Teacher Dean

解題文章網址：

https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/TOEFL_iBT/M.1466698769.A.523.html

題目：

It's not appropriate that students disagree with an instructor.

● 第一個示範音檔

“It is totally appropriate that students disagree with an instructor, because disagreement often makes discussions more effective.

For example, after explaining something, sometimes an instructor would ask his students, ‘Don't you think so?’ If one of them says no, the instructor would often go on to explain more－maybe like giving them an extra example－so he can convince his students. In the end, that student may be convinced and the whole class also learn more from the instructor.”

● 第二個示範音檔

“It is totally appropriate that students disagree with an instructor.

First, the instructor might in fact be wrong. If a student spots a mistake the instructor has made during class but chooses not to say anything just because students are asked not to disagree with an instructor, his classmates would end up learning something incorrect!

Second, a little challenge often leads to perfect instruction. When an instructor is contradicted by his students, he would usually expend more effort to illuminate and justify the truth. As a result, students get the most out of the instruction.”

● 第三個示範音檔

“It is totally appropriate that students disagree with an instructor, because the instructor might in fact be wrong.

One time when our teacher was discussing logical reasoning questions with us, he said, ‘This preMise is crucial ...’ I raised my hand and said, ‘It's Premise, not preMise, Mr. Helmsley.’ He looked it up on Merriam-Webster.com right away and said, ‘You're right, Dean. I'm so glad you corrected me.’ Truth is, a good teacher thrives on challenges from students. He continues to learn, even from his very own pupils－no wonder I remember Mr. Helmsley as a very outstanding instructor.”

TOEFL iBT Writing，Integrated Task，以 TPO 25 為例。畫底線部分為模板（template）架構。整合寫作的精神：力求事務性地直指核心──這也是我這個模板和範文所欲表現的。

The two texts deal with the question whether those excavated clay jars, each containing a copper cylinder surrounding an iron rod, were used as batteries at the time they were produced. The reading passage proposes three arguments to deny the possibility that they were used as batteries, while the lecturer disagrees with the passage, counterattacking the three arguments respectively.

First, the accessory issue. The passage mentions that no battery accessories, such as metal wires, were found, so these vessels must have not been batteries, since otherwise there should have been wires excavated with them to make sense. However, the lecturer stresses that it was some villagers, not trained archaeologists, that discovered those vessels first; since they were not experts, they might have overlooked, even thrown away, the seemingly insignificant wires. So the “absence” of the wires doesn’t necessarily justify that they never existed.

Second, the purpose issue. The passage points out that the copper cylinders in the vessels must have been used for the same purpose as those similar in structure discovered in a nearby city: to hold scrolls of texts. The lecturer agrees on the similarity part, but goes on to say it does not necessarily mean that the vessels could not later be adapted for another purpose, that is, serving as batteries. If you start off as a scholar, it doesn’t mean you have to be a scholar all of your life.

Third, the uselessness issue. The passage brings forth a question: what should ancient people do with these vessels, if they were used as batteries? There were no things relying on electricity at that time! The lecturer replies that the small electricity discharges from the vessels could actually be utilized by people then. For example, a man could use that electric shock to convince others that he had magical powers. Also, the mild discharges could have medical significance at that time; they could be used to treat patients.

template and sample essay by Teacher Dean