Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Parents are the best teachers. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
There is much debate over whether or not parents are the best teachers. Although there are some benefits of being thought by parents, I believe that disadvantages significantly overweight them. I hold this opinion for several reasons. Firstly, parents are not educated to be teachers. For a long time, scientists have been studying the perfect approach to students. Their method is based on elaborate psychological research and experiments. While pursuing their degree, besides from how to handle the facts, teachers are taught those tutoring approaches. This psychological training is essential for efficient knowledge passing. Therefore, although parents have the best intentions and strong will to educate their children, they lack important skills necessary for achieving their goal. Their method is based on their personal preference, rather than scientific study, and thus can lead to undesirable results. Secondly, parents’ unconditional love for their offspring can lead to subjectiveness. Unlike school teachers, parents have feelings that can disturb their judgement. For example, it is a common occurrence that a parent does not see his or her child’s faults. This, naturally, sabotages every chance for improvement. Moreover, even if they spot the problem, it is very likely that they will not admit it. Most of the time, parents believe their children are perfect. Cognition of the opposite would hurt parents’ feelings, so they choose to turn the blind eye. Also, if they admit those children’s faults, they might be too gentle, in order to prevent their youngsters from experiencing stress or anxiety. Thirdly, a parent is only one person, so his or her knowledge is quite limited. In school, there are dozens of teachers, every of whom is specialized in one specific field of study. Consequently, a child can access significantly more information at school than at home. In conclusion, parents are not the best teachers. They are not psychologically trained, too subjective and have too limited knowledge to be the proper tutors.
Nowadays, food has become easier to prepare. Has this change improved the way people live? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
Due to science and technology development, food preparation has been significantly facilitated. Now, myriads of cooking appliances, which require little or no skill to use, substitute exhausting cooking techniques used in the past. Moreover, supermarkets provide a great assortment of half-prepared food that require only a few minutes to be finished. This raises the question of whether this change improved the living standard. I believe this is a positive thing for society because of the two main reasons.
Firstly, food preparation became notably less time consuming. Nowadays, people are having busy and fast lives. They are so overwhelmed with their jobs and obligations that they have little spare time. It is expected that they want to use their leisure to be with their families and friends or simply rest. This contributed to the fact that time became man’s greatest asset. However, nutrition, an essential part of our lives, has always required time investment. Now, due to technology discoveries, such as refrigerators, microwaves and food processors, a substantial amount of time is saved. This represents one obligation less, so it allows people to focus on more important things.
Secondly, this change contributed to an increased number of employed mothers. In the past mothers had to stay home in order to feed their youngsters. It was expected for a woman to be a housewife and employment was out of the question. However, today, a child can cook his or her own meal, since it is already half prepared. Thus, mothers can go to work relaxed, untroubled by their children, and focus on achieving business goals. Consequently, the workspace gender gap is considerably reduced.
In conclusion, facilitation of meal preparation brought many improvements in everyday life. Thanks to technology, we can save a significant amount of time and reduce the difference between men and women in the business world.
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.
As technology develops, the number of factories in urban areas is increasing. There are different opinions on whether this process is positive. Some argue that this is necessary for industrial development, while others think that its impact on the environment is far more important. I agree with the latter. The positive side of factory building is industrial growth. Production is rising, and consequently more goods are sold. This benefits local residents, because it brings money to the community. This way, living standards are rising and inhabitants' lives are becoming more convenient. Also, the new factory opens new working spaces. Accordingly, unemployment is declining and even more money is made. Also, new residents are settling in the area, and as a result the community is growing. Factories can turn poor urban areas into developed and significantly upgrade residents’ lives. On the other hand, there are some disadvantages factory construction brings. Firstly, factories bring enormous pollution to the area. Neighborhood is polluted by harmful gases emitted from factories’ chimneys. Carbon-dioxide, essential part of those gases, creates the greenhouse effect, which is a main factor of global warming. Also, some compounds of emitted gases acidize the rain. Acid rain contaminates the water and soil, and destroys historical monuments. Also, chemical spills and toxic waste additionally contribute to pollution. As a result, the health of people and local flora and fauna is jeopardized. Secondly, factories are producing a great amount of noise. This disturbs inhabitants and animals. People are unable to fulfill their obligations properly and animals are running away in order to find calmer environments. In conclusion, factory construction can bring both good and bad side effects. There are few advantages, such as industrial growth and employment rise. However, there are also disadvantages, such as pollution and noise. In my opinion, environmental consequences are far more important than money. Thus, I strongly oppose the factory. The positive side of factory building is industrial growth. As production increases, more goods are sold. This benefits local residents, because it enriches the community. As a result, inhabitants live more convenient and commodious lives. Also, the new factory opens new working spaces. Accordingly, unemployment is declining and even more money is made. In the pursuit for jobs, new residents are settling in the area, and this way the community is growing. All this leads to the conclusion that factories can turn poor urban areas into developed and significantly upgrade residents’ lives. On the other hand, factory construction brings many disadvantages. Firstly, factories are great area pollutants. They pollute the water by emitting harmful gases to the atmosphere. Carbon-dioxide, essential part of those gases, creates the greenhouse effect, which is a main factor of global warming. Also, some compounds of emitted gases acidize the rain. Acid rain contaminates the water and soil, and destroys historical monuments. Also, chemical spills and toxic waste additionally contribute to pollution. As a result, the health of people and local flora and fauna is imperiled. Secondly, factories are producing a great amount of noise. This disturbs inhabitants and animals. People are unable to fulfill their obligations properly and animals are running away in order to find calmer environments.
If you could change one important thing about your hometown, what would you change? Use reasons and specific examples to support your answer.
Every town has its strengths and shortcomings, which reflect on people’s life quality. Thus, every man should seek a solution in order to upgrade his or her community. In my opinion, one of the most important things in my hometown is pollution caused by power plants and factories. I strongly believe that attitudes of factory and plant administration toward environment safety must be improved for several reasons.
Firstly, none of these objects contain proper filters, neither the law obliges them to. The factories and plants are emitting harmful gases such as sulfur-oxides and carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is contributing to the creation of the greenhouse effect. As a result, global temperature is rising, fatally disturbing nature. Sulfur oxide emission leads to acid rains. As a consequence, soil and water is contaminated and historical monuments are destroyed. Moreover, as world recognized nature research institutes stated, plants and factories in my area are one of the biggest pollutants in the whole continent, contaminating even the other countries. In my opinion, the only solution to this problem is installing proper filters to the chimneys.
Secondly, factories are improperly disposing tremendous amounts of tоxic waste and chemicals into the neighborhood. This industrial debris finally ends up in the soil and rivers, destroying local flora and fauna. In contact with the waste, plants wither and animals sicken or suffocate to death. Owing to the plant illnesses caused by such behavior, agriculture is jeopardized, and the economy is suffering. Due to such neglection of nature, many lives are imperiled. Furthermore, detrimental materials already left in nature, can not be decomposed, thus they pollute the area for eternity. All of this makes me really sad and emphatic about plants and animals and I would strongly fight against this atrocity.
In conclusion, due to the necessity of preserving our lives and local environment we must introduce some serious changes. If you ask me, the best solution is installing proper filters, because of cleaner air, and organizing safe waste disposal, because of the ruining of nature.
How do movies or television influence people’s behavior? Use reasons and specific examples to support your answer.
People are often confronted with the argument concerning television’s impact on human deportment. While there are positive societal consequences resulting from television, it is also true that it can bring many drawbacks. To begin with, the main positive impact television has on human’s behaviour is cultural awareness. Through different television shows, the spectator can meet different cultures, as well as his own. What in the past required long travels, now can be done from the cosiness of the living room. This allows the watcher to draw distinctions between cultures and notice their strengths and shortcomings. As a result, he or she can adopt some good sides and self improve. On the other hand, television, containing many violent scenes and situations, contribute to the rise of aggressive conduct in the society. Children, constantly exposed to such scenes, tend to manifest more aggressiveness, and have higher chances to become bullies as they mature. Moreover, television, by promoting brutality, gives rise to normalisation of such deportment. As a result, violence is considered an essential part of human lives, and people are beginning to ignore brutality, believing that it is better to mind their own business. Besides from promoting violence, another negative impact of television is general decrease in self-confidence. People are usually forgetting that tv shows are not real life. In other words, most of the things we see on television are staged and embellished. For example, actors that we consider extremely beautiful are actually wearing tons of make-up. Similarly, relationships are not that romantic, neither is the school so fun. As a consequence, the audience gets disappointed in their lives and becomes doubting their value. They start asking themselves if they are the problem that caused such boring lives and become gradually less confident. In conclusion, there are both positive and negative ways television influences our conduct. The positive is cultural awareness, and negative are violence promotion and confidence decrease. I, myself, believe the negative ones take precedence over the positive, thus it would be desirable for society to take action and make some changes.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Television has destroyed communication among friends and family. Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion.
The debate over whether television ruined communication among friends and family has been going on for decades. Some people think that television aggravates communication, while others believe that it is improving it. I, myself, agree with the latter for three reasons. Firstly, television gathers people in the same space, and as a result socialization occurs. For example, it is usual for a family to sit together in the Sunday evening and watch their favourite show. While in the past everyone minded their own business and fulfilled their duties, today they spend time together, chitchatting and discussing the show. Similarly, friends go together to cinemas. As a consequence, by sharing their perspectives of the movie they become closer. Secondly, communication is improved since television brings new topics to talk about. TV shows and news are the main platforms for politics, fashion and celebrity lives. Adults, by watching TV, prepare for heated discussions with their friends. During those debates, while their opinions concur or oppose, they start to understand and respect each other more. As a result their communication is strengthened. Similarly, when teenagers meet they discuss fashion and gossip about celebrities. They laugh and joke together and as a result the atmosphere becomes more friendly and more appropriate for the new transaction of ideas. Thirdly, participating in the tv show can also improve communication. For example, there are many TV quizzes that require group participation. Passion and desire to win positively impacts group communication. Participants work together to achieve their goal, and unconsciously improve their relationship. Similarly, there are many charitable tv shows, such as ones that build homes for the impoverished, that reconcile and help unfortunate families. As their lives become easier, they become more positive, enjoying each other’s company more. In conclusion, although there may be some negative impact of television on communication between friends and family, I strongly believe that it is significantly outweighed by the positive. Television gathers the family in the same space, brings new topics to talk about and introduces shows in which people can participate and strengthen their relationship.
Some people prefer to live in a small town. Others prefer to live in a big city. Which place would you prefer to live in? Use specific reasons and details to support your answer.
People hold different views toward living environments. Some people believe that it is better to live in a big city, while others think that it is better to live in a small time. I, myself, agree with the latter, because of the three main reasons. Firstly, the calmness and peacefulness of small cities have a positive effect on our psyche. Silence helps in focusing and developing ideas. It has been proven many times that a human being needs tranquillity in order to achieve his or her full potential. For example, many of the famous scientists and artists needed to isolate in order to achieve their goals. In contrast, noise can disturb our thoughts and consequently hinder us. Secondly, small cities, unlike urban areas, are less polluted. There are no factories, power plants or heavy traffic to harm the environment. Since clean air and water are always accessible, residents of small cities are healthier and live longer than those of the urban areas. Also, since the soil is not contaminated, food growing from it does not harm the consumers. Moreover, residents do not need to waste vast amounts of money for hospitals, because they usually do not have serious health issues. Thirdly, in the small cities you do not need to lose time in traffic. Since almost every distance can be traveled by foot or bike, motor vehicles are unnecessary. Thus, instead of spending hours in traffic, residents of a small city can do something useful for his or her development. In contrast, in urban areas the average man spends 3 hours per day in traffic. As a result, a serious amount of life, necessary for achieving goals, is wasted and can not be retrieved. In conclusion, it is more advantageous to live in small cities, because they are calm and peaceful, clean and require no time wasted in traffic. I strongly believe that living in small areas can bring only benefits. “When people succeed, it is because of hard work. Luck has nothing to do with success.”
Do you agree or disagree with the quotation above? Use specific reasons and examples to explain your position.
There are different views on whether luck has an impact on success. Some people believe that hard work is the only factor contributing to success, while others think that luck is also important. I, myself, agree with the latter, because of the 3 reasons. Firstly, luck brings us opportunities. Lucky people come across chances everyday. They can run into them while in the grocery store, walking their dog or doing any other usual job. For example, while casually walking in the shopping center a lucky person can come across a man in trouble. After providing help, this person will find out that this man is actually an influential businessman. Grateful entrepreneur becomes a person's new contact and possible coworker. Although hard work is essential for spotting and using those opportunities, a person without luck will never encounter them and thus will not even have the chance to use them. Secondly, sometimes luck is essential for making right decisions. There are always many paths we need to choose between during our lifetime. Often, although paths seem similar, one leads to success and other to failure. And since they can not be distinguished in the beginning, the choice depends solely on luck. For example, an entrepreneur is deciding whether to invest in two different companies. Since the companies are progressing equally, he randomly decides to invest in the first company. And due to some unexpected events the second company declares bankruptcy, so with less luck an entrepreneur would be bankrupt as well. Thirdly, luck determines your place of birth and consequently the quality of your life. No one can choose in which country or family he will be born. People born in wealthy families and countries will have more convenient lives and more opportunities to study and make money. On the other hand, people living in empowered families and countries will often need to give up education in order to sustain their family, working hard menial jobs significantly less paid than in developed countries.In conclusion, although hard work is essential for success, luck is also very important. It brings us opportunities, help in making decisions, and a good birth environment.
Many people visit museums when they travel to new places. Why do you think people visit museums? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer
Since their occurrence, museums have been one of the most popular tourist attractions. For a very long time, there has been an ongoing debate on the reasons for this popuIarity. believe there are 3 main reasons why people visit them. Firstly, visiting museums is the best way to learn about the culture of the city or country. They contain many traditional and historical artifacts that help understand the past. Only by going to the museum, one can really learn about the country he or she visited. For example, by comparing traditional clothes, found in museums, of different nations, we can understand their similarities and differences. Similarly, by seeing everyday tools people in the past used we can understand their financial and technological situations. Secondly, people visit museums in order to enjoy the artwork they have never seen. In museums people scrutinize and discuss paintings, sculptures and other forms of art. Thus, they have fun and take pleasure. Moreover, every museum is special because it contains unique pieces of art. Since, there can be only one original artwork, there is no similar museum. As a result, every museum brings different experiences. By going to museums you will always learn new things that can not be seen anywhere else. Thirdly, museums represent great places to take pictures. With the increasing popularity of social platforms, taking artistic and high-quality photos became essential. Museums yield great details for both backgrounds and pictures. For example, there is an increasing occurrence of art paintings and sculptures on social media profiles. Similarly, more and more people are taking portraits and selfies accompanied by art work. By presenting famous art on their profiles, people become more interesting and consequently more popular. In conclusion, there are many reasons why people visit museums. They visit them to learn about the nation's culture, see new pieces of art and take pictures.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Universities should give the same amount of money to their students’ sports activities as they give to their university libraries. Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion.
People hold different opinions on whether universities should invest in sport activities as much as they do in the university libraries. Some people believe that the same funding is desirable, because sports brings many advantages, while others that this act would be reckless. I, myself agree with the latter, because of the three main reasons. Firstly, libraries contribute to the fundamental purpose of universities, education. People attend universities primarily to learn and discover new things from the area they are interested in. Libraries, with their great assortment of study materials help them achieve their goals. Only well equipped libraries can follow the curriculum. In contrast, although sport activities are a good way for relaxing and having fun they are not nearly as important to students as libraries. Secondly, well equipped libraries are essential for covering the wide range of studies taught at universities. Universities contain many faculties, each of whom deals with different topics. This means that libraries must contain an enormous number of books that will encompass the whole curriculum. With the insufficient funding, libraries can not provide proper sources for learning and as a result this will negatively reflect on university. Thirdly, funding libraries are essential for keeping in track with rapidly developing technology and science. Today, science is progressing as never before. Everyday new inventions and discoveries are made. Libraries, in order to follow this advancement, need to be continually upgraded. This is important, because if a student wants to grow into a representative scholar and academic must be aware of all the newest discoveries in the world of science. Sport, on the other hand is slowly changing, and thus, sport activities can be organized with significantly smaller budgets. In conclusion, universities should invest more in libraries than in sport activities. Libraries contribute to education, need to cover a wide range of studies and follow the technology advancements.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People are never satisfied with what they have; they always want something more or something different. Use specific reasons to support your answer.
Society holds different views on whether people have the ability to become satisfied with what they have. Some people argue that this situation is possible for human beings, while others believe that a human lacks this ability. I, myself agree with the latter because of the two main reasons. Firstly, one can never become satisfied with what he or she has because every time one achieves or gets something new he or she explores new things that can be acquired. With every acquisition a person expands his or her view of the world and realizes there are even more things available than he or she ever imagined. For example, when I was younger I thought getting into the best secondary school would provide me with ultimate happiness and bring me satisfaction, however as I enrolled in it and talked to a number of people I had met there, I realised there are even better schools out there and this realisation contributed to my dissatisfaction. Secondly, every time people get something they feel great happiness and therefore are eager to relive this again. In the process of acquisition, happiness hormones - serotonin and dopamine - are released. This brings a human into a state of extreme elation and as a result a human is enticed to do everything to feel this again. For example, every time I buy some piece of clothing I give promise to myself that I will not do it again because I rightfully reason that this action is a serious waste of money. However, every time I buy it I feel really happy and my mood is immediately upgraded, so every time I will do it again, against my common sense. In conclusion, people can never be satisfied with what they have because every time they acquire something new they realise there are even more things to get and because when they get something they experience extreme happiness and are lured to experience it again.