Writing Feedback / TOEFL Integrated task - three possible explanation regarding the origin of this old manuscript [2]

Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they respond to the specific points made in the reading passage.

old manuscript origin

The speaker and the reading talk about a manuscript presented by a bookseller named Wilfred M. Voynich. The reading provides three possible explanation regarding the origin of this old manuscript. The speaker, however, refutes each possibility.

First, the speaker said that the work cannot be a product of Ascham. He argues that Ascham was a typical writer and could not produce such an original work. In addition, Ascham's book about plants is a collection of other authors work. Therefore, the speculation that Ascham wrote the book is inconsistent and unlikely.

Second, the speaker argues that although Kelley was a good deceiver, he didn't need such an articulated work to deceive people of that time. A much simpler manuscript would suffice for this purpose. Therefore, it is unlikely that he spent so much effort to produce such a fake manuscript and then sell it to wealthy nobles in Europe.

Third, according to the speaker, there are ways that we can speculate a manuscript age. So, it is a useless trick for Voynich to create it. The speaker argued that Voynich might fake the paper by using an old paper but he could not fake the old ink used in the manuscript.

[200]

Lecture: vocaroo./i/s01KuAoVNpMj

I appreciate any comment that helps me score higher in this task. Thanks.

• 
  reading
  

Writing Feedback / Young members of a society wants independence from their parents [4]

Some young adults want independence from their parents as soon as possible. Other young adults prefer to live with their families for a longer time. Which of these situations do you think is better? Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion.

independence from a family

Young members of a society hold different social norms as to when to get independence from their parents. Some youngsters prefer to get independence as soon as they can while others would like to spend more times with their families before their independence. In my opinion, young people who prefer to become self-sufficient quicker will benefit the most and have a better life afterward.

The young individuals who prefer to leave their parents and live on their own will learn how to stand on their feet faster. In order to live alone, they have to pay their own expenses and to do that they obliged to find a job in the first place. Therefore, they get a job as soon as they leave their parents house which makes them independent financially. In addition, these young people need a place to live and since they abandoned their parent's house they will rent an apartment or a condo. Having a job and renting a place shows them as a person who stands on his/her feet without their parents help.

The youngster can have a lot more fun when they live on their own. For example, they can arrange trips that they had not have the chance before like camping in the middle of a jungle for a month. In addition, they have the chance to invite their friends whenever they want. This is not possible while you live in your parent's house. For instance, when my friend rented an apartment on his own, we could work on our project together more often.

Being independent can provide a situation that you can help your family in many ways. For example, when my friend left his parents to live in a foreign country, he could help his father to have a special heart operation abroad. Furthermore, since he has a good financial situation, he can spend more time with his family in a year.

The aforementioned points convinced me that it is much better for youngsters to get independence from their families as soon as they can. In this way, they can learn how to have a life on their own, more fun activities, and oddly enough they might have the chance to help their parents.

[376]

Writing Feedback / "Never, never give up" that translated as we should never stop pursuing our goals through hard work [5]

The expression "Never, never give up" means to keep trying and never stop working for your goals. Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.

going after our goals continually

Our goals are what defines us through life. As a result, I agree with the statement "Never, never give up" that translated as we should never stop pursuing our goals through hard working. Working hard to reach our goal reveals our true identity as a hardworking person and how strong we are to reach our goals.

Showing passion and endurance in our journey to reach our goals identify us as a hard working person. As a result, we can be proud of ourselves. For example, an athlete who practices months or even years to win a one-time competition defines himself as the best athlete in his field. He can claim himself a winner and show us this feature in reality. Additionally, not being tired illustrates that we value our goals which is an acclaimed personality. Therefore, people will respect us more and consider us a reliable person.

At times, achieving a goal can be cumbersome. By trying hard and remaining on the track to reach our goals we can show how strong person we are. Researchers, for instance, spent many years to find out reasons behind some natural phenomenon. They do several field experiments and field observations until they could solve mysteries of life. Spending such a long time to understand reasons reveals that they are a strong person. Another good example would be Paralympic games athletes who despite their physical restrictions overcome their difficulties and stand on the winner's side in the competition.

In brief, going after our goals continually is one thing that I have been agreeing to it all my life. It not only shows our passion and value for our goals but proves what a strong person we are. This is a trait that every individual should acquire it.

[292]

Please feel free to feedback on any aspect you think is helpful. Thank you all.

Writing Feedback / If you could give money to only one type of charitable organization, which one would you choose? [3]

Imagine that you plan to donate money to charity to help people in need. If you could give money to
only one type of charitable organization, which one of the following would you choose and why?
- An organization that provides food and housing to people in need
- An organization that gives people money to start their own small business
- An organization that provides medical care to people in need

donating to charities

Donating to a charity is a profound way to influence others life and enhance the lives of those who are in need. Numerous non-profit organization exists that people can financially support them through donating. In my view, one of the best examples of such organizations for support is an organization that helps those who need a place to settle and has a hard time buying food. This kind of organizations reduce nutritional deficiency in the society, help people improve their lifestyle and decrease social gaps among citizens.

Although food supply improved during last decades, yet there are individuals who suffer from not eating enough. Providing food to these people through this organization can help these people. For example, some people have a salary well below the standard norm in the society, so they do not have sufficient money to buy food. As a result, in the long-term, they experience nutrient deficiency which affects their health. By donating money to these organizations, we will enable them to supply these people enough food so that they stay healthy.

Providing housing services is another sector that can make a big difference in people's mental situations. Without a home, people tend to lose their mental security which eventually will prone them to other problems like insomnia, health problem and lack of confidence. Accommodating homeless people settling in a place improves their mental status. As a result, they will be more productive. Imagine a person who lost his or her home in an accident. If he or she could not find a place as soon as possible, his or her work performance would be lessened which might cause the employer dismiss them because of low performance. As you can see, not having a home or a place has a catastrophic domino effect on a person's life and helping this kind of organizations reduce the possibility of such difficulties.

The other reason I prefer helping a charity whose focus is on food and housing is that it can decrease social gap among citizens. For instance, I as a person who has a good job with adequate salary can empower those with a low salary. With this donation, I can help them to have a better life. Furthermore, it is quite human to help those who had not had the chance to find a profitable job. Take as an example, a person who owns a big company. Is it fair that he can have anything he wishes, while some of the people with a low-level job, experience financial problems? Therefore, donation of such people to organizations that provide food and housing can help those in need spent less on their housing and food. Consequently, their lives standard will improve and they can have a normal life like people who have an average income.

In conclusion, donating to charities is the most effective way to help those who are in need. However, as I explained in previous lines, I prefer to donate to an organization that provides food to people and helps them with housing because they have a more influential role on these people.

[522] 45min

Currently, I focused to deliver a relevant and complete response with a good sentence variety, rather than insisting on a time constraint. I appreciate anything cross your mind while you taking time to read my essay. Thank you for your feedbacks.

Writing Feedback / Choose one of the following transportation vehicles and explain why you think it has changed people. [2]

Choose one of the following transportation vehicles and explain why you think it has changed people's lives.
automobiles, bicycles, airplanes
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.

Transportation plays an important role in the human life. Several forms of transportation have invented by mankind but in my opinion, the invention of the airplane was a milestone in human history. It affects many aspects of our life including time, distance, and safety. Here I explain how each of these factors has changed by the introduction of the airplane.

The invention of a flying device enabled us to spend less time traveling around the world. Before the invention of the airplane, it took months or even years for a person to travel to another part of the world, while now this device allows us to go to another continent in a matter of hours. For instance, it took almost two years to go from the United States to Asian countries like Thailand in the past. Furthermore, an interesting fact about the airplane is that using an airplane you can follow the sun around the world. In other words, you will see no sunset if you fly at the right speed along the sun around the world.

In addition, it has changed the concept of long distances. In the past, a distance of five or six thousand seemed long but now, even a ten thousand kilometer distance is nothing to us because we can arrive there quite soon. Therefore, in our era, the notion of distance has changed for us. For instance, in these days, when we say a place is remote we mostly think of inter-planet distances.

Finally, airplane improved our travel safety standards. For example, many engineers and technicians will check the airplane components in order to ensure their functionality. Moreover, as opposed to automobiles or bicycle, many safety measures are applied to the airplanes. For example, a driver in a car is the sole person who is responsible for the safety of passengers but in case of an airplane besides pilots, many other entities like control tower on earth and many radars are responsible for our safety.

In conclusion, the introduction of airplane affects our lives in many ways. It allows us to safely travel longer distances in a shorter amount of time and that is why I think it has changed our lives compare to other transportation vehicles.

[373] 45min

Writing Feedback / Do you agree or disagree that progress is always good? [6]

Do you agree or disagree that progress is always good? Use specific reasons
and examples to support your answer.

Change is an inherent element of this world and development is one way to change. However, I disagree that unbiased progression is always pleasant. In this essay, I provide several reasons and examples of situations where moving forward is not always good.

An advance in diseases is not welcomed. For example, in recent years the influenza virus has evolved and become more powerful. This progress means that more people are going to be infected. Therefore, healthcare systems should spend more budget on public health. As a result, instead of spending taxes on developing schools and education system, we have to put it on preventing a cold outbreak. Besides, such progression can also endanger elder population and infants lives too. Since their body defense system is either weak or not developed enough.

Similarly, technological advances can also be unpleasant. Consider, for instance, the development of the Atomic bomb. This progress in science brought several casualties to human society. Not also it caused the death of millions of people in Japan, but also no one knows if it will be the cause of millions of death in the future. Another example of problems caused by this development in science is the incident happened in Chernobyl reactor. It supposed to bring inexpensive energy to the population but it only brought casualty and made the region uninhabitable. While people could use their old energy resources that nature presented to them.

These examples of progress in human history convinced me to disagree with the statement that development is always good. Progress can burden taxpayers, endanger infant and senior citizens, and it might also stimulate loss of human's lives.

[274]

Writing Feedback / People should sometimes do things that they do not enjoy doing [3]

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People should sometimes do things that they do not enjoy doing. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.

doing some undesirable things

People face several situations in their life that they have to deal with it. So, I agree that there are occasions where people should do things that they are reluctant to do. They should do it to protect their family, achieve a goal, or they have no other options. These are very common situations where people should abandon their joy for a bigger benefit.

Family members are among the most important persons in our lives, so sometimes we should do things that are not enjoyable to us but makes their life more convenient. For example, my uncle has to work when he was only fifteen. He did not like it because he loved to go to school. But at that time, he has decided to protect his family and therefore started working in a factory near his home.

Moreover, sometimes you have an important goal in your life that you have to undertake many things for it. For example, an astronomer should go through several difficulties to be an astronaut. An astronomer has to study for years to be ready for it. And then he or she has to do several fieldworks which seem unfavorable to many people. Despite these difficulties, they go all the way through it to reach their goal.

Another situation comes when you have no other option. For instance, when you are in a foreign country and you have run out of money. Instead of being poor, you prefer to do any job, no matter how hard it is. You do it because at the time you have no other option except standing on your feet.

In conclusion, there are several situations that an individual should do undesirable things. However, the cause is not so important because by doing it you show that the life is such a precious thing to you.

[307]

Writing Feedback / Television, newspapers, magazines, and other media pay too much attention to VIP's personal lives [4]

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Television, newspapers, magazines, and other media pay too much attention to the personal lives of famous people such as public figures and celebrities. Use specific reasons and details to explain your opinion.

We Are Obsessed with Celebrities

I agree that celebrities and famous people are in the spotlight of written and visual media. Ordinary people are interested in personal lives of public figures and as a result, newspapers and other public media are trying to cover this aspect of their life. In addition, owner of public media has to sell their products to survive in business.

People want to know more about individuals who admired them. A vivid example is those who work in film industry, they play a role in famous movies which people like. So apart from their professional personality, people want to know how they behave when they are at home, what do they buy when they go out, and who they are in a relationship with. For example, I remember how people followed up Brad Pit relationship with famous actress Angelina Juli which made newspapers and paparazzi look for their picture together.

Moreover, media wants to make money from its publishing. To make money they have to publish something that is in their customer's interest. Therefore, they look for stories and news of personal life of public adores. For example, a magazine has several expenses to pay and if it does not sell its magazines, it has to close itself. As a result, making money is another reason why some public media are so focused on the personal lives of public figures.

In conclusion, magazines and public medias pay attention to the personal lives of famous people because of the attraction of ordinary people to them. In another word, they are attracted to their personal lives because the public has an interest in them.

[272]

And please tell me in which part I need individual practice to enhance my writing. Plus, it seems I have hard time addressing the topics as they really want me to do.

I write this in 33 min, which I presume, it will gets better as I write more.

Writing Feedback / Children raised in the countryside have better than those from urban areas? [3]

It is better for children to grow up in the countryside than in a big city. Do you agree or disagree? Use specific reasons and examples to develop your essay.

opportunities for a child

When it comes to the issue of whether it is better for children to grow up in the countryside or in a big city, people's opinion differs based on their view on life. Some prefer to take back their children from pollution and all the crowd exists in city life, while others find merits in growing up their children in the city. Personally, I completely disagree with growing children in a countryside because by living in city children can use better educational facilities and learn modern communication skills effectively.

Education has a major part in the children's success and this cannot be achieved without good schools and universities. Most good schools and universities are located inside or near cities. As a result, without living in a city, it would be very difficult for a child to access these institutes. For example, many good universities in the United States like MIT, Stanford and Georgia Tech are in cities. Moreover, without a good education, there is a high chance that he or she becomes unemployed in the future. So by living growing up in a city, he has the chance to build his or her future.

On the other hand, people should have effective social and communication skills to find a good job. Those who live in countryside mostly don't have such skills. When a child grows up in a city, he has to talk with many people during the day. He also has the opportunity to attend classes to learn communication skill like Center For Communication skills in our city. On the other hand, using the learned communication skill he or she can find a job easier, as many companies need a person who can strongly talk with its customers.

In summary, growing up in a city provides many opportunities and enhancement for a child. These facilities can ensure his working future and that's why I am opposing growing up a child in the countryside.

[324]