1

Global Warming One of the biggest problems facing the world today is global warming. It is the increase in the average temperature of the Earths near surface air and oceans. The reckless felling of trees, rash industrialisation, luxurious automobiles and pompous comforts are ceaselessly fanning out the cancer of pollution. The result is the green-house effect in which the greenhouse gases like carbon di oxide, methane and water vapour trap the heat of the sun and make the earth warmer. This essay will examine the problem of global warming and suggest some solutions for it. Many problems could result from global warming. One of the biggest is rising sea level. This could result in the flooding of low lying coastal areas and cities, such as Egypt, the Netherlands, and Bangladesh. Another problem is changes in weather patterns. Many areas of the world are experiencing increased hurricanes, floods, and other natural disasters. A final issue associated with this phenomenon is the negative effect on animals. Fish populations could be effected, while some insects which spread disease might become more common. There are several things we can do to deal with global warming. One answer is to stop making C02. We can do this by switching from oil, coal and gas to renewable energy. A second solution is to plant more trees. Trees absorb C02 and produce oxygen, which is not a greenhouse gas. A third idea is to use less energy and recycle more products. We can do car pooling, use more public transport, drive less, buy fuel efficient vehicles and accept recycled materials. If we use less energy and are more environmentally friendly, the earths temperature may not rise too much. In conclusion, making small changes now in the way we live means avoiding huge changes in the future. Scientists, governments and individuals must work together to overcome this serious threat.
Global warming positive side 1. 2. 3. G.W. would lengthen the growing season at high latitudes more atmospheric CO2 is known to spur plant growth warmer winters would lengthen the navigation season on lakes, rivers and harbours where seasonal ice cover is a problem 4. G.W. would have economic benefits for people living in cold climate because less home heating needed in winters.

The mass media have an adverse effect on moral standards. Do you agree? The empire of mass media has conquered almost all territories and now people cant live without it. Having such an influence on our lives, it has both harmful and beneficial effects. So, I am not in consummate accord with this statement. The beneficial effects of mass media are that it provides us all the information we need from all over the world. It entertains us and at the same time it helps us find more about a topic we are interested in. On the other hand, TV and the Internet destroy communication between the members of the family and make them behave like teenagers. There is also the case of the famous "paparazzi" who make the lives of the VIPs a living hell. They don't care about the right to privacy and do whatever it takes to find out spicy details about singers or actors. Furthermore, today mass media have become a form of manipulation of the population and this affects the society's capacity to make a decision on its own. On the contrary there are times when newspapers help their readers as they want to protest on a certain subject. For example, if you want the president of the country to find out you are not pleased with something you write a letter to the national newspaper and they publish it. This way, you know for sure the president will find out about it while having breakfast, as everybody reads the newspaper in the morning, including the president. The Internet helps you connect with even the farthest places of the planet, it helps you with detailed and varied information, but it also makes you "addicted" to the computer all day long. In conclusion, like any other thing in our lives, mass media have both positive and negative aspects, but the essential ones are those positive. So we should not hesitate and read more or be interested in keeping in touch with everything that is new.

The media plays a valuable role in keeping us informed and entertained. However, many people believe it has too much power and freedom.' Discuss your views on this, giving examples and presenting a balanced argument both in favour of, and against, the power and freedom of the media.' (Check your vocab for IELTS)
Barely a hundred years ago, if we wanted to stay informed about what was going on in the world, we had to rely on word of mouth or, at best, newspapers. But because communication technology was very basic, the news we received was often days or weeks old. We still have newspapers, of course, but they have changed almost beyond recognition. Whether we choose to read the broadsheets, with their quality coverage of news and other current affairs by top reporters and articles by acclaimed journalists , or if we prefer the popular tabloids, with their lively gossip and colourful stories, we are exposed to a wealth of information barely conceivable at the beginning of the last century. We also have television and radio. News broadcasts let us know about world events practically as they happen, while sitcoms, chat shows and documentaries, etc. keep us entertained and informed. And there is also the internet, where we can access information from millions of websites around the world which we can then download onto our own computers. However, these forms of information and entertainment (or 'infotainment' as they are now sometimes collectively called) have their negative side. Famous personalities frequently accuse the gutter press (and sometimes even respectable papers) of invasion of privacy by the paparazzi who are determined to get a story at any cost. Newspapers are often accused of libel by angry politicians who dislike reading lies about themselves, and there are frequent accusations of chequebook journalism , with unscrupulous reporters paying people to create stories for their newspapers or television programmes. Of course, it is not just the papers which are to blame. Sex and violence are increasing on the television. Undesirable people fill the internet with equally undesirable material which can be accessed by anyone with a home computer. And the fear of information overload prevents many from logging to the Internet. Many argue that the government should impose stricter censorship to prevent such things happening. But others argue that freedom of the press is the keystone of a free country. Personally, I take the view that while the media may occasionally abuse its position of power, the benefits greatly outweigh the disadvantages. Our lives would be much emptier without the wealth of information available to us today, and we are better people as a result.

Water shortage is becoming a problem Discuss this problem and suggest some solutions

We need water to live. When there is a water shortage, there is a serious problem. This problem is now facing many countries in the world. This essay will discuss the reasons for this and suggest some solutions. The main reason for this problem is the growing population in the region. This means there are more demands on the water supply. For example, more land is used to supply food and so more water is needed for irrigation. Some of this water comes from desalination plants, but some comes from underground reserves. These resources are difficult to replace, as little rain falls in this region. An additional problem is water pollution. With increased industrialisation comes the increased use of chemicals. Another reason for water shortage is that as countries become richer people use more and more in their homes. For instance, people like to bath or shower every day. One solution is to make more water available. This can be done by building more desalination plants. However, this is very expensive and some countries could not afford to do this. Another possibility is to educate people so they do not waste water. Another solution is to protect existing water supplies like underground supplies and take steps to prevent them becoming polluted. Also, recycled water could be used for irrigating farms. These are some ideas to help solve the problem. Saying that, it is essential that everyone must become involved, including governments, if a lasting solution is going to be found. Otherwise, the problem could become a disaster.

Although the position of women in society today has improved, there is still a great deal of sexual discrimination. Do you agree? Throughout this century, the role of within society has changed, and the majority of people feel that this change is for the better. More women work than ever before and women with careers are accepted in our culture now. Nonetheless, in my opinion, there is still a great deal of sexual discrimination against women within society, and the belief that sexual equality has been achieved is not altogether accurate. To begin with, many women find it very difficult to return to work after having children. The main reason for this is that there are rarely any provisions made for childcare in the workplace. If mothers have to be able to resume their careers, they are forced to find someone to look after the children and this can be very time consuming and expensive. Secondly, the traditional views of the position of women within society are very deeply ingrained. For instance, not only is the view that women should stay at home and look after the family still widely held but it is also reinforced through images seen on television programmes and advertisements. An example of this is that a few men are ever seen doing housework on television, since this is traditionally thought of as a womans job. Thirdly, since families often need two incomes to enjoy a good standard of living, a woman finds herself doing two jobs: one at the home and another at the office. So, in fact women carry the burdens of equality but get none of the benefits. In contrast, there are some people who claim that the problem of sexual discrimination no longer exists. They point out that women have legal rights to protect them against discrimination. In addition, women are now judges, business leaders and politicians. Nonetheless, such examples are the norm and discrimination is still very much with us. Taking these points into consideration, I would say that the position of women has changed only slightly. While rules and laws have changed, it is the deep rooted opinions of people which are taking longer to change. Until these attitudes change, sexual discrimination will continue to be a problem which we all need to face and fight against.

International entertainers, including sports personalities, often get paid millions of dollars in one year. In your view, with widespread poverty in the world, are these huge earnings justified? The salaries of many singers, dancers and sports people have increased out of all proportion in recent years, while in places like Sudan people are starving to death. I do not believe that anyone should be able to earn such enormous salaries when so many people in the world are living in poverty. One of the factors which should affect what a person can earn ought to be the benefit of person's work to society. It is unreasonable for a famous singer to be able to earn far more from an evening's entertainment than, for instance, a medical scientist who develops a new drug which produces a treatment for a common disease. The pop star certainly has a value in society, but the value in no way exceeds, or even matches, the value gained from a successful medication. Secondly work done should be paid according to the amount of effort and skill that goes into it. Nobody would deny that a famous person works hard and is skillful, yet such people do not work any harder than thousand of other workers who have no claim to fame. Yet market forces are such that these superstars can obtain millions of dollars while other unknown people sometimes earn less than they need to survive. Finally, it should be possible for governments to work together to ensure that the amount of money in circulation should be more equally and fairly distributed. This seems only fair given that there are so many suffering. To conclude, it is clear that world poverty is a serious problem and yet the problem could be eased if governments and companies gave more thought to paying salaries on a more equitable basis and if they started to contribute more money to those in need.

Some people say that television is a very useful tool when it comes to education. Others argue that television is a much overused, ineffective teacher. Discuss both of these views and give your opinion as to the usefulness of television as an educational tool. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. (net) There is a lot of controversy about whether TV can play a role of teacher. Some people hold a viewpoint that it can never be educational at all. Others, although, disagree, referring to TV's high potential of teaching through amusement. As a matter of fact, television nowadays can hardly be called educational. All those talk shows and soap operas we can see every day are completely waste of time and can even have negative effects by distracting young and undisciplined people from their studies. Moreover, the most of so called educational programmes like National Geographic cannot replace books and academic lectures because they tend to entertain people and have not an aim to give deep and concentrated knowledge. However, TV can be a powerful mean of delivering information and a nice part of learning process. Educational Methodists have proved that the more senses are involved at the time of studying, the more effective result can be achieved. Television produces both picture and sound, so its usefulness is obvious. Many teachers already use this advantage actively by showing to students video cassettes which go as supplementary material to many language courses. So why not to broadcast such movies through television? The problem of ineffectiveness of television as educational tool is in fact not a problem of television itself, but of people who decide the content of particular channel. It is hardly unlikely that content directors would abandon their high profits and change talk shows to lectures and video-lessons. Therefore, those, who insist on TVs uselessness maybe right, but let us not forget that as technology improves new cheap ways of broadcasting appear, for instance video podcasts. They can prove exclusive power of such learning tool as television.

The wealth gap between 1st world countries and 3rd world countries seems to be increasing. How can we reduce this gap? Do you think that developed countries have a duty to assist developing countries in every way? Every day the rich countries in the world get richer and the poor countries get poorer. Can we reduce this gap? Of course we can. The question is whether the people in power want to do it? Reducing the wealth gap can be achieved by cancelling third world debt, cancelling trade and farming subsidies so that third world countries can compete, getting rid of third world corruption and investing and building in third world countries using local people and skills and allowing them ownership of businesses. There are other things as well. Unfortunately there is no profit in business for first world countries to do these things. Some will do them but most will not. The ordinary man on the street wants things to be better for poorer countries and the politicians say that they will help but the politicians will in the end do what business tells them to do. Politicians also rightly feel they have a duty to protect their own countries and keeping economically dominant is part of this duty. Creating effective competition for their own countrys businesses is not part of what they are expected to do. This then leads on to whether I believe that developed countries have a duty to help the developing countries. Yes, I do. As an individual I believe that we have a duty to assist the poorer countries with their development in all aspects. We can provide teachers and education and doctors on the small scale and on the larger scale the things that I have talked about in the previous paragraph. Can we do this? Yes. Will we do this? See the previous paragraph again. In conclusion you can see that I believe that there is a split between what would happen in a perfect world and what actually happens. We have a duty to reduce the wealth gap between developed and developing countries and we can do it, but it is unlikely that this will happen quickly.

As most foreign aid benefits the donor more than the receiver, developing countries should refuse to repay their debts. To what extent do you agree. In the past, most developing countries were short of ready funds to build the infrastructure necessary for development. So the foreign countries were asked to provide loans for projects to help these countries become self-reliant. Over the past 30 years, many countries have spent most of their income repaying the interest on foreign debts. These countries are locked into a cycle of debts as the interest rates are now very high. What little these countries can earn in foreign exchange through the sale of raw materials is used to pay off the massive debts. Many people consider the initial loans responsible for these debts to be more beneficial to the lender than to the borrower. There are many reasons why these debts should be eliminated / not paid. In poor countries, it would seem much more sensible to spend on medicines to combat disease, machinery to help indigenous industry, agriculture and on teacher trainers so the education system can combat ignorance and poverty. In the absence of these things the Third world citizens are suffering and dying young and those benefiting from the huge interest paid by the underdeveloped countries are the rich bankers of the West. It can be argued that these debts should be retained. One argument is that these debts have been legally incurred and like any other debt must be honoured. Everyone with a debt would want it eliminated and difficult decisions would have to be made concerning which debts to drop. To conclude, it can be said that on humanitarian grounds these debts should be written off. Where people are suffering and dying for debts incurred by others years before they were born, any arguments for paying these debts do not seem logical or powerful.

10

Should rich countries help poorer ones? Today, the world is becoming more and more closely linked. Trade has increased and the movement of people between countries is greater than ever before. However, billions of people still live in poverty, and in many places, the gap between rich and poor is widening. This essay will look at the arguments for and against helping poor countries. There are many reasons for helping poor countries. First of all, there are humanitarian reasons. Like individuals who give to charity, many countries feel it is their religious, social, or moral duty to help people in other countries who are suffering from famine, drought, war, or disease. However, many rich countries also donate money for political or diplomatic reasons. They want to maintain a relationship of dependency with the recipient, or simply to influence the government and direction of the country. A further reason why many countries help poorer ones is for economic reasons. The donors may want to control the supply of commodities such as oil, water, or wheat. Alternatively, the richer country may want to ensure markets for their own products, whether these are planes, computers or shoes. However, aid is not necessarily the best way to help a country. For one thing, billions of dollars of aid often goes missing, into corrupt governments or inefficient administration. A second point is that many foreign aid projects are unsuitable for the target country. Many agencies build huge dams or industrial projects that fail after a few years or that do not involve the local people. Furthermore, much aid returns to the donor. This can be in the form of expensive specialized equipment and experts from the donor country. There are many other ways we can help poor countries. Opening up trade barriers, so that poor countries can sell their goods is one way. Another is to remove subsidies so that imported goods from poorer countries can compete fairly. A third method is to forgive debts. Many poor countries have huge interest repayments on old loans. The needs of the poorer countries may seem obvious. However, although our humanity makes us want to help eliminate poverty and suffering, we must examine the real needs of poor countries and implement solutions that will benefit both them and us.

11

If you could change one important thing about your hometown, what would you change? Use reasons and specific examples to support your answer. (Toefl topic Barrons) If I could change one thing about my hometown, I think it would be the fact that theres no sense of community here. People dont feel connected, they dont look out for each other, and they dont get to know their neighbours. People come and go a lot here. They change jobs frequently and move on. This means that they dont put down roots in the community. They dont join community organizations and theyre not willing to get involved in trying to improve the quality of life. If someone has a petition to put in a new street light, she has a very hard time getting a lot of people to sign. They dont feel it has anything to do with them. They dont get involved in improving the schools because they dont think the quality of education is important to their lives. They dont see the connection between themselves and the rest of their community. People dont try to support others around them. They dont keep a friendly eye on their children, or check in on older folks if they dont see them for a few days. Theyre not aware when people around them may be going through a hard time. For example, they may not know if a neighbour loses a loved one. Theres not a lot of community support for individuals. Neighbours dont get to know each other. Again, this is because people come and go within a few years. So when neighbours go on vacation, no one is keeping an eye on their house. No one is making sure nothing suspicious is going on there, like lights in the middle of the night. When neighbours children are cutting across someones lawn on their bikes, theres no friendly way of casually mentioning the problem. People immediately act as if its a major property disagreement. My hometown is a nice place to live in many ways, but it would be much nice if we had that sense of community.

12

Obesity

Obesity has become a major problem in the world. Over 60% of people are overweight. This is a difficult problem with many serious effects on the individual and country.

Obesity can be divided into three main causes - diet, lifestyle and education. One of the chief causes is diet. Young people eat more and more highcarbohydrate, high-fat burgers and pizza in fast-food restaurants. However, some traditional foods are also very oily, and because of increasing affluence are eaten more often than in the past. Lifestyle is a second main cause of obesity. As a result of technological advancements, most people now have sedentary jobs, and do not exercise regularly. However, one of the main causes is lack of education and awareness. The society's attitude to food often leads to over-consumption. Parents do not teach good eating habits to children, and many people lack knowledge about good nutrition or a balanced diet.

Obesity affects the individual and the country. The biggest effect is on the individual. First of all, being overweight has health risks. Obesity can lead to heart disease, diabetes, and other conditions. The quality of life suffers, as it is difficult to enjoy exercise or move. Another result is lack of self-esteem. This can lead to depression, eating disorders and crash diets. The country is also affected. It becomes very expensive for the government to provide advanced medical care such as heart transplants. Unhealthy citizens are also less productive. and their children learn poor eating habits.

Obesity or even being overweight has serious effects on the individual and the society. Both need to take action to examine the causes of this problem and find solutions.

13

Smokers can cause themselves serious health problems. The choice to smoke is made freely and with knowledge of dangers. Smokers should therefore expect to pay more for medical treatment than nonsmokers. To what extent do you agree with this statement? Everyone has the choice of being a smoker or not. The people who choose to smoke do so knowing there is a risk of causing harmful damage to themselves. However, I do not entirely agree that these people should have to pay more to receive all the medical treatment they need. I think there are many situations in which a medical problem has nothing to do with whether a person smokes or not. In these cases, where an illness has no relation to smoking, then I believe that smokers should not be required to pay more than other people for their medical treatment. Most car accidents, for example, have no connection with smoking, and the people who are injured ought to have the same medical help, regardless of the cost. And what about the common flu - it does not seem justifiable to me that a smoker should have to pay more to see a doctor for an illness we can all contract. On the other hand, I agree that a smoker should pay more than a non-smoker for the necessary treatment of any condition which has been caused by smoking. The principle that people should take responsibility for their own actions is a good one. Consequently, if a person chooses to smoke knowing that this habit can cause serious health problems, then there is no reason why the community or an insurance company should have to pay for medical treatment for an illness which could have been avoided. In many countries, cigarette packets have a clear warning that smoking can cause health problems and so no smoker can claim not to know the danger. Lung cancer is sometimes a fatal disease and the treatment is both lengthy and expensive, and it is unfair for the smoker to expect the hospital or the community to carry the cost. In fact, it could also be argued that those who smoke in public should be asked to pay extra because of the illness caused to passive smokers. In conclusion, I feel that smokers should pay more in cases related to smoking, but for any other illness they should pay the same as anyone else.

14

It has been proved that smoking kills. In some countries it has been made illegal for people to smoke in all public places except in certain areas. All countries should make these rules. Do you agree or disagree with this statement? The idea of banning smoking from public places always was a very controversial one. Those who defend smoking on streets and in offices refer to human rights and the fact that tobacco is legal. Others hold an opinion that since there are undeniable proofs that cigarettes cause lethal diseases not only to smokers but to surrounding people, smoking should be allowed only in special places. I totally agree with the idea of making smoking legal in certain places only. On the one hand, it is the society who makes smokers to smoke and it would be not fair just to put them into exile and consider the problem solved. Since we sell them tobacco they should have right to use it wherever they want. On the other hand, those who do not smoke should have the right to breathe clean air. When somebody is smoking cigarette, health of non-smokers is under attack. Personally I am a former smoker, but even for me breathing tobacco smell is unbearable. It is not only makes people to temporarily feel bad but also causes long term effect. There are researches showing that so called passive smoking could be even worse for health than smoking itself. Causing damage to anyones health is illegal, that is why there is no excuse for smoking in public places. Another reason for this is the fact that not every legal action is allowed on public. Moral, cultural and juridical limitations are exist. For example, there are toilets for peoples bladder and nobody is allowed to urinate on streets. Tobacco is much more dangerous than that so there is no doubt every country should consider moving smokers to special places. To conclude with, every country must think of the wellbeing of its citizens and make steps to protect them from dangerous effects of tobacco by banning smoking from public places.

15

Zoos Zoos are an unsuitable environment for wild animals and should, therefore, be abolished. Firstly, zoo animals are kept in a very confined area compared with their vast natural habitat. Secondly, breeding programmes are far less successful than zoos claim. Thirdly, zoo animals are exposed to many diseases and other dangers. Zoo animals are usually kept in very cramped enclosures and do not behave like their wild counterparts. Polar bears, for example, are given about 10 metres of walking space whereas in their Arctic home they roam for many hundreds of kilometres. Similarly, primates, big cats and birds are often confined in cages where they lack exercise and stimulation. Many animals develop unnatural habits such as pacing back and forth or swaying from side to side. Supporters of zoos argue that they help to conserve endangered species, but in fact they are not very good at this. Even the world famous panda breeding programme has been very costly and unsuccessful. Also, zoo life does not prepare animals for the challenges of life in the wild. For example, two rare lynxes released into the wild in Colorado died from starvation even though the area was full of hares, which are a lynxs natural prey. The zoo is an unnatural environment that exposes animals to numerous dangers. Diseases often spread between species that would never live together naturally. For example, many Asian elephants have died in US zoos after catching herpes from African elephants. Furthermore, zoo animals are often exposed to chemicals, solvents and other toxic substances. Finally, it is common for visitors to tease and provoke caged animals. In conclusion, therefore, it is not true to say that zoos are educational or that they help to protect endangered species. In reality, they only teach us how wild animals behave when they are confined in small spaces. Breeding programmes provide zoos with good publicity, but in fact most of them are failures. Finally, zoo animals are probably more at risk of dying from disease or poisoning than their wild counterparts. It is time that we abolished these cruel institutions!

16

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? A zoo has no useful purpose. Use specific reasons and examples to explain your answer.

I think that the question about whether a zoo has no useful purpose is the one that is open for debate. It is a topical question nowadays. Some people believe that a zoo has an essential and cognitive purpose. However, other people believe that a zoo has no useful purpose and people should observe wild animals in their nature. Personally, I think that both options have their advantages. In the following paragraphs I will analyze these points and present my own view in favor of people who think that animals should not be kept in a zoo.

From the one side, a zoo has many benefits for people. First of all, children can learn about animals not only from books and TV programs but from actually watching them alive. They can see animals, touch them and even feed them. I think it is an amazing experience for a child. He gains more knowledge and experience from this "communication" with an animal. Second of all, a zoo is a perfect place for adults to see many animals that people are not able to see in their lives.

However, from the other side, I keep asking myself "What kind of benefits wild animals have from a zoo?". Unfortunately, I can not find any of them. I think that wild animals should live in their nature environment. Moreover, I think that we should observe them through TV programs sitting in our favorite chairs, or people who like danger should try to observe them in the native environment. I think that animals are not toys. I know that most zoos try to keep their animals in the environment which is close to their native, but they can not give them as much freedom as animals want to.

To sum up, I think that wild animals should not be kept in a zoo. Personally, I enjoy more watching "Discovery Channel" then watching a black bear who does not know where to hide from the scorching sun in a Texas zoo.

17
With all the troubles in the world today, money spent on space exploration is a complete waste. The money could be better spent on other things. To what extent do you agree or disagree? It is true that vast amounts are spent on space exploration for apparently little gain while people suffer from terrible poverty around the world. Supporters of space programs say that space exploration has brought inventions to the world that we would not have had. The famous example is non-stick pans! Supporters also point out that it is in human nature to strive to discover the unknown and that we can progress in all ways by unlocking the secrets of the stars. These are all valid points. On the other hand how can we as human beings justify the billions of dollars spent sending people into space so we can have non-stick pans while millions of people around the world are dying of disease and famine? With the money spent on space exploration, wells could be dug, farmland could be developed, medicine could be bought, schools and colleges could be built, and teachers, doctors and nurses could be trained. Even if we could justify money on exploration, wouldnt it be better to spend the money on exploring the sea on our own planet that could offer enough food to provide for the entire world?

From what I have said in this essay it would seem that I would agree that money should be spent on better things than space exploration. However, this is not the case. I understand all the reasons for spending money on better things but I also strongly believe that it is necessary that the human race should continually strive to develop our technology and broaden our horizons. The money in the long run is well spent on space exploration. Governments spend millions of dollars each year on their space programmes. Most recently Mars is the focus of scientists attention. Some people think this money would be better spent on dealing with problems closer to home. Do you agree or disagree. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge and experience. It is true that vast amounts are spent on space exploration while people suffer from terrible poverty around the world. With the money spent on space exploration, wells could be dug, farmlands could be developed, medicine could be bought, schools and colleges could be built and teachers, doctors and nurses could be trained. I understand all the reasons for spending money on better things, but I also strongly believe that it is necessary that the human race should continually strive to develop our technology and broaden our horizons. The technology that put men on the moon, launched space shuttles and will build a space station has found its way into everyday life on earth. Common secondary uses of space research are called spin-offs. The common smoke detector used in homes was first prepared for spacecrafts as a warning system. Computer bar codes in retail stores, shock absorbing shoes used by tennis players and athletes, lightweight materials used for helmets and sporting materials and non stick coating used in pans were all first developed as part of space research. Space technology has provided many benefits to the medical field as well. Pace makers used to treat cardiac as well as remote monitoring devices for intensive care patients and portable medical equipment carried aboard ambulances are but a few applications of space technology providing daily benefits in hospitals, offices and homes. To conclude I can say that it is basic human nature to strive to discover the unknown and we can progress in all ways by unlocking the secret of the stars. So the money is well spent on space exploration. Governments around the world are spending billions in support of space programs. This money would be better spent on research into improvements in human health. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? There is an opinion that countries are spending a lot of their cash assets on space projects while they should rather finance medical science sufficiently. Spaceships are flying all over the Universe at the time people are dying from AIDS or even flu. Is there any point of throwing money into the outer space? On the one hand, human really have not fought many dangerous and highly contagious diseases. Moreover, industrialization and economical progress brought new diseases as a result of receiving more comfortable life. They are diabetes, cardio-vascular problems, etc. In addition, launching just one space shuttle into the sky requires so many natural resources and brings so many pollution, that it influences ecology a lot. That brings us new health issues, that need additional funding, which could be withdrawn from excessive payments for space research. On the other hand, scientists already have fundraising from commercial pharmaceutical companies. A lot of diseases have been fought in just last 100 years and there is an increase in mankind life expectancy. Moreover, improved health and elongated life of population leads to a new problem overpopulation. Space research can help to find a new home for Earth inhabitants. The last, but not the least, who knows, there is a chance we could found on other planets a panacea for all diseases. As for me, I am not a very healthy person and my parents either. However, if there is a one, very small chance, that something exciting will happen and astronauts will meet alien civilization on other planets, I would not be happy that government is spending money for medicine only. We have overcrowded planet and we should search for ways of expanding our habitat.

18

The world would be a much poorer place without colour. To what extent would you agree or disagree. Colours are one of the greatest blessings that god has bestowed upon people in the world. Have you ever thought what it would be like to live in a world without colour. Forget everything for a moment and start using your imagination. Try to think how you would feel if people, cats, dogs, birds, butterflies and fruits had no colour at all. You would never want to live in such a world. Would you? Colours have a crucial role in mans communication with the outside world and in the proper functioning of his memory. Hearing or touch, alone are not enough to define objects. How can we define colourless flowers placed on a colourless table. Human eye can recognize millions of colours. Identifying objects and our surroundings are not the only benefits of a diversity of colours. Colours also give us a lot of pleasure. The beautiful blue sky, the blood red sunset or a rainbow after a rainfall do add happiness to our lives. The colours of nature have been arranged so as to appeal to the human soul. Nowadays some prisons are painted pink and green to put prisoners in a better mood. Colours hold a special significance in our culture also. In some parts of the world white is worn for weddings and black for funerals. In other parts white is the colour of mourning. Red is the symbol of love. Red also represents danger. Blood is red; fire engines are red and traffic signals are also red. Colours also reflect the personality of a person. The colour of your clothes can have a considerable impact on how you are perceived. Light colour reflects a sober personality. Colours also have been used as a treatment of some mental disorders. To put it in a nutshell, I can say that the world would definitely be a much poorer place without colour. They add life and beauty to our world.

19

There are two types of traveller: those who do it because they want to, and those who do it because they have to. Discuss this statement, using specific examples. (check your vocab for TOEFL) Most of us have, at some point in our lives, experienced the joys of travel. We go to the travel agent to pick up our brochures. We book a two-week package tour with flights and accommodations included, (or if we are independent travellers, we make our own way to the country and travel around from place to place with a rucksack on our back). We make sure we have all the right currency, our passport, and any visas that are necessary to get us into the country. We go to the airport and check in. We strap ourselves into our tiny coach class aircraft seats and a few hours later we disembark from the aircraft, strange new sights, smells, and sounds greeting us. Nowadays, it seems, the whole world goes on vacation at once: the age of mass tourism is in full swing! But for the great majority of people around the world, travel is done in the face of great adversity and hardship. They never get to indulge in an allinclusive vacation in a luxury hotel with all meals and drinks included. They never get to explore the lush Amazon rain forest or the frozen wastes of the Arctic on an ecotourism vacation. For them, travel is a matter of life and death. I refer, of course, to all the refugees escaping from their own countries, or the internally displaced moved from one part of their country to another by an uncaring government, or economic migrants forced to find a job and seek a living wherever they can. Can you imagine anything worse than the misery these people must face? Let's not confuse them with those expatriates who choose to live in another country and often have nice houses and high salaries. These people are simply desperate to survive. As well as losing their homes because of war or famine or other natural disasters, they must come to terms with their new environment: for many, the culture shock can be too great. And while many countries with an open policy on immigration will welcome them in with open arms, others will simply turn them away. These people become persona non grata, unwanted and unwelcome. Even if they manage to get into a country, they will often be deported or repatriated. Their future is uncertain. Something to think about, perhaps, the next time you are checking in to your five-star hotel by a palm-fringed beach or sitting in a coach on an excursion to a pretty castle in the countryside.

20

Science and technology have come a long way in the last 60 years, and our lives have become better as a result. Do you agree with this statement? (check your vocab for TOEFL) The second half of the twentieth century saw more changes than in the previous two hundred years. Penicillin has already been discovered and used to treat infections; there have been many remarkable advances in medicine that have helped to increase our average life expectancy way beyond that of our ancestors. Incredible inventions such as television have changed the way we spend our leisure hours. Perhaps the most important breakthrough however, has been the microchip. Nobody could have imagined, when it was first invented that within a matter of years, this tiny piece of silicon and circuitry would be found in almost every household object from the kettle to the DVD recorder. And nobody could have predicted the sudden proliferation of computers that would completely change our lives, allowing us to access information from the other side of the world via the internet or send messages around the world by e-mail at the touch of a button. Meanwhile, research into other aspects of information technology is making it easier and cheaper for us to talk to friends and relations around the world. Good news for technophiles who love modern technology, bad news for the technophobes who would prefer to hide from these modern miracles. But everything has a price. The development of cybernetics led to mass automation in factories, which in turn led to millions losing their jobs. The genius of Einstein led to the horrors of the atomic bomb and the dangerous uncertainties of nuclear engineering (we hear of accidents and mishaps at nuclear power stations around the world, where safeguards to prevent accidents were inadequate). The relatively new science of genetic engineering has been seen as a major step forward, but putting modified foods onto the market before scientists had properly analysed them was perhaps one of the most irresponsible decisions of the 1990s. Meanwhile, pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies continue to experiment on animals, a move that many consider to be cruel and unnecessary. Of course we all rely on modern science and technology to improve our lives. However, we need to make sure that we control it rather than the other way round.

21

The Art should be better funded by the government but there must be more control over where the money goes. Discuss. (check your vocab for TOEFL) Since prehistoric ages The Art highlights our lives, adds beauty and happiness and cultivates the taste among the people. However, nowadays creative projects became very pricey and can not bring pay-off to its authors. Some people think that the government should pay for those projects and, of course, observe precisely how those funds are being spent. This is quite obvious that no structure except government knows nations cultural needs best. It can evaluate which sphere of cultural life have the necessity of development and achieve its goals of public loyalty by funding a specific field of The Art, controlling budget by giving maintenance only to projects they are interested in. However, funding The Art selectively can lead artists to the lack of freedom in expressing themselves. In other words, then those who have power use money to regulate cultural life, it can limit the imagination and put artists into borders they would be scared to cross. Thus, here comes the censorship, which has nothing in common with the main democracy principles. For example, similar situation was in the Soviet Union, there solely the government controlled The Art and therefore the only career an artist could pursue is praising the Communist Party by his creations. As an alternative of letting a government to control spending money on The Art, a non-governmental independent organization could be established. It must consist of the best cultural activists from a country. This would add a certain level of budget control and would guarantee there are no limits for The Art. To conclude with, I believe that funding The Art is one of the main tasks of a state, but the purpose of it should be development, not making it to serve government political needs.

22

All education, primary, secondary and further education, should be free to all people and paid for by the government. Do you agree or disagree with this statement? (check your vocab for TOEFL) The opinion that every citizen should have the right to study at school or university for free is very controversial one. Those, who disagree, refer to enormous expenditures of government in case of establishing such laws. Although, I hold the viewpoint that not charging people for education could become very beneficial for country and its economy. First, young people from poor families could be very smart. Looking back to history and biographies of distinguished people, raised in poverty can illustrate this best. Making schooling available only for fortunate is not fair. Moreover, the state well-being could also be affected, because there would be a lack of talented specialists, whose skills was not discovered and developed by proper training. Another advantage of making education free of charge is happiness of the nation. Inability of individual to collect amount of money needed to pay school or university fees cause stress and anxiety of the middle-class society, which can even keep them from having children. Nowadays we can see that the lowest birth rate is in countries where prices of enrolment to highest education institutions are very high. This clearly indicates the fact that citizens of rich countries do not feel able to provide their future offspring proper education. Finally, nothing seems to be more beneficial to economy than intelligent nation. Free courses and study programs can prepare excellent specialists, who would work to bring profit themselves and hence their country. That would surely compensate most expenses of state budget caused by education of no charge. To sum up, even though making all schools free can be very expensive for state economy, advantages are invaluable. After several years such improvements would bring fruits of happy, intelligent nation confident about its future.

23

Some people think children are more successful in foreign language studies than adults. Discuss. The viewpoint that children are better learners became almost a common sense, although it is not always true in terms of learning foreign languages. When it comes to make an approach to, for example, Japanese or French, adults have proven themselves superior learners because of their experience of getting knowledge of their own language and their performance is generally better motivated. Every adult have some amount of education it their past and it mean he has already received general understanding of the structure of native language. Thus, this more or less categorized base usually serves as a template for foreign grammar or vocabulary. Person only has to place new material on certain shelves in his memory and operate them like it their own language. Children, in contrast, are usually confused by any grammar, even of their country. Bringing foreign language to curriculum adds embarrassment because they do not have sufficient understanding of grammatical of semantic categories and can not bring to order such huge amounts of information. Grown-ups also appear to be more enthusiastic about language studies. As a matter of fact, this skill for them is a tool that can be used to achieve career goals. Obviously, more motivated individual do better, and even if his abilities are modest, through practice success can come very fast and lot of success stories can prove it. Kids, though, usually consider second language lessons as a fun or, otherwise, something boring and, even if they tend to absorb knowledge like sponges, without use it rapidly disappears. With no proper encouragement youngsters just do not know they have to practice new words and grammar in order not to forget them. Thus, while it would not be mistake to suggest children are naturally better learners, let us not forget that adults are usually better suited to language studies.

24

Some people think high school graduates should travel or work for a period of time instead of going directly to study at university. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of both approaches. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. You should write at least 250 words. There is a considerable controversy about what young people should do after receiving graduation certificate of high school. The majority holds the viewpoint that obtaining A university degree immediately after school is the only option to become successful and established person. Others, however, tend to disagree; in their opinion after finishing school individual should receive an opportunity to see the world or try his skills on job. On the one hand, basic knowledge, came into possession of a pupil at school should be preserved and receive further development at university. Human brain forgets facts rapidly, especially those, which are not in use. In the case of making a long pause between graduation from school and enrolling to an university, person may become unable to pass admission exams. On the other hand, on job training may provide an opportunity of receiving experience and choosing career before deciding the sphere, in which student wants to obtain higher education. For instance, young person can try his skills of management, working as an assistant manager in a small shop. In addition, that could also help him to understand if this work is really what he desires and prevent from making an expensive mistake of choosing wrong major. Another option of understanding someones needs is travelling. This is a perfect way to see the world and different professions in use. Person, who have never been in rural areas could be charmed, for example, by romanticism of cheese making and come to decision to make genuine milk products all his life. To sum up, there are some ways different from the standard scheme of going to university right after school and they should not be overlooked. Personally I think that whichever option person chooses, time before university should not be wasted on entertainment or parties. It is essential to use it wisely, thinking about the future.

25

Enormous effort is put into researching and marketing the perfect potato crisp while research for stress at work for example is ignored. How important are staff working conditions. Should employers research and improve the working conditions of the staff or should they concentrate more on the product? (Insight SB) Nowadays, most businesses are concerned primarily with improving and pushing products at all costs, therefore neglecting the strain this strategy puts on their personnel. I believe it is of vital importance to restrain excessive work load. I also think employers should pay more attention to organizing friendly working environment for their employees. In my point of view, conditions that employers provide for their personnel are very important. First of all, uncomfortable offices affect the pace of work. Extra efforts to keep everything organized may become the biggest time wasters. Secondly, inconvenient timetables influence labour productivity. Repetitive long hours at work get workers exhausted. Finally, relations between managers and employees matter. Unfriendly atmosphere undermine selfesteem, co-operation and ability of staff to come up with creative ideas. I convinced that researching and improving employees working conditions is rewarding. To begin with, improving workplace is an integral part of effective personnel policy. It helps a company become the employer of choice for skilled workers. Furthermore, neglecting to monitor the wellness of staff leads to extra expenses since more workers would use the insurance plan. Finally, businesses seeking efficiency should gather information on the latest advances in work space ergonomics. Strong competition forces employers to upgrade staff work areas to boost the performance of staff. I also feel that concentrating solely on the product is ineffective. For one thing, marketing, even most aggressive, would not make the product any better. The perfect potato crisp results from the work of well-trained staff. For another, companies overlooking workers needs in favour of merchandise are unstable. Staff retention problems restrain the companys potential to come regularly on the marker with new offers. At last, neglecting staff damages the reputation of a manufacturer. Customers might refuse buying a product, if they know it is made through hard exploitation of workers.
To summarize, employers should accept working conditions as being very important to successful company development. Disregarding researching and improving working conditions undermines enormous effort put into promotion of the product.

26 Should University Students Have their Own Cars?

Some students feel that a motor vehicle is an absolute necessity. They say that having a car makes life easier and gives them freedom to travel wherever they want. I completely disagree with this idea. Owning a car while in university is a waste of money and actually causes more problems than it solves. First of all, let's talk about money. On the average, students work twenty hours a week at $7.00 an hour. From their wages, they must pay for food, housing and tuition. A typical used car costs between $5000 and $9000. In addition to the initial price of the car, students must come up with money for gas, insurance and repairs, which often amount to hundreds of dollars a month. By the time they finish paying for their cars, students have little money left for daily expenses. Not only are cars expensive, but they also give students a lot of trouble. If a student drives downtown, for example, and something goes wrong with his car, he has to call friends from campus to help him fix the vehicle; unless, of course, he knows how to repair it himself. He ends up spending valuable time and money taking care of the car or pushing it to a service station to have it checked. Instead of the car being a time-saving device, it becomes a time and money-wasting inconvenience. Another disadvantage of owning a car is that everyone else wants to use it. Socalled "friends" often ask if they can borrow the car to pick up someone from the airport or run to the mall to do some shopping. If they don't drive they ask you to take them in your car. You end up being a taxi driver instead of concentrating on your school work. An automobile, therefore, is definitely not essential for a university student. Unless, of course, he is super-rich and has a lot of time to waste running around. Otherwise, it can be a great burden which will end up costing the student a lot of time, money, and unnecessary trouble.

27 21st century is expected to herald drastic changes. What are the areas do you think these changes influence.

Guidelines 1. Nanotechnology and biotechnology may bring significant changes in health care. 2. Widespread awareness of human rights will lead to liberation of women 3. Globalization will have far-reaching impact 4. Natural resources will become scarce. Change is but natural. Everything undergoes a sea of changes over a period. Scientific and technological breakthroughs harbinger many a changes in the 21st century. It is bizarre that old superstitions pave way to new ones. Nanotechnology offers astounding possibilities in all walks of human life, by reducing waste. Nanotechnology coupled with biotechnology may cause significant progress in health care. Perhaps, biotechnology will wipe out poverty which is still the worst enemy of mankind. Agriculture will become a thing of the past. Afforestation and environmental rehabilitation programmes may repair some of the damages caused to the environment by human activities. Now that the human genome project has become successful, our fight against many diseases may become victorious before the end of the 21st century. Cell transplant, instead of organ transplant, might revolutionize treatment of diseases. Super specialty surgical departments may disappear before the end of the 21st century. The awareness of human rights will become widespread, resulting in the liberation of women in the third world, where it is yet to take place. The institutions of family and marriage will have to adapt to newer challenges. Population figures in the developing world show a steeply upward trend. Consequently, providing everybody with basic amenities of life is going to be a big challenge for the governments. Lack of adequate living space is going to be a gigantic dilemma. Some natural resources such as water may become scarce. Globalization is likely to have a far reaching effect. Governments are likely to become weaker. Politicians decisions will not have a profound influence and effect on citizens. Because people are becoming assertive and they are good at reading between the lines. Wars may become less likely, although minor regional conflicts may take place in different parts of the world. Change is imminent in every sphere of human life. What is certain is that those who accept changes, instead of those resisting them, will be more successful. By becoming proactive we can make the changes favourable to us.

28

Fast-paced lifestyle is unique to cities, world over. What are the possible reasons for this inclination? Guidelines: 1. Cities emerge as centres of trade, commerce, education etc. 2. Overcrowded cities create social, cultural and financial problems. 3. Traffic congestion, pollution, stress and strain are the part and parcel of city life. 4. Adequate public transport system, improved sanitation facilities, recreational facilities and health clubs will reduce problems. Population growth is a reality. Cities emerge where people prefer to live together in great number. Fifty years ago, New York was the only city with more than one million inhabitants. Now there are more than two dozen of this category. Cities have always been centres of education, trade commerce, etc. The industrial revolution gave rise to many cities in Britain. Other countries that experienced the same wind of change followed the suit. Crowded cities create a lot of social, cultural and political problems. The slums are responsible for the increase in number of crimes. People have to commute long distances. People are packed in public transport vehicles like sardines in a can. When both the parents work, children remain unattended at home. The Psychological needs of children are not met. This may lead to several problems such as insecurity, drug addiction, juvenile delinquency etc. Big cities where large numbers of people arrive everyday face the problem of accommodation. The current trend is that more and more people are moving to big cities to find work and settle there. Stress associated with the modern work culture is more prevalent in cities than in villages. Traffic congestion and pollution make life more difficult. The problems of urbanization are partly due to the design of modern cities. Introducing adequate public transport system and better sanitation facilities are welcome changes. Recreational facilities, parks and health clubs also can help. Developing small towns instead of expanding big cities also requires consideration. Urbanization beyond limit is powerful enough to frustrate all efforts to make people happy and comfortable.

29 Use and throw culture is becoming common these days. What steps can we do to counter this situation? Guidelines 1. 2. 3. 4. Consumer culture is rampant. Things are disposed after short term use. Overtaxing earths resources. Leading to an unavoidable energy crisis.

Modern culture is a consumerist one. It is also known as disposable culture. We live in an age of ever-growing technology. People show keen interest in the latest forms of technology. As such, durability has taken a back seat. The attitude of giving preference to convenience also encourages the throw-away culture. Throw-away culture represents anything from disposing the used syringes or tea cups to discarding computers or even vehicles after using them for a very short period. Repairing and reusing machines do not interest big companies. Instead, what they do is selling more and more of their products. In many ways the throw-away culture is wasteful. Destroying used plastic is becoming a major problem everywhere. Recycling plastic is a process that needs a lot of electricity. Generating electricity at an affordable cost is a serious challenge to mankind. Conventional methods of generating electricity add to pollution. Disposing of a lot of waste materials such as heavy metals like lead and mercury and poisonous gases has become a formidable challenge to mankind. It is said that the earth can satisfy everybodys need. But satisfying everybodys greed is beyond its means. At the moment, we are overtaxing the earths resources. Our needs are unlimited but the means to satisfy them are limited. Producing substitutes for many scarce materials is possible; but this process needs an abundant supply of energy. Considering all these aspects, the throwaway culture is taking the world to the brink of an imminent energy crisis. The earlier we realize this, the better it is for everybody.

30 The world has changed a lot. Todays world is not a safe place to bring up children. Discuss.

Information technology and globalization have ushered in a new era of better lifestyle, but they also have brought with them certain evils. Definitely the quality of life has improved by leaps and bounds. But it is clear that somewhere we have lost our values and social priorities. We are immune to violence. Most of us are not empathetic to our fellow beings sufferings. Crime has increased several manifold and our cities and towns are no longer safe place for our vulnerable children. It is strange that even in the midst of material prosperity, terrorism, new diseases, and the rate of crime on a global level flourish. It is an irony that the number of crimes committed in metropolitan cities, where everyone is thought to be self sufficient and secure, is the highest. Insatiable greed, hunger for power, break up of families and perverted value systems are the underlying causes for the increase in crime rate. The two world wars were considered to be the biggest massacres that mankind has ever witnessed. More than half the people killed were soldiers. But in todays wars, more civilians lose their lives than ever before. People live in constant fear of terrorist attack, biological warfare, high jacking, nuclear threat, etc. Children brought up in this insecure environment are conditioned to be suspicious of everyone they come into contact with. Television is a popular entertainment. But they also bombard our homes with stories of violence either in the form of news exclusives or horror movies. Aggressive cartoon characters and macho heroes from films also confuse children. Children are cautioned against drug peddlers and other anti-social elements. Again, the biggest boon in our generation is internet. But the fact that cyber crimes is steadily increasing is a proof that it has a downside to it as well. Alarmingly, most of the hackers on the Internet are young children. To sum up, violence has assumed global proportions. The need of the hour is not to lie back and to be confined to our rooms, but to be proactive. We have to spend more time with our children and provide guidelines, since examples are better than precepts. We adults have to be good role models. Todays children are the hope of tomorrow and the builders of future generations.

31

Should dangerous sports be banned? (For) Millions of people play sports every day, and invariably, some sustain injury or pain. Most players and spectators accept this risk. However, some people would like to see dangerous games such as boxing and bull fighting banned. Some sports are nothing but an excuse for violence. Boxing is a paramount example. The last thing, an increasingly violent world needs, is more violence on our television. The sight of two men, or even women, bleeding, with faces ripped open, trying to obliterate each other is barbaric. Other sports such as American football or rugby, also barely conceal violence. It is argued that the players can choose to participate. However, this is not always the case. Many boxers, for example, come from disadvantaged backgrounds. They are lured by the prize money or by the social or peer pressure and then unable to escape. Even in richer social groups, schools force reluctant students to play aggressive team sports, claiming that playing escalates the students character, but in fact, increasing the risk of injury. Even where people can choose, they sometimes need to be protected against themselves. Most people approve of governments efforts to reduce smoking. In the same way, governments need to act if there are unacceptably high levels of injuries in football, diving, mountaineering, motor racing and bull fighting. It can not be denied that all sports involve challenge and risk. However, violence and aggression should not be permitted in the name of sports. Governments and individuals must act to limit brutality and violence, so that both children and adults can enjoy and benefit from sport.

32

Against

It is startling that many sports are becoming increasingly regulated. Sports bodies and medical organizations are targeting boxing, rugby and other games in an effort to improve safety standards and to reduce injuries. However, for some people this is not enough, and they would rather see that dangerous sports banned completely. Sports, competitions and games seem to be natural to humans. Young children not only learn their own limits and strengths through play with others, but they also learn valuable social lessons about what is acceptable behaviour and rights of others. Sports, therefore, are not just a physical phenomenon, but a mental and social trainer. There is, also, the concern of freedom. Without a wide range of sports, many people would feel trapped or limited. We live in a democratic world and people should be free to participate in activities with others as long as they do not affect the safety of the non-participants. There should, indeed, be some limits to the power of governments to ban sports. If one sport is banned because of alleged danger, there will be enough reasons to ban almost all the sports. Even football can be banned because sometimes it turns lethal. Furthermore, many sports would go underground, leading to increased injury and illegal gambling. Nobody denies that regulations are needed. Medical boards have introduced safety rules in boxing and in soccer and the players have welcomed such safety regulations. But the role of government should, verily, be reduced. In conclusion, our society would be healthier if more people took part in sports of all kinds. We should continue to try to prevent accidents and injuries. However, we should also ensure that all sports are existing, and, above all, fun too.

33

People in all modern societies use drugs, but today's youth are experimenting with both legal and illegal drugs, and at an increasingly early age. Some sociologists claim that parents and other members of society often set a bad example. Discuss the causes and some effects of widespread drug use by young people in modern day society. Make any recommendations you feel are necessary to help fight youth drug abuse.

You should write at least 250 words. You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Drug abuse among youth. Threatens society Causes Effects on society Solutions Causes 1. Availability drugs are beneficial generally. Harmful if taken for intoxication. 2. Unemployment 3. Friendship started for pleasure or social formalities 4. Parental negligence 5. Parental influence parents drink 6. Media Heroes drink eg. Devdas the hero is drinking like a fish 7. Advertisement Bagpiper club soda everyone knows it is a whisky 8. Antisocial elements They want to make hush money( easily got money ). One bottle costs 5/-Rs but sell it for 200-300 9. Teachers negligence 10.Legal negligence 11.Broken homes 12.Failure of love affairs 13.Stress of examinations Suggestions 1. Strict laws and regulations 2. Parents must be role models. Instill positive values in children 3. Strict vigilance and scanning about friends. Censor the friends

34

Trade and travel would be a lot easier with a single, global currency that we all use. Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Would a single currency cause any problems? You should write at least 250 words. It is clear to me that the idea of a single global currency is an excellent ideal to work towards. There can be no doubt that trade and travel would be vastly easier. On the other hand I believe that it would cause problems today. The benefits of a single currency can be seen with the use in Europe of the Euro. Whenever you are travelling between countries using the Euro, the problems of currency changing and exchange rates are history. Similarly business between countries using the Euros is so much easier; no more worrying about exchange rate risk and pricing. Everyones money is the same. The same thing is true with the US dollar. Most countries do not use the US dollar but it is accepted in many places. There are many countries that you can travel to and just take US dollars to use. At present though a global currency would be impossible. Firstly most countries would not accept the idea. Secondly all countries are in different economic states. Some are economically very strong and some are in a state of collapse with inflation ruining the economy. Such countries could not be brought into a world currency as it would cause massive financial instability worldwide. So it is clear that a global currency would indeed cause some serious problems. So, in conclusion I see a global currency as a future ideal but it will not happen in my lifetime. It would make trade and travel much easier but the problems it would cause nowadays would be insurmountable.

35

Everyday traffic seems to get worse on our roads. How can we reduce the number of cars on our roads today? What alternatives can we offer car drivers? You should write at least 250 words. The more people that there are in the world, the more cars there are on the road. People are richer too and often families have more than one car. It has been proved that building more roads does not work; it just encourages more traffic. So, what can we do? People like their cars and the freedom and independence that cars give them. One possibility would be to raise car taxes and fuel taxes so that people do not want to spend the extra money. Taxes on new car sales as well could be increased in order to discourage people from buying. Perhaps a used car sales tax could be introduced too. In the same way motorways could have tolls charged for using them although this may just increase congestion on smaller roads as people try and avoid the motorways. The government that introduces such ideas will not be popular though and would probably lose power. Governments would therefore be unlikely to set up such new measures. I think it would be better to try and change peoples attitudes and offer them alternatives. Educate them more about the pollution and waste that they are causing. Persuade them to car share, use public transport or even cycle if the distances are not too long. Countries such as Holland and Denmark are well known for how their citizens are passionate about green issues and how they use bicycles when they can. Reducing traffic is a difficult task. I dont think it is possible realistically to reduce car numbers but I do think that we can change peoples attitudes and get them to use different ways of travelling.

36

A lot of people believe that the amount of violence shown on TV and in the cinema affects the actions of our young people and therefore increases the amount of violence in our society today. Do you agree or disagree with this statement? What can be done to reduce violence in our society today? The question of whether the amount of violence on TV and cinema has affected young people in our society is something which cannot be quantified or proved. My opinion is though that the answer is yes, it has. TV and cinema today do show a large amount of violence and, although we try and shield our young people from seeing too much, they still get to watch it. At the age of eighteen in my country they can see everything anyway. Violence on the streets has increased. That has been proved. The connection between TVs and the cinemas obsession with violence and todays street violence cannot be proved but it is logical that the two are connected. Young people imitate what they see and it is logical that they see glamour in what they do when they commit violence. How can we lessen violence? Reducing the amount of violence on TV and in the cinema would certainly be a good start. Being more vigilant about what age children are when they see violence in these media, and raising the age limits would also help. Another good idea would be to channel the violence of young people. I dont think that national service should be re-established in this country but, if people are convicted of violence and sent to prison, then why not give them the option of serving in the army. Their violence will be controlled and they will be subjected to discipline so that they will be better able to control themselves when they leave. Thus I agree with the statement that cinema and TV violence affects the young people in our society. There are some things that can be done to better the situation but I doubt whether anything will be done.

37

Children's lives these days are quite different from our generation's. Describe what the biggest changes are in younger generation and explain some factors of this phenomenon. Over the past few decades, the world has significantly changed. Nowadays, many have begun to wonder what the reasons behind [=for] these changes are. Two major factors contributing to this phenomenon are advances in media and changing family dynamics [=organization]. First, advances in media, such as the Internet and TV, have meant that children spend a large portion of their leisure time in front of a screen. Consequently, they are not getting proper amounts of exercise, which results in an increase in the number of children who are overweight and obese. In addition, fast food restaurants have become increasingly popular, which has also contributed to children's health problems Moreover, another leading force of this trend is changes in the family unit. Compared with a half century ago, nuclear families have become way more common in modern society. People tend to have only one child, which has caused personality disorders such as depression, loneliness, and selfishness. This is mainly because parents with one child have tendency to put all their focus and money into their only son or daughter. Studies have indicated that over 65% of children who are brought up without siblings show self-centered behavior find it difficult cooperating with their peers. In summary, there are many factors that have caused children to live very differently from the generation before them. There are high hopes that parents exercise(s) wisdom in treating their children.

38

Some people prefer to eat at food stands or restaurants. Other people prefer to prepare and eat food at home. Which do you prefer? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. Man, through the ages, has undergone many changes from the time when he had to haunt for food to these days when he has to buy it. Some people prefer to buy fresh vegetables, meat and fruits and prepare food at home. However, other people prefer to skip that step with cooking and have dinner at a restaurant. I think that both of these choices have some advantages and disadvantages. Below I will give some reasons to support my answer. Personally, I do not like fast food. So, my choice is always between a restaurant and my home. First of all, I would like to say that cooking is a great tradition. It helps people to relax, reflect on some pleasant moments while peeling or cutting the vegetables. It is a means of eliminating one's stress and tension. Second of all, sometimes I do not want to have something too complicated for my dinner. I just want to have light food like a salad and a glass of milk. So, one of the reasons why I like to eat at home is because I can have what I want at this moment. One greater thing about eating at home is that I can sit in front of the TV and watch an interesting programme or a movie. Finally, having dinner at home allows a family communicates with each other, be closer and share some good and bad moments that happened earlier that day. Besides, eating at home is a great way to save some money. As for restaurants, I see some positive aspects about eating there too. First of all, I sometimes get tired from peeling, cutting, washing, frying, etc. It does not mean I do it a lot. Sometimes I just use the microwave and a preprocessed food that I bought earlier. I want to have something more delicious than I have in my refrigerator, something that is time-consuming to prepare at home. So, for me it is a good reason to go to a restaurant. There one may meet old friends or just has a great time listening to music and tasting some delicious meats. Also, restaurants are a good place to celebrate something. One does not have to prepare food for all friends who are coming, wash dish, put in order all that mess after the party, etc. In conclusion, I think that it does not important where one has one's dinner. What important is that it must be full and nutritious.

39

Some people think that children should begin their formal education at a very early age and should spend most of their time on school studies. Others believe that young children should spend most of their time playing. Compare these two views. Which view do you agree with? Why? People learn through out their entire lives. Curiosity was always the basic characteristic of a human being. We always want to break limits and learn more. At this point some people think that children should begin their formal education at a very early age and spend most of their time on school studies. This will help them to succeed in the future. However, for several reasons, which I will explain below, I think that children should not study at a very early age. Of course, children who begin to study at a very early age have more chances to succeed in the future. They gain more knowledge and experience which are priceless and valuable. In addition, studying more now they will give them the opportunity to perfect their knowledge in the future and become better professionals. However, I think that every child must have his or her childhood. Children should learn through playing and communication with their friends and parents. I think that such basic qualities as kindness, self-confidence and just a good sense of humour can not be gained from studying. Children should spend more time with their family, playing and learning with their parents. Imagine that a child instead of playing with his friends does his homework and feel exhausted and tired. Another important aspect of this is that children at their early ages need more exercise because at this age the development of their body is a very essential aspect. Children first of all must be healthy. To sum up, I think that children should have their careless childhood with no responsibilities. Moreover, I am sure that playing helps them develop not only their bones and muscles but their ability to make decisions, analyze things, make conclusions, which is very good for their future.

40

A company has announced that it wishes to build a large factory near your community. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of this new influence on your community. Do you support or oppose the factory? Explain your position. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. New factories often bring many good things to a community, such as jobs and increased prosperity. However, in my opinion, the benefits of having a factory are outweighed by the risks. That is why I oppose the plan to build a factory near my community. I believe that this city would be harmed by a large factory. In particular, a factory would destroy the quality of the air and water in town. Factories bring smog and pollution. In the long run, the environment will be hurt and peoples health will be affected. Having a factory is not worth that rise. Of course, more jobs will be created by the factory. Our population will grow. To accommodate more workers, more homes and stores will be needed. Do we really want this much growth, so fast? If our town is going in growth, I would prefer slow growth with good planning. I dont want to see rows of cheaply constructed townhouses. Our quality of life must be considered. I believe that this growth will change our city too much. I love my hometown because it is a safe, small town. It is also easy to travel here. If we must expand to hold new citizens, the small-town feel will be gone. I mould miss that greatly. A factory would be helpful in some ways. However, I feel that the dangers are greater than the benefits. I cannot support a plan to build a factory here, and hope that others feel the same way.

41 Owning a mobile phone is a waste of money. Young people spend far too much money on them. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? First, the advantages. keep in touch - friends - family text messages - cheaper emergencies

On the other hand, many contracts - networks - how to choose? new technology - fashionable friends have latest model

It is true that mobile phones can be expensive, but in modern life they have become a necessity. In this essay, I will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of owning a mobile phone. There are at least three advantages to owning a mobile phone. Firstly, if you have a mobile phone, you can keep in touch with your friends and family easily wherever you are. This even includes if you are travelling, that it is possible to keep in touch all the time. Secondly, keeping in touch with a mobile phone does not have to be expensive because you can contact people with text messages. Text messages are much cheaper than phone calls. Finally, mobile phones are very good if you find yourself in a bad situation. For example, you may be lost somewhere or in the countryside away from a land line phone. In cases of an emergency, mobile phones are extremely valuable and useful. Now to turn to the disadvantages. Firstly, it is difficult to know what the cheapest way of owning a mobile phone is. This is because there are a lot of networks to choose from, and all have a wide choice of payment options. Secondly, while some people use their phones for communicating with friends and family and for other practical purposes, other people simply have them as a fashion statement, because their friends have the same model, or because they simply want to show off how much money they have. In this case, I think the money could be better spent and I agree that owning a mobile phone is an expensive waste of time. On the whole, I would agree that there is pressure for young people to spend a lot on the latest mobile phone. However, I believe that the advantages of owning one outweigh the disadvantages.

42 In the near future more people will be living in urban areas than in rural areas. However city life brings more problems than benefits for its residents. To what extent do you agree with this statement? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
First, the advantages employment and educational opportunities amenities and facilities On the other hand pollution stress

Living in the city is becoming a reality for the majority of the population on our planet. People are moving away from the fields and moving towards the skyscrapers. What effect does city life have on the quality of life of its residents? In this essay I will discuss the advantages and the disadvantages of living in a city. In my view, one of the main benefits of living in a city is that residents have access to more opportunities in the fields of work and study. After all, the majority of companies, factories, plants and educational establishments are based in urban centres. This means that residents can enjoy both a higher standard of living and quality of life. For example, they can afford to take advantage of the amenities and facilities on offer such as sports centres, exhibition halls and theatres. However there is increasing recognition that cities can be bad for our physical and mental health. The faster pace of city life creates competition and higher expectations among people which can cause stress and conflict. Furthermore, increasing car ownership in cities creates a dirty, polluted atmosphere which is directly responsible for breathing problems such as bronchitis and asthma. To summarise, I think city life provides some major benefits for residents greater choice and convenience in their work, study and leisure time. However, this has both advantages and drawbacks. It enables people to improve both their standards of living and quality of life. However, not everyone can cope with the strains associated with a faster pace of life. In my opinion, this is a negative effect. On the whole, I think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages but we should try to plan, design and develop our cities with the health and happiness of people in mind.

43 More and more women in developed countries are choosing to have a career rather than a family. This will have negative consequences for society in the future. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge and experience.

In many developed countries nowadays, we can see governments worried about the falling birth rate and trying to make policies to reverse this trend. One of the reasons for the declining birth rate in developing countries could be the rise of the career woman women who prefer to concentrate on their careers rather than on raising a family. In this essay I will outline the positive points of this then go on to look at the negative consequences and finally give my own opinion of the topic. First of all, in traditional societies, women have been responsible for looking after the family and therefore not taking part in the commercial world. However, this stops half of society contributing to a countrys economic development and is not good for the country or for women who may not be using their talents to their full extent. Secondly, in todays global economy, commerce needs the skills that women are better at than men, like maintaining relationships and networking. So women staying in careers rather than just looking after a family has many positive consequences. On the other hand, there are negative effects of this too. As mentioned previously, some women concentrate on their careers instead of having a family and this leads to a declining population in many developed countries. Secondly, women that do have a family and try to keep their career at the same time are pulled in two directions, with not enough time for their family and too much to do at work which leads to anxiety and stress. To summarise, when women choose to have a career rather than a family this can have both positive and negative effects on a modern society. However, for individual women, this often means that they have too many things to do and this results in personal stress. On the whole, I agree with the statement in terms of the negative effects this has on individuals, but not in terms of society.

44

Corporal Punishment

Many parents use physical punishment to discipline their children. Others prefer to use different methods to reward good behaviour or punish misbehaviour. This essay will look at some of the arguments for and against physical punishment of children.

It is often claimed that physical punishment will damage children in later life. Opponents of corporal punishment claim that the children will grow up to become delinquents or even beat their wives. However, many happily married adults today were slapped when they were younger but have never hit their spouses. Another point often made is that physical punishment teaches children that you can use force to make others do what you want. In fact children brought up well soon learn that force by itself is nothing - it must be associated with right. Finally, some people say that punishing a child by smacking him will damage the relationship between the child and the parents. This is clearly wrong. Children who understand the reasons for rules will be happier than children who are not given clear guidelines.

There are definitely concerns about physical punishment. Some parents lose control and can injure children - even breaking bones or causing bruises. Others can use violence excessively or as the only method of discipline. In this case, the child will be hurt, fearful and anxious and will not learn to distinguish right from wrong. The biggest problem with physical violence is when it is not appropriate to the age of the child. It can be very effective to quickly smack a two-year-old who is screaming. However, it is not effective to beat a 16-yearold who is late for school once again.

In conclusion, physical punishment can be a useful method of discipline. However it should be the last choice for parents. If we want to build a world with less violence we must begin at home, and we must teach our children to be responsible.

45

Mobile phones should not be used while driving. Give your opinion about whether or nor using mobiles while driving should be made illegal, and give arguments for and against the statement.

Mobile phones are used all over the world. Some people think that it is dangerous to use mobiles when you are driving and it should be illegal. I think that there are points in favour of the statement and some points against.

One point in favour of the statement is that drivers cannot keep their mind on the road if they are talking on the phone. Research shows that many accidents happen when people are driving and chatting on their mobiles. Another point is the driver may receive bad news, and drive in a dangerous way. A further point is the driver might not pay attention to where he wants to go because his attention has been diverted by a conversation, and cause an accident by suddenly changing direction.

There are also arguments against the statement. An important point is that if there is a problem in a remote area then you can ring for help. For instance, if you see an accident you can ring the police and give them the location. A further issue is that you may need to make a call if you are a businessman. Also, you can tell someone if you will be late for a meeting. Another point is you can keep in contact with your family and help with any problems.

In conclusion, although there are arguments in favour of the statement there are more arguments against. In my opinion people should use mobiles only in an emergency, and not for chatting to friends.

46

Censorship: Is it Necessary?

In many countries around the world, government censors restrict access to certain kinds of material for their citizens. Movies with sexual content, textbooks with political ideas, violent video games - all sorts of material can be blocked. Some people agree strongly with the need for censorship. They argue that it protects society. Others disagree, believing that they should be free to decide what they read, see or talk about. This essay will examine the arguments for and against censorship. There are many arguments against censorship. Some people feel that they should be free to decide what they watch or read. Others feel that censorship is pointless today. Nowadays people can travel to other countries and discuss ideas or read materials unavailable in their own country. It is also impossible to block material on satellite or on the internet. One of the biggest objections to government censorship is that much material is blocked for no apparent reason. Censorship can be supported on many grounds. People in favor of censorship believe strongly that the society needs to be protected against violent and pornographic material. There is often very strong support in a society for limits on certain kinds of materials for religious or cultural reasons. Another point in favor of censorship is that many people are not educated enough to really understand complex political ideas. Allowing people to discuss political ideas without enough background knowledge could destabilize a society. In conclusion, people are strongly divided on the issue of censorship. While some people have very valid reasons for objecting to censorship, others believe firmly that they alone have the right to decide what they read or see. There is no doubt in my mind that censorship is totally unnecessary and pointless. People should be free to make up their own minds, and to exercise their choice as adults.

47

Censorship is necessary in the modern society. Discuss

Censorship is an issue which frequently generates a great deal of heated debate. Supporters maintain that it is vital to protect society. Opponents claim that it is unjustifiable restriction to public access to information Firstly, all countries have secrets which must be safeguarded for reasons of national security. For instance, if an enemy country were to acquire such highly sensitive information, the effects could be catastrophic. Consequently, governments have to have the power to restrict access to information concerning aspects such as armed forces or particular aspects of foreign policy. Secondly it is often argued that censorship is necessary to prevent the broadcast and publication of obscene material which is considered offensive or harmful to public morals. Many people feel that without censorship the public would be constantly subjected to material that the majority would find offensive. For this reason, the government has a duty to impose certain restrictions on the mass media by censoring films and texts which contains explicit scenes of sex, violence and foul language. In contrast, opponents of censorship point out that when it is abused by governments, censorship becomes an instrument used to misinform society and maintain power. In order to control the flow of information which reaches the public, repressive regimes try to put constraints on the media, thus denying citizens the right to information owing to the fact that governments believe it may lead them to seek greater freedom. Furthermore, it is generally felt that mature adults are able to make informed choices about what they watch, read and listen to and should, therefore, be permitted to make their own decisions, for example, some comedians make use of offensive language and taboo subjects in their performances. Critics of censorship argue that the only people who will watch and listen to such material are adults who have made a conscious decision to do so. Thus, it is claimed, it is unjust to censor material like this since it is not forced upon people who may subsequently be offended by it. All things considered, it can be concluded that a certain degree of censorship is always necessary. The best course of action would be to attempt to achieve a balance between the requirements of the country and the public on the one hand, and individuals rights on the other.

48

People point to the number of presidents and to the rulers who come to power at an advanced age, or artists and famous people who achieve success late in life as one of the arguments against age discrimination in the work place. What are the dangers of such discrimination? Do you feel age discrimination should be banned or do you feel that there are certain jobs that should be open to younger people Age discrimination in workplace has been prevalent in both the developing as well as the developed world in some form or the other. People are often judged by how old they are and not how much they know or how efficient they are. This discrimination is visible during the process of hiring, promotions and retirement. Although certain jobs could be well suited for younger people, it is my contention that judging efficiency based on the age factor alone is irrational and counterproductive. It is common belief that as people grow older they tend to be less productive as the aging process has a telling effect on their capacity to perform. However, my observation is that people who do regular exercise, eat right are less prone to such ailments than people who dont, regardless of age. Older people are more experienced and knowledgeable, and compared to their younger counterpart, should take less time in making critical decisions which can impact production itself. Its true that poets, artists, scientist and even politicians tend to produce their best in later part of their life establishing the fact wisdom comes with age. Another argument for age discrimination is that older people resist changes that could potentially enhance the efficiency and productivity of the company. However, recent studies in business process reengineering have found this phenomenon has more to do with the fear of loss of power and control and can impact workers of any age. Besides, older people are supposed to be at the top tier of the company making exactly the decisions that call for bringing in changes in the ways companies do business. In conclusion, companies should treat older people with vast experience as more of an asset than a liability. Companies should abandon age discrimination and hire people purely on merit such as educational qualifications, recent work experience and achievements.

49

People in the modern world depend too much on computers. Discuss In todays world nearly every aspect of life is touched by computer technology. Computers are used for business, public services, education and entertainment. Some people are concerned by this development. They fear that vital skills are being lost as computer technology replaces various ways of working in a wide variety of areas from arts and design to banking and commerce. They point out that chaos can occur when computer systems fail. This can lead to breakdown of essential services such as transport, law and order. Another negative effect of computers is that they isolate us from the world just outside our front door. We may speak to our friends and family less because we are busy playing computer games indoors. Computers also encourage us to lead a sedentary lifestyle which is hazardous for our health. Last but not the least computer games can be addictive for children and they may spend less time on studies. However, people could not enjoy their present standards of living without computer technology. There are now a far more number of people in the world today than there were a generation ago. The fact that there is enough food for them, they can travel safely from one place to the other and they can be provided with medical care is largely due to computer technology. It is only because of computer technology that the world is now a global village. The internet has revolutionised our means of communication. We can share information and interests far easily than in the past. In my opinion, therefore we have to accept our dependence on computers, but at the same time we should find ways to make this dependence less dangerous. By becoming pro-active we can make our dependence on computers less dangerous.

50

Security Cameras and Privacy Security cameras have become ubiquitous in many countries. Whereas before they appeared only in banks and at high-security areas, they are now entering public places such as malls, streets, stadiums and transport. Many people feel this affects their privacy. This essay will examine whether the advantages of these cameras outweigh their negative impact.

Surveillance cameras have several benefits. An obvious benefit is that the police can catch criminals in the act, thus reducing crime. This will make the streets safer for ordinary people. A more important point is that criminals, particularly young offenders or petty criminals will be deterred. They will not be tempted to carry out crimes, and thus society will be a lot safer. Cameras are also cost-effective and unobtrusive. Authorities do not need to spend large amounts of money on police.

However, security cameras are far from being a perfect solution. The biggest objection concerns privacy. Many people feel that they should be free to travel or move around a shop, mall, street or country without being photographed or recorded. They feel that being watched constantly is like being in a jail, and that ordinary people are losing their freedom because of these devices. Another point is that although the police say that only criminals have something to fear from the cameras, many people do not trust governmenth too much information. Corrupt authorities could use information in the wrong way or twist it to victimize some groups. Thirdly, cameras and computers can make mistakes.

In conclusion, although there are definite advantages to using surveillance devices such as cameras, we need to balance the need for security with respect for the individual's privacy and freedom.

51

Telecommuting: will it change the world? Telecommuting will have major effects in the worlds of work and family life. However, its biggest effect will be in the area of individual freedom, responsibility, and time management.

Work and workplaces will alter dramatically. Offices may become smaller, as fewer desks are needed. There will be greater need for high-bandwidth connections to link the office and the home, and even homes to other homes, as other employees and supervisors also begin working at home. Hours spent commuting, traffic jams, and fights for parking should diminish, as workers make fewer journeys or work staggered hours. Family life will also change. Workers, both husbands and wives, can arrange their work around family commitments such as taking children to school, cooking, leisure activities, etc. However, households will also have to set aside areas for work - particularly if both spouses are telecommuting.

However, although the ideas of more time at home and less time travelling are attractive, there are some drawbacks to telecommuting. People may feel unable to escape their work, and may even work longer or more unsocial hours. The quality of work may suffer because of the reduced face-to-face interaction with other employees. There may be delays if other workers are not immediately available. Telecommuters may feel isolated or unmotivated, or insecure about decisions. A major change will be in the way people think about work as a place or an institution. Instead, they will focus on the task or product. Workers may feel less loyal to a company and more inclined to change jobs or work part-time or on contract.

In conclusion, the effects are difficult to predict because they depend on the extent to which telecommuting becomes popular. However, telecommuting could be the start of a major societal shift, possibly as big as the Industrial Revolution which created our present ideas of work.

52

Who learns faster - children or adults? Small children seem to learn very quickly, while adults sometimes appear to lose the ability to pick up new subject such as languages, music, games, or computer programs. In this essay, I will discuss whether children or adults make the best learners. It is undoubtedly true that children seem to learn very quickly. In just a few years, they can learn how to play a musical instrument, speak one or even two new languages, and deal with many subjects at school. They even have time for sports and hobbies, and become experts in their favorite pastimes. However, how much of this is social pressure and how much is genetic? I am convinced that while children's brains have a natural ability to absorb new information as part of their developmental growth, much of their achievement is because of social pressure. Schools force them to take many subjects. Parents force them to practice new sports or to learn music. Even their playmates force them to become better at computer games or to read Harry Potter novels faster. In summary, children may enjoy learning, but their environment also is a big motivating factor. Adults on the other hand are supposed to be poor learners. However, I disagree with people who say that adults cannot learn quickly. Adults have many skills that compensate for the decline in the ability of the brain to grasp and remember new material. They can organize their learning by setting times for reading or practice. They can build on skills and experiences they know already. Adults usually cannot learn to do ballet or to play the violin, but even despite these physical challenges, their motivation can often be higher than a child's. Unfortunately, society does not encourage many adults to learn. People are busy with families and work, and some adults may feel that further learning is pointless, since they have already achieved many goals at work or in their personal life. In conclusion, I feel that we cannot generalize about children or adults being better learners. It depends on the situation and the motivation of the person, and the level of enthusiasm he or she has for learning.

53 The most important ingredient of learning English is Grammar. Playing games, discussing problems, and having a good time is important. However, if we don't focus on grammar it is all a waste of time. For the Importance of Focusing on Grammar Without grammar, language doesn't exist. How can I feel confident about using grammar if I don't understand the rules? A solid knowledge of all the rules is necessary to speak a language well. The best way to learn a language is practice, practice, practice the correct usage. Good English means correct English. Games do not promote learning, they promote having fun and nothing else. Making mistakes reflect poor learning. If we don't learn the rules we will not be able to improve our English when we are not attending English classes. Communication Means More than Understanding Rules Communication is possible even when we make mistakes Understanding rules in my head doesn't mean that I can communicate. There are many different styles of learning, some of which do not include "grammar banging". The only thing that is important is that people can understand me and I can understand them. Many native speakers make mistakes in grammar usage. Doing grammar exercises all the time is boring and therefore leads to lack of attention. Playing games is a great way to actually use the language - not just study it. It is difficult to become fluent if the teacher interrupts me every 30 seconds to correct a grammar mistake. Grammar is boring!

54 Retirement Age

When should people be made to retire? 55? 65? Should there be a compulsory age limit? Many old people work well into their 70s and 80s, running families, countries or corporations. Other people, however, despite being fit and highly talented, are forced to retire in their or even earlier because of company or national regulations. This essay will examine whether people should be allowed to continue working for as long as they want or whether they should be encouraged to retire at a particular stage. There are several arguments for allowing older people to continue working as long as they are able. First of all, older employees have an immense amount of knowledge and experience which can be lost to a business or organization if they are made to retire. A second point is that older employees are often extremely loyal employees and are more willing to implement company policies than younger less committed staff. However, a more important point is regarding the attitudes in society to old people. To force someone to resign or retire at 60 or 65 indicates that the society does not value the input of these people and that effectively their useful life is over. Allowing older people to work indefinitely however is not always a good policy. Age alone is no guarantee of ability. Many younger employees have more experience or skills than older staff, who may have been stuck in one area or unit for most of their working lives. Having compulsory retirement allows new ideas in an organization. In addition, without age limits, however arbitrary, many people would continue to work purely because they did not have any other plans or roles. A third point of view is that older people should be rewarded by society for their lifes labour by being given generous pensions and the freedom to enjoy their leisure. With many young people unemployed or frustrated in low-level positions, there are often calls to compulsorily retire older workers. However, this can affect the older individuals freedom - and right - to work and can deprive society of valuable experience and insights. I feel that giving workers more flexibility and choice over their retirement age will benefit society and the individual.

55 Multinationals - Help or Hindrance? For Multinationals Offers employment to local workers Promotes peace internationally Creates sense of community crossing international borders Allows entire world to improve standard of living Gives access to quality products regardless of location Promotes economic stability Raises standard of living for regions involved in production Gives local economies new economic opportunities Fact of life which needs to be accepted Reflects global economy Against Multinationals Ruins local economies Depletes local work forces by drawing to metro centres Stifles cultural growth and expansion on local level Provides little help with problems which are local in nature Creates cultural homogenization Too big, little interest in the individual Gives political power to outside interests Creates economic unstability by being subject to the whims of the global economy Replaces traditional values with materialistic values Makes local economies subject to mass layoffs

56

Argue for or against keeping pet dogs in large cities FOR

Many people believe that dogs should not be kept in large cities. I disagree with them. They say that pet dogs should be banned because they are dangerous to man since they carry diseases like rabies and that they attack people especially young children. In addition they are of the opinion that dogs are expensive to keep. For instance they eat large quantities of food that could go to feed the poor and starving of the world. What is more many people spend large amounts of money on their dogs, even buying them beds and toys, taking them to doctors when they are sick, burying them in pet cemeteries when they die. Some owners even leave them their money when they die. However I disagree with these arguments. Many animals carry disease not just dogs. In fact people carry more dangerous diseases than dogs, including rabies. What is more very few people are attacked by dogs and if they are it is because they have attacked or frightened the dog. As for expense what people do with their money is their own business. Finally there will always be poor in the world. Let us now look at why dogs are good animals. First they are used by the police to catch criminals and to smell out drugs and explosives. What is more they are able to save peoples lives after an earthquake when they are buried in their houses. In addition dogs are used for security and to protect property as well as women and children from robbers. Finally dogs are used to guide the blind in the streets and to be a friend to old and lonely people. For all these reasons I believe that pet dogs should not be banned form cities.

AGAINST
Many people are of the opinion that dogs are great animals and that pet dogs should be kept in cities. I disagree. They say that dogs are good animals that help the police catch criminals and find drugs and explosives. In addition dogs protect property and guide the blind in the street. Finally they say that dogs save lives after an earthquake by finding people buried under fallen buildings. All this is true, but it doesnt mean that everyone should have the right to a pet dog in the city. I agree that the police, the blind, the fire department and security services as well as people who want to protect their homes and loved ones should have dogs, but this is a small amount of people and a small amount of dogs. What I am against are all the people who want them just for pets. To begin with dogs are dirty. They foul the streets with their dirt and people step in it and carry it about with them. Secondly many dogs are dumped by owners when they get tired of them, as a result they become street dogs and can frighten or even attack people, especially children. What is more it is not right that so much money is spent on these animals when people in the world are hungry. The British for example spend more on their dogs than they do on themselves! For these reasons I believe that dogs should be banned from large cities!

(Words

247)

57

As computers are being used more and more in education, there will be soon no role for teachers in the classroom. There have been immense advances in technology in most aspects of peoples lives, especially in the field of education. Nowadays, an increasing number of students rely on computers for research and to produce a perfect paper for school purposes. Others have decided to leave the original way of learning and to get knowledge through online schools. These changes in the learning process have brought a special concern regarding the possible decrease of importance of teachers in the classroom. Some people believe the role of teachers started to fade because computers have been helping some students to progress in their studies quicker than when compared with an original classroom. For example, in the same classroom, students have different intellectual capacities, thus some would be tied to a slow advance in their studies because of others incapacity of understanding. In this way, pupils could progress in their acquisition of knowledge at their own pace using computers instead of learning from teachers. However, the presence of a teacher is essential for students because the human contact influences them in positive ways. Firstly, students realize that they are not dealing with a machine but with a human being who deserves attention and respect. They also learn the importance of studying in group and respect other students, which helps them to improve their social skills. Moreover, teachers are required in the learning process because they acknowledge some students deficiencies and help them to solve their problems by repeating the same explanation, giving extra exercises or even suggesting a private tutor. Hence, students can have a bigger chance not to fail in a subject. In conclusion, the role for teachers in the learning process is still very important and it will continue to be in the future because no machine can replace the human interaction and its consequences.

58

Studying overseas is better than studying locally. Do you agree? Make no mistake, every student dreams of studying overseas. However, this dream may not always be the best choice. Studying locally has also been proven to provide students with an equal amount of benefits and experiences. First of all, students studying locally need not learn how to speak the local language. They would have already known it. This extinguishes any communication problems between the students and their surroundings. Students can mix and blend with their fellow schoolmates and teachers with ease. Also, the students would be closer to home, being able to see and communicate with their loved ones, in person mind you. Moving on, studying locally is not as expensive as compared to studying overseas. Students would not need to rent rooms as they can stay in the very house they have been living in. Winter clothing, which is also costs a lot of money, is also not needed (for those studying in equatorial countries such as Malaysia). Local calls are also far more cheaper than international calls. With all this said, is studying overseas still the dream of millions of students worldwide? The answer would be, yes. "It will change your life. Youll come back a new person. For years, the benefits of study abroad have been described in these words. Studying abroad positively and unequivocally influences the career path, world-view, and self-confidence of students. One of the most common reasons students study abroad is language immersion. Students wanting to learn a language will go to school in a country where that language is spoken, the theory being that immersion into an environment where a particular language is spoken is the best way to learn the language. Another popular reason to study abroad is the desire of many to gain an understanding of the world around them.
In conclusion, the choice of studying locally or overseas is clearly up to the student. If one would like to stay near home and stay in their comfort zone, studying locally would be their best choice. However for those who would wish to explore the world, meet new people and learn new cultures and languages, studying overseas is definitely the choice for them.

59

Censorship of the media has no benefits at all. What do you think? Censorship. What is it exactly? It is the practise of officially examining books, movies and other forms of mass media and suppressing unacceptable parts. However, the real question is, Is it beneficial? Censorship is a controversial issue in our current society - it has both benefits and faults. I shall begin with the benefits. Firstly, censorship helps to keep the public away from any misleading information. One example would be the action of censoring footage of terrorism and brutal man slaughter to prompt the public not to panic. Individuals may be provoked into violence and destructive protesting. The facts of a news may be distorted without the use of censorship. Secondly, with censorship, the audience is protected from excessive violence, porn and horror. Censorship helps protect the audiences who are unable to differentiate fact from fiction, thus minimising the chances of a individual trying to re-enact the incident seen from the mass media. Also, media violence may urge potential abusers to harm women and children. Students, as well, are prevented from exposure to inappropriate materials such as pornography. Now, moving onto the faults of censorship. As you all know, censorship is a tool of national propaganda. Censorship may be manipulated, thus misleading the audience in their behaviour, speech and thoughts. This would affect the publics opinion and prompt unnecessary conflicts. Finally, it might incur anger and suspicion among races, leading to political unrest in the nation.
Censorship without professionalism and sensitivity could possibly affect the quality and aesthetic value of a production. Films, documentary programmes, autobiography, literature materials and other mass media that contain sensuous and intellectual elements are censored at different scales by different national censorship boards. This unprofessional censorship would disappoint movie directors, the cast and the audience. In conclusion, mass media functions to explain and describe to the human race what others do, feel and think. Globalisation have given to us access to all types of information, ranging from the internet to books. The mass media should be given the freedom of press with regards to humanity. In short, reasonable censorship in media is preferred.

60

The student who study from the school to university get benefit less and contribute less too, than those of student who go to travel or job and get skills and experience before going high. Do you agree or disagree? ( Band 7 essay from ielts blog) Nowadays, in our competitive world, to succeed, knowledge from school and university is not enough. Therefore, the students who study from school to university get less benefit and contribute less too, than those who go to travel or job and get experience and skills. There are following two reasons to prove my opinion. I call the group of people who study from school to university is group A and the other group is group B. Firstly, at school and university, what group A gains is almost theory, theory and theory. Of course, theory is very necessary, however, you cant do everything with theory. You must have practical experience. This is what group A lack very much. Although in the third of forth year at university, group A can be apprentices in some companies, to help them approach their future jobs, they arent trained well because of short time. And the real job is still very strange with them. After graduating, without experience, group A cant accomplish their work perfectly. On the other hand, it takes them time and money to keep up with other experienced ones and may be scorned. Therefore, group A can contribute less than group B who has the most two important things: skills and experience. Secondly, as group A is contribute less, they surely get less benefit. Moreover, many companies which employ people in group A have to train them from the back-ground. These companies take this cost from group As salary to get rid of the fact that their employees may leave after being trained to other companies. So, less benefit is unavoidable and certain, Whereas group B are more loyal and effective workers. They also have useful experience and skills. Besides, their education is the same as or even higher than group A. As the result, group B get more benefit absolutely. In conclusion, I think student should go to travel or job before going high. Therefore, they cant only have basic knowledge but also skills and experience which are useful for them to get a good job and a brilliant future.

61