Leaders and directors of many organizations are often old people. Some people believe that it is better for young people to be leaders. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view?The First draft:Traditionally, an organization will appoint an older person as its leader and take advantage of his rich experience of management to make the operation much smoother. The direct result of this decision is that young people will be left no chance to move upward the ladder of career. Some people in favor of the development of the young people encourage the organization to change their mechanism of appointment. At this point, I believe that only when some higher positions open up to the youth, can the society become more prosperous.The spirit of innovation held by the youth decides the future of the organization. The alteration in our society is proceeding at an astonishing rate, and the knowledge people have mastered can become obsolete easily. To make a success out of the fierce competition in the society, keeping up with the social progress seems like the best way. The mind of the young people tends to be more flexible so that it will be easier for them to embrace the new developments or ideas. They are also easily spurred by the nouvelle things to come up with the new ideas. It is the spirit of innovation that serves as the powerful engine to propel the organization to move further.Compared with the older people, the youth also enjoy the advantage of better health condition. It is inevitable that the health condition of people will become worse when they get older. It also cannot be denied that the pressure stemming from work is also intense. One cannot endure the work pressure on condition that his health condition was in bad situation. Young people do not need to be anxious about this issue. The vigor of the youth will give the confidence to the co-workers and also the board of the organization. The work can be well completed by the young people.The easy and comfortable working atmosphere created by the young people will further improve the production of the organization. Compared with the older leader, young people may be more innovative and healthier, so there is every reason to believe that they can complete the work as well as the older people. Our society should be more tolerable to provide opportunities to the young people to attest to their capacity.(396 words)Some people think that the amount of noise people make should be controlled strictly. Others say that people are free to make as much noise as they wish. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.The first draft:Noise has been described as a demon haunting people living in metropolitan city. Some people propose that the government should issue some policies to constrain the behavior of making noise in case of affecting the normal life of others. Some hold the different opinion that it can be counted as the liberty of citizens to do anything, such as making noise.Those in favor of strict restriction of the action of making noise or controlling the noise under certain volume may argue that this policy will contribute to the formation of peaceful living condition. It can be imagined that city-dweller need a good rest in a quiet environment after a long-day work. Noise may become the biggest threat for people who seek a peaceful life. Out of this concern, it is the responsibility of the government to initiate the incentive to encourage citizens to make lower volume of noise to offer the comfort for the neighborhood. Only in this way can the harmonious social atmosphere can be formed under the condition that the quarrels and complaints about making noise among neighbors are dwindling.People objecting the interference of the authority to daily life may be in fear that personal liberty will be infringed by the powerful authoritative institution. It is long held belief that the less is governed, the better the government is. The government should not touch upon the all edges of people’s life. Also, citizens have the right to resist the forceful action of the government. Making noise in one’s home can be lined as the personal affair which the government should not touch and the result of government interference is the loss of personal freedom. However, that is not to say, people can make any volume of noise at random. If the noise becomes an annoying thing to bother others, this issue has become the public affair which the government should participate in and in which the government has the responsibility to coordinate the all parts of interests.In conclusion, the liberty of modern citizen has its limitation. The prerequisite of personal freedom is not bothering or hurting others. Once the basic condition is breached, it is the government that should stand out to keep things in order and create a harmonious society for prosperity, peace and safety.(387 words)Some scientists or travelers like to travel to remote natural environment such as south pole. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?The spirit of going into wilderness and pioneering the new frontier is the impetus for the formation of modern civilization. To explore the unknown world in nature, numerous scientists have set out for those mysterious places. To test the limit of human capability, some adventurers or travelers set their feet in the no-human zone.The aspiration for the unknown has created what we have enjoyed today. It is the spirit of adventure that has propelled the advancement of human society. Facing the energy crisis these days, scientists need to seek for the new energy or substitute energy to power the modern social engine while these valuable energy resource may be hidden in some remote areas. To solve the myth of cosmology, astronauts with the expectation of the scientists will enter into the outer space to exploit an unknown world and find the answer of the puzzle of the interstellar. In the history of the United States, the folks launched the Westward Movement for more land to cultivate and for resource to thrive, which is not only the expansion of the territory but the continuation of the pioneering spirit.The process of the exploration is, undeniably, permeated with the dangers, barriers, obstacles and challenges. No one can guarantee what will happen in the next minute. The history of human being is also a history of struggling and combating with the nature. The power of nature makes us horrified and every time the nature is furious about human activities and revenges, the toll we have to take is very high, and even catastrophic. We, human being, go to nature, explore the mystery of nature but cannot destruct nature if we want to return soundly. We are condescending under the foot of nature. It should be noted that adventure coexists with the uncertainty and danger. Consequently, people should make careful calculus before exploring the unknown nature.All in all, creating a brave new world seems to have become a mission waiting for people to perform, no matter what stands on the road ahead, bliss or disaster. Exploring the unknown world is a necessary step for each generation to take with the purpose of leaving less doubt for their off-springs.(366 words)Some people think too much attention and too many resources are given to the protection of wild animals and birds. To what extent do you agree or disagree?These days, many organizations of environmental protection have been founded and people with love for nature have joined the forces to publicize the important implication of protecting the surroundings for human society. As we share the same biosphere with the animals, the decrease of the number of the animals will have a direct impact on our life. In this point, protecting animals which are always regarded as our friends seems crucial for our existence.Protecting wild animals is meant to keep the balance of ecosystem. The history of natural science has ever and ever again demonstrated to us that human being has no choice but to endure the dire consequence of ecosystem imbalance. The disappearance of an animal from the food chain will result in the rapid proliferation of that of lower level in the linear link or the dwindling number of that of higher level in the chain. It should not be neglected that we, the human being, are also the part of this food chain in nature. If the proper measures are not taken promptly, any damage inflicted on the food chain will no doubt affect our own survival.The essential implication of protecting the wild animals lies in maintaining the ecological diversity. Animal species have appeared and disappeared continually since life began on Earth. This is a natural phenomenon. It has been unchangeable fact that the extinct dinosaur will not come into existence once again. However, species have been vanishing at a much faster rate for about a century now thanks to human factors such as pollution, commercial overexploitation, poaching and deforestation. If these behaviors cannot be restricted, the direct result is the disappearance of some animal species. Also, people with strong interest in zoology, especially some children, cannot bear the grievance of witnessing the extinction of some animals.A better knowledge and understanding of animals gives us a better understanding of our own species. The will to protect animals and nature in general demonstrates the value of a society. And if the optimal development of our resources is a priority, it must be achieved not only economically or socially, but environmentally as well. This is the vision of sustainable development, which dictates that we use our natural resources wisely for the benefit and enjoyment of future generations.(362 words)2015.02.07We live in cities or towns which have museums displaying historical and cultural importance, but people do not visit them. Why do people not visit museums in their local areas? What can be done to attract local people?The museum professionals have frequently been puzzled by the elusive masses who never enter local museum doors. They are often in deep bewilderment why they cannot attract a broader spectrum of the public, or a larger audience that comes regularly with all the treasures they offer. It is also a question that programs that are successful in one museum or with one group fail to garner equal response with other audiences.The main reason why people nowadays visit museums less is that they cannot bear the boredom brought by the tour. People often find the experience of staying in museums dull because they, in fact, have no idea about what they are viewing. Barring a learned few, museum visitors are pretty clueless when it comes to, namely, Oriental tapestry, or ancient Egyptian earthenware. Yet museums assume a worrying degree of knowledge, offering painfully little information about the items on display. People will not be enlightened only by an inscription that read s “clay pot, 1200-1300, Russia”. So it is time to think what role museums can expect to play in contemporary travel itineraries with global tourism expanding at exponential rates and in innovative ways.Creating a positive experience for visitors is an essential way for museums to be welcoming and inviting places to a wider variety of people. Museums should put themselves in t heir “customers’ shoes.”They should adopt both the mind-set and infrastructure to do what it takes to make visitors want to come, to feel welcome when they arrive, cared for and engaged during their stay. And by the time they leave, they are eager to return. A visitor-focused museum should actively solicits audience feedback on everything from what people think of the art on display to whether the restrooms are adequate. Adopting and applying those practices will benefit them and their institutions and result in a better experience for people they serve.We cannot leave museums to be graveyards for stuff and tombs for inanimate things. More effective measures should be sought to encourage local people's involvement in relevant arenas. Traditional museums should listen to their visitors' voice, facilitate dialogue and social interaction with visitors.(356 words)2015.2.14The use of mobile phone is as antisocial as smoking. Smoking is banned in certain places so mobile should be banned like smoking. To what extent do you agree or disagree?The rapid development of modern technology has brought a wide array of bizarre items for human benefits, be it saving labor or improving efficiency. The mobile phone is one of these greatest inventions in human history. Some people suggest not using mobile phone in terms of the declining face-to-face communication, while it is my opinion that the use of mobile phone should not be banned by virtue of convenience and efficiency itengenders.The mobile phone bridges the gap between people in different places and the convenience of communication makes the mobile phone the priority among modern communication devices. The world is moving forward, so are people who inhabit in this changing world. More and more people are leaving their hometown and migrating to other places, even abroad, with their workplace altering. The separation between people and their relatives causes a seething pain which has been alleviated or cured, to some extent, by the occurrence of mobile phone. Despite the disadvantage of not seeing images or faces, the greetings through sound could convey the message that everything is fine. The convenience of communication and soothing effect achieved have necessitated the mobile phone to become an integrated part of modern life.Nobody can suspect the efficiency brought by the use of mobile phone in the modern world, especially in business world. The efficiency has a decisive effect on the success of business. It is the mobile phone that plays a significant role in this process. Some spontaneous decision made by the board must be distributed to all departments instantly. Without communication devices, such as the mobile phone, this cannot be achieved. Some emergency also should be noticed in short time, and mobile phone, no doubt, will provide an ingenious solution to help the company out of morass and mess.Although it should be acknowledged that the mobile phone still has some shortcomings, which are waiting for device engineers to improve, the convenience and efficiency it brings to daily life should never be underestimated. The suggestion that the mobile phone should be banned using seems ridiculous unless the scientists can provide a replaceable or high-ended devices.(34 mins 354 words)。