2014年6月的亚太区考题为“Are people who stay in the same community happier than those who move from one place to another?” 对绝大多数同学来说，本题在语言层面应该不存在理解障碍，题目问我们长居同一地与搬来搬去哪种比较令人快乐，但想要抓住出题者深层次的考察点却并不容易。如果只解读出长居与搬迁，那么在写作当中很难体现出对题目的深刻洞察。
理解本题可以从community一词入手。在本题语境中，对community比较恰当的理解是“the people with common interests living in a particular area； broadly: the area itself”(Merriam-Webster Dictionary)。很显然，题目中的community指一种地方，因此我们取它的引申义，即“有共同利益/兴趣的人所生活的特定区域”。通过对关键词的释义同学们可以发现，题目表面上是在问长期住在某地，真正的深意蕴含在居住环境中的人身上，也就是说，stay in the same community除了指住在同一个地方之外，还蕴含着与自己的同胞、乡亲或有同好的人生活在一起的意思，而move from one place to another恰恰切断了这种人与人之间的联系。对题目理解到这一步，才算是在审题上达到了评分标准中“insightful”的要求。
在我们所选析的这篇考场作文中，作者恰好对上文所谈的深刻性有所涉及，但在论述上做的不够充分到位，得到了9分。接下来我们会从立意、论证、语言等角度对这篇文章进行一个比较深入的分析，同时探讨一下在哪些方面进行提升可以帮助本文获得一个更好的成绩。
In this era determined by fast social development, moving from places to another cannot fulfill people’s desire anymore. There is a huge amount of people tending to stay in their original place. Some people argued that moving places to live can make them happy because they have access to meet new friends and expand their horizons. This is also the reason why the so-called “couch surfing” so popular. However, from my own perspective, the statement above is implausible and in order to be happy, people should spend their whole lifetime in the same community and any reasons are as follows.
在首段中，作者将我们常用的两种开头写法——开门见山法与让步法——混合使用。首句提出搬迁式的生活不能再满足人们的欲望，人们更倾向于呆在一个地方。之后让步，论述了搬迁的好处(“meet new friends and expand their horizons”)，并用couch surfing的例子简要地进行了证明，这里作者对对方观点的关照是十分有效的。接下来作者用however转折，引出自己的观点，即获得快乐的方法是长居同一地，并在结构上引出下文(“any reasons are as follows”)。这里作者有写作不准确的地方，通过分析下文可知，作者在证明自己观点的过程中主要使用的论据是examples而不是reasons，因此这个reason是不准确的，可以换成一个更宽泛的词evidence。
虽然作者将两种开头方式进行了杂糅，但叙述条理清晰，在论述对方观点上充实而有度，自己的观点明确，也在结构上对下文进行了介绍，符合我们对有效开头的要求。如果想要进一步提高，首先可以考虑将段首两句论述自己观点的话放到转折之后，使结构更加明晰，另外对desire这个词更加深入地论述，即决定我们选择长居还是搬迁的欲望到底是什么。其实在本题当中，这个desire应指人们与自己的同胞或同类人生活在一起时获得的认同感、归属感与安全感，也就是我们在本篇评析的引言中提到的题目深层次的考察点。作者在首段写作中对这方面有考虑，但没有进一步的点明。
The story of Kant Immanuel, who is an influential Germany philosopher can perfectly illustrate my idea. Kant didn’t leave to a outside world in his whole life and he spent his whole lifetime in his original community. When Kant was a eight year-old boy, he started his career as a student in a small town in German. Then, he also had his college in the same town. When he was graduated he was regarded as the best student and as time goes by, he was fortunately choose to be a noted professor in a variety of universities. However, these universities are far from his community but with high salaries. All his living situation could be enhanced to a large extent. We all know that the Kant’s response is NO ad he still insisted in his own researches. Kant thought that he had all his friends in his community and he loves his living place very much. He doesn’t want to transfer to another place at all due to his friends. Eventually, Kant got award in his academic area and he became the one of the greatest philosopher in German. Kant’s success shows the power that original community have and people are fulfill themselves if they do not chang living places at all.
第一个主体段，作者使用了哲学家康德的例子。康德一生都居住、工作在他所出生的小城，从未踏出过家乡一步，并最终从中受益。从例子内容本身来说，作者选材十分贴合。
作者以一个简洁有效的主题句总起，一句话概括例子大意。之后从康德的八岁写起，叙述他幼年成长、接受教育都在同一个小城中，行文清晰流畅但稍显啰嗦。接着作者写到康德接到多个大学聘书，但最终决定留在家乡，进入本段论述的重点。作者给出的康德决定长居一地的原因是他要与自己的朋友呆在一起，触及了题目的本质，即人的影响，可惜下文迅速结尾(“eventually”)，直接写到了他这样做的结果。这里作者犯了同学们在SAT写作中经常出现的错误之一：只写什么样，不写为什么会这样。也就是只写了与朋友们在一起使康德取得了最终的成功，却没有论述康德在长居一城、与朋友的相处中究竟获得了什么好处，这些好处又是如何帮助他获得最终的成功的。与自己的同类人一起生活的影响这一题目本质没有得到有效的发展和论证。
其实想要论证人的影响这一点并不困难，作者只需沿着他所停下的点(“due to his friends”)继续写下去。比如我们可以说朋友的认同与支持可以持续地为康德提供学术研究的动力；身在熟悉稳定的社交环境中，康德就无需把精力放在维持自己的人际关系上，从而可以更好地专注于自己的学术研究中；因为身边的人有与自己共同的利益与兴趣点，因此自己的成就可以更好地被评判与接受，从而更容易获得满足感与价值感，等等。论述到这一步，才算是真正把议论文写作中要求的how与why说清楚了。
另外，本段中的语法错误略多，一般过去时和一般现在时杂糅，也有一些动词的使用错误，这里不细表。
Second of all, the earthquake in Wen Chuan can also proof my statement. In May 12 2008, Wen Chuan was faced a horribal natural disaster and about 8 million of citizens lost their homes. When government asked to rebuild their home, the citizen refused. They thought the restoration their home should be fixed, bet not changed to another strange place. The government, who is the sponsor was shocked by people from WenChuan’ decision. Nowadays, Wen Chuan becomes a good place again and people living there felt they are the most happiness people in the world because they didn’t agree with the government to change their living places. The idea of WenChuan people is clear and fixed, they think their original community can offer whatever they want and even the natural disaster can’t cut off their living place.
第二个主体段，作者举了汶川人民在地震灾后选择原址重建的例子，依然在选材上十分贴合。但由于时间所限，论述得不够充分。与上段类似，在论述“为什么要原址重建、人们到底能够从一块世代相承的土地上得到什么”这个点上基本没有展开，而这本应该是我们论述的重点。在这里我们可以说，一块土地承载的是我们所沿袭下来的生活方式，坚持土地正是坚持这种生活方式；也可以说，家乡地不仅仅是一个居住的地点，它还联系着我们和上一代甚至祖先的感情，而搬迁会把这种情感联系切断；当然也可以说我们这道题的关键点，选择相同的居住地其实是为了与相熟的人生活在一起，从而进一步论述这些相熟的人带给我们的好处。
作者在评分标准中的“develop”这一点上做得不够到位，导致“insightfulness”欠缺，是这两段的通病，也是导致这篇文章没有取得一个更高分数的主要原因。另外，时态混乱依然是本段的主要语言问题，虽然没有影响文章的理解，但错误的数量已经影响了文章传达的有效性，也造成了作者的失分。
Based on what 2 analysised above, we can that people who stay can be happy instead of changing.
综上所述，本文的优点包括开头有效，叙述清晰流畅，所选两个例子非常贴合题意，意识到了题目的深层次含义并有所涉及。缺点主要是关键点论述不到位及时态问题。如果想要冲击10分以上的高分，除了语言上要更严谨之外，在主体段论述中要减少背景信息的铺陈，将论述的重头戏与篇幅大部分放在“how”与“why”这两个关键点上。
