Integrated writing, TPO 29: Edmontosaur's survival on Alaska's North Slope

[Keivan68]

The writer discusses the reason for Edmontosaur’s survival in Alaska’s North Slope, and states that they survived because of their migration south to more hospitable regions. The writer further provides three reasons of support for the migration hypothesis. However, the speaker refutes each of the writer’s reasons.
Firstly, the writer reasons that the Edmontosaur’s diet supports the migration hypothesis. The professor disclaims this by stating that these dinosaurs could find food in their habitat without migration south because the region had a warmer climate in summer. She further explains that in the Arctic region, the sun was in the sky about 20 hours a day, thus there was good condition for vegetation to grow widely in summer. In winter, however, most of the vegetation became dead, but the dead of them also provides enough nutrition for Edmontosaurs to feed and survive.
Secondly, the writer reasons that living of Edmontosaurs in herd supports the migration hypothesis. The professor disaffirms this by providing examples of two kinds of animals which live in herd but do not migrate. She further reasons that living in herd does not necessarily means that animals migrate, because they might have other reasons to live together, such as extra protection from predators.
Thirdly, the writer professes that Edmontosaurs were migrating long distances because they could do so. However, the professor claims that this reason suffers from logical defect, because the capability to migrate long distances does not substantiate the existence of migration. The professor further reasons that although Edmontosaurs could run very fast but their children could not do so. Therefore, during migration, the herd must walk slowly in companion with the children and they could not reach their destination by this way. So, the migration hypothesis is truly problematic.

TOEFL listening lectures: A university lecture by a professor of Natural History

[Beeesneees]

TITLE EDITED.
Please help everyone to make the most of this forum and its resources by giving your threads meaningful and relevant subject lines.

[Luschen]

Hi Keivan, I thought your essay was quite good. You have addressed all of the main points of the lecture. You do have a few minor errors and there are a couple more details you could have added. Overall, I would rate this a 4.5 out of 5. I also included another essay so you can see what a 5 would look like.

@Keivan68

The writer discusses the reason for Edmontosaur’s survival in Alaska’s North Slope, and states that they survived because of their migration south to more hospitable regions. The writer further provides three reasons of support for the migration hypothesis. However, the speaker refutes each of the writer’s reasons.
Firstly, the writer reasons that the Edmontosaur’s diet supports the migration hypothesis. The professor disclaims this by stating that these dinosaurs could find {“could have found” seems like a better tense} food in their habitat without migrati[ng] south because the region had a warmer climate in summer. She further explains that in the Arctic region, the sun was in the sky about 20 hours a day, thus there w[ere] good condition[s ] for vegetation to grow widely in summer. In winter, however, most of the vegetation became dead[died], but the dead of them[dead plants] also provide[d ]enough nutrition for Edmontosaurs to feed and survive.
Secondly, the writer reasons that living of Edmontosaurs['] [living] in herd[s ] supports the migration hypothesis. The professor disaffirms this by providing examples of two kinds of animals which live in herd[s ] but do not migrate. She further reasons that living in herd[s ] does not necessarily means[mean] that animals migrate, because they might have other reasons to live together, such as extra protection from predators.
Thirdly, the writer professes that Edmontosaurs were migrating long distances because they could do so. However, the professor claims that this reason suffers from [a] logical defect, because the capability to migrate long distances does not substantiate the existence of migration. The professor further reasons that although Edmontosaurs could run very fast[,] but {don’t use both “although” and “but” together like this} their children {in animals it would be “their young”} could not do so. Therefore, during migration, the herd must walk slowly in companion with [to accompany] the children[young] and they could not reach their destination by this way. So, the migration hypothesis is truly problematic.

Here is another essay I found on the same topic that I would rate a 5:

Both the passage and the lecture relate to the migration hypothesis, which says that the elephant-sized edmontosaurs survived the winter by migrating south. On the one hand, the passage mentions three reasons supporting this hypothesis, while the lecture refutes all these reasons by saying that they are not convincing.
First of all, the passage states that the edmontosaur’s food supports the migration hypothesis. Edmontosuars only ate plants and because there would have been no plants in the North Slope winter, it proves that the edmontosaurs must have migrated to warmer areas to find food. In contrast, the lecture disagrees by saying that the edmontosaurs did not migrate for food. The North Slope’s temperature during the winter was even higher than today. There were twenty four hours of sun shining in the peak of summer, and as a result, the plants would grow in good condition. Moreover, in the winter, edmontosaurs would live on the nutrients given by dead plants.
In addition, the passage goes on to say that the edmontosaurs lived in herds. Many migratory animals such as buffalo andcaribou also live in herds in order to coordinate their migration. In contrast, the lecture emphasizes that the edmontosaurs lived in herds not because of migration, but in order to have protection against predators. The lecture also mentions the elks in America, which live in herds but do not migrate.
Last but not least, the passage asserts that edmontosaurs were capable of migrating long distances. They could use their locomotive power to increase their speed to move to warmer regions. Nevertheless, the lecture disputes this point by claiming that the young edmontosaurs could not run at speeds up to forty-five kilometers per hour like the adults. These young edmontosaurs would slow the migration process of the herd. As the result, the older ones did not leave the younger, so they would stay and survive during the winter in North Slope despite cold weather.

TOEFL listening lectures: A university lecture by a professor of Natural History

[Keivan68]

Thank you very much for your corrections and hints
Nevertheless, I have a problem regarding the independent task
You said that there are a couple more details I could have added. You mean details of the reading or the listening?
The essay you mentioned does not add more details from the listening than mine, but it adds more details from the reading. Noteful says that it’s better to add details from reading as less as possible, only one sentence in each paragraph, because it does not bring you any scores, and the scores lie on the listening part. Do not you agree with this?
Please reply as soon as possible dear Mr. Luschen because I will have TOEFL tomorrow morning.
Regards

[Luschen]

@Keivan68

Thank you very much for your corrections and hints
Nevertheless, I have a problem regarding the independent task
You said that there are a couple more details I could have added. You mean details of the reading or the listening?
The essay you mentioned does not add more details from the listening than mine, but it adds more details from the reading. Noteful says that it’s better to add details from reading as less as possible, only one sentence in each paragraph, because it does not bring you any scores, and the scores lie on the listening part. Do not you agree with this?
Please reply as soon as possible dear Mr. Luschen because I will have TOEFL tomorrow morning.
Regards

Yes, I guess I didn’t realize that those extra details were from the reading. I agree that the important thing is to concentrate on the lecture, but if you have enough time, adding some extra details from the reading can make the differences between the reading and the lecture more clear. Your content was probably good enough to get a 5, if you could have eliminated your usage errors. Good luck to you in the test! Please let me know how you do.

[Huriahkh]

Hello Keivan , what does TPO 20 mean as you wrote in your thread?
Huriah.

[Keivan68]

Dear Luschen,
Thank you very very much for your big helps.
My TOEFL score arrived with writing score of 28 and total score of 101.
I really owe my success to English Test and YOU!

I left you a private message with a question.