热门关键字：
常见问题解答
联系电话：027- /
传真：027-
学校地址:武汉市洪山区珞瑜路560号吴家
湾大厦19楼
当前位置：首页 > 考题预测
2014年6月托福独立写作机经预测（上）
信息来源:新思达国际英语学校官网 发布时间:
摘要：新思达国际英语学校为大家整理了2014年6月托福独立写作机经预测，大部分机经都为大家整理了答案，但是新思达在此提醒您话题模板仅供参考，只有自己整理的话题模板才能彰显自己的英语实力，希望大家托福考试顺利。
2014年6月机经预测（上）
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Teachers should assign homework for students every day. (080427CNW2=070113CNW2)
Most students in this world struggle daily with their homework. Many teachers believe that daily homework is the key to education and school success. I agree with this opinion. Here are my reasons.
First, daily homework can reinforce the knowledge students learned at school. A student cannot concentrate every minute, and remember everything that a teacher taught in class. Daily homework is the best way for students to review what he learned during the day, and study on the problems that he do not understand, and prepare for the next day’s work.
Second, daily homework is the basis for success in exams. This is especially true for those students who are not so bright, and the only way to succeed in school is doing homework each day. Whenever the homework flags the class behavior dips, the social behavior is muddled, and the grades take a nosedive. No matter what the ability of a student, daily homework is the key to students’ school success.
Third, daily homework can help students develop good learning habits. Learning is not always an enjoyable experience and students always need to spend hard time on it. Daily homework can form a kind of habit of learning for students. Once a habit is formed, learning is not such a painful thing and a student can find it more and more interesting. Obviously this will greatly benefit to a student.
In conclusion, daily homework is crucial to students’ success. Life requires us to keep learning in order to catch on with this fast pacing society. A good learning habit and method that we developed when we are students can benefit us for the rest of our life.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? In twenty years’ time, people will lead a more leisurely life. (080803CNW2=070609CNW2)
I disagree with this. I think society is moving in a direction where people will be busier and working more than ever in the future. People will have more options to turn their passions into businesses, jobs and careers will be more appreciated, and people will feel more compelled to help others in their spare time.
Work and leisure used to be quite separated. Imagine someone in the 1950s, for example. They would come home from the office, put their slippers on, and watch some television in the evening. Maybe on the weekends they would do some woodworking in the backyard, building bird houses and end tables for fun. But in today’s world (and looking ahead to the future), it is so much easier to make businesses out of our hobbies. If you’re good at building bird houses, why not sell them online and get some recognition and money for your talent? If you think you have a good knowledge of wine, why not start a blog where you review the local vineyards? People still have fun, but the internet helps their spare time and hobbies be a little more productive.
In these shaky economic times, where jobs can sometimes be hard to find, I think that people are going to appreciate any work that they can get. Quitting your job to spend more time at home might not be a realistic or appealing option. There won’t be any guarantees that you will easily get a job again when you need to. So I think most people will keep their heads down and just gratefully accept any work that they can get.
Finally, the world is generally more compassionate than it has been in the past. There are so many charities and non-profit organizations out there that are very easy to find and volunteer for. It has become almost expected to devote some of your spare time to helping others. This doesn’t have to be a daily or even a weekly event. But it is a part of many people’s lives and I think it will continue to be. And it is a form of work, rather than leisure. There just isn’t any payment involved.
That is why I think people will have less leisure time in twenty years. Based on current trends, hobbies will become mixed with business, regular jobs will not be discarded willingly, and increased volunteer time will mean increased work for the average person.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is better to spend money on something that lasts a long time, such as an expensive piece of jewelry, than on something that provides short-term pleasure, such as a vacation. (081213CNW2=070518CNW2)
I disagree with this. A lot of fancy and pricey items may last a long time, but they do not ultimately bring as much happiness as purchases that only last a short time. Many expensive items are hardly used, because the owners are so worried about accidentally damaging them. Short-term pleasures like meals at restaurants can be quite cheap, and therefore more frequent and varied. Finally, fleeting pleasures like vacations can create wonderful memories that do last forever.
Many people seem to have a handful of very nice, well-crafted, and expensive items in their house. Maybe it’s a gold necklace. Maybe it’s some fine silverware and dinner plates inherited from a great-grandmother. Maybe it’s a rare guitar only made for two years in the 1960s. A person can feel pride in owning these things. But at the same time, often such items are hardly used because the owner is afraid of damaging them. They might only use the silverware and dinner plates on Christmas day. The guitar might not even be played, but kept in a display case instead. How much joy is actually taken in these items, in the long run? So much money is spent, but then the item is hidden away for safe keeping.
Then we have simple little pleasures like going out to dinner. The purchase doesn’t last—your food is gone very quickly! But you do truly enjoy it. And since getting dinner is so cheap, you can do it frequently. Get Mexican food with your best friend on Tuesday and then grab some Greek food with your parents that weekend, and so on. Go to a new restaurant every time if you want. It will be fun, tasty, and always changing. I think experiences like these are definitely worth the money because of how often they add happiness and excitement to a person’s life. The same idea could be applied to women buying make-up or perfume or other such items. Eventually the product will run out, but they will be used and enjoyed very often, maybe even everyday. Sometimes little delights like these enhance our lives more than we even realize.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The purpose of television is to educate, not to entertain. (090222CN=071005NA)
I would have to disagree. Television can both e I do not think it should have to be one or the other. In fact, the two work best going hand-in-hand.
One of television’s most striking attributes is the way that it can capture the attention of viewers with such force, making them sit up and pay attention to what is on the screen. First and foremost, with its combination of sound, image, and continual feed of programs, television is entertaining by design.
Things get interesting when one considers the different ways that entertainment can be presented. Of course, there are the trashy television programs like reality shows about vain rich people and daytime talk shows where the audiences scream at the wild guests. There are the infomercials that air in the middle of the night and try, urgently, to convince you to buy a blender that you absolutely do not need. These things might entertain us. Their sheer silliness might make us laugh when we’re bored or sitting around with friends, having a glass of wine. There is no education to be had there, but at least the viewing can be fun sometimes.
Then there are shows, such as skillfully-written dramas and even some comedies, that are both entertaining and educational in the way they provoke thought about human nature. Through empathizing with a broad spectrum of characters and following them through tangled and often intense situations, we come to see ourselves and others in a more open-minded and thoughtful way. These shows are put together with intelligence and viewers can indeed learn from them, while still utterly enjoying them.
Finally, there are programs that are the most traditionally educational, like documentaries and news investigations. They are easy to find on television as well and can teach viewers about endless topics, from popular subjects in history to obscure trivia. You can certainly educate yourself through watching them. And once again, the use of stirring visuals and narration will almost always entertain the viewer and keep him or her engaged, perhaps more than a dry textbook would.
My point is that television is always an entertainment medium. Saying that television should be solely education-based and not entertain the viewer is disregarding the basic way that television functions. Yet as the viewer is entertained, more often than not there is education of various types to be found within the programs. They are often learning something. It is each individual person’s choice what specifically they want to watch and how much they want to engage their intelligence. But the option for learning is always there and presented in a fun, enticing way, which is a great thing.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? In 20 years from now on, students will not use printed books any more. (090329CN=070804CN)
I disagree and believe that, although digital books are becoming increasingly popular, printed books will still not be completely gone from the academic realm in twenty years. School and university libraries have invested a lot of time and money into their printed book collections over the years. Their transition to digital books will be slow and incomplete for quite a while. Also, many students still find it easier to study with books they can physically hold in their hands. Finally, there is a certain love for tradition and older technologies that a lot of people still hold on to.
Schools and universities have been building up their physical libraries for decades. Just go to any random area of a college library and sort through the books. There will be a lot from the 1960s, the 1950s…It’s common to find books nearly a hundred years old! Schools used to pour a lot of time, energy, and money into improving their physical book collections. And although now the transition is starting for changing to digital books, I think it will be a very slow process. What will become of these thousands and thousands of books, taking up entire buildings, with their own history and worth? It’s not as simple as just bringing them all to a thrift store. They will be around for a while yet. It would be wasteful to just toss them all aside.
I also think that students find a certain comfort and ease when studying with physical books. They can highlight important text, they can put bookmarks throughout the pages, they can toss the book in their backpack and bring it with them to class or to a coffee shop. These things can be done with digital books, to an extent, but the process is much slower and more complicated. When you own an expensive device, you worry about even taking it outside your home. With a book, you have no problem reading it on the bus or subway. You’re also not straining your eyes staring at a digital screen for too long!
Finally, the passion that many young people have for nostalgia should be noted. There are many teenagers, born in the age of the CD, that own record players and use them frequently! There are college students who decorate their apartments with old furniture and artwork more from their parents’ generation. It comes from an appreciation for and interest in the past. These same people will probably never abandon books entirely, because they simply don’t want to.
In conclusion, printed books will still be used by students in twenty years. School libraries will still likely be holding on to their large book collections, studying with printed books can be easier for some, and many people like physical books because they appreciate nostalgic items.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Teachers should be paid according to how well their students perform. (090808CN=071028CN)
I disagree with this idea. Some teachers make a huge positive impact on their students that can’t be measured by grades or tests, there are students that don’t do well even if they have fantastic teachers, and having extra money as a possible reward could make some teachers unfortunately cheat the system.
Good teachers can have various effects on their students. Yes, some lead their students to get good grades. That’s important, of course. But teachers can also inspire confidence in their young students, making them believe they can do anything they set their mind to. Teachers can give their students a broader view of the world. Teachers can spark the imaginations of the children they instruct. Teachers can be funny, exciting, and life-changing. They can do so much to help kids develop their personalities and sense of self. That is more important and far deeper than some grades on a test. I don’t think it’s right to reward just the grades and disregard the wonderful things that can’t be measured.
Also, some kids just naturally struggle with schoolwork. They may have a learning disability that makes reading difficult. Or they may have a short attention span and struggle to pay attention during lectures. Not every student is going to get good grades, no matter how attentive and skilled the teacher is. Punishing the teacher with a lower pay also seems wrong in that scenario.
Finally, as unpleasant as it is to think about, some teachers may cheat the system if they know they can get more money out of it. They could lie about their students’ average test scores and make them seem better than they are. They could be lazy with their grading, giving A’s and B’s where lower grades were actually deserved. Greed for money can make people do awful things. And the students would suffer as a result, not actually receiving the strong education they deserve.
So, although it is a complicated issue, I don’t think teachers should be paid according to how well their students perform. There are some teachers who are wonderful without focusing much on tests and statistics, some students get bad grades regardless of how good their teachers are, and some sneaky teachers could lie about grades in order to get more money.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Visiting museums is the best way to learn about a country.(091025CN=081012CN)
I suppose I agree with this, although I think museums should just be one part of the many ways you learn about a country you are visiting! However, museums are very useful in the way they firmly place their country within a history and culture, give you a taste of what type of art they have to offer, and show what the nation’s values are, based on what they choose to display about themselves.
Sometimes a trip to the museum can really help you connect with a country. There is so much history you can learn about a country from a museum. This helps you to connect everything you see around you, which you might not have otherwise understood or appreciated. For example, if you learn, after paying a visit to a French museum, that Paris was radically redesigned in the mid-1800s, you begin to newly appreciate the wide streets and city parks in this city. Without the context that history museums provide, foreign countries can seem like their various parts don’t match up.
Art museums, on the other hand, let us hear the voices of the citizens of these countries themselves. Are there a lot of eccentric paintings and installations, showing a culture of free spirits? Or does a tradition of dignified ceramics and statues hint of a serious sophistication?
You can’t judge a whole nation just from a sample of their artwork, of course. But you get definite glimpses of what values they hold dear to them based on what they choose to display in museums. Items shown in museums are meant to be precious and important. A museum in one country might display tree trunks from a forest that was very important to them, but is now being damaged by logging. But a museum in a different country might never dream of showing natural items like that! Seeing these distinctions helps you understand the country you’re visiting on a much deeper level.
Therefore, I do think that visiting the museums is probably the best way to learn about a country you are visiting. They teach you about the country’s history and cultural context, they show off the art of the citizens, and help you see where their values lie.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Getting advice from friends who are older than you is more valuable than getting advice from friends of your own age.(091101CN=070817NA)
Although friends of all ages can of course give good advice depending on the situation, I agree that generally the more helpful advice comes from friends who are older. They have probably experienced similar things to what you are going through, they have experienced more than you have, and they have the benefit of hindsight and putting things in proper perspective.
If you have a friend who is a few years older than you, there is a good chance they’ve dealt with something similar to whatever your problem is. If you’re twelve and nervous about going to your first school dance, your fourteen year-old cousin can tell you what to expect. If you’re thirty and considering buying a house, a friend who is thirty-five and has gone through the whole process can help you. Meanwhile, someone who is your own age would probably be just as confused as you, since they haven’t experienced these things either.
Not to mention that friends who are older than you have had similar experiences, plus more experiences in their longer life! They might bring up things that you never would have considered from your limited position. They can tell you about various jobs they worked when they were your age, various types of people they dated and how that turned out, various places they went to…They could offer up some really helpful information that wasn’t even on your radar before.
Finally, friends who are older than you have the wonderful benefit of hindsight. They are distanced, by time, from the events they’re telling you about. Therefore, they can understand them more clearly. Even if you have a worldly friend who is your own age and dealing with lots of interesting things, his or her advice may not turn out to be the wisest. He or she doesn’t even know yet how everything will turn out. But an older friend can tell you, “That seemed really fun, but I regretted it so much later,” or “I wish I had done that!” Everything is in perspective, which makes their advice that much more helpful.
In conclusion, I think friends who are older than you end up giving better advice. They have likely experienced what you’re dealing with, they’ve dealt with more than that, and their advice comes from a place of wisdom, looking at everything in perspective.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Parents should give school-age children money as a reward for getting a high mark (grade) in school. (091121CN)
I agree and think parents giving their school-age children money for getting good grades is a nice idea overall. It can help motivate kids to get good grades, it makes younger kids understand the importance of good grades, and it keeps a dialogue open between parents and children when it comes to school.
When you’re six or seven years old, you might have no interest in school. Or maybe you’ll love science, but be bored with history and math. It might be hard for you to understand why you have to try hard and do well. All you want to do is play. What’s the point of this school stuff? But if your parents are offering you money in exchange for getting good grades, that will motivate you really fast. You’ll stay on track and do well and learn, because there is a physical reward that you can understand and appreciate.
More importantly, as you get older and continue this process, you’ll begin to realize the other benefits of getting good grades. Classes might become more fun and interesting. Your self-confidence might increase, because you are studying hard and understanding everything. You’ll feel more accomplished, because there is someone actively encouraging you to do well. Your parents are telling you that they know you can succeed.
Connected to this is the fact that parents giving their children money for good grades keeps the line of communication open between them when it comes to school. It’s always very sad when parents pay no attention to their children’s schooling and the kids start to get failing grades. It can be a disaster if it continues into high school. But if the parents are giving money as a reward, it means that there is a system in place. The parents are looking at the report cards carefully, every quarter and semester, noticing any good or bad patterns. They are talking with their children about any issues that they might be having at school. They are paying attention and supporting their children, which is a very good thing.
That is why I think parents paying their children for good grades is a good idea. They are giving the kids an initial motivation for doing well in school, they are helping them understand the benefits of good grades, and they are communicating openly with their kids about school on a regular basis.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? As modern life becomes more complex, it is essential for young people to have the ability to plan and organize. (091205CN=070721CN)
I agree that having the ability to plan and organize is very useful for young people. This has probably always been true to an extent, but modern life does seem to have more things to keep track of! It’s very important, for instance, that people know exactly when they are scheduled to work or go to class. Special events and meetings may be more disparate than in the past and the need to write down their dates and locations may be greater. Even talking with family and friends can sometimes be a little complicated these days. All of these are reasons to invest in a planner and commit to organizing your time. It really does make things easier.
The basic “9 to 5” job isn’t necessarily the standard for everyone in the 21st century. We don’t all work morning to evening and get home in time for dinner. Some people work the graveyard shift or work online. Some people work random hours and take college classes in between. If that’s the case, then their class schedule also changes every semester, rearranging their entire day! It can get very complex and writing down the scheduled hours every day can be infinitely helpful.
It also seems that special events are harder to keep track of when we live in a world of so many intersecting cultures and niches. It’s not as if everyone is simply going down to the local community center and all going to the same gatherings anymore. Maybe there’s a manga fan club you found online that meets at someone’s house every Wednesday. Or maybe there’s an evening yoga class you want to check out at the new yoga studio in the next town over. These events aren’t so centralized and organization is key to keeping them straight, writing down their individual addresses, times, and dates.
Sometimes even talking with friends and family is easier when scheduled. If your sister lives on the other side of the country, you need to factor in the time difference when calling her on the phone. If you’re Skyping with a friend in a different country, that also must be pre-planned.
In conclusion, planning and organizing are fantastic skills to have. Work, school, events, and social interactions are just a handful of the things we need to keep track of in our complicated modern world. It’s great for young people to plan accordingly. 10
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Parents do not understand their children as well as parents did 50 years ago. (091212CN=080711NA)
“The more things change the more they stay the same,” is certainly as true today as it ever was. Children have always believed that their parents cannot possibly understand the unique problems growing up entails. Parents have always believed they know what is best for their children. While some of the challenges that face young people today are different from what their parents experienced, the main difference is in the form those challenges take rather than their inherent nature. Relationships, temptations, and doing well in school were issues for people now in their sixties, just as they are for people in their teens and early twenties.
Even though students today have a larger body of knowledge they have to master, than did their counterparts 50 years ago, getting good grades and being successful so as to get a good job is just as important as it ever was. Perhaps fewer young people expected to go on to college 50 years ago than today. Still they needed to proved mastery in their field of study then as now, even if the tools they used were different. Certainly students relied more heavily on what their teachers told them, than in today’s world with the internet providing access to different ideas. But the goal of learning enough to get a good job, whether in the field of science, or history, or languages, or the arts, or engineering, has not changed. Children still study hard, worry about their grades, and are supported and encouraged by their parents.
Children have always been tempted to do what they see others doing, even if that is frowned upon by their families. Driving a car without a license, slipping out at night to be with friends, or yearning for items they cannot afford are things that children of 50 years ago experienced. Now that those children are parents, they clearly understand those same temptations that their offspring are facing. That today’s children are being lured by iPods, different style clothing, or things they see on the internet, does not change the nature of the temptation, only the way the temptation manifests.
Friendships and having a boyfriend or girlfriend is another universal urge. There are more places for young people to meet out of view of their parents than there may have been 50 years ago. However, even people who seem quite ancient by children, were worried about whether their friends liked them, or whether they might be betrayed. Parties, dancing, going to public entertainments whether movies, concerts, or street performances, have always been places for people to meet and form relationships, both friendship and romantic. Young people of any time find plenty of ways to meet friends and chat and flirt without their own parents being aware.
Youth today may be exposed to more risks than their parents experienced. The drugs are more dangerous, intimate encounters can lead to unforeseen results, failure can ruin career possibilities. The specifics are different, but the motivations and urges come from the same human source as they did 50, 100, or 150 years ago.
NEW! Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The ability to read and write is more important now than in the past. （091220CN=071117NA）
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The environmental issue is too complex to be handled by the individual. (100123CN=080314NA)
Although individuals can certainly do their part to help the environment, I believe that the problem is more complicated than that. I think that helping the environment is a massive issue that is best dealt with by attacking it from all sides, both on an individual scale and in a systematic way that incorporates large numbers of people all working together.
At the very least, individuals can do things in their daily life that help the environment. These don’t have to be big things, just little changes to the routine. They can carpool, ride their bike, or take the bus on their way to work or school, reducing the total amount of pollution released into the air. They can recycle their paper, plastic, and metal items rather than throwing them away to be added to a landfill. They can create a compost in their backyard (or even on their deck if they live in an apartment) and put their food scraps in it, once again cutting down on garbage put into landfills.
Individuals can also re-use items as much as possible to ease the production of new items at factories, which suck up energy and release chemicals into the air. Even using the same portable coffee mug all the time instead of buying a disposable cup every day can help.
As helpful as these individual acts are, there needs to be some sort of infrastructure in place to make it all work. For instance, if someone lives in a small town that doesn’t have its own recycling plant or bins available, it would be very difficult for them to recycle at all, wouldn’t it? Or if there were no bicycle lanes in a city and bicyclists had a very difficult time getting around and were scared for their safety, then riding a bike to work or school wouldn’t really seem like a good or realistic option.
These habits that help the environment need to be thought about by large groups of people, including local committees and city planners, and need to be promoted by society as a whole in order to truly work to their full capacity. A case of individuals all doing their part independently is admirable, but it’s even better when it is a community doing its part to help the environment together.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is more important for the government to spend money on improving Internet access than on public transportation. (100522CN=080509NA)
In this highly technological society, access to the internet has become an essential part of our lives. Some people argue that the government should provide more funding for the discovery of new uses for the internet because of its practicality and efficiency. However, I do not agree with this argument because I believe that the government should provide funding for other significant functions, one of which is ameliorating our public transportation.
Undoubtedly, we spend our lives in crowded cities, where we face the intractable problem of encountering traffic jams. Whether hurrying to work or returning home after a long day, we can easily become stuck in a large traffic jam, especially on the holidays, when the traffic situation becomes worse. We even experience traffic jams when taking buses so crowded that we can barely take a deep breath. Building more overpasses to let more transportation pass through and adding more buses to accommodate the population are positive responses to the traffic problem that should be taken as soon as possible.
The importance of the Internet seems less significant when compared with that of public transportation. The reason is that the internet can only equip us with knowledge and information that could be acquired from other media, such as the television or radio, while a well-regulated transportation system will not only provide us with a sense of satisfaction about our living environment but also create a positive impression of this city. Changing the color of the buses to the same color and limiting the number of the cars are both ways of creating a good environment within a city, and should be considered by the government. Therefore, to create a safe and pleasant living environment, improving public transportation is imperative.
In sum, although I admit that increasing access to the Internet will keep us more informed of current events and allow us to gain more knowledge, I argue that it is more important that the government provide funding to improve our means of transportation. Doing so will not only improve our traffic situation but also increase our satisfaction with our environment.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Most business people are only motivated by the desire of money. (100626CN=080816NA)
I disagree with this statement and think that business people are often motivated by more than just money. First of all, businesses can cover almost any aspect of society and surely many business owners, managers, and workers first got involved in their job out of passion. There are also non-profit businesses and companies that give large amounts of money away. Finally, some business people don’t even make that much money at all.
I would think that for someone to invest all the time and money it takes into opening and sustaining a certain business, they would have to be passionate about said business. You don’t sweat and scrub your new restaurant into shape for several months straight if you don’t like cooking. You don’t start making your own soaps and lotions and selling them at local Farmer’s Markets if you don’t really care about bath products. This extends to even the most wealthy and successful business people. Owners of computer companies love and excel in technology. Owners of car companies love the purr of a good engine. These people want to make money because they still need to make a living. But they are in their specific field because they truly enjoy it and are good at it.
Then there are the companies that are non-profit and have the goal of helping the needy. They might provide food for low-income families or give new clothes to homeless people. The people who are employed at these companies are working just as hard as those at businesses that make a profit. They earn a wage, but it sure seems like they have a generous spirit and desire to help people as well. If they were only concerned with making money, there are more fiercely profit-driven places they could go. Additionally, even businesses that make a profit will often donate large sums of money to charity. There are motivations to do good seen all the time.
Finally, going into business is not even a guarantee that you will earn a lot of money. “Business person” is such a broad term. You don’t immediately become an executive, riding around in a limousine! It would be silly to commit to such a career if your sole goal is money. You must be interested in business in other ways.
That is why I don’t think that most business people are motivated only by money. While there is certainly money to be made, you must first be passionate about your specific area of business to even thrive. Some businesses don’t profit from their endeavors and other businesses still are generous in giving money away. And just because you are a business person, you won’t necessarily be making a huge amount of money, depending on what you’re doing.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Professional athletes, such football and basketball players, do not deserve the high salaries that they are paid.(100710CN=090515NA)
A number of celebrities receive large amounts of money for what they do, and the public often argues that this level of financial reward is not justified. However, one group of highly paid celebrities who have earned their status and prestige through extremely hard work are the professional athletes who play in team sports. Many of them have gained acclaim not only in their own country, but around the world, athletes like Michael Jordan and David Beckham.
Professional athletes deserve the high salaries they are paid because it is their talent and skill that makes sports a multi-billion dollar franchise in the entertainment industry. They spend grueling hours every day practicing and refining their strength, technique and timing so that they can give their ultimate best on the field or court or ski slope. Their job is to win for themselves, their teams, their coaches, and above all, for the fans who are watching them perform. It is only fair that they should receive a high salary for that kind of dedication and commitment toward the sport they have chosen as their life’s work.
Being good at a sport is not enough for professional athletes. They have to improve their abilities constantly. One of the well-known aspects of competition in professional sports is that when a team or player wins, the bar is always set a little higher for the next time. There is no stopping and settling for success. Rewarding them for going the extra mile seems entirely appropriate.
In addition, these athletes face intense scrutiny and their work is measured and critiqued by everyone. Sports fans in particular are famous for their fast criticism and often negative assessment of the athletes who play the games. They clamor to see their team win every time. As an example, Tom Brady of the New England Patriots has a phenomenal record of bringing the Patriots to the Super Bowl. His talent as both a quarterback and a motivator show him to be a team leader of great power and effect. Yet although he led the Patriots to two Super Bowl wins in 2004 and 2005, when the team lost in 2008 to the New York Giants, Brady received massive criticism. It was as if the fans had amnesia about his previous, outstanding record. They wanted him to lead the Patriots to a final win all the time. This is an example of the enormous pressure placed on the shoulders of professional athletes. A high salary seems a just reward for accepting that level of stress.
It is only fair that professional athletes should share as well in the massive profits gained by management and corporations from professional sports. It is also fair that they should receive an above average compensation for the risks they take every time they go out onto a field or court to create the magic of the game and make it come alive for the fans who love it. In the end, however, all good professional athletes share one thing in common. They want to create something wonderful through the skills and talent that they have honed for so many years, some of them since childhood. We owe them.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Students should not take part-time jobs while they are studying in the university. (100814CNW2=090612NAW2)
The majority of students in universities prefer not to work while they are taking courses. They believe that work will take away valuable time from their studies and cause them to get lower grades. They also do not want to work because it interrupts the social life they want to lead on campus. Many students believe that there is no advantage to be gained by working at a part-time job. The truth is, sustaining a part-time job can be a vital stepping stone not only toward a student’s academic goals, but to the student’s emotional and intellectual maturity.
Statistics indicate that working at a part-time job does not interfere with academic success. At Beijing University, for example, over half the students were employed either off or on campus and they achieved good grades whether working 12 hours or 30 hours per week. They set up schedules and managed their study time more effectively than many students who did not have jobs. They also assumed a greater responsibility for how they carried out their work and study assignments.
Contrary to popular belief, students do not experience a lack of socialization if they have part-time jobs. In fact, they are more likely to gain social skills by meeting diverse people and developing a network of contacts, including staff, faculty, employers and customers. They get experience in problem solving and how to handle crises. Given their skill at managing time, they find ways to see movies, relax with friends, or attend concerts. They are not isolated or exhausted by having to work as well as needing to study.
Universities want to help students find work and spend a lot of time and effort matching students to jobs that relate to the student’s ambitions and life goals. Work opportunities can include the chance for a business student to be an intern in a corporation, for a student majoring in psychology to work at a clinic, or for an engineering student to work on machines. Students can in this way gain career-related experience and build self-confidence. Such experience assists them considerably when they apply for full-time positions in the field of their choice.
Yet one other advantage to working at a part-time job is that students can reduce their need for educational loans. They can also help their families if that is important for them to do. Earning their own money brings a sense of accomplishment and purpose they might not otherwise discover.
Not all students want to work, it is true. Some who do have a part-time job may feel they have no choice in the matter. Others may choose to work to gain experience and knowledge or to increase their skills. Whatever reason exists, in the end, students with part-time employment will most likely find themselves at a distinct advantage in the long run.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The telephone has greater influence on people’s lives than television has. (100821CN=080516NA)
When it comes to television and telephone, an issue that has been discussed for several years emerges in my mind: whether the telephone has had a greater influence on people’s lives than the television. Some people think that television has had a greater impact, while others hold the opposite viewpoint. I believe, however, that both have had an equal influence.
In ancient times, there was no television, so people could only obtain limited information directly from the other people who lived near them. When the television was invented, the era of the information explosion began. By watching television, people can gain a large amount of information without going outside, which means people can learn of events that are happening in other parts of the world. In contrast, the telephone cannot provide such convenience to people. On this level, I believe that television has had a much greater impact on people’s lives.
Nonetheless, the telephone has its own merits, and has had a profound influence on the entire world. Could you imagine living in a world where you do not have and cannot use a telephone? I think the answer is definitely no because life without a telephone would be so inconvenient. For example, in ancient China, if the king wanted to tell a minister in another province about an important case, he had to send a person with a letter from Beijing to a place several thousand kilometers from the Forbidden City, which would require much time and be very difficult. Currently, however, making a telephone call allows people to be in contact with their families or friends even in remote places. Therefore, the influence of telephone has not been minimal.
In conclusion, it is inadequate to simply say that the telephone has had a greater influence on people’s lives than the television because both have some outstanding functions that the other does not. Consequently, I subscribe to the opinion that the two objects have both had a significant bearing on people’s lives.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Technology designed to make our life simpler actually makes our life more complicated.(100926CN=090621CN=080223NA)
I, in some ways, agree with this statement. Technology certainly makes information easier to access and research. Yet, as technology gets more and more comprehensive in what it can accomplish, we become more and more dependent upon it. Tasks become less straightforward and yes, in many cases, more complicated than they would have been.
Take, for instance, the act of getting directions to a new place. Fifteen years ago, we would take out a map of our town or the surrounding areas, examine it, and then write down step-by-step directions for how to drive to our destination. Sometimes it was even as simple as memorizing the route. It would take a few minutes, but once it was done, it was quite easy to carry out.
Today, many people immediately look to their GPS system in their car instead. This technological innovation is meant to make the whole navigation process smoother, but can be riddled with distracted driving and glitchy machinery that can’t find specific addresses or suggests routes that don’t make sense. After hearing the grating GPS voice tell you about an upcoming turn three or four times in a row, you start to wonder if the hassle is worth it.
Similar issues arise when people have internet access on their cell phones. If out and about with a friend and wanting to grab some lunch, instead of just heading into a nearby restaurant and seeing what they have to offer, there can be internet searches for restaurant reviews and minutes of scrolling through prices and menu offerings, slowing everything down and disrupting the spontaneity of the moment.
Of course, GPS systems and smart phones and other such technological devices aren’t horrible. They can be very useful. But when they start to become overused, reached for constantly without even consciously thinking about it, it can be problematic. We complicate our days with typing things in, pushing buttons, staring at tiny little screens a little too much. Why not trust our instincts and our environment a little more? Why not just walk or drive down the street with confidence, read road signs, head into a restaurant with no preconceived notions? We might be pleasantly surprised at what we find! I think once the technology is set aside until it is truly needed, we’re able to think and act with much clearer minds.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? To remain happy and optimistic when you fail is more important than achieving success. (101009CN=090321NA)
Every person has tried to achieve some kind of success at different stages of their life, whether it is to become no. 1 in the class or win a competitive offer from a company you are applying for. However, we cannot always succeed and sometimes we have to face failure. But even though failure is inevitable, I believe we should still remain happy and optimistic, for the following reasons.
First of all, if we have a happy and optimistic attitude towards failure, we will achieve success more easily the next time. On the one hand, people who have a positive attitude will learn from everything. When they fail, they would find their shortcomings and learn a valuable lesson from this experience rather than crying for the spilt milk. On the other hand, they will not be upset because of this failure and will continue to try until they succeed. These two important qualities would enable them to win over any difficulties through their lifetime.
Second, random success is transient while happy and optimistic attitudes endure time and will lead us toward final success. Once in a English Contest held by my school I fell behind my classmate Jim and only won the second prize. Jim was thrilled at his success and became so pride of himself that he even did not attend the English class. However, I made up my mind to study hard to catch up with him. And I believed that I could fulfill this commitment through hard work. It turned out that in the next year’s English Contest, I was the winner while Jim did not win any prize because of his pride and self-complacence. This case indicates that it is the positive attitude that matters not the results. Because when we acquire this happy and optimistic attitude we can overcome any difficulties and win lots of success in our life.
Finally, the goal of our life is not success at some particular event such as wining the contest, getting promoted, earning a lot of money and so on but to live our life fully. This require us to maintain the happy and optimistic attitude at every moment especially when we fail. Because only when we get through these adversities optimistically can we grasp the truth of life and learn to appreciate every tiny thing and every single minute. And this is the ultimate goal and the real meaning of life.
In conclusion, remaining happy and optimistic in the face of failure is far more important than simply winning. Only when we have the positive view toward life can we overcome difficulties, maintain success and live our life fully.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is better to relax by watching a movie or reading a book than by doing physical exercises. (101017CN)
For many years, research has shown that doing exercises helps to alleviate a number of health complications, leading to a healthy body, soul and mind. However, some people use all excuses to justify reasons as to why they lead a sedentary life. This essay seeks to look at benefits of physical activities as opposed to reading a book or watching television.
Doing exercises offers many benefits to one’s physiological processes. As opposed to watching TV or reading a book where energy expenditure is low, physical exercises aid in efficient blood flow and cardiovascular fitness. On the contrary, lack of exercises often leads to a number of health problems such as high blood pressure, heart diseases and obesity. To be able to truly relax one must possess a healthy body, and this has to be achieved by healthier activities like jogging, fitness training, or mountain climbing, rather than sitting in a chair all day long.
Moreover, exercises help people utilize their leisure time more constructively. People gain motor skills and other relevant traits like strength, flexibility and coordination. On the other hand, some books and programs on television end up making the viewers imitate bad habits which they see from the actors or read in the books. Since these groups of people lack time to release their stress, the chances of them developing bad habits is very high compared to those who engage in sports, games and exercises.
Finally, some forms of exercises encourage socialization and team building, which is a much greater way to relax than being alone. Examples of these exercises include many of the collective sports people often do such as soccer and basketball. In these sports, people meet and play as a team, share their happiness and excitement with each other and as a result achieve much higher levels of enjoyment and satisfaction. By contrast, watching TV or reading a book is often solitary experience, involving little interaction with others, which is boring.
In a nutshell, doing exercises is much more beneficial than watching television or reading a book. Our bodies require regular exercises to make us remain active and healthy. A fit person is more productive in the workplace since he/she can effectively accomplish responsibilities, and can also be more relaxed after work because he/she is more actively involved with the nature or other people around him/her.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is better to take a secure job with a low pay than to take a job with a high pay but is easy to lose.(101031CN=090925NA)
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is better to take a secure job with a low pay than to take a job with a high pay but is easy to lose.
Today, many people eagerly seek a high-paying yet insecure job in order to confront the great financial pressures surrounding us, such as soaring living costs. In contrast, others, who are inclined to lead lives of less abundance, prefer jobs with low pay that are more secure. As far as I am concerned, the sort of job an individual seeks should depend on his or her age.
The young, who need to prepare for their future lives, can afford to take a stab at jobs with high pay that are high-risk. Young people, full of vigor yet without the burdens of family, are well suited to risky jobs. For example, one of my friends works for a big fund company, earning a high salary in a situation where the competition is fairly severe. Although he works long hours, the rewards he obtains from this job satisfy his demand for a house in the city as well as his need to prepare for a wedding and to support his future family. More importantly, he feels a sense of achievement by succeeding in the face of fierce competition. In this way, the job meets his needs both materially and psychologically.
Although a high-salary job might fulfill a person’s desire for a decent lifestyle, such a job is not suitable for middle-aged people who cannot expend the energy involved in the work and who cannot risk losing their jobs. For example, unemployed people in their 40s and 50s cannot easily find a new job to make a living, as these people, unlike the young, cannot readily gain new skills in a short time, which leads to companies’ reluctance to hire them. When people in this age group who earn high salaries lose their jobs, most of them run into a dilemma, as they are incapable of affording the high cost of raising children. Thus, middle-aged people are not advised to have low-security jobs.
In summary, an apparently insecure job with high pay does not meet everyone’s needs, and neither does a low-pay, secure job. Only when we become aware of our requirements can we make a wise decision.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Playing sports teaches people more lessons about life. (101219CN=081205NA)
Many people, believing that life is life and sport is sport, maintain that sports cannot teach them anything about life. However, I think that sports have many aspects that are similar to life, and I would argue that people can learn important lessons from sports.
For instance, sports can teach people not to give up. All participants in a game have a strong longing to win, so they try their best to play the game, even if they have no energy. Even in the midst of exhaustion, persistence leads players to move in order to beat their opponents. For example, in the NBA game between the Houston Rockets and the San Antonio Spurs in 2004, the Spurs gained a 74-66 lead within the last few minutes, meaning that the Rockets were nearly beat by the Spurs. A large segment of the audience left the Toyota Center, but T-Mac, the heart of the Rockets, did not want to lose the game. Therefore, at the end of the game, he offered an incredible performance, winning an unbelievable thirteen points within 35 seconds to beat the Spurs. People can learn a lesson about not giving up from this basketball game and T-Mac.
Additionally, sports teach people about unity. In the 2010 South Africa World Cup, the Germans have embodied this spirit. The German team is not like the teams of England, Brazil, and Argentina, which have a large number of A-list superstars, but the members of the German team use their unity to beat their rivals one by one and earn respect. The coach of the Netherlands team remarked that the threat presented by the German team is not its offense but its unity. I believe that people can be deeply affected by the spirit of unity they see in sports.
Sports can be a mirror reflecting something meaningful in people’s lives. I firmly believe that sports teach people lessons about life.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The food we eat today is much healthier than in the past. (110108CN=091211NA)
In the past decades, food and health have received a lot of attention. While some people claim that the food we ate in the past was better, I hold the opposite opinion. Some people may argue about the environment, because the degree of contamination was much lower in the past and the growing environment for crops was better. But a good environment is no guarantee of the eating quality. Given the fact that the equipment for food preservation was simple and crude and the food hygienic standard was lower in the past, it's hard to say the food we ate was healthy. For example, just ten years ago, most people in my hometown were not able to afford refrigerators to preserve food. Considered that salt can prevent food from decay, people at that time prefer to have cure food and that have been proved bad for health. However, with the rapid development of technology, today we have more advanced equipment to preserve food from decaying and the logistical system for food transportation simplifies the conveyance process, which promised the freshness of the food. High technology leads to a more convenient and healthier life. Some people may argue that food diversification leads to a worse lifestyle, because lots of young people choose to have fast food and that's bad for health. But we should admit that people live in modern times pay more attention to the nutrient arrangement and absorption value of food and drink, because even fast-food restaurants begin to provide menus that reflect how much creoles contained in their foods. There are more nutritionists than before who teach people not only how to arrange different food materials but also how build up a well-balanced diet that can help to fortify the body against disease. For example, more and more specialists encourage people to have organic foods, which have been proved to have more nutritious than conventionally grown food. What's more, some colleges start to create characteristic curriculum such as food research to help students construct good eating habit. Last but not least, there are more health-care foods that specialized in particular health problems than before. For example, diabetic foods, which contain little sugar or no sugar, are especially for diabetic patients and good for their health. All in all, with the more advanced science and technology and better eating habits, as well as more health-care foods in this day and age, there is no doubt that the food we have today is much healthier.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? In order to celebrate major events, it’s better to organize a big party with lots of people than to have a small party where only close friends and relatives are invited. (110122CN=091113NA)
When it comes to a birthday, or some other festivals, we usually hold a party to celebrate. In fact, there are a large amount of people who would like to hold a small one because it is much cheaper as well as easier. However, I would like to invite my friends and relatives as well as related ones to a big party. The following would speak out my opinion in details.
Admittedly, holding a small party would save us a lot of money as only a few people would come. Also, the small one would be much easier to hold. Just several callings and messages would settle it. However, a larger party has many other obvious advantages as follows. First, the atmosphere of a larger party would be much better than a small one, as the more the people, the more activities would be held. Then, much more laughter would come out from so many people. That would be very interesting and convenient. In such a big party, we could relax ourselves thoroughly.
Furthermore, in the process of holding a big party, we could learn much more than from a smaller party. Before the party, we have to make sufficient preparation for it, such as when and where the party should be held to fit so many people’s table needs, what the people would eat, which kinds of activities should be held to satisfy the popular favor. All of them would help us to develop self-independence and self-confidence, which would be useful in our future.
More importantly, as the big party is not limited to my friends and relatives, I would meet a great number of new faces. At the party, I could utilize the chance to make a lot of friends and share each other’s experience, which would broaden my horizon. At the same time, I could communicate with my friends and relatives with our joys and sorrows, the party would be a platform for us to communicate with everyone.
As the atmosphere of a big party is much better, and it could broaden my horizon as well as brings me some new friends, also it could strengthen some good qualities. There is no doubt that I would like to hold a big party to invite many people who are not limited to my friends and relatives.
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People should buy things made in their own country, even if they are more expensive than things made in other countries. (110312CN=091204NA)
Numerous factors have an influence on the tastes of customers, including brand, quality, appearance, service, place of production, and technology. Some people prefer to purchase things made in their native countries because they believe that this inclination is a form of patriotism. I cannot agree with this perspective for a number of reasons.
To begin with, it is impractical to determine the location where products are made in many cases. To reduce costs and improve product quality, manufacturers usually employ technologies and materials from all over the world. As a result, it can be difficult to distinguish where a product’s place of production is. For example, the brand of a computer might be Lenovo, but its central processing unit might be designed by Intel and its display might come from Sony. Lenovo is a company in China, whereas Intel is located in the United States and Sony is located in Japan. If a person buys a Lenovo computer, he or she is buying a product from a Chinese company but is also purchasing products from the United States and Japan. In the case of many products, it is not possible for people to buy things made entirely in their own country.
In fact, choosing products from various countries can benefit both customers and society as a whole. Of course, buying products from native companies can spur the development of companies in one’s own country over the short term, yet I would argue that people can benefit more if they buy things from different countries over the long term. A variety of companies from different countries lead to competition among manufacturers. When this occurs, civilians can enjoy the benefits of low prices and good services. This reminds me of the Korean beef policy. The Korean government encourages citizens to purchase beef from their own nation and forbids importing a large amount of beef from other countries. As a result, few people eat beef. What is worse, without competition, local technologies for producing beef have been stagnant. Therefore, I am not supportive of the view that one should buy things only from one’s own country, no matter how expensive the product is.
In sum, because of the difficulty of distinguishing places of production and in light of the benefits resulting from purchasing products from various countries, I cannot agree with the idea that people should buy things made in their own country regardless of price.
托福课程推荐
新托福破冰特训暑假班（保80冲90）
新托福90分阶梯强化暑假班（保90分）
新托福90分签约保证暑假班（保90冲100）
新托福100分签约保证暑假班（保100分）
下一篇： 上一篇：
带"*"表示为必填如想了解更多的课程信息，请留下您的联系方式
*学生姓名：
家长称谓：
*联系方式（电话/QQ）：
*咨询课程：
电子邮箱：
学习意向：
是否参加过考试：
武汉新思达国际英语 New Star International English
地址：武汉市洪山区珞瑜路560号吴家湾大厦19楼 邮编：430070 邮箱：
电话：400-027-781180 传真：027-
版权所有：武汉纽思达教育科技有限公司|武汉新思达国际英语|武汉雅思培训|武汉托福培训|武汉SAT培训
技术支持：