(1)
model answer:
The three graphs of wheat exports each show a quite different pattern between 1985 and 1990. Exports from Australia declined over the five-year period, while the Canadian market fluctuated considerably, and the European Community showed an increase.
In 1985, Australia exported about 15 millions of tonnes of wheat and the following year the number increased by one million tonnes to 16 million. After that, however, there was a gradual decline until 1989 and 1990 when it stabilised at about 11 million tonnes. Over the same period, the amount of Canadian exports varied greatly. It started at 19 million tonnes in 1985, reached a peak in 1988 of 24 million, dropped dramatically in 1989 to 14 million tonnes and then climbed back to 19 million in 1990. Seventeen million tonnes were exported from the European Community in 1985, but this decreased to 14 million tonnes in 1986 and then rose to 15 million in 1987 and 1988 before increasing once more to 20 million in 1990.
(2)
Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, and the protection is a waste of resources.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The current global extinction crisis is one of the greatest challenges posed by the rapid expansion of human populations. The protection of endangered species, as far as I can see, should be a top priority for three main reasons: economic value, scientific value, and survival value.
Wild animals provide many valuable substances, such as meat, skins and furs. The financial value of wild species is important to the economies of many nations. In many countries the recreational viewing of animals at zoos is also a source of revenue.
The study of wildlife, on the other hand, provides valuable knowledge about various life processes. Such study has helped scientists understand how the human body functions and why people behave as they do. Scientists have also gained medical knowledge and discovered important medical products by studying wildlife. In addition, by observing the effect of environmental pollution on wild animals, scientists have learned how pollution affects human life.
Furthermore, every species of wildlife plays a role in helping maintain the balanced, living systems of the Earth. These systems must continue to function if life is to survive. Thus, the loss of any species can threaten the survival of all life, including human beings.
In conclusion, the protection of wild animals in the 21st century is by no means a waste of resources; on the contrary, its importance should ever be more stressed by international organizations, government agencies, industry and individuals for the valuable resources the wild animals provide us and for human survival. (250 words)
(3)
Some people claim that there are more disadvantages of the car than its advantages.
Do you agree or disagree?
The current hot issues include the one of weighing the advantages and disadvantages of the automobile. In my opinion, its advantages outstrip its disadvantages for two major reasons: impact on society and economic impact.
Firstly, the development of automobiles has had an enormous effect on people’s way of life throughout the world. The automobile has given people freedom of movement. It influences where people live and work and how they spend their leisure time. However, each year, motor vehicle accidents kill an estimated 300,000 people throughout the world. But it is the drivers that are the chief factor in vehicle safety because they are responsible for about two-thirds of all accidents. Besides, the automobile itself has become safer and modern road building techniques have increasingly lowered the risk of automobile accidents.
Secondly, many nations depend on automobile production to provide jobs for millions of workers. Filling stations, restaurants, and other businesses that serve automobile travelers are of major importance to a country’s economy. In addition, many developing nations have begun making automobiles to stimulate industry. For example, China has promoted broad-based automobile manufacturing. However, automobiles produce terrible air pollution that endangers people’s health in many of the world’s big cities. But in many countries, steps have been taken to control air pollution caused by automobiles.
In summary, the striking changes in people’s lives and the economic impact created by the automobile in the early 20th century have since spread across much of the globe and its disadvantages are becoming insignificant. (250 words)
(4)
Tobacco is a kind of drug. People have been free to sue it. Some people think that it should be illegal to use it comparing with other drugs. To what extent do you agree or disagree? What is your opinion?
The use of tobacco products has been a controversial issue for many years. To my mind, tobacco should in no sense be compared to drugs as illegal, but should not be encouraged either, considering its harm to health.
Tobacco has long been a source of money for the governments in many countries. This income comes from taxes on the manufactured products. Excise taxes also come from tobacco that arrives from other countries.
Yet, cigarette smoking is a leading cause of many life-threatening diseases. During the 1960’s, scientists established that smoking tobacco products – especially cigarettes – could cause lung cancer, heart disease, and other illnesses.
While cigarette smoking has its harm mainly on individuals, drug abuse has a range of potentially harmful effects not only on individuals but also on family, friends, work and society.
Cocaine can cause high blood pressure, leading to a brain stroke. Injecting drugs into the body with contaminated needles can lead to blood poisoning, which may result in death. Sharing needles with a person who has AIDS can give a user those diseases.
Frequent drug users may turn to crime to meet the increasing expense for their habit. Continued drug use may cause personality changes. Some users lose interest in school or work, or have difficulty meeting the responsibilities of a job or family.
To conclude, cigarette smoking, in spite of its harm to a person’s health, has the advantage of earning revenue from taxes for a country and it is incomparable to the lethal drug abuse. (250 words)
(5)
Some people believe that students who want to go to university after graduation from high school should have about one year’s time to get a job to obtain work experience or have a travel to enlarge their vision.
Do you agree or disagree? What is your opinion?
High school students who intend to study at university should attend tertiary education after graduation. To spend one year’s time doing a job to acquire work experience or to travel for broadening one’s vision is, to my mind, a waste of time and energy.
First, university education is the continuation of high school education for those students who want to pursue their learning at an advanced level. A break of one year from academic study will probably weaken one’s memory of what has been learned, especially for those who will study such theoretical subjects as mathematics, physics or chemistry.
Besides, many nations have established one examination that all students must pass to qualify for admission to a university. For example, in China there is a college entrance examination. Anyone who fails in the examination will be denied of admission into a university.
Furthermore, one year’s work or travel does not help students much in their academic studies at university because it is unpredictable for one’s work experience to be integrated into one’s studies of specific subjects, to say nothing of traveling experience. Even if some subjects, such as MBA, require students to have work experience, one year’s work experience, however, is not sufficient to meet the requirements of three or five years, and one’s work experience should, after all, be related to management.
To conclude, I would rather suggest that university’s curriculum allow the integration of academic study with practical training for the compensation for students’ lack of work experience.(250 words)
(6)
Some people say that the government should not put money on building theatres and sports stadiums. They should spend more money on medical care and education. Do you agree or disagree?
Much discussion concerning allocation of resources assumes that the government should spend money on medicine and education rather than on theatres and sports stadiums. In my opinion, this issue should be examined from the angle of whether the investment benefits the great majority of the population.
The institutions of medical care and education, undoubtedly, should receive priority in the allocation of a government’s expenditures, at the thought of millions of children from deprived backgrounds who now get a substandard education, and who would require a relatively high quality of education if they are to enjoy anything approaching equality of opportunity in later life. Another pressing need of society is improvement of medical care for the adult poor, for the aged, and so forth down the list.
Theatres and sports stadiums are institutions for promoting human culture. A successful theatrical event is an exciting and stimulating experience, whether it occurs in a grand theatre or a high school auditorium. Spectators as well as those involved in the production feel this excitement. Sports stadiums, on the other hand, attract millions of spectators to watch professionals play every year. Many more millions watch games on television, read about them in newspapers, and discuss them with their friends. Therefore, can we say that these are unnecessary public expenditures the government should ignore?
In conclusion, today man is becoming ever more aware of his spiritual needs. Medicine and education are needs that we recognize, but are contacts with theatrical or sports events also basic needs?(250 words)