Human relations have been undergoing great changes over the years, and there are several factors that contribute to it.

What changes do you see today compared to yester years?
Look at those major factors that effect these changes?

Change is the order of the day. Virtually, there is nothing that does not change. So is the case with human relations, especially at a time when humans are going through fast paced developments. The factors that make these changes are many.

The most important change that has happened in human relation is the absence of warmth and intimacy people of all walks of life used to have before. There was a time when people took great pleasure in meeting others. Now such relations hardly exist.

Let me find another area where we find relations dwindle. The way younger generation looks at the older ones has totally changed. Older generation is being dumped as wastes. For example, in our culture parents used to have great control over their children, but now it is children who call the shots. Things have changed a lot, and so are human relations.

What are those factors by the way? Firstly, I think, the world is too wonderful to be spent sticking to the so-called relations. People are highly ambitious, and they find no reason why they should worry about relations. Secondly, life has become so fast and people are after their dreams. For example, highly educated children may find it worthwhile sending their parents to an old home. Here what happens is opportunity as a factor rules over relations as an obligation.

In short, we cannot do without change. But we have to understand that the forces that make changes in our relations can be managed to some extent if we wish so. Unfortunately, the ones who try to do so are very small in number.

270 words
jaypeesdoc

Parents, who fail to send their children to school even when education is given free of cost and as right of every child, are doing more harm to their society and nation than to their children and themselves.

How far can you agree or disagree with this?

Who does not know that educating children is extremely important? But many parents fail to do it, all the educational facilities notwithstanding. I feel that such parents do more harm in several different ways, including harm to society and nation.

A child being properly educated is a great asset to his/family, society and nation in many more ways than one. This is what I feel. Because it impossible to predict which child would turn out to be what. What ever that is, it is education that makes it possible. In case, parents fail to send their children to schools on what ever grounds, it not only harms the child and his/her future prospects, but there is a matter of social and national loss. For example, a poorly educated child is an eye sore in many counts.

Let me explain it. Poorly educated children are bound to grow up like other children, and there will come up to become adults and parents. Obviously, they would be poor parents. The children they beget cannot be healthier, and nor are they going to be educated better. What happens is a cyclic action. This will lead to a set of permanent poor in society. Is a poorly educated child not a loss to family, society and nation? So the onus lies on parents’ shoulders. They should ensure that their children go to school at any cost.

In short, it is right say if parents fail to abide by their duty of sending their children to school, there will be personal, familial, social and national loss. The latter ones are more harmful than the former ones. A nation cannot afford to be called poor for long.

270 words

Education that does not foster civic consciousness among students is in all means an incomplete education, all the other skills and knowledge it fosters notwithstanding.

How right or wrong is this perception in your opinion?

Instilling civic consciousness needs to be the most important component of any education. That is what I feel about it, and I cannot but agree to the view that an education that does not do it is incomplete.

Education as such, in my opinion, is to make an individual lead a civilized, productive and meaningful life. If we look at the three conditions, ‘civilized’ comes first. In this context, being educated in some way is one thing and being civilized in its true sense of the term is just another. Here comes the role of civic consciousness. An educated person needs to have enough civic consciousness to be able to lead a civilized life. For example, switching a light off when not in use is a sign of civic consciousness; so is the case with keeping one’s surroundings clean.

On the other hand, if a stream of education happens to foster all other skills and knowledge, but fails to develop a sense of civic consciousness, what ever education that may be, it will be incomplete. For example, let us take the case of an educated person. She or she is not ready to behave well on a mass transport system or find it just alright to spit right on the road he or she walks on. What ever qualification such a person sports up his or her collar is absolutely incomplete.

To conclude it, it is right to say that civic consciousness is what makes a person lead a life worth living one with others. Being a social animal everyone needs to lay great stress on this factor while they get their children or themselves educated.

270 words

Though modern communication tools are said to be able to keep people closer, there is a view that people these days are much more distant from one another than they used to be.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view?

How distant or close are people from one another these days thanks to the innovations in communication technology? Though opinions differ, what I feel is that people are not so closer, but they remain much more connected than ever before.

Communication tools these days help people to remain connected. This does not mean that they are closer than ever before. Being connect and being closer are two different things. What happens now is that these tools offer people enormous possibilities to be away from one another. At the same time, it is possible for people to get an impression that they remain closer. This is a feeling created out of their being able to be connected one another through different modes of communication. For example, almost all people use either a mobile or a community platform like blog or facebook to be online.

All these possibilities notwithstanding, the fact remains that people these days are not so close as they used to be. Today everything is matter of fact and mechanical. The very social activities like periodic meetings at a place, family visits, periodic gathering of like-minded people at special occasions, and even personal invitations for family and cultural gatherings are being responded impersonally. All thanks to modern communication tools. For example, how many of us are able to meet our friends and family friends today as often as we used to?

In short, technology is for man’s good, and man is able to identify that fact too. So, we all need to harness the possibilities communications tools offer. Why are we more distant today from one another? We happen to be tools in the hands of technology, not the other way round.

270 words
jaypeesdoc

Bar graph on number of mobiles and landlines per 100 people in 7 countries

The bar graph describes data on mobile and landline density per 100 people in seven selected countries.

It is obvious that mobile phones are more popular than landlines. Let us look at the figures. In Denmark, UK, Sweden and Italy, number of mobile phones per hundred people remains between 70 and 80. But their corresponding figures for landline are much lesser, except for Denmark where landline is more popular than mobiles. The figures of UK, Sweden and Italy go like almost 55, 65 and 45 per hundred people.

Now let’s look at the numbers of Canada, US and Germany. In Canada and US the landline density is almost two times more than mobile density, 65 and 35, whereas in the US the popularity of mobile is comparatively less than landline, the figures are nearly 50 and above 65/100. And finally the numbers of Germany are 70 and 60 mobiles and landlines respectively.
In conclusion, it seems that mobile phone use is higher in Europe than in North America. That ends the report.

At a time when the need for wood as raw material for domestic and industrial purposes is increasing alarmingly, some people feel that promoting plastic as alternative to wood is a feasible idea.

How good or bad is this idea in your opinion?

The need for wood as a raw material is high. However, the importance trees cannot be overlooked either in these carbon intensive days. In such a scenario, I think, it is a good idea to promote quality plastic, of course with certain conditions.

To begin with, quality plastic is highly durable, recyclable, cost-effective and easily manageable. For example, furnishing and fittings made of plastic last for a life time, and plastic saves a lot of time, energy and money by way of mass manufacturing, easy movement and cheaper price.

Another point is that, if it is accepted world over, industrial felling can be reduced greatly and the Planet will be able to breathe easy by way of greater green cover, carbon recycling and falling mercury levels. For example, green cover loss is caused more by industrial felling than by development. If this could be minimized, planet would be a better place to be in.

However, we need to put forth some conditions if plastic is to replace wood. Firstly, I think, it is mandatory for all nations that intend to promote plastic to have permanent recycling system in place. Secondly, there should not be any compromise on the provision that only durable, recyclable products are made. And, finally, there needs stringent laws governing quality standards.

Therefore, it may be concluded that there is not going to be any fall in man’s need for raw materials. But the need for keeping trees is higher too. In such a state of affairs, plastic can do great service to mankind, if wisely managed. This write up proves it.


255 words
Jaypeesdoc. 14.8.010

The art of writing time-bound.
Hundred words
On a topic of choice
In 20 minutes
In pairs
Spelling, basic grammar, cohesion/coherence and punctuation


1.
Shopping has become more a pastime than a necessity of life. Reasons:
Occupied life, limited options, facilities, money, consumerism and nuclear setup.

Ajaypeesdoc. Visit.www.jpsukham.blogspot.com. 14.8.010. kit folder

2. Entertainment is highly expensive today. What are the major reasons?
Old ones have gone, great variety, tech supported, private participation money, marketing/competition.


3.
Educating a female is like educating a family. Explain.
No evils, women suffer all evils, educate others, earn and empower the family, beget healthy children.


4. It takes a village to raise a child. Explain
Complex, factors, Money and material, village has it all: poor rich, healthy and weak, upper and lower, beliefs and superstitions, pains and gains, hills and rivers, seasons. Grow better.

Ajaypeesdoc. Visit.www.jpsukham.blogspot.com. 14.8.010

5. What are the advantages of a mixed school?
Cross section, social life, gender parity, saves money, competition, discipline, core and soft skills

6.
Life in an apartment offers plenty of advantages. What are they?
Proximity, availability, conveniences: privacy and security and dignity

Try to develop 100 words out of these key ideas. You are free to make decent mistakes. Please take every mistake as an opportunity to learn. And never ever repeat a mistake which you have once done and got it corrected. Good luck. Stick to time. IELTS is a time-bound programme.

The fast paced industrialization that is taking place in the field of leisure and entertainment across the world offers both advantages and disadvantages.

Do you think its advantages outweigh the disadvantages?

Intro
Inevitable
Higher needs
Service providers
More ads than disads
Ajaypeesdoc.12.8.010
Ads.
Opportunites:
Entertainment
Investment
Development
Employment
Better life
Talents Ex. Children/talens- educated/get employed

Harms
Kills the old
Financial/for the rich
Consumption
Waste and social health Ex. Power, water,

Concl:
Outweigh
Cannot do
Here to stay
Be wise

A skeleton of 19 words visit. www.jpsukham.blogspot.com. Google vaatupura

Gender parity in healthcare is more important than ensuring gender parity in education.

· To what extent do you agree or disagree with this?

Health is wealth or knowledge is wealth? Opinions differ of course. But, when it comes to gender parity in these two areas, I would agree with the view that it is better gender health that matters more than better gender parity in education.

Why I support this view is because health takes care of everything else, even gender parity in education. An educated community of males and females may be able to lead their life the way they like. But their healthy status is what makes them sustain in life so that they can continue living their lives. For example, a highly education female and a male may be able to find means for their life as they enjoy parity in education. What if one of them is not enjoying parity in healthcare? All the qualifications notwithstanding, he or she may not be successful in life.

Coming to gender parity in education, I would like to argue that, though evenly educated great number of females are tend to be leading low key lives due to their preoccupations with culture, community and religious implications. A good number of them are not able, in many cultures, to keep that parity in real terms. But, if there is better parity in healthcare, they would be able to lead healthy lives in many more ways than one, other than the one that education offers. So, I would say gender parity in healthcare is wealth, and education is a means to that end.

In short, my point is that uniform healthcare is more important than uniform education. The above inferences prove the same too. Anyway gender parity in different dimensions of life is of perennial significance.

280 words

While conventional games were physically, socially and intellectually charging, new generation games are found to be the other way round; making participants passive and enervating.

· To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view?

Games of olden times had many dimensions; social, physical and so on. Such games, naturally, fostered many faculties in several different ways. However, what we have today in the name of games, to a greater extent, are not so involving as to make the participants any better.

The roles games play in the mind and body of children are decisive. A game can either foster or spoil their faculties depending on the nature of the games. Fortunately, children of the past had several such physically, socially and intellectually involving crude games. For example, in our culture, there used to be many country games like throw ball, hide and seek, treasure hunt, chase and catch etc. These games involved group of children and they had been able to pick up better physical health, intellectual acumen and socializing skills, to mention a few, by playing such games.

On the other hand, the games children play today are less involving and more isolating? Primarily, most of such games are individual games or maximum for pairs. Secondly, today, it is all supported by technology and children happen to use many gadget and devices which are more programmed than intellectually charging. For example, there are video games of all types, snake and ladder and the like. However, there are a few games like scrabble, jigsaw and crossword puzzles which are some way able to benefit children.

In short, I don’t think, there is much disagreement on the view that older games were more involving and encouraging, and children picked up many skills and faculties. But today, barring a few games, most of the activities children do in the name of play are less involving and rarely fostering.

270 words

Keeping female children and women healthy is the best thing a society can do for the betterment not only of its present generations but also for all the generations to come.

· To what extent can you support this view?
· Do you think that gender parity in healthcare is not needed?

Not many, including myself, would oppose the view that the health of female children and women is of greater importance than anything else for today and tomorrow’s generation. But the fact remains that gender parity in healthcare is needed as much, too.

My first argument in favour of this is that it is the females’ welfare that makes social welfare. Let me make it clear that, from time immemorial, it is women who have been keeping the health status of the family intact. Such families are able to beget healthy children, both male and female. Obviously, such children would constitute a healthy generation in the days to come. For example, a healthy female will become a healthy wife, a mother and, above all, a caring home maker. So female health is what makes the real difference in social health.

However, gender parity in healthcare is crucial as well. This is mandatory for general social welfare. Health indices of a given society are calculated in terms of the health status enjoyed by both the genders. Obviously, we cannot ignore the health of males. For example, if male children and men are not healthy enough, there is going to be a weaker generation of males. All these facts notwithstanding, much hope needs to be pinned up on the health status of female children and women. This is more a matter of existential health than individual or social health.

Looking at both the views, it is right to conclude that the health of women and children, male and female, is of greater significance, and that is the best a society can do to itself. It does not mean that gender parity in healthcare is of no use. It deserves its due, too.

275 words

Nations around the world show great interest in hosting international events of sports and games and this tendency is found to be more in poor nations than in the rich.

What are the factors that promote world economies to go after such events?
Why are poor nations more interested than the rich?

Competing for playing host of international sports extravaganzas is nothing new. When it comes to the factors that encourage all nations to do so too, there is not much difference either. However, poor nations have some special interests in such gala events.

Coming to the common factors that make all nations go for it, the primary thing, in think, is the opportunity such events offer. Chances for foreign currency inflow, international market exposure and development, augmenting of infrastructure and so on do come everyday. Above all, cutting a media image across the world is not every nation’s cup of tea. For example, China was able to invite the envy of super powers when it spectacularly hosted Olympics last time. Actually, China was getting a golden chance to make the world understand that developing nations too can hold such events.

Obviously, like China, all so called developing economies want to strike a cord in the international power platforms. Naturally, international events are right occasions to do it. Coming to the increasing tendency shown by poor nations, I think, apart from those common factors, primarily, these nations need to prove that they are as able as the rest of the world. Secondly, these nations take it as an opportunity to achieve growth in the shortest possible time. For example, the capital city of India, New Delhi, is witnessing unprecedented development in infrastructure in the wake of Common Wealth games. And the whole world is anxiously looking at India. Is it not clear why poor nations compete?

In short, international sports events are opportunities for all nations. However, poor nations try to shoulder such a huge responsibility because they need to prove the point that they are not second to any one, developed or developing.

270 words

Lunch and dinner sales at a restaurant for a week

The table is the breakup of lunch and dinner sales recorded at a restaurant in a business district for a week starting from October 7. Figures are in dollars.

It is evident that sales figures of lunch on week days ranged between 2,400 and 2,500 dollars. But Thursday recorded a slight fall, from 2,485 to 2,375. Coming to weekend, Saturday sales stood slightly above 1,200, which was less than fifty percent of Monday sales. And the least sales happened on Sunday; 1,010 dollars.

In contrast, Monday’s dinner sales was 50% more than lunch sales; 3,610 dollars against 2,400 dollars. In the following days, the figures kept on increasing with Wednesday recording a slight fall. The figures were 3,850, 3,445, 3,900 and 4,350, Tuesday to Friday with the latter recording the highest of, 4,350.

Saturday dinner sales had the same pattern of lunch sales. It posted 50% less than what it had on Monday. However, on Sunday, this figure rose to 2,450 dollars which was more than two times the sales of lunch on Sunday.

That ends the report
170 words

Though health is taken to be the force behind the wealth of a nation, in today’s knowledge-driven economies, it is education that makes a nation wealthy.

How do you look at these propositions?

Is it health or education that makes a nation healthy? Opinions differ much more today than it was before because it is the times of knowledge economies. However, the fact remains that it is health that is the ultimate wealth of a nation. That is what I feel.

A healthy population is instrumental to the wealth of a nation in many counts. First of all, when citizens are healthy enough, they are likely to be knowledgeable and productive by way of what we call a healthy life. It is healthy life that makes a person everything else. Let me cite example of a nuclear family which is not healthy but highly educated. And their knowledge is their wealth in more ways than one. But when it comes to converting that knowledge into wealth, what comes first is health. So health is the key to wealth.

When it comes to knowledge-driven economies of these times, there are innumerable openings for people to make great differences in their life, and their nation’s health, by exploiting knowledge they gain out of education of all types. Yes, it is true to some extent, especially when people have opportunities to get informed and thereby empowered in financial terms. This is more so when there is not much physical effort involved in getting informed by education. This proposition is more fitting to today’s special circumstances. But, ultimately, it is health that holds the key.

To conclude it, I would like to say that knowledge is able to make a nation wealthy these days, but that ability hinges more on people’s health than on anything else. In my opinion, health is wealth and knowledge is a means to wealth.

285 words jaypees

Number of leisure hours a year for different age groups in Somelant
This table is the result of a survey conducted on people of different age groups of Someland to find out how many hours they spend on six different leisure activities a year.
To begin report, watching TV/video is the most popular leisure activity among all age groups. While teens spare 1200 hrs, people in their 70s and above find 1100 hours. The corresponding figures for those in their 20s and 60s are same, 700. Those ones in their 30s, 40s, 50s find 400, 500, 600 hours respectively.
Cinema is liked most by teens who spend 100 hours. That is 12 times less than what they set aside for Watching TV/Video. All other age groups’ figures remained between 75 and 25 hrs.
Socializing with four or less people is liked most by people in their 30s, 300 hours. But as people grow older, the time they spare for this goes down like 250, 200 etc. The same way, younger age groups spare 150 hrs for this. However, for socializing with four or more people, these two age groups utilize more than two times that number, 350 hours. But the following age groups spend no more than 50 hrs.
Next is group exercise. It is again teens who like it most by sparing 450 hours. This figure goes down as age advances. When people are in their 50s, the figure comes to seven times less than what teenagers spend for it. Finally, individual exercise is not so popular among teens. They find one third of the time they spare for groups exercise. But people in their 30s and 40s utilize 200 hours each.
In summary, it can be said there is a close relation between age groups, types and leisure and number of leisure hours.
That ends the report. Ajaypeesdoc. 7/8/010 8pm