成绩单上有挂科、有低 GPA、有空档期——多数人的第一反应是「要不要在 Additional Information 里解释一下」。而这个问题的答案有一半是「不要」。 解释一件招生官本来不会注意的事，等于亲手把它变成一个问题。所以这个工具的第一步是劝退：按「会不会被看到 × 看到后影响大不大 × 你有没有恢复证据」三件事逐项判断，明确告诉你哪几项该写、哪几项不该写。 第二步才是怎么写，而核心只有一句：**解释的说服力不来自原因，来自之后发生了什么。** 原因回答「为什么发生」，恢复回答「为什么不会再发生」——招生官要判断的是你未来两年能不能读下来，所以后者才是关键。没有恢复证据的解释，效果很有限。 还有一条单独处理：如果涉及违纪或学术诚信，这一类和其他所有类型都不同——多数申请表有专门的披露栏并要求如实回答，不如实回答的后果远重于事件本身。这一类工具不给措辞建议，建议提交前咨询专业人士。$2 解锁按类型的成稿、篇幅控制、以及推荐信里要不要提这件事。A failed course, a low GPA, a gap year — the first instinct is usually "should I explain this in Additional Information?" Half the time the answer is no. Explaining something a reader wouldn't otherwise have noticed turns it into a problem you created. So this tool starts by talking you out of it: each item is assessed on whether it will be seen, whether it changes the assessment once seen, and whether you have evidence of recovery — then says plainly which to write and which to leave. Only then, how to write it, and the core is one sentence: **an explanation persuades through what happened next, not through the reason.** The reason answers "why did this happen"; the recovery answers "why won't it happen again" — and since the reader is deciding whether you can complete the programme, the second question is the one that matters. One category is handled separately: anything involving discipline or academic integrity works differently — most applications have a mandatory disclosure question, and answering it inaccurately carries consequences far exceeding the original incident. The tool offers no wording for that category and recommends professional advice before submitting. $2 unlocks drafts by category, length calibration, and whether a recommender should mention it.
按类型的完整成稿（用你填的事实写，不套模板）+ 字数限制内的取舍（先砍什么）+ 推荐信里要不要提这件事、怎么跟推荐人说 + 面试被问到时的答法。Complete drafts written from your actual facts, what to cut first under a word limit, whether and how to have a recommender address it, and how to answer if it comes up in an interview.
本工具做写作判断与结构辅助，不代表任何学校的实际评估标准，也不预测录取结果。是否需要解释、篇幅限制与披露要求各校不同，请以申请系统中的具体说明为准。**涉及违纪、学术诚信或任何需要强制披露的事项时，本工具不提供措辞建议**——请如实回答申请表的披露问题，并在提交前咨询你所在学校的相关老师或有资质的顾问；不如实披露的后果通常远重于事件本身。请勿在解释中虚构原因或夸大恢复情况，材料之间的一致性是会被交叉验证的。涉及健康信息时，你没有义务披露超出必要范围的细节。你填写的内容不入库。This helps with judgement and structure. It does not represent any school's criteria and predicts no outcome. Whether to explain, length limits and disclosure requirements differ — follow the instructions in the application itself. **For discipline, academic integrity or anything subject to mandatory disclosure, this tool offers no wording** — answer the disclosure question truthfully and consult a qualified adviser before submitting; inaccurate disclosure carries consequences far exceeding the original matter. Never fabricate a reason or overstate a recovery; materials are cross-checked. Where health information is involved, you are not obliged to disclose more detail than necessary. Nothing you enter is stored.