Science is considered to develop people’s lives in all parts in life. I completely agree with this statement. in my opinion, it has many advantages for people’s lifestyle. Because today we can see its effect on all aspects of life.


To begin with, in the health and treatment, the development of science rescued many humans and animals. In history we can see if it had not developed over time, we would have lost many significant humans. As a result, scientist has devoted more time and budget to improve science in this major. For instance, some years ago, in the period of coronavirus, the only thing which was able to cure and save people was vaccinating. We could see how effective it was and after that the death rate dropped dramatically.


Furthermore, science plays a crucial role in the convenience of people’s lives. It not only enhances the transformation, but also it saves more time for people to spend their time on other important things. In other words, educated people do not spend much time to go other places as it was before, they can research about other aspects of science to find an answer in order to make people’s lives better. Also, one of our important sources to survive is food, due to the improvement of agricultural facilities, our food has been advanced in quality and quantity. For example, in developed country, owe to accessible and high-qualified food and facilities, the people’s life span has increased.


In conclusion, science was able to save people and make their life better to be more comfortable and convenient. In my perspective this outcome is the most important goal of science.

There are two viewpoints about subjects which are presented at universities. some students believe that it is better that university students should be taught some subjects in a framework related to their majors or they can have some extra schedules related to the other subjects. While it is a good idea that students expand their information in numerous areas, it can add some pressure to their tasks and they can not concentrate on the main subjects.

On the one hand, when students have developed their knowledge about some subjects further, they will be more skillful in the future.Moreover, if they can not find an occupation related to the subjects that are taught, they will have other opportunities due to their knowledge has been expanded. Furthermore, this approach is radically efficient in preventing a phenomenon is named monotony. For instance, most students nowadays are eager to experience diversity in the environment which are trained, and creating diversity in subjects can be really helpful for this matter, such as some universities in Germany that not only present main subjects but also have some extra classes for students who are interested in other subjects.

On the other hand, students have a determined potential. Hence, it is obvious that if they are taught many different subjects, they will be frustrated. Meanwhile, the capacity of student's brains is limited and they can solely learn some of the main subjects properly. Also, this approach may lead to some illnesses because the diversity in information that is present in the universities increases the pressure on students significantly. For example, there are some universities in South Asia which are presenting some subjects in addition to the main subjects but some students have left their courses because they do believe that, the pressure, they have experienced is more than their tolerance.

To sum up, presenting some additional subjects in universities may lead to developing the knowledge of students. However, there are some pros and cons, and in this case drawbacks overweight the advantages and may have some negative implements on the health of students circumstances.

There are two viewpoints about subjects which are presented at universities. some students believe that it is better that university students should be taught some subjects in a framework related to their majors or they can have some extra schedules related to the other subjects. While it is a good idea that students expand their information in numerous areas, it can add some pressure to their tasks and they can not concentrate on the main subjects.

On the one hand, when students have developed their knowledge about some subjects further, they will be more skillful in the future.Moreover, if they can not find an occupation related to the subjects that are taught, they will have other opportunities due to their knowledge has been expanded. Furthermore, this approach is radically efficient in preventing a phenomenon is named monotony. For instance, most students nowadays are eager to experience diversity in the environment which are trained, and creating diversity in subjects can be really helpful for this matter, such as some universities in Germany that not only present main subjects but also have some extra classes for students who are interested in other subjects.

On the other hand, students have a determined potential. Hence, it is obvious that if they are taught many different subjects, they will be frustrated. Meanwhile, the capacity of student's brains is limited and they can solely learn some of the main subjects properly. Also, this approach may lead to some illnesses because the diversity in information that is present in the universities increases the pressure on students significantly. For example, there are some universities in South Asia which are presenting some subjects in addition to the main subjects but some students have left their courses because they do believe that, the pressure, they have experienced is more than their tolerance.

To sum up, presenting some additional subjects in universities may lead to developing the knowledge of students. However, there are some pros and cons, and in this case drawbacks overweight the advantages and may have some negative implements on the health of students circumstances.

Writing task 2 (an essay)

Many criminals commit more crimes as soon as they are released from prison. What do you think are the causes of this? What possible solutions can you suggest?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

In recent times, many rural inhabitants have been relocating to big cities, decreasing the population of small town. In my opinion, it is a negative development as, bringing about many problems for both dwellers in cities and villages, as well as society as a whole.

One obvious reason why decreasing the population of rural areas is detrimental is food concern. By decreasing the population of the countryside, there would be fewer farmers to produce agricultural products. Rural people provide the country with products such as vegetables, fruits, and grains, without which we are unable to satisfy our basic need for food. So, the authorities will force to import from abroad with higher price.
If authorities cannot supply people with enough food, this will lead to tremendous consequences including malnutrition and other disease that put further strain on government.

Decreasing the population of the countryside means increasing the inhabitants of the city. If we have an overpopulation city, there would be less job available for settlers. Another point to consider is that people in the rural people are not familiar with office work or industrial work that are prevalent in urban areas. As a result, new comers will face many challenges to find a job and they usually force to accept lower paid positions. This leads to higher population of outskirts, increasing the crime rate, and lower safety of the cities which causes tremendous problems for the society.

In conclusion, I see the dwindling population of the countryside as negative since it causes many issues for people, government and the whole country.