日韩美女一区二区三区-久久久精品在线视频-五月天久久久噜噜噜久久-国产免费视屏-影音先锋亚洲资源-大番蕉尹人一线久久-国产高清视频在线观看97-成人春色影视-综合亚洲桃色第一影院-免费看污视频在线观看-久久这里只精品热在线18-黄色一级视频看看-www.桃色-不卡av网-国产亚洲日韩妖曝欧美-成人国产精品一区

　　環(huán)球教育托福考試今天為大家?guī)砹?strong>2016年9月9/10/11日托福寫作/口語預(yù)測。

　　感謝環(huán)球教育教研中心的老師們，給大家提供超精準(zhǔn)命中率的托福考試預(yù)測~

　　托福考試預(yù)測和真題回憶均由環(huán)球教育教研中心供稿，轉(zhuǎn)載請注明。

　　獨(dú)立寫作

　　1.Do you agree that people will feel happier if they have fewer possessions?

　　Money-worshiping is often condemned and frowned upon. Some people even attribute all the dissatisfaction in our life to the pursuit of personal possessions. They believe that with fewer possessions, people would live a much happier life. However, real life abounds with examples where people do not feel happier or enjoy more emotional well-being when they have fewer personal possessions.People who are extremely poor will certainly feel unhappy if they are deprived of part of their possessions. These people can barely survive with their current properties and belongings, so if they lose any, they can hardly sustain their own lives. The Syrian refugees can be a typical example. These refugees, when abandoning their home, took little with them. What they have taken with them are normally personal belongings and passports. Should they lose any of them, their life for the following days would be miserable. They might starve if they cannot get food, or they might be denied entrance to the refugee camp if they cannot prove their identity. They would be far from happy when they lose some of their personal belongings.Similarly, common people will also feel unhappy, if not uneasy when they find their property shrink. Common people, including the working class and the middle class, may seem to lead a comfortable life with a stable income. However, their seemingly comfortable life is often one step away from bankruptcy if the stock market experiences a downturn, or if a family member is diagnosed with a deadly disease. For example, the plunge in the stock market in China last year has caused a decrease in property for millions of stockholders. Many suffered from constant anxiety, others from insomnia. Never can we find any claiming to be happy or satisfactory with a shrunk property. Also, countless times have we read news about medical treatment consuming all the deposits of an average family, leaving them depressed and miserable.The only exception is probably the billionaires, who are most likely to remain unaffected when facing a reduction in property. The reason is that these people have various assets and businesses, so if one slumps, there are always others on the rise. Their personal possessions are embodied in figures on the bank account, which, if dwindles, tends to creep back some days later. In the meantime, they might even fail to notice the difference. For example, after having donated more than 30 billion dollars to charity, Bill Gates remains the richest person in the world for 18 years in a row. Of course he claims to be happy since his donation helps to improve the life of those in need. However, others, whose possessions reduce only because of financial fluctuation, simply do not care too much.In conclusion, only those with real assets and business may remain untouched by a shrink in possessions, others, including the average people and the underprivileged, will feel less happy about the loss of possessions.

　　2.Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? All school teachers should be required to take courses every five years to update their knowledge.

　　Every subject is constantly developing with the forefront being renewed on a yearly basis, so it is believed that teachers should update their knowledge accordingly. However, asking the teachers to take courses every five years would be inadvisable, since it would be unnecessary for teachers at certain levels of education.To begin with, it would clearly be quite unnecessary for the primary school teachers, since they only offer basic knowledge, which seldom changes in five years. For example, the basic calculation principles have never changed since they were invented; the basic grammatical rules have also remained almost the same for centuries. Teachers of these subjects obviously do not need to update their knowledge of the subject they are teaching every five years. Besides, subjects such as music and PE are all the more stable, with almost no requirement on new knowledge.A first sight, it would seem necessary for university professors as they usually have to keep themselves informed of the forefront of their own fields of study. However, the fact is that professors and lecturers attend conferences or seminars, and read newly-published academic articles themselves so as to keep up with the latest development of their field. Taking courses would only waste their time and impair the academic freedom. These teachers would spontaneously seek out information about their field regularly, so it would be unwise to force them to take courses at too long an interval.In fact, among teachers of different levels of education, only middle school teachers might find it necessary to take such courses. This is because the syllabus and test forms may change regularly and if they are not familiar with the modifications, they may fail to enhance the academic performance of their students. For example, middle school teachers should be fully aware of the reform in SAT writing and teach the students the new skills required; otherwise, their students might be wrongly instructed and score too low in the test, failing to get enrolled in top-notch universities. More often than not, the changes in the syllabus and test forms are subtle but complicated, so assembling the teachers and giving them instructions would lead to a most satisfactory result. In this way, the education bureau can make sure that every teacher understands the changes and that they can teach students more effectively.In conclusion, although teachers do have to update their knowledge, it is not necessary to require teachers of all levels to take courses every five years.

　　3.The opinions of celebrities, such as entertainers and athletes, are more important to the younger people than they are to the older people.

　　Talk shows and news programs often broadcast opinions of celebrities, be it from entertainers or athletes. Their voices can be heard everywhere and people would sometimes listen. As with anything new or fashionable, opinions and viewpoints made by these famous people clearly means more to the younger generation than to the older people.First, the younger generation may refer to the opinions of celebrities when making purchasing decisions. It is not uncommon these days for entertainers or athletes to endorse for a product. As the spokesmen for a certain brand, these celebrities would openly support the product. As a result, those young people who are fascinated with their idols may deem the product as impeccable and choose to buy these products so as to share the same style. However, older people have already formed their own habit and may be loyal to their own favorite brands, so they seldom listen to the recommendations from these spokesmen or beauty ambassadors.Second, the social life of the young people always involve the celebrities. When a teenager or a young adult show little knowledge about the celebrities, he or she would be considered weirdos or outsiders, thus being rejected by the average social circle. For example, one would seem obsolete these days in China if he or she knows nothing about the catchphrase “prehistoric power”. Immediately after Fu Yuanhui, a Chinese swimmer, uttered these words, the phrase went viral on the social media along with her exaggerated facial expression. The younger generation soon created various memes and incorporated the catchphrase into their daily conversation. However, the older generation seemed unaffected by this. They did not share the memes with their friends, nor did they quote her words.Finally, opinions of celebrities may even influence the career aspiration of the younger generation. These days, young people are much more likely to see themselves as potential sports stars or entertainers. After all, the prevalence of these figures in the mass media may convey the impression that such positions are plentiful. If a singer or a basketball player boasts his or her success and career, millions of the young would follow the track, competing in talent shows, or sweating on the basketball court. The older people, however, are much more sensible when hearing these things, either because they have already chosen a career or because they are aware of the cruelty of life.In conclusion, words from famous people can exert a great influence on purchasing decisions, social life and career aspiration of the younger generation, while for the older and more mature generation, the influence is minimal.