to own such fancy vehicles. The demand will be created from this information source.

Thirdly, recommendations from a salesperson in a store make people feel the item more real. In other words, when we go to a store, we can really feel the item we are trying to buy and we can ask questions on the spot. For example, if I long to buy a car, the salesperson can tell me all the knowledge about the car, some of which I might not aware. This gives me more information to make my final decision. Perhaps, they might not be as genuine as my friends or colleagues in the product, but I can ask questions and touch the item and generate more questions for my final decision.

On the contrary, if I just read the newspaper or listening TV about it, I can only sort out the information that has been selectively and intentionally released by the seller. For a big purchase item, I think people need to be as cautious as possible and really feel the item in order to make their final decisions.

In conclusion, whatever people try to buy, they need as much information as possible before they make their final decision. Especially for big purchases, which are more costly and if folks do not gather enough information and buy things on an impulse, they can end up losing money and gaining things not in their favor. As the proverb says, “it is never sorry to be mindful."

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is important to know what is happening around the world, even if it does not affect your personal lives.

It is important to know what is happening in the world, even if you think it doesn't affect your personal life. In reality, it is impossible for an individual to remain unaffected by world events. As effective global citizens, we must be aware of world issues and take responsibility for ourselves, one another, and the earth.

Our awareness of the world helps us shape our lives instead of letting life happen to us. We are all part of a single global community now, thanks to the Information Age that brought us together.

Consequently, the number of inter-government organizations is on the rise. The G8 (The Group of Eight), NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization),UNWTO(United Nations World Trade Organization) and IMF (International Monetary Fund) to name a few, meet yearly to discuss issues that impact every global citizen. We are wise to know the discussion topics and take part in influencing the decisions.

As human beings, our responsibility is toward our shared humanity. We rely indirectly on one another for survival. We benefit from understanding the issues that underlie conflict and war. It is the only way to creatively imagine possible solutions. Humans must collectively move from the traditional principle of conquering to a new principle of cooperating. Doesn't every human being start as a baby without malice in his heart? Doesn't every parent want food, water, shelter, and a better life for her children? Doesn't each of us have personal dreams and ambitions? We must embrace our basic human similarities. Seven billion people live on Earth. Either we live cooperatively, or we die divisively.

Earth sustains humanity, so it is our duty to protect it. In our current economic system, many people are destroying the earth for monetary gain. Nutrient pollution in the ocean, rising carbon dioxide levels in the air, and jungle deforestation endanger the delicate balance of life on Earth. Multinational companies threaten our food source permanently with genetic engineering. The present rate of destruction cannot continue uninhibited. Eventually, Earth will no longer be able to sustain life.

Don't think that you can turn your gaze from the events of the world and continue with your happy life. The drama of world events will unfold with or without your awareness. Directly or indirectly, world events have an effect on your lives.

Who do you think contribute more to the society, political leaders or artists?

Our society is composed of many aspects that affect people living in this community. Each individualcan be viewed as a cog in this big machine-the society-. Great artists bring esthetic contributions to people for their spirits under this competitive society, while political leaders set up the rules and standards for people residing in the same community or country.

Who has the greater influence in our society? To me, personally, I do not agree with the prompt and think that political leaders benefit our society more than great artists do.

To begin with, political leaders withhold more political resources that can make a big difference to the society. To be more exact, they are the people elected by citizens and are empowered by those people to carry on national welfare. For example, we are living in a society of economic instability. People lose jobs easily and they are forced to keep up with the increasing living expenses.

It is political leaders who can change the law and use the national fund to come to their aid, not the great artist. When people are in need of medical care, it is political leaders who can enact policies to help those who have trouble paying the bill or design a program to assist those people to pay off their bill later and go under the treatment at present.

For the issue of education-the most fundamental unit for the greater development of country-, political leaders can also use their power to bring the awareness of the public to help out, such as donating money, contributing books or places for poor kids to receive education. None of these can be achieved by great artists.

In the second place, political leaders can gather people's will in a wider range. Throughout history, when the society is rife with corruption, injustice or the disparity of the rich and poor, political leaders can serve to the performer and pioneer of the society.

For instance, in America, African Americans were the underprivileged group; in other words, there were injustices for them to, for example, seek for employment, fair treatment in social benefits or welfare. Leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. can accumulate the will of more people and take it to the legal level, making sure African Americans are protected by the law and have the liberty to pursue their happiness on this land.

Another example can be seen from Abraham Lincoln, the 16th president of the United States. He saw the injustice of the slavery system and fought for the right of slaves, who should also be considered the citizens in the US. Assassinated, Abraham Lincoln benefited the society in a great range that affects generations of generations. Another great example is Bill Clinton who led America to a great stability in economy with his diplomatic skills and perseverance. Thus, the way those political leaders benefit the society is irreplaceable and way profound than that the artists can do to our society.

As to the other option—great artists—to our topic, they of course benefit our society a lot. For instance,art work really help people relieve the pressure their daily life and work bring to them. In addition torelieving stress, great artists, like Beatles calming people down with their songs and giving hopes to those who are in depression and who are in times of difficulty.

Our society becomes more peaceful and people have the power to look at the bright side of unfavorable conditions and be optimistic. Those are great benefits. However, in terms of “greater benefits,” by comparison, I would still choose political leaders because they are more accessible to the nation’s resource and they have more power to convene the public to reform for a better tomorrow for all.

 Writing

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is more important for the government to spend money on new buildings than to preserve historic or traditional buildings and homes.

Over the years, several changes have been made in the architectural field. In this case, architects have been able to come up with new construction styles which are more sophisticated than the ancient ones. Modern architectural designs have led to the construction of skyscrapers which are preferred to the old traditional buildings. This leaves us with the question of whether governments should utilizemore resources in maintaining modern buildings because of the following reasons.

Ancient buildings depict the history, culture, and traditions of a country. This is because traditional buildings remind people about their origins and the experiences they have had over the years. Consequently, a country can lose its history if it does not preserve ancient buildings, which act ashistorical evidences. By preserving the traditional buildings, it will be easier to maintain cultural values in future generations. Traditional buildings also help foreigners to learn more about the historical background of a given country.

Ancient structures enhance the natural beauty of cities; hence, making them distinct and attractive. Besides this, such structures often serve as landmarks especially in busy places. Moreover, the unique features of ancient structures spur tourism activities, and this benefits a country economically. The traditional buildings can also serve as museums which can create employment opportunities.

However, some individuals contend that ancient buildings are extremely precarious owing to the kind of materials that were used in constructing them. According to the critics of old buildings, modern buildings are properly designed and well-constructedusing durable building materials. Nevertheless, some modern constructions are not friendly to the environment due to the nature of the materials used in constructing them. Modern buildings are also considered to be more comfortable since they are furnished with nice fittings.

In conclusion, the urgent needs to preserve ancient structures in areas of the world where they are poorly managed cannot be overstated. The government should not neglect the old structures because they help in maintaining a county's cultural heritage.

Some people argue using a cleaner energy to protect the environment, but some people says the traditional energy sources such as coal and oil is less expensive, what is your suggestion?

When it comes to debates about clean energy, I always fall on the side of supporting more expensive but sustainable energy projects.

First of all, most of the less expensive energy sources such as coal and oil are pretty limited, and the sooner we can free ourselves from reliance on these energy sources, the better. Everybody knows this, though few people think about it in their day-to-day existence. This is because humans are generallyshort-sighted, and "limited" doesn't seem like such a problem if it's not something we have to face in our own lifetimes.

But research shows that current generation may live to witness peak oil and coal production—that is, the point when oil and coal production reach their maximum and then quickly decline. Once the foundation of dirty energy crumbles, all of the power-hungry infrastructure we've built on top of it willcollapse, too. Clean energy is more sustainable and can help us avoid this sudden collapse.

Second of all, even though cleaner sources of energy seem more expensive to develop and run, I believe that this is only in the short term.

Dirty energy production has hidden costs that only show up years or decades later. Environmental damage is one of these costs—companies and governments are already spending billions or more a year trying to reverse the damage we've caused to forests, rivers, oceans, etc. The BP oil spill is one prominent example of this. But there's also the issue of human health—in America alone, the "health cost” of coal production runs in the hundreds of billions. This comprises costs coming from mining accidents as well as large-scale impacts due to climate change and human exposure to pollution. For these reasons, I don't think the “dirty energy is cheaper" argument is all that sound.

Of course, this opposition to dirty energy can seem unfair to poorer countries, which may not have themeans to pursue or sustain clean energy projects. These countries might feel cheated, thinking, "Today's developed countries were all given a shot at coal-and oil-fueled growth in the past—why aren't we being given the same chance?" While I can sympathize, I think these countries can actually best serve their interests by taking the long view, it can be tempting to mimic the past strategies of first-world countries—after all, their methods seem to have paid off.

But we also have to look at the prices these countries are now paying for that dirty growth—environmental damage. The arguments for clean energy are many. However, they all hinge on long-term rather than short-term benefits. If we can correct our near-sightedness, then there is still hope for the future.

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: The main role of a university professor is to educate students rather than to do research.

Professors play an essential role in higher education. Students are motivated and inspired by renowned professors who cooperate with either the school or the enterprise. The more things they do, the worse efficiency they might have toward every work. As for our topic, what is the main role of a university professor over the issue of educating students or doing research? To me, personally, I think professors should focus more on doing research than educating students.

First of all, the research could have great importance in the real world and could one day lead to real breakthroughs. In other words, the research done by professors in the college environment can result in great contributions to the society, such as to the medical world, like a cure for cancer or a solution to global warming.

As is known, in order to solve problems big or small，a series of research needs to be observed and performed by professional people who are based on the academic work. College professors are those who have PhDs and performed and practiced tons of experience in the field relevant, thus they should focus mainly on doing research, which could make a big difference to the world rather than students in the school.

Besides, they are working in the school，so they are provided a great environment to focus on their research and meanwhile they can also inspire students for the future study. It, therefore, seems fair that a professor should spend more time doing research than giving lectures to students.

In addition, if a professor's research was successful it could benefit the university and the students in two ways. First, the university would be able to receive grants and funding to continue with further research. This money would help the university improve their research facilities, which would benefit the students who use these facilities.

Secondly, recognition of the research would improve the reputation and standing of the university, which is something that would also benefit the students who studied there by association, such as Ivy League schools in the US.

Moreover, a professor who continues to do research is more aware of recent developments and is kept at the forefront of the field, which will eventually benefits college students in the long run. The professor is also more likely to be a more enthusiastic teacher because they will be excited about the new discoveries they are making and be eager to share this enthusiasm with the students they teach, who in turn will also learn the spirit and methods performed by the professors at the same time.

Admittedly, some people may think that professors should not just focus on doing research; for example, they are “teachers” by definition who should spend more time on the education part. True indeed, this is a cogent argument; however, we are talking about colleges or universities in this regard.

To put it differently, students in this level are more self-motivated and know what they want in their studies. Professors should not play the role of “teachers” who merely teach as what their teachers in high school do; instead, professors should play the role of “instructors"，who instruct students when they have problems along their self-study path.

Besides, too much “teach” may bring about the dependence of learning that makes students only search for the right answer. As we all know that education is not all about doing “the right thing”，but trying to think independently and making mistakes and learning from those mistakes as a whole. It should, therefore, be given precedence over teaching for the role of professors and they should be allowed to focus more on their research.

转载自： X-Team 讲师团原创。

 相关阅读：

※新通外语深圳地址：

福田中心：福田区深南中路中核大厦4楼（地铁站科学馆A出口） 电话：0755-83985745（电子地图）

天利中心：南山区天利中央广场A座27楼 （地铁后海站D出口） 电话：0755-83980138（电子地图）