Academic Discussion questions and Responses
ETS sample 1: Binary question
1. Agree with Kelly but disagree with her on methods
I agree with Kelly on the priority of environmental protections over education. That is, as a policy maker, I would spend more money on conserving the environment than on improving education. However, Kelly seems to think that there is one best approach to protect the environment and that the government needs to prioritize that approach. I take issue with this view of Kelly’s. To me, effective protection of the environment requires a multi--pronged approach. To reduce pollution, for instance, the government should not only discourage producing pollution but also encourage producing clean air directly. For the former purpose, the government should enact and enforce such a policy as the carbon tax, the tax levied on the carbon emissions required to produce goods and services. And for the latter purpose, the government should enact and encourage a policy of reforestation, the process of planting trees where trees have been removed. Given the speed and severity of global warming, I, as a policy maker, would put all my effort into protecting the environment.
2. Agree with Kelly but disagree with her on the reason
If I were a policy maker, I would invest more on environmental protections than on education. My reason for this is different from Kelly’s. Her reason is that the Earth is the only planet we have and this is why we must take care of it. As a sci-fi fan, I personally can imagine that it is possible for the earthlings to colonize other planets and make homes there in the future. My motivation to put more emphasis on environmental protection comes from the consideration that the government will save a significant amount of money in the long run if it invests in environmental protection programs now. Consider how much money the government spends on solving problems arising from preventable climate disasters. This month alone, our nation experienced five natural catastrophes -- flooding, tornadoes, wildfire and two hurricanes-- causing the government to spend billions of dollars to rescue the disaster-affected people and to assist their livelihoods. This type of spending will keep increasing as the frequency and severity of the natural disasters increase due to climate change. If the government focuses on environment protection now, then the government will not need to spend so much money on problems arising from natural disasters, which will then allow the government to spend money on other important areas such as education and public health
3. Agree with Andrew but add a different reason
My view is in line with Andrew’s view, that the government should spend more money on education than on environmental protections. I think Andrew did a great job in explaining how education relates to protecting the environment. His two reasons are spot on, and worth recapturing: educated people can make decisions that are geared toward protecting the environment as they understand the effects of their actions; education in science and technology will produce better solutions to protect the environment. While I absolutely agree with these two reasons, since I have other reasons to prioritize education, here I add aspects that Andrew neglected to mention. For me, investment in education is far more important than in environment protection since education produces more immediate conditions that make our lives better. Studies have shown time and time again that societies with high rates of education completion have lower crime, better overall health, and civic involvement. Their findings are unanimous on this point: the root cause of poverty is the lack of access to education. Considering these benefits of investing in education, a policy maker should prioritize education over any other policies.
Dr. Byrnes' TOEFL Writing Course