c17t3 作文，AI 评分和范文，柱状图+职场话题
本帖最后由 HelloWorld 于 2024-11-23 07:50 编辑Part 1
You should spend about 20 minutes on this task. Write at least 150 words. The chart below gives information about how families in one country spent their weekly income in 1968 and in 2018. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
我的原文GPT-4o修改
The graph compares the expendatures of families in one week using their weekly earnings in a specific country between 1968 and 2018.
The datas was broken down into 8 categories and was compared according to their propertions.
In 1968, food consumed the largest proportion of all weekly expendatures, then it expencing the most significant decrease, which declined sharply from 35% in 1968 to approximately 17% in 2018, making it the third largest proportion in the end. Fuel and power, clothing and footware, personal goods also saw a vital decrease. Meanwhile, household goods remained un changed, staying at around 8% in the two years.
Leisure underwent a sharp increase and then became the largest proportion of expendature, which from around 9% in 1968 to about 22% in 2018. The other two categories seeing
significant increases were housing, from 10% to 19% and transport from 8% to 14% in the two years.
The graph compares the expenditures of families in one week using their weekly earnings in a specific country between 1968 and 2018.
The data was broken down into 8 categories and was compared according to their proportions.
In 1968, food consumed the largest proportion of all weekly expenditures, then it experienced the most significant decrease, which declined sharply from 35% in 1968 to approximately 17% in 2018, making it the third largest proportion in the end. Fuel and power, clothing and footwear, personal goods also saw a vital decrease. Meanwhile, household goods remained unchanged, staying at around 8% in the two years.
Leisure underwent a sharp increase and then became the largest proportion of expenditure, which rose from around 9% in 1968 to about 22% in 2018. The other two categories seeing significant increases were housing, from 10% to 19%, and transport, from 8% to 14% in the two years.
预估得分：GPT-4o 5.5-6；Claude 6；Copilot 5.5-6；Gemini 6-6.5
预估得分：GPT-4o 6-6.5；Claude 6.5；Copilot 6.5-7；Gemini 7-7.5
GTP-4o 9 分范文：
The bar chart illustrates the percentage of weekly income spent by families on various categories in one country in 1968 and 2018.
Overall, there were significant changes in spending patterns over the 50-year period. In 1968, the majority of income was allocated to food, whereas in 2018, leisure became the largest expenditure. Spending on housing and transport also saw notable increases, while the proportion spent on food and clothing declined.
In 1968, families spent the largest proportion of their income, around 35%, on food. However, this figure decreased dramatically to approximately 15% in 2018. Similarly, spending on clothing and footwear fell from about 10% to just under 5%. In contrast, the percentage spent on housing doubled from roughly 10% in 1968 to 20% in 2018, making it the second-largest category in the latter year.
Transport expenditure also grew significantly, rising from about 8% to 14%, while spending on leisure almost tripled, increasing from around 7% to nearly 23%. On the other hand, categories like fuel and power, household goods, and personal goods saw only minor changes, with slight decreases or minimal increases over time.
In conclusion, the data demonstrates a shift in family spending priorities, with less emphasis on essential items such as food and clothing and more on housing, leisure, and transport in 2018 compared to 1968.
Part 2
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task. Write at least 250 words. Some people believe that professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should be required to work in the country where they did their training. Others believe they should be free to work in another country if they wish. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
我的原文GPT-o1 修改
There is considerable debate over wether professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should stay and work in the country where they were chained. As far as I am concerned, they should be allowed to make the decision by themself wether stay or go to another country.
It is undeniable that there are some areas for professionals which can only be found the suitable jobs in the country which provide trainings, such as airplan designing engineers. As we all know, there are few countries that are able to design and manufacture airplan, like France. They also provide the best trainning course. So in those special fields of professionals, the best choice is to stay where they were trained.
For most of kinds of jobs, the professionals can go to any where as they wish. For example, I am an soft engineer, designing both the frondend and backend. I learn it in China, which is one of the most developed country in the internet technology area. Here, I can learn the most recently new software technology and gain lots of experience. But the skill are universal, software designings are almost the same amoung all countries. The only difference is the language, for instance, in Japan, the website need to show Japanese. So if I can speak Japanese, I can also go to Japan and work there.
In conclusion, professionals have their owen free will to decide which country they want to work, only in some special fields that are suggested to stay in the country they did their training in order to find the suitable job for them.
There is considerable debate over whether professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should stay and work in the country where they were trained. As far as I am concerned, they should be allowed to make the decision by themselves whether to stay or go to another country.
It is undeniable that there are some areas for professionals which can only be found suitable jobs in the country which provides training, such as airplane designing engineers. As we all know, there are few countries that are able to design and manufacture airplanes, like France. They also provide the best training courses. So in those special fields of professionals, the best choice is to stay where they were trained.
For most kinds of jobs, the professionals can go anywhere as they wish. For example, I am a software engineer, designing both the frontend and backend. I learned it in China, which is one of the most developed countries in the internet technology area. Here, I can learn the most recent new software technology and gain lots of experience. But the skills are universal; software designs are almost the same among all countries. The only difference is the language. For instance, in Japan, the website needs to show Japanese. So if I can speak Japanese, I can also go to Japan and work there.
In conclusion, professionals have their own free will to decide which country they want to work in, only in some special fields that are suggested to stay in the country they did their training in order to find the suitable job for them.
预估得分：GPT-o1 5.5；Claude 5.5；Copilot 5.5；Gemini 6
预估得分：GPT-o1 6；Claude 5.75；Copilot 6；Gemini 6.5
GPT-4o 9 分范文：
In today’s globalized world, the movement of professionals, such as doctors and engineers, across borders is a common phenomenon. While some argue that these individuals should be obligated to serve in the country where they were trained, others believe they should have the freedom to work wherever they wish. Both perspectives carry significant implications for societies and individuals.
On the one hand, requiring professionals to remain in the country where they received their training can be seen as a matter of reciprocity and social responsibility. Many nations subsidize education for fields like medicine and engineering to address domestic shortages of skilled workers. In return, it is reasonable to expect these professionals to contribute to the well-being of their home country, at least for a certain period. For instance, rural areas in developing countries often face critical shortages of doctors and engineers. Enforcing such a policy could help alleviate these disparities, ensuring equitable access to essential services.
On the other hand, freedom of choice is a fundamental human right, and professionals should not be restricted in their career decisions. Mobility allows individuals to pursue better opportunities, improve their skills, and achieve personal growth. Additionally, professionals working abroad often send remittances back to their home countries, contributing to the local economy indirectly. For example, Indian engineers working in Silicon Valley have not only advanced global technology but also contributed to India’s development through financial investments and knowledge transfer.
In my opinion, while it is important to address national needs, enforcing mandatory service in the training country may be overly restrictive and counterproductive. A more balanced approach would be to incentivize professionals to stay, such as through financial rewards, career growth opportunities, or loan forgiveness programs. This respects individual autonomy while encouraging contributions to the country’s development.
In conclusion, the debate hinges on the balance between national interests and personal freedoms. While professionals should ideally contribute to the country that supported their education, imposing rigid restrictions is not the optimal solution. Incentives and opportunities can effectively retain talent while respecting individual choices, benefiting both society and the professionals themselves.
9 分对我来说，模仿难度很大，很多高级词汇即使看得懂也用不好
下次还是继续让 AI 提供 7 分范文就好
页:
[1]