Integrated writing.

Essay topics:

Integrated writing.

The reading passage states why Pluto is no longer considered as a planet in our solar system, but rather as a dwarf planet. However, the lecturer presents some points that cast doubt on it.

First, the passage states since Pluto does not meet the triad of a planet, as it does not have dominancy in its territory and has not swept away other objects around it, can't be recognized as a real planet. However the lecturer refutes this claim because like any other plant, these wandering objects orbiting around Pluto can be considered as its moons.

Second, the lecturer states that some astronauts believe that it's better to widen our criteria for recognizing a celestial object, which orbiting sun without being a moon of other objects, as planet rather than narrowing it. This way, there may be over 50 planets in our solar system. It opposes to the passage that confines the number of solar planets to only nine ones.

Third, the lecturer opposes to the passage in case of calling Pluto the dwarf planet because it is rather confusing and may have some socio-economical negative influences. Excluding Pluto from solar planets mandates rewriting textbooks, revising museums, posters, and all cultural items that include Pluto as a planet.

Votes
Average: 8.5 (2 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2024-02-22 joyce05 100 view
2024-02-22 joyce05 view
2023-06-05 mirondevsi view
2023-01-24 joyce05 100 view
2023-01-02 villian7 view
>>> More users practiced this topic >>>
Essay Categories
TOEFL
Essays by user nargess1981 :

Comments

Sentence: First, the passage states since Pluto does not meet the triad of a planet, as it does not have dominancy in its territory and has not swept away other objects around it, can't be recognized as a real planet.
Error: triad Suggestion: trial?

Happy New Year, Nargess!

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 26 in 30
Category: Very good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 9 9
No. of Words: 208 250
No. of Characters: 1008 900
No. of Different Words: 117 100
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.798 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.846 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.429 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 77 80
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 53 60
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 29 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 16 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.111 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.183 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.778 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.434 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.677 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.088 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5

The lecture provides some arguments that contradict the passage's claim, saying Pluto is not a true planet but rather a dwarf one. The arguments are organized in the following three parts.

For the first thing, it points to the controversy among the astronomers about the definition of a planet. Several scientists believe that a large celestial object which revolves around the sun, has enough gravity to have a round shape, and has its own moon should be considered a planet. This opposes the reading that indicates the ability to completely clearing its orbit of other orbiting objects is one of the definitive criteria of a planet.

Secondly, the lecture advocates the approach that widens the definition of a planet rather than narrows it down. In fact, any large object orbiting the sun without being the satellite of another orbiting object can be considered a planet. Accordingly, our solar system has about 15 planets. This is against the idea developed by the passage that limits the solar planets to only 8 ones, excluding Pluto.

At last, putting Pluto under the classification of a dwarf planet will provoke lots of confusion in educational settings. There are great numbers of text books, museum exhibitions, charts, and etc. that require revisions, which means a significant expenditure. This undermines the passage that suggests categorizing Pluto as a dwarf planet instead of a true planet will resolve the problem of its definition.