本文为大家介绍的是2015年6月13日ACT写作真题回顾，作为改革前的最后一次写作题目，我们来分析一下吧。
ACT写作真题回顾,ACT写作
下面就让小编来为大家介绍一下2015年6月13日ACT写作真题回顾的相关内容吧，大家要好好把握，希望能够给准备ACT考试的同学带来帮助。
题目：Should the communitieshave the curfew laws requiring that persons under age 18 stay at home at acertain time of night?
社区是否应该有宵禁法规定18岁以下的青少年在晚上固定的时间不能出门?
题目分析：
这是一道之前考过的题目。
1.审题：
A.写的时候要注意题目要求，不能不加区分地写curfew，因为在美国curfew分两种，daytime curfew 以及curfew at night，在写作的过程中，要在例子中时刻体现出night这个时间点。
B. curfewlaws的制定主体是community，因此写的时候，不能写成high schools是否应该支持curfew laws，也不能写成state or federalgovernment是否应该制定curfew laws. 时刻记住要紧扣题目。
C.curfew laws的对象是不满18岁的孩子，因此在写作中，一定要提及孩子的年龄表明是针对未成年人，这样，才是符合题目的。
2.写作逻辑
学生在写的时候，可以选择支持，也可以选择反对的观点，只要理由充分即可。
在下面的这篇范文中，选取的观点是反对社区制定宵禁法案, 文章给了三个主要的理由，并且在给每一个主要理由的时候，都对counterargument做出了回应。
回应counterargument非常重要，因为它是critical writing的重要体现。
第一段：引言
尽管有人支持晚上宵禁，但是我不支持，理由有三：不能降低犯罪率，损害了孩子自由的权利，不能保证孩子的good behaviors。
第二段：详述理由一：不能降低犯罪率
Topic Sentence：(其中对counterargument有做出回应)
Reasons(证据): 两个短例子(例子要具体)
专家意见
Conclusion
第三段：详述理由二：损害了孩子自由的权利
Topic Sentence：
Reasons(证据): reasoning (推理)
三个短例子反问句(例子要具体)
Counterargument: 孩子太小还不能享受宪法赋予的全部自由权利
Counter-counterargument:承认Counterargument的合理之处，但指出解决方案：父母而非Curfew laws是更好的选择
Conclusion
第四段：详述理由三：不能保证孩子的good behaviors
Topic Sentence：(其中对counterargument有做出回应)
Reasons(证据): 列举三个短例子(例子要具体)
Counterargument:有了curfew laws只要父母加强孩子在家活动的监控，就能保证孩子的好行为
Counter-counterargument:承认Counterargument的合理之处，但住处这样的话，实际起作用的是父母而不是curfew laws.
第五段：总结
范文
Thereis a hot debate in communities about whether curfew laws should be enacted toprevent the kids under 18 from go out from 8pm to 5 am. Although some believe incurfew laws, I think curfew laws at night should not be introduced because theyfail to reduce local juvenile crime rate, violate the right prescribed in theconstitution and cannot guarantee the good behaviors of the kids.
Firstly, although the community lawmakers support curfew laws byclaiming that, with curfew laws in place, a fear for fine and jail time willkeep the delinquent teenagers at home and foster a safer neighborhood, thecurfew laws can be ineffective in curbing crimes. It’s not hard to imagine that12 years old boy picks the afternoon instead of the night to steal a bike andthat a 14 years old girl smashes the windows of a car in the night when apatrolman is not at present. There is hard evidence against the legitimacy ofcurfew laws. Accordingto juvenile crime researchers Karl Miller and MikeSolomon, statistical analysis shows that curfew cannot reduce any type ofjuvenile crime, neither on an absolute basis nor relative to adult crime rates.When curfew laws fail to curb teenagers’ incriminating activities, why should the local communities bother to enact suchlaws?
Secondly, requiringthe young to stay at home violates kids’ constitutional right of freedom. In a free country, freedom doesn’t require proof tojustify one’s decisions. If a teen wants to take a stroll in the part at 10pm,why should a police question him? If a minor feels too exhausted during the dayand prefers jogging at 11 pm or 5 am, why should she serve jail time for thisreason? If a kid wants to go to beech and watch the sunrise at 4:30 am, whyshould he be fined 500$ for it? Some might raise a concern that a kid is too youngto enjoy the constitutional freedom to its fullest. Sure, that might be true.But kids have their parents, right? Given individualized situations, the custodians,rather than the authority, are in a better position to decide whether the kidsare disciplined enough to enjoy the freedom of going out at night. Why shouldthe taxpayers’ money be spent on enacting and implementing curfew laws to do athing that parents can do better?
Thirdly,the local authorities, who are expecting the kid to behave itself owing to theenactment of curfew laws, will be disappointed to find out that staying insideat night won’t guarantee the good behaviors. Not loitering on the street from8pm to 1am doesn’t mean a kid won’t watchpornographic videos for 5 hours in a row; not robbing the elders in thedancing square at 9pm won’t stop a kid from stealingthe credit card of their parents to purchase the lasted release of Ipad 4online; being locked in the bedroom from 8pm to 5am doesn’t mean that a kid won’ttake marihuana secretly. Of course, if parents could keep an eye on a kid whenshe or he is at home during the night, the kid will behave better. But, in thatcase, the credit goes to the parents not to the local curfew laws.
Inconclusion, even though the communities intend to introduce curfew laws tomaintain the safety of a neighborhood, curfew at night is not a good choicebecause it cannot deliver a satisfactory result in maintaining a safecommunity, protecting the young’s right of freedom, or ensuring good behaviors.Compared with curfew laws, better performance of paternal duty might be abetter answer.
以上就是对2015年6月13日ACT写作真题回顾的介绍，希望大家能够用心体会，更多精彩内容小编稍后为您呈现。最后，前程百利祝大家在ACT考试中取得优异的成绩。
您还可能关注：
下一篇：22服ACT考试备考良方
