As people today are paying an increasing amount of attention to the quality of education, numerous strategies are proposed to improve the status quo. Among all the tactics in discussion, a raise of salaries for university professors stands out as an appealing approach. However, despite the fact that such a raise may serve as a stimulus to teachers, the outcomes will not be as desired as we think.

Admittedly, by spending more money on professors' salaries, universities may provide an incentive to current teachers in terms of their devotion to work and to prospective faculty members. This is true because when teachers in a university earn a decent pay that they are satisfied with, they tend to contribute to their teaching career more willingly. Also, such a practice as raising the current salaries can attract potential professors who have got excellent academic background and are outstanding in their profession.

However, considering that the budget of a university is limited, it is not necessary at all for universities to distribute a large amount of money to paying the stipends of professors for the sake of quality education. To begin with, a majority of university professors are paid very well, sometimes even better than what they deserve. As a matter of fact, the salaries of professors have abundant sources, such as business companies who hire them as advisors and myriads of grants. Besides, teachers are only one part of education; the limited budget can be well planned if other aspects, like the infrastructure on campus and academic resources, are included in discussion. For example, if a university invests a certain amount of money on improving the capacity of the library, which is accessible to all, and on subscribing more electronic databases and journals, students will definitely benefit a lot by taking advantages of the available sources in the library. Thus, their academic performance will be greatly improved when they use the public resources to prepare for classes and to review class contents before examinations. In addition, the quality of education in college is also concerned with how the college is managed. Experts in education have always claimed that a university, either profitable or non-profitable, needs to be well managed for the sake of quality and efficiency. So it is equally important for universities to hire a number of administrators to facilitate the overall teaching progress.

All in all, raising the income of college teachers is not the priority that universities should consider in order to improve the quality of education. Instead, universities can either invest their extra money on making the infrastructure better and increasing the available academic resources, or use the money to hire a group of experts in administrating the whole universities.

第二篇：task 2课件范文

1

With the current emphasis on technology in education, many parents and schools are introducing computers to children at young ages. However, some people are against the use of computers at schools because they are afraid computers might affect children’s growth in negative ways. I agree with their concerns.

Too much interaction with the computer isolates children emotionally from real-life experience. Children need to go outside and run around, seeing the real world with their own eyes. Yet powerful technologies at school are confining children in the classroom. Moreover, the lack of direct interaction with others has a negative impact on a child's communication abilities and interpersonal skills.

Computers also decrease the amount of time a child spends in creative thinking. Especially at early ages, children need live lessons that engage their hands, bodies and minds – not computer simulations. Entertained constantly and effortlessly by so many adult-generated images, children seem to be finding it harder to generate their own images and ideas.

Apart from affecting children mentally, the frequent use of computers at school by children also has long-term medical consequences. Physicians have been reporting symptoms such as eye-strain and obesity in teenagers who began using computers at a young age. There are also potential health risks of toxic emissions from new computer equipment and exposure to radiation from old video display monitors.

The effectiveness of computer use in schools has never been proven. It is clear that educators and parents need to focus on conventional forms of instruction which are more beneficial to a child’s mental and physical growth.

Nowadays most students start their higher education immediately after their graduation from high school. However, some people think that students shall benefit more from their courses if they work for some time to obtain some hands-on experience before they enter university. Personally, I think they are right.

In the first place, students will be less hesitant in deciding what to major in as a university

2

student after a period of work or travel in the real world. If they have worked one or two years, students may get to know what kind of knowledge or skills they need in order to have a decent job in the competitive society. Thus they know what they need to learn before entering university.

Furthermore, some hands-on experience will help them better understand the courses offered in university. For example, a student of business administration will find his experience with a multinational company helpful to him in his study of the relevant courses. Unlike those who have never been to any business firm, he knows what a typical company is like and how it works.

Finally, some work before college years will make a student more independent. Nowadays high school students are generally well taken care of either by their parents or by teachers. This unfortunately makes them too dependent on the others, especially in times of difficulty. If they work with a company for some time, even on a part-time basis, they will become more independent, which can help them succeed in university years.

All in all, some work experience is of great help to a university student. We should encourage them to have such experience before they get enrolled in university.

balance

Both parents and teachers want to help young kids to learn to behave well and therefore give all kinds of instructions to them. Some believe that children benefit a lot from rules and disciplines. However, a few argue that this prevents children from growing into a socially adaptable future generation. Both views are correct, but only to a certain extent.

Strict parenting ensures the safety of children. Small kids are always curious about things around them and like to experiment with behaviors that are sometimes dangerous. A simple rule such as “do not play with fire” may keep children away from dangers. Besides, only by obeying rules at schools can a student learn effectively. “Listen attentively during a lesson”, “finishing homework on time” or “do not be late for class” are all rules that a student should follow in order to get the most out of his school life.

However, too many rules interfere with children’s desire to be free and independent and may not be good for their future development. An inactive child who sits quietly in school all day may find himself at a loss when he enters the real world because the modern society values individuality and creativity. What’s even worse, a child who is constantly supervised may finally

3

reject or even resent adults, especially when no reason is given as to why a rule must be followed.

From my point of view, a healthy balance should be maintained between disciplining and accepting the childishness of children. Without the necessary rules and guidance, children become mischievous and easily get into trouble. But children are not little adults. Mistakes and misbehaviors are normal childhood experiences, a part of their growing up.

4.

In recent years there has been a vast increase in the number of students choosing to study abroad. This is partly because people are more affluent and partly due to the variety of scholarships which are available for overseas students nowadays. Although foreign study is not something which every student would choose, it is an attractive option for many people.

Studying overseas has a number of advantages. Firstly, it may give students access to knowledge and facilities such as laboratories and libraries which are not available in their home country. Furthermore, by looking abroad students may find a wider range of courses than those offered in their country’s universities, and therefore one which fits more closely to their particular requirements.

On the other hand, studying abroad has a number of drawbacks. These may be divided into personal and professional. Firstly, students have to leave their family and friends for a long period. Moreover, studying abroad is almost always more expensive than studying at one’s local university. Finally, students often have to study in a foreign language, which may limit their performance and mean they do not attain their true level.

In my opinion, however, the disadvantages of studying abroad are usually temporary in nature. Students who study abroad generally become proficient in the language quite soon and they are only away from their family and friends for a year or two. Furthermore, many of the benefits last students all their lives and make them highly desirable to prospective employers.

4

Group study has been shown to be an effective method for students to become successful learners, but while most students have been accustomed to this traditional way of learning, others prefer to study alone at their own pace. The two approaches each have distinct advantages, and the choice is more a matter of personal preference.

Group study is strongly advocated by some because it requires the sharing of ideas amongst group members. During group study, students listen to what their fellow students say and debate with them if there is a disagreement. Naturally, their communication skills and critical thinking abilities are greatly enhanced. Moreover, peer pressure can be a positive force which can motivate and challenge the students to do their best. The competitive learning environment also prepares the students for the future reality.

However, studying alone also offers some unique benefits to the students. First of all, the individual learner is kept away form the distracting conversation or unnecessary interruptions in a classroom with many students. Then they can concentrate well and make more efficient use of their time. Also, the individual learner can pace his or her own learning and decide for himself/herself when to start or when to stop. This is especially helpful to those intellectually gifted students who may be bored with regular but simple classroom teaching.

In conclusion, there are strong arguments for each study method, but as far as I am concerned, group study is more effective because I feel that if the learner shares what he knows with someone else then his own understanding of the subject matter could be further improved.

In recent decades, the world has seen a rising number of interracial marriages. Take China as an example. As China opens its doors to the outside world, huge numbers of foreigners swarm into China either to do business or have fun and many of them choose to marry local Chinese girls and settle down.

The biggest advantage of the interracial marriage is the enhancement of mutual understanding between different cultures. With two people from different cultural backgrounds bound together in wedlock, they can develop a better understanding of each other's national history and social tradition. They might even learn some good points from the culture of their other half, which can generate great benefits to the family and create a harmonious society and a

5

peaceful world.

On the other hand, one disadvantage of marring people of different races or countries might be the reportedly high divorce rate compared with that of domestic marriage. Living with people of different cultural backgrounds often means adjustment, compromise and even sacrifice. This is by no means easy to cope with, especially for those people who fall in love at first sight. Failure to adapt on either side may well end up in a tragic divorce for both.

To sum up, there are both advantages and disadvantages to interracial marriage. But I think if two people truly care and respect each other, the power of love can solve any problems. Anyway, I think people should think carefully before making the decision to marry someone from a completely different cultural background.

English is well on its way to becoming the dominant global language. It is the official language of most multinational companies in China and is growing in use by local Chinese companies as they pursue foreign markets. Some people believe that more advantages than disadvantages will be brought by the spread of English as a “global language”. I have some reservations on this view.

Admittedly, a common language brings understanding and efficiency. English has been playing an essential role in promoting international communication, helping people to know the world better. In addition, the rise of English as a global language means that products with English brands will have a chance of reaching world consumers and achieving ‘classic status’.

However, every country has its own language as a symbol of cultural identity. The adoption of a universal language means the extinction of other minor languages, which will lead to the loss of world cultural diversity. What is more, for political or religious reasons, English is not readily accepted and used by all the peoples in the world. For example, after 911 attack, some Muslim countries take a cautious and even hostile attitude towards America and American culture. Therefore, it is almost impossible to push forward the spread of English among these countries.

To sum up, it is difficult to tell whether or not the advantages outweigh the disadvantages regarding the spread of English as a global language. What we may have to consider is how to accept this trend as positive while at the same time staying away from its drawbacks.

6

Multinational companies find it easy both to market their products all over the world and set up factories wherever they find it convenient. However, some people point out that these companies bring many negative impacts to the individuals and the society as a whole. I agree with them and I believe multinational companies have had a harmful effect on our quality of life in three main areas.

To begin with, multinational companies make us have less choice of products to buy. When powerful multinational companies invade local markets with their goods, they often force local companies with fewer resources to go out of business. As a result, we are obliged to buy multinational products whether we like them or not.

Another impact is on the local culture. This can be seen by the fact that we all shop in similar multinational supermarkets and buy identical products wherever we live. As a result, the human race is losing its cultural diversity. If we consumed different products, societies all over the world would be more varied.

Finally, as we become more dependent on multinational companies, we are more vulnerable to their decisions. When, for example, a multinational decides to move its production facilities to another country, this has an adverse effect on its workers who lose their jobs.

All in all, I believe that multinational companies have had many negative impacts on our lives. But if we as voters pressured our governments to make multinational companies more responsible and to protect local producers from outside competition, we could have the benefits of globalisation without its disadvantages.

单边支持

Medical research involving animals has dramatically improved the health of the human race. Without animal testing, the cure for polio would not exist and diabetics would suffer or die from their disease. Despite these benefits, some people believe that it’s too cruel to use animals for testing medical techniques and drugs. In their opinion, animal experimentation should be completely forbidden. I do not agree with them.

Animal testing allows scientists to test and create new drugs. Animals such as monkeys or rabbits have similar physical processes to humans. This allows scientists to test the effects of certain drugs. If a drug produces adverse effects in animals, it is probably unfit for human use.

Animal testing is cheap. There is a large supply of animals for medical research. Animals such as mice are easily bred, and maintained safely in controlled labs. The costs of testing in humans would be extremely high

7

Many people argue that animal testing is cruel. In some cases this is true. Some of the tests certainly seem painful, but the great majority of people on this planet eat meat or wear leather without any guilt. Where is their sympathy for animals? Furthermore, animals clearly do not feel the same way as humans, and scientists are careful to minimize stress in the animals, since this would damage their research.

双边讨论

Every year, millions of animals undergo painful suffering or death as a result of scientific research into the effects of drugs, food additives, cosmetics and other chemical products. While most people think animal testing is necessary, others are upset by what they see as needless suffering.

Many medical treatments and procedures have been developed from experiments on animals. Since animals share many features with humans, scientists use animals to test the safety and effectiveness of newly developed drugs before pilot testing on small groups of patients. Medical teams practice new operating techniques such as transplants on animals. Without animal testing, many procedures or new drugs would be extremely unsafe.

However, many people are concerned that animals are suffering unnecessarily and cruelly. They do not believe that every new drug needs to be tested on animals, especially with the huge database of knowledge and modern computer models. They particularly feel that animal testing should not be used for non-essential products such as cosmetics, shampoos, soaps, and cleaning products.

In summary, there are good reasons both for and against animal testing. As far as I am concerned, it all depends on the nature of experimentation and the type of animal used. For example, endangered species should never be used for experiments. Also, experiments on animals that do not significantly benefit humans should be avoided as much as possible. After all, treating our fellow as mercifully as possible will demonstrate our humanity.

To close the gap between large cities and rural areas has never been an easy task, especially in an era of urbanization when people worldwide crowd into towns and cities for a better life. One suggestion under consideration is to make new teachers and doctors serve a few years in rural areas before they can move on with their career back in the city.

The benefits of this solution are obvious. In some remote villages, ignorance and illnesses are severely hindering development. The newly graduate teachers and doctors bring the

8

desperately needed education and medical care to the people there. Furthermore, young people themselves can gain immeasurably from this practice. Working under harsh conditions away from modern comfort and convenience, they tend to be stronger in spirit and can easily cope with any difficulties they may face in their future careers.

Yet thinking from another perspective, a compulsory service program certainly has its drawbacks. In a world of equal opportunities, using administrative powers to restrict people’s choices about where to work is acting against personal freedom and showing disrespect for individuality. Apart from this, motivation is another key ingredient to the success of an individual’s career. Even the most talented college graduate cannot be expected to achieve much if he is compelled to serve in backward areas.

The best solution, therefore, is not to order, but to encourage. We should instill a sense of responsibility in young people and give more incentives to those who are willing to work in difficult areas, so that we can address the problem of urban-rural disparity while respecting whatever decisions new teachers or doctors have made.

A country active in scientific research is often one that has a strong power for innovation and wealth creation. Nevertheless, the optimal structure for such kind of research is still a source of debate. Should it be the sole responsibility of the government?

Some people argue that it’s better for the government to control scientific research. They believe that research into nuclear technology or national defense is in the national interest or involves high levels of secrecy and should be carried out only by the government. Also, in basic scientific research which is directed purely towards the advancement of knowledge, or where results cannot be guaranteed, there is little incentive for the private sector to go into these areas and therefore the government takes the leading role.

There are, however, reasons for private companies to participate in scientific research. Research is done more efficiently by private companies because they are profit driven; their products are also more closely associated with market needs. Research into simple articles such as cosmetics or cough medicine is not what the government is interested in, so it’s necessary for the private sector to invest in these areas because they are important for our daily lives.

From my point of view, both the government and the private companies should be actively involved in scientific research. We should encourage the cooperation between different research institutes including state-owned research centers, universities and corporate labs to accelerate the transfer of technology and research into products and services that can benefit human life.

9

International Sports games such as the Olympics and the World Cup draw the attention of billions of people every year, but are competitive sports on a global scale really making the world more peaceful?

Proponents say international sporting events help create mutual understanding and international harmony. In ancient Greece, when it was time for the Olympic Games, warring states would declare a truce to allow athletes and spectators to travel and participate in the Games safely. Since then, Olympic Truce has been a concept behind every modern Games, helping to promote world peace successfully through sports. There is also the famous “Ping-Pong Diplomacy” during the cold war, when the goodwill visit of a US table tennis team to China led to better relations between the two countries.

Critics, on the other hand, claim that contests between countries in the field of sports are often associated with hostility, jealousy and violence. It is often reported that football fans from two rivalry countries clashed with each other causing injuries, deaths and an intense hatred ever since. In a more dramatic scenario, some even fear that the gathering of teams and sports fans from around the world in one spot may pose potential security problems, as it makes an ideal target for international terrorists.

I myself have been an avid sports fan, and watching world championships is my favorite. Yet I seriously doubt that these games can really promote world peace. In my opinion, the “fair play” spirit of modern sports is being undermined by corruption, briberies and drug scandals. As this spirit is the most important basis for promoting friendly sport, I would argue that international sporting events are gradually losing their power of achieving a much bigger aim – to promote world peace.

In most countries of the world the population is increasing alarmingly. This is especially true in poor, undeveloped countries. Overpopulation causes a considerable number of problems.

In poor countries it is difficult to provide enough food to feed even the present number of people. In addition, poor countries usually have a lot of unemployment too, and an increase in population simply makes the situation worse. The environment also suffers when there are too

10

many people living on the land.

In rich, industrialised and developing countries it is very difficult for governments to provide effective public services in overcrowded cities. Moreover, there is usually a great deal of crimes, which is often due to high rates of unemployment. Further large increases in population only cause more overcrowding, unemployment and crime.

There are two main solutions to the overpopulation problem. Firstly, every woman who is pregnant, but who does not want to give birth, should be allowed by law to have an abortion. Secondly, governments must educate people to limit the size of the family. In China, couples are penalised financially if they have more than one child. This may seem cruel, but the "one-child policy" is beginning to have an effect in the world's most populous nation. Eventually, similar policies might also be necessary in other crowded nations such as India, for example.

To sum up, in population exploded continues, many more people will die of starvation especially in poor countries, and even in affluent nations, will become increasingly difficult.

Drug abuse is rife in many countries. Billions of dollars are spent internationally preventing drug use, treating addicts, and fighting drug-related crime. Although drugs threaten many societies, their effects can also be combated successfully. This essay will look at some of the effects of drug use on society, and suggest some solutions to the problem.

Drug abuse causes multiple problems for countries and communities. The medical and psychological effects are very obvious. Addicts cannot function as normal members of society. They neglect or abuse their families, and eventually require expensive treatment or hospitalization. The second effect is on crime. Huge police resources are needed to fight smuggling and dealing. Criminal gangs and mafia underworlds develop with the money from drugs.

However, the menace of drugs can be fought. Education is the first battle. Children need to be told at home and in school about drugs. People need to be aware of the effects so that they can avoid this problem A second approach is to increase police manpower and powers to stop dealers and to enforce the law. However the main target should be the user. Families and counselors need to talk to children and people at risk. Drug prevention centers should be established to help people quit using drugs. Jobs are needed to give these people a role in society so they will not feel abandoned.

In conclusion, The danger from drugs is too great to ignore. Although the problem may seem impossible to eliminate, there are concrete steps that can be taken to weaken the hold of drugs on society.