Month: November 2020

GP Essay Questions on Environment

GP Essay Questions on Environment. Have a look at these GP Essay Questions on Environment from the past papers

  1. How far can we satisfy the worldwide demand for food and still protect the environment?
  2. ‘Environmental concerns and economic growth cannot co-exist.’ Do you agree?
  3. Should we be concerned about the ‘greenhouse effect’?
  4. ‘Human beings have unlimited desires, but limited resources.’ Is it possible to reconcile the two?
  5. ‘The only future for the car is its elimination.’ Discuss.
  6. Consider whether noise is a problem in modern society.
  7. Evaluate the problems, and benefits, of the various ways in which society deals with waste materials.
  8. ‘Air travel creates more problems than benefits.’ Is this a fair comment?
  9. Have multi-national businesses had a positive or negative impact on your society?
  10. How far is recycling the answer to the problem of waste?
  11. Can the transport of food over vast distance be justified?
  12. Is effective farming possible without science?

Nobody has the right to pull the plug on someone’s life.

From a religious perspective, life is given to us by God and that nobody can have the right to take away our lives except for God. However, in today’s society, taking away of other’s life are is still seen. They come in forms like capital punishment, murder cases, suicide and euthanasia. I feel that taking someone’s life is morally incorrect as we do not have the right to pull the plug on someone’s life. Also, I feel that God is the only one that can take away life because he is the one who created us.

Euthanasia is the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma. In short, it means legal suicide. Normally, In countries where it is legal, doctors used to adopt this method to relieve the pain of the patients by putting them to “sleep”. However, this is abused by some family members who are greedy. For example, they may bribe the doctor into using euthanasia so that the family members can inherit the patient’s properties or wealth. Although euthanasia is legal, I believe that the taking of life should not be done by others but by God himself. However, this is from a religious stand point. From a legal stand point, let’s take Dignitas as an example.  Dignitas is an organization located in Switzerland, that ends the life of people with assisted dying organization that helps those with a terminal illness and severe mental illness to die assisted by qualified doctors. In addition, they provide assisted death to people provided they are of sound judgment and submit to an in-depth medical report prepared by a psychiatrist that establishes the patients’ condition, as required by Swiss Courts. This form of euthanasia is legally correct. However, in some cases, euthanasia is not legally correct too. Jack Kevorkian, commonly known as “Doctor Death” was a euthanasia activist. He was arrested and tried for his direct row involvement in a case of voluntary euthanasia.

In addition, the Government also plays a part in pulling the plug of others life. The death of serious offenders are presumed to be correct, however, criminals are still humans and they deserve equal rights as we do. Deontology is an ethical position that judges the morality of an action based on the action’s adherence to a rule or rules. Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics holding that the proper course of action is one that maximizes utility, specifically defined as maximizing happiness and reducing suffering.  This can be contrasted with deontological ethics. Although the role of the government is to protect its citizens, taking the life of a human should be deemed wrong. Philosophy concept like deontology forbids the taking of life, promoting that we should all act on a strong moral compass.

Last of all, Vigilante. In some cases “vigilante justice” is rationalized by the idea that adequate legal mechanisms for criminal punishment are either nonexistent or insufficient. Vigilantes typically see government as ineffective in enforcing the law, and such individuals often presume to justify their actions as fulfilment of the wishes of “the community”.Persons alleged to be “escaping the law” or “above the law” are sometimes the victims of vigilantism. Although doctors can play a role in easing the pain of a patient, and in other instances, the government can keep the peace and offer retribution to its citizens by capital punishment, in practical and moral points of view In conclusion, nobody has the right to pull the plug of someone else life because it goes against religious doctrine.  

‘The media is guilty of misguiding’. To what extent is this true?

The media can be said to play an important role in contemporary society. It is present everywhere from traditional media such as television or newspapers to new media such as social networking sites like Facebook or Twitter. In my opinion, the media is guilty to a large extent of misguiding with regards to negatively influencing the mindsets of individuals in the aspects of race, politics and education.

Media can cause conflict through inflammatory remarks and deepen racial divides. For example, in 1964, the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) a political party in Malaysia., utilised the local Malay newspaper, Utasan Malayu to incept anti-racial thoughts into Malays, particularly through the dissemination of rumours that Malays in Singapore were ill-treated by other races and the People’s Action Party. This led to racial riots across the Causeway in both Singapore and Malaysia leading to heavy casualties.  Hence, conflict can arise from untrue generalisations through the use of media in which anti-racial sentiments is brought up. These may then be sensationalised by the Media which may intensify anti-racial thoughts. This is largely indicative of how the media is guilty of misguiding in displaying anti-racial rhetoric which can cause different races to turn against one another.

[you only cited one example – you have to address it quickly if this is an anomaly or something that occurs regularly]

Media may also be extremely biased especially when it is state-controlled in which false claims are published. For example, at in a national North Korean state-sponsored website, it was cited that close to 99% of North Koreans voted in a national poll for the ruling party in ‘free and fair’ elections. This is obviously untrue and is published probably to deceive the international community as well as North Koreans that North Korea’s leadership is well received and is in a stable position so as to consolidate power. Hence this shows how the state, or in this case, the leadership of the state may utilise the media to further their own agendas thus proving how media may be extremely biased towards a state or in this case, leadership of a state. Thus, it largely indicates how the media is guilty of misguiding through the deception of the common masses especially by state-controlled media in which may result in manipulation of the people to reach its objectives.

[why is the above point on North Korean elections viewed with trepidation? Why can one NOT believe that is said in the N/Korean press?]

Media can also negatively influence individuals through popular portrayals which may result in undesired social consequences. For example, the Success Tech Academy shooting in which resulted in the death of students believed to be caused by bullying and social trauma. Although it is undeniable that the social pressure exerted on the shooter by the bully may have largely compelled him, however, the Media may also have played a role in this unfortunate accident. Through popular violent portrayals in mediums such as television, teenagers may become negatively influenced and misled into thinking that violence was justifiable under various circumstances and that human life has little value. Had there not been popular violent portrayals, the perpetrator might have to think twice about taking a human life thus it may have inadvertently caused the shooting to occur. Hence, this shows how the media may exert negative influence onto individuals, instilling the wrong set of values thus misguiding individuals into heinous acts as such.

However, some may argue that media can also help in edifying individuals particularly through the rise of various platforms.  For example, e-learning implemented by schools worldwide can help students to learn through the internet with the use of multiple interactive websites. Online learning can also provide a plethora of resources through numerous websites which may contain a surfeit of useful information. This can help students to gather more information in regards to a particular field of study and conduct research more effectively. Thus, this shows how the media is not only not guilty of misguiding but is in fact useful in guiding students particularly in education for example, in aiding with research and providing more information in which students can learn and understand better. Although this may be true, however, advocates of this claim have failed to realise that these platforms can at the same time, be guilty of misguiding individuals (in this case students). For example, although the use of interactive websites may be useful for learning, however, these websites may also be biased and provide false information. Eg? Students, being unequipped with prior expertise, may fail to realise that they may be in fact absorbing wrong facts and may lead to grave misconceptions. Thus, although interactive media can aid in learning, however, it has limitations and is still largely guilty of misguiding particularly through wrong facts and may thus obscure understanding and application of learning concepts.

On the other hand, detractors may also argue that Media can help to provide fast and accurate news through eyewitness accounts with the rise of citizen journalism. This can be done through social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter. An example of this would be the recent General Elections in Singapore where the latest news was constantly updated in various social websites as well as blogs and video blogs (vlogs). By providing up to date news through eyewitness accounts, more information can be provided. Hence, the media is not guilty of misguiding but can, in fact, guide individuals into better decision making with more information provided. While I agree this is true, however citizen journalism can also be laden with inaccuracies as well as bias. For example, people may not report their findings objectively and may, in fact, report things from one party’s point of view to get others to see things in his/her perspective. Eg? In addition, the news reported in various sites, especially social networking sites may be filled with inaccuracies as people may attempt to sensationalise a piece of news to cause greater impression or even garner a greater commotion. Eg? Thus, although the media may in some cases guide individuals by providing more information through citizen journalism, however, it is still largely guilty of misguiding individuals due to bias as well as inaccuracies.

In conclusion, I feel that the Media is largely guilty of misguiding by creating false impressions and misleading untruths. This misguidance may have broader implications in an increasingly wired society which is dependent on media particularly new media. With the rise of new media, ever greater complex issues will begin to surface with the examples of cyber-bullying and shootings such as that of the Californian shootings. (which one?)_ It may well be up to individuals to discern information and extricate themselves from the misguidance media may bring.

Hi Alan.

An interesting essay, but you’ve not seen the big picture. Your counter-arguments are non-existent, and the balance is too short and not in-depth.

C: 14/30  L: 12/20

To what extent has technology changed the face of education?

Technology has transformed the education system today, especially in developed countries. It has changed the pedagogical methods in education, where teachers are slowly moving away from the traditional blackboard teaching to using computers. Technology has also influenced the way students learn and have reduced their dependence on teachers as their mentors. Written assessments are also slowly being replaced by computerized assessments. Therefore, some are of the opinion that technology has changed the face of education significantly. On the flip side, critics have claimed that technology remains an additional tool to educate and the traditional methods of teaching and learning remain largely unchanged. While it is true that technology has changed the face of education, it is not to say that traditional methods of teaching and learning have become obsolete.

[The question is TWE, so you have to show the extent in the intro. Based on your hook and overview, seems like you agree that tech has changed the face of education. The last sentence is not needed unless you disagree, then your first 5 sentences have to be changed.]

Technology has changed the way students learn. In the past, students generally derive their knowledge from their teachers and schools. However, today, more students are becoming less reliant on their teachers for knowledge and are instead using technology to do independent learning. Especially in this age where information and knowledge become obsolete quickly, what students learn in school could be outdated. Therefore, technology has allowed students to derive up-to-date information more easily and have diminished the traditional role of teachers as mentors. With more schools being equipped with tablet computers and e-readers, students can engage in online learning using MOOC (Massive Open Online Courses) such as the Khan Academy. There has also been a rising trend of students using their mobile phones in class to search for information. Furthermore, with the ‘Teach Less, Learn More’ initiative in schools in Singapore, teachers are required to teach less while students do independent research work. However, even though it is true that students are moving away from relying on their teachers for knowledge and are becoming more open to using technology, one has to recognise that this shift is still less significant in schools today. This is due to the fact that there is still a significant dependence on schools and teachers in providing fundamental knowledge to students. Furthermore, information that students access to online could be inaccurate or excessive, which could instead debilitate students’ learning rather than allowing them to learn more. Therefore, while it is true that technology has contributed to a change in the way students learn, it is not to say that this shift is so significant that teachers’ role as a knowledge provider has become obsolete.

[To show a further link, you can show that just as tech has changed the face of business, similarly, a new pool of knowledge workers has to be trained in school to meet the demands of industry].

Technology has changed the way teachers teach today. Teachers today are slowly moving away from the traditional blackboard to the use of technology in their teaching. For example, in a recent 2013 survey conducted by the PBS LearningMedia, 71% of school teachers in the United States have used tablet computers or e-readers in their classrooms. The use of technology has allowed teachers to respond to a variety of learning styles known as VARK(Visual, Auditory, Read/Write, Kinesthetic). For example, web-based educational games provide hands-on activities for kinesthetic learners, while interactive whiteboards allow visual learners to learn better. This move to a less didactic teaching environment has also allowed for more classroom discussions. While these are encouraging signs of change in the way teachers teach, it is not to say that traditional blackboard teaching is no longer useful. Traditional blackboard teaching is still useful in today’s education system as it is a simple and convenient method of teaching. Therefore, technology should not be viewed as a replacement but more of a complement to traditional blackboard teaching. One also has to be aware that technology serves as a tool to assist teaching and should not become a teaching crutch. Hence, while it is true that teachers are embracing technology as a tool in teaching, traditional methods of teaching still remain relevant today.

[The eval is good. It is important to recognize that these changes are in the developed world, while the developing world battles for tech to be used in different ways, such as soil sample analysis, water pH level reading, new methods of farming, etc]

Technology has also changed the way assessments are carried out and graded. Today, written assessments are slowly being converted to electronic-based assessments, which students can access to using their tablet computers or mobile phones. This has also made it easier for students to detect any plagiarism in their work by using plagiarism checkers available online. Technology has also influenced the way in which teachers mark and grade their students’ work.  For example, Harvard University has recently introduced an automated computerised system that uses artificial intelligence to grade their students’ essays. These signs of change show that technology is slowly replacing written work. However, it is important to recognise that major assessments and examinations are still largely written and the grading of these assessments is still being done by writing. Therefore, electronic-based assessments may apply more for minor examinations and term tests. Hence, even though technology has transformed the written nature of assessments to electronic-based, this transformation is still less significant in schools today.

[Students do not check for plagiarism, the school does. If the student has plagiarized, the student knows – no need to check. What about assessments that cannot use tech?]

Conclusion?