The three ways of preserving Torreya taxifonia Both the lecture and the passage discuss the ways of preserving Torreya taxifonia. This is a type of evergreen tree which will probably extinct soon. The author gives the three possible ways of saving the tree. Whereas the lecturer claims that none of these ways provides a satisfying solution. The first option is to relocate Torreya to Northern Florida, where it was found in abundance. The microclimate of Florida is wet and cool, that makes it a good fit for the tree. However, the climate in the region is much dryer and warmer now, according to the professor. This was caused by global warming and the drain of soil in the region. As for the second solution, that is moving the population of Torreya to an absolutely different location. The location should fit the tree's environmental requirements. As the result, the population will flourish. The lecturer mentioned the negative effect of such transplantation. That is, the relocated plants could spread quickly and kill other spices. The last option is preserving Torreya in research centers, where it will exist in a closely monitored environment. Scientists will take care of the tree and conduct researches. Although this approach has many benefits, the professor asserts that the plants will not be able to resist diseases. The main reason is that in order to be resistant to illnesses the plant's population should be big and diverse. It's not likely that research centers will be able to host the required number of the plants. Overall, the professor claims that the three ways described by the author are not satisfying. Each of them has at least one drawback.

A person should never make an important decision alone. According to the claim, one should never take important decisions alone. I disagree with this for two main reasons. First of all, some decisions directly affect our personal life. Listening to the advice of other people is essential, but we have to deal with outcomes ourselves. We have to listen to our internal voice when it comes to crucial decisions. My parents wanted me to be a financial adviser. They told me that it will benefit me in the long run because the job is highly paid. Of course, I listened to them and enrolled in a university to get the profession. Finally, when I started to work in a bank, I understood very quickly that it's not the job of my dream. As for the second reason, it's good to understand responsibility for a decision. People often choose the easiest way to attain their goals. It's the way our brain works. If someone gives us recommendations regarding a decision, it's likely that we'll use them. However, what if the person who gives a piece of advice is not an expert? He/she can be our friend or family member and wants only good for us, but the responsibility will be ours. For example, a friend says that a company's stock prices will significantly increase at the end of a month. He might be right, but what if he isn't? In my opinion, it's much better to make decisions alone since we feel personal responsibility for them. Finally, I think that all decisions which potentially will have a serious impact on one's life should be made by him/herself. This is because no one knows our motives and goals better than us.

Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet Both the article and the lecture discussing the doubts regarding the origin of the famous Rembrandt's painting "Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet". The author explains three problems which result in the doubts. The lector, on the other hand, claims that the portrait was drawn by Rembrandt himself, but it was changed later by another artist. The first problem is, according to the article, that there is a contradictory detail in the portrait. The woman depicted in the picture is wearing a white linen cap. This kind of clothes was worn by servants. However, she is also wearing a fur collar which servants could not afford. The lector claims, according to the research, that the collar was added a century ago after the portrait was painted. Regarding the second problem, there are significant errors in the composition of light and color in the painting. The author asserts that Rembrandt could not make such mistakes. The fact that the portrait was reworked explains the errors, according to the professor. The added details changed the direction of light which was initially drawn by Rembrandt. Finally, the author mentions the panel that the portrait was painted on. It consists of several pieces of wood glued together. According to the author, Rembrandt had never used such a technique. On the other hand, the professor explains the glued pieces by the change. Additional pieces were added in order to make the portrait bigger. Overall, the professor explains all the problems mentioned in the passage. The research mentioned by the lector proved that the painting was drawn by Rembrandt, but changed later by another artist. This change caused doubts about the portrait's origin.

In twenty years there will be fewer cars in use than there are today According to the claim, in twenty years, there will be fewer cars in use than now. I absolutely disagree with this for three reasons. Firstly, a modern society deeply depends on automobiles. They are used for products delivery, public transport, and private drives. It will be difficult to replace them completely in the next twenty years since there should be a reliable alternative. I don't think that many people will agree to use trolleys or railroads in the way they use cars. This will require building rails all over a city. Secondly, pollution, which is the main problem associated with cars, is almost solved. People more and more use cars with electric or hybrid engines. It's likely that mass production will help to provide the supply of them. Consequently, the prices will increase and people all over the globe will be able to buy them. Thirdly, many of us prefer using personal cars because of their comfort. If we reduce the number of cars, we have to use public transport more frequently. I don't think that it's convenient for all. For example, some people with disabilities can't use buses and trolleys because they first have to go a significant distance from their homes to a bus stop. Also, a car is not only a vehicle but also a thing that shows a social status. In my opinion, quite a lot of people want to buy a luxurious automobile in order to prove themselves that they are rich. Finally, It's not likely that, in twenty years, there will be fewer cards in use than today. Distribution and public transportation systems rely on automobiles. Also, there are technical innovations which solve the pollution problem.

A teacher must know his subject very good. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? A teacher’s ability to relate well with students is more important than excellent knowledge of the subject being taught. According to the claim, a teacher's soft skills is more important than the excellent knowledge of his/her subject. I disagree with it. In my opinion, a teacher must know and understand the subject being taught very well. There are two reasons. First of all, a teacher should help students to gain the skills they need. It's hardly possible to teach someone to solve Math problems if you don't how to do it. He/she should be able to answer any question related to their subject. Students usually feel if a professor doesn't have enough experience or knowledge. This causes disappointment and raises questions about the quality of education in a university or a college. When I was a student, I took courses which were provided by lectors having a little knowledge of a subject. Those courses were not interesting. During the lessons, the lectors read textbooks out loud. Despite the fact that the lectors were kind and attentive people, I didn't like their lessons. Second, a teacher must evaluate students and their works. Textbooks usually contain answers to all the questions and quizzes which are given to readers. This helps an inexperienced teacher to check students' skills. But what if a student has difficulties with understanding a topic or solving a task. It's not likely that the teacher will give useful recommendations. On a contrary, if a teacher is a professional, he/she easily understands a student's strengths and weaknesses. The teacher will give more interesting and creative tasks for students who show good results. For those who are struggling with the subject, he points on areas of development. Finally, a teacher must love and know his/her subject perfectly. It benefits students and educational institution, where the teacher works. Of course, the ability to relate well with students is important, but experience and the excellent knowledge of the subject being taught are crucial.

Why do you think many young people are not voting? Many democratic countries report low voter turnout in people aged 18-25. Why do you think many young people are not voting? According to the claim, the vote attendance of young people is low in many democratic countries. In other words, only a few people aged 18-25 take their part in elections. In my opinion, there are two reasons for this trend. Firstly, young people are not interested in politics. They are more interested in everyday things such as their studies, love affairs, and hobbies. When I was 18, I rarely thought about governments, human rights, and economics. At those ages, people in my country usually don't work. Only a few of them have kids. Consequently, the problems which could affect the older generation simply don't bother them. For example, a rise in taxes is not a big deal if one doesn't pay any taxes. It's vital to give political education to the people of that age. I believe that it should increase the vote attendance because they will know about current problems in their countries. Secondly, they don't believe that their votes will change the results of elections. This is especially true in my country. When a political party or president wins elections several times in a row during twenty years, it's not likely that a voter thinks that his opinion means anything. It happens despite the fact that my country is democratic. The establishment in power structures doesn't want to give up. Governments of this type can even spend parts of their budgets on propaganda which negatively effect young people's motivation to vote. I'm really upset that it happens. The only way to deal with that is to be politically active. Unfortunately, not all of us want to do that. Overall, I think that immaturity and desperation are the main reasons for the trend. Political opposition should do its best to involve young people in politics. Young generations have an unlimited amount of energy which can be useful for important changes.

Health care for citizens Do you think a government should use tax dollars to ensure quality health care for its citizens, or that health care should be the responsibility of individuals? I believe that a government should use a part of collected taxes on citizens' health. A government has enough money to provide quality of its healthcare system. Let's consider the ways a government could accomplish this goal. First of all, some people can't afford medical treatment. They are usually senior citizens, physically disabled people, and orphans. Who will help those people if a government decides to delegate this responsibility to individuals? Only a government can collect money and create a budget, which will include the spendings on those who are in need. Of course, there are private clinics, but someone should pay for their service. In my country, every citizen can get medical treatment for free. The main drawback is that the quality of the service is not as good as in private clinics. But it's definitely better than nothing. Secondly, a government should control health institutions. All organizations which provide health service must be authorized by experts. Otherwise, people could become victims of non-professional treatment. For example, an unqualified doctor can prescribe medication which will harm his/her patient. I think that the special government agencies should control clinics and hospitals. They have to check the qualifications of employees, quality of equipment and hygiene. Overall, a government must ensure the quality of health care for its citizens. Taxes allow them to get the money they need to do that. Moreover, citizens are the most valuable asset of any government. Therefore, their health is the top priority.

How could student evaluations of university professors and faculty be used most effectively? In my opinion, student evaluations should be used for adjusting course materials and improvements in the delivery of lectures. Those are the most important areas because students mostly interact with professors and read textbooks. Therefore, student feedback on them is very valuable. How these evaluations could be used specifically? First of all, in my country, course material is usually defined by the requirements of government institutions. As a result, the material could become outdated since those agencies rarely review the requirements. Here the evaluations become handy. Some of students are very motivated and have a much better understanding of their area of study than employees of the government institutions. Professors and faculties could use them to include additional topics in a curriculum. Likewise, they can plan less academic hours on topics which are not actual. I believe that evaluations of students who graduated from university are helpful as well. The main reason is that graduate students can estimate the value of a study program from the market's point of view. In other words, they see which of courses are useful because they apply their knowledge and skills at work. Second, the feedback of students regarding professors must be used for improvements in lecture delivery. Lectors have a chance to understand what students like and dislike. It could be a quality of a presentation, a volume of speech or communication with auditory. Professors can spend some time working on these issues. When I was a student, I often wanted to tell my professors what I think about the content of a lecture. But I didn't because I was afraid that my critics can offend them and affect my scores. Finally, I believe that student evaluations are very useful. They give opportunities to make changes in courses and lecture delivery. I hope that someday they will be required in all universities.

The sensorimotor stage of childhood development The famous psychologist Piaget gives a definition of the sensorimotor stage of childhood development. It’s the first stage and lasts from birth until age two. Piaget claims that children of this age have very limited mental abilities. According to the passage, Piaget believed that kids in this stage cannot fully think. Especially, they are not able to make deductive decisions. For example, a child can’t define a shape of an object which fits a round hole. The professor mentioned the research that contradicts this idea and proves that kids of age three do think. The experiment conducted during the research shows that kids can find an object which was displayed to them and then hidden. Another Piaget's suggestion is that children in this stage of development have limited memory. They can’t remember the events of the past. They are bound to the present. The lector says that this idea is also wrong. She claims that kids have ideas about the world because they are surprised when something unusual happens. For instance, children are astonished when they see a magic trick. Overall, the professor feels that ideas of Piaget are useful, but many of them were proven not to be the truth. I agree with the professor since I have very early childhood memories. My parents said that the events which I memorized took place when I was two years old. Therefore, I believe that children in the sensorimotor stage are able to think and learn.