Topic: parents are more involved in their children’s education than the parents in the past.
It is not uncommon to see that parents are have incredible zael to participate into their children’s education in many perspectives. At contemporary society, parents always take part in some semilars that are related to students’s study and force their children to join the extra-curricula classes which can help their chldren to improve acdemic performance. Therefore, as far as I am considerd, nowadays, parents’ involvement in kids’ study is much more emphasized than ever before.
Compared with the parents in the past,parents at present, have a strong will to make their children more competent in the future career. With the development of the society, the compitition in the modern society is increasingly fierce than ever before. Every parents want their children not only can survive in the compitition but also want them to be successful in the future. Hence, those parents take pains to achieve this ambitions on their own way and consequently, because they think education is the gateway to seccess, they should be involved in their children’ s study and help their children as well. On the contrary, because of the low living standre, parents in the past only think how to bring chilren up and let them survive, so there is no time for them to have such ambitions. Therefore, it is reasonable for us to think that parents nowdays are more interseted in children’s education.
Additionally, it is universally acknowledged that in the modern era, parents have a extremely high expectation than in the past. Parents want their children to be versatile and prominent, which lead most part of children can not achieve this goal at all, thus, under this circumstance, parents will help children in personally that of course include preants’ participation in children’s study. By contrast, in the past, parents just make their children free and let them do what they want. Parents will not discipline children unless they make blunder. So, we can draw a conclusion that the untouchable expectation make parents involve more in the children’s study.
In conclusion, because the increasingly competitive society and high expectation make parents nowdays have more zeat in children’s study and take part in it actively. But, from my perspective, parents should give enough space for children to manage their own study.
The most important problems affecting our society today could be solved within our lifetime.
As the economy and technology develop at an incredible speed in today’s society, there are an increasing number of people believing that the most important problems affecting our society today could be solved within our lifetime. In my view, however, this is out of the question and the three most significant problems affecting the society, namely war, environmental destruction and disease, will still influence us and may not be entirely resolved forever.
War is a problem afflicting humans since they took into being in the first place. Wars take place when different countries have conflicting benefits, which is unlikely to be eliminated as long as the boundaries between countries still exist. For instance, in the Middle East where water is extremely scarce, many countries are in conflict in contention for water resources. Since every country acts for the sake of its own benefit, it seems that people in the region are incapable of living together in harmony. Eternal world peace, therefore, is unlikely to be achieved in our lifetime.
Environmental destruction emerged not long before but it is becoming increasingly severe and can not be ignored. With the large-scale utilization of fossil fuels and rapid development of industry, huge amounts of pollutants are being produced, contaminating the environment to a large degree. The disposal of these pollutants being a tough task, it is hardly possible that we can completely get rid of them within a short period of time. Furthermore, even if we can come up with optimal methods for dealing with these substances, there remains the problem that these methods may cost too much and obstruct the development of economy.
Last but not least, the well-being of people around the world is threatened by a variety of diseases, ranging from AIDS to cancer, the cures for which have not been discovered yet. Diseases set off panics among humans, affect their normal life and leave people badly off with the high medical expenses. There are thousands of scientists devoting themselves to finding cure for diseases, but new types of diseases keep emerging and there is no eliminating all of them.
In summary, the problems with the most significance today are going to be passed on to our offspring. To eliminate these problems thoroughly, there is still a long way to go.
Some people think that a university professor should focus time on doing research, while others think that the main role of a professor is to educate students in a university.
What is the main role of a university professor, to educate students or to do research? Some people believe that professors should focus their time on doing research, but as far as I am concerned, it is educating that deserves more devotion of professors.
To begin with, professors are teachers in universities, so it is their responsibility to teach students with absolute dedication and enthusiasm. University professors play an critical role in students’ learning knowledge and the methods for learning, by giving lectures in class as well as assigning them tasks to do using what they have learned. A good professor should be someone who can teach well and is patient with students.
In addition, taking education as the main responsibility does not mean that professors are not supposed to do research. On the contrary, those who have achieved success in research tend to be better teachers. Doing research allows professors to have a broader horizon, enabling them to seize the point of the science and technology today and to have a deep understanding of the knowledge they are going to teach. Furthermore, professors who do research well may offer their students better opportunities to do research in the field they study.
Admittedly, there are scientists who cannot teach well but stand out in their specialized field. Rather than teaching and doing research at the same time, I believe that they should concentrate on their research and not take the position as professors. There are many people who are merely researchers and whose achievement in their specialized areas is without parallel. As for professor, this occupation should be left to those who can give quality lectures and help students to learn well.
In conclusion, professors should regard educating students as their main responsibility and devote themselves to teaching. In today’s society, however, there are some professors who do not teach students with dedication. They focus on research merely for money, which will not only do harm to students’ study, but will hinder the development of science as well.
It is often not a good thing for people to move to a new town or a new country because they will lose their friends.
Many people have had the experience of moving from one place to another. Some feels it a bad thing because they will lose their old friends in the place they move from. In my view, however, it is anything but a bad thing. Not only will we keep in touch with our old friends, but we will make new friends as well.
With the modern communicating technology, distance is never a barrier that keeps people from contacting others. Even if people to a new town or a new country, telephone, email and instant message will allow them to keep in constant touch with their old friends without any inconvenience. Take myself for example. When I entered college, I had to leave my hometown for Beijing, thus I was separated from my friends in my hometown. But I called them every weekend and we often chat online when we are both free. So distance did not make me lose touch with them at all.
Furthermore, it could even be a good thing to move away for people and their old friends. Instead of becoming estranged from each other, they will miss each other and thus become even more intimate. Not having conflicts over trifles, people will appreciate the merits of their friends more. There is a saying that ‘distance makes the heart grows fonder’, which means that when people are separated by distance, they may like each other more. So distance is never a obstacle between friends.
Moving to a new place allows people to make new friends, and that does not necessarily mean that people cannot maintain their old friendship. On the contrary, people can still stay in touch with their old friends, because one can never have too many friends. When it comes to my case, my old friends even came to be familiar with my new friends and they became friends before long.
In conclusion, moving to a new town or a new country will not make people lose their old friends. Friendship is one of the most precious things that we have and deserves to be cherished by us all our life.
It is more enjoyable to have a job which requires you to work only three days a week with long hours rather than to have one which demands you to work five days a week with shorter hours.
I would rather choose a job which demands me to work five days a week with shorter hours. Though three days of work a week will allow people four days of holiday in a row, during which they can go on trips, there are some drawbacks of working for longer hours and fewer days.
To begin with, working for longer hours for only three days does harm to people’s health. If every week there is three days when people get exhausted from their work, they are sure to run out of energy. The rest four days, on the other hand, is likely to be spent playing with friends. This style of living may well leave people’s life out of order. Take my experience for example. I have worked day and night for three days in preparation for an exam. And after the exam, I went on a trip with my friends. When I returned school, I was exhausted because of lack of rest. So it is not a good idea to work for long hours and have too long vacation.
Besides, having long holidays will keep you from working efficiently. People who work five days a week tend to work with low efficiency the day after the weekend due to the fact that they cannot adjust themselves to working immediately. Then what will happen to people working only three days while having four days off? They will be inefficient in one third of their working time. Let alone the fact they may easily be tired because they work too long on each of the three days.
Last but not least, working for five days a week enables people to keep up with the latest progress of their work. Usually situations change frequently and a project may require constant attention. If people work for only three days a week, it is probable that they ignore what happens on the days they do not go to work. Thus they may fail to adjust their project according to the changes in time.
To sum up, it is better to choose a job requiring people to work for five days a week with short hours, which will guarantee a health lifestyle, high efficiency as well as job quality.
Since people care public recognition more than money, they will work harder to obtain public recognition even though there is no more money given.
People usually work hard in pursuit of money as well as public recognition. But it would be radical to say that they will work harder to obtain public recognition even thought there is no more money given. Public recognition is what we obtain naturally while money is a must in our lives.
To begin with, we all rely on money to satisfy our basic needs in order to survive. No one can subsist without any money. The food we eat, the clothes we wear, the house we live in are all bought with money. There is a saying that ‘we cannot get everything with money, but we can get nothing without money’, indicating the significance of money to our lives. How can a person owning high public recognition but no money survive in today’s society? So if a job requiring more effort provides people with higher public recognition but with no more money, I doubt whether there will be anyone who want to undertake it.
There do exist people who pursue public recognition, but those are usually the rich who already have huge amounts of money. Only when a person has enough money, will the person seek to gain the acknowledgement of the society. It is money, rather than public recognition, that is the fundamental motivation of people who exert themselves to work harder. There are famous people doing voluntary work or undertaking charity cause, but they are just wealthy enough not to worry about money.
Further more, public recognition is not always something desirable. People who enjoy high public recognition may be envied by others. More commonly, people are likely to be too curious about their private lives, which will prevent them from leading a peaceful life like everyone else does. Therefore, it is not always intriguing to receive high recognition from the society.
To sum up, I do not believe that people regard public recognition more important than financial income. Even if there are indeed some people working hard for recognition, mere recognition will never be their ultimate destination.