Reading.
I very much liked doing the reading part of the exam on a computer: you can adjust the text size, change the background and font color (I chose blue text and the cream color background - a nice combination?), and see both the text and the question on the same window. Unlike the paper-delivered test, most importantly, you do not have to spend extra time copying your answers to your answer sheet. I also recommend the test takers to use Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V hotkeys to copy the selected text from the reading passage and paste in into your answer area. Enough talking about the benefits of the CD reading.
I had the following passages:
Passage 1: about bird migration.
Difficulty level:
6 T/F/NG questions + 7 Gap-filling question (like in most latest Cambridge books)
Passage 2: about curing astronauts in space.
Difficulty level:
Here I had, which paragraph contains the following info question type, followed by some gap-filling questions and the matching question type (do not remember the number of questions I had per each question type noted).
Passage 3: about a person who contributed a lot to marketing.
Difficulty level:
5 multiple-choice questions, 4 summary questions and 5 Y/N/NG questions.
Unexpectedly, there were some words whose meanings I did not know, and they determined the answers to the given questions. Still, I tried to do my best because each incorrect answer could sway the outcome. This time it is 8.5.
⚡️ @alisherposts ⚡️
I very much liked doing the reading part of the exam on a computer: you can adjust the text size, change the background and font color (I chose blue text and the cream color background - a nice combination?), and see both the text and the question on the same window. Unlike the paper-delivered test, most importantly, you do not have to spend extra time copying your answers to your answer sheet. I also recommend the test takers to use Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V hotkeys to copy the selected text from the reading passage and paste in into your answer area. Enough talking about the benefits of the CD reading.
I had the following passages:
Passage 1: about bird migration.
Difficulty level:
Easy. It took me 16 minutes to finish the passage.6 T/F/NG questions + 7 Gap-filling question (like in most latest Cambridge books)
Passage 2: about curing astronauts in space.
Difficulty level:
Medium. It took me 20 minutes to finish the passage.Here I had, which paragraph contains the following info question type, followed by some gap-filling questions and the matching question type (do not remember the number of questions I had per each question type noted).
Passage 3: about a person who contributed a lot to marketing.
Difficulty level:
Difficult
It was a real challenge. Unlike my previous exam when I had completely understood everything I had read and been more confident in my answers, this time it was much harder. This is the proof that I have to work on my vocab. I had:5 multiple-choice questions, 4 summary questions and 5 Y/N/NG questions.
Unexpectedly, there were some words whose meanings I did not know, and they determined the answers to the given questions. Still, I tried to do my best because each incorrect answer could sway the outcome. This time it is 8.5.
⚡️ @alisherposts ⚡️
👍5⚡1
Alisher&Mukhammadali posts
Reading. I very much liked doing the reading part of the exam on a computer: you can adjust the text size, change the background and font color (I chose blue text and the cream color background - a nice combination?), and see both the text and the question…
My 3rd passage was called Leo Burnett.
It is known to all that the technological scientific advances have made greater changes to the range and quality of our food. Some people regard it as an improvement while others believe that the change is harmful. Discuss and give your own opinion.
It is true that the range and quality of the food we eat have been significantly improved due to breakthroughs in technology and science. While some feel that this development is detrimental, I side with those who argue that it is a change for the better.
People who think that advancements in the range and quality of the food are negative have a number of reasons. One is connected with the concern over the use of chemicals. It is known that nowadays farmers make use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides to improve the yield and eradicate unwanted weeds and insects. This casts doubt on the wholesomeness of our food, and such health problems as obesity, proneness to allergies and stroke are often the consequences. Not only this, but the continuous and long-term use of changed crop-growing techniques may lead to mutations, and we may not be able to enjoy the original taste of fruits and vegetables.
In spite of the arguments presented above, I agree with the supporters of this change. First and foremost, genetically modified food can be an ideal solution to the prevalent problem of hunger. This is because genetic modification enables us to produce food in short periods of time, which can cater for the needs of poverty-stricken areas where starvation persists. Besides being the key to overcoming famine, improved techniques of food growing provide people with a chance to choose the food type they want to consume. This means that consumers can choose either economical GM products or expensive organic foods.
Although some consider the change brought about by scientific and technological developments in the range and quality of the food we consume to be a negative one due to health issues, others see it as a remedy to the issue of starvation and limited variety. Overall, I support the latter view.
Around 35 min. 303 words.
#task2
⚡️ @alisherposts ⚡️
It is true that the range and quality of the food we eat have been significantly improved due to breakthroughs in technology and science. While some feel that this development is detrimental, I side with those who argue that it is a change for the better.
People who think that advancements in the range and quality of the food are negative have a number of reasons. One is connected with the concern over the use of chemicals. It is known that nowadays farmers make use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides to improve the yield and eradicate unwanted weeds and insects. This casts doubt on the wholesomeness of our food, and such health problems as obesity, proneness to allergies and stroke are often the consequences. Not only this, but the continuous and long-term use of changed crop-growing techniques may lead to mutations, and we may not be able to enjoy the original taste of fruits and vegetables.
In spite of the arguments presented above, I agree with the supporters of this change. First and foremost, genetically modified food can be an ideal solution to the prevalent problem of hunger. This is because genetic modification enables us to produce food in short periods of time, which can cater for the needs of poverty-stricken areas where starvation persists. Besides being the key to overcoming famine, improved techniques of food growing provide people with a chance to choose the food type they want to consume. This means that consumers can choose either economical GM products or expensive organic foods.
Although some consider the change brought about by scientific and technological developments in the range and quality of the food we consume to be a negative one due to health issues, others see it as a remedy to the issue of starvation and limited variety. Overall, I support the latter view.
Around 35 min. 303 words.
#task2
⚡️ @alisherposts ⚡️
👍6🔥2
Fewer people are reading books these days. Therefore we should close all libraries and use the funds for something more urgent like healthcare. Do you agree or disagree?
I was in the city recently, and I walked past a derelict building which used to serve as a library. Not far away, another dilapidated one stood waiting to be demolished so that a hospital or a school could be erected in its place, as the locals told me there. I wished policy makers had paid more attention to the role of libraries before making such decisions.
To start with, libraries can bridge the gap between the highly-educated and the under-educated. Many people throughout the world, especially in poor countries, still rely on public libraries as their primary source of information and education. Not only do they make use of a large number of books at libraries, but they also use the internet provided there. Furthermore, fewer libraries means discouraging people who are eager to read and study but who cannot find a calm and peaceful place to do so. For instance, there used to be a small library in my neighborhood, which some people, even the elderly, attended regularly. But after its closure, the majority of the members did not bother with taking longer journeys to other libraries.
That said, it should also be admitted that in deprived areas whose populations are in dire need of more urgent services such as basic healthcare and schools, libraries could be considered a lesser priority. It is no exaggeration to say that such deprivations may well dampen the enthusiasm for reading books, let alone visiting the local library. For example, in the Sistan and Baluchestan province in Iran, there are areas where students have to travel more than two hours to get to their “schools”, and many people there have to go to the larger cities for medical treatments. Thus, it would be hard to justify keeping, and spending money on, public libraries in such circumstances.
To sump up, having weighed up the pros and cons of closing libraries, it is obvious that such policy would negatively impact people to whom libraries are important learning facilities providing various services for the local community. Nevertheless, insisting on keeping libraries while people struggle with their basic necessities cannot be an effective policy.
Have you liked the structure?
P.S.: it is not my essay.
⚡️ @alisherposts ⚡️
I was in the city recently, and I walked past a derelict building which used to serve as a library. Not far away, another dilapidated one stood waiting to be demolished so that a hospital or a school could be erected in its place, as the locals told me there. I wished policy makers had paid more attention to the role of libraries before making such decisions.
To start with, libraries can bridge the gap between the highly-educated and the under-educated. Many people throughout the world, especially in poor countries, still rely on public libraries as their primary source of information and education. Not only do they make use of a large number of books at libraries, but they also use the internet provided there. Furthermore, fewer libraries means discouraging people who are eager to read and study but who cannot find a calm and peaceful place to do so. For instance, there used to be a small library in my neighborhood, which some people, even the elderly, attended regularly. But after its closure, the majority of the members did not bother with taking longer journeys to other libraries.
That said, it should also be admitted that in deprived areas whose populations are in dire need of more urgent services such as basic healthcare and schools, libraries could be considered a lesser priority. It is no exaggeration to say that such deprivations may well dampen the enthusiasm for reading books, let alone visiting the local library. For example, in the Sistan and Baluchestan province in Iran, there are areas where students have to travel more than two hours to get to their “schools”, and many people there have to go to the larger cities for medical treatments. Thus, it would be hard to justify keeping, and spending money on, public libraries in such circumstances.
To sump up, having weighed up the pros and cons of closing libraries, it is obvious that such policy would negatively impact people to whom libraries are important learning facilities providing various services for the local community. Nevertheless, insisting on keeping libraries while people struggle with their basic necessities cannot be an effective policy.
Have you liked the structure?
P.S.: it is not my essay.
⚡️ @alisherposts ⚡️
👍6
Alisher&Mukhammadali posts
Fewer people are reading books these days. Therefore we should close all libraries and use the funds for something more urgent like healthcare. Do you agree or disagree? I was in the city recently, and I walked past a derelict building which used to serve…
To me, it is a 7.5 or higher essay. I liked it much.
👍2
Another great question up for discussion. What would be your answer to the question above?
Anonymous Poll
35%
True
22%
False
43%
Not given
Some people think it is a good thing for senior managers to have much higher salaries than the other workers in a company. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Today, there are some companies that pay their top executive workers seven-figure salaries. This might raise the question of whether it is right to do so when other workers are paid much less. Although these companies have their reasons to pay top managers large sums, I believe it can be undesirable for two reasons.
To begin with, it can be argued that companies are justified in their decision to pay senior management staff premium salaries. These people working at top positions assume huge responsibilities that come with high workloads and stress, as a result. The average senior manager is expected to work on and create agendas, make important decisions as well as handling other businesses of their company, unlike other workers who only specialize in a small set of tasks. Another reason behind paying senior managers well might have to do with the idea of encouraging other workers to work harder and strive for the top positions in the company. Knowing that they will be paid significantly more, junior partners would work extra hours in the pursuit of a promotion and making the amounts top executives do.
On the other hand, I think this trend can have adverse effects on company culture. Firstly, it can create huge pay gap between workers at the two ends of the company hierarchy: senior management and average workers. This might further lead to problems within the company after workers realize that the company’s earnings are not being fairly distributed. This, indeed, was the case with Amazon recently when workers at some branches of the company complained how they were being underpaid and that top managers were lining their pockets from the large profit margins the company was making. One other disadvantage to a large remuneration to senior management workers is that after making a certain amount of wealth, they can become laid-back and take their jobs lightly. The creation of this sort of mentality among senior managers is likely to affect other workers down the company structure.
In conclusion, I am of the opinion that paying senior managers considerably more than other workers can mean unfavorable changes in company culture despite the justifications shown for this practice.
#task2
Today, there are some companies that pay their top executive workers seven-figure salaries. This might raise the question of whether it is right to do so when other workers are paid much less. Although these companies have their reasons to pay top managers large sums, I believe it can be undesirable for two reasons.
To begin with, it can be argued that companies are justified in their decision to pay senior management staff premium salaries. These people working at top positions assume huge responsibilities that come with high workloads and stress, as a result. The average senior manager is expected to work on and create agendas, make important decisions as well as handling other businesses of their company, unlike other workers who only specialize in a small set of tasks. Another reason behind paying senior managers well might have to do with the idea of encouraging other workers to work harder and strive for the top positions in the company. Knowing that they will be paid significantly more, junior partners would work extra hours in the pursuit of a promotion and making the amounts top executives do.
On the other hand, I think this trend can have adverse effects on company culture. Firstly, it can create huge pay gap between workers at the two ends of the company hierarchy: senior management and average workers. This might further lead to problems within the company after workers realize that the company’s earnings are not being fairly distributed. This, indeed, was the case with Amazon recently when workers at some branches of the company complained how they were being underpaid and that top managers were lining their pockets from the large profit margins the company was making. One other disadvantage to a large remuneration to senior management workers is that after making a certain amount of wealth, they can become laid-back and take their jobs lightly. The creation of this sort of mentality among senior managers is likely to affect other workers down the company structure.
In conclusion, I am of the opinion that paying senior managers considerably more than other workers can mean unfavorable changes in company culture despite the justifications shown for this practice.
#task2
❤1⚡1
Alisher&Mukhammadali posts
Write your overview on these bar graphs in the comments section) ⚡️ @alisherposts ⚡️
My version:
Overall, people in Denmark drive by far the longest distances per year both by car and the other means of transport. Although it is the Spanish who drive their cars least, people in the UK show the smallest figures in using public transport, but they spend the longest time commuting compared to the other European countries.
⚡️ @alisherposts ⚡️
Overall, people in Denmark drive by far the longest distances per year both by car and the other means of transport. Although it is the Spanish who drive their cars least, people in the UK show the smallest figures in using public transport, but they spend the longest time commuting compared to the other European countries.
⚡️ @alisherposts ⚡️
❤1🆒1
Some students find some subjects such as Mathematics or Philosophy difficult, so these subjects should be optional instead of compulsory.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this question?
Some people argue that because there are some students who struggle with certain subjects like Mathematics and Philosophy, students should be allowed to decide whether or not to study these subjects. I believe these subjects should be kept as a mandatory part of the teaching curriculum although they present challenges to some students.
There are some obvious reasons why some might think that difficult subjects requiring critical and creative thinking should be voluntary. Firstly, for those students who are not simply interested in these subjects, they can be a waste of their time and energy. Instead, their time can be better spent on learning other subjects of their interest, whether it be social studies or less complex subjects like Geography where abstract thinking is rarely expected of them. Subjects like Philosophy contain many an abstract concept which can confuse the learner and even discourage them from pursuing it. One such concept, though might appear fairly simple to some people, is the meaning of happiness which is relentlessly sought after by philosophers. To students who measure happiness in simple terms, trying to view it from others’ perspectives might merely overcomplicate things.
Having said that, I still think that Mathematics and Philosophy should not be left out of the curriculum. Everyone should study Mathematics not just as a means to gain a qualification of some kind, but as more of a way to prepare for life. This is because the basics of this subject are extensively used in almost every aspect of our lives; when making a simple transaction at a store or figuring out how large a carpet you will need for one’s living room, one would generally be required to do plain arithmetic calculations. These subjects, in addition to some of them being a necessity, cultivate critical and higher thinking in students. Those students equipped with these skills are better prepared to solve real-life problems where one oftentimes has to be ingenious and deductive in their approach to solving these problems.
In conclusion, while I understand why some students should be free to choose to study certain difficult subjects, I also think that these subjects should remain to be required at schools and universities.
#task2
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this question?
Some people argue that because there are some students who struggle with certain subjects like Mathematics and Philosophy, students should be allowed to decide whether or not to study these subjects. I believe these subjects should be kept as a mandatory part of the teaching curriculum although they present challenges to some students.
There are some obvious reasons why some might think that difficult subjects requiring critical and creative thinking should be voluntary. Firstly, for those students who are not simply interested in these subjects, they can be a waste of their time and energy. Instead, their time can be better spent on learning other subjects of their interest, whether it be social studies or less complex subjects like Geography where abstract thinking is rarely expected of them. Subjects like Philosophy contain many an abstract concept which can confuse the learner and even discourage them from pursuing it. One such concept, though might appear fairly simple to some people, is the meaning of happiness which is relentlessly sought after by philosophers. To students who measure happiness in simple terms, trying to view it from others’ perspectives might merely overcomplicate things.
Having said that, I still think that Mathematics and Philosophy should not be left out of the curriculum. Everyone should study Mathematics not just as a means to gain a qualification of some kind, but as more of a way to prepare for life. This is because the basics of this subject are extensively used in almost every aspect of our lives; when making a simple transaction at a store or figuring out how large a carpet you will need for one’s living room, one would generally be required to do plain arithmetic calculations. These subjects, in addition to some of them being a necessity, cultivate critical and higher thinking in students. Those students equipped with these skills are better prepared to solve real-life problems where one oftentimes has to be ingenious and deductive in their approach to solving these problems.
In conclusion, while I understand why some students should be free to choose to study certain difficult subjects, I also think that these subjects should remain to be required at schools and universities.
#task2
👍3
Alisher&Mukhammadali posts
Photo
The maps illustrate Brightsea coastal zone in 1950, its look today and plans for future development.
Overall, a comparison of the three maps reveals that the coastal zone has experienced and is going to experience significant changes. The most significant development has been and is expected to be in construction of a number of amenities and infrastructure for visitors. Despite these reforms, few parts of Brightsea has not seen or is set to see any changes.
Focusing on Brightsea’s 1950 and current plans, by far the most noticeable change has been in road infrastructure. While the lighthouse in the heart of the area and the jetty to the north of Brightsea have remained unchanged, a café and a hotel have been erected in place of fishermen’s cottages and the lighthouse keeper’s house respectively. Additionally, a shop just east of the area and a ferry wharf by the coast have been constructed.
If we compare today’s look with the future plan of development, the place is subject to massive changes with the construction of a sailing club, a supermarket with a car park, and apartments in place of the café with a restaurant behind them. The hotel is also planned to be extended, and the newly-built place to the southwest of Brightsea is expected to serve a dual purpose: a telecommunications antenna and a ferry wharf.
#task1
⚡️ @alisherposts ⚡️
Overall, a comparison of the three maps reveals that the coastal zone has experienced and is going to experience significant changes. The most significant development has been and is expected to be in construction of a number of amenities and infrastructure for visitors. Despite these reforms, few parts of Brightsea has not seen or is set to see any changes.
Focusing on Brightsea’s 1950 and current plans, by far the most noticeable change has been in road infrastructure. While the lighthouse in the heart of the area and the jetty to the north of Brightsea have remained unchanged, a café and a hotel have been erected in place of fishermen’s cottages and the lighthouse keeper’s house respectively. Additionally, a shop just east of the area and a ferry wharf by the coast have been constructed.
If we compare today’s look with the future plan of development, the place is subject to massive changes with the construction of a sailing club, a supermarket with a car park, and apartments in place of the café with a restaurant behind them. The hotel is also planned to be extended, and the newly-built place to the southwest of Brightsea is expected to serve a dual purpose: a telecommunications antenna and a ferry wharf.
#task1
⚡️ @alisherposts ⚡️
👍10🤩2