Technology is becoming increasingly prevalent in the world
today. In the not too distant future, technology will completely
replace the teacher in the classroom. Analyze both sides of this
argument.
The use of technology is increasing rapidly in the modern world.
Growing technological influence can even be seen in the classroom.
The argument that technology will completely replace the teacher in
the classroom is a subject that is both supported and refuted by
many. Both sides of this argument will be analyzed before a reasoned
conclusion is drawn.
Firstly, it is easy to see the progressive rate at which technology is
able to mimic the teaching abilities of human beings. For example,
several iPhone applications are able to hold the attention of young
children for hours at a time, while concurrently teaching them things.
Thus, it is clear that on a small scale, machines can act as effective
teachers. The possibility for a robotic teacher in the future can
therefore be seen.
However, on the other side of this argument, it must be remembered
that a teacher powered by artificial intelligence would have little to no
control over its students. For example, it is commonly understood that
children require the watchful eye of a teacher to ensure that they are
indeed completing their class work and not fooling around during
class time. Unfortunately, this is something that a robotic teacher
simply cannot provide. Thus, this makes it clear why the argument
that technology will never completely replace the teacher in the
classroom could also be possible.
In summary, both sides of the argument regarding the possibility of a
technologically driven classroom have strong support. However, after
analyzing the two camps it is clear that the idea of having a class run
entirely by a machine is unlikely to materialize anytime soon. As
such, it is predicted that the plausibility of technology-based
classroom teachers will remain weak.
Some people think that museums should be enjoyable places to
entertain people, while others believe that the purpose of
museums is to educate. Discuss both views and give you own
opinion.
People have different views about the role and function of museums.
In my opinion, museums can and should be both entertaining and
educational.
On the one hand, it can be argued that the main role of a museum is
to entertain. Museums are tourist attractions, and their aim is to
exhibit a collection of interesting objects that many people want to
see. The average visitor may become bored if he or she has to read
or listen to too much educational content, so museums often put more
of an emphasis on enjoyment rather than learning. This type of
museums is designed to be visually spectacular, and it may have
interactive activities or even games as part of its exhibitions.
On the other hand, some people argue that museums should focus on
education. The aim of any exhibition should be to teach visitors
something that they did not previously know. Usually this means that
the history behind the museums exhibits needs to be explained, and
this can be done in various ways. Some museums employ
professional guides to talk to their visitors, while other museums offer
headsets so that visitors can listen to detailed commentary about the
exhibition. This way, museums can play an important role in teaching
people about history, culture, science and many other aspects of life.
In conclusion, it seems to me that a good museum should be able to
offer an interesting, enjoyable and educational experience so that
people can both have fun and learn something at the same time.
Compared to previous generations, an increasing number of
people are traveling overseas for holidays.
Why is this? Is this a positive or negative trend?
There are a number of factors which explain the rising tendency for
people to take trips overseas for pleasure, and this has both
advantages and disadvantages as will now be discussed.
Innovations in technology have made overseas travel not only faster,
but also more accessible for those on a limited budget, meaning that
in some cases a family can holiday in a different country with less
inconvenience and a better price than staying in their home country. A
flight from the UK to Spain, for example, can be accomplished in less
time than it takes to get from one side of England to the other.
One of the clearest advantages here is that it gives people the
opportunity to experience different cultures and customs, giving a
broader perspective of the world. By visiting other countries, people
become more understanding and tolerant of other cultures, and can
learn to appreciate the cultural differences that exist. There are also
benefits for the holiday itself, as many people tend to holiday in
destinations that have better weather.
However, there are disadvantages for the country, as citizens are
spending their money overseas rather than in the domestic market.
However, this is negated by the fact that although people leave their
own country for a holiday, other people visit their country for the same
reason. In New Zealand, for example, money spent overseas by
people leaving the country is replaced by those who visit the country
for their holiday.
To conclude, advances in technology have given the consumer more
choice in overseas holidays, and this has both positive and negative
ramifications.
The advent of the Internet has made it possible for people to
work from home. Write an essay looking at the advantages and
disadvantages of this professional arrangement. Share personal
examples in your essay.
The Internet has revolutionized the world in many different ways.
Among these, it has made it possible for people to work from home.
This essay will analyze the advantages and disadvantages that arise
when a person lives and works in the same place. Following this look,
a reasoned conclusion will be shared.
On the one hand, working from home gives people the flexibility to set
their own hours, which can allow for the arranging of a schedule that
makes a person more productive. For example, a friend of mine
freelances as a programmer from home and has discovered he is
most productive when he works late at night. As such a schedule
would not be possible at a normal 9 to 5 desk job, the positive effects
his home office arrangement have on his productivity can be seen.
Examples like this clearly show the advantages that can derive from
working at home.
However, working from ones abode can often be the cause of mental
anguish. For instance, I recall once collaborating with an online team
from the comforts of my apartment. Although this arrangement
allowed me to make my own schedule, it also meant that I had to
constantly be on call, as my co-workers contacted me day and night
with their work-related problems. Thus, some jobs done from home
may make it difficult for a person to detach themselves from their
professional commitments.
The above look illustrates that certain jobs and certain people may be
more fitted for the home office arrangement. It is thus recommended
that prospective home office workers weigh the pros and cons before
engaging such a commitment.
The advent of the Internet has made it possible for people to
work from home. Do you feel this working arrangement has
more advantages or disadvantages? Share personal examples
in your essay.
The Internet has revolutionized the world in many different ways.
Among these, it has made it possible for people to work from home.
Despite the many advantages that may derive from this arrangement,
it is felt that working from home is predominantly disadvantageous to
the professional. This will be proven by looking at how the home sets
professionals up to be both distracted and unable to detach
themselves from work.
For one, although working from home may be effective for many, most
people are likely to get distracted under these conditions. For
example, a former manager of mine once delegated a writing task to
me and instructed me to complete it at home. When I went to engage
the project, I found it difficult to stay focused in an environment I
traditionally relaxed in, and as a result the quality of my work
suffered. My experience clearly shows that for people like myself,
working from home is disadvantageous to productivity.
In addition to this, the stay-at-home worker often finds it challenging to
distance themselves from their work, and this can be mentally
exhausting. For instance, a colleague of mine started his own
business from home. Within the first few months, he was receiving
telephone calls, emails and faxes at all times of the day and night. In
the end, he felt forced to migrate this professional pursuit to a rented
office apartment simply because it was taking over his life. As this
story illustrates, the disadvantages of a home-based job are
numerous.
To conclude, despite advantages of lower overhead and
independence, working from home has many more drawbacks than
favourable points. It is thus hoped that professionals everywhere
think carefully before settling on this working arrangement.
Modern societies need specialists in certain fields, but not
others. Some people, therefore, think that governments should
pay university fees for students who study subjects that are
needed by society. Those who choose to study less relevant
subjects should not receive the government funding.
Would the advantages of such an educational policy outweigh
the disadvantages?
In every country, there are fashions among students about which
subjects are the best to the study at university. Sometimes the
popularity of a subject is determined by how much money a graduate
could subsequently earn in that field. Or subjects that are perceived
as relatively easy may also become popular, in spite of later
difficulties of finding appropriate employment. It is up to governments
to give incentives to students to choose subjects that match the needs
of their society.
Obviously one way to do this would be for the government to pay the
fees of those choosing such subjects. The advantage would certainly
be that higher number of students would enroll and would later fill the
employment gaps.
However, the disadvantages of such a policy would be considerable.
For example, the students attracted by the funding may not have any
real interest in or aptitude for that subject. Such students may drop
out before graduation or after working only a short time in a related
job. Furthermore, funding one group of students but not other would
penalize those with a genuine interest and ability for another field.
Such discrimination would certainly affect the whole of higher
education of the country, and students would develop very negative
attitudes towards going to university altogether. This would be very
counter-productive for any country.
In conclusion, I think there are many other incentives for students that
could be considered, such as making courses more interesting to
take, or the job rewards greater after graduation. The education policy
proposed above, however, would certainly have more long-term
disadvantages than benefits for society.
The worlds air pollution levels are rising year on year. Discuss
what you feel are the causes and effects of this disturbing trend.
The growing level of airborne pollutants has proven to be a major
obstacle for humanity in the 21st century. To address this issue,
encouraging popular understanding is a paramount first step. This
essay will examine the major causes and effects of atmospheric
pollution.
Firstly, the greatest causes of airborne pollution growth today come as
a result of both progression in the developing world and wastage in
the developed world. For example, as the affluence of over 2 billion
Indian and Chinese people continues to grow, sales of pollution-
causing vehicles will move in tandem. As this phenomenon
compounds with the tremendous levels of pollution already coming
out of the developed world, a recipe for unshrinking levels of air
pollution can be seen. Thus, demand for petrol vehicles in the
developing world and resource wastage in the developed world can
be concluded todays greatest causes of airborne pollutants.
The effects of these airborne pollutants tend to manifest themselves
as health issues. For instance, it is estimated that a larger percentage
of children have asthma today than ever before in human history.
To make matters worse, scientists are now finding air pollution can
cause abnormal foodstuffs growth among farming populations the
world over, and consumption of these foods has been linked to
cancer. Thus, growing asthma and cancer rates are the most chilling
effects of the worlds rising air pollution.
Following this look, unfortunate trends in the developed and
developing worlds are inciting swelling numbers of asthma and cancer
sufferers. These are considered to be the most significant causes
and effects of the planets air pollution levels. Thus, controlling
byproducts of human activity has to become central to humanitys
collective strategy for the 21st century.
Government investment in the arts, such as music and theatre, is
a waste of money. Governments must invest this money in public
services instead.
To what extent do you agree with this statement?
These days, the government spends a large part of its budget not only
on public services, but also the arts. Although I agree that it is
important to spend money on public services, I do not think spending
on the arts is a waste of money.
There are several reasons for spending a significant amount of the
government budget on public services. First and foremost, public
services are the things such as hospitals, roads and schools, and
these things determine the quality of life that most of us will have. For
example, if the government does not spend enough money on
hospitals, the health of our society may decline. Similarly, if not
enough money is spent on schools, our children may not be properly
educated. Also, it will be the poor in our society that will be affected
more if we do not spend enough on these things because they are the
ones more dependent on such services.
However, this does not mean that the arts should be completely
neglected. To begin, it is difficult for many arts institutions to generate
much profit, so without some help from the government, many
theatres and other such places may have to close. Moreover, the arts
also have an important impact on our quality of life. Many people get
great pleasure in going to see music and theatre performances so it is
important that the government assists such institutions so that they
can continue to provide entertainment to the public.
To sum up, there are clear benefits of ensuring a large amount of
investment goes into public services as this influences the quality of
life for nearly all of us. That said, I do not believe spending money on
the arts is a waste of money as this too provides important benefits.
Some people believe the aim of university education is to help
graduates get better jobs. Others believe there are much wider
benefits of university education for both individuals and society.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.
These days, more and more people are making the choice to go to
university. While some people are of the opinion that the only purpose
of a university education is to improve job prospects, others think that
society and the individual benefit in much broader ways.
It is certainly true that one of the main aims of university is to secure a
better job. The majority of people want to improve their future career
prospects and attending university is one of the best ways to do this
as it increases a person's marketable skills and attractiveness to
potential employers. In addition, further education is very expensive
for many people, so most would not consider it if it would not provide
them with a more secure future and a higher standard of living. Thus
job prospects are very important.
However, there are other benefits for individuals and society. Firstly,
the independence of living away from home is a benefit because it
helps the students develop better social skills and improve as a
person. A case in point is that many students will have to leave their
families, live in halls of residence and meet new friends. As a result,
their maturity and confidence will grow enabling them to live more
fulfilling lives. Secondly, society will gain from the contribution that the
graduates can make to the economy. We are living in a very
competitive world, so countries need educated people in order to
compete and prosper.
Therefore, I believe that although a main aim of university education is
to get the best job, there are clearly further benefits. If we continue to
promote and encourage university attendance, it will lead to a better
future for individuals and society.
In order to solve traffic problems, governments should tax
private car owners heavily and use the money to improve public
transportation.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of such a solution?
Traffic congestion in many cities around the world is severe. One
possible solution to this problem is to impose heavy taxes on car
drivers and use this money to make public transport better. This essay
will discuss the benefits and drawbacks of such a measure.
One of the first benefits of such a measure is that the heavy taxes
would discourage car owners from using their cars because it would
become very expensive to drive. This would mean that they would
begin to make use of public transport instead, thus reducing traffic
problems and pollution as well. Another benefit would be that much
more use would be made of public transport if it was improved. It is
often the case that public transport in cities is very poor. For example,
we often see old buses and trains that people would rather not use.
High taxes would generate enough money to make the necessary
changes.
Nevertheless, there are drawbacks to such a solution. First and
foremost, this would be a heavy burden on the car drivers. At present,
taxes are already high for a lot of people, and so further taxes would
only mean less money at the end of the month for most people who
may have no choice but to drive every day. In addition, this type of tax
would likely be set at a fixed amount. This would mean that it would
hit those with less money harder, whilst the rich could likely afford it. It
is therefore not a fair tax.
To conclude, this solution is worth considering to improve the current
situation, but there are advantages and disadvantages of introducing
such a policy.
Global warming is one of the most serious issues that the world
is facing today.
What are the causes of global warming and what measures can
governments and individuals take to tackle the issue?
Probably the most worrying threat to our planet at the present time is
global warming. This essay will examine the reasons why global
warming is occurring and discuss some possible solutions.
The predominant factors resulting in the warming of the earth are the
emissions of CO2 and deforestation. CO2, which damages the ozone
layer, comes from several sources, but the most problematic are
those coming from the burning of fossil fuels from power plants. This
releases thousands of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.
Another cause of these emissions is the burning of gasoline for
transportation, which continues to grow because of our demand for
cars and also our increasing worldwide consumption, resulting in an
escalating need to transport goods. Also, forests store large amounts
of carbon, so deforestation is causing larger amounts of CO2 to
remain in the atmosphere.
Nevertheless, there are potential ways to solve these problems, or at
least reduce the effects. Firstly, governments need to reduce our
dependence on fossil fuels and promote alternatives. Plant-derived
plastics, biodiesel, wind power and solar power are all things that are
a step in the right direction, but governments need to enforce the
limits on CO2 emissions for the polluting industries in their countries
for these to be effective. Also, individuals can play a part by making
lifestyle changes. People should try to buy cars with the best fuel
economy, and only use their car when really necessary. They can also
switch to energy companies that use renewable energy rather than
fossil fuels. Finally, small things like buying energy efficient light bulbs,
turning off electricity in the house, and planting trees in the garden
can help.
To conclude, although global warming is a serious issue, there are
steps that governments and individuals can take to reduce its effects.
If we are to save our planet, it is important that this is treated as a
priority for all concerned.
Currently there is a trend towards the use of alternative forms
of medicine. However, at best these methods are ineffective,
and at worst they may be dangerous.
To what extent do you agree with this statement?
Alternative medicine is not new. It is accepted that it pre-dates
conventional medicine and it is still used by many people all over the
world. I am unconvinced that it is dangerous, and feel that both
alternative and conventional medicine can be useful.
There are several reasons why the conventional medical community
is often dismissive of alternatives. Firstly, there has been little
scientific research into such medicine, so there is a scarcity of
evidence to support the claims of their supporters. Furthermore,
people often try such treatment because of recommendations from
friends, and therefore come to the therapist with a very positive
attitude, which may be part of the reason for the cure. Moreover,
these therapies are usually only useful for long-term, chronic
conditions. Acute medical problems, such as accidental injury, often
require more conventional methods.
On the other hand, there remain strong arguments for the use of
alternatives. Despite the lack of scientific proof, there is a lot of
anecdotal evidence to suggest that these therapies work. In addition,
far from being dangerous, they often have few or no side effects, so
the worst outcome would be no change. One of the strongest
arguments for the effectiveness of alternative therapies in the West is
that, whilst conventional medicine is available without charge, many
people are prepared to pay considerable sums for alternatives. If they
were totally unhelpful, it would be surprising if this continued.
I strongly believe that conventional medicine and alternative therapies
can and should coexist. They have different strengths, and can both
be used effectively to target particular medical problems. The best
situation would be for alternative therapies to be used to support and
complement conventional medicine.
Some people think that the best way to reduce crime is to give
longer prison sentences. Others, however, believe there are
better alternative ways of reducing crime.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Crime is a serious and growing problem in most societies. Although
many people believe that the best way to tackle this is to place people
in prison for longer periods, others are of the opinion that other
measures will be more effective.
There are benefits of giving offenders longer prison sentences. Firstly,
spending a long time in prison provides an opportunity for the prison
services to rehabilitate a prisoner. For example, someone who has
committed a serious offence such as assault will need a long time in
prison in order to be sure they can be re-educated not to re-offend. In
addition to this, longer prison sentences will act as a deterrent for
someone who is thinking of committing a crime.
However, some people argue that leaving people in prison for a long
time means that they will mix with other criminals and so their
character will not improve. One alternative is community service. This
gives an offender the opportunity to give something positive back to
society, and so it may improve their character. Also, the government
could focus its resources on the causes of crime, which would lead to
less crime in the future.
In my opinion, it is important to look at alternative methods. Many
countries have lengthy prison sentences, but crime has continued to
increase throughout the world, so it is clear that this is not completely
effective. That said, long prison sentences should remain for those
who commit serious crimes such as assault or murder, as justice for
the victim and their family should take priority.
To conclude, there are good arguments for and against long
sentences, so governments must continue to research the various
methods of crime reduction to ensure effective policies are in place.
Overpopulation of urban areas has led to numerous problems.
Identify one or two serious ones and suggest ways that
governments and individuals can tackle these problems?
Many countries of the world are currently experiencing problems
caused by rapidly growing populations in urban areas, and both
governments and individuals have a duty to find ways to overcome
these problems.
Overpopulation can lead to overcrowding and poor quality housing in
many large cities. Poorly heated or damp housing could cause
significant health problems, resulting in illness, such as bronchitis or
pneumonia. Another serious consequence of overcrowding is a rising
crime rate as poor living conditions may lead young people in
particular to take desperate measures and turn to crime or drugs.
In terms of solutions, I believe the government should be largely
responsible. Firstly, it is vital that the state provides essential housing
and healthcare for all its citizens. Secondly, setting up community
projects to help foster more community spirit and help keep young
people off the street is a good idea. For example, youth clubs or
evening classes for teenagers would keep them occupied. Finally,
more effective policing of inner city areas would also be beneficial.
Naturally, individuals should also act responsibly to address these
problems, and the motivation to do this would hopefully arise if the
measures described above are put into place by the government. This
is because it will encourage people to have more pride in their own
community and improve the situation.
Therefore, it is clear that the problems caused by overpopulation in
urban areas are very serious. Yet if governments and individuals
share a collective responsibility, then it may well become possible to
offer some solutions.
In the last 20 years there have been significant developments in
the field of information technology (IT), for example the World
Wide Web and communication by email. However, these
developments in IT are likely to have more negative effects than
positive in the future.
To what extent do you agree with this view?
The last two decades have seen enormous changes in the way
people's lives are affected by IT, with many advances in this field.
However, while these technological advances have brought many
benefits to the world, it can be argued that these developments in IT
will result in more negative impacts than positive.
To begin, email has made communication, especially abroad, much
simpler and faster, resulting in numerous benefits for commerce and
business. Furthermore, the World Wide Web means that information
on every conceivable subject is now available to us. For example,
people can access news, medical advice, online education courses
and much more via the internet. It is evident that these improvements
have made life far easier and more convenient for large numbers of
people and will continue to do so for decades to come.
Nevertheless, the effects of this new technology have not all been
beneficial. For example, many people feel that the widespread use of
email is destroying traditional forms of communication such as letter
writing, telephone and face-to-face conversation. This could result in a
decline in people's basic ability to socialize and interact with each
other on a day-to-day basis.
In addition, the large size of the Web has meant that it is nearly
impossible to regulate and control. This has led to many concerns
regarding children accessing unsuitable websites and viruses.
Unfortunately, this kind of problem might even get worse in the future
at least until more regulated systems are set up.
In conclusion, developments in IT have brought many benefits, yet I
believe developments relating to new technology are likely to produce
many negative effects in the future that must be addressed if we are
to avoid damaging impacts on individuals and society.
A few major languages are increasingly spoken in different
countries, while the usage of others is rapidly declining. Is this a
positive or a negative development?
Advances in technology, transport, and communication have given
rise to the phenomenon of globalization. A lot of barriers have been
pulled down; the exchange of ideas between countries and cultures
has never been freer in any time in history. This has in turn led to an
expanding use of a few major languages such as Arabic, Chinese,
Spanish, and especially English. There are obvious benefits to this,
but the possible cultural ramifications must not be ignored.
Obviously, the use of one major language as a lingua franca or bridge
language is desirable because it enhances cross-cultural
communication. It embodies a clear, accessible standard for
everybody to follow be it in books, movies, academic or popular
publications, or the Internet.
Additionally, if a country is to become globally competitive either in
business or the labour market, then it is imperative for it to understand
and utilize the dominant international language. In my part of the
world, you will not make progress in a career or business without
English because corporate communications and commerce is mostly
conducted in this language. A business might succeed locally without
it, but growth in the bigger national or international market will be
curtailed.
Then again, the dwindling usage or even extinction of many minor
languages is an unfortunate result of this phenomenon. This happens
when less and less people speak their mother tongue because of a
shifting of allegiance to the second language. This is unfortunate
because language death also means a loss of cultural identity.
Original meanings and nuances are lost in translation. Culture forms
language, and language revolves around culture, the demise of one
means the same for the other.
Maybe the best course of action is a form of compromise.
Governments must take steps to preserve their languages and
dialects by supporting appropriate legislation and by funding the
efforts of learning institutions. Individuals should continue using their
mother tongue and take pride in their distinct cultural heritage.
It is often said that people over the age of 60 should not work
anymore because of the problems they create, that employers
should make them retire. Do you agree or disagree? Give
reasons for your opinion.
In a lot of countries, 60 is the mandatory retirement age. It is as if
people this age are outmoded, ready for replacement. Personally, I
think that our senior citizens should not be written off; they can still be
very productive members of society.
The biggest issue raised against older people is their declining
physical abilities. That they are not as quick on their toes as they used
to be; their endurance is noticeably less. But while bodily functions at
this age are not at their optimum, the mind is not. While they may not
as physically competitive, their acquired wisdom goes a long way
towards solving problems or managing situations that would rattle
younger people. Many of the greatest minds in our planet, scientists
like Einstein and world leaders such as Churchill, worked beyond their
sexagenarian age.
Secondly, some say that the information and knowledge of senior
workers is obsolete. In this day and age where the computer reigns
supreme, they cannot compete with the quick developments in
technology, something at which the majority of fresh graduates are
proficient in. The answer to this is training. Nobody is born knowing
anything. Employers should give them the benefit of the doubt; train
them properly and our elders might just surprise you.
To end, ability and know-how does not automatically deteriorate with
age. As long as a person is competent and has the will to contribute,
then age should not be a barrier. Youth may have its energy, but age
brings wisdom.
Modern means of communication have introduced relevant
changes in our lives; some believe benefits outweigh
disadvantages, others the opposite. Discuss your view and state
your opinion.
We live in an age of wonder. Today we have things that would have
been thought fantastic or implausible a generation ago. This is
especially true in the field of communication; these modern means of
communication have brought significant changes to our lives at all
levels.
Modern technology like mobile phones and the Internet are now
ubiquitous parts of our daily routine. More than ever we could connect
with ease, even talk with people who are geographically removed.
Those with family members overseas can appreciate this; they can
talk with their loved ones or even see them through internet chats. We
can now shop online; it has opened new avenues for commerce.
These contemporary means of communication has made a great
impact not only on individuals but also on the whole of society. It has
made possible underground, bloodless revolutions. In places under
dictatorial or martial rule, like China for example, the phenomenon
called tweeting has enabled ordinary citizens to step-up and be
heard. The voices of the small people which have been hushed in the
past now find an outlet.
On the other hand, others declare that this phenomenon has lessened
the value of face to face communication. Communication has become
impersonal, they say, and it has actually isolated people instead of
bringing them together. But while this has some truth to it, it cannot be
denied that mobile phones and the Internet have enabled our voices
and words to reach a wider audience than ever before.
To end, if properly used, these technologies will better our current
state of life. We need to embrace this fact but not blindly. As in
anything else, we must proceed with prudence to make the most out
of it.
Some people say that self-employment is better than working for
a company or institution. Discuss both points of view. What is
your opinion?
The means of making a living diverges into two avenues. The most
common road that people take is to get employed either by a private
or public institution. Some others choose to be a bit more daring and
put up their own enterprise.
Being an entrepreneur does have its risks, especially for the neophyte
businessman. There is a lot more to learn than just simple office work.
You will have to be involved at all levels. If the business ever
founders, then it would be much more painful, even to the personal
level. Nevertheless, the potential monetary and psychological rewards
are beyond what a mere regular employee can expect. Being your
own boss and steering the direction that the company takes is a
challenge that has its own appeal.
On the other side, being an employee is a more traditional and secure
choice. The paycheck just rolls in every month, and ones duties and
responsibilities are usually clearly defined. There are even some
positions in giant companies which pay astronomically. Even so,
company salaries follow a standard and there are caps as to what a
worker can earn. A lot dream and work towards being promoted and
eventually moving in the top circle, but few will reach this level.
Employees more often than not do not have much say in the direction
of a business.
Having experienced both being an employee and putting up my own
business, I would say entrepreneurship sits better with me. It is not
advisable for everybody; it is by far more challenging and demanding.
Nevertheless I like knowing that I am building something which will
have my personal stamp, something that I built from the ground up
into a resounding success. Without the men and women who took the
risks and the conviction to follow their hearts, a lot of frontiers would
have remained unconquered.
In the end, it all goes down to the choices and work-style of the
individual. Some do better alone, while others need the security or
creative hubbub that a big workplace brings. Whatever the
preference, what is important is the responsibility, willingness, and
ability to exert the effort demanded by the occupation.
Many people think that the government should pay the tuition
fees for all adults who interested in university studies. Do you
agree or disagree?
The more educated its constituents, the better it is for the government.
A highly-skilled workforce is desirable for any country, but not
everybody can afford to go back to school. I believe a compromise
should be reached; the government should subsidize the fees for
qualified individuals.
Channeling funds into adult education is a more worthy cause than
what some governments are doing right now. This is infinitely better
than funding weapons development, clandestine ventures, or any of
the various government projects that are of no direct benefit to
citizens. A countrys real wealth lies in its people, so it makes good
sense to prioritize them.
There are adults who would definitely want to further their education
but are hampered by obligations or financial constraints. Being an
adult means working, bills, errands, possibly children. All these
discourage or even prevent some from considering a return. A
financial support from the government will definitely be a big help, a
factor that might swing the decision for a lot of people.
On the other hand, we must not ignore some difficulties that a subsidy
scheme entails. This costs money just like any other venture. There
will be some who will not finish their studies or take a long time,
thereby increasing the overhead. A few people even say that some
adults will take advantage of this in some way. Nonetheless, there are
safeguards that can be applied. Of course there should be a
screening for qualified applicants; mainly these should be people who
have the intellectual capacity or skills suited to the course. Moreover,
the financial situation of the applicant is a significant factor. The poor
but deserving should have preference.
To end, the government, and we ourselves, must recognize this
worthy cause; a noble goal that must be supported. It has some risks,
but nothing is totally risk-free. The long-term benefits outweigh the
short-term difficulties it may entail.
It is sometimes argued that too many students go to university,
while others claim that a university education should be a
universal right.
Discuss both sides of the argument and give your own opinion.
In some advanced countries, it is not unusual for more than 50% of
young adults to attend college or university. Critics, however, claim
that many university courses are worthless and young people would
be better off gaining skills in the workplace. In this essay, I will
examine both sides of this argument and try to reach a conclusion.
There are several reasons why young people today believe they have
the right to a university education. First, growing prosperity in many
parts of the world has increased the number of families with money to
invest in their childrens future. At the same time, falling birthrates
mean that one- or two-child families have become common,
increasing the level of investment in each child. It is hardly surprising,
therefore, that young people are willing to let their families support
them until the age of 21 or 22. Furthermore, millions of new jobs have
been created in knowledge industries, and these jobs are typically
open only to university graduates.
However, it often appears that graduates end up in occupations
unrelated to their university studies. It is not uncommon for an English
literature major to end up working in sales, or an engineering graduate
to retrain as a teacher, for example. Some critics have suggested that
young people are just delaying their entry into the workplace, rather
than developing professional skills. A more serious problem is that the
high cost of a university education will mean that many families are
reluctant to have more than one child, exacerbating the falling
birthrates in certain countries.
In conclusion, while it can be argued that too much emphasis is
placed on a university education, my own opinion is that the university
years are a crucial time for personal development. If people enter the
workplace aged 18, their future options may be severely restricted.
Attending university allows them time to learn more about themselves
and make a more appropriate choice of career.
The free movement of goods across national borders has long
been a controversial issue. Some people argue that it is
necessary for economic growth, while others claim that it
damages local industries.
One of the most debatable issues of the last century has been the
extent to which international trade benefits or harms national
economies. Many arguments have been made for and against free
trade between nations. In this essay, I will discuss both views and
state my own position.
Those who support the expansion of global free trade claim that
economies grow faster when they can specialise in just a few
industries in which they have a strong advantage. As a result, each
region or country produces something of value to the world economy.
For example, East Asia manufactures electronic goods, the Middle
East exports energy, and the EU produces luxury items. Free trade
proponents claim that dependence on global trade helps to strengthen
international cooperation and prevent wars.
Meanwhile, opponents of free tradesometimes called
protectionistsclaim that the unrestricted movement of goods and
services causes damage to local communities. This is because jobs
are lost when it becomes cheaper to import a product than to produce
it domestically. They also argue that the vast distances travelled by
food, oil, and consumer goods is harming the environment and
making our lives unsustainable. Protectionists are in favour of tighter
controls on the movement of goods and services in order to protect
jobs and livelihoods.
In conclusion, while there are convincing arguments on both sides of
the debate, a return to protectionist policies would surely be a
mistake. I believe that global trade is inevitable and should not be
restricted. It is no longer realistic for nations to source all of their
energy, food, and manufactured goods within their own borders.
The internet has transformed the way information is shared and
consumed, but it has also created problems that did not exist
before.
What are the most serious problems associated with the internet
and what solutions can you suggest?
There is no doubt that the internet has revolutionized communication
and information-sharing in the same way that the telegraph and the
television did before it. However, societies have had to cope with
unanticipated new problems, including crimes which traditional laws
are powerless to prevent. This essay will address some of the illegal
acts enabled by the internet and propose solutions.
To begin with, the global scale of the internet means that national laws
are no longer adequate to control what happens online. Take
restrictions on legal reporting, for example. In some countries, the
media is prohibited from revealing details of a defendants past in
case this prejudices a fair trial. However, such restrictions are no
longer enforceable now that information may be freely published in
other countries and accessed by all. The only solution here, it seems,
is to adopt global standards. Since the internet traverses national
borders, the flow of information can only be controlled if all nations
agree on what can and cannot be shared.
Another problem concerns anonymity, as internet users can easily
conceal their identity and even impersonate others. Many crimes such
as identity theft and child abuse result from the ease with which
criminals can operate anonymously online. Some have proposed a
system of online identification, similar to a passport, which would
allow all internet users to be verified and traced. I believe this idea
should be explored further, though there are clearly concerns about
the security of those who use the internet to protest against
oppressive regimes.
In conclusion, the only long-term solution to the problem of internet
crime is greater international cooperation. Since the problem is global
is scale, the solution must also be global. A new agency of the United
Nations should be created to tackle the problems described here.
In many developed countries, life expectancy is rising while
birthrates are falling. As a result, the elderly will make up a much
larger proportion of the population in future.
Is this a positive or negative development?
How long do you expect to live? Until the age of 80? 100? If you had
asked your parents the same question, they would surely have felt
that a life expectancy of 70 was around average. Your grandparents,
meanwhile, might have felt fortunate to live for 60 years. It is clear that
people are living longer than ever before, but is this a positive or
negative development?
On the one hand, increased life expectancy brings many opportunities
later in life to try things that you could not do in your youth. Going on a
world cruise, taking up a new hobby, even going back to university to
get a degree: all of these opportunities are available to retired people
nowadays. What is more, while many parents find raising children to
be a stressful experience, spending time with grandchildren brings far
more pleasure. Therefore, a more elderly population generally means
a happier population with more time to enjoy life.
On the other hand, since elderly people often rely on the government
or their children to support them, there are real concerns about the
financial consequences of an aging society. Countries such as Japan
are already being forced to raise both taxes and the age of retirement
in order to offset the problem. Without a doubt, many other countries
will need to take similar actions in the coming decades.
Overall, I would say that the benefits to individuals of living longer far
outweigh the cost to society of supporting an elderly population. Of
course, various countries need to take steps to ensure that the
process is carefully managed.
Some people think that cities are the best places to live. Others
prefer to live in a rural area. Compare the advantages and
disadvantages of living in the city to living in the countryside.
Whether cities are better than rural area or vice-versa is a contentious
question, it depends on one's choice, as to, what they prefer. Both cities
and rural areas have their pros and cons. Rural areas have quaint
environments whereas there is always something fascinating about big
cities.
Cities generally have better infrastructure, education system and
advance health care facilities. You get to meet people from all walks of
life, learn to coexist with people from different ethnicity, race, caste and
culture; hence you become more tolerant, open minded and start
respecting each other differences. Whereas countryside people are less
tolerant, caste system still prevails and the powers lie with a certain
group of people. If you see, today in India, Love marriages /inter-caste
marriages are very common in cities, whereas people are being
murdered in the name of honour in rural areas. Gender inequality is very
evident in a rural area, where women are being restricted only to
household chores and do not have much say in decision making, but in
cities, both are treated equally. It is not uncommon to see people
migrating to cities for better jobs, better education.
People in the cities are always under tremendous pressure and stress,
they always have to be up to date with technologies and hence there is
no time to relax. Recently studies have shown a surge in the number of
cases of heart attacks, which is due to increase in stress level. People in
cities are constantly exposed to high level of pollution, adulterated food
and chemically grown vegetables, which adversely affects their health,
owing to which the average life of people living is cities is less than
people living in rural area. Increased cases of obesity, suicides, diabetes
are also resulting in stress and unhealthy living. Rural areas on other
hand have no or very less pollution, pure food item and less stress,
people have more time for themselves and their families.
To sum up, I think both cities and rural areas have their own charm. Cities
have more busy and hectic life but have better facilities, rural areas, on
the contrary, have more relaxed, laid back lifestyle but lacks in up to date
technologies like computers and international standard of healthcare and
education system.
Nowadays, more and more foreign students are going to English-
Speaking countries to learn the international language
English". It is undoubtedly true that studying English in an
English-speaking country is the best way, but it is not the only
way to learn it.
Model Answer 1: Persuasive
There is no debate that being in a real English language environment
will help anyone to master the language in the fastest and most
effective way and many international students prefer to go to English-
speaking countries to study and learn the international language. I
agree that this is a good way, yet students can learn English in other
useful ways and those can be even better than the first approach.
Being in an English speaking country helps students learn English in
many ways. Firstly, the surroundings and environment influence our
learning. We are forced to speak, read write, and slowly we start even
thinking in English since we have to. Secondly, quick learning of the
language can become a strong motivation because, in turn, we will
get quick feedback that lets us find what we learn really benefits us in
life and education. This inspires us to continue to learn more. Its a
positive reinforcement Learning builds on progressively. The initial
learning serves as the basis for further learning. Thirdly, in an English-
speaking country, you will be learning from the life and culture which
is not present off that land.
However, in this age of cross-culture communication and Internet,
learning English in an English-speaking country is not the only way.
The English language learning opportunities are available in many
countries. Nowadays people are able to find various ways of learning
the English language in their home country that are highly effective
and productive. Watching English movies, television, listening to
English music and browsing Internet can open up a vast plethora of
English materials. For instance, one can make use of the vast storage
of materials (video, sound, graphics, etc.) on the Internet to facilitate
language study. Sometimes non-English speaking students may need
a different approach for learning English. The principle of different
students, different teaching, by the famous saying by Chinese guru
Confucius, maintains that different teaching approaches are useful for
different segments of students. The way a foreign student learns a
language is quite different from those of an English native speaker.
For example, a foreign student higher level; however, it is
unnecessary for a native speaker. Last but not the least, on some
occasions, students may find teachers in their own countries do a
better job in figuring out their exact weak points and the remedies for
them. A teacher of a non-English country understand the basic of a
student and can combine both the native language and English to
make the study plan and this might be more helpful than a native
English teacher's approach of studying.
In conclusion, I believe studying English in English-speaking country
is a good way but in many cases, the other ways can be proven to be
more efficient than being in an English speaking country.
Learning from experience is better than learning from text and that
makes an English speaking country living person more competent
than a non-English speaking country living person in terms of the
command of the language. When the first person communicates
naturally and without any brainstorming, the later one would do that as
less accurately. Pronunciation and language style is very important in
terms of communicating English and that can be best learned from the
native speakers of this language and thats why being in an English
speaking country to learn the language is the best way. Because of
this realisation, thousands of people from different parts of the world
are coming to English Speaking countries to learn the language.

Model Answer 2: Refute In conclusion, though a language can be learned through reading,
practice and other good ways, being in a country where this language
Language is a skill and like any other skill, it can be best achieved is the native language is the best way to learn it.
through practising. Being in an English speaking country gives a
competitive advantage of learning it faster and in a more efficient way
than other ways and that why I consider learning English can be best
achieved by being in an English speaking country.

Many people would argue that, if learning English in only possible by

living in an English country ho come people with really good English
can exist when they have never been to an English-speaking country.
Yes, it is true that proper study and determination to grasp the
language can bring success to a person without living in a non-
English-speaking country but there are some gaps yet. The amount of
effort someone needs to put in learning the language would be much
more compared to someone living in an English speaking country.

Firstly, being in an English speaking country would make the learner

to communicate in this language all the time and being in such a
situation helps learn faster and more competently. They would learn
the language through practical experiences and that is more important
than reading tomes of grammatical rules from textbooks.

Second, the language is not merely how it is defined in the grammar

books and how the words are spelt. Rather it is a natural ability to
express the feelings and thought to someone else in an effective way
and it is quite impossible to become a natural thinker of a language
without actually being in an environment where this is the only
language.
 Compare the advantages and disadvantages of three of the
following as media for communicating information. State which
three you consider the most effective.
Comic
Books
Radio
Television
Film
Theater
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples
from your own knowledge or experience.
Model Answer 1:
In our daily life, we communicate information through lots of different
media like the internet, televisions, radios, books, cell phones, films
etc. We are living in such a time when information is one of the most
important issues and the information technologies as well as the
communication media greatly influence our lives. The rapid-growing
websites and TV channels are many of few little examples how media
are spreading to make information easily accessible. All the media for
information interchange have advantages and disadvantages and not
all can attract all types of audiences. Comics, books, radios,
televisions, film and theatre are all very powerful media for
communicating information. In my opinion books, televisions and film
among those aforementioned six media are most effective.
Books are the witness of history and the main source from which we
gain knowledge. From a very ancient period till now, books have been
working as the light-house for our society. In our childhood, we gather
most of our knowledge and skills from books. It opens new horizons in
front of us. The writer writes down their experiences, imaginations,
knowledge, explanation etc. about each and every issue of our lives.
Books are the long lasting protocol to make a bridge among writers
and readers.
However, all are not happy to read books. They expect something
easier and more vivid. Music, radios, films etc. are more appealing to
them. Television is another powerful media. Watching television is a
part of our daily lives. Most of the people who have a TV set, watch
programs, news etc. with apt attention. It is a strong medium for
Government and other organisations to send their messages to the
mass population. Program representatives also broadcast the
people's view and opinions about different controversial issues in TV
programs. However, this medium has lots of demerits and bad
impacts. Government and politically biased organisations often send
negative and misleading news. Again young people watch different
satellite channels and try to adopt the alien culture which is really
harmful for the culture and tradition of a country.
Films are an audio-visual representation and can catch the attention
of people from different geographical locations, races and cultures. A
good film can shape someone's morality and doctrine and the film-
makers with their huge amount of money, are so careful to make their
films realistic and eye-absorbing. Every film has a direct or potential
message or moral. On the contrary, some films also bring a wrong
message to us. For example, protagonists are always smoking in the
films and it seems that smoking is a good and smart habit. It causes
many younger people imitate them smoking.
In conclusion, I would like to some up that books, televisions and films
are the most powerful and effective medias for communicating
information.
Model Answer 2:
Communication media plays a vital role in todays world. It enables us
to stay informed of the happenings in the entire world, provides
access to real-time information, and entertains us. There are different
kinds of media in use today, namely comics, books, radio, television,
film, theatre etc. out of these, the most effective are the television,
radio and books.
Television, or TV for short, is an electronic device that enables us to
see and listen at the same time to an act that has been recorded.
These can be replayed any number of times. News on a TV enables
us to view the current events occurring in different parts of the world.
Video of an event can be telecasted live as it happens through remote
satellite links. A TV can also be a source of education and
entertainment. Educational channels, such as Discovery channel,
telecast several interesting programs on topics such as wildlife or
solar system. Other channels, such as Star movies, telecast movies
throughout the day.

A radio is an electronic device that uses microwave communication to

send and receive information. Unlike a TV, a radio cannot display an
image or a video, and the communication is limited to voice only.
Typically, a radio is used for access information such as news and live
traffic updates. The information is conveyed on fixed bands of
microwave frequency called channels. A user can set the frequency of
the radio to access a particular channel.

Books are the one of the oldest kind of communication medium. A

book typically consists of several pages, made from wood pulp bound
together. A book is typically identified by a title and an author, and
optionally an ISBN number which identifies a book uniquely. A book
usually contains a material on a given topic, divided by sub-topics in
form of chapters. Books are often classified by genre, which is a
theme in which the topic can be classified. Examples of genres
include fiction, non-fiction, science fiction, mystery etc.

Of all the communication media available today, television, radio and

books are the most important and effective ones. These are also the
most commonly used media in the world today and they are
responsible for binding the world together.