MY ANSWER: YES! – One position, more straightforward to write, much easier to read.

PARAGRAPH 1 experience that is practical contacts, on the job skills. EG: Studies from the UK Government show graduates with work experience are two times as prone to find employment…..

PARAGRAPH 2
Better preparation, opportunity to improve social skills, close the gap between academia and private sector, helps student decide on future before committing long haul, EG 1/6 students can change their higher education course while at uni….

Many individuals believe that it’s far better to learn something in a combined group in the place of individually. Do you agree or disagree?

Paragraph 1
Agree – learning in group has advantages that are many of teamwork could be adopted
Group can utilize each person’s skill expertise

Paragraph 2
Disagree – Individualism is better
Self reliant, own the result, not dependant on others
more aged way, more responsible
No laggards

Topic and Answer: Education (child)

Many people think that children must do organised activities inside their spare time while some genuinely believe that children should be absolve to do what they need to accomplish in their leisure time. Which viewpoint do you agree with? Use reasons that are specific examples to guide your answer.

PARAGRAPH 1 -In favour of letting them choose.
-benefits letting your brain wonder, children can express themselves, find themselves, do whatever they prefer and excel… etc etc
-EG Recent studies also show 12% of school students dislike physical education, therefore if sports were chosen it might be unfair for this minority.

PARAGRAPH 2 -Reasons against “organised activities”
Organising activities is:
-costly for the institution
-need time to plan‘equipment that is-possible to shop for
-furthermore research has revealed that mental performance operates better after a distraction from an organized task such as studying.

Topic and Answer: Globalisation

Many people say that globalisation additionally the growing wide range of multinational companies have a negative impact on the surroundings. Which viewpoint would you agree with? Use reasons that are specific examples to support your answer. As to the extent can you agree or disagree? Use reasons that are specific examples to guide your position.

PARAGRAPH 1 -DEFINITELY DAMAGING THE ENVIRONMENTAL SURROUNDINGS interaction that is-Increased countries
-Increase in products or services traded -this means more production, therefore more resources. EG China ‘workshop associated with world’ – many places air pollution masks needed.PARAGRAPH 2 -MULTINATIONALS / PROBS WITH GLOBALISATION
-YES increase pollution – (this decision taken for simplicity)
-Globalisation requires global solutions -these can have drastic consequences if accidents happen
-EG BP gulf coast of florida, oil spill, destroyed the local ecosystem…

Scientists think that to be able to protect environmental surroundings, people must use less energy in their daily lives. However, many people never have changed the real way they live. How come you believe many people have not taken action that is individual? What might be done to encourage them to do something?

Ideas for body paragraph 1

Not taken action that is individual:
– Danger not immediately or directly facing them
– Tragedy of the commons
– Collective problem – better to shirk responsibility

Ideas for body paragraph 2

What could be done to encourage them to do something?
– Media campaigns by the us government
– Tax or financial incentives EG In Tokyo ……

Some think that could be the responsibility of men and women to deal with the environmental surroundings. Others say this is the government that should be careful of this environment. Discuss both views and state your opinion.

Paragraph 1
People should care for environmental surroundings because:
Our company is the consumers, we vote with your wallets,
Throw away culture become considerably too prevalent – individuals are causing horrendous damage (pacific garbage patch)

Paragraph 2
Government should take care of the surroundings because:
They have the charged power to legislate
Can impose fines and taxes on polluters
said to be guardians of this country, which means that collectively they are guardians for the earth… not true the truth is

Conclusion
Both should always be doing more!

In lots of countries small shops and town centers ‘re going out of business, because individuals have a tendency to drive towards the large stores that are out-of-town. This results in a rise in car use, and it also implies that people without cars have limited usage of stores that are out-of-town. You think benefits of such development outweigh its disadvantages?