扫码添加助教

免费领取

备考资料大礼包

扫码关注公众号

【托福写作机经】2025年5月17日上午场托福考试回忆

2025-05-28 16:05:10来源：网络

【考试动态】2019年SAT考试时间报名费用报考指南成绩查询送分流程成绩要求成绩换算
【资料推荐】SAT词汇巴朗3500系列SAT阅读OG1-8经典错题解析SAT数学满分冲刺重要知识点
【备考指导】CB发布2018年SAT考试官方报告SAT北美考点汇总美国大学TOP100SAT成绩要求

　　2025年5月17日的托福考试已经成为回忆，新东方在线SAT考试网为大家整理了此次考试的托福写作机经，让我们一起来回顾和分析这次的写作考查内容。

托福写作机经

第一套

　　综合写作植物重复2018.8.25

阅读

听力

　　主题：控制false bamboo spread的三种方式

　　1. 用挖掘机把竹子的根部给清除掉，而且清除完了之后还要去清理土壤，防止这些竹子再次生长。可以用干燥的方法来进行处理。

　　1. 想清楚这种竹子的根部的话，它将会深达数米，这使得完全清除这种竹子的根部几乎是不可能的，因为哪怕只有一小段根部，它也能重新成长

　　2. 还可以用强效的化学除草剂，通常喷在叶子上，然后会渗入根部，通过这种方式可以将杂草完全杀死。在夏季使用的时候，这种方法非常有效。

　　2. 当用除草剂来杀死这些竹子的时候，每个季节会喷3~4次，并且要喷好几年。之后这些竹子才会停止生长，而这会花费大量的金钱来进行购买这种除草剂。而且对于政府来说，这也将是一笔非常庞大的支出。

　　3. 有一种特殊的昆虫是这种竹子的天敌。它会吸食这种竹子的水分，这会使得这些竹子完全死亡，并且这种植物还不会伤害到英国的其他植物，所以可以很好地去阻止竹子的蔓延。

　　3. 这种昆虫都是在亚洲地区好用，但是英国太寒冷了，到冬季的时候这些虫子就会死亡，以至于过了一段时间之后，就没有足够的虫子，来吃这些竹子了。Meanwhile, the robins laid a second set of eggs each year, which the scientists left in place, thus increasing the bird's population.

学术讨论

　　教育

　　Your professor is teaching a class on education. Write a post responding to the professor’s question.

　　In your response, you should

　　· express and support your personal opinion

　　· make a contribution to the discussion in your own words

　　An effective response will contain at least 100 words. You have ten minutes to write.

　　Doctor Achebe: One traditional method of classroom instruction is lecturing. Lecturing involves the teacher talking about a topic for an extended period of time and expecting students to learn by listening attentively. Today, some educators believe that teachers should limit how much time they spend lecturing and instead teach by encouraging in-class discussions and having students work in groups. However, some teachers still teach primarily by lecturing. Do you believe lecturing is an effective teaching method? Why or why not?

　　Kelly: In my opinion, lecturing is mainly ineffective because a teacher who only gives lectures can't know what's going on in students' minds. When a teacher lectures and students are just required to sit there, the teacher can't really check if students understand the lecture. Students have to contribute somehow to show whether or not they are learning.

　　Paul: I think lecturing can be effective. Some teachers can explain even complex concepts by telling interesting stories and by providing memorable examples. When teachers lecture in an entertaining way, students enjoy attending class and feel motivated to learn. Whether a teacher's lectures are effective depends on the teacher.

第二套

　　综合写作城市规划重复2021.12.18

阅读

听力

　　主题：基础设施私有化的利弊

　　First, by selling infrastructure, city or state governments can quickly raise large amounts of money. For example, the city of Chicago made $2 billion by leasing the Chicago Skyway, a toll road, to a private company for 99 years. The money from the lease allowed Chicago to immediately address issues that would have otherwise gone unfunded, from balancing the budget to improving public schools.

　　By selling or leasing infrastructure. Governments are actually losing money in the long term. And it's true that the city of Chicago took in a huge amount of cash when at least its toll road. But the city also gave up the right to collect holes for the next ninety nine years. The amount of money the government would have collected from the tolls would have exceeded the amount of money it made from the sale. The government took in a large sum of money all at once. But it could have earned even more if it had just held onto the road.

　Second, private companies will maintain the condition of infrastructure better than cities or states do. City and state politicians tend to spend tax money on projects that will get them votes. Building new things or supporting new services is more attractive to voters than the almost invisible maintenance of infrastructure, like bridge or water system repair, which is why city- or state-owned infrastructure is often poorly maintained. Private operators, however, are in the business of running the infrastructure successfully, so is in their best interest to maintain the long-term health of the infrastructure.

　　Second, it's not a sure thing that private operators will do a good job maintaining infrastructure. The priority of private companies is to generate a short-term profit for their owners and investors. Money spent on maintenance reduces short term profits. So companies often avoid or postpone spending money on it. For example, one private company in the southern United States bought a city water system, but it was so determined to make a quick profit that it let the condition of the water system completely deteriorate. In the end, the city government had to take the water system back to repair it.

　　Third, private firms are likely to introduce new technologies that will make infrastructure operate better and more efficiently. Private companies have an interest in making the financial investment in new technologies that will ultimately pay off with cost-saving efficiencies, and hence profit. Government bureaucracies have no such incentive, and as a result, many new technologies go unimplemented.

　　Third, there is no strong motivation for a private company to invest in new technology to make operations more modern and efficient. The reason is that there is no competition. A city has only one water system, only one electrical service grid, so when a private company controls a piece of infrastructure, it has a virtual monopoly. Because there is no alternative provider that consumers can choose from. There isn't much pressure on the private company to improve the service at all.

　　●学术讨论教育重复2023.9.17

　　Your professor is teaching a class on education. Write a post responding to the professor’s question.

　　In your response, you should

　　·express and support your personal opinion

　　·make a contribution to the discussion in your own words

　　An effective response will contain at least 100 words. You have ten minutes to write.

　　Doctor Achebe: As of this semester, I have embarked on a study to explore the various factors influencing children's cognition. It's becoming increasingly evident that a child's surroundings can significantly impact their development. In light of this, the question arises: should parents allow their children to watch online videos, whether for entertainment or educational purposes? Please share your insights on this matter, considering the potential effect s on a child's cognitive growth.

　　Kelly: We should not allow young children, especially those under two years old, to watch videos. It's crucial for their development to engage in real-life communication with others during this critical period. Watching videos doesn't provide the opportunity for meaningful interaction. Even for older children, it's essential to prioritize physical activity over extended screen time. Instead of sitting still in front of screens, they should be encouraged to stay active to support their overall well-being.

　　Paul: I agree that very young children shouldn't be exposed to videos. However, I believe that older children can benefit from watching certain videos, especially those that showcase animals or provide unique insights not easily encountered in everyday life. These videos can be educational and expand their horizons by offering a window into experiences they might not otherwise have access to.

　　范文：

　　From my perspective, students should be allowed to watch online videos. This is because they serve as dynamic educational tools when used strategically. For instance, platforms like Khan Academy use short, structured videos to explain complex concepts visually, catering to diverse learning styles. Research from Cambridge University (2022) further reveals that students who engage with educational videos score 18% higher in problem-solving tasks compared to peers relying solely on textbooks, as multimedia content stimulates both auditory and visual cognition. Additionally, videos exposing students to global perspectives—such as TED-Ed talks or virtual museum tours—cultivate critical thinking and cultural awareness. While concerns about distractions exist, parental guidance and school-mandated content filters can mitigate risks. Banning such resources entirely would deprive students of accessible, up-to-date learning materials essential in a digital era. Therefore, students should have access to watching these videos online.

第三套

　　综合写作城市规划重复2022.4.6

阅读

听力

　　主题：修建Erie Canal的问题与解决

　　The first challenge was the local terrain and landscape. The canal had to be dug out and built through areas that would make construction difficult. There were many forests and clearing a channel through a forest required a slow process of using saws to cut down trees and then axes to chop out the tree stumps and roots that remained. In addition, another challenge was that the canal would also pass through wetlands, in which workers might fall ill from malaria, a disease caused by mosquitoes.

　First, dealing with clearing the trees and the concerns about malaria. Let's start with the trees. To deal with them, some very useful devices were invented, for example, to pull tree stumps with roots out of the ground, the tree stump was attached with chains to a device called a stump puller. A team of strong animals like oxen then pulled this device. Which then pulled the stump out of the ground. Greatly reducing the amount of manual labor involved.

　　The second challenge was a lack of workers. The entire United States at that time had a relatively small population. The massive construction of a canal would require many thousands of workers, which opponents of the canal said the country would not be able to supply.

　　As for the dangers posed by the wetlands. Well, workers simply waited until winter to dig through these regions. Why winter. Well, that was because mosquitoes that cause malaria are not active at that time second, getting enough workers well, thousands of immigrants from Europe arrived in the United States just around the time construction was to start. These new immigrants wanted jobs and were willing to take on the difficult work of digging the canal. So by a lucky coincidence, there was a sufficient number of workers for the construction.

　　Finally, critics argued that the Erie Canal would not yield enough benefits to justify its high cost. The main purpose of the canal was to facilitate commerce between the coast and the interior of the United States. However, at the time there were simply not very many people who lived or wanted to settle in the Midwest, so there wasn't that much in the way of goods produced there to be sent back to the coast.

　　Lastly, the critics, as you read, argued that there were not enough people in the interior of the United States to generate enough trade. However, there was a reason why not many people lived in the interior. It was difficult to get there and costly to ship goods back. That all changed with the completion of the canal. The travel time for new settlers to get to the Midwest decreased from six weeks to six days. And as to the cost of shifting products from the interior back to the east coast. While what had cost one hundred dollars to ship over, land was reduced to only ten dollars by way of the waterways.

　　学术讨论环保重复2023.9.24

　　Your professor is teaching a class on economics. Write a post responding to the professor’s question.

　　In your response, you should

　　·express and support your personal opinion

　　·make a contribution to the discussion in your own words

　　An effective response will contain at least 100 words. You have ten minutes to write.

　　Doctor Achebe: This week, we'll be discussing solutions to air pollution. In today's world, excessive consumption and reliance on cars are contributing significantly to this issue. Many economists suggest that the government should increase fuel taxes for cars. By raising the cost of fuel, it's believed that this could discourage overuse of private vehicles and reduce air pollution. Do you agree with this approach? Should there be higher fuel taxes to prevent or combat air pollution? Why or why not?

　　Kelly: I believe increasing the fuel tax for cars is a good idea. Cars are a main source of pollution; if the government does this, it could reduce the use of private cars and encourage people to switch to public transportation or other means like cycling. Furthermore, this could significantly decrease air pollution leading to better public health and a cleaner environment.

　　Paul: I disagree with increasing the car fuel tax. l feel that adding taxes for economic reasons feels somewhat like punishing the public, who are not directly responsible for this issue. So, increasing the tax would be meaningless. In other words, the solution should address the source of pollution more directly rather than simply making it more expensive for the general public to use their cars.

　　范文：

　　I disagree that simply raising fuel costs is an effective way to curb air pollution, because it unfairly punishes commuters without offering viable alternatives. In modern metropolitan regions, many families have relocated to suburbs in search of larger homes and a healthier living environment. For these residents, owning a private car is not a luxury but a necessity: buses or trains often do not serve peripheral neighborhoods, and when they do, schedules are infrequent and routes indirect.

　　If the government imposes higher fuel taxes, suburban drivers will face steeply increased commuting expenses with no realistic means of avoiding them. Rather than reducing emissions, this policy could provoke widespread frustration as households struggle to balance inflated gas bills with other living costs. Moreover, people might delay maintenance, leading to older, more polluting vehicles on the road—an unintended consequence that actually worsens air quality.