📚 Year 8 CIE Philosophy: Exam Techniques and Marking Criteria | Year 8 CIE 哲学：答题技巧与评分标准
In Year 8 CIE Philosophy, doing well is not just about knowing what different philosophers said. It is about showing the examiner that you can think clearly, build a logical argument, and consider more than one side of an issue. This article explains the key exam techniques and the marking criteria used to judge your work, so you can turn your philosophical ideas into top marks.
在 Year 8 CIE 哲学中，取得好成绩不仅仅意味着你知道不同哲学家说过什么，更重要的是向考官展示你能清晰思考、构建有逻辑的论证，并能从不同角度看待问题。这篇文章将为你讲解关键的答题技巧和评估作业时使用的评分标准，帮助你把哲学思考转化为高分。
1. Understanding the Question Command Words | 理解题目中的指令词
The first step to a successful answer is working out exactly what the question is asking you to do. CIE Philosophy questions use specific command words such as ‘explain’, ‘analyse’, ‘evaluate’ or ‘discuss’. Each one tells you the depth and style of answer expected. If you only describe when the question says ‘evaluate’, you will lose important marks even if you know the content perfectly.
写出高分答案的第一步，是准确地判断题目要求你做什么。CIE 哲学题目会使用明确的指令词，比如 “解释” (explain)、”分析” (analyse)、”评价” (evaluate) 或 “讨论” (discuss)。每一个词都提示了期望的作答深度和风格。如果题目要求 “评价”，而你只做了 “描述”，那么即使你对内容了如指掌，也会丢掉重要的分数。
Before putting pen to paper, underline the command word. Ask yourself: does the question want me to explain a concept, compare two views, or make a judgement about which argument is stronger? For example, ‘Explain Plato’s allegory of the cave’ requires a step-by-step account of what the allegory shows and why it matters. ‘Evaluate the claim that appearances are deceptive’ expects you to weigh up evidence for and against, then reach a justified conclusion.
动笔之前，先划出指令词。问一问自己：这道题是要我解释一个概念，比较两种观点，还是对哪一种论证更有力作出判断？例如，”解释柏拉图的洞穴寓言” 要求你一步步说明这个寓言揭示了什么以及它的意义所在。”评价 ‘表象是骗人的’ 这一论断” 则期待你权衡正反两方面的理据，然后得出有依据的结论。
Common command words and what they mean in philosophy: Explain – give reasons for how or why something is the case. Analyse – break an argument into its parts and show how they work together. Discuss – explore different sides of an issue, often including strengths and weaknesses. Evaluate – make a judgement about the value or success of an idea, using criteria. To what extent do you agree – consider both agreement and disagreement before stating your final position.
哲学中常见的指令词及其含义：解释 (Explain) — 给出某事是如何发生或为何如此的理据。分析 (Analyse) — 将论证分解为若干部分，并说明它们如何协同运作。讨论 (Discuss) — 探索问题的不同侧面，通常包括优点和缺点。评价 (Evaluate) — 使用评判标准对某一观点的价值或成败作出判断。你在多大程度上同意 (To what extent do you agree) — 先考虑同意的理由和不同意的理由，再陈述你的最终立场。
2. Show Knowledge and Understanding Clearly | 清晰展示知识理解
The first assessment objective in CIE Philosophy is Knowledge and Understanding (AO1). Examiners want to see that you can accurately recall key concepts, definitions, and philosophical views. This does not mean memorising long quotes; it means being able to explain an idea in your own words and using precise philosophical vocabulary.
CIE 哲学的第一个评估目标是知识理解 (AO1)。考官想看到你能准确回忆关键概念、定义和哲学观点。这并不意味着死记硬背长篇引文；而是指你能用自己的话解释一个观点，并使用准确的哲学术语。
When introducing a philosopher’s idea, name the thinker (e.g. ‘Aristotle argued that…’) and give a concise, accurate summary. Avoid vague statements like ‘some people think we need rules’. Instead, pin it down: ‘Hobbes believed that without a powerful government to enforce rules, life would be “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”.’ Always define central terms the first time you use them. For example, ‘Empiricism is the view that all knowledge comes from sensory experience.’
在介绍一位哲学家的观点时，要提出思想家的名字（例如 “亚里士多德论证说……”），并给出简明准确的概括。避免模糊的说法，比如 “有些人认为我们需要规则”。要具体确切：”霍布斯认为，没有强有力的政府来执行规则，生活就会 ‘孤独、贫困、卑污、残忍而短寿’。” 首次使用核心术语时务必给出定义。例如：”经验主义 (Empiricism) 认为所有知识都来自感官经验。”
Knowledge marks are also awarded for relevant examples. An example from everyday life or a thought experiment can show that you truly understand a concept. If you are explaining utilitarianism, you might give the example of choosing to donate to a charity that helps the greatest number of people. Keep examples clear and tied directly to the point you are making.
恰当的例子也能帮你拿到知识分。来自日常生活或思想实验的例子，能够证明你真正理解了一个概念。如果你在解释功利主义，可以举一个选择向能帮助最多人的慈善机构捐款的例子。例子要清晰，并直接与你要说明的论点挂钩。
3. Building a Logical Argument | 构建有逻辑的论证
Philosophy is about reasoning, so your answer must not be a list of facts. You need to build a chain of reasoning that leads from your opening point to a conclusion. A strong argument has three parts: a clear claim, reasons to support it, and a recognition of possible objections or alternative views.
哲学关乎推理，所以你的答案不能只是一系列事实的堆砌。你需要构建一条推理链条，从你的起始观点一路通往结论。一个有力的论证包含三个部分：清晰的论断、支持它的理由，以及对可能的反对意见或替代观点的认可。
Use indicator words to make your reasoning easy to follow. Start a claim with ‘It can be argued that…’ or ‘One reason to think this is…’. Support it with ‘because’, ‘since’, or ‘for example’. When you consider an objection, signal it clearly: ‘However, some might object that…’ or ‘A counter-argument is that…’. Then show why your main point still stands or how you might modify it. This structure shows the examiner you are thinking philosophically, not just reporting what others have said.
使用标志词可以让你的推理过程一目了然。提出论断时，可用 “可以论证的是……” 或 “这样想的一个理由是……”。提供支持时用 “因为”、”由于” 或 “例如”。当你考虑反对意见时，要明确标示：”然而，有人或许会反驳说……” 或 “一个相反的论证是……”。然后说明为什么你的主要观点仍然成立，或者你会如何修正它。这样的结构能让考官看到你在进行哲学思考，而不只是在转述别人的说法。
Imagine the question is: ‘Do humans have free will?’ A weak answer would simply describe what determinism is. A strong answer would state a position (‘There are good reasons to doubt that we have free will’), present the deterministic argument from causation, then introduce the counter-argument from our feeling of choice, and finally weigh them up. Each step should connect logically to the next.
试想一道题目：”人类有自由意志吗？” 一个较弱的答案可能只描述了决定论是什么。而一个优秀的答案会陈述立场（”有充分理由怀疑我们拥有自由意志”），给出基于因果关系的决定论论证，然后引入基于我们选择感受的反论证，最后加以权衡。每一步都要有逻辑地与下一步相连接。
4. Using Philosophical Vocabulary Accurately | 准确使用哲学词汇
Using precise philosophical vocabulary is one of the clearest signs to an examiner that you have moved beyond common-sense talk. However, never use a technical term just to sound clever. You must show you understand its meaning and use it appropriately in context. Misusing a term will lose you marks for understanding.
准确使用哲学词汇是向考官表明你已超越常识性谈论的最明显标志之一。但千万不要为了显得聪明而使用术语。你必须展示出你理解它的含义，并在上下文中恰当使用。误用术语反而会在理解层面失分。
Key terms for Year 8 often include: ‘premise’ (a reason given in an argument), ‘conclusion’ (what the argument is trying to prove), ‘valid’ (if the premises were true, the conclusion would have to be true), ‘sound’ (a valid argument with true premises), ‘a priori’ (knowledge before experience), ‘a posteriori’ (knowledge from experience), ‘dualism’, ‘materialism’, ‘scepticism’, and ‘ethical relativism’. Build a glossary as you revise and practise writing sentences that use these terms naturally.
Year 8 常见的关键术语包括：”前提” (premise, 论证中给出的理由)、”结论” (conclusion, 论证试图证明的命题)、”有效” (valid, 如果前提为真，结论必然为真)、”可靠” (sound, 前提为真且论证有效)、”先天” (a priori, 先于经验的知识)、”后天” (a posteriori, 来自经验的知识)、”二元论” (dualism)、”唯物主义” (materialism)、”怀疑论” (scepticism) 以及 “伦理相对主义” (ethical relativism)。复习时建立一份术语表，并练习用这些术语自然造句。
Instead of writing ‘Descartes’ idea about the mind and body being separate is interesting’, you could write ‘Descartes’ substance dualism claims that the mind is a non-physical substance distinct from the physical body.’ This not only shows better knowledge but also leads more naturally into analysis and evaluation.
不要写 “笛卡尔关于心灵和身体分离的想法很有趣”，而可以写 “笛卡尔的实体二元论 (substance dualism) 主张心灵是一种非物理的实体，与物理的身体截然不同。” 这样不仅能展现更扎实的知识，也能更自然地导向分析与评价。
5. Analysing Arguments, Not Just Describing Them | 分析论证，而不是仅仅描述
Analysis (AO2) involves breaking an argument down into its parts and explaining how these parts work together – or fail to work together. The examiner wants to see that you can identify the structure of a philosophical argument and show its strengths and weaknesses from the inside.
分析 (AO2) 涉及将一个论证拆分成若干部分，并解释这些部分是如何协同运作的——或如何未能协同运作。考官想看到你能识别哲学论证的结构，并从内部揭示其优点与弱点。
When analysing a classic argument, identify its premises and conclusion. Ask yourself: does the conclusion follow from the premises? Are the premises plausible? Is there a hidden assumption? For example, in Anselm’s ontological argument, you might point out that the argument assumes existence is a property that makes something greater, which Kant later challenged. Showing this kind of critical awareness is what lifts a middle-mark answer to a high one.
分析一个经典论证时，找出它的前提和结论。问一问自己：结论能否从前提中推出？前提是否合理？是否存在隐含假设？例如，在安瑟伦的本体论论证中，你或许会指出，该论证假设 “存在” 是一种使事物更伟大的属性，而后来康德对此提出了质疑。展现出这种批判性意识，正是将中等分数答案提升为高分答案的关键。
For your own arguments, a useful technique is to imagine a critical friend asking ‘Why should I believe that?’ after each step you write. If a step is shaky, acknowledge it: ‘One might question whether this premise is always true; for instance…’. This does not weaken your answer – it strengthens it, because it shows you are evaluating your own reasoning as you go along, which is a high-level skill.
对于你自己的论证，一个有用的技巧是想象一位善于挑剔的朋友，在你写完每一步后都问 “我凭什么要相信这一点？”。如果某一步有漏洞，就坦诚指出来：”有人或许会质疑这一前提是否总是成立；例如……”。这样做并不会削弱你的答案，反而能增强它，因为这表明你在论证过程中不断自我评估，这正是一种高阶技能。
6. Evaluation: Weighing Up Different Views | 评价：权衡不同观点
Evaluation (AO3) is often where the highest marks are won. To evaluate means to make a reasoned judgement about the value, strength, or success of a philosophical claim or argument. You need to go beyond listing pros and cons, and show why one side is more convincing, or under what conditions a claim holds true.
评价 (AO3) 通常是赢得最高分数的地方。评价意味着对某个哲学论断或论证的价值、强度或成败作出有理有据的判断。你需要超越单纯罗列正反观点，而是要说明为什么某一方更有说服力，或者在什么条件下该论断能够成立。
A strong evaluation uses criteria. For instance, when evaluating whether an argument is good, you might use criteria such as logical consistency, whether its premises are supported by evidence, and whether it accounts for our lived experience. Say something like: ‘While the argument from design is intuitively appealing because it explains order in nature, it is weaker than the evolutionary explanation because it introduces an unobservable designer and does not increase our predictive power.’
有力度的评价会使用评判标准。例如，在评价一个论证好不好时，你可以使用逻辑一致性、前提是否得到证据支持、能否解释我们的实际体验等标准。可以这样表达：”虽然设计论证因其对自然秩序的解释而具有直觉上的吸引力，但它弱于进化论解释，因为它引入了一位不可观察的设计者，并且没有增强我们的预测能力。”
You can also evaluate by showing the implications of accepting a view. ‘If moral relativism is true, then we could never justifiably criticise the practices of another culture, which seems to conflict with our strong belief that things like slavery are wrong.’ This kind of evaluation shows deep philosophical engagement.
你也可以通过揭示接受某一观点的推论来进行评价。”如果道德相对主义是真的，那么我们就永远无法正当地批评另一种文化的习俗，而这似乎与我们坚信奴隶制等是错误的这一强烈信念相悖。” 这类评价展现出深度的哲学参与。
Remember that you do not need to have a final, knock-down answer. Philosophy rarely produces absolute certainty. A mature evaluative conclusion can be tentative: ‘On balance, the arguments in favour of free will are currently stronger, but the debate remains open.’ This is perfectly acceptable and often more sophisticated than an overconfident ending.
请记住，你并不需要给出一个终极、不可动摇的答案。哲学很少产生绝对的确定性。一个成熟的评价性结论可以是试探性的：”总体来看，支持自由意志的论证目前更占上风，但争论仍在继续。” 这完全是可以接受的，而且往往比一个过于自信的结尾更显成熟。
7. Structuring a Balanced and Coherent Answer | 构建平衡且连贯的答案
A well-structured answer makes your ideas easier to follow and gives the examiner a clear path through your reasoning. For longer essay-style questions, use a simple but effective structure: a brief introduction that sets out the issue and your approach, a series of paragraphs each making one clear point, and a conclusion that directly answers the question.
结构良好的答案能让你的想法更易于理解，并为考官提供一条清晰的推理路径。对于较长的问答题，可以采用简单而有效的结构：一段简短的引言，点明问题和你的处理方式；一系列段落，每段阐明一个清晰的观点；以及一个直接回应问题的结论。
Your introduction should not be a long warm-up. One or two sentences are enough: ‘The question of whether we can ever know anything for certain is a central problem in epistemology. This essay will examine both sceptical challenges and the responses from foundationalism and coherentism.’ Then move straight into your first substantive point.
引言不应当是长篇的预热。一两句话就足够了：”我们究竟能否确知任何事物，这是认识论的核心问题。本文将考察怀疑论的挑战，以及基础主义和融贯主义的回应。” 然后直接进入你的第一个实质论点。
Each body paragraph should follow the PEEL pattern: Point (state the idea), Explain (elaborate with clarity and perhaps an example), Evaluate (briefly consider a strength or weakness), and Link (connect back to the question or forward to the next point). This keeps your answer analytical rather than narrative.
每个主体段落都应遵循 PEEL 模式：Point (陈述观点)、Explain (清晰阐述，可配以例子)、Evaluate (简要考虑优点或缺点) 和 Link (回扣问题或链接至下一点)。这样能保持答案的分析性而非叙述性。
For a discussion question, it is often effective to deal with the side you disagree with first, then present your favoured view, and finally offer a balanced conclusion. This shows you can engage with opposing viewpoints fairly, a key skill in philosophy.
对于讨论类题目，通常有效的做法是先处理你不同意的观点，然后提出你倾向的见解，最后给出平衡的结论。这表明你能公正地对待对立观点，这是哲学中的一项关键技能。
8. Managing Your Time Wisely | 明智地管理时间
Many good philosophy students lose marks not because they do not know the material, but because they spend too long on one question and run out of time for the rest. In a typical 1-hour paper with two sections, decide in advance how many minutes you can give to each question based on the marks available.
许多优秀的哲学学生失分，不是因为不熟悉内容，而是因为在某一道题上花费太多时间，以至于没时间做剩下的题目。在一份典型的两部分、一小时考卷中，要根据可用分数提前决定每道题该分配多少分钟。
A useful rule of thumb is to spend about 1 minute per mark. If a question is worth 10 marks, aim to spend around 10 minutes on it. This includes planning, writing, and a quick check. For a 20-mark essay, allocate 20–22 minutes. Leave 5 minutes at the end to re-read your answers and correct any obvious mistakes.
一个有用的经验法则是每分值分配约 1 分钟。如果一道题值 10 分，目标就大约花 10 分钟完成，包括规划、书写和快速检查。对于 20 分的论文题，分配 20–22 分钟。最后留出 5 分钟重读答案，改正明显错误。
At the planning stage, jot down 3–5 key points you want to cover. This stops you from wandering off topic. If you are running out of time, switch to bullet points for the remaining arguments – in philosophy, a clear outline of an argument in note form is better than a beautifully written paragraph that never reaches its conclusion.
在规划阶段，快速记下你想覆盖的 3–5 个关键点。这样可以防止跑题。如果时间快不够了，剩余论证可以改用要点形式——在哲学中，以笔记形式清晰勾勒一个论证，比写出辞藻华丽却没能到达结论的段落要好得多。
9. Avoiding Common Mistakes | 避免常见错误
One frequent mistake is simply telling a story rather than answering the question. In philosophy, you are almost never asked just to retell a myth or a philosopher’s biography. Always connect any factual content back to the philosophical issue at hand. If you mention Plato’s cave, the examiner is not interested in the description of shadows on the wall; they want to know what it tells us about knowledge and reality.
一个常见的错误是单纯讲故事，而不是回答问题。在哲学中，几乎不会要求你仅仅复述某个神话或哲学家生平。始终要将任何事实性内容与当下的哲学议题联系起来。如果你提到柏拉图的洞穴，考官并不关心墙壁上影子的描述；他们想知道的是，这则寓言告诉我们关于知识和现实的什么道理。
Another pitfall is writing answers that are too short or lack development. If a question asks for two reasons, make sure each reason is fully explained, not just stated in one sentence. An underdeveloped reason, such as ‘because it makes people happy’, should be expanded: ‘because, according to utilitarianism, the right action is the one that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number, and this policy would increase overall well-being by…’
另一个陷阱是答案写得太短或缺乏展开。如果一道题要求给出两个理由，务必确保每个理由都得到充分解释，而不是只用一句话陈述。一个未充分展开的理由，比如 “因为这让人快乐”，应该扩充为：”因为根据功利主义，正确的行为是能为最大多数人带来最大幸福的行为，而这项政策将通过……增加总体福祉。”
Avoid presenting an argument as ‘some people say X but others say Y’ without giving any reasons or evaluation. This is the ‘fence-sitting’ approach and rarely earns marks beyond the lowest levels. Even if you are genuinely undecided, you must show why the evidence pulls in different directions, not just that there are two sides.
也要避免在没有给出任何理由或评价的情况下，把论证说成 “有人说 X，但另一些人说 Y”。这就是 “骑墙” 策略，几乎只能得到最低等级的分数。即便你确实拿不定主意，也必须说明为什么证据会指向不同方向，而不只是说 “存在两个阵营”。
10. Understanding the Mark Scheme Bands | 理解评分等次
CIE mark schemes for philosophy typically divide performance into bands. While the exact wording varies by paper, a typical scheme might have four bands. Band 1 (lowest) shows limited understanding, with assertions not supported by reasoning. Band 2 shows basic understanding with some relevant points but weak analysis or evaluation. Band 3 shows good understanding with a reasonably developed argument and some evaluation. Band 4 (highest) shows a thorough, well-argued, and critically evaluative response.
CIE 哲学评分方案通常将表现分为不同等次。虽然具体措辞因试卷而异，但一个典型的方案可能包含四个等次。等次 1（最低）表现出有限的理解，只有未经理由支持的断言。等次 2 展现出基本的理解，有一些相关的观点，但分析或评价薄弱。等次 3 展现良好的理解，论证得到合理展开且有一定评价。等次 4（最高）展现透彻、论证有力且具有批判性评价的作答。
To move from Band 2 to Band 3, you need to do more than identify relevant ideas; you need to explain why they matter and how they connect. To reach Band 4, your evaluation must be sustained throughout the answer, not just tacked on at the end. This means considering objections and counter-objections at several points, and your conclusion must flow from the evaluation you have done.
要从等次 2 提升到等次 3，你不仅要指出相关的观点，还要解释它们为何重要以及如何相互联系。要达到等次 4，你的评价必须贯穿整个答案，而不是在最后临时附加几句。这意味着要在多个环节考虑反对意见和再反驳，而且你的结论必须从你所作的评价中自然得出。
Examiners often give credit for ‘quality of written communication’ or clarity. This does not mean fancy handwriting, but a logical flow of ideas, correct philosophical vocabulary, and well-constructed sentences. A clearly expressed but simple argument will always score higher than a confused but ambitious one.
考官常常会根据 “书面沟通质量” 或清晰度给予认可。这不是指漂亮的字迹，而是指思路的逻辑流畅、恰当的哲学词汇和结构良好的句子。一个表达清晰但简单的论证，总是比一个雄心勃勃却混乱不清的论证得分更高。
11. Using Thought Experiments and Examples Effectively | 有效使用思想实验和例子
Thought experiments are powerful tools in philosophy because they test principles in a vivid, imagined scenario. Familiar ones you might use include the Ring of Gyges (on the nature of justice), the ship of Theseus (on identity over time), and the trolley problem (on ethical decision-making). However, simply describing a thought experiment does not earn marks – you must explain how it illuminates the philosophical issue.
思想实验是哲学中强有力的工具，因为它们通过生动的想象场景来检验原则。你可能使用的熟悉例子包括裘格斯的戒指（关于正义的本质）、忒修斯之船（关于历时同一性）以及电车难题（关于伦理决策）。然而，仅仅描述思想实验并不能得分——你必须解释它如何阐明了哲学问题。
For example, when discussing whether something can be the same object if all its parts have been replaced, you could introduce the ship of Theseus. Then ask: if the old planks were reassembled, which ship is the real Ship of Theseus? This forces a deeper analysis of what we mean by ‘identity’. Your answer should explore the criteria of identity (physical continuity, functional continuity, etc.) that the thought experiment brings to light.
例如，在讨论一个物体在全部零件都被更换后是否还是同一个物体时，你可以引入忒修斯之船。然后提问：如果把旧的木板重新组装起来，哪一艘才是真正的忒修斯之船？这将迫使我们对 “同一性” 的含义作更深入的分析。你的答案应当探索这个思想实验所揭示的同一性标准（物理连续性、功能连续性等）。
Real-life examples can be just as effective, provided they are simple and universal. When discussing moral responsibility, you might refer to a young child breaking a vase – do we blame them in the same way we blame an adult? This swiftly raises questions about knowledge, intention, and capacity. Always pick examples you can explain in a few lines; overcomplicated examples eat up time and obscure the philosophy.
真实生活中的例子同样有效，只要它们简洁且具有普遍性。在讨论道德责任时，你可以提到一个小孩子打碎了花瓶——我们会像责怪成年人一样责怪他吗？这会迅速引出关于知识、意图和能力的问题。始终选择几行字就能说清楚的例子；过于复杂的例子会耗费时间，并模糊哲学焦点。
12. Revision and Exam-Day Practical Tips | 复习与考试当天实用贴士
Effective revision for philosophy is not about passive rereading. Create summary tables for each topic: key philosopher, argument, strengths, weaknesses. Practise writing full answers under timed conditions. Use past or specimen questions, and then mark your own work using the band descriptors to see where you lost marks. This self-assessment is one of the fastest ways to improve.
有效的哲学复习不是被动地反复阅读。为每个主题制作摘要表格：关键哲学家、论证、优点、弱点。在计时条件下练习写完整答案。使用过往真题或样题，然后对照等次描述标出扣分项。这种自我评估是进步最快的方法之一。
On the day of the exam, read the entire paper carefully before you start writing. Choose optional questions wisely – pick the one you can argue best, not always the one whose topic you like most. During the exam, if your mind goes blank, take a deep breath and write down the basic definitions you already know. Often this primes your memory and the rest will flow.
考试当天，在动笔之前仔细通读整份试卷。明智地选择选答题——选择你能论证得最好的那一道，而未必是你最喜欢的话题。考试中如果大脑一片空白，深吸一口气，写下你已经知道的基本定义。这往往能激活你的记忆，剩下的内容便会随之而来。
Finally, after finishing your last paragraph, quickly check for incomplete arguments. Did you state a conclusion that matches the question? Did you use philosophical terms where appropriate? A two-minute review can often spot and fix small errors that would otherwise drop you down a band.
最后，写完最后一段后，快速检查看是否有未完成的论证。你是否陈述了与题目相匹配的结论？是否在适当之处使用了哲学术语？两分钟的复查往往能发现并修正一些小错误，否则这些小错可能会让你跌入更低的评分等次。
Published by TutorHao | Philosophy Revision Series | aleveler.com
更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）
屏轩国际教育cambridge primary/secondary checkpoint, cat4, ukiset,ukcat,igcse,alevel,PAT,STEP,MAT, ibdp,ap,ssat,sat,sat2课程辅导，国外大学本科硕士研究生博士课程论文辅导Cancel reply