Younger students are China’s future, and they deserve a happy and relaxed childhood. Nowadays, some children are asked to take extra classes, like painting or piano, but these younger children tend to be very tired and only have one hour to take a break. Some people claim this way will force students to learn more knowledge. However, I believe it will make younger students unhappy.

To begin with, younger students have poor concentrated ability due to the developing brains. Therefore, they are difficult to focus on lessons for a long  time. If adults force younger students to sit in chairs for more than one hour, then they must be exhausted that negatively affects their brains’ developing. When I was in elementary school, my math teacher was likely to combine two classes into one and asked students to focus on lessons for a long time. Every time I finished classes, I always felt hungry and sleepy. So, forcing students to have lessons over one hour do harm to younger students’ growth.

Moreover, all younger students like playing outsides, and having lessons decrease their playing time. Undeniably, younger students dislike having classes, not to mention classes more than an hour. Without having enough time to play with friends, younger students must be in bad moods. Even worse, they will have depression. According to the research of PUMC, children age 5-10 in China have a high rate to have depression because they are forced to participate in a lot of lessons without any relaxation. For example, my 9-year-old brother need to attend the art class, the English class and the mathematical Olympiad class. He sleeps at 10:00 pm every night, which is very for a young child. Therefore, I believe lessons for a long time will make younger students stressful.

Having long classes harm young students’ growth because they have less time to take a break. Also, this type of education can easily push students into depression. Thus, I support the view that having lessons over one hour will be bad for younger students.

Does the conclusion need to repeat two main ideas mentioned above?

The reading passage and the listening part both discuss how humpback whales can migrate a long distance but not losing. The author in the reading part points out that they rely on stars, and shows three reasons to support this idea. However, the professor in the lecture disagrees with this statement.

First, the reading part suggests that humpback whales are of intelligence to guide directions by using stars because they have complex brains. On the contrary, the professor says that there are also some other animals can use stars to navigate by, such as ducks, whose intelligence is about on average. Thus, using stars to guide directions may be born with and has nothing to do with smarts.

Second, the reading shows that whales can migrate in straight lines because of using stars as oriental objects. But the lecture claims the Earth’s magnetic field helps humpback whales navigate in straight lines instead of stars. According to the research result, humpback whales’ brains have biomagnetite, which can use magnetic field to create some feels to orient them.

Third, the passage says that humpback whales sometimes will make their heads above the water to look for stars, which is called spy-hopping. But the professor points out that even though this activity is rare, sharks will also perform like that. Sharks use it to hurt animals, however, rather than looking star or migrating. Meanwhile, humpback whales will spy hop during the day when has no stars in the sky. So, under these situations, humpback whales use stars just for speculation.

Many factors will contribute to the development of society, and one of them is the development of cities. While some people claim that there will be some negative impacts, I hold the point that the development of cities has positive influences on society.

First of all, the cities’ development can maintain the stability of society because of a lot of job opportunities. As we all know, one of the main reasons that causes society’s crime is the high rate of unemployment. Owing to the development of cities, economy will become better, thus more positions will be provided, and more and more people will get jobs, which, definitely, be of benefit to the society’s stable. For instance,ten years ago, there were a lot of people could not find job<b>s</b><b>,</b> and the crime rate was very high in my hometown because they had nothing to do but violence. However, nowadays, people are easy to find jobs, and they will not do bad things. So, the cities’ development will contribute to society.

Moreover, it is beyond doubt that the development of cities can make the whole society develop because of building fundamental infrastructures. The fundamental infrastructures, like roads and transports, are foundation of economical growth. People can use these to trade with others quickly and conveniently. Thus, in the long run, society will be improved. As we all know, China has helped many developing countries build up some roads and trains. After that, the data from Peking University show that these countries develop quickly, and modern consciousnesses flood into the society, which will increase the development of the whole society. However, without these economical activities, this kind of progress will not appear in such a short time. Thus, under this situation, I agree with that the development of cities will be of benefit to society.

Admittedly, the rapid development of cities will bring some problems, like environment pollution or traffic jams, but its positive points will overweight its negative points. And also, due to the society develop, these issues will be solved in the future.

By considering all points that I mentioned, I suggest that the development of cities will impact the whole society positively.

First, the reason why I hold this view is that there will be a good example for public if wealthy people give away to charities. As we all know, people having the ability to earn more money tend to become ordinary people’s hero, because they must be talented in some flied. Hence, public will follow the step of these wealthy people and do what they do, such as donating money to charities. For instance, my favorite people named Lay Zhang, who is a producer of music, he tends to do some charities, like helping poor areas’ school build up reading rooms or setting scholarship for his junior high school. Which inspired me a lot. Therefore, his fans follow his way and also donate some money to poetry, no matter how much money. Consequently, he builds up a wonderful example for the whole society. However, in the long run, if people who are capable of earning more money just enjoy buying expensive things instead of helping others, they will feel bored and have no sense of achievement. Even worse, they may addict to alcohol or drug to achieve satisfaction. So, I think rich men should do more charities.

Second, without doubts that everyone should take responsibilities to make the whole country become better. People who are able to make more money should take their duties to help the country develop. And clearly, doing charities is a excellent way to reduce the government’s load. According to the survey conducted by Peking University, even though the government had had put so many efforts to help poor areas, there are still a large number of people under the lowest line of incomes. This situation means that public should do something not just the government. So people who earn more money are the best choice. When they donate money to help others, the government will relief a little. For example, Jack Ma helps a large number of rural teachers to get training, which will definitely improve teachers’ level. Hence, the rural students can get better educations in the future. Under such a condition, I note for the latter one.