1. remove by people, 直接把树拔出来或者cut down;
2. use fungus, 使用fungus让叶子自己脱落；
3. prevent people from spreading seeds, 清洗人们的衣服，防止粘上种子帮助传播；
1. After removing, seeds are exposed to the sun, thus there will be more velvet trees than before, and pesticides are not useful; 树拔掉后seeds会被阳光激活，会长更多树，使用杀虫剂也无效；
2. Fungus take effects only in damp condition, while it’s very dry there; 这种fungus需要潮湿的环境，但是夏威夷很干燥；
3. Birds can spread seeds; 这种树会结sweet fruits, 鸟很喜欢吃，鸟吃了这种树的果实后，排泄物会带着种子，就会携带并传播出去。
2）关于primary care doctors紧缺的原因。
2. 政府会培养advanced degree的护士，并适度放权让他们分担医生的工作量，比如开处方等；
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
It is proper for the public to know celebrities, such as musicians’ or sportsmen’s, political views.
Use specific examples to support your answer.
It is common that an increasing number of celebrities such as musicians and sportsmen have more opportunities to express their political opinion to the public so some people claim that it is essential for the public to understand those stars’ opinion while others hold the opposite view because those celebrities’ political views are not closely related to people’s daily life. However, I think getting the hang of the celebrities’ political view is unnecessary.
Firstly, we may be misled if we are exposed to the political view presented by the celebrities because those successful and famous stars could take advantage of mass media to give us out wrong information intentionally for procuring large amount of money in a short time. For example, Kent, a talented musician born in a small village in Europe, expressed his political about using plastic bags in his county, stating that it is necessary for his government to enforce the law compelling its people not to use plastic bags because plastic bags is detrimental to people’s health. As a matter of fact, his perspective towards plastic usage is nothing but he wants to attract more attention from the public, thus making large sums of money for his luxury life and ignoring people’s human right. Thus, it is celebrities’ unfair opinions that misguide people and, therefore, knowing celebrities’ opinion is of no importance.
Although a minority of people might hold that view that people are easy to keep updated with the government’s policy if the influential celebrities voice their political view straight in public because those celebrities who are household name opine their views in a relaxing way, thus showing that people have more chances to be involved in the current affairs actively. However, there are many other ways for people to keep abreast of the government’s latest policy, such as News Programs online and in mobile phone. Those free sophisticated electric devices outweigh the celebrities.
In conclusion, I support that it is improper for people to know the celebrities’ political views because those views might misguide people. Only by isolating people from political views demonstrated by those celebrities can the society develop in a harmonious way.
How to protect the natural environment?
1. Walking or cycling;
2. Recycling and reusing objects instead of throwing them into trash bin;
3. Buying organic food using no chemicals.
The issue surrounding environmental challenges has become more pronounced than ever. It is no longer a rare sight that articles warning against the threat of global warming and air pollution often climb newspaper headlines. Some believe that walking or cycling proves effective way to counter environmental problems, whereas others are convinced that recycling and purchasing organic foods are deemed better alternatives. I am strongly in favor of the former argument.
Among a myriad of environmental issues, what compel our utmost attention are undoubtedly global warming and air pollution, not least because of their relative gravity to other environmental problems we have identified. The rise in average global temperature has not only affected mankind, but also made our planet inhospitable to a broad range of other species. In a similar vein, the ever-deteriorating air pollution has also made it increasingly difficult to breathe, threatening our very survival. Thus, promoting green mode of transport such as walking or cycling can withdraw our dependence on alternative, more convenient transport that largely relies on fossil fuels for power. If vehicular emission of carbon dioxide and toxic air pollutants could be cut by half, it would make our environment a much safer, cleaner place to live in.
The trouble with the other two solutions lies primarily in financial and practical threshold. Recycling used trash is a grandiose project if implemented on a national scale. The vast complexities involved in the type of trash, separation, rinsing, chemical reactions, and so forth could entail a tremendous amount of money. For some countries, such technologies may not even be readily available yet. They probably would have to import overseas, thus further driving up the total costs involved. Purchasing organic foods may sounds great, but the price organic producers charge is often twice or more than their traditional counterparts. This would seriously limit the demographic segment for whom such organic produce can be rendered accessible.
In conclusion, choosing walking or cycling is the best way to make our earth a better place to live in. This is probably the most effective way to transform the environment we face today. Recycling and buying organic food are out of doubt eco-friendly, but the potential change they can effect would probably take years to be feasible.
High school teachers spend most of the class time lecturing while the students listen and take notes. Other high school teachers spend most of the class time on discussion and projects in which students are highly involved and exchange their ideas. Which of these two approaches do you think is more effective for students’ learning and why?
With schoolwork onerous and knowledge more esoteric, it is more difficult for students, especially those in high school, to succeed in academic performance. Under such scenario, many teachers tend to add interactive activities to classes, while others insist conventional teaching methods. In view of the benefits in grades as well as in well-rounded development, it is a wise move for teachers to apply new teaching tactics.
First, including more class activities is beneficial to students’ school performance. When passively instilled knowledge into, students feel less like taking initiative to think for themselves, making it harder for them to absorb and apply what they have learned in class. But it would be a different story if they participate in discussions and projects in class because interactive activities require them to practically use boring and tedious knowledge to express themselves and complete tasks. Gradually, a mastery of knowledge will arise. For example, a teacher in art history class will ignite students’ passion if he holds a debate contest demanding students to explain the social impact caused by Picasso’s paintings instead of just talking about every artist, every piece of art and the influence brought by endless wars in Renaissance.
Additionally, allowing students to take part in the class can cultivate their abilities. Class discussions, presentations, projects and debate not only deepen students’ understanding of knowledge but also need them to collect information, do research, calmly and explicitly express their ideas and deal with conflicts and arguments all by themselves. In such process, students will have their communicative skills, information categorization, management, organization and critical thinking practiced. For instance, to meet the need and requirement of a teacher in archaeology who intend to encourage students to research into the medieval weapons and carry out presentations, students have to visit museums, search for pictures of the weapons online, speculate their function, analyze their pros and cons and the social meaning, thus proficient in contact with others, manage information and time and optimizing thinking pattern.
Granted, it is not to say that lecturing for the whole class is totally harmful. One benefit is that force-feeding urges students to focus more in class rather than get distracted by other related topics or some games. Also, some classes – politics and literature, for example – are too serious and strict to be explained in a relaxing fashion. That being said, the pace of teachers will easily get faster once teachers keep talking, making knowledge arcane. Besides, without any kinds of activities, it is almost impossible for teachers to know how well the students understand the knowledge.
In a nutshell, new teaching methods – involving students in the class – are favorable and more effective.