1. Some people think that schools should stop teaching students by using books, because students find them boring and that children can learn from films, TV, video games and computer instead. To what extent do you agree?
Nowadays, the voice of replacing book with films, TV, video games and computer in class is getting louder and louder as many argue that books today are easy to lose attention from students and make classes boring in the face of multimedia, which I disagree. It’s true that the introduction of multimedia to teaching makes the class more attractive, but it doesn’t mean that the books lost their place in class.
Why? Because books and multimedia serve as different ways to enlighten children, that is, while the text and illustrations of books can present ampler knowledge and the logic behind it, multimedia means are only taken to enhance students’ memory of knowledge by either vivid animated scenes or the interaction between man and machine in modern classroom. And if the use of books is stopped in school, it would be also a pity that the children then might lose the chance pick up ability to comprehend knowledge and concepts by simply the written statement of it that leaves greater room to train children in imagination and pick up the skills of wording and writing during it along the way. What’s more, study as a self-driven process towards self-achievement should not always be just “fun” as it requires persistence and time, and it should be a good thing to teach by books as it allows the students to be immersed in the lines of words rather than distracted by other things in multimedia.
All in all, traditional as it is, teaching by books is still the best way to arrive the best learning effect and will keep on functioning in conveying knowledge clearly and logically into students’ mind.
2. People are now surrounded by advertising. This both affects what people think is important and has a negative impact on people’s lives. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The real influence advertisement can bring to ordinary people is arguable. In my opinion, although I have to admit that the prerequisite of any successful advertisement is to influence the general public, it would be unwise to ignore its merits.
The influence of advertisement has already gone far beyond its most obvious function: to popularize products. Despite the fact that such ability is the main purpose when advertisement debuts, there is more to it, as now it has commonly functioned as an approach to provide extra value to the goods, achieved by constant appearance of certain concept in advertising and therefore to shape public opinion. An example of this is diamond, which has been disguised so well that almost everyone now is certain that it is one rare mineral with extremely low reserves and a symbol of long-lasting relationship, although the fact could be the exact opposite.
However, saying it is wrong to overlook the effect of advertisement is not equal to saying it is acceptable to ignore the most significant advantage of it, being to fulfill demands, since it is beyond argument that demands drive purchase, especially for those living in less satisfied condition. Yet it should also be noticed that demand is a vague expression that has been constantly misunderstood as the ‘demand of necessity’, in which case the need in people has been restricted to the basics to maintain life. The purpose of many purchases people made has now extended to satisfy their mental desire, or as a commitment to others in the case of diamond.
Overall, while one must recognize the profound influence of advertisement in people’s life, this may not be completely negative.
3. Many countries invest money to prepare competitors to join top competitions like Olympic Game and the World Cup. It is necessary to offer money to encourage children to exercise. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Many countries are investing more in pulling for the children’s exercise in order to promote competitor’s fostering. Some people embrace the phenomenon, while others side against this. Personally, my preference goes to the former notion.
Indeed, it is understandable why many oppose it. Spending money to encourage children to take exercise will distract their attention from study. The time children can spend is established. If they involve themselves in exercising further，they have to cut down the energy and time on study. It is reported that more children prefer to exercise because exercise can make them relaxed and they can play with the peers. Exercise encouragement among children can definitely result in study time occupation.
Although the stance sound plausible，I still insist that the progress of encouraging juveniles to exercise should not be curbed. The primary reason for this is that physical condition of children can be improved. More equipment for entertainment are facilitated at home, leading to the young generation’s lacking physical excises and sedentary life. More investment in exercise encouragement, such as building more sport fields and setting up scholarship for these positive young sport participants, would render activity joining more attractive.
Furthermore, more potential and competitive athletes can earn more prizes in top competitions. More money spent on fostering competitors can cultivate lots of potential sportsmen. Government’s inclination means stronger supporting in professional equipment and training. And changing social bias that exercising is not an achievement is another bonus. Both these benefits will make children devote themselves to exercising and have more possibilities to access to great prizes in great competitions.
To sum up, I do not deny that exercise encouragement among young generation will bring about learning time occupation. However, I still believe we should take into consideration the healthy condition enhancing of the children and more possibilities in gaining prizes in competitions.