Custom Writing Paper

MY ANSWER: YES! – One position, much easier to write, much easier to read.

PARAGRAPH 1 experience that is practical contacts, face to face skills. EG: Studies through the UK Government show graduates with work experience are twice as likely to find employment…..

PARAGRAPH 2
Better preparation, chance to improve social skills, close the gap between academia and private sector, helps student decide on future before committing long term, EG 1/6 students will change their higher education course while at uni….

Lots of people believe that it’s safer to learn something in a combined group instead of individually. Do you agree or disagree?

Paragraph 1
Agree – learning in group has advantages that are many of teamwork may be adopted
Group can utilize each person’s skill expertise

Paragraph 2– that is disagree is better
Self reliant, own the result, not based upon others
more aged way, more responsible
No laggards

Topic and Answer: Education (child)

Some individuals genuinely believe that children should do organised activities within their leisure time although some genuinely believe that children must be absolve to do what they need to accomplish within their free time. Which viewpoint do you agree with? Use reasons that are specific examples to guide your answer.

PARAGRAPH 1 favour that is-In https://customwritings.us.com/ of them choose.
-benefits letting your head wonder, children can go to town, find themselves, do what they prefer and excel… etc etc
-EG Recent tests also show 12% of school students dislike physical education, therefore if sports were chosen it could be unfair to the minority.

PARAGRAPH 2 -Reasons against “organised activities”
Organising activities is:
-costly for the institution
-need time to plan‘equipment that is-possible to purchase
-furthermore research has revealed that the brain operates better after a distraction from an organized task such as for example studying.

Topic and Answer: Globalisation

Lots of people say that globalisation in addition to growing number of multinational companies have a effect that is negative the surroundings. Which viewpoint can you agree with? Use specific reasons and examples to guide your answer. To what extent would you agree or disagree? Use reasons that are specific examples to aid your situation.

PARAGRAPH 1 -DEFINITELY DAMAGING ENVIRONMENTAL SURROUNDINGS
-Increased interaction between countries
-Increase in products or services traded -this means more production, therefore more resources. EG China ‘workshop associated with world’ – many places air pollution masks needed.PARAGRAPH 2 -MULTINATIONALS / PROBS WITH GLOBALISATION
-YES increase pollution – (this decision taken for simplicity)
-Globalisation requires global solutions -these can have drastic consequences if accidents happen
-EG BP gulf coast of florida, oil spill, destroyed the local ecosystem…

Scientists think that to be able to protect the environmental surroundings, people must use less energy inside their daily lives. However, many people never have changed the real way they live. How come you might think lots of people have never taken action that is individual? What could be done to cause them to become do something?

Ideas for body paragraph 1

Not taken action that is individual:
– Danger not immediately or directly facing them
– Tragedy of the commons
– Collective problem – easier to shirk responsibility

Ideas for body paragraph 2

What might be done to cause them to become take action?
– Media campaigns by the us government
– Tax or incentives that are financial In Tokyo ……

Some believe that is the responsibility of people to deal with environmental surroundings. Others say it will be the national government that should take care of the environment. Discuss both views and state your opinion.

Paragraph 1
People should care for environmental surroundings because:
We are the consumers, we vote with our wallets,
Throw away culture become considerably too prevalent – consumers are causing horrendous damage (pacific garbage patch)

Paragraph 2
Government should care for the environment because:
They usually have the capacity to legislate
Can impose fines and taxes on polluters
said to be guardians associated with the country, which means that collectively these are generally guardians of the earth… not true in fact

Conclusion
Both should really be doing more!

In a lot of countries small shops and town centers ‘re going out of business, because people tend to drive into the large out-of-town stores. This results in a rise in car use, plus it implies that people without cars have limited usage of out-of-town stores. Do you consider advantages of such development outweigh its disadvantages?