Reading passage
Native to the Mediterranean region, medusahead is an invasive species of grass that has overwhelmed North American grasslands. The plant quickly takes over fields that it has invaded and prevents the growth of native specles. This can cause critical damage to regional ecosystems and scenic wildlands. Several methods to handle medusahead have been explored by ecologists. One solution is to burn the medusahead off the land with controlled fires. By doing so, vast amounts of medusahead can be eliminated quickly. Medusahead holds onto its seeds longer than other annual native plants, and the seeds are more likely to perish while still attached to the plant. Strategically timed fires could burn away the medusahead and its seeds while leaving the fallen seeds of native plants unharmed. Native plants could then reclaim the burnt areas and have space to grow. Another option is to allow cattle, like cows and sheep, to feed on medusahead. These livestock breeds are known as grazers because they graze, or eat, small portions of grass constantly throughout the day. If permitted into fields where medusahead is widespread, the cattle would graze on it and significantly reduce its presence. Native plants could then re-establish themselves on the land. This plan is particularly effective since medusahead is most common in the midwestern United States, where a lot of cattle and livestock are raised. The third possibility is to employ a fungal parasite that specifically targets medusahead. In the Mediterranean region, where medusahead originated, there is a species of fungus that inhibits the normal root development of medusahead. The parasite would prevent medusahead from growing while ignoring native plants. Introducing the fungus to North American grasslands would make it possible for native species to better compete against medusahead.
Listening script
The methods proposed in the reading are not likely to be effective for controlling medusahead. Let me explain why.
First, fire might destroy medusahead on the surface, and, if timed perfectly, its seeds, too. But medusahead will likely return anyways. The plant has deep, durable roots. They can even survive the intense heat of a controlled fire. If the roots are left intact, the plant will grow again in the next season. So, even if every plant and seed on the surface is destroyed in the fire, the fields will be full of medusahead again because of the toughness of its roots. Second, medusahead is not attractive to grazers. This means that if grazers are released in a field full of medusahead, but there are still other kinds of grasses, the grazers will eat the other plants first. They will eventually eat some of the medusahead, but only when it is the last option available. They will eat the plants and grasses that ecologists are trying to protect first. It is a scenario where the proposed solution could end up making the problem worse. There would be fewer native grasses and more space for medusahead. Finally, the fungal parasite is also a long shot. While it sounds like a logical solution, you have to understand tha medusahead and its fungal parasites have coexisted in their native habitat for a very long time. Like all organism medusahead has been forced to adapt to its threats, so it has developed resistances against the fungus. As such the fungal parasite will only damage medusahead that is already weak. The weak strains would be culled out, which ends up promoting the growth of even stronger medusahead that is resistant to the fungus. Bringing fungal parasites to North America would likely be inefficient for controlling the spread of medusahead.
My answer
The passage introduces three solutions to prevent medushead from damaging to regional ecosystems and wildlands. However, the lecturer effectively challenges the points made in the passage by providing three reasons.
Firstly, the lecturer refutes that it can solve the problem to burn the medusahead off the land with controlled fires. The lecturer partially agrees that it could remove medusahed and its seeds but he warns that medusahead could grow again because their roots have resistence to intense heat. It means the burnt areas could return to the previous state with many medusaheads.
Secondly, the lecturer questions that cattle like cows and sheep would be effective. He highlights that this kind of grazers doesn't eat medusahead with high priority but rather they eat other plants first. In the end, the zones where other plants used to be before getting grazed will be more space for medushead.
Lastly, the lecturer doesn't agree that employing a fungal parasite will be a solution. he mentions that medusahead and fungal parasites have co-existed for a long time. During that time, medusahead have reinforced their resistence to fungl parasites. And he also points out that introducing the fungus to North Americans, which the passage provides as an example, is not successful case at all.
Evaluation
Your writing is well-organized and the flow of ideas is clear. However, there are a few minor issues that need to be addressed. Here is the grading based on the TOEFL Writing Rubric.
Task Achievement (4/5): You provide a clear overview of the main points from the reading and the lecture. However, there are minor details from the lecture that are not accurately captured, which could lead to misunderstandings.
Cohesion and Coherence (4/5): The essay is generally well-structured, with clear transitions between the points. However, there are a few places where the writing could be smoother.
Language Use (3/5): Your sentences are generally clear, but there are several grammatical errors and odd word choices throughout the essay. More complex and accurate sentence structures could improve this score.
Mechanics (3.5/5): The essay has a few spelling and punctuation errors. It could also benefit from better paragraphing, especially in the introduction.
Overall, your essay is well done and communicates your ideas effectively. Improving your grammar, language use, and mechanics could enhance your writing significantly. Some areas to focus on include verb tenses, correct word usage, and more varied sentence structures.
Re-writing (1)
The passage proposes three methods to combat the invasion of medusahead in North American grasslands. However, the speaker in the lecture presents counterarguments to each of these suggestions, offering insights into why they might not work as effectively as hoped.
Firstly, the lecturer counters the assertion made in the passage that burning medusahead and its seeds could effectively control its proliferation. While the lecturer concedes that such fires could eliminate the visible part of medusahead and possibly its seeds, he points out that the resilient roots of medusahead could withstand the high temperature of such fires. This means that even after a fire, medusahead could regrow in the following season, thus making the burned areas susceptible to a new wave of medusahead invasion.
Secondly, the idea of using livestock such as cows and sheep as grazers to decrease the presence of medusahead is challenged by the lecturer. He emphasizes that these grazers do not prioritize medusahead as a food source, instead opting to eat other plants first. Consequently, the areas previously occupied by these other plants could end up being overrun by medusahead, exacerbating the problem rather than alleviating it.
Finally, the lecturer disputes the efficacy of utilizing a specific fungal parasite to hinder medusahead growth. She informs us that medusahead and its fungal parasites have cohabitated for a long time in their native environment, leading medusahead to develop resistance against the fungus. She further points out that the introduction of these fungal parasites to North American grasslands could end up promoting the growth of more robust, fungus-resistant medusahead strains, making the control of its spread even more challenging.
Re-writing (2)
The reading passage presents three methods to handle the issue of medusahead, an invasive species of grass, in North American grasslands. However, the lecture disputes each of these strategies, giving three key reasons.
Firstly, the lecture argues against the idea in the reading that controlled fires could successfully eliminate medusahead. The lecturer agrees that fire might destroy medusahead and its seeds, but he points out that medusahead has deep, durable roots that can survive the intense heat of a fire. This means that even if all the plants and seeds are burnt, medusahead could still grow back the next season.
Secondly, the lecturer disagrees with the reading's suggestion that using grazers, such as cows and sheep, could effectively reduce medusahead. He points out that these animals don't prefer medusahead for their diet and would eat other plants first. This could lead to an increase in medusahead since there would be more space available for it to grow.
Lastly, the lecture counters the idea from the reading that using a specific fungal parasite could stop medusahead growth. The lecturer says that medusahead has developed resistance to this fungus over time, so only the weaker medusahead would be affected. This could actually result in the growth of stronger, fungus-resistant medusahead. So, using this fungus in North America might not work well in controlling medusahead.