연세대학교 언더우드 편입

안녕하세요!

글쓰기 이전에 본인 소개 할게요. 2018학년도에 연대 언더우드 HASS (QRM) 로 일반편입한 16학번 권유정입니다. 전적대는 15학번 세종대학교 경제통상학과였습니다. 1년 반전의 결과는 아래와 같습니다

연대 Underwood HASS: 최종합격

중대 경제학과: 최종 합격

이대 국제학부: 1차 합격, 면접 불참 (연대랑 겹침)

성대 경영학과: 1차 합격, 면접 불참 (연대 결과 나온 후)

한양대 (무슨 과였었는지 까먹었습니다..): 1차 불합격

먼저 글을 쓰는 이유는 편입 당시 편입에 정보가 거의 없었고 공부를 하면서 참고를 할 수 있는 사이트나 학원이 정말 적다고 자주 느꼈습니다. 편입 성공을 하면 꼭 편입을 시작하시는 분들께 도움이 될 수 있는 글을 남겨야겠다고 생각했었는데 항상 말만 하다가 1년 뒤인 오늘 하게 되네요. 그동안 20명 넘는 사람들과 했던 과외, 그리고 많은분들이 상담 했던 내용들을 중점으로 글을 쓰겠습니다.

저는 편입 영어와 편입 영어 논술만 했기에 편입 한국어 논술에 대해 아는 것이 없습니다. 또한 모든 경험은 개인적이기에 사람마다 시작 선과 습득 능력이 다르다는 것을 인지하고 시작했으면 합니다. 마지막으로 오타가 있으면 양해 부탁드립니다 ㅎㅎ..

편입 준비 기간

저는 3학년 1학기가 끝나고 6개월 휴학을 하고 공부를 하려고 했는데 실제로는 좀 (놀다가) 쉬다가 3개월을 미친듯이 공부했습니다. 1개월 김영 (김응석 교수님)을 다녔고 1개월 해커스를 (에리카정 교수님) 다녔는데 둘다 정말 도움이 하나도 안 돼서 나머지 1개월은 독학했습니다. 김응석 교수님같은 경우 너무 광대한 정보를 알려주기만 하고 글 쓰는 방법을 뚜렷하게 가르쳐 주시지 않아서 뭘 배운지도 기억이 안납니다.가끔 글 쓰는 과제를 내주셨는데 써가지고 오면 어떻게 써야하는지나 대안 하나 없이 그냥 까기만 하셔서 돈낭비 였습니다. 이후에 짜증나서 해커스로 옮겼는데 해커스에서는 자료는 많이 받았는데 참석을 정말 느리게 해주셔서 화나서 그만뒀습니다.. 조금 긴 얘기지만 16개인가 참석 해준다 했는데 학생들을 생각없이 받아서 교수님이 4개 까지는 (대충) 해주고 나머지는 거의 안해주셨습니다. 저같은 경우는 참석이 진짜로 많이 필요 했었기 때문에 둘다 결국엔 도움이 안되었고 혼자 공부하는게 날 것 같다는 생각으로 독학했습니다. 

학원을 추천하는 학생: 
- 편입 전반적인 이해도를 설립하고 싶다 (1~2달)
- 시간관리가 혼자서 안된다, 다른 사람들과 스터디룸에서 공부하면 집중이 잘된다
- 등수를 알고 싶다 (개인적으로는 등수는 별로 중요치 않습니다. 당일날 잘해야해서)

이 외는 별로 추천하지 않습니다

준비 전

학점: 당연히 고고익선이 좋지만 학점은 그렇게 중요하지 않은 것 같습니다. 제가 3 초반인데 된걸 보면 ^^… .. 

스펙: 저는 시험 전에 토플이 113인가였는데 만기 될 것 같아서 다시 텝스를 봤습니다. 공부 제대로 시작하기 전과 후에 한 번씩 볼려 했는데 905 받고 이후에 귀찮아서 못 봤습니다.. 개인적으로는 언더우드에서는 공인영어점수가 그렇게 중요하지 않은 것 같습니다. 영어 논술만 아주 (아주) (아주) (정말) 잘 보면 (+ 운) 되는 것 같습니다.

고려사항

학교 결정시: 물론 편입이 좋은 학교를 보고 하는 것은 맞지만 그렇다고해서 경쟁률에 따라 본인의 과를 정하는 것은 추천하지 않습니다. 원하는 과인지, 그리고 공부 방식이 본인에게 잘 맞는지를 판단하고 학교마다 요강을 꼼꼼히 읽어보시고 정하시는 것이 가장 좋습니다. 저는 고대 국제학부가 한국어로 시험을 보기도 하고 과 분위기가 연대가 개인적으로는 더 마음에 들어서 연대 지원을 선택했습니다. 
또한 요강이 늦게 나오기에 작년 요강들 모두 (제발) 꼼꼼히 읽는 것이 아주 중요합니다. 서류 기간 놓쳐서 떨어지는 학생들이 그렇게 많습니다.. 

공부 방법

편영: 저는 처음부터 문법이 딱히 필요하다고 느끼지 않아서 인강은 듣지 않고 조금 무식하게 매일마다 기출문제 한 세트 씩 풀었습니다.. 김영 편입에 로그인하셔서 기출 문제에http://www.kimyoung.co.kr/data1/data_sub10_univ.asp
가면 학교별 기출 문제가 정말 많은데 싹 다 뽑아서 하나씩 풀고 오답 고치고 하면 6시간 정도는 가더라고요. 오답 문제 노트는 따로 없고 단어 틀리는 거는 싹 다 정리해서 외웠습니다. 이렇게 매일마다 풀다 보면 나중에 1달 정도 전에는 어려운 세트는  9개, 쉬운 세트는 다 맞는 등 조금 왔다 갔다 하지만 평균적으로 4~6개 정도 틀리면 되는 것 같아요.

편영논: 독학을 어떻게 했냐고 묻는 분들이 가장 많으신데

-    필사: 매일마다 타임즈 기사를 하나씩 읽고 필사하고 마음에 드는 내용이면 외웠습니다. 기사를 온라인이든 신문지이든 상관은 없는데 좋은 기자분들이 어떻게 글을 쓰는지, 어떤 좋은 단어들을 사용하는지, 이 문단에서는 이 문장이 어떤 역할을 하는지 등을 배우고 따라 쓰는 연습을 했습니다. 매일마다 하다 보면 기본 시사는 물론 글쓰기도 늡니다. 아래처럼 매일마다 배운거나 글 쓰는 방법 등도 정리해서 저만의 족보를 만들어 나갔습니다.

-    단어: 단어는 편영이랑 마찬가지로 들어가는데 저는 전에 SAT를 공부했을 때 썼던 flash card들이 있어서 이 단어 위주로 공부했습니다. 가끔씩 중대나 서강대 같은 경우 미친 단어들이 나올 때가 있는데 이 단어들만 빼면 어느정도 다 커버가 됩니다. 워드스마트 펴서 모르는 단어가 없으면 준비되신 거라고 생각하시면 됩니다. 이 단어들을 외운 후 논술을 쓸 때 10개정도를 정하고 에세이를 쓸 때 같이 문장에 넣어서 쓰면 훨씬 더 외우는 데 도움이 될 것입니다.  저는 “P”가 들어가는 단어들이 너무 안 외워져서 아예 싹 다 정리해서 들고 다니기도 했습니다. 

-    첨삭: 첨삭이 정말 정말 정말 정말 제일 중요합니다. 내 머리에 있는 게 나는 다 적은 것 같은데 실재로는 그렇지 않은 경우가 많습니다. 저는 첨삭을 받을 곳이 별로 없어서 정말 힘들었는데 주변에 영어를 잘하는 친구가 있거나 교수님이 있다면 계속 괴롭히면서 참석을 받으세요.

-    주제: 뭐에 관해 쓰냐고 묻는 분들이 많은데 처음 시작할 때는 기본적인 주제로 시작을 하시는 걸 추천 드립니다. 예를 들어서 구글에다가 “debate topics for middle school students라 치면 정말 많이 나오는데 모든 토픽들에 대한 다양한 논점들을 하나하나 정리하시는 게 좋습니다. 엄청 쉬워보이지만 이유를 대라고하면 이유를 대지 못하는 경우가 정말 많습니다. 이런 당연한 이유들을 논리적으로 설명하는 것을 연습해보세요

이후 참석도 잘 받고 더 어려운 주제들을 쓸 준비가 되면 구글에 “SAT essay prompts” 또는 한양대학교 입학처에서
수시모집 >> 기출문제 자료실 >> 논술 (에세이) >> 논술 / 모의논술 >> 글로벌인재 (어학)
http://site.hanyang.ac.kr/web/go/-3?p_p_id=board_WAR_bbsportlet&p_p_lifecycle=0&p_p_state=normal&p_p_mode=view&p_p_col_id=column-1&p_p_col_pos=1&p_p_col_count=2&_board_WAR_bbsportlet_action=view 에 들어가서 영어 에세이들을 Question들을 보지 말고 쓸 수 있는 다양한 에세이들을 써보세요. SAT와 한양대 prompt들은 정확히 정해져 있어서 오히려 보지 않고 본문만 읽고 쓰다 보면 여러 논점을 정리할 수 있었던 것 같습니다.
한달 정도 남았을 때는 기출들을 3일에 하나씩 써보고 계속 고치고 쓰는게 좋을 것 같습니다.
개인적인 팁은 글을 쓴 후 1주일 뒤에 다시 보면서 다시 고쳐 보는 것을  추천 드립니다. 1주일 뒤에 다시 보면 놓친 부분들이 많이 보일 것입니다.

편입 이후

저는 아주 아주 (아주) 만족스럽게 다니고 있습니다. 언더우드의 토론식 수업도 정말 잘 맞고 친구들의 정서도 잘 맞아서 너무 행복하게 다니고 있습니다. 물론 성적은 행복에 비례하지 않기에 뛰어나게 받고 있진 않지만.. 학교에 따라 다르지만 연대 자체가 커서 어차피 서로서로 몰라서 (모래알..) 아는 친구들끼리 놀게 돼요. 뻔선 / 뻔후나 교류반이 없다는 건 아쉽지만 3-4학년 취업 준비하느라 아쉬움도 정말 잠깐인 것 같습니다

기출들을 올려도 되는지 확실하진 않지만 문제가 된다면 내리겠습니다. 년도도 맞는지 확실치 않네요..

연세대 편입 영어 논술 2014년 기출문제

Text 1

Lee: All types of knowledge ultimately mean self-knowledge. So therefore, my students are coming in to ask me not so much how to defend themselves, or how to do somebody in-rather, they want to learn to express themselves through some movement –be it anger... be it determination. So what I’m saying is that my students are paying me to show them, in combative form, the art of expressing the human body.

Interviewer: Which is acting, in a sense, isnt it?

Lee: Well, it might sound too philosophical, but it’s un-acting acting, or acting un-acting. What I’m saying is it is a combination of both. Here is natural instinct, and here is control. You are to combine the two in harmony. If you have one to the extreme, you will be very unscientific. If you have another to the extreme, you will become a mechanical man-no longer a human being. It is a successful combination of both. So it is not pure naturalness-or un-naturalness. The ideal is un-natural naturalness, or natural un-naturalness.

Interviewer: Of all your students, which was the best? Who adapted best to this oriental form of exercise and defense?

Lee: As a fighter, Steve McQueen, he is good in that department because, that son of a gun has got the toughness in him. I mean, he would say, “all right baby, here I am, man” you know, and he’ll do it! Now James Coburn is a peace-loving man... I mean he’s really, really nice, and super mellow, and all that loving man... You know what I mean? Now he appreciates the philosophical part of it. Therefore, his understanding of it is deeper than Steve’s. So it’s really hard to say who is best.

Interviewer: It’s interesting, we don’t in our world-and haven’t since the days of the ancient Greeks who did-combine philosophy and art with sport. But quite clearly the oriental attitude is that the three are facets of the same thing.

Lee: Man, listen to me ok? To me, ultimately, martial arts means honestly expressing yourself. It is very difficult to do.

Text 2

From the very first scene of Enter the Dragon, the presentation of Bruce Lee and his Shaolin art insistently urges the viewer to believe that there really is more to martial arts than fighting. The opening scene of Enter the Dragon is a ritualistic “rite of passage” combat sequence in a Shaolin Temple. This is immediately followed by a kaon-like question-and-answer session between Lee and his master, in which the master begins by saying “I see your talents have gone beyond the mere physical level. Your skills are now at the point of spiritual insight” The mysticism of this exchange is immediately further consolidated by the following scene in which Lee tutors a young monk, Lau, and explains that a correctly executed kick (or any combative exchange) “is like a finger pointing away to the moon.” In its attribution of some enigmatic depth to martial arts, Enter the Dragon is an exemplary instance of the most popular kind of discourse about them. For the myths and messages of the discourses and texts of martial arts often insist that there is indeed more to these fighting practices than fighting. But what “more” is there?

Question

In Text 2, Bowman questions the supposed “depth” of martial arts. Write an essay that (1) provides an answer to Bowman’s question based on your close reading and critical evaluation of the two texts, and (2) compares and contrasts Lee’s account of martial arts with another art form or activity in answering the first part of the question, you may go beyond Lee’s specific answers. For example, you might pay attention to the dynamics between interviewer and interviewee in Text 1, or to find parallels and divergences between Text 1 and Text 2. In answering the second part, you should choose an art form or activity that you are familiar with. The Length of the essay should be within the range of 600-1000 words.

--

연세대 편입 영어 논술 2015년 기출문제

Passage 1 

He that is nourished by the acorns he picked up under an oak, or the apples he gathered from the trees in the wood, has certainly appropriated them to himself. Nobody can deny but the nourishment is his. I ask then, when did they begin to be his? when he digested? or when he eat? or when he boiled? or when he brought them home? or when he picked them up? and it is plain, if the first gathering made them not his, nothing else could. That labour put a distinction between them and common: that added something to them more than nature, the common mother of all, had done; and so they became his private right. And will anyone say, he had no right to those acorns or apples, he thus appropriated, because he had not the consent of all mankind to make them his? Was it a robbery thus to assume to himself what belonged to all in common? If such a consent as that was necessary, man had starved, notwithstanding the plenty God had given him. 

Passage 2 

The earth is given to men in common for the purposes of life, by the bounty of Heaven. But to divide it, and appropriate one part of its produce to one, another part to another, must be the work of men who have power and understanding given them, by which every man may accommodate himself, without hurt to any other. This common right of every man to what the earth produces, before it be occupied and appropriated by others, was, by ancient moralists, very properly compared to the right which every citizen had to the public theatre, where every man that came might occupy an empty seat, and thereby acquire a right to it while the entertainment lasted; but no man had a right to dispossess another. The earth is a great theatre, furnished by the Almighty, with perfect wisdom and goodness, for the entertainment and employment of all mankind. Here every man has a right to accommodate himself as a spectator, and to perform his part as an actor; but without hurt to others. 

Instructions

Write an essay first to justify the ownership of the property and second to criticize the unequal ownership of residual property. You have to use the idea from the passages to verify your idea. 

--

편입 영어 논술 2018년 기출문제 - 이게 제가 풀었던 걸로 기억하고 있습니다.

Text

While there is only speculation about how humor developed in early humans, we know that by the late 6th century BCE the Greeks had institutionalized it in the ritual known as comedy, and that it was performed with a contrasting dramatic form known as tragedy. Both were based on the violation of mental patterns and expectations, and in both the world is a tangle of conflicting systems where humans live in the shadow of failure, folly, and death. Like tragedy, comedy represents life as full of tension, danger, and struggle, with success or failure often depending on chance factors. Where they differ is in the responses of the lead characters to life’s incongruities. Identifying with these characters, audiences at comedies and tragedies have contrasting responses to events in the dramas. And because these responses carry over to similar situations in life, comedy and tragedy embody contrasting responses to the incongruities in life. 

Tragedy valorizes serious, emotional engagement with life’s problems, even struggle to the death. Along with epic, it is part of the Western heroic tradition that extols ideals, the willingness to fight for them, and honor. The tragic ethos is linked to patriarchy and militarism—many of its heroes are kings and conquerors—and it valorizes what Conrad Hyers (1996) calls Warrior Virtues—blind obedience, the willingness to kill or die on command, unquestioning loyalty, single-mindedness, resoluteness of purpose, and pride.

Comedy, by contrast, embodies an anti-heroic, pragmatic attitude toward life’s incongruities. From Aristophanes’ Lysistrata to Charlie Chaplin’s The Great Dictator to Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11, comedy has mocked the irrationality of militarism and blind respect for authority. Its own methods of handling conflict include deal-making, trickery, getting an enemy drunk, and running away. As the Irish saying goes, you’re only a coward for a moment, but you’re dead for the rest of your life. In place of Warrior Virtues, it extols critical thinking, cleverness, adaptability, and an appreciation of physical pleasures like eating, drinking, and sex.

Along with the idealism of tragedy goes elitism. The people who matter are kings, queens, and generals. In comedy there are more characters and more kinds of characters, women are more prominent, and many protagonists come from lower classes. Everybody counts for one. That shows in the language of comedy, which, unlike the elevated language of tragedy, is common speech. The basic unit in tragedy is the individual, in comedy it is the family, group of friends, or bunch of co-workers.

While tragic heroes are emotionally engaged with their problems, comic protagonists show emotional disengagement. They think, rather than feel, their way through difficulties. By presenting such characters as role models, comedy has implicitly valorized the benefits of humor that are now being empirically verified, such as that it is psychologically and physically healthy, it fosters mental flexibility, and it serves as a social lubricant. With a few exceptions like Aquinas, philosophers have ignored these benefits.

If philosophers wanted to undo the traditional prejudices against humor, they might consider the affinities between one contemporary genre of comedy—standup comedy—and philosophy itself. There are at least seven. First, standup comedy and philosophy are conversational: like the dialogue format that started with Plato, standup routines are interactive. Second, both reflect on familiar experiences, especially puzzling ones. We wake from a vivid dream, for example, not sure what has happened and what is happening. Third, like philosophers, standup comics often approach puzzling experiences with questions. “If I thought that dream was real, how do I know that I’m not dreaming right now?” The most basic starting point in both philosophy and standup comedy is “X—what’s up with that?” Fourth, as they think about familiar experiences, both philosophers and comics step back emotionally from them. Henri Bergson spoke of the “momentary anesthesia of the heart” in laughter. Emotional disengagement long ago became a meaning of “philosophical”—“rational, sensibly composed, calm, as in a difficult situation.” Fifth, philosophers and standup comics think critically. They ask whether familiar ideas make sense, and they refuse to defer to authority and tradition. It was for his critical thinking that Socrates was executed. So were cabaret comics in Germany who mocked the Third Reich. Sixth, in thinking critically, philosophers and standup comics pay careful attention to language. Attacking sloppy and illogical uses of words is standard in both, and so is finding exactly the right words to express an idea. Seventh, the pleasure of standup comedy is often like the pleasure of doing philosophy. In both we relish new ways of looking at things and delight in surprising thoughts. Cleverness is prized. William James said that philosophy “sees the familiar as if it were strange, and the strange as if it were familiar.” The same is true of standup comedy. Simon Critchley has written that both ask us to “look at things as if you had just landed from another planet” 

Prompt

1. To what extent do you dis/agree with the author’s characterization of the distinction between comedy and tragedy? Articulate with a thorough example / How do you approach your life thorough comedic / tragic way?
2. Using the passage or others, analyze how the diagram can have comedic effects. Fill in the space of the diagram by composing your own lines or make your diagram of similar feature.

많이 에세이 틀에 관해서 여쭤보셔서 간단하게 글의 기본적 틀 올려봅니다. 도움 되셨으면 합니다.

Essay Structure

Prompt: Should the government restrain the growth of science for religious reasons?
1. Introduction

• Hook: 1 sentence: The controversy between religion and science has troubled the minds of many scientists. 
• Summary of given paragraphs: 2-3 sentences: The author of passage 1 also elaborates on such controversy by  arguing that (summary), Continuing upon such notion, the author of passage 1 asserting that christianity has hindered the development of human cloning, as it violates human rights. He goes on to ….
• Thesis + reason 1, reason 2. (In such notion / Thus,) The government must enforce the limitation on science as ___Reason 1___ (science brings ultimate truth to the society), and ___Reason 2___

2. Reason 1, Paragraph 2

• Thesis restatement + reason 1
• Example (2-3): specific examples, including specific events, cases, theorist’s interviews, economic phenomenon, :: a specific and credible example (do not use examples like "people do this usually..")
• Analysis (3-4) why? Why does my example fit exactly with my thesis? Analyze my thesis. (Bottom up analysis)
• Thesis restatement + reason 1 : make sure to paraphrase

3. Reason 2, Paragraph 3: Similar to paragraph 2

4. Conclusion: Hook, Thesis + reason 1 + Reason 2, Concluding sentence

전반적 코멘트

편입이라는 게 외국에서는 정말 쉬운데 한국에서는 진짜 하늘의 별 따기인 것 같습니다. 편입이 한국에서 조금 더 접하기 쉬운 개념이었으면 좋겠다는 생각이 큽니다. 이 글이 조금 도움 됐으면 하는 마음으로 마무리하겠습니다. 긴 글 읽어주셔서 감사합니다.