【Daily Writing作文特训小组】香草鱼的作文贴

香草鱼UID：3125484

10月8日 20100312NA
Agree or disagree? If children wantto do well in school, parents should limit the hours of watching TV programs ormovies

Recently, the majority of people argue as if it is a general truth that parents should restrain children watching TV in order to perform well in school. However, while others have divergent attitude that watch TV may help to relieve the children from the daily work and study. But to be frank, the disadvantages of the plan overweigh much more than the advantages brought to children either for the purpose of education, or because of promoting life management, or just for improving communication between people.

The first and foremost problem is that TV doesn't have much educational effect on children's study, and limiting the children from the TV could help to get in touch with more meaningful things. Consider what we've already seen on TV today, there are hardly teaching or introducing content, but just entertainment or other meaningless thing. Moreover, the violence or sex content on TV may be imitated without supervision of the parents. As a consequence, cause serious social effect on children.

In addition, TV time restriction also can teach children to prepare their own life and to become more independently. For example, an recent American study indicates that about 22 percent of children without managing their time in LA. The main reason is that they just waste time on TV. If these children have the ability of time-control, especially on TV, they may do a good job about manage their life. It is my belief that their parents and even teachers should teach children to stay away from TV. As their habits have not been built up, TV time limitation will have a profound influence on these children, lasting to their grown up.

Moreover, enforcing the children to stay away from the TV, they may have more time on intercommunicating with people. My sister, for instance, which once was a naughty and dependent kid, always stay in front of the TV without a word after she come back from school in those years. Recently, her parents realize the critical problem and confine her TV time to one hour. And now, she can talk with people around after school instead of watching TV.

Taking into account of all these factors, we may reach the conclusion that it is wiser to limit children from watching TV, this not only teach them to prepare their study and life, but also enhance communication ability between the children and other people.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
香草鱼的训练小组:
Daily Writing作文特训小组:https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1309607&highlight=
香草鱼的口语帖：https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1385010-1-1.html
香草鱼阅读小组：https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1385011-1-1.html

alohasallyUID：2860276

改好啦  

fantasyfrogUID：2548341

我们独立写作是一组的，麻烦帮我改一下，谢谢https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1304734-1-1.html

香草鱼UID：3125484

10月10日 20100306NA Some people believe that people should follow their ambitious dreams andgoals even they are not realistic; others believe that people should focus onachieving realistic goals. What’s your opinion and why? Use specific reasons to support your answer.

Recently, the majority of people arguewhether it is wise for persons to chase their ambitious dreams and goals whicheven are not realistic. No matter which angle we choose to consider the problem,the main aim of the controversy is to find a way to a more progressive andmeaningful life. As for me, I would rather choose to follow the ambitious goalother than the realistic one, either for the purpose of life achievement, orbecause of the dependency to environment, or just for the view of life.


The first and foremost thing is thatambitious dream can be our life impetus prominently. Once a man set up aaggressive goal to for himself, the psychological and physical factors can befully concentrated and inspired, to the point, personal achievement tend to bemore ambitious accompanied with hard work. Consider the example of GeorgeWashington in the Revolutionary War. With the British Empire at the back of the enemy, at a time, the American militarythought they would never defend their land and fight against the enemy.However, with the ambitious dream of independence and continuous struggle inthe war, the American people win the war and build their own nation and Washington was electedto be the first president. Without ambitious goal, Washington might probably not succeed in theend and the history would be different.


In addition, ambitious dream can also helpus to get rid of dependency to the environment. Nowadays, we may confront withvarious kinds of inducement from our surrounding. That's all because our livesdepend on our environment-we need food, clothes, jobs, entertainment. All this things,which are often ignored, can shake our persistence to a better future andpersuade us back to the present situation. Thus, we should understand why weneed ambitious dreams for a more meaningful life.




Moreover, in order to broaden horizons, weneed ambitious goal. Sometimes, we may face some problem in front of us, don'tknow what to do and get confused. With the ambitious goal, we can just considerthe point that affect our long, thus broad our view to problems, and to life. Somepeople say that an unrealistic ambitious dream is useless because it can hardlybe accomplished. While this is partly true, I think we should set an ambitiousgoal on the realistic ground.


Taking into account of all these factors,we may reach the conclusion that we should set up a more ambitious goal for usnot only because of considering life achievement, but also for getting rid ofthe inducement from the environment and broadening our life view.

reginakishuUID：3110732

~~~

sharon011516UID：2455184

第一次改，嘿嘿

香草鱼UID：3125484

10月11日 20100213NA Doyou agree with the following statement? In a team, those who do not accept others' criticism cannot succeed.

Recently, the majority of people argue that people who do not hear others' criticisms cannot achieve their goal. Indeed, these people may have less possibility to reach their success. But to be frankly, I disagree with the point that one who doesn’t accept other's critical suggestion cannot succeed, because of the personal intelligence, and external interruption.

The first and foremost thing is that people can rely on their intelligence and hard work to succeed. Without hearing the critical sound, people may lose the opportunities to review themselves, find the flaws in their work, and correct the course of life. But some of them still can get to the destinations with their capability sooner or later. Take the example of Tomas Edison inventing light bulb, he ignores the critiques from others, and with repeatedly trials, he made the first bulb and reach the goal. So, other's critiques is a important but not a dominant factor.

In addition, the critiques may be an interruption on the way to success, and people ignoring them can have the advantage to win to some extent. Consider that when one are developing a new type product or thinking about a new theory, sometimes the competitor will by all odds to ruin the work process. They may critic on some unrelated issue and if the people want to accomplish his/her task, the critiques must not be accepted. Otherwise, your work will be delayed even be rejected. On that point, ignoring the critiques is inevitable.

Some people say that critiques are the only way that others point out the weak point of us. While this is partly true, the theme exaggerates the function of the critiques. Nevertheless, I think that learning from others is also a way to improve ourselves and help to succeed.

Instance of the same sort can be multiplied indefinitely. Taking into account of all these factors, general speaking, we may reach the conclusion that people who are not reluctant to hear the critical voice from outside may succeed only because they can achieve the goal with their own, but get rid of the interruption as well.

香草鱼UID：3125484

10月12日 20100522NA
Do you agree or disagree with the followingstatement? Working at home using computers or telephones is better than workingin the office.


Nowadays, as the new pattern of handlingofficial business has been emerged, the majority of people argue as if it isbetter to work at home. However, while others have divergent attitude thatpeople should stay in the professional office to deal with various business.But to be frankly, I prefer to work in the office either for the purpose ofconvenience, or because of communication with the outside world, or just forpersonal communication.


The first and foremost reason is thatpeople will do business more conveniently and more efficiently in office thanat home. Consider when there is a contract to be signed up, a person can justgo to marketing department to prepare files, and go to the meeting room withrelational people. If something happens accidentally, you can just call in thebuilding very quickly. While on the other hand, the ability of handling thingsat home is limited, both in activity or dispatch. Only you can do is callingand e-mailing. That means the traditional office way is more proper.


Besides, in the daily life, it is importantto keep in touch with the information transmitting in the work, so traditionalpattern of work is the way to make you fresh. Some people may say that you canalso link to the world thought the Internet. But with my experience, most ofthe crucial information especially in the business area is acquired throughpeople, not through those machines, like computers and phones. Internet doesnot contain everything. With the widespread the all kinds of communicationmethods, this influence is getting more and more obvious in the man dominatingworld,


Moreover, sometimes a person should work inthe office to feel the surroundings. Staying home for long, one will get moreand lonely and anxious. Imagine a person was confined in a dozens squares of aplace for about ten or more hours a day, it's like a prison and the man must byall odds to get out of there. Thus, I think working in the office is morehealth for a person in psychology and physics.




Taking into account of all these factors,we may reach the conclusion that it is wiser to work in the office not onlybecause it's more convenient, efficient, but also it can also help update one'sbrain and communicate with other people.

qqlddUID：2594915

7# 香草鱼
欢迎来改~~https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1309117&page=1&extra=#pid1775515857

jackieydanUID：3182030

實在不好意思啊，之前我以上上不來寄託。。。。
現在才發有點晚了。見諒啊。。。我的作文在https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1309557-1-1.html
1011 獨立

Joymoon0307UID：3145258

10月12日的独立改好了·~下午网页打不开，没传上来~~

LZ的作文用词挺好的，学习了~~~

Joymoon0307UID：3145258

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1301327-2-1.html  我的作文在这里的13楼~

amanda330UID：2768793

没看到你作文啊？14号的

香草鱼UID：3125484

10月13日 20100619NA
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? If you need to discuss upsetting or controversial problems with others, using e-mail/text messaging is better than using telephone/voice-messaging.

Recently, the majority of people argue that when discussing upsetting or controversial problems with other people, whether it is better to use e-mail/text messaging than telephone/voice-messaging. In various situations, the main aim of discussion is to obtain a wise and reasonable result. To be frankly, I think that e-mail/text messaging is better than using telephone/voice-messaging, that people can discuss upsetting or controversial problems more clearly, deeply, and completely.

The first and foremost thing is that people can understand discussing processes more clear, which are all recorded on screens. When one asks a question and sends it through e-mail/text message, the other can see clearly what he or she asked and answers it. When one of them have some divergent on the discussion, he or she can find where they diverge can solve it, while telephone/voice-messaging doesn't supply the function. Also, the recorded discussions can be evidence in case that someone may deny what he or she said.

In addition, because e-mail/text message need some time to send and receive, we can have the periods to consider what are talking deeply. Taking the business communication for example, when a company have a contract that contain a couples of controversial buying and selling with their client, we often use e-mail messaging rather than telephone messaging. Once we receive an e-mail, we cannot often answer it immediately and will consider it for some time; we even will have an inner meeting about how and when to answer the client. While on the other hand, we often talk about some insignificant issues other than upsetting ones on the phones because we know the time is limited.

Moreover, in order to get completely understandings of upsetting or controversial problems, we should use email/text messaging. That's all because we can send and receive e-mail/text message with more than three people at a time easily, while can only have a talk between two people on the phones. And with more people joining, we can have a more comprehensive view of the upsetting or controversial problems.

Taking into account of all these factors, we may reach the conclusion that it is wiser to use e-mail/text messaging not only because we can discuss upsetting or controversial problems more clearly, consider them deeply, and get a comprehensive view of them.

香草鱼UID：3125484

10月14日 20090403NA
Do you agree or disagree with the followingstatement? The best way to improve the quality of education is to increaseteacher’s salaries.


Recently, the majority of people argue thatit is suitable to enhance the level of teacher's salaries to promote theeducation, while others hold a divergent attitude that the enhancement wouldhave the opposite result. In various situations, the main aim of the controversialis to make better use of the human resource on education. As for me, I think weshould increase teacher's salaries so that teachers would get inspired, notworried about their life, and more outstanding people would be attracted toimprove education.


The first and foremost thing is thatincreasing teacher's salaries to ensure their life, they will not be distractedfrom livelihood, thus will concentrate more on how to instruct students better.Consider the example of my father, a university teacher. At 1990s, the salarieslevel, even in university, is very low because of the national policy. And myfather always worried about the outcome of my family and had to do some extrawork outside the school, and sometimes the instruction would be delayed. As wecan see, increasing teachers' salaries to ensure their life is crucial to theimprovement of the education.


In addition, enhancement of salary levelwould attract more brilliant people into education, and then help to promoteeducation. Once schools are allowed to pay more money to the teachers, peoplewill by all odds to compete for teaching jobs, and the more brilliant will winand join to be teachers. For instance, in these years, people are paying moreand more attention on education, and the educational background and quality ofthe teachers in schools is increasing rapidly because more and more universitystudents are willing to be teachers and satisfied with the income.


Further, elevate the level of income willinspire the enthusiasm of the teachers to some extent. Although some people saythat increasing the teacher's salaries would put weigh on the wrong purpose. However,this is partly true, because that teaching jobs are also jobs, and people wish toget rewarded after their hard work. We should make them believe that the moneyworth their hard work.


Instance of the same sort can be multipliedindefinitely. Taking into account all these factors, we may conclude that weshould enhance the level of teacher's salaries so that they are willing tofocus on teaching, and more brilliant persona can join the troops of education.