lain0119的作文~

lain0119UID: 2695504

第一次发上来=w= 欢迎各种拍砖~

3.5：Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? In order to become a financially responsible adult, people should be taught how to manage money at an early age. + ~, r- I$ t. @& T9 w

Traditionally, it is convinced that the cultivation of managing money at early age contributes to the financial resposibility of adults. Proponents of such belief, however, simplify the conception of managing money, that is, to adopt a series of investigation approaches based on current financial conditions. So complicated is managing money that the feasibilities of cultivating financial management to children is open to doubt. In addition, various noises appearing later, the effect of nurturing financial management habits may not work. Therefore, I profoundly contradict that learning to manage money at early age benefits being a financially responsible adults.

First, there is no guarantee that children can receive systematic education of managing money. While investigation, playing an essencial role in managing money, requires a handful of knowledge of finance, calculation, the evaluation of risk and so forth, it is suspectable if parents, the first and best tutors, can provide such know-hows for the reason that they are not proficient in financial knowledge. Accordingly, it is unsound to cultivate the habit of managing money children in the beginning.

Further, granted that appropriate guidance is offerd, it is doubtful whether children, at immature intellctual stage, can accept the abstract expertise of managing money or even handle the operation procedures merely. Consider the process of the stock dealing, one of the basic investigation products. Registering an account at first, one should next select promising stocks and then purchase them with a sum of manipulation fees. In general, since not until most people become adults, do they know how to trade stocks, let alone children. In summary, it is difficult for children to cope with finacial management.

Last but not least, it is uncertain if the habit of finance management formed in people's early year will equally apply to older age. Take me as an instance. I was taught excessive consumptions, such as grant a loan, swiping credit cards were considered to be the hint of people who can make the best use of money when I was 10. Due to the financial crisis in the late 2008, however, it is wiser for a financially responsible adult to store money to the bank. It seems that were I keep the financial management habit of over consumption, I would be the next victim of the financial crisis. In summary, it is unknown whether training for managing money in people's early age will make a difference later.

In conclusion, since it is virtually impossible to provide children for proper guidance as well as enable them to grasp the knowledge of managing money, it seems that the feasibility of teaching children how to manage finance is questioable at the first step. Besides, influenced by a myriad of noises, it remains doubt if the habit of managing money cultivated in one's childhood will make sense in the future. Thus, I fundamentally deem that to make a financially responsible adult, people ought to learn, rather than be taught, the means of managing money in their later and whole life.

lain0119UID: 2695504

怎么个状况= =为啥子木有童鞋改我作文...
不管了,先来一篇今天的~
3.6：Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Government should pay more attention on health care issues than on environmental issues.

In the era of social and natural changes leading to more concerning on the relationship between human beings and the environment, there is much controversy over the issue that which, health care or environment project should take the priority. From my perspective, in comparison with the environment issues, the health care problems should always be at the center of attention.

First and foremost, in order to avoid the suspicion of the premise, whether the focus of health care issues and that of environment problems can be dichotomized, of the statement, one needs to clarify both their relationships and . It is true that a myriad of health problems are actually triggered by environmental problems. In Fengyang country lying in the southwestern of China, for instance, the higher rate of nephritis of local residents is attributed to their drinking the waste water released by the indigenous factories. However, such phenomena is no more than extreme and rare case. Moreover, the environment issues referring to the protection to endangered animals primarily, the issues of health problem amount to ensure that residents have access to health care service, rather than analyze the influence of environment on the health condition. In this case, it is possible to weigh the significance of the two distinctive issues.

Further, it is the prime duty, guarding citizens' survival rights, of the government that determines the significance of the health care issues is prior to that of environment. Offering accesses of consulting doctors, reducing or even exempting the expenses of health care, such as medicines, operations, developing that deals with the large-scale diseases, the health care projects play an indispensable role in citizen's survival. In contrast, what the environment issues concentrate is the protection of creatures, which, indeed, is trivial to the survival of human beings. Accordingly, it is inappropriate - and, perhaps even cruel- for one to consider that government should put more energy on the environment issues especially when citizens basic needs are not guaranteed adequately.

Last but not least, it is neither necessary nor possible for the authority to fix their major attention on environment issues. To begin with, at various times, many species have become extinct as a result of natural, such as natural selections, rather than human, process. Thus, there is no justification for the government to make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in money, to save endangered species, let alone attach more importance to that instead of providing better health care. Besides, so tough is the implementation of certain environment issues that saving some endangered animals, to some extent, is beyond people's ability. For example, how can people collect samples of endangered creatures? Is it possible for scientists to enable them to multiple in the lab? Is there any insurance that the population of these lab-bred endangered species can recover in the wild? None knows. Hence, it seems that pouring limited budget in these environment issues is no more than a waste of money and it is wiser for governments to spend the expenditures on the health care projects in that some patients, at least, can benefit from them.

Therefore, due to the responsibility of the government as well as the complication and high expenses of saving endangered creatures, it is desirable for the authority to emphasize the importance of health care issues firstly.

swbaiUID: 2600532

Traditionally, it is convinced that the cultivation of managing money at early age contributes to the financial resposibility of adults. Proponents of such belief, however, simplify the conception of managing money, that is, to adopt a series of investigation approaches based on current financial conditions. So complicated is managing money that the feasibilities of cultivating financial management to children is open to doubt. In addition, various noises appearing later, the effect of nurturing financial management habits may not work. Therefore, I profoundly contradict that learning to manage money at early age benefits being a financially responsible adults.

First, there is no guarantee that children can receive systematic education of managing money. While investigation, playing an essencial role in managing money, requires a handful of knowledge of finance, calculation, the evaluation of risk and so forth, it is suspectable if parents, the first and best tutors, can provide such know-hows for the reason that they are not proficient in financial knowledge. Accordingly, it is unsound to cultivate the habit of managing money children in the beginning.

Further, granted that appropriate guidance is offerd, it is doubtful whether children, at immature intellctual stage, can accept the abstract expertise of managing money or even handle the operation procedures merely. Consider the process of the stock dealing, one of the basic investigation products. Registering an account at first, one should next select promising stocks and then purchase them with a sum of manipulation fees. In general, since not until most people become adults, do they know how to trade stocks, let alone children. In summary, it is difficult for children to cope with finacial management.

Last but not least, it is uncertain if the habit of finance management formed in people's early year will equally apply to older age. Take me as an instance. I was taught excessive consumptions, such as grant a loan, swiping credit cards were considered to be the hint of people who can make the best use of money when I was 10. Due to the financial crisis in the late 2008, however, it is wiser for a financially responsible adult to store money to the bank. It seems that were I keep the financial management habit of over consumption （这句有问题）, I would be the next victim of the financial crisis. In summary, it is unknown whether training for managing money in people's early age will make a difference later.

In conclusion, since it is virtually impossible to provide children for proper guidance as well as enable them to grasp the knowledge of managing money, it seems that the feasibility of teaching children how to manage finance is questioable at the first step. Besides, influenced by a myriad of noises, it remains doubt if the habit of managing money cultivated in one's childhood will make sense in the future. Thus, I fundamentally deem that to make a financially responsible adult, people ought to learn, rather than be taught, the means of managing money in their later and whole life.


楼主写的很好，继续加油！

lain0119UID: 2695504

对头,以前也有人说我长的句子写得太多了,反而让文章不清爽.好吧...我也不知道为什么我会对长难句那么执着= =我知道这样不好!!!!!!! 4# by19900610hnyt

lain0119UID: 2695504

3.7：Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Visiting museums is the best way to learn about a country., _+ k. D3 X3 ^9

Being a must-see for a bunch of tourists, the museum is considered as a window to enable those travelers, especially the short-trip ones, to have a glimpse of the culture of a country. Nevertheless, due to the limitation, the superficiality of the approach as well as the existence of other proper options, people cannot get insightful look into the culture of a country by only visiting the museum.

Admittedly, it's true that visiting the museum plays an effective and efficient role in drawing an outline of a culture for the tour-agency-travelers, staying at a region for merely several days. Museum exhibiting the most representative work and the supreme splendid achievement of the culture, those short-trips tourists can, at least, absorb the essences of the country. Nevertheless, the essence does not equal the whole culture. It appears that cultural dross, such as the history of invasion, national negative characters should also be included in the integral culture. Yet, in some cases, such cultural deficiencies are either unreasonably beautified or not demonstrated in the museum at all. If so, scarcely can people deem that knowledge of cultures derived from visiting museums is intact.

Further, by browsing the museum, one merely scratches the surface of the culture, that is, its material cultures, rather than examines the kernel, such as the system, the values or the characteristic, of the culture. For instance, I visited the Palace Museum last summer. Though deeply impressed by the spectacular architectures of the museum as well as the delicate collections it exhibited, other than such superficial perceptions, neither was I imparted with the aesthetic view nor did I political system of that dynasty. It seems that my cognition of the culture of ancient China doesn't go any further. In summary, browsing the museum regarded as the best way to grasp the culture, people's horizons will be inevitably cramped at a skin-deep level.

Last but not least, other than visiting the museum of a country, there lies a diversity of options to catch on the culture of a country. For example, since the way people look, dress and act somewhat reveals their attitudes and interests shaped by the culture, it is likely that observing the behavior of its people, rather than visiting the museum, presenting still, objects, enables people to comprehend the dynamic culture more accurately. All in all, hardly can visiting the museum be supposed as the best way to catch on a culture for the reason that there are plenty of superior multiples.

To sum up, though visiting the museum makes the travelers understand the culture of a country roughly in a short time, it is far from the most ideal way to get a deep insight into the culture. Such approach, just like "instant noodles", can merely provide fast-food and limited cultures that only ensure the basic needs rather than a feast of nutritious culture.

辛苦各位童鞋鸟~

增肥UID: 2773671

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=1068396&extra=

bensonseuUID: 2707369

3.7：Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Visiting museums is the best way to learn about a country., _+ k. D3 X3 ^9 ; K; t. H" E" w7 Y

Being a must-see（长见识了我~~！） for a bunch of tourists, the museum is considered as a window to enable those travelers, especially the short-trip ones, to have a glimpse of the culture of a country. Nevertheless, due to the limitation, the superficiality of the approach as well as the existence of other proper options, people cannot get insightful look into the culture of a country by only visiting the museum.（狂赞下这个开头！）

* B9 w/ j* _; f/ R
Admittedly, it's true that visiting the museum plays an effective and efficient role in drawing an outline of a culture for the tour-agency-travelers, staying at a region for merely several days. Museum exhibiting the most representative work and the supreme splendid achievement of the culture, those short-trips tourists can, at least, absorb the essences of the country. Nevertheless, the essence does not equal the whole culture. It appears that cultural dross, such as the history of invasion, national negative characters should also be included in the integral culture. Yet, in some cases, such cultural deficiencies are either unreasonably beautified or not demonstrated in the museum at all. If so, scarcely can people deem that knowledge of cultures derived from visiting museums is intact.2 B" i% J0 ~* `

* }  r: }$ Y4 k( {/ Y- G$ U+ \1 s2 _* m
Further, by browsing the museum, one merely scratches the surface of the culture, that is, its material cultures, rather than examines the kernel, such as the system, the values or the characteristic, of the culture. For instance, I visited the Palace Museum last summer. Though deeply impressed by the spectacular architectures of the museum as well as the delicate collections it exhibited, other than such superficial perceptions, neither was I imparted with the aesthetic view nor did I political system of that dynasty（额。。。这句没懂，望站内与你讨论）. It seems that my cognition of the culture of ancient China doesn't go any further. In summary, browsing the museum regarded as the best way to grasp the culture, people's horizons will be inevitably cramped at a skin-deep level.

Last but not least, other than visiting the museum of a country, there lies a diversity of options to catch on the culture of a country. For example, since the way people look, dress and act somewhat reveals their attitudes and interests shaped by the culture, it is likely that observing the behavior of its people, rather than visiting the museum, presenting still objects, enables people to comprehend the dynamic culture more accurately. All in all, hardly can visiting the museum be supposed as the best way to catch on a culture for the reason that there are plenty of superior multiples.

To sum up, though visiting the museum makes the travelers understand the culture of a country roughly in a short time, it is far from the most ideal way to get a deep insight into the culture. Such approach, just like "instant noodles", can merely provide fast-food and limited cultures that only ensure the basic needs rather than a feast of nutritious culture.
（好久没有看到这么好的一篇文章了，文笔在我看来已经超过了ets对toefl的要求，阁下应该练过了gre的aw的吧，要不这样的文章确实让人实在好的难以让人接受。很多好词好句都值得我学习，中间那句我没懂的希望能够站内赐教。）

lain0119UID: 2695504

3.9：Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People should not pay to the public transportation.

In this era of rapid social and technological change leading to the rising of the awareness of citizenship, issues concerning rights and obligations of the citizen, such as whether residents should pay for the public transportation, emerge. A bunch of people propose that the charges for the public transportation should be revoked due to its nonprofit. However, from my perspective, such belief fails to take into account either the citizens' responsibility or the feasibility, or the untoward consequences ensuing. Therefore, I fundamentally contradict the proposal.

First and foremost, the responsibility of citizens requires that they should disburse the public transportation project. Admittedly, it is true that offered by the government, the public transportation program is kinds of nonprofit utility. Nevertheless, fees for the operation and maintenance of the public transportation are still necessary. While the passengers not only use but also enable the public vehicles age, it is absurd that these people are not bound to pay for the attrition.

Further, even granted that passengers can get rid of the responsibility, who should pay for the expenditure remains a sphinx. Should social organizations or corporations pay it? The expenditures including the oil prices, drivers' salaries, repairing charges, being sky-high, it is transparent that none dares and can pour the money into the abyss, the public transportation program, without any profits from the public. Or should the government steer funds to the public program for being the greatest economy subject in a nation? So large is the sum of money that even the government has to seek for additional financial resources to meet the end of the budget. If so, it is entirely possible that the government will impose extra taxes, the most common way of increasing income, on citizens. Under such conditions, people still pay for the bill of public transportation, indirect. Moreover, such extra taxes are indeed unfair to those who go to work on foot or by cars. Why do these people have to pay for objects that are not consumed? Accordingly, the presume of the public proposal is open to doubt.

Last but not least, the proposal overlooks the potential hazards following. People might as well imagine them. Undoubtedly, more people, even those whose destinations are a stone throwing away, might shift to communicate simply owing to its non-cost. Consequently, a great amount of traffic pressures will be burdened. For example, the passengers may be more crowded in a bus and thus more buses are needed. Then, if more buses are added to cope with the problem, a chain of new troubles will spring up. For instance, will lanes be enough to contain those buses or other public vehicles? Or will traffic congestions be triggered? Plus, with the increasing communicators, is it possible the number of car-purchasers or people who take taxies decline? Will it contribute to the shrinking of private transportation marketing and thus strike the whole economy? In this case, by adopting the unconsidered proposal, people seems to make more troubles rather than benefit from it.

To sum up, without considering the citizen's responsibility, the feasibilities and the possible results of the proposal, it is summarily, and perhaps even irresponsible to deem that people should not pay for the public transportation.

这次没有用那么多的长句了,要尽量长短结合,嗯~缓慢试验中~继续超时= =

lain0119UID: 2695504

3.10: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Improving schools is the most important factor in successful development of country.

In this era of rapid social and technological change leading to relentless and ruthless international competition, increasing concerns are imposed on capable people, the core element of the fierce competition. Accordingly, a bunch of people conclude that improving schools, the cradle of people with ability, should be considered as the most crucial element to make a prosperous country. Such belief, however, overlooks not only the relationship between long-term goals and urgent events, but also the regulation of competition mechanism and the complexity of international competition. Thus, I tend to conceive that education is merely one of the ingredients determining the development of a nation and that is all.

To begin with, from the view of the relationship between long-term events versus urgencies, education, the long-term program of a nation requiring constant investment, ceases to urgent events, such as health care, poverty, and finance in very period at least. After all, those urgent events relates tightly to the survival of a nation. Consider the financial crisis of the late 2008. During the period, governments struggled to coping with the financial crisis to guard their survival rather than improved the quality of education blindly. If they drowned in the financial tsunami at first, no one will steer funds to enhancing schools in the future. In words, the most significant factor pushing a country forward varies according to different periods.

Besides, in the term of social competition, capable people cultivated by improving schools will not propel the nation automatically without well-regulated competition mechanism. It is common to see that in some government departments, especially those of eastern relationship-oriented nations, the promotion relies on the private relationship with the leader in stead of individual ability. Consequently, mediocre flatterers taking over, people with real ability yield to secondary positions and thus contribute little to the development of a nation. In this case, improving schools amounts to a waste of money. Hence, the development of a nation ascribe to the factor of ensuring the opportunity for citizens of ability equally.

Last but not least, from the perspective of the complexity of international competition, the development and strength of a nation not simply depends on education but a multiple of aspects involving science technology, military, culture and to name a few. Take the early 1990s of the United States as an instance. In comparison with enhancing schools, this nation constructed the information highway and Uncle Sam, as a result, witnessed its booming economy and made himself the forerunner of the information technology internationally. Therefore, far from the most essential factor of fueling a nation, improving schools is one of the possible means at best.

In conclusion, unless the government coordinates the relationship between education and other short-term events and ameliorates the social competition mechanism and focuses the development at a macro level, it is summarily, and perhaps even naive to acclaim that improving schools plays a major role in developing the country.

今天还是超时,吐血...

s499992008UID: 2688967

: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Improving schools is the most important factor in successful development of country.
: C5 U( S1 x' r  h" Y
In this era of rapid social and technological change leading to relentless and ruthless international competition, increasing concerns are imposed on capable people, the core element of the fierce competition. Accordingly, a bunch of people conclude that improving schools, the cradle of people with ability, should be considered as the most crucial element to make a prosperous country. Such belief, however, overlooks not only the relationship between long-term goals and urgent events, but also the regulation of competition mechanism and the complexity of international competition. Thus, I tend to conceive that education is merely one of the ingredients determining the development of a nation and that is all.

To begin with, from the view of the relationship between long-term events versus urgencies, education, the long-term program of a nation requiring constant investment, ceases to urgent events, such as health care, poverty, and finance in very period at least. After all, those urgent events relates tightly to the survival of a nation. Consider the financial crisis of the late 2008（这是不是缺少主语啊）. During the period, governments struggled to coping（struggle to do sth.吧） with the financial crisis to guard their survival rather than improved（improving） the quality of education blindly. If they drowned in(into 吧，这个我也不太确定) the financial tsunami at first, no one will（这的时态感觉有点问题） steer funds to enhancing（去掉ing） schools in the future. In words, the most significant factor pushing a country forward varies according to different periods. 2 ]' M! U7 C! J6 o4 x

Besides, in the term of social competition, capable people cultivated by improving schools will not propel the nation automatically without well-regulated competition mechanism. It is common to see that in some government departments, especially those of eastern relationship-oriented nations, the promotion relies on the private relationship with the leader in stead of individual ability. Consequently, mediocre flatterers taking over, people with real ability yield to secondary positions and thus contribute little to the development of a nation. In this case, improving schools amounts （这个amount能表达你想要的意思吗？换成mean比较好吧）to a waste of money. Hence, the development of a nation ascribe to the factor of ensuring the opportunity for citizens of ability equally.（这段全是论，没有例子，没有细节不知道你发现了没有？）
2 `7 D( W' |! \. n; s
Last but not least, from the perspective of the complexity of international competition, the development and strength of a nation not simply depends on education but a multiple of aspects involving science technology, military, culture and to name a few. Take the early 1990s of the United States as an instance. In comparison with enhancing schools, this nation constructed the information highway and Uncle Sam, as a result, witnessed its booming economy and made himself the forerunner of the information technology internationally. Therefore, far from the most essential factor of fueling a nation, improving schools is one of the possible means at best.

In conclusion, unless the government coordinates the relationship between education and other short-term events and ameliorates the social competition mechanism and focuses the development at a macro level, it is summarily, and perhaps even naive to acclaim that improving schools plays a major role in developing the country.
（感觉全篇，就是再论述。。。例子相对比较少。而且有的比较武断。。。例如你说的长期投资教育，就会停止其它方面的投资吗，，这个太绝对了吧。。。。）
不过你用了许多形容词，，我觉得挺好。。。
本人水平有限。。有说的不对的话。。。。就见谅吧。。

lain0119UID: 2695504

3.12: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?  The purpose of television should all be educative, not entertain.1 T, h7 {# y' A. R1 G

Imagine that one day the entertainment purpose of television is replaced with totally educative motivation-all recreational programs and news are removed and educative programs take over. Some prigs believe that it is reasonable in that people have more access to education opportunities and don't have to be exposed to vulgar jokes any more. This belief, however, it is definitely one-sided. It unfairly assumes that the recreational purpose and the educative purpose can be dichotomized. Besides, such belief omits the benefits, both to the public and the manager of the television, brought by the diversion.

First and foremost, the purpose of television programs, in general, cannot be divided distinctively into two parts, namely education and recreation. For example, laughing at Sesame Street’s dolls, young children obtain some elementary language education; amused by odd behaviors of four science nerds in the Big Bang Theory, people, at least, hear of the string theory; amazed at of each contestants in the American Idol, the public knows several derivative of the music world more or less. Therefore, it seems impossible to broadcast programs merely focusing on the purpose of education.

Further, it is indispensable for television programs to serve as an entertainment tool to liberate people from the relentless and ruthless world. In comparison with educational programs, various recreational programs appear to exaggerate the misfortune of the television character, which enables audiences to conceive that never can the real situation, no matter how discouraged it is, be worse. Consider the television competition show the Apprentice. The moment when the host spits the words "you are fired!" might be a nightmare to every loser. That, however, can be a relief to those who are fired in the real world for the reason that their firing moment is not broadcast in the front of audiences of the United States at least. Hence, the entertainment television is of great importance to people’s psychological health.

What's more, entertainment plays an essential financial-supporting role in the survival of the television. Since human nature drives people to chase amusement automatically, the audience will shift to other media if the television programs rule out any recreational elements. Advertisers who target at the audience, then, will tend to retrieve their budgets from televisions and steer them to other media instead. Consequently, losing the major income, the TV station cannot survive, let alone run for education. Accordingly, maintaining the entertainment purpose attaches significance to the management of a TV station.

To sum up, though people regard that overwhelmed box news should be filtered, they cannot bear that television runs exclusively for educative either. Set apart whether the purpose of television can be parted into education or education, the public don't expect to be imbued with the didactics-they need an exit to release their pressure; nor do those television tycoons approval of eliminating the entertainment purpose-they are aiming at advertisers’ pockets, which will pay for the popular media only.

lain0119UID: 2695504

好吧...我又先帮我改上一篇作文的童鞋一步顶帖鸟= =

3.13: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?  Young people should try different job before they decide which job or career they will do in the long term.

Traditionally, people believe that trying a myriad of jobs helps young folks make a wise career decisions. Admittedly, enriching their experience and broadening youths' horizon, these jobs, to some extent, can enable people to judge which job is more suitable. Such belief, however, is too hasty in that it unfairly assumes that the work experience plays an indispensable role in determining one's lifelong career. Meanwhile, emphasizing the significance of experience too much, it omits not only one's true feeling but also the feasibility of graduates major in certain field finding different jobs. Therefore, I fundamentally contract the belief.

First and foremost, the assumption that young people cannot be in charge of their careers without any job experience is unwarranted. What if those who have already established their lifelong career when they are students? Consider Rose Frantzen, a relatively young artist whose work represents the derivation of Realistic Impressionism. When she attended the art school, she was told by one of her instructor that she was not good at illustration, that she should go into advertising instead. However, never had she given up painting and the experience of studying advertising courses, in turn, convinced that she could be a good artist. Later, Frantze indeed proved herself an talent artist and her work was shown around France. It appears that Frantze doesn't undertake any jobs outside her art world, but she succeeds. Therefore, the working experience is unnecessary to make a correct long-term career choice.

Further, in comparison with the experience and the number of jobs people engage in, it is people's instinct that leads them to worthy career sometimes. For example, it is unreasonable for one to quit his/her first job summarily to simply chase different working experience. What if the person realizes the initial position is the ideal but only find that the job opportunity is taken over by others? If so, rather than promise a prosperous future, sticking to try different jobs blindly goes to the opposite. Accordingly, no matter whether it is the first job you take, once the job appeals you, it deserves devoting.

Last but not least, it is general to say that all young people should do different jobs. It is unrealistic, at least, for the secular world to offer students major in abstract subjects, such as mathematics, theoretical physics, astronomy and so forth, various opportunities. Since their logical thinking and reasoning cannot shift to concrete objects directly, their careers are confined to the academic world narrowly. Hence, as for these people discussed above, it is even impossible to try different jobs, let alone decide their career relying on these experience.

Therefore, though the experience of different jobs makes sense to some degree, scarcely can it be the decisive factor in the determination of career choice. Actually, other than try different jobs, young folks should also stick to their own truth and adjust to their majors.

zhangwen08UID: 2713418

13# lain0119
不好意思 我比较习惯晚上改作文~
3.12
3.12 lain.doc (36.5 KB, 下载次数: 6)

2010-3-13 20:39:56 上传

下载次数: 6