Some people believe that technology has made man more social.

 To what extent do you agree or

disagree with this opinion?

Experts throughout both the developing and developed world have debated whether the advent[the
arrival of a notable person or thing."the advent of television"]
of sophisticated[ultra modern] modern technology  such as mobile phones, laptops and iPad  have
helped to enhance and improve people's social lives or whether the opposite has become the case.
Personally, I strongly advocate the former view. This essay will discuss both sides using examples from
the UK government and Oxford University to demonstrate points and prove arguments.

On the one hand [no comma???]there is ample, powerful, almost daily evidence  that such technology
can be detrimental  especially to the younger generation who are more easily affected by it’s addictive
nature  and which can result in people  feeling more isolated from the society.

The central reason behind this is twofold, firstly, the invention  of online social media sites and apps, such
as Twitter and Facebook have reduced  crucial face-to-face interactions  dramatically.  Through use of
these appealing and attractive mediums, people feel in touch and connected yet lack key social skills and
the ability to communicate.

Secondly,  dependence on such devices is built up frighteningly easily which may have a damaging effect
on mental health and encourage a sedentary lifestyle. For example, recent scientific research by the UK
government demonstrated that 90% of people in their 30s spend over 20 hours per week on Messenger
and similar applications to chat with their friends instead of meeting up and spending quality time
together  or doing sport. As a result, it is conclusively clear that these  technology advancements have
decreased and diminished  our real life interactions.

On the other hand,  although there are significant downsides to technological developments, its’
multifold advantages cannot be  denied. This is largely because the popularity of technology such as
cellphones allows people to connect freely and easily with no geographical barriers.
People are able to share any type of news, information, photos and opinions  with their loved ones
whenever and wherever they want therefore keeping a feeling of proximity and closeness. For example,
an extensive study by Oxford University illustrated  that people who work,  or study abroad and use
applications like Facetime and WhatsApp to chat with their families,  are less likely to experience
loneliness and feel out of the loop [unknown/no idea]than those  who do not.

Consistent with this line of thinking [thought/idea/concept]is that businessmen are also undoubtedly
able to benefit from these advances by holding  virtual real -time  meetings  using Skype which  may
increase the chance of closing  business deals without the need to fly.
From the arguments and examples given I firmly believe that  overall  communication and mans’
sociability has been advanced enormously due to huge the huge technological progress of the past
twenty years and despite {of}some potentially serious health implications which governments should not
fail to address, it is predicted that its popularity will continue to flourish in the future.

sophisticated modern technology

enhance and improve people's social lives
addictive nature
feel out of the loop
isolated from society
reduce crucial face-to-face interactions dramatically
a damaging effect on mental health
encourage a sedentary lifestyle
spend quality time together
connect freely and easily with no geographical barriers
proximity and closeness
its less likely to experience loneliness
popularity will continue to flourish

Some people think that a person improves their intellectual skills more when doing group activities.
To what extent do you agree? Use specific details and examples to explain your view.

intellectual skills= the intelligence= intellectual abilities.

group activities.= group-level cognition= team-games and study-groups= learning in a group
tight time constraints= within the span of seconds
a diverse range of rapid

In recent decades, many researchers have studied the importance of group-level cognition. Indeed, to
my mind, there is now convincing evidence that group activities improve = of individuals. In this essay, I
shall examine how research in team-games and study-groups supports this view.

To begin with, team-games clearly require individuals to perform a diverse range of rapid mental
calculations. This is because, in a sporting context, players must predict and anticipate possible actions
within tight time constraints.

For example, a recent Cambridge study showed that soccer players can – within the span of seconds –
calculate over a dozen different permutations [change in order]that could result from a single soccer
related action. Such predictive powers clearly improve players' mental abilities and result from activities
performed in a group context.

Secondly, study-groups enable individuals to obtain information that they could not acquire in isolation.
This is because peer feedback allows individuals to refine their understanding of concepts and to also
learn new information from other members in the study-group.
For example, a study by The British Institute for Learning found that, if individuals participated in study-
groups, they had a far more objective and sophisticated understanding of a topic than learners who
were not part of study-groups. Therefore, it is certainly the case that learning in a group improves an
individual’s mental abilities.
In conclusion, I strongly agree with the notion that group activities improve intellectual abilities. In the
future, we will certainly see schools take greater measures to ensure that more group-level cognition
occurs in the classroom.

In some countries, the number of shootings increase because many people have guns at
home. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Give specific reasons and examples to
support your answer.
at home= household=

children and teenagers= minors

Across the globe, many individuals own guns for self-defence and recreational purposes. Gun
related mortalities in households – in particular – throw the ethics of such forms of private gun
ownership into sharp relief. In this essay, I shall appeal to crime statistics to argue that a
person is at a far greater risk being shot if there is a gun in a household.

Firstly, it is intuitively obvious that having a gun in a household endangers children and
teenagers. This is because minors do not have the requisite knowledge or maturity to handle
guns safely. For example, the US Department of Justice recently revealed statistics showing that
150 American children and teenagers die each year because of accidents relating to household
guns. Therefore it is incontrovertible that household guns lead to additional shootings.

Secondly, household guns became especially dangerous when spouses have violent arguments.
This is because male sexual rage, in particular, often results in deadly aggression. For example,
The International Crime Bureau recently produced statistical evidence that – if there is a
household gun – a man is twice as likely (if he discovers his wife having an affair) to kill her in a
fit of jealous rage. Therefore, once again, household guns correlate positively with additional
shootings.

In conclusion, there is undeniable evidence that having a gun in a house leads to further
shootings. Given the strength of this evidence, in the future, more legislature needs to be put in
place to limit private gun ownership.

Some people believe that international sporting events are the ideal opportunity to show
the world the qualities of the hosting nation. Others believe that these events are mainly a
large unjustifiable expense. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

international sporting events= Global athletic events

an economic avalanche
public relations disaster
positive promotion.= publicity,=
the expense of= expensive= expenditure= economic management
lot to gain=benefits

Global athletic events such as the Olympics, the World Cup, the Extreme Games, and even the
American Super Bowl are incredible opportunities for countries. These iconic spectacles can
provide a country with an economic avalanche[disaster] of benefits or expose it to a public
relations disaster. This essay will look at both points, using Russia and the United Kingdom as
examples.
Firstly, it is important to bear in mind that simply hosting the event and having the world’s
media attention cannot guarantee a positive promotion. This is because although the country is
receiving enormous amounts of publicity, the media will often report controversial news as well
as.

Take the Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, for example. The media spotlight is shining bright on
the athletes but also highlighting the polemic legislation regarding homosexuality. Therefore,
despite the international recognition to be gained, the country can also face a possible backlash.

Secondly, the expense of building large infrastructures necessary to hold these events can dwarf the
benefits, unless they are fully amortized [കടം വീട്ടൽ]= the action or process of gradually writing off
the initial cost of an asset.
]afterwards. This is largely due to the fact that stadiums, Olympic parks, ski runs etc. are expensive to
construct and undertake large capital expenditure, often by the public sector.
In the Commonwealth Games in Manchester in 2002, the council commissioned a stadium for athletic
events which was later adapted and sold to the local preeminent football club, Manchester City.
Therefore with proper, fair, economic management of such buildings and facilities the cost can be
recuperated.[recover]= സുഖം പ്രാപിക്കുക

To conclude, a host city or nation has a lot to gain from these events but only if they are
economically administered correctly and the country has no controversial issues for the media to
pull out of the closet.

Crime is a big problem in the world; many believe that nothing can be done to prevent it.
To what extent do you agree or disagree? Give your own opinion.

Crime is unquestionably one of the most prevailing and worrying aspects in any society, and its
prevention should be taken seriously. Crime prevention can be executed in various ways, firstly
through a sustained honest presence in the community and secondly through international
cooperation.

A local presence by incorruptible law enforcement authorities may be costly, however, the long-
term investment would pay dividends in the future. A safer region would encourage trade,
investment and set an invaluable example for younger generations.

For example, crime has dramatically been reduced in the Favelas around Rio de Janiero in
Brazil. This was achieved largely through the government committing large funds of money to
stationing police headquarters in and around the slums. These financial expenditures greatly
benefited the community.
Secondly, due to the large-scale severity and the global impact that crime has in some areas of
the world, global cooperation is critical. Operating in a different way would incur significant
financial losses and render any expenditure futile.

For example, Somalian pirates in Africa have reigned terror amongst many ocean transport
companies in the area. Only through large-scale international cooperation was policing the
area possible. Therefore, crime reduction can be attributed to a joint effort between countries.

To conclude, illegal activities are a costly and dangerous fact in the present global economy;
however, through large-scale government investment prevention is an attainable goal. Also,
spreading the expense through international cooperation the resources invested can be
significantly more effective in reducing criminals’ effectiveness abroad.