1. It has been said, “Not everything that is learned is contained in books.” Compare and
contrast knowledge gained from experience with knowledge gained from books. In your
opinion, which source is more important? Why?
As far as I can remember, people have been debating the pros and cons of knowledge from
experiences versus that from books. They also argue that which knowledge plays a more
important role in this society. From my point of view, I firmly feel that the former is more
crucial than its counterpart. The rationale behind this is presented below.
Among other things, we need to dwell on the following question: why does a theory exist?
There might be numerous reasons for this question. In my opinion, it is for reality. Unless theory
applies to reality, it is nothing more than dead theory. Let’s take an example in the realm of
sports. A myriad of sports doctors and/or scientists have attempted to set up uncountable
theories in an effort to make better records. They have poured all of their energy into inventing
lighter shoes, better sportswear, more scientific balls, and so on. As you know, countless
theories are under such inventions. Through trial and error, they have tried their best to make
achievements. What do they want? Theory! No, they have only pursued better records.
Even assuming the above is not less implausible, some argue that without such theory, it would
not be impossible to be successful in the field of sports. I concede that if it had not been the
scientists’ efforts and commitments to sports, we would have not dreamed today’s remarkable
improvement in the sports industry. But, I have another reason why I put an emphasis on the
knowledge from experience. Consider the following:
It’s was the time I went to Boston last month. Before going there, I had tried to collect every
information on Boston ranging from airport to hotel, subway, souvenir stores, etc. I, on the other
hand, faced a big problem as soon as I arrived at the Boston airport. It was that the information
on subway was wrong on the Internet. This kind of happening frequently occurs on the Internet.
Not all the information online is not trustworthy. But, if accompanied with a guide, I would be
able to reduce my problems. But, through this precious experience, I came to realize that
experience far outweighs thousand books. It’s because I could learn it by using my five senses
which leave a lasting imprint on the mind.
For these reasons, although everyone may hold a different position on this issue, I strongly think
that the knowledge is not less significant that that gained from real experiences.
2. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Technology had made the world
a better place to live. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
As far as I can remember, people have been debating the pros and cons of today’s technology.
They also argue whether or not the technology only has a positive impact on our lives. From my
point of view, whether it is beneficial or not, I strongly feel that technology offers us greater
opportunities to enjoy ourselves. The rationale behind this is presented below.
Among other things, transportations have been dramatically developed. In the past, especially
200 years ago, nobody would have dreamed that we could be able to go to America by air. This
is all attributed to the advent of technology and its fast development. Even such transportations
have been still improved. For example, when I was in elementary school, it took seven hours to
visit my grandparents’ house. Yet, it now requires just two hours to go there. What a huge
difference! We are all beneficiaries of this remarkable, state-of-the-art science.
But, even assuming the above is not less implausible, some argue that we, human beings, suffer
from scorching summer, massive flooding, air pollution, and so forth. They believe that science
has brought us more curse than blessing. I, however, argue that everything has its dark side.
Hence, I still put an emphasis on that such technology has created more merits than flaws.
Consider the following:
These days, most people enrich their lives by surfing the Internet. Through the Internet, they can
gain a vast wealth of information with a single click of a mouse in the comfort their homes.
What a convenient! Not only can they do shopping on the web, but they also take online courses
presented by cyber universities. For instance, my elder sister works during the daytime; yet, she
has always had desire for higher education. Without such programs, it would not be possible for
her to realize her dreams. For this reason, it is needless to say that she benefits from current
technology.
All things considered, although everyone may hold a different position on this issue, I firmly
feel that technology has allowed us to have a greater enjoyment of life. We can travel on and
forth by plane as well as we can enroll in cyber universities although we are hectic.
3. Do you agree or disagree? Children should begin their formal education at a very early
age and should spend most of their time on school studies. Use specific reasons and
examples to support your choice.
As far as I am concerned, ongoing debate exists over whether or not children should spend the
bulk of their time at school. Many people, if not most, argue that enjoying themselves at an
early age is much important because it’s conducive to shaping their emotions. But, from my
point of view, I think that children should stay at school for a long time if possible. The rationale
behind this is presented below. (The reasons might be only admitted in South Korea.)
Among other things, we can prevent parents from wasting a vast amount of expense. In Korea,
parents have poured all of their energy in order for their children to go to top-notch schools.
Unfortunately, this is the most important matter because it affects the rest of their lives. For this
reason, they spend a fortune on hiring tutors, buying books, or sending them to private schools.
However, poor parents can’t afford to these things. Hence, unless children are allowed at school
for a long time, there might occur conflicts between rich and poor family.
But, even assuming the above is not less implausible, some may argue that parents are the best
teachers in the world not only because they like their children the most but also because they
have enormously positive influences on them. Yet, I counter-argue “Do they get a formal
training and/or are they professional teachers?” Consider the following:
At school, there are many experts on education. Since they specialized in their major, they can
teach students well and lead them down right paths. What’s more, they might have plentiful
experiences to teach students and meet a lot of people from different backgrounds. For this
reason, they have know-how how to lead their students well. We have a legitimate reason why
we call them “experts”. I strongly feel that numerous students will be able to stand on the
shoulders of giants if they are at school.
All things considered, although people may hold a different position on this issue, I firmly argue
that school provides children (students) with numerous opportunities: 1) Parents can save huge
sums of money. 2) Children can have a better chance to be successful.
4. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? All students should be required
to study art and music in secondary school. Use specific reasons to support your answer.
As far as I am concerned, people have been debating the pros and cons of making arts and/or
music classes mandatory at school. Some argue that students may be detracted from their
interests and concentration on their major studies if they take diverse courses. But, from my
point of view, I firmly feel that arts and music are very important in our lives. The rationale
behind this is presented below.
Among other things, engaging in a broader field of study is crucial to expand our knowledge. It
is needless to say that such diversity will be able to allow us to have a greater chance to be
successful. For example, my elder brother got an interview for getting a job last year. During the
interview, according to him, he gave good impressions to interviewers not only because his
presentation was excellent but also because he gave adequate answers from weird questions. For
this reason, he was able to pass for the interview well. He believes that this was all attributed
that he took a variety of cultural courses at college ranging from arts to music, bowling, history,
and so forth.
But, even assuming the above is not less implausible, some argue that students should only
focus on classes related to their major. By taking part in such classes, they believe that they can
easily climb the ladder for success. But, they carelessly overlook the most important fact that
arts and music provide us. Consider the following:
Most people might know that arts and music are very conducive to our health. This is already
evidenced by a number of clinical studies. Hence, these days, numerous doctors take advantage
of them in order to treat their patients. Many studies have also shown that arts and music play
vital roles in helping disturbed patients. What’s more, we can escape our stress by taking part in
music classes in which we can play the musical instruments and sing our favorite songs. It’s not
too much to say that they are perfect roots of having better health.
All things considered, although everyone may hold a different position on this issue, I strongly
argue that arts and music are indispensable to our lives, especially at school. It’s because that
they are beneficial to our health and they help us to have much knowledge.
5. Some people believe that a college or university education should be available to all
students. Others believe that higher education should be available only to good students.
Discuss these views. Which view do you agree with? Explain why?
As far as I am concerned, many people have been debating over whether people have to be
provided equal opportunities for high education or not. Regarding this controversial issue, I
firmly feel that such high education should be available to all students. The rationale behind this
is presented below.
Among other things, I strongly believe that the primary role of education is to equally present
identical opportunities to people. Let’s suppose that if a small number of people have the green
light for further education, do you think it’s fair? It violates the spirit of education.
But, even assuming the above is not less implausible, some argue that this world is properly
operated by elites. They also bolsters themselves by saying that only a small portion of people
are qualified for getting a formal training at college. They point out that numerous people have
been admitted by open admission. But, they believe less than 50% of students will be able to
graduate from college on time. In the case of Korea, I concede that countless students give up
their courses; in the end, they become dropouts. However, although their claim is entirely
plausible, they carelessly overlook the important matter. Consider the following:
As you know, people have their own different potentials. But, the long and short of it is that the
difference between good and poor students is determined by the fact they discover their
potentials early, late or never. Hence, poor students also have chances for better students. For
example, my elder brother, named Yong, had been in the army for twenty-six months. According
to him, through rigorous trainings in the camp and/or army, he could find his inner person. Since
then, he has inspired himself with self-confidence. As a result, his grades at college have been
straight A’s. Every semester, he could get a scholarship. Accordingly, I assume that nobody can
predict our potentials. Consequently, higher education should be given to all students.
All things considered, although everyone may hold a different position, I firmly feel that we
have to get a same green signal for further studies.
6. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is more important for students
to study history and literature than to study science and mathematics. Use specific reasons
and examples to support your opinion.
As far as I am concerned, people have been debating over whether students should be taught
history and/or literature at school or not. Some strongly argue that studying history and
literature is not directly conducive to our lives. But, from my point of view, I firmly feel that we
make those courses (history & literature) mandatory. The rationale behind this is presented
below:
In this rapidly changing society, as stated above, some people have emphasized that history and
literature do not shed light on our lives. These days, with the advent of technology and its fast
development, we are all in a hurry to keep track of such fast-improved science. For this reason,
people who are against history and literature bolster themselves by saying that since only
today’s remarkable, state-of-the-art technology enrich our lives, we don’t have to study history
and literature.
Even assuming the above is not less implausible, they carelessly overlook the important reason
why we should learn history and literature. Its primary reason is that we should not repeat
making mistakes like the past. Through appreciating such mistakes, we can be prepared for our
bright future. As you know, everything has its own history; thus, without sufficient
understanding of something, we will be likely to make analogous mistakes.
As you know, numerous legendary figures such as Alexander the Great, Buddha, Ghandi,
Roosevelt, etc. have been always respected by countless leaders over time. This point insinuates
that they regard these great people as their role models. Then they would like to be successful
like them. I venture a guess that Bill Gates who is a CEO of Microsoft might have his own role
model among historical figures. For these reasons, we can conclude that numerous leaders who
live in this technology society even have the person they admire. This suggests that history also
plays a vital role in maintaining and enhancing the 21st society.
All things considered, everyone may hold a different position on this issue. Yet, I put an
emphasis on that we should study history (and literature) at school. This is because not only that
history still has a positive impact on us, but also because it can prevent us from making
mistakes.
7. A university plans to develop a new research center in your country. Some people want a
center for business research. Other people want a center fro research in agriculture
(farming). Which of these two kinds of research centers do you recommend for your
country? Use specific reasons in your recommendation.
As far as I am concerned, people have been debating the pros and cons of investing a center for
agriculture versus doing a center for business. From my point of view, I feel we need to invest
money to the field of agriculture. The rationale behind this is presented below.
Among other things, we have been eating rice as our main meal. This suggests that our lives
have been exposed to farming. Even though, these days, the number of farmers has been
gradually declined, in the past, 90% of the people were farmers. But, unfortunately, such
agriculture in Korea has been ignored and abandoned by people. Then, who will protect it? How
can we protect it? Unless we keep maintaining and/or improving it, we will feel a sharp regret
for it in the near future.
Even assuming the above is not less implausible, some argue that, in this rapidly changing
society, a number of companies have currently attempted to locate their branches abroad. This is
attributed that they would like to keep track of today’s growing trend: “Internationalization.”
They, however, make a careless mistake. Consider the following:
In 2007, we made an FTA contract with the U.S.; thus, Korean agriculture is now severely
intimidated by the free trade. Therefore, if we only focus on world business, the competitiveness
of our farming will be weakened.
As you know, numerous agriculture products will be
brought in Korea soon. They are very inexpensive. Their qualities are not that bad compared to
Korean ones. The crux is not this. The disaster is that most farmers will lose their jobs. Whose
fault is this? Government or farmers? In order to prevent farmers from losing their jobs and
worksites, it’s the time when we have to pour all of our energy to guard ours.
All things considered, everyone may hold a different position on this issue. Yet, I strongly
believe that we must invest huge sums of money to agriculture. The reasons are simple. It is for
defending our products and our people.
8. A friend of yours has received some money and plans to use all of it either to go on
vacation or to buy a car. Your friend has asked you for advice. Compare your friend’s tow
choices and explain which one you think your friend should choose.
If we usually have money, we will belong to the following categories: One is spending money
on something; the other is saving money for a better future. If my friend asks me such a
question, I am going to choose the latter one. The rationale behind this is represented below.
Among other things, nobody can predict our future. It’s entirely possible that we will have a
cancer next month or next year. Except that we are rich, we need huge sums of money when we
face an unforeseen circumstance. To illustrate my uncle’s example, he had a testicular cancer in
2005. Although his insurance covered more than 80% of the expenses, he and his family had
suffered from pecuniary problems. Therefore, we need to save as much money as possible in
order not to face disaster. If not, nothing and nobody will guarantee us shining tomorrow.
Even assuming the above is not less implausible, some may challenge my point by saying that
they can escape their stress from their humdrum day-to-day lives and/or their hectic ones if they
buy what they want. Hence, they claim that wasting money on something they really like to
purchase can alleviate their stress. They also bolster themselves that it will be more conducive
to their health. I totally approve of their opinion. But, they make a careless mistake. Consider
the following:
In our lives, as people age, they need a vast amount of money. Let me present some examples
about this: educating their children, their children’s wedding, house occasions, someone’s death
in their family, etc. What’s more, after retirement, since they no longer earn money, they should
need much money. To illustrate one of them in detail, it usually takes more than $200,000 to
educate one child in South Korea. (This might vary from family to family.) I feel that it’s a big
burden on parents. If we dwell on other factors (wedding, house occasion, and death), we had
better make a bank book right now.
All things considered, although everyone may hold a different position on this issue, I strongly
support the perspective of saving money. As stated above, it’s not only because it can lead us to
a bright future, but also because we can be prepared for unexpected situations.
9. Some people think that governments should spend as much money as possible on
developing or buying computer technology. Other people disagree and think that this
money should be spent on more basic needs. Which one of these opinions do you agree
with? Use specific reasons and details to support your answer.
Hi Soongdora
I’ve streamlined the prose and the grammar and touched up some of the
sentence constructions. I think you articulate your words well, so some
of my changes are refinements of a way of saying something: so, a phrase
like many, if not most, people are even suffering from fundamental necessities
should be many, if not most, people in the world are suffering from a lack of
fundamental necessities. Also it is always helpful in such writing to look for more
economy in the way you say things. So, instead of a sentence like From my point of
view, I agree to the latter. The rationale behind this is presented below…. would be
better as one sentence… I agree with this stance against computer development and
present my reasons below.
A regular problem with ESL students is use of prepositions (in, of, with, by); singular
and plural verbs (they point out but he points out) and tenses. I think your tenses are
good, but one or two prepositions are out of place.
Otherwise, I think your essay reads well.
I have used Word’s Track Changes to record my edits. The text below is the clean,
edited version of your document, and, if you are happy with it, you can use it as is, or
copy and paste it. The text below that shows my edits highlighted.
If you have any queries, please don’t hesitate to contact me,
Kind regards
WordMechanic
1. Final version
People have been debating the pros and cons of improving computer technology as far back as I
can remember. However, many people are against it because the development of computer
technology requires a huge outlay of capital at a time when many, if not most people in the
world, are suffering from a lack of fundamental necessities. I agree with this stance against
computer development and present my reasons below.
People around the world, especially in Africa, are undernourished. They don’t have
enough money to buy basic needs. A recent UNICEF report reveals that a third of the children in
Africa do not have enough food. Accordingly, UNICEF has put a special emphasis on this
matter in an attempt to reduce starvation. They point out that if we each send just one dollar to
Africa, the people of Africa will be free of worries for two days.
But, even assuming the above is very plausible, some may argue that with the advent
and rapid development of technology, today’s world has provided us with greater conveniences.
One of the best illustrations is the Internet. These days, countless people can access a vast
wealth of information with a single click of a mouse. It’s very convenient. This idea is
compatible with mine, but there is one important matter to consider:
The earth is gradually weakening. Even though current high-tech products give us a
greater enjoyment of life, if the future of the earth is threatened, saving it will be imperative.
Although science has made the impossible possible, and the unrealistic realistic, its advances
have been more of a curse than a blessing. For example, we are now suffering from air pollution,
scorching summers, massive flooding, and so forth. Do you still believe we should focus on
improving science? The more we concentrate on science, the worse the earth will become. Now
is the time to look after the earth.
To sum up, everyone may hold a different position on this issue. But, in my case, all
things considered, I firmly believe that spending money on basic needs is a better idea. This is
because many people throughout the world are malnourished, and the earth needs our protection.
2. Edits Highlighted
People have been debating the pros and cons of improving computer technology as far back as I
can remember. However, many people are against it because the development of computer
technology requires a huge outlay of capital at a time when many, if not most people in the
world, are suffering from a lack of fundamental necessities. I agree with this stance against
computer development and present my reasons below.
People around the world, especially in Africa, are undernourished. They don’t have
enough money to buy basic needs. A recent UNICEF report reveals that a third of the children
in Africa do not have enough food. Accordingly, UNICEF has put a special emphasis on this
matter in an attempt to reduce starvation. They point out that if we each send just one dollar to
Africa, the people of Africa will be free of worries for two days.
But, even assuming the above is very plausible, some may argue that with the advent
and rapid development of technology, today’s world has provided us with greater conveniences.
One of the best illustrations is the Internet. These days, countless people can access a vast
wealth of information with a single click of a mouse. It’s very convenient. This idea is
compatible with mine, but there is one important matter to consider:
The earth is gradually weakening. Even though current high-tech products give us a
greater enjoyment of life, if the future of the earth is threatened, saving it will be imperative.
Although science has made the impossible possible, and the unrealistic realistic, its advances
have been more of a curse than a blessing. For example, we are now suffering from air pollution,
scorching summers, massive flooding, and so forth. Do you still believe we should focus on
improving science? The more we concentrate on science, the worse the earth will become. Now
is the time to look after the earth.
To sum up, everyone may hold a different position on this issue. But, in my case, all
things considered, I firmly believe that spending money on basic needs is a better idea. This is
because many people throughout the world are malnourished, and the earth needs our protection.
10. Some people believe that university students should be required to attend classes.
Others believe that going to classes should be optional for students. Which point of view do
you agree with? Use specific reasons and details to explain your answer.
1. First draft
There is an ongoing debate over the pros and cons of mandatory curriculum as far back as I can
remember. Some points out that such compulsory courses may prevent students from having
creative thoughts. However, others believe that university should give the green light to students
for choosing classes by themselves. I agree with this stance against the latter and present my
reasons below.
To begin with, if school makes courses optional, many students, perhaps most, are reluctant to
participating in ethics, history, and philosophy classes. The reasons might be that they are too
boring to foster students’ motivation for studies, and that they are not beneficial for their future
success. Yet, at least, in the case of history, I strongly believe that it’s very conducive to today’s
world. We can be sure to know something of the future by studying history since it repeats every
time. Furthermore, legendary figures, such as Alexander the Great, Napoleon, Buddha, and/or
Genghis Khan, have been always inspiration and sources to countless leaders in this high-tech
society. This well insinuates that history (as well as other courses) can provide us with
invaluable lessons.
But, even assuming the above is very plausible, some may argue that mandatory courses have
negative impacts on student’s ingenious thoughts. I concede this idea. But, I still put an
emphasis on required courses because there is a more important matter to consider:
Students can be more successful if they follow the courses proposed by university. As far as I
am concerned, those courses are made carefully by school administration where there are
numerous educational experts. Their roles are to lead students down correct paths. So, my point
is that students can better prepare for their future success in both their further studies and job
employments. The chance to fail will be much lower than that made by students.
To sum up, everyone may hold a different position on this issue. Yet, all things considered, I
firmly believe that required courses have more advantages than optional ones. This is because
history, ethics, and philosophy classes offer students wisdom, and they are supported by a lot of
educational specialists.
2. Edited version
There has been an ongoing debate over the pros and cons of mandatory curriculum for as long
as I can remember. Some point out that such compulsory courses may prevent students from
thinking creatively. However, others believe that university should encourage students to choose
their own classes. I agree with the former stance.
To begin with, if a school makes courses optional, many students, perhaps most, are
reluctant to take courses in ethics, history, and philosophy. The reasons might be that they are
too boring, and that they are not relevant for their future success. History, believe that is very
relevant to today’s world. We can be sure to learn something about the future by studying
history since it repeats itself. Furthermore, legendary figures, such as Alexander the Great,
Napoleon, Buddha, and Genghis Khan, have inspired countless of today’s leaders. This well
insinuates that history (as well as other courses) can teach us invaluable lessons.
But, even assuming the above is very plausible, some may argue that mandatory
courses limits students’ creativity and ingenuity. I concede this idea. But, I still put an emphasis
on required courses because there is a more important matter to consider:
Students can be more successful if they follow the courses proposed by university. The
curriculum is planned carefully by experts in the administration and on the faculty. Their roles
are to lead students down correct paths. So, my point is that students can better prepare for their
future success in both their future studies and employment. The chance to fail will be much
lower than that made by students.
To sum up, people disagree on this issue. Yet, , I firmly believe that required courses
have more advantages than optional ones. This is because history, ethics, and philosophy classes
offer students wisdom, and they have the support or many educational specialists.
11. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Teachers should be paid
according to how much their students learn. Give specific reasons and examples to support
your opinion.
1. First draft
People have been debating over the pros and cons of merit system as far back as I can remember.
Some are against it because it can disrupt a school’s atmosphere. However, others approve of
the system since they believe that it can motivate teachers to give good lessons. I agree with this
stance against merit system and present my reasons below.
First of all, merit system can instill high competition among teachers. Accordingly,
they make every effort in order to get a high salary. It’s entirely possible that they may hide
important materials or may not share each other’s ideas. Many studies in Korea have shown that
merit system had a negative impact on school. Hence, it has not spread all over the Korea. This
insinuates that many educational experts, perhaps most, consider it as failure.
But, even assuming the above is very plausible, some may argue that merit system
plays a vital role in motivating teachers to make good classes. Therefore, this can automatically
have positive influences on students. They also have the legitimate question: What is education
for? They firmly believe that education exists only for students. I totally agree with this position,
but there is one more important reason to consider:
Numerous teachers are reluctant to teaching students under merit system. This is
because teachers are screened by students. For this reason, they will attempt to make an outward
show by the allure of getting more money. Yet, do you think this is appropriate in the field of
education? Even though students commit bad things, they will not scold them because they are
evaluated by those students. If this situation spreads all over the schools, who will assume
teacher’s positions?
To sum up, everyone may hold a different opinion on this issue. However, in my case, I
do not approve of merit system. This is because the system can be a cause of devastating
school’s atmosphere and countless teachers may not want to give lectures under merit system.
2. Editied version
People have been debating the pros and cons of the merit system in Korean education as far
back as I can remember. Some are against it because it can disrupt a school’s atmosphere.
However, others approve of the system since they believe that it can motivate teachers to
provide good lessons. I am against the merit system and present my reasons below.
The merit system can instill high levels of competition among teachers. Accordingly,
they will make every effort in order to get a higher salary. It’s entirely possible that they may
hide important materials or may not share each other’s ideas. Many studies in Korea have
shown that the merit system had a negative impact on schools. Consequently, it has not spread
widely throughout Korea. This implies that many educational experts (perhaps most) consider it
a failure.
But even assuming that the merit system had some negative impact, others may argue
that it plays a vital role in motivating teachers to conduct good classes. Therefore, this can
automatically have a positive influence on students. They also have the legitimate question:
What is education for? They firmly believe that education exists only for the students. I totally
agree with this position, but there is one more important factor to consider.
Many teachers are reluctant to teach students under the merit system. This is because
teachers are scored by students. For this reason, they will simply attempt to make themselves
more appealing, driven by the prospect of getting more money. Is this appropriate in the field of
education? Even though students commit bad acts, teachers will not scold them because they are
evaluated by those students. If this situation spread through all the schools, who would assume
teacher’s positions?
To sum up, everyone may hold a different opinion on this issue. However in my case, I
do not approve of the merit system. This is because the system could be devastating to a
school’s atmosphere and countless teachers may not want to give lectures under a merit system.
12. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Games are as important for
adults as they are for children. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
1. First draft
There has been an ongoing debate over whether or not games play an important role to adults.
Many people, perhaps most, are against this position that games are not conducive to adults.
However, others may assume that games have positive impacts on adults. I agree with the latter
stance and present my reasons below.
First of all, games instill a sense of cooperation regardless of age. Hence, even though
they are already grown-up, they can have an opportunity to learn the importance of mutual aid
and remind it over time. As you know, we, human beings, are social animals. Everything in the
world is mutually interwoven. For this reason, I firmly believe that cooperation can play a vital
role in sustaining peace and/or controlling today’s complicated society.
But, even assuming the above is very plausible, people who disapprove of my idea
may argue that games are not helpful for adults. Like the following proverb, “The child is father
of the man,” they assert that games cannot change one’s characteristics much. I somewhat agree
with this assertion. Yet, I still put an emphasis on my position since there is one more important
matter to consider:
They can stay healthy by participating in sports games. As people age, they have a
greater chance to get diseases or to be fat. To illustrate my uncle’s case, he underwent lung
surgery after his retirement. The main reason for getting it is that he had not exercised when he
was young according to his doctor. But, these days, he recovered his health because he has
worked out regularly. As far as I know, he goes to a mountain every week. What’s more, many
clinical studies have shown that 30 percent of the Korean men are suffering from their
overweight. For this reason, I strongly believe that games can provide us with better lives.
To sum up, although everyone may hold a different position on this issue, I am for the
idea that games are important to us, especially more to adults. The rationale is that games teach
them a sense of cooperation as well as adults can be healthier than before when they exercise.
2. Edited draft
There is an ongoing debate over whether or not games play an important role in adults’ lives.
Many people, perhaps most, believe that games are not valuable to adults. Others, however,
believe that games have positive impacts on adults. I agree with the latter stance and present my
reasons below.
Games instill a sense of cooperation regardless of age. Hence, even though adults are
already grown, games give them an opportunity to learn the importance of mutual aid and are
reminded of that importance as they play on a regular basis. As you know, as human beings, we
are social animals. Everything in the world is mutually interwoven. For this reason, I firmly
believe that cooperation plays a vital role in sustaining peace and controlling today’s
complicated society.
Even assuming the above is very plausible, people who disagree with my view may
argue that games are not helpful for adults. Like the following proverb, “The child is father of
the man,” they assert that games cannot change one’s characteristics. I somewhat agree with this
assertion. Yet, I still emphasis my position because there is one more important matter to
consider: Adults can stay healthy by participating in sports games.
As people age, they have a greater chance of contracting diseases or becoming fat. To
illustrate, we can look at my uncle’s case. He underwent lung surgery after his retirement.
According to his doctor, the main reason he needed this operation it is that he had not exercised
when he was young. These days, my uncle recovered his health because he has worked out
regularly. As far as I know, he goes to the mountains every week. What’s more, many clinical
studies have shown that 30 percent of Korean men suffer from being overweight. For this reason,
I strongly believe that games can provide us with better lives.
To summarize, although everyone may hold a different position on whether games are
valuable to adults or not, my position is that games are important to adults. In fact, games may
be more important to adults than children. My rationale is that games teach adults a sense of
cooperation as well as help adults live healthier lives when they exercise.
13. Some people trust their first impressions about a person's character because they
believe these judgments are generally correct. Other people do not judge a person's
character quickly because they believe first impressions are often wrong. Compare these
two attitudes. Which attitude do you agree with? Support your choice with specific
examples.
There has been an ongoing debate over the pros and cons of the first impression when
evaluating people. Many people, perhaps most, are against this stance that first impressions are
very important. However, others raise the objection because they believe that first impressions
change over time. I agree with the latter position and present my reasons below.
First of all, our first impressions are not always the same. As time passes, they could be
altered dramatically (or a little). For example, I met my high school friend two months ago. At
that time, I was very surprised at his appearance. In the past, he didn’t care about his outfits,
whereas, he now became dandy. His marvelous suits made everyone in the party astonished.
According to him, after he passed a bar exam, he has attempted to switch the prejudice towards
him.
But, even assuming the above is very plausible, people who disapprove of my idea
may assume that first impressions play a vital role in job interviews. They also point out that
first impressions are one of the most significant, deciding factors to aid in one’s successful
employment. I totally concede this. Yet, I still put an emphasis on my idea because there is one
more important matter to consider:
Do you think first impressions give us perfect answers when judging a person? I don’t
think so. These days, many studies have shown that first impressions cannot be a trustworthy
factor. The rationale is that giving a good impression is not guaranteed one’s success in reality.
For this reasons, Samsung, which is one of the leading electrical companies in the world, makes
every effort to hire employees. Their plans for employment have been dramatically changed. It
is said that it takes twelve hours to have an interview with one candidate. In addition to this
muti-layered interview, Samsung hosts a training camp for a month in an attempt to select good
employees. This indicates that they came to realize that first impressions are not conducive to
choosing good people.
To sum up, everyone may hold a different position on this issue. However, all things
considered, I am for the idea that first impressions are not helpful for judging others like the
following proverbs: One should not judge a book by its cover; Beauty is only skin deep.
14. Some people think that human needs for farmland, housing, and industry are more
important than saving land for endangered animals. Do you agree or disagree with this
point of view? Why or why not? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
There has been an ongoing debate over whether or not we should protect endangered species
throughout the world. Some are against this stance that we must focus on our basic needs,
whereas others point out that we must look after endangered animals. I agree with the latter
position and present my reasons below.
First of all, the earth is sick enough because of heedless constructions for human needs.
This insinuates that the more we develop lands for us, the more the earth will become threatened.
Hence, saving the earth is more imperative. As you know, overexploiting resources and
deforestation have devastated the earth. Now is the time to care about the earth.
But, even assuming the above is very plausible, some may argue that countless people
are suffering from a lack of fundamental needs. A recently released UNICEF reports says that
one-third of the children in Africa are undernourished. The report also states that if we each
send just one dollar to Africa, they will be able to buy foods for two days. Accordingly, they
firmly believe we should place on developing lands for us. I partially concede this idea. Yet, I
still put an emphasis on my idea because there is one more important matter to consider:
As stated above, endangered species imply that the earth is in danger. With the advent
of technology and rapid development, we have benefited from such remarkable, state-of-the-art
technology. Today’s science made the impossible possible, the unrealistic realistic. However,
everything has its dark side; thus, it has also had negative impacts on the earth. We are suffering
from scorching summers, habitat destruction, air pollution, and so on. What I emphasize is that
endangered species have been severely affected by today’s technology. Someday, the ecosystem
will be heavily destructed and/or influenced by humans’ unlimited greed. For this reason, what
we take care of endangered animals is what we protect ourselves.
To summarize, everyone may hold a different position on this issue, But, I am for the
idea that we should protect endangered animals. I have two reasons for this. One is that the earth
is already fully developed. The other is the ecosystem will be destructed.
15. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Being a leader is better than
being a follower. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
There has been an ongoing debate over the pros and cons of being a leader versus being a
follower. Some people believe that being a leader is much better than a follower, whereas others
believe that the former is not that attractive because leaders usually handle more works than
followers. I agree with the latter stance and present my reasons below.
Does every have skills for leadership? The answer to this question is No. For this
reason, many companies, perhaps most, attempt to invite good leaders. They sometimes try to
invite proved, qualified leaders outside companies. It is said that those companies don’t mind
paying much money for scouting talented CEOs. This implies that there are only a small number
of people who are considered as good leaders.
Even assuming the above is very plausible, some are against my view because leaders
have the right to control some things within their boundaries. Furthermore, they get paid more
than normal employees. Hence, by the allure of getting a high salary, most people would like to
assume leader’s positions. I concede this. But, I put an emphasis on my stance since there is one
more important matter to consider: Leaders are more likely to get stressful.
It’s entirely possible that conflicts and/or cacophonies might frequently occur in any
groups. At those times, leaders should take care of every small part happened in the groups. One
the other hand, in the case of followers, they just focus on their duties. To illustrate, my uncle
got prompted as a vice president last tear when numerous people congratulated him. But, these
days, he has often been sick due in large part to his overloaded work. After this, I came to
realize that leaders may have more advantages than followers, and vice versa.
To summarize, although everyone may hold a different position on this issue, I am for
the assumption that followers can better enjoy themselves because they have less work than
leaders and the less work allows them a greater enjoyment of life.
16. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Only people who earn a lot of
money are successful. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
There has been an ongoing debate whether or not earning a lot of money makes us successful.
Some people believe that getting a high salary implies one’s success, whereas others believe that
they can be successful regardless of money. I agree with the latter stance and present my reasons
below.
Making much money doesn’t guarantee one’s success. Many people, perhaps most,
may think that one’s high salary is deeply related his/her accomplishments. However, this point
varies from person to person. To illustrate, my sister earns more than seven thousand dollars a
month. In her age, she earns quite much money. However, the long and short of it is that she
wants to quit her job these days. This is attributed that she is not interested in her current job.
Her primary interest is in computer graphics. Hence, she would like to build her career in field
of computer technology.
But, even assuming the above is very plausible, some may disagree with my view
because of the following saying: Money talks. They firmly believe they can do everything with
money. I concede this. But, I still put an emphasis on my assertion because there is one more
important matter to consider: enjoying something is a short cut to lead us to the path of success.
Most successful people have their own stories. In my opinion, one of the best
illustrations of this is Steve Jobs who is a current CEO of Apple Computer. When he was young,
he used to research about computer at his garage since he was not rich. However, he has pushed
on such difficulties. At long last, he was one of the most successful people throughout the world.
My point is that the main reason he made accomplishments he had found his calling.
Accordingly, there are countless people who are engaging in their favorite fields. Even though
they earn a small amount of money, I find that if they are satisfied with their jobs, they would be
the most successful people.
To summarize, although everyone may hold a different position on this issue, I am
against the idea that only people who make much money are successful. This is because there
are countless people who feel sad in the world though rich and because poor people can be also
considered as successful.
17. People should not have to pay for public transportation
Some people might claim that citizens should not have to pay for public transportation
systems for various reasons: (1) fee for public transit should be covered by tax money, and
(2) the lack of finance can be covered by some citizens’ donation. However, I believe that
people should pay for public transportation and I suggest two different reasons for this: (1)
the lack of budget will cause the failure of maintenance, and (2) such failure in maintenance
will directly influence on the higher chance of disastrous accidents to citizens.
First of all, it is not beneficial to the authority of public transportation system because it will
deteriorate the overall quality of transmit services. This is mainly because making the fee
free of charge for public transit services will directly cause the lack of budget for
maintenance. As a good example, one small town in Massachusetts, the US, once made the
policy and allowed local residents to take public transportations for free. However, this
policy did not last long because it directly caused financial constraints for repairing or
maintaining transit services and even for paying salaries to employees such as bus drivers,
engineers, and so on. Since there was simply no money for operation, the authority could
not appropriately maintain high quality of service and the customer (i.e., citizens) complaint
significantly increased.
In addition, failure in maintenance of public transportation systems is directly related to
possible disastrous accidents in cities or local areas. When it malfunctions frequently while
running, citizens on the ride can be exposed to the unexpected tragic accidents. According
to JoongAng Ilbo, a leading newspaper publishing company in Korea, there was an accident
in China a week ago, and more than ten citizens got seriously injured. After the
government’s investigation, it was turned out that the authority of public transportation had
neglected the overall maintenance of their assets (-i.e., buses and subways) simply due to
lack of financial resources. Partly, the lack of budget was derived from the fact that the fee
for public transportation systems in China was almost free of charge.
In conclusion, I believe that citizens should pay a certain amount of fee, if little, to take
public transportations. It is definitely true that such policy will put the authority of public
transportation in the lack of financial resources, which will directly result in the lack of
maintenance of the assets. Also, such failure in maintenance can cause citizens to run on the
risk by getting them exposed to unexpected disasters.
18. People will spend less time cooking and preparing food in twenty years than they
do.
Some people might claim that people will spend more time preparing foods in the future
for various reasons than do they. However, I believe that people will spend less time for
cooking in the future than now. To support this argument, I suggest two different reasons:
(1) the advancement of cooking devices or equipment, and (2) the possibility to develop
brand-new pills to supplant our regular diet.
First of all, people will be able to reduce the time to spend for cooking or preparing food in
the future because of the continuing development of cooking devices or equipment. Indeed,
for the past decades, many electronic companies have launched new kitchen appliances that
have made cooking or food making more efficient and convenient than before. As a good
example, in my country, Korea, we eat Kim-chi, almost everyday. Since it is good to eat KimChi when it is crispy, not too much ripened, while eating, housewives used to make this
food every month. It took a few days to make a certain amount of it and sometimes took
up to a week. However, Korean electronics companies, Samsung and LG, have recently
developed and commercialized a special type of refrigerator exclusively for Kim-chi. With
this refrigerator, Korean housewives now do not make Kim-chi that often compared to the
past, because it keeps Kim-Chi fresh for long. Overall, this special refrigerator helped Korean
housewives spend less time in food making and do spend more time working or enjoying
their leisure time.
In addition, physiologists or biologists will soon develop certain type of pills or supplements
that can supplant our normal diet. In fact, an article published by the LA times, a leading
local newspaper in Los Angeles, has recently validated this argument. The article shows that
the human-biology lab in the Tokyo University, Japan has been trying to develop pills that
can supplant people’s regular diet, through which people do not have to eat three meals a
day. This pill was initially designed and developed to improve people’s overall health
condition and prevent diseases such as obesity or diabetes; however, it is also expected to
reduce time to spend in cooking, food- making process, or even eating.
In conclusion, I think in 20 years, people will spend less time in cooking and preparing for
foods. Cooking utensils and equipment are getting evolved and pills to supplant regular diet
will have been fully developed and commercialized. Together with this, numerous social
changes, including the increased number of double income families, can make possible the
given statement as well.
19. 창의적인 것과 세밀하게 계획을 짜는 것 중 어느 것이 문제를 해결함에 있어 최고의 결
과를 만들어내는가
I believe that it is the planned idea, rather than creative one, that leads us to achieve the
best output. To support this argument, I suggest two different reasons: (1) creative ideas are
important and initiate innovation, but never enough for us to reach the peak, and (2) being
well-planned is the way for us to avoid unpredictable accidents or interventions that people
can face while working on and to achieve goals.
First of all, even though I believe the power of the creativeness, I only think this is only the
start of innovation. What leads the creativity to become the real innovation is planned ideas
following by in an effort to succeed. As a good example, we can think of the way that the
hardware company “Apple” develops its new products. At the beginning, product designers
come up with ideas by intuition. Such intuition-driven ideas cannot be re-born as the
product like Ipod or Iphone without developers,’ designers,’ and marketers’ endeavor to
successfully enter and settle down in the market. Likewise, other companies, being
outstanding in markets, do investigate market situations and track on diversified consumer
preference by analyzing environmental factors around the firms. As such, the factor that
leads full growth in one’s goal is carefully planned ideas.
In addition, such well-planned ideas help goal-seekers predict possible interventions or
accidents and successfully achieve their goals. Indeed, there have been lots of empirical
studies that figure this out. One academic paper, published in Journal of Developmental
Psychology in 2005, tested that a high school student, who evaluates themselves objectively
and well plans his/her pace of study in the long term perspective as well as the short term
view, more likely to perform better academically and to enter the university they wanted to
attend. Also, an article written by JoongAng Ilbo, a leading Korean newspaper publishing
company in 2008, reported that successful athletes like Yuna Kim or Tae-Whan Park always
keep an eye on their strength or weakness and that of their competitors as well to be
completely prepared for competitions. Thus illustrated, I believe that it is the well-planned
idea that makes the goal be achieved and reach the peak.
In conclusion, I think generating a creative idea is not enough to refine outputs of tasks and
achieve goals successfully. To attain the full growth, people should focus on planning and
implementing detailed procedure as well as coming up with creative ideas.