Television and Communication. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Television has destroyed communication among friends and family. Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion. Television has marked a deep change in our life. It changed the ways we relax, get news and information about weather etcetera. It’s true that television catches a lot of our attention, but I don’t think that it had destroyed communication with other people. First, a lot of people watch television during their meals. This fact doesn’t imply that they can’t speak with others. For example, a family can watch the news on television and then discuss them. In addition to this, people can watch television with others. I and my friends usually watch football matches together and this leads to more communications and interaction between us. Watching matches together, we establish a deep relationship. This is not possible without television because the stadium is far from our houses. According to this two example, television can improve communication, rather than decrease it. Secondly, TV programmes can be talking points too. If you meet a new person and you can’t find a good conversation topic, maybe talking about a TV programme that both like can be a good way to know each other’s interests. When I met a girl when I was 18, I remember that she was a bit shy, but I asked her if she used to watch a TV series and after that, she talked all the night about this. It’s true that some people prefer watching television rather than going out with friends. This doesn’t mean that television ruins friendships because in these cases is the person that chooses to watch television rather than staying with his friends. In conclusion, according to the examples above, I disagree with the statement. Communication is people’s responsibility.

Discuss abouth this statement: In twenty years there will be fewer cars in use than there are today Estimating the number of cars in the future is not simple but I believe that the number will decrease for these following reasons. The first reason is market saturation. During the nineteenth century and the first years of the twentieth, the number of car owners has grown enormously so today a lot of people already have a car and this makes the number of cars’ growth more difficult. The owners will probably buy new cars but these will replace the old ones, so the number will not change. Secondly, the crisis marked the last year of the world economy and it reduced the purchase power of the people and this will discourage the purchase of cars. The price of cars has decreased during years, but cars aren’t a primary good. Even though having a car is a helpful good for people, food, health service, clothes are more important. Thus people that have to choose between a car or primary goods, they will decide upon the latter. Thirdly, pollution is becoming an even more relevant problem for society. So governments are trying to encourage people to use non-polluting vehicles like bicycles or public transport. In some country, people using bicycles to get to work are rewarded with a bonus on their wage. These kind of incentives will probably lead to a reduction of the number of cars. In addiction to this, there some projects that could revolutionize the way we move in the cities. One of these is replace cars with cell travelling on aerial rail. If this project is realized, the number of cars will decrease sharply. According to these three reasons, I definitively agree with the statement

TOEFL Speaking & Writing Hi everyone!! I'm practicing for TOEFL test and i looking for help to improve speaking and writing task. In return I can help you with Italian. We can use Skype or messages, as you prefer :)

Television advertising directed toward young children should not be allowed. What you think about? Children’s minds are easy to convince. They believe everything is said by an adults. This is a positive thing if adults are educating the children, teaching good behaviors. But this characteristic can be exploited by people that are looking for their own interest. Advertising has a strong power. Let’s think about a toy: showing other kids having fun, including particular colors or music in the advertisement, it is easy to create a desirable object for the kids. Advertising can change children’s idea about toys. When my little cousin’s birthday was near, I asked him If he had wanted a particular toy. He answered me that he didn’t like it. After few days, he said me that he saw that toy in the television and he would appreciated that as a gift. In conclusion, I think that advertising is a main source of money for television and it is obvious that television owners try to exploit this source, but they should respect kids’ minds. They can broadcast advertisings of adults product

What are the qualities of a good neighbor? Use specific details and examples in your answer. Good neighbors share these following features. First of all they are kind: they always smile to their neighbors and are available to help them if they need it. For example, if an old woman has to move an heavy furniture object from her home, a good neighbor should help her. If you leave your home for few days, a good neighbor should care your garden. Secondly, they respect other neighbors. They don’t listen music at a high volume, keep clean common areas, don’t disturb public quiet. They can have parties at their home but they should ask to their neighbors if it could be a problem. In general, if they want to do something that can be annoying for someone, they should ask if they can do it. This way, they establish a relationship based on respect and mutual comprehension. For example, I will get angry if my neighbor play music instruments late. One time, he explained me that he would did it because he would have a concert soon and he needed more practice. So I agreed, because I know how much was important to him and it was just a single time. Notice that if you aren’t a good neighbor, it is more difficult that other people will be. If you aren’t polite, you can’t expect that other neighbors will be. So the first step to have good neighbors is to be one of them.

Teacher’s ability to relate with students is moreimportant than knowledge of thesubject being taught I think that it depends on the level of teaching. For example, teachers of elementary school don’t need an high level of knowledge, they have to know just the things that are necessary for an elementary school student. But it is fundamental that they explain the importance of study hard, do assignments, respect other schoolmates, be polite. They share with parents the responsibility of the education of children. As the level of teaching increase, teachers’ knowledge has to be greater. But professors should establish a good relationships with students too. I’m a University student and most of my professors explained me that is normal to face problems at the start, the things I would have to study are difficult so I shouldn’t give up even if it seems difficult. At the beginning, after some exams I thought it was too hard for me. But I followed their advice and I achieved good results. In addition to this, even if teachers have a wide knowledge of an argument, they can’t transfer it to the students through a bad relationships with them. Behaviors like being unavailable, threating students discourage students to work better and learn more. In conclusion, the relationship between professors and students is necessary to let the students learn something. But at a high level of teaching, also professors’ knowledge is important too.

To give/impose pace It is correct to say "to give the pace/to impose the pace"? For example if there is a runner and other one follow the rhythm of the first, it's okay to say that the first is giving/imposing the pace? I hope my question is clear enough.

Discuss: It is more important for students to understand ideas than it is for them to learn facts. In my opinion, just learning facts is useless. I’ll try to explain my idea with some examples. Students involved in scientific fields, as mathematicians, physics, engineers, biologists, don’t have just to remember facts or physics laws, they have to understand them. Because this kind of knowledges are useless if you can’t use them. They have to know how to apply Phisycs' principles to the specific case and just memorizing them is not sufficient. They usually use previous knowledges to explain, to understand new situations and this is possible only if they have deeply understand what they studied. If you study History, you obviously need to remember facts, but you have also to understand why they happen, the reasons that originated the historical events. This way, you can discover why some empire lasted for more than a century and other less.

Do you agree with this statement? Only people who earn a lot of money are successful. I strongly disagree with this statement. First of all, people could earn money with frauds or exploiting other people. These kind of people are clearly not successful. All the volunteers don't receive money for their work but they help poor people to get food, home and assistance. In my opinion, they are successful people even though they don't earn money. Another example are scientists and writers. Not all of them collected a plenty richness, but they are famous for their discoveries. On other hand, there are examples of successful people that own big entrerprises. But their success is often linked to inventions or great ideas.