Patrick Shen10/15A類范文
來源：
小編： 133Patrick Shen10/15A類范文
來源：環球教育網 www.ielts.com.cn 2005-10-24
Essay Question 10/15
In many countries, good schools and medical facilities are available only in cities. Some people think new teachers and doctors should work in rural areas for a few years. But some others think everyone should be free to choose where they work .Discuss and give your own opinion.
題目分析：
GZ明擺著沒招兒了，老題出兩三道之后怕咱們發現規律（其實規律明擺著在那兒）就又趕緊編一兩道“新題”給咱做。這不就是“城鄉差異”加“教師和護士的待遇”兩道題合一塊么！今年所謂的“新題”沒有一道不是這么改裝出來的，IELTS作文出題在話題方面明顯已經遇到了困境。TOEFL的寫作出題者就聰明，預感到總有一天作文話題是會出盡的，所以就把所有的題放在網上每次從里面挑題考，這樣考官雖然剛開始累一點，但是不用永遠不停的逼著自己想新話題，哪有那么多完全不同的可以當作考題的話題可出呀？讓你用中文一直出有寫作考試價值的作文題你出得了么？很多同學以為“劍4”的作文題都是新編的，怎么會！絕大多數都是以前考過的老作文題甚至G類作文題（比如students' behavior,比如 freedom of creative artists)再拿來編一本新書！可以肯定，IELTS作文總有一天要走上固定題庫（但是不一定會公布在網上，而且也有可能把老題微調一下就非說成是新題，英國人做事和老美不一樣,這就要求咱們對文章結構要有調整的能力）的道路，否則考官活得太累了（從今年全球幾個大考區的題目，劍4www.ielts.org上面發布消息用的一些范文可以看出他們現在已經明顯感到了作文考試不固定題庫這種很有個性的做法有多么累。去年中國區的負責人跟咱們大陸考生信誓旦旦的說作文題再也不會重復考了，每道題都是不重樣兒的，今年還不是滿眼的老題么！英國人做事就這種風格）
具體看10/15這道題，當然是想素材四種方法當中的綜合法得出觀點：去農村有好處但是要自愿。那么就四段，還是老一套，開頭段3+1或者再加一句4+1，主體段1講不太傾向的觀點1+4，主體段第二段更傾向的觀點1+6，結尾段3句。詞匯90%以上用36天背單詞里面的詞就搞定了，30個加分句型和通用，專用模板背熟，10/15這篇里我沒有用那十句“名人講IELTS”。9月17號之后大陸沒有考試，另外幾個考區都是老題，所以一直沒寫新的范文。這兩天剛旅行結束回北京還有點累，所以這篇范文沒太努力給大伙兒寫，17，8分鐘隨手寫完了交差 ：）
In this day and age, it can be generally observed that the disparity between cities and the country has been aggravated by relentless urbanization. With respect to educational and medical facilities, a yawning gap has emerged between those in cities and the rural ones. This manifest chasm has prompted some to suggest that teachers and doctors fresh out of university work in the country for a few years.Yet many are opposed to this view on the grounds that it infringes upon individual freedom to choose where they work.Personally, I think both these two views have merit and demerit.
[U]Granted,assigning new teachers and doctors to the countryside may create certain benefits.To begin with,this practice can help foster a strong sense of obligation in many teachers and doctors.[/U]They can experience first-hand how the rural residents are held back by the out-moded teaching and medical facilities and this, in turn, can inspire a host of professionals to commit themselves to the alleviation of this disturbing situation. Moreover,the inferior living and working conditions in the country can temper many of these young professionals’ soul.They are very likely to be more tenacious and determined and hence more successful than their urban counterparts in later careers.
However,there are even more drawbacks that this practice can engender.In the first place,many young teachers and doctors will feel unmotivated or frustrated if they are sent to rural areas against their own will.They may have a hard time getting accustomed to the shabby housing and primitive facilities and slack off at work.In the second place,if new teachers and doctors are coerced to work in the countryside, a considerable proportion of them may find it daunting when it comes time for them to relocate to cities after a few years in the country.They will feel intense occupational stress when they cannot operate efficiently equipment much more advanced than the devices they are used to back in the country school or hospital. Last but not least, given the inferiority of the rural educational and medical facilities,it is highly probable that the inexperience of new teachers and doctors will lead to unsatisfactory job performance in rural schools and clinics.We really cannot expect fresh recruits to work wonders with outdated tools.
In the final analysis,I concede that sending teachers and doctors fresh out of college to the countryside may produce specific advantages. However,if we enforce this indiscriminately,that will surely generate even more banes. On balance, I am convinced that we should optimize our workforce and honor the individual freedom in determining where they work.
