新版写作第三大题，限时 10 分钟，建议 100–160 词。 高分 = 直接回应教授 + 一个说透的理由 + 与同学观点互动（部分认同/推进）+ 具体例子。 切忌：泛泛而谈话题、三个理由都浅、与同学观点重复。
情境：教授问大学是否应更多用网课取代线下课。Maria 认为省钱，Tom 认为线下互动重要。 要求：写一段学术讨论回帖，100+ 词，与同学观点互动。 限时：10 分钟 话题：教育
While I see Maria’s point that online courses cut costs for both universities and students, I think she overlooks what gets lost when classes move fully online. In my experience, the most valuable part of a seminar is the spontaneous back-and-forth — a classmate challenges your idea, and you have to rethink it on the spot. That kind of friction is hard to reproduce over a chat box.
That said, Tom is right that in-person interaction matters, but it does not have to be all or nothing. A hybrid model, where lectures are recorded and class time is reserved for debate, could capture most of the savings while keeping the interaction that actually drives learning.
情境：教授问减缓气候变应主要靠政府还是个人。Ana 认为个人消费选择重要，Ben 认为需政策。 要求：100+ 词，给出你的立场并与一位同学互动。 限时：10 分钟 话题：环境
I largely agree with Ben that systemic change requires government policy — individual recycling simply cannot price carbon or fund clean energy at scale. However, I would push back on the idea that the two are separate. Personal choices create the political demand that makes bold policy possible.
For example, when millions of households switched to rooftop solar, it shifted the conversation from “whether” to “how fast” to decarbonize, and lawmakers followed the voters. So rather than asking which side is responsible, we should see individual action as the engine that makes government action feasible.
情境：教授问公司是否应默认远程办公。Cara 认为效率高，Diego 认为团队协作受损。 要求：100+ 词，给出立场并互动。 限时：10 分钟 话题：科技/职场
Diego raises a fair concern that remote work weakens the casual collaboration that sparks new ideas, and I have felt that too — some of my best project ideas came from hallway chats. That said, Cara is right that focused work at home can be far more efficient without constant meetings.
The real solution is not a blanket policy but flexibility. Teams could set two or three in-office days for brainstorming, while leaving the rest remote for deep work. This way, we keep the spontaneous exchange Diego values without sacrificing the productivity Cara describes.
情境：教授问是否应普及四天工作制。Lena 认为提升幸福感，Omar 认为产出会降。 要求：100+ 词，给出立场并互动。 限时：10 分钟 话题：商业/职场
Omar worries that a four-day week hurts output, but evidence from pilot programs suggests the opposite: when given one fewer day, teams cut pointless meetings and focus on what actually moves the needle. Productivity often holds or even rises.
I side more with Lena, though. The bigger gain is retention — companies that offer compressed weeks see far lower turnover, which saves the huge cost of hiring and training replacements. For knowledge work especially, rested employees simply make fewer costly mistakes. The trade-off is worth it.
情境：教授问社交媒体总体增加还是减少人的联结感。Priya 认为联结，Sam 认为替代真实接触。 要求：100+ 词，给立场并互动。 限时：10 分钟 话题：科技/社会
Sam is right that scrolling is no substitute for being in the room with someone — a like never replaced a hug. But I think Priya captures the bigger picture: for people who are isolated by distance or disability, these platforms are often their main lifeline to community.
Take international students: a group chat with family back home is what gets many through their first lonely semester. The tool itself is neutral; what matters is whether we use it to supplement real connection or to hide from it. Used well, it clearly increases belonging.
情境：教授问拥堵城市应优先投资公共交通还是道路容量。Hana 认为公交，Leo 认为开车更自由。 要求：100+ 词，给立场并互动。 限时：10 分钟 话题：城市化
Leo values the freedom of driving, and in spread-out suburbs that freedom is real. But in a dense city, adding road lanes mostly creates more traffic — studies show new drivers fill the space within a year. Public transit scales where cars cannot.
I agree with Hana that buses and trains should come first. A single metro car moves hundreds per trip, and reliable transit also raises property values near stations, funding further lines. Freedom matters, but in a city of millions, shared mobility is simply the only option that scales.
情境：教授问高等教育是否应免费。Nina 认为公平，Theo 认为纳税人负担重。 要求：100+ 词，给立场并互动。 限时：10 分钟 话题：教育/政策
Theo is right that free tuition shifts a heavy bill to taxpayers, many of whom never attended university. That fairness point deserves real weight. Still, I lean toward Nina, because the cost of an uneducated workforce is bigger than the tuition itself.
Consider regions where student debt forces graduates to skip risky but innovative careers — freeing that talent grows the whole economy, and the tax base expands with it. A smarter model might be means-tested free tuition: fully covered for low-income students, loans for the rest. That captures Nina’s equity without ignoring Theo’s concern.
情境：教授问课堂使用 AI 写作工具总体利弊。Yuki 认为提升效率，Ravi 认为损害思考。 要求：100+ 词，给立场并互动。 限时：10 分钟 话题：科技/教育
Ravi’s worry is legitimate: if students outsource every draft to a bot, they never learn to wrestle with an idea. That skill is the whole point of education. Yet Yuki is also right that AI can handle the busywork — formatting, basic grammar — so learners spend time on argument, not punctuation.
The answer is not banning the tool but teaching its bounds. A class might let AI check structure but require students to defend every claim in discussion. Used as a sparring partner rather than a ghostwriter, it strengthens thinking instead of replacing it.