2025年8月23日下午场托福写作完整版答案及解析（含范文）

阅读

听力

　主题：独角鲸的tusk作用

　　First, the narwhal dwells and hunts within the Arctic Circle, where the sea is often covered with thick pack ice. Like other whales, the narwhal needs air to breathe and cannot stay underwater indefinitely. Eyewitnesses have reported seeing narwhals use their tusks to pierce through the ice sheet from below. The ability to break the ice in this way would give a narwhal access to air whenever it needed to take a breath. That would make it possible for narwhals to freely hunt in waters that are covered with ice.

　　First, if you apply pressure to a normal tusk. It will actually bend about thirty centimeters in any direction. This flexibility means that it cannot really be used for breaking through an ice sheet that is more than a few cent meters thick. The reason narwhals are able to spend long periods of time in the sea that's covered with ice is that the ice sheets typically break up by themselves in certain places. Supposed observations of narwhal ‘s piercing through an ice sheet, they have simply been narwhals seen sticking their heads out of the water in places where the ice sheet had already begun to break up.

　　Second, the tusk could serve as a weapon for fighting with other male narwhals as they compete for territory. Just as rams and male deer charge at one another with their horns or antlers. Male narwhals may charge or joust with another. Some observers have claimed to have seen aggressive clashing of tusks between male narwhals.

　　What the second theory in the reading passage probably refers to is a behavior observed in male narwhals called tusking. The reason that some observers may have mistaken tusking for an aggressive behavior is that they observed it from a distance. People who have observed the narwhals husking up close give very different accounts. Instead of tusking generally seem to gently rob their tusks. That's more consistent with some sort of communication role, rather than defending territory.

　　Third, the surface of the tusk contains many millions of microscopic holes connected to nerves. This configuration suggests that the tusk serves as a sensor that allows the narwhal to detect ocean properties, for example water pressure, temperature, salinity of the water, and even barometric pressure above the water's surface. The ability to sense such properties would be an important adaptation aiding in the narwhal's survival.

　　Third, as to the usefulness of the tusk for detecting properties of the ocean important for survival. Well, consider this. Almost all male narwhal have tusks, but very few female narwhal have the structure. Furthermore. Female narwhals live longer than male narwhals. If the function of the tusk was to give the animal information needed for survival, why wouldn't females have tusks as well? And since they don't. How do we explain their greater longevity?

阅读

听力

　主题：Anasazi 文明的迁移

　　Anasazi 文明的迁移是因为战争

　　1.好多重要地点甚至祭祀场所都被火烧了，就是是因为战争引起的火灾

　　焚烧祭祀地点是很多文明迁移前的传统，并不一定是敌人烧的

　　2.当地遗留了好多工艺品，说明原住民被消灭了而不是正常离开，因为正常离开是会带走那些物品的

　　如果是战争，获胜的一方应该会拿走工艺品，但现实是现场有很多遗留的工艺品，说明是原住民自己不要了:人们自愿离开受旱灾肆虐的地区时，往往会舍弃许多物品。他们只需带走力所能及的食物和饮水，其余非必需品则尽数遗弃

　　3.该文明正处于全盛时期，且资源充足，没有理由突然消亡

　　正是因为文明发达人口增长，所以他们更容易受缺水影响，最终选择迁移

阅读

听力

　主题：single-stream recycling的缺点和反驳

　　First, single-stream recycling can be dangerous for workers at the recycling center. While the sorting process for most recyclable materials is done by machine, glass needs to be separated and sorted by hand from other materials collected for recycling. Glass is often broken in the process of collecting the materials, so workers who sort glass from the other materials are at risk of being cut.

　　What about the potential for injury to workers who sort glass? Well, several steps can be taken to reduce the risk to acceptable levels. Workers can be given safety training and be monitored to make sure they follow the proper safety procedures. They are also required to wear protective clothing. There should be quick access to medical help if an injury occurs. These measures can ensure reasonable safety for workers.

　　Second, contamination—that is, materials not being separated well from one another—is practically unavoidable in single-stream recycling. The sorting process is complex and far from perfect; the different types of recyclables do not always get sorted correctly. For example, plastic can accidentally be shredded along with recycled paper. In cases when enough plastic gets mixed in with the paper, the overall recyclable material is considered contaminated and cannot be processed further. So instead of being used in new products, the material has to be discarded—just as though it had never been collected for recycling in the first place.

　　It's true that some of the collective material gets contaminated and so ends up as waste. But if you look at the overall picture. Single stream recycling actually reduces waste. Consider this. Placing all recyclables in a single container is easy and convenient, then that encourages many more families to participate in the recycling program instead of just throwing stuff away as waste. Which is what they did in the traditional system. So single stream recycling greatly increases the overall amount of material that gets recycled and reused. This more than makes up for the small amount that's contaminated.

　　Third, single-stream recycling systems are expensive to build. A single-stream system facility generally costs more than three times what a traditional recycling facility costs. Most cities and towns have limited funds, and if they already have a traditional system that works, there is no reason for them to spend the money to build a new, single-stream system.

　　Third, while single stream recycling systems are initially more expensive to build, they are less expensive to operate than traditional recycling programs. This is because you can reduce cost with single stream collection trucks. You see, in a traditional system, to pick up one families recycling required to trucks. One truck for one type of recyclable materials, another truck for the other types. The fuel and labor cost for operating the trucks were very high. With a new system, you can just use one truck to pick up all recyclables, which will save money. So once the initial cost of implementing a single stream recycling facility system are paid for the overall cost of operating, the program goes down dramatically.

阅读

听力

　主题：新手教师的培训体系

　　Loss of interest in a teaching career

　　First, this proposal could decrease the number of people who want to become teachers. The new system would require novice teachers to complete three extra years of training before they can be hired. When people realize how long it will take to become a schoolteacher, fewer of them will want to begin an education degree. The United States already has a shortage of teachers, and this system would make the situation worse.

　　First, the new system would actually increase the number of school teachers. The extra training will not discourage new school teachers because in the proposed training schools they would be paid as regular employees. So even though they have to wait to receive their own classroom, they would still earn full pay right away. Plus they would be better prepared, which is important because under the current system, ten percent of teachers quit after a single year of working because they feel unprepared. The new system would increase their preparation and keep them in schools.

　　Uneven level of training at different schools

　　Critics also point out that novice teachers would be sent to many different teacher training schools. Each training school would be staffed by different expert teachers. This means that novice teachers might receive better training in some schools than in others. Novice teachers leaving some training schools would be better prepared to teach independently than novice teachers leaving other schools.

　　Second. Even though novice teachers in the new system would end up in different training schools, the current decentralized system splits novice teachers up even more you see. In the current teacher education system, A single american university can send novice. Teachers to over three hundred or more different schools, often placing a single novice teacher at each school that results in a really uneven training. In fact, the proposed new system of teacher training schools would centralize training much more than it currently is, since several novice teachers would end up at the same training school and have the same training experience. In addition, with several novice teachers at each school, novice teachers would be able to learn from each other, not just from expert teachers.

　　Concerns of parents

　　Finally, parents might worry that if their children are enrolled as students at these training schools, it will put the children at a disadvantage. It could be difficult to convince parents to enroll their children in schools with so many inexperienced schoolteachers. The parents may fear that the quality of such schools is questionable.

　　Finally, children who attend training schools would not be at a disadvantage. The regular staff at these training schools would be experienced teachers. In fact, novice teachers would be added to the current staff. This means that because there are more teachers in total at the school, children at these training schools get more individualized attention from teachers than in other schools, and research shows that when there are more opportunities for children to get individualized attention from teachers. Children learn better.

阅读

听力

　主题：基础建设私有化

　　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 it 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.