综合写作
Reading: prehistoric defensive constructions （forts） in Andes are unusual
in some places, walls are absent, making them vulnerable to attack;
they have multiple entranceways, while normally other forts have 1 or 2 gates only;
lack of space to store enough water
Lecture:
The places that don’t have walls because they are naturally defended by cliffs or steep mountains;
Entranceways all face clear open space with great visibility, people in the forts could easily spot potential attackers, to block the gate and get prepared;
Andes region is dry, without enough food and water for the army, they wouldn’t choose to surround the forts and wait till they surrender. If the fort could withstand the initial attack, it could survive.
美国的ANDE wall是不是一种防御机制。
Reading: 不是
1.wall不是连续的，有gaps，不能达到防御的目的
2.wall 由multiple entranceways构成，而一般的防御建筑只有一个出口和入口
3.没有walls和储水的地方，无法供给城内抵御外敌
Listening: 赞成
1.这些gaps都是悬崖之类，通常是容易受攻击的地方
2.这些ways是用来contact，因为site在large area，而且这些通道很窄
3.敌人也要面临食物和水短缺的问题，因为这里气候干燥
独立写作
Should governments spend money on scientific research even if it has no practical value
写作思路：
政府应不应该支持科学研究即使没有实用性般来说，陈述中说得这么明确的，都不应该全部赞同。
1.赞同知识应该更新，可以举事实例子，身边的上课时发生的事儿。
2.但是不一定上课，可以自学；事实上有些事情用上课也学不好。
3.即使是上课，五年规定得太死了。可以分学科设计年限。
范文解析：
Scientific researchs are valuable only if they can finally turn into practical use and solve practical problems.
Before deciding their limited annual budget on science research projects, it is important for the govenment to make clear their priorities first — on projects that yield practical fruits or on researchs that turn into anything but practical use. We live in an era when technology brings us, along with unprecedented convinience and comfort,numerous troubles some of which are even threatening human survival. We are quite familiar with these issues through the meida: Global warming due to green house gas emission, deforestation and animal distinction because of habitat expansion, and frequent breakout of pandemic disease owing to antibiotics abuse,not to mention the surging world population which will demand our agriculture to yield twice as much food anually as it does now to sustain by 2050. Yet what we know few about are the solutions to them.
Time is urgent while budget is always tight. The answer to these issues lie in techology innovation. Whereas those scientific researchs that focus on unrealistic problems are no cure for environmental issues, science projects that concentrate on practical use electricity as power will greatly reduce greenhouse gas emmision; Program that develops new medicines will kill lethal bacterias and save people's life; Studies on new seed will largely enhance crop survival rate and field production. All these science projects will improve our life quality and require immense governemnt investment.
Overall, unrealistic science study can not directly improve our life. In other words, it is not only a waste of time, but also a huge waste of money. Government need to spend their limited science budget wisely — dedicate most of them to projects that will directly address our current issues.
