Writing Feedback / GRE:Educationors should dissuade students from pursuing fields unlikely to succeed. [5]

Issue 3:
Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.
As we may all agree, Mozart and Steven Hawking are very successful people in their fields of study although music and cosmology seems unlikely to succeed to most of us. People share different talent in different aspects, Educational Institutions shouldn't perturb people's decision in pursuing their own career because they have no idea which one is the right way for different students to go.

Before I make my assertion, I have to concede that there are really some certain fields of study that are hard for people to reach a certain success. For instance, students in the field of Internet Technology (IT) are much easier to find a job than those who study Biological Engineering (BE) in China nowadays. So it's really Educational Institutions' job to solve this issue and to save those intellectual students from unemployed. But should we really have to dissuade students from pursuing unlikely success fields of study just because they may not find an occupation? Maybe that's not the case.

Considering the recommendation in the topic, there would be lots of clogs in putting that conception into reality. First of all, how we could separate all the fields of study into categories which stand for easier and harder to succeed is a big question. Does people really easier to success in high requiring fields than low ones like I said between IT and BE? As we all know, finding a job doesn't mean that you are succeeded. It's true IT students will easily find a job in the community, but they are really harder to success because there are too much competitors in this field. Unless you are super good, or you will do some really ordinary works day by day and find out success is something that never comes to you. In the sense like that, maybe BE is a better choice for students.

What's more, if we really put that recommendation into actions, more issues will appear on board. Imagine how chaotic the society will become under the blind dissuade of Educational Institutions. Certain fields of study which considered as unlikely to succeed will become abashed ones, and the consequences of that would be horrible. The society as a whole will develop in an unbalanced situation, some of the fields really need intellectuals while others are overwhelmed, and that will make the relative easier likely ones become really hard to success because of the severe competition. Also, most of the students choose their career for some certain reasons. Those students should receive a stronger support from the Educational Institutions. That's really the educators' job to let things become easier for those strong-minded students who are struggling for success in tough fields but to dissuade them from choosing it.

There is a saying in China goes like: In the 360 different categories of fields of study, elites come out from every single one. When we are facing the unbalanced situation in opportunities between different fields, we can try some other methods such as enhancing the corporation among them, increasing the research found, hiring better teachers or trying to make more occupations in the community to make it right.

After telling the points above, what should Educational Institutions do it's crystal clear, changing students' mind is the last thing we should do.

Writing Feedback / TOEFL - Basic economic class can help the students touch the surface of this field [4]

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement. High school students should take a course on basic economics

In today's community, economy becomes the order of the day. Getting to know the theory in this area seems really important for our students. Then, the earlier we jump into this area, the more skillful we will be. Thus, in my point of view, although it will take some time on it, high school students should take a course on basic economics. Let me explain it in detail.

For the primary concern, it can provide students a sense of direction in academy. Basic economic class can help the students touch the surface of this field, let them to know what this subject mainly discuss. That will help the students cultivate their own interest and a sense of career orientation. Finally, students may study harder for their economic dreams.

On the other hand, economy is always correlate with politics, students can study specialized knowledge along with some Politian status, which may open their vision toward the nation and don't get limited in the textbooks. Besides, there is also an intimate connection between economy and enterprises, students can also gain knowledge more practical and vivid.

In addition, the basic economic course can also help with the students when they go to college. They may feel more readily to learn the knowledge in this field and save much time, with that they are able to study more efficiently and more deeply than other students. That's as well would provide the students with more confidence and let them become more compatible.

Considering all those factors above, I suggest the basic course of economic is necessary.

Writing Feedback / TOEFL essay--In a team, those who do not accept others' criticism can not succeed [5]

In a team, those who do not accept others' criticism can not succeed

Although some people like to reject others' criticism in a team as a symbol to their unique wisdom, but I suppose those people are not likely to succeed. Here are the reasons.

Rejecting others' criticism may bring lose to the team. As we all know, only if the whole team achieved the goal, can everyone of the team really gain their own success. So if anyone in this team does not accept others' criticism, they don't admit their fault and keep holding different opinions on problems, it will be hard for the team to reach one aim together, in case like that the efforts everyone made will be seriously reduced. Besides, if criticism is not accepted, it may lead to an argument or even a quarrel among teammates, harmony ambience will no more existed, everyone in this team will get involved, no one will succeed that way.

On the other hand, people like that may be helpless when troubles come. If someone always keeps other's criticism outside, there will be less people in the team to give advice to them, wrong behaviors become part of them because no one would tell them what is the right thing they should do, even no one would like to help them when they are in a real trouble, and they're more likely to lose. For people like that, no one will believe they will make a success.

No criticism means no progress. The environment we lived in just like a big team, people around us are our teammate. If we did something wrong but keep criticism outside, then we keep the world outside, because we don't give ourselves chances to correct them. We will never grow up in that way, never make progress, and never succeed either.

To sum up, we should always keep our door open to the outside world, letting criticism comes in, refine ourselves all the time, in that way we part of the team are more likely to succeed.

Writing Feedback / TOEFL eassy- it is easier to succeed nowadays than in the past. agree or not? [4]

Success always has a fundamental interconnection with social background. People were influenced by the government, the culture and numerous social events of their own time. So the question goes, which could be more easily to success: nowadays or the past. Now I'd like to discuss this particular issue in my following words.

Some people might suggest people in the past are more likely to success. Imagine that we live in a period of ancient time, Ancient Greek, for example. That's the period that western psychology and philosophy began to grow and flourish. So you might think living in that period of time is more likely to success than the world we live today. Things are not that simple, ancient society has a strict status of hierarchy, only a small number of private people can have the right to get educated. How can a person easily success without a wide vision and knowledge?

Back to today's life, we're living in a world with highly developed technology, large volumes of information and fully developed social strategy. We gained education since we were born, get to know about events happening outside the country with a single clip of the mouse button. So wouldn't that be a little easier to success than ancient time? Although we're facing a number of problems today, such as having high pressure and severe competitions at work. But those problems are much easier to handle comparing with those problems like severe social unfairness.

Although we see many people succeed in the past, like Socrates and Plato, they made huge achievement. But we also see successful people nowadays too, like Barak Obama and Bill Gates. The truth is, people can't reach success without knowledge, only with that power can people gain success, and we can gain it easier than before don't we?

To sum up, living in this world full of opportunities, one can more easily to gain success.