CAM 18 TEST 1

The most important aim of science should be to improve people’s lives.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
It is a common belief that the most important purpose of science is serving humanity. While I agree
that the advancement of science has extended human lifespan, I believe that preservation of several
animal species should be considered.
In conclusion, while the advancement of sience undeniably plays a crucial role in improving human
lives, it is equally important to consider the preservation of various animal species.
 Some people believe that studying at university or college is the best route to a successful career, while others believe that it is
better to get a job straight after school.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.
The question of whether graduates should continue the pursuit of higher education is a subject of considerable debate. While some
people argue that possessing a bachelor’s or master’s degree brings better job opportunities, others assert that becoming an employee
after graduation gives them financial independence. From my perspective, it is advantageous for high school graduates to enroll in
university instead of seeking a job.
 CAM 18 TEST 2
Some university students want to learn about other subjects in addition to their main subjects.
Others believe it is more important to give all their time and attention to studying for a
qualification.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
The question of whether university students should be required to study other subjects in addition to
their main subjects is a common topic of discussion. While some argue that it is a personal choice,
others assert that it is a personal preference. Although both viewpoints have their merits and demerits, I
believe that it is more important to learn about other subjects in addition to their main subjects.
In conclusion, while there are valid arguments on both sides, I believe that equipping university
students with essential skills is beneficial. It provides students with opportunities for attracting
employers.
VOCABULARY
Adaptability in an ever-evolving job market
Enhance employability
Contribute to personal growth
 CAM 18 TEST 3
In many countries around the world, rural people are moving to cities, so the population in the
countryside is decreasing.
Do you think this is a positive or a negative development?
It is increasingly common for people to live in metropolies rather than countryside. Although there are
some beneftis of rural-to-urban migration, I would believe that there are far more drawbacks.
In conclusion, although I recognise that it has job and education opportunities for immigrants, I
consider it to be a negative development overall.
Nowadays, a growing number of people with health problems are trying alternative medicines
and treatments instead of visiting their usual doctor.
Do you think this is a positive or a negative development.
It is increasingly common that patients with health issues are turning to alternative medicines and
treatments rather than seeking care from their regular physicians. While there are certain beneftis
associated with using alternative approches, I would like believe that there are far more drawbacks.
 CAM 18 TEST 4
In many countries, people are now living longer than ever before. Some people say an ageing
population creates problems for governments. Other people think there are benefits if society has
more elderly people.
To what extent do the advantages of having an ageing population outweigh the disadvantages?
Having an aging population -> state budget spend on the elderly very much -> E.g people will receive
money from social insurance.
By contrast, the elderly will help to teenagers to comprehend country culture, history -> Eg boring
lessons in school are more difficult to acquire than the elderly’s story.
The demographic shift towards an ageing population is a global phenomenon. While some argue that
an ageing population poses challenges for governments, others assert that there are substantial benefits
to having more elderly individuals in society. In my perspective, the advantages of having an ageing
population clearly outweigh the disadvantages, as it brings about opportunities for intergenerational
knowledge transfer, fosters a wiser society, and enhances cultural richness.
A global phenomenon
While some argue that…, others assert that…
In my perspective, copy the question, and adding “clearly” before “outweigh”.
The advantages of having an ageing population clearly outweigh the disadvantages, as it brings
opportunities for intergenerational knowledge transfer, and contributes to the society in various ways
Some people argue that an increase in age population can lead to problems for governments.
One significant disadvantage of an ageing population for governments is the increasing burden on
healthcare and social welfare systems.
If citizens live longer, the state budget will utilize to pay a considerable amount of money for their
health bills, leading to governments having to raise certain taxes such as personal income tax or
corporation income tax to offset these bills. For instance, employees working in company are required
to pay state social insurance, which is approximately 15% of their salary. This fund is used by the
government to finance healthcare for the elderly. However, as the population ages, the government may
need to increase this rate to maintain these services.
In contrast, an ageing population also offers numerous advantages to society. One of the most notable
benefits is the opportunity for intergenerational knowledge transfer. Elderly individuals often possess a
wealth of experience, wisdom, and expertise accumulated over a lifetime, which can be passed down to
younger generations. For example, while many history lessons taught in high school may seem boring
and difficult to grasp, if veterans share these lessons through their personal experiences, students may
find learning about history more engaging.
In conclusion, it is true that an ageing population poses challenges for governments. It is clear that
these are outweighed by the significant benefits that elderly people bring to society.
In conclusion, leaving rural areas and living in cities have both positive and negative aspects. Although
it has job and education opportunities for immigrants, it might negatively impact the lives of those
remaining in rural areas in terms of managing their farms and also mental health. I consider it to be a
negative development overall.
the possible advantages of
it has job and education opportunities for immigrants, I consider it
The question of whether people to live in metropolies rather than countryside is positive or negative
development is a subject of considerable debate. Although there are some benefits of rural-to-urban
migration, I would assert that there are far more drawbacks.
Although it has job and education opportunities for immigrants
In conclusion, although the benefits of transportating goods over long distances via railways are
undeniable, the value of road networks, particularly for local commuting and transportation, cannot be
overlooked.
the destruction of infrastructure
In conclusion, while I recognise the possible disadvantages of online learning, I consider it to be a
positive development overall.
In conclusion, I do believe that while 24-hour TV programs bring undeniable advantages such as
inclusivity and economic growth, it is essential to recognize the potential negative consequences,
including sleep disturbances and impacts on family dynamics.
 In many countries around the world, rural people are moving to cities, so the population in the
countryside is decreasing.
Do you think this is a positive or a negative development? (The best)
In numerous nations worldwide, the population of rural areas is declining due to the immigration of
people from rural areas to metropolitans. I believe this movement has both benefits and drawbacks,
which will be discussed in this essay.
On the one hand, migration from the countryside to cities has several positive effects. One of the most
important ones is job opportunities. In rural regions, people mainly work on land and farms or take care
of animals, whilst they could be employed by various recruiters such as industrial factories, famous
companies, and retail markets. As a result, people could have a higher wage and a better life quality,
and also working in famous companies strengthens their resumes for their future careers. Moreover,
continued education is another benefit of moving to cities because, in most parts of the world, rural
areas provide only primary and secondary schools, and if individuals intend to go to colleges or
universities, they have to relocate to a nearby city.
However, there are several negative outcomes of moving to cities. Usually, the elderly do not like to
leave their home and start a new lifestyle in cities. They remain alone with lots of agricultural
workloads, which is more than their abilities since they do not have enough physical strength, and
many suffer from ongoing health conditions. Furthermore, the psychological health of older people
could be affected because they might assume that they are abandoned after moving their young family
members to cities. It is a fact that the elderly are more prone to depression than other populations, so
moving young individuals might exaggerate this issue.
In conclusion, leaving rural areas and living in cities have both positive and negative aspects.
Although it has job and education opportunities for immigrants, it might negatively impact the lives of
those remaining in rural areas in terms of managing their farms and also mental health.
 Some universities now offer their courses on the Internet so that people can study online. Is this
a positive or negative development?
It is true that online courses are becoming a common feature of university education. Although there
are some drawbacks of Internet-based learning, I would argue that there are far more benefits.
The main drawback of the trend towards online university courses is that there is less direct
interaction. Students may not have the opportunity to engage face-to-face with their teachers, and will
instead have to rely on written forms of communication. Similarly, students who study online do not
come into direct contact with each other, and this could have a negative impact on peer support,
discussion and exchange of ideas. For example, whereas students on traditional courses can attend
seminars and even discuss their subjects over coffee after lessons, online learners are restricted to
chatting through website forum areas. These learners may also lack the motivation and element of
competition that face-to-face group work brings.
Despite the negatives mentioned above, I believe that online university courses are a positive
development for various reasons. Firstly, they allow learners to study in a flexible way, meaning that
they can work whenever and wherever is convenient, and they can cover the material at their own pace.
Secondly, the cost of a university education can be greatly reduced, while revenues for institutions may
increase as more students can be taught. Finally, online learning offers open access to anybody who is
willing to study, regardless of age, location, ability and background. For example, my uncle, who is 65
years old, has recently enrolled on an online MBA course in a different country, which would have been
impossible in the days before Internet-based education.
In conclusion, while I recognise the possible disadvantages of online learning, I consider it to be a
positive development overall.
In many countries, there are 24-hour TV programs. Is it a positive or negative development?
In recent years, the introduction of 24-hour TV programs has become a transformative force in the
media landscape, sparking debates on whether this development is positive or negative. In my opinion,
this tendency is both a positive and negative development.
On the one hand, there are many reasons why this tendency is positive. Firstly, the availability of 24-
hour TV programs addresses the diverse schedules and lifestyles of individuals, fostering a sense of
inclusivity. In fact, the flexibility inherent in continuous broadcasting proves particularly beneficial for
those with unconventional working hours, students, and individuals residing in different time zones.
Secondly, the 24-hour TV model plays a pivotal role in stimulating economic growth by creating job
opportunities and supporting various industries. This is because the constant demand for fresh content
and live programming energizes the media and entertainment sector, leading to increased employment
in areas such as production, broadcasting, and advertising.
On the other hand, it is crucial to acknowledge the potential negative impacts associated with the 24-
hour TV culture. One negative side is that late-night viewing, in particular, poses challenges for
individuals prone to insomnia or those susceptible to disturbed sleep patterns. As a result, this
prolonged exposure to screens can lead to difficulties falling asleep and other health issues. For
example, frequent late-night television watching or the use of electronic devices can disrupt an
employee's sleep, leading to difficulties in concentration, decision-making, and task performance at
work due to inadequate sleep quality. Another drawback is the potential diminishment of quality family
time with excessive program watching. If individuals, especially children, prioritize screen time over
socializing or engaging in activities with family members, it may adversely impact their social
development.
In conclusion, I do believe that while 24-hour TV programs bring undeniable advantages such as
inclusivity and economic growth, it is essential to recognize the potential negative consequences,
including sleep disturbances and impacts on family dynamics.
 Some people say that advertising is extremely successful at persuading us to buy things. Other
people think that advertising is so common that we no longer pay attention to it.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
In the modern world, advertising is ubiquitous and plays a pivotal role in the market dynamics. Some
individuals assert that advertisements are highly effective in influencing our purchasing decisions,
while others believe that due to their omnipresence, we have become indifferent to them. This essay
will explore both perspectives and offer my viewpoint on the matter. (a balanced view)
In today’s consumer-driven society, advertising is a pervasive force that shapes our attitudes and
behaviors. While some argue that advertisements have become so commonplace that they are largely
ignored, I firmly believe in their potent influence on our buying habits,
In the age of digital media, we are constantly bombarded with advertisements. While some argue that
these ads significantly sway our purchasing decisions, I am of the opinion that their sheer ubiquity has
led us to largely overlook them, rendering them less effective than often perceived.
 The Internet has significantly altered our lives in many positive ways. However, there are also
negative aspects that come with the use of the Internet.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
The advent of the Internet has undeniably revolutionized our lives, bringing both significant
advantages and disadvantages. While it is true that the Internet can sometimes have negative impacts, it
also opens up a world of opportunities and benefits. This essay will explore both the potential
drawbacks and benefits of Internet use, arguing that despite some concerns, its advantages are
substantial.
Negative aspects:
On the one hand, the Internet has brought about several negative impacts. The most obvious is the
issue of cybercrime, which is becoming increasingly prevalent in our digital age. Personal information
can be easily exploited by hackers, leading to identity theft and financial loss. Additionally, the Internet
can also be a source of misinformation, with fake news and propaganda spreading rapidly, causing
confusion and even inciting fear or hatred. Moreover, excessive use of the Internet, especially social
media, can lead to addiction, negatively affecting mental health and personal relationships.
Indeed, one of the negative aspects of the Internet is that it can promote a sedentary lifestyle. With the
convenience of online shopping, entertainment, and even work, people may find themselves spending
long hours in front of their computers or other devices, leading to a lack of physical activity. This
sedentary behavior can contribute to various health issues such as obesity, heart disease, and
musculoskeletal problems. For instance, the rise of online gaming and streaming platforms like Netflix
can lead to people spending excessive hours sitting, which can contribute to a sedentary lifestyle and
associated health issues. It’s important to balance these activities with regular physical exercise.
On the other hand, the benefits of the Internet are undeniable.
Positive aspects:
It has made information readily accessible, promoting education and knowledge sharing on a global
scale. For example, online learning platforms like Coursera and Udemy have made educational
resources available to anyone with an internet connection, breaking down geographical barriers and
promoting global knowledge sharing.
Communication has been revolutionized, with people able to connect with others around the world
instantly, fostering understanding and cooperation between different cultures. An example of this is the
use of social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter, which allow people from different parts of the
world to interact and share ideas, fostering a global community and promoting cultural understanding.
Furthermore, the Internet has opened up new avenues for business and commerce, creating job
opportunities and boosting economies. For instance, the emergence of e-commerce platforms like
Amazon and Alibaba has created numerous job opportunities worldwide and boosted economies,
especially in developing countries. These platforms have transformed the way we do business, allowing
even small businesses to reach a global audience.
In conclusion, while the Internet does have its drawbacks, its benefits are substantial and far-reaching.
It is a powerful tool that, when used responsibly and wisely, can greatly enhance our lives and society
as a whole. Therefore, it is crucial to educate users about the potential risks and promote safe and
ethical Internet practices. This way, we can mitigate the negative impacts and fully harness the
immense potential that the Internet offers.
 The Internet has significantly altered our lives in many positive ways. However, there are also
negative aspects that come with the use of the Internet.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
The Internet has undeniably revolutionized our lives in numerous ways. It has made information
readily accessible, facilitated global communication, and transformed the way we work, learn, and
interact. However, the Internet also has its drawbacks, which are worth discussing.
The Internet’s most significant advantage is its ability to democratize information. This has
transformed education, as knowledge is now more accessible than ever before. People can learn new
skills, research complex topics, and even earn degrees online. Moreover, the Internet has made it
possible for people to communicate and collaborate with others globally, breaking down geographical
barriers. It has also revolutionized commerce, allowing people to buy and sell goods and services from
anywhere in the world.
However, the Internet also has its downsides. One of the main concerns is privacy. With so much data
being shared online, there is a constant risk of personal information being misused or stolen.
Cybercrime, such as hacking and phishing, is also a significant concern. Additionally, the Internet can
be a double-edged sword when it comes to accessibility of information. While it allows for easy access
to valuable knowledge, it also makes it easier for misinformation to spread, leading to issues like fake
news.
In my opinion, while the Internet does have its negatives, its positives far outweigh them. The key is
to use it responsibly and be aware of its potential risks. We should take steps to protect our privacy
online, be discerning about the information we consume, and use the Internet’s power to learn and grow
positively. In the end, the Internet is a tool, and like any tool, its impact depends on how we use it.
 Some people believe that it is essential to learn a foreign language in school, while others believe
that it is not necessary.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Introduction paragraph
In today’s globalized world, the question of whether or not to learn a foreign language in school is a
common topic of discussion. While some argue that it is crucial, others believe it is not necessary. Both
viewpoints have their merits and demerits.
Positive aspects of learning a foreign language in school.
On one hand, proponents of learning a foreign language in school argue that it equips students with
essential skills for the future. In an increasingly interconnected world, knowing a second language can
open up job opportunities. For instance, a person fluent in both English and Spanish could work as a
translator or interpreter, roles that are in high demand in global businesses. They could also work in
international customer service or sales, where their language skills would enable them to communicate
effectively with customers from different countries.
Furthermore, studies have shown that learning a new language can enhance cognitive abilities,
improving problem-solving and multitasking skills. For example, a person learning a new language
often encounters unfamiliar words and grammar rules, which requires them to use problem-solving
skills to understand and use these new concepts. Additionally, practicing a new language can involve
switching between languages, which can improve multitasking abilities.
Negative aspects of learning a foreign language in school.
On the other hand, those who believe it is not necessary to learn a foreign language in school often
argue that the time and resources spent on this could be better utilized.
They suggest that students could focus more on core subjects such as math, science, and their native
language, which are often seen as more directly beneficial to their academic and career prospects. For
instance, a strong foundation in math and science can open up opportunities in fields like engineering,
medicine, and technology, which are often associated with high earning potential and job security.
Similarly, proficiency in one’s native language is crucial for effective communication and can be
advantageous in many career paths, from journalism to law.
Additionally, with the prevalence of translation technology, some may argue that the need for
multilingualism is lessened. For example, with the advent of translation apps like Google Translate,
individuals can now understand and communicate in multiple languages without having to learn them.
These technologies can instantly translate text, spoken words, and even entire websites, reducing the
necessity for multilingual proficiency in everyday communication.
Conclusion paragraph.
In conclusion, while there are valid arguments on both sides, I believe that the benefits of learning a
foreign language in school outweigh the potential drawbacks. It is a valuable skill that can enrich
students’ lives both personally and professionally
 Some people believe that studying at university or college is the best route to a successful career,
while others believe that it is better to get a job straight after school. (SIMON)
Discuss both views and give your opinion. (A > B)
When they finish school, teenagers face the dilemma of whether to get a job or continue their
education. While there are some benefits to getting a job straight after school, I would argue that it is
better to go to college or university.
Viewpoint A.
The option to start work straight after school is attractive for several reasons. Many young people
want to start earning money as soon as possible. In this way, they can become independent, and they
will be able to afford their own house or start a family. In terms of their career, young people who
decide to find work, rather than continue their studies, may progress more quickly. They will have the
chance to gain real experience and learn practical skills related to their chosen profession. This may
lead to promotions and a successful career.
Viewpoint B -> Stating your opinion.
On the other hand, I believe that it is more beneficial for students to continue their studies.
Firstly, academic qualifications are required in many professions. For example, it is impossible to
become a doctor, teacher or lawyer without having the relevant degree. As a result, university graduates
have access to more and better job opportunities, and they tend to earn higher salaries than those with
fewer qualifications.
Secondly, the job market is becoming increasingly competitive, and sometimes there are hundreds of
applicants for one position in a company. Young people who do not have qualifications from a
university or college will not be able to compete.
For the reasons mentioned above, it seems to me that students are more likely to be successful in their
careers if they continue their studies beyond school level.
 In many countries, a small number of people earn extremely high salaries. Some people believe
that this is good for the country, but others think that governments should not allow salaries
above a certain level.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
The question of whether the governments should establish a salary maximum for each industry is a
common topic of dicussion. While some argue that it is essential, others assert that it is not
considerable. Although both viewpoints have their merits and demerits, I believe that governments
should not permit salaries to exceed a certain level.
On the one hand, high salaries has brought about several substantial benefits for the country. The most
obvious is boosting economy, as higher incomes enable individuals to spend more, leading to increased
consumer demand and economic. Additionally, high salaries attract skilled professionals and experts
from various fields, fostering innovation and competitiveness in industries. This influx of talent can
also lead to the establishment and growth of new businesses. Furthermore, high salaries often result in
higher tax revenues for the government, which can be high salaries attract skilled professionals and
experts from various fields, fostering innovation and competitiveness in industries. This influx of talent
can also lead to the establishment and growth of new businesses allocated towards public services and
infrastructure improvements, benefiting society as a whole. For instance, while workers who make over
80,000,000 Vietnamese Dong per month are required to pay 35% of personal income tax, those who
make less contribute proportionally less tax revenue. This higher tax contribution from top earners
significantly bolsters government revenue, allowing for greater investment in public services and
infrastructure.
On the other hand, those who argue that governments should not allow salaries above a certain level
often highlight the detrimental effects of income inequality. When a small portion of the population
earns disproportionately high salaries, it can exacerbate socioeconomic disparities within society. This
can lead to social unrest, as those with lower incomes may feel marginalized or unfairly treated. For
example, in some countries, CEOs earn hundreds of times more than the average worker in their
company, leading to discontent among employees and public outcry against perceived injustice.
Moreover, excessive wealth concentration at the top can hinder social mobility and perpetuate cycles of
poverty for those at the bottom of the income ladder. This undermines the principles of fairness and
equality upon which many societies are built. Therefore, proponents of salary caps argue that
government intervention is necessary to ensure a more equitable distribution of wealth and promote
social cohesion.
In conclusion, I can understand why high salaries are perceived to bring significant benefits to the
country, but it seems to me that governments should set a limit on the wages of the highest earners in
society.
 In many countries, a small number of people earn extremely high salaries. Some people believe
that this is good for the country, but others think that governments should not allow salaries
above a certain level.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
People have different views about whether governments should introduce a maximum wage. While in
some ways it may seem reasonable to allow people to earn as much as companies are willing to pay, I
personally believe that employee remuneration should be capped at a certain level.
There are various reasons why it might be considered beneficial to allow people to be paid extremely
high salaries. If companies offer excellent pay packages, they can attract the most talented people in
their fields to work for them. For example, technology companies like Google are able to employ the
best programmers because of the huge sums that they are willing to pay. Furthermore, these well-paid
employees are likely to be highly motivated to work hard and therefore drive their businesses
successfully. In theory, this should result in a thriving economy and increased tax revenues, which
means that paying high salaries benefits everyone.
However, I agree with those who argue that there should be a maximum wage. By introducing a limit
on earnings, the pay-gap between bosses and employees can be reduced. Currently, the difference
between normal and top salaries is huge, and this can demotivate workers who feel that the situation is
unfair. With lower executive salaries, it might become feasible to introduce higher minimum wages,
and everybody would be better off. One possible consequence of greater equality could be that poverty
and crime rates fall because the general population will experience an improved standard of living.
In conclusion, it seems to me that it would be better, on balance, for governments to set a limit on the
wages of the highest earners in society.
 Some people believe that professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should be required to
work in the country where they did their training. Others believe they should be free to work in
another country if they wish. (CAM 17 TEST 3)
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion
The argument for professionals working in the country where they received their training is based on
the principle of reciprocity. The country has invested resources in their education, and it is only fair that
the country benefits from their skills and expertise. This is particularly relevant in developing countries
where there is a shortage of skilled professionals. By staying and working in their home country, these
professionals can contribute to the development and progress of their nation.
On the other hand, the freedom to work in another country is seen as a fundamental right.
Professionals should have the liberty to seek better opportunities and living conditions for themselves
and their families. Working abroad can also lead to personal growth and development as they are
exposed to different cultures and work practices. They can bring back this knowledge and experience to
their home country, thereby contributing to its development.
In conclusion, while there are valid arguments on both sides, I believe that professionals should have
the freedom to work in another country if they wish, but efforts should be made to encourage them to
contribute to their home country
 Some people believe that professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should be required to
work in the country where they did their training. Others believe they should be free to work in
another country if they wish.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion
Upon completion of their training, professionals such as doctors and engineers are often faced with
the decision of where to apply their skills. While some argue that they should be required to serve in the
country where they received their training, others believe in the freedom to choose their place of work.
The argument for professionals to work in their country of training is compelling for several reasons.
Firstly, these individuals have benefited from the educational infrastructure of their home country, often
at a subsidized cost. Therefore, it is only fair that they contribute back to their society. Secondly,
countries invest heavily in the training of these professionals with the expectation that they will serve
their local communities. If these professionals choose to work elsewhere, the home country may
experience a shortage of skilled workers, leading to societal and economic challenges.
On the other hand, the freedom to work in another country presents its own advantages. Professionals
can gain global exposure, learn from diverse work cultures, and bring back valuable insights to their
home country. This cross-pollination of ideas can lead to innovation and progress. Furthermore, the
right to choose one’s place of work is a fundamental aspect of personal freedom and should be
respected.
In conclusion, both views have their merits. However, a balanced approach that respects personal
freedom while ensuring societal benefit could be the most effective way forward
 Some people believe that professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should be required to
work in the country where they did their training. Others believe they should be free to work in
another country if they wish.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Professionals, especially those in critical sectors like healthcare and engineering, often face the
dilemma of whether to serve in their home country or seek opportunities abroad after their training.
While there are compelling arguments on both sides, I believe that the decision should ultimately rest
with the individual.
The view that professionals should work in their home country after their training is based on several
reasons. Primarily, these professionals have often benefited from subsidized education and training, and
it is only fair that they contribute back to their society. Moreover, countries often face a shortage of
skilled professionals, and retaining them can help address critical societal needs. For instance, doctors
and engineers can play a pivotal role in improving the healthcare infrastructure and technological
advancements of their home country.
On the other hand, the freedom to work in another country presents numerous benefits. Professionals
can gain exposure to advanced technologies and practices, which they can later bring back to their
home country. Additionally, working in a foreign country can lead to personal growth and better
remuneration, which can indirectly benefit their home country through remittances.
For the reasons mentioned above, it seems to me that professionals should have the freedom to choose
where they wish to work, but they should also be encouraged to contribute to their home country in
some capacity."
 Some people believe that professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should be required to
work in the country where they did their training. Others believe they should be free to work in
another country if they wish.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
The question of whether professional like doctors and engineers are required to serve in the country
where they received their training is a common topic of discussion. While some argue that it is an
obligation, others assert that it is a right. Although both viewpoints have their merits, I would agree that
they should be free to work in another country if they wish.
On the other hand, I believe that it is more advantageous to professionals to work in another country.
It opens up a world of job opportunities and higher salaries. For example, doctors who possess
profound knowledge in their respective field in developed countries tend to earn higher salary than
those in developing countries due to higher overall living standards in these regions and the advanced
health infrastructure. Moreover, these countries typically have more resources to invest in healthcare,
which allows them to readily access a wealth of information. This can further enhance their advanced
skills.
In conclusion, I can understand why people required professional to stay in the country, but it seems to
me that they have freedom to choose any international workplace they desire.
 On the one hand, requiring doctors and engineers to stay in the country helps the government address
the shortage of skilled workers, which is a major problem for every country, especially in developing
economies. Moreover, the authorities and taxpayers are investing heavily in the education and training
of professionals. Hence, skilled workers need to meet their demands. Most importantly, professional
people can improve the quality of the country's life. For example, doctors can provide healthcare to
people who would otherwise not be able to afford it, and engineers can help build infrastructure that
improves transportation, communication, and other essential services.
On the other hand, providing a chance to work in other countries to skilled workers means increased
opportunities for professionals because they might have job satisfaction, high wages, and a better
quality of life. Furthermore, working in another part of the world leads to greater diversity and
innovation. For instance, when professionals from different countries work together, they can bring new
ideas and perspectives to the field. Working abroad can help experts enhance their global understanding
of the world; they might be able to develop a better understanding of other cultures, which is beneficial
for individuals.
In conclusion, I can understand why people require professionals to stay in the country, but it seems to
me that they need to select areas where they work.
 Some people think that all university students should study whatever they like. Others believe
that they should only be allowed to study subjects that will be useful in the future, such as those
related to science and technology. (SIMON)
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
People have different views about how much choice students should have with regard to what they
can study at university. While some argue that it would be better for students to be forced into certain
key subject areas, I believe that everyone should be able to study the course of their choice.
There are various reasons why people believe that universities should only offer subjects that will be
useful in the future. They may assert that university courses like medicine, engineering and information
technology are more likely to be beneficial than certain art degrees. From a personal perspective, it can
be argued that these courses provide more job opportunities, career progression, better salaries, and
therefore an improved quality of life for students who take them. On the societal level, by forcing
people to choose particular university subjects, governments can ensure that any knowledge and skill
gaps in the economy are covered. Finally, a focus on technology in higher education could lead to new
inventions, economic growth, and greater future prosperity.
In spite of these arguments, I believe that university students should be free to choose their preferred
areas of study. In my opinion, society will benefit more if our students are passionate about what they
are learning. Besides, nobody can really predict which areas of knowledge will be most useful to
society in the future, and it may be that employers begin to value creative thinking skills above
practical or technical skills. If this were the case, perhaps we would need more students of art, history
and philosophy than of science or technology.
In conclusion, although it might seem sensible for universities to focus only on the most useful
subjects, I personally prefer the current system in which people have the right to study whatever they
like.
 Some people think that all university students should study whatever they like. Others believe
that they should only be allowed to study subjects that will be useful in the future, such as those
related to science and technology. (SIMON)
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Being required to study subjects.
Some industry cannot be essential in the future
Learning whatever they want
Creating motivation for university students.
May experience abundance of skilled professionals and experts from various field.
The question of whether university students should be required to pursue essential majors in the future
is a common subject of discussion. While some argue that it is necessary, others assert that it is not
advisable. Although both viewpoints hold their merits, I believe that university students should have the
freedom to choose any subjects they desire.
In conclusion, I can understand why the potential benefits of compelling university students to study
essential subjects required by society, but it seems to me that they should have the freedom to pursue
their interests and passions.
 Some people think that all university students should study whatever they like. Others believe
that they should only be allowed to study subjects that will be useful in the future, such as those
related to science and technology.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Some people argue that university students should have the freedom to study whatever they are
passionate about. Others, however, believe that students should only be allowed to study subjects that
will be beneficial in the future, such as those related to science and technology. Both views have their
merits and demerits.
The proponents of the idea that students should study whatever they like argue that passion and
interest are the driving forces behind success. When students choose subjects they are passionate about,
they are more likely to excel in their studies, enjoy the learning process, and ultimately pursue a career
in a field they love. This can lead to a fulfilling and successful career.
On the other hand, those who advocate for a more practical approach to education argue that students
should focus on subjects that are likely to be useful in the future. They believe that fields related to
science and technology, for instance, offer more job opportunities and are more likely to lead to a stable
and lucrative career. This view is based on the premise that education should prepare students for the
workforce and the practical realities of the job market.
In conclusion, while some people believe that university students should study whatever they like,
others believe that they should only be allowed to study subjects that will be useful in the future. Both
views have their merits, and a balanced approach that combines passion with practicality could offer the
best outcomes for students.
 Some people believe that it is best to accept a bad situation, such as an unsatisfactory job or
shortage of money. Others argue that it is better to try and improve such situations.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Some people hold the view that it is wise to accept unfavorable situations such as an unsatisfactory
job or lack of money, while others argue that efforts should be made to improve these circumstances.
Both perspectives have their merits and are worth discussing.
Accepting a less than ideal situation can be seen as a form of resilience. Life is full of challenges and
not all circumstances can be perfect. By accepting a difficult job or financial hardship, individuals can
learn to cope with adversity and build character. This acceptance can lead to personal growth and the
development of coping strategies that can be beneficial in the long run. Furthermore, acceptance does
not mean resignation. It can be a strategic choice, allowing individuals to focus their energy on aspects
of their life that they can control.
On the other hand, striving to improve one’s situation is a proactive approach that can lead to tangible
changes. If one is dissatisfied with their job, they could seek further training or education to improve
their career prospects. Similarly, if one is facing financial difficulties, they could explore ways to
increase their income or reduce their expenses. This approach encourages personal development and
fosters a sense of agency.
In my opinion, a balance between acceptance and improvement is key. While it is important to accept
that not all situations can be perfect, it is equally important to strive for improvement and not become
complacent. By adopting this balanced perspective, individuals can navigate life’s challenges with
resilience and determination.
 Some people believe that it is best to accept a bad situation, such as an unsatisfactory job or
shortage of money. Others argue that it is better to try and improve such situations.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
People have divergent opinions about whether it is better to accept a worse situation or make the best
endeavor to improve it. Although it is easier and has a lower risk of content with the status quo, I
believe changing the condition that you dislike is of paramount importance.
Undeniably, embracing the awful situation can avoid the risks of failure. A case in point is that for
those who are prone to anxiety of failure, it will be deleterious to fight for change that might be
unsuccess. In addition, people cannot often avoid bad situations, so it is best to accept the reality. For
instance, when an economic downturn occurs and companies go bankrupt, it is almost useless to try to
reverse the situation.
On the flip side, there are several beneficial results of improving the poor circumstances. First of all, if
the situation is unacceptable, it is imperative to take a turn for the better and prevent any inconceivable
consequences. For example, people who are unemployed for a long period of time can lead to severe
financial problems. What’s more, determination of advancement can help the individual to set a goal to
achieve and become more energetic in daily life. Focusing on the solutions can divert some of the
negative emotions such as feelings of bad luck or guilt and thus lead to a positive impact on their
health.
In conclusion, although sometimes it is effortless to avoid bad conditions, I am convinced that it is
better to find out solution rather than being passive in improving since it will increase the likelihood of
solving the root of the problem and help us remain in a positive attitude for a longer time span.
 Some people believe that it is best to accept a bad situation, such as an unsatisfactory job or
shortage of money. Others argue that it is better to try and improve such situations.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
These days, more and more people become hesitant to change as they do not want to break out of their
comfort zone. Consequently, they tend to accept some negative situations, such as undesirable
occupations or lack of cash. However, I do believe that they would rather try at heart in order to
improve such situations than accept them. In this essay, I will look at both sides and draw some
conclusions.
Let’s begin with the advantages of unwanted circumstances as they enable individuals’ sense of
adaption. It is unavoidable for people to experience some ups and downs as they are parts of daily life.
By accepting these difficulties, an individual might relax their mind with no pressure of any ambitions.
For example, this phenomenon is suitable for women the most because they have higher responsibilities
in terms of nurturing children and taking care of the family. Therefore, being pleasant with what they
are having now will enable them less depressed to strike a work-life balance.
Turning to the other side of the argument, I totally agree that taking action is better than doing
nothing. If people try to get out of unfavourable conditions, once they get success, they will be resistant
to other challenges in the future. To be more specific, by being brave to find a new job instead of
sticking to the present horrible one, for instance, employees may gain more valuable lessons through
that tough period of a lifetime. As a result, they can enjoy the fruit after continuous efforts.
In conclusion, although remaining unchanged when dealing with unwelcome situations may benefit
mental health, working hard to figure things out will provide useful skills and lessons for further
development.
 Some people believe that it is best to accept a bad situation, such as an unsatisfactory job or
shortage of money. Others argue that it is better to try and improve such situations.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
The issue of whether people should continue their life even if it is not good and or modify the existing
situations by using hard work. I advocate the latter group.
To begin with, the former view, which suggests the conventional way to adapt to difficult tasks. This
approach is the most simple method in the short run to overcome the difficulties of life. The majority of
people are unable to change their situation and acceptance of this fact will make them feel more secure
and less at risk. This is because when a person makes a change, things may not turn out the way they
thought they would. For example, many people who stick to a bad job are afraid of being fired. They do
not like their job but they do not want to quit because they are afraid of an uncertain future. As a
consequence, they accept the bad situation without making an effort to improve it.
On the other hand, the latter view is more optimistic since there are certain conditions that can be
improved if we give them a try. For instance, better jobs are available on the market and this might
require learning new skills or acquiring a qualification but it is worth trying. Thus, there are several
situations that can be improved with a little effort. As all people live once it is of paramount importance
to have job satisfaction and promotion prospects after that.
In conclusion, I believe that although it is good to accept a few things in our lives, we should not be
confined to unpleasant circumstances. In my opinion, the second view is more effective in putting effort
into benefiting from a better life and this is closely related to a sense of satisfaction.
 The older generations tend to have very traditional ideas about how people should live, think
and behave. However, some people believe that these ideas are not helpful in preparing younger
generations for modern life.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view?
It is true that many older people believe in traditional values that often seem incompatible with the
needs of younger people. While I agree that some traditional ideas are outdated, I believe that others are
still useful and should not be forgotten.
Traditional ideas are oudated
On the one hand, many of the ideas that elderly people have about life are becoming less relevant for
younger people. In the past, for example, people were advised to learn a profession and find a secure
job for life, but today’s workers expect much more variety and diversity from their careers. At the same
time, the ‘rules’ around relationships are being eroded as young adults make their own choices about
who and when to marry. But perhaps the greatest disparity between the generations can be seen in their
attitudes towards gender roles. The traditional roles of men and women, as breadwinners and
housewives, are no longer accepted as necessary or appropriate by most younger people.
Traditional ideas are still useful.
On the other hand, some traditional views and values are certainly applicable to the modern world.
For example, older generations attach great importance to working hard, doing one’s best, and taking
pride in one’s work, and these behaviours can surely benefit young people as they enter today’s
competitive job market. Other characteristics that are perhaps seen as traditional are politeness and
good manners. In our globalised world, young adults can expect to come into contact with people from
a huge variety of backgrounds, and it is more important than ever to treat others with respect. Finally, I
believe that young people would lead happier lives if they had a more ‘old-fashioned’ sense of
community and neighbourliness.
In conclusion, although the views of older people may sometimes seem unhelpful in today’s world, we
should not dismiss all traditional ideas as irrelevant.
 Some people believe that hobbies need to be difficult to be enjoyable.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Some hobbies are relatively easy, while others present more of a challenge. Personally, I believe that
both types of hobby can be fun, and I therefore disagree with the statement that hobbies need to be
difficult in order to be enjoyable.
On the one hand, many people enjoy easy hobbies. One example of an activity that is easy for most
people is swimming. This hobby requires very little equipment, it is simple to learn, and it is
inexpensive. I remember learning to swim at my local swimming pool when I was a child, and it never
felt like a demanding or challenging experience. Another hobby that I find easy and fun is photography.
In my opinion, anyone can take interesting pictures without knowing too much about the technicalities
of operating a camera. Despite being straightforward, taking photos is a satisfying activity.
On the other hand, difficult hobbies can sometimes be more exciting. If an activity is more
challenging, we might feel a greater sense of satisfaction when we manage to do it successfully. For
example, film editing is a hobby that requires a high level of knowledge and expertise. In my case, it
took me around two years before I became competent at this activity, but now I enjoy it much more
than I did when I started. I believe that many hobbies give us more pleasure when we reach a higher
level of performance because the results are better and the feeling of achievement is greater.
In conclusion, simple hobbies can be fun and relaxing, but difficult hobbies can be equally pleasurable
for different reasons.
 Some people believe that hobbies need to be difficult to be enjoyable.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is often argued that hobbies should pose a challenge to be truly enjoyable. While I agree that some
level of difficulty can enhance the enjoyment of a hobby, I believe that this is not always necessary.
On the one hand, there are several reasons why people might find difficult hobbies more enjoyable.
Firstly, overcoming challenges can lead to a sense of achievement and satisfaction. For example,
mastering a complex piece of music on a guitar or successfully climbing a high mountain can bring
immense joy and a feeling of accomplishment. Secondly, difficult hobbies often require a higher level
of skill and dedication. This can lead to a deeper engagement with the hobby, as individuals may need
to invest time in learning and practicing. Finally, difficult hobbies can also provide mental stimulation.
Hobbies such as chess or solving complex puzzles, for instance, can keep the mind active and engaged,
which many people find enjoyable.
On the other hand, easy hobbies can also be enjoyable and fulfilling. Firstly, not everyone seeks
challenge and stimulation in their leisure time. Some people may prefer easy hobbies as a way to relax
and unwind from the stresses of daily life. For example, activities such as gardening or knitting can be
therapeutic and calming. Secondly, easy hobbies are often more accessible to a wider range of people,
including children, the elderly, or those with physical limitations. This inclusivity can bring joy to many
people who might otherwise be excluded from more challenging activities. Finally, easy hobbies can
also provide opportunities for social interaction. Hobbies such as bird watching or walking groups can
bring people together and foster a sense of community, which can greatly enhance the enjoyment of the
hobby.
In conclusion, while difficult hobbies can certainly be enjoyable due to the challenge and engagement
they provide, easy hobbies should not be overlooked for their ability to provide relaxation, inclusivity,
and social interaction. Therefore, the level of difficulty is not the sole determinant of the enjoyment of a
hobby. It largely depends on the individual’s personal preferences and what they seek to gain from the
hobby.
 There are many different types of music in the world today.
Why do we need music? Is the traditional music of a country more important than the
international music that is heard everywhere nowadays?
It is true that a rich variety of musical styles can be found around the world. Music is a vital part of all
human cultures for a range of reasons, and I would argue that traditional music is more important than
modern, international music.
There are many reasons why music is of great importance to our lives. Firstly, music is something that
accompanies all of us throughout our lives. As children, we are taught songs by our parents and
teachers as a means of learning language, or simply as a form of enjoyment. In fact, children delight in
singing with others, and it would appear that the act of singing in a group creates a connection between
participants, regardless of their age. Later in life, people’s musical preferences develop, and we come to
see our favourite songs as part of our life stories. Secondly, music both expresses and arouses emotions
in a way that words alone cannot. It is difficult to imagine life without it....
In my opinion, traditional music should be valued over the international music that has become so
popular. In fact, International pop music is often catchy and fun, but it is essentially a commercial
product that is marketed and sold by business people. Traditional music, by contrast, expresses the
culture, customs and history of a country. Traditional styles, such as …(example)…, connect us to the
past and form part of our cultural identity. Therefore, it would be a real pity if pop music became so
predominant that these national styles disappeared.
In conclusion, music is a necessary part of human existence, and I believe that traditional music
should be given more importance than international music.
 Explain some of the ways in which humans are damaging the environment. What can
governments do to address these problems? What can individual people do?
Humans are responsible for a variety of environmental problems, but we can also take steps to reduce
the damage that we are causing to the planet. This essay will discuss environmental problems and the
measures that governments and individuals can take to address these problems.
Two of the biggest threats to the environment are air pollution and waste. Firstly, gas emissions from
factories and exhaust fumes from vehicles lead to global warming, which may have a devastating effect
on the planet in the future. (Cho ví dụ) Secondly, as the human population increases, we are also
producing ever greater quantities of waste, which contaminates the earth and pollutes rivers and oceans
(Cho ví dụ)
There are many measures governments and individuals can take to solve this problem. Firstly,
Governments could certainly make more effort to reduce air pollution. In fact, they could introduce
laws to limit emissions from factories or to force companies to use renewable energy from solar, wind
or water power. They could also impose ‘green taxes’ on drivers and airline companies. In this way,
people would be encouraged to use public transport and to take fewer flights abroad, therefore reducing
emissions. Secondly, individuals should also take responsibility for the impact they have on the
environment. They can take public transport rather than driving, choose products with less packaging,
and recycle as much as possible. Most supermarkets now provide reusable bags for shoppers as well as
‘banks’ for recycling glass, plastic and paper in their car parks. By reusing and recycling, we can help
to reduce waste.
In conclusion, both national governments and individuals must play their part in looking after the
environment.
 Some people say History is one of the most important school subjects. Other people think that,
in today’s world, subjects like Science and Technology are more important than History.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
(CAM 13 TEST 3)
The question of which subject is the most crucial is a common topic of discussion. While some people
argue that it is History, others assert that it is Science and Technology. Although both viewpoints have
their merits and demerits, I would believe that Science and Technology are more important than History
in today globalised world.
To begin with, national heros have dedicated their blood and even their lives to protect the country
from its enemies, so it would be wrong for us to completely forget historical events. For example,
during the Vietnam War from 1954 to 1975, approximately between 2,000,000 and 4,000,000 soliders
and civilians lost their lives while resisting the American invasion. Their brave actions were crucial in
achieving peace. Therefore individuals should respect them and honor their sacrifices by remembering
and learning from historical events.
On the other hand, there are various reasons why I believe that Science and Technology are the most
important subject. The most obvious benefit is opening up a world of opportunities for higher salaries
and better career advancement. In today’s globalized world, in addition to the advent of e-commerce,
small and large businesses have begun transitioning from selling goods at traditional markets to e-
commerce such as Amazon and Shopee. Therefore, workers with profound knowledge in using
technology tools can easily attract employers, while also offering competitive salary compared to
overall living standards.
In conclusion, I can understand why some people argue that History is one of the most important
subjects. However, it seems to me that subjects related to Science and Technology offer more practical
benefits compared to History.
COMMENT (6.5)
Tính chính xác: Bạn nên kiểm tra lại ngữ pháp và từ vựng. Ví dụ, “enermies” nên được sửa thành
“enemies”, “openning” nên được sửa thành “opening”, “employes” nên được sửa thành
“employers”.
Tính đa dạng: Bạn nên sử dụng nhiều cấu trúc câu và từ vựng khác nhau để làm phong phú bài viết. Ví
dụ, thay vì lặp lại “Therefore, individuals should respect them and honor their sacrifices”, bạn có thể
viết “Thus, it is our duty to honor their sacrifices by remembering and learning from these historical
events”.
Tính liên kết: Bạn nên sử dụng các từ nối để kết nối các ý và các đoạn văn một cách mạch lạc. Ví dụ,
bạn có thể thêm “On the other hand” trước đoạn văn thứ hai để tạo sự chuyển mình giữa hai quan
điểm.
Tính thuyết phục: Để làm cho lập luận của bạn thuyết phục hơn, bạn nên cung cấp thêm ví dụ cụ thể và
dẫn chứng cho các quan điểm của mình.
 (CAM 13 TEST 4)
In spite of the advances made in agriculture, many people around the world still go hungry.
Why is this the case?
What can be done about this problem?
 (CAM 15 TEST 4)
In some cultures, children are often told that they can achieve anything if they try hard enough.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of giving children this message?
The question of whether children benefit from working hard for themselves is a common topic of
discussion. While some argue that it is impossible, others assert that it is advisable. Although both
viewpoints have their merits and demerits, I believe that conveying this message to children can have a
positive impact on their future lives.
To begin with, an individual’s success is largely contingent upon their educational background and
financial resources. Therefore, it is often considered impossible for children to achieve success without
a solid foundation in these areas. For instance, students aspiring to become doctors or lawyers with
poor academic standings often face the challenge of passing a highly competitive national entrance
exam, which can be overwhelming given their abilities. As a result, they will miss out on opportunities
to choose other majors that require average scores, and may even develop stress-related mental illnesses
if they fail to gain admission to prestigious universities that train doctors and alawyers.
On the other hand, there are various reasons why I believe that if students study hard, they will
achieve success in their future lives. The most obvious benefit is practical experience and valuable
knowledge obtained through learning and engaging in activities, even if they encounter failure. To
illustrate this, English learners can enhance their cognitive abilities as they frequently encounter
unfamiliar words and grammar rules. Therefore, if they aspire to study another language, they can apply
the same methods for learning unfamiliar words and grammar rules.
In conclusion, despite the loss of opportunities, I assert that children who receive and practice this
message can improve their future lives.
COMMENT (7.5)
Task Response: Bạn đã trả lời đầy đủ câu hỏi, đưa ra quan điểm rõ ràng và phát triển ý tưởng một
cách chi tiết. Điểm: 7.5/9
Coherence and Cohesion: Bài viết của bạn có sự liên kết logic giữa các ý và các đoạn văn. Tuy nhiên,
có một số chỗ cần sử dụng các từ nối để tạo sự mượt mà hơn. Điểm: 7/9
Lexical Resource: Bạn đã sử dụng một loạt từ vựng phong phú và chính xác. Điểm: 8/9
Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Ngữ pháp của bạn chính xác với một số lỗi nhỏ. Điểm: 7.5/9
 (CAM 10 TEST 3)
Countries are becoming more and more similar because people are able to buy the same
products anywhere in the world.
Do you think this is a positive and negative development.
The question of whether technology yields more advantages than disadvantages is a common topic of
discussion. While some people argue that it is crucial for societal progress and innovation, others assert
that it poses significant risks to privacy and mental well-being.
While some people argue that technology is crucial for societal progress and innovation, others assert
that its impact is negligible
The question of whether technology yields more advantages than disadvantages is a common topic of
discussion. While some people affirm that it does, others deny that claim, arguing that the
disadvantages outweigh the benefits
 (CAM 11 TEST 3)
Some people say that the only reason for learning a foreign language is in order to travel or to
work in a foreign country. Others say that these are not the only reasons why someone should
learn a foreign language.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
The question of what reasons people learn a foreign language is a common topic of discussion. While
some people argue that it is for travel or to work in another country, others assert that it provides
essential skills. From my perspective, I believe that learning a second language is not only beneficial
for traveling or working in a foreign country, but also for educational purposes.
To begin with, many people learn a foreign language for practical reasons. If they plan to travel to a
country where that language is spoken, being able to communicate in the local language can make the
trip more enjoyable and less stressful. Similarly, if they intend to work in a foreign country, knowing
the language can open up job opportunities and make it easier to adapt to the new environment. For
example, consider a person who plans to work in France. If they learn French, it could open up job
opportunities in various fields like technology, fashion, or cuisine. Moreover, knowing the language
would make daily life easier, from understanding work emails to ordering food at a local café. Thus,
their adaptation to the new environment would be smoother and quicker.
On the other hand, there are various reasons why I believe that learning a foreign language can benefit
from education perspective, in addition to the perspectives of travel and work. The most obvious
benefit is improving multitasking and problem-solving skills. To illustrate this, English learners may
encounter unfamiliar words and grammar rule, requiring them to ultilize their problem-solving skills to
understand the context. This process often involves deciphering the meaning based on the sentence
structure or using a dictionary to find the definition.
In conclusion, I can understand why some people say that the only important purposes for learning a
foreign language are traveling or working. However, it seems to me that learning another language can
enhance multitasking and problem-solving skills.
 CAM 12 TEST 4
Some people believe that allowing children to make their own choices on everyday matters (such
as food, clothes and entertainment) is likely to result in a society of individuals who only think
about their own wishes. Other people believe that it is important for children to make decisions
about matters that affect them.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
 CAM 10 TEST 1
It is important for children to learn the difference between right and wrong at an early age.
Punishment is necessary to help them learn this distinction.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion.
What sort of punishment should parents and teachers be allowed to use to teach good behaviour
to children.
Kids tend to commit mistakes very often, and it is necessary to teach them the understanding of the
distinction between good and bad at an appropriate age. Not only a normal discussion on correct and
incorrect things but also some types of disciplinary actions are needed on time while handling the
different situations with children. In my point of view, punishments are a good way to bring discipline
out of students. However, a rigid punishment is not necessary most of the time, parents or teachers
could think of soft but impactful penalties for their youngsters.
To begin with, penalising young people, to make them aware of the difference between right and
wrong at an early age, is a part of progressive character development. Additionally, with punishment,
they could learn to admit their mistakes or misdeeds which is a wonderful behavioural skill. Often,
children never forget the ways they had been scolded for their inappropriate doings and furthermore,
they try to avoid a similar mistake in future. For instance, when I was in school, we all were scolded by
our teacher for bunking the class to play cricket, and after this incident, I never bunked classes
anymore.
Although punishing the kids could impact positively on their bad habits, there should be certain
patterns to follow while disciplining the children from different age groups. Parents as well as
professors could start treating them differently against their good or bad practices. Appreciating
youngsters for their nice work is a welcomed gesture whereas, escalating their misdeeds is also an
important practice. For example, teaching toddlers through discussion, scolding students by assigning
some tasks, and forcing juveniles for community work are considered good policies that help to learn
correct and incorrect acts.
To conclude, kids are the future of the world, and we should put some effort into making them aware
of right and wrong at their correct stage of life. However, some sort of disciplinary actions are much
needed because only a discussion may not work every time against some unwanted acts by our young
individual.
 Some people think that instead of preventing climate change, we need to find a way to live with
it. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The question of whether we should live with climate change rather than an attempt to address it is a
common topic of discussion. From my perspective, I completely disagree with this views.
To commerce with, I believe that various environmental issues can pose serious health risks, if we
choose to live with climate change. For instance, a surge in temperature and weather patterns can create
favourable conditions for the proliferation of bacteria and viruses, leading to an increased risk of
disease outbreaks. Therefore, it can cause millions of deaths, and even a threat to human survival.
Moreover, floods caused by the melting of polar ice can damage infrastructure and property. This not
only requires considerable repair and rebuilding costs, but also can disrupt businesses and local
economies.
In terms of animal, I also argue that the extinction of various animal species cannot be overlooked.
The rare species may find difficult to survive in drastically changing environments. For instance, polar
bears, which are adapted to cold Arctic temperatures, are facing threats due to the melting of polar ice
caps caused by global warming. As their natural habitat shrinks, they struggle to find food and
reproduce, which could potentially lead to their extinction. Moreover, many rare species play crucial
roles in their ecosystems. They can be key predators, pollinators, or provide other benefits that help
maintain biodiversity. Their extinction could disrupt these ecosystems, leading to unforeseen
consequences.
In conclusion, it is clear to me that we must address the problems of climate change, and I disagree
with those argue that we can find ways to live it.
 Some people believe that studying at university or college is the best route to a successful career,
while others believe that it is better to get a job straight after school.
The question of whether studying at university or college after graduation is the most suitable choice
is a common topic of discussion. While some people advocate for pursuing higher education at a
university or college, others argue that entering the workforce immediately after school is a more
beneficial choice. I believe that the advantages of higher education outweigh those of immediate
employment.
To begin with, there are various reasons why many young people desire to earn money as soon as
possible. Governments have introducted laws to give a considerable number of universities and
colleges financial autonomy, which allows them to develop specialist paths. As a result, these
universities and colleges have dramatically increased university tuition fees, leading to a situation
where students cannot afford these fees. Moreover, students from low-income families can help their
families financially if they start earning right after graduation. For instance, they can contribute a small
portion of their earnings towards household expenses, such as paying for electricity bills.
On the other hand, I believe that it is more beneficial for students to pursue higher education. The
most obvious benefit is that is open up a world of job opportunities. To become a doctor or lawyer, one
is required to possess a practicing certificate and relevant degrees. Therefore, in order to obtain these
certificate and degrees, they must first earn a bachelor’s degree in their respective field.
In conclusion, while I can understand why students from low-income families are encouraged to get a
job straight after school, it seems to me that pursuing higher education is the best route to successful
career.
WORK
When choosing a job, the salary is the most important consideration. To what extent do you agree
or disagree?

On the one hand, the importance of earning from work is undeniable. Firstly, we must acknowledge
that for most people, salary has a direct relationship with quality of life. When we earn more, for
example, we are able to consume high-quality food and drink and we can buy more digital products for
entertainment, improving our living standards. Finally, when we earn more and have enough money as
a backup, we also have more possibilities to make choices, reject unreasonable requests and have more
freedom.

On the other hand, the argument that salary should be the most important factor may be a
shortsighted view, since there are other aspects that should also be under consideration. What can we
learn from this job and our future career path should be one of them, which means that career prospects
and opportunities for further study need to be taken into account. The working atmosphere and the
relationship with superiors and colleagues can also have a big impact. Just imagine, for instance, when
you work under huge pressure every day and no one is willing to give you a helping hand, this can be
awful, even if you earn a lot. Furthermore, life consists of a variety of things that we need to
experience, rather than working day and night. Therefore, whether the job offers a work-life balance
that you can accept also plays a big role in the career decision.
 CAM 15 TEST 2
TECHNOLOGY
In the future, nobody will buy printed newspapers or books because they will be able to read
everything they want online without paying.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
In today’s globalised world, it is increasing common for people to acquire information through
websites rather than buying printed newspapers or books. While I agree that the convenience of reading
online without any cost could potentially lead to a decline in the purchase of printed materials, I believe
that printed newspapers and the ol
Firstly, the digital age has indeed made it easier for people to access information at their fingertips.
Online platforms offer a vast array of news articles, books, and other resources that can be accessed
anytime, anywhere. This convenience, coupled with the fact that most online content is free or
relatively cheaper than printed materials, makes it an attractive option for many. Moreover, the
interactive nature of digital content, such as embedded videos, hyperlinks, and infographics, enhances
the user’s reading experience, making it more engaging and informative.
However, despite the advantages of digital reading, printed newspapers and books still have their
unique value. One of the main benefits is the lack of distractions. Reading a printed book or newspaper
allows for complete focus on the content, without the constant interruptions of notifications, pop-up
ads, and other digital distractions. Furthermore, many people appreciate the tactile experience of
holding a book or newspaper, which can’t be replicated digitally. Lastly, printed materials do not
require a device or electricity, making them accessible in situations where digital reading is not
possible.
In conclusion, although the convenience and cost-effectiveness of reading online are undeniable,
printed newspapers and books still hold their own value, particularly in limiting distractions.