جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید.

Some People Prefer to Eat at Food Stands or Restaurants. Other People Prefer to Prepare and Eat Food at Home. Which Do You Prefer? In today's industrial world in which we live, the rate of people who eat outside of home is growing and it is important to review the downsides and benefits of eating places. In my opinion, meals which are provided by ourselves would be more desirable. First of all, home-made foods are healthier. The process of preparing food takes two steps. The first step is providing the nutrients and the second step is the cooking procedure. If you are supplying goods for your meal, you would gather the best goods ingredients which you are able to find. Also, home-made foods are cooked with best efforts of being healthy, but/whereas there is no assurance that outside foods are cooked correctly or the using used nutrients have highsuperb quality. Second, the amount of money spent spending on outside foods can be enormous. Cheap foods are prepared with uncertified goods and in as a result, they are not healthy and cause you different kinds of illnesses. On the other hand, high-priced meals may be healthier, but not everyone can afford buying expensive foods every day. In contrast, home-made meals can be assembled with less charge/expenditure and better quality. On the other hand, outside food can save us lots of/a great deal of time. Preparing one meal can take at least one hour from the cook and in the extremely busy world we live in, this amount of time is precious. Eating places can spend this time instead of us and we can get to do/fulfil our other responsibilities. In conclusion, I think home-made foods is are more preferable than those prepared outside food. Not only is it healthier, but also it costs less. But having meals on in eating places a few times in a month would not be harmful and can buy us some extra time when it is needed.

جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید.

In many countries, people are moving away from rural areas and towards urban areas. Why do you think that is? What problems can this cause? (Mona meschi) In the past few decades, villagers' immigration is has been a phenomenona that is growing rapidly and overpopulation is happening, especially, in the third world countries. This issue is the result of industrialization. Hence, administrationrs make every effort to tackleing this worrying trend and finding long term and short term solutions to prevent this problem from growinggrowth. Most of experts argue that unemployment is the main cause of moving away from villages because Farming and ranches are no longer cost-effective for villagers. The other reason which may be true to some extent is better life quality in cities. For example in Iran, despite of development programs of the country, the government has always focused on big cities to be developed from a variety of aspects. Another reason which may be true is younger immigrants try to be free and have more privacy via living in big cities where they can get lost in the crowd. Obviously, this issue have has many negative side effects. Surely, cities would be more populated and crowded as well as housing costs and traffic jams will increases. Available job opportunities will be reduced even for citizens, so illegal jobs, such as peddlinge selling will be created. Another considerable impact is unofficial settlement. In as a result, cultural and social problems will occur, which leading to crime growth and security decrease. In conclusion, I would say that if administrators does not find a proper solution for this harmful problem, all the villages will be ruined and also in the cities none of the citizens will have even the minimum of quality of life.

جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید.

ISchools as the first and most important social institution that children enter contribute a lot in development of their social and cognitive skills. Therefore, despite a small number of benefits in attending single-sex schools , I am of this opinion that still the benefits of mixed schools outweighs that those of the other approach to a great extent. The best and foremost most benefit of mixed schools is that children learn how to socialize with the opposite gender. Studying in an environment that boys and girls are sitting next to each other wipes up all the wrong assumptions and illusions going around about men and womean's differences in terms of their abilities or mentalities as children have this opportunity to communicate and get to know each other closely. Secondly, bisexual/coeducational/coed schools offer a more dynamic environment. A normal society is the one that/where men and womean equally participate in every activity that. To illustrate, imagine a city in which only men or womaen dwell ; it will would be certainly devoid of required enthusiasm and motivation any society needs for progress. On the other hand, some may argue that separating girls and boys in schools would help them to focus on educational materials more and there will be less risk of digression. For instance, in some countries, such as iran or Saudi Arabia, children spendt their whole primary and secondary educations in single-sex schools backed by this logic that mixture of opposite genders might lead to decadence and deviate them from the original purpose of studying. All in all, I hold the view that although there might be some trivial benefits in going to separate schools, it might entail many negative consequences which are not worth to practicinge. Thus, the choice of mixed school stands out by far.

جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید.

In recent years some countries have experienced very rapid economic development. This has resulted in much higher standards of living in urban areas but not in countryside. This situation may bring some problems for the country as a whole. What are these problems? How might they be reduced? Many developing countries are experiencing urbanization these days, in this phenomenon cities are being more equipped in terms of facilities and life standards. As a result of these changes, the difference between urban and rural life style became has become/turned/grown deeper, hence many problems will would begin to appear. First of all, when the countryside inhabitants observe the urbanized areas, where which are experiencing more prosperous life, they would be encouraged to move from their village. Therefore, the inflow of rural residents would happened and since no infrastructure is provided yet, it could cause many negative outcomes such as creating slums, overcrowded areas and traffic congestion. Furthermore, by increasing numbers of citizens, they might encounter the lack of job opportunity, then more governmental funds must paid to unemployed people, in consequence less budget would be left for other subsidies such as health care, education or public transportation. In addition, this immigration would boost the crime rate, in other words, people from different cultures and different life styles gather together, since they do not have not enough time to get along with each other, the disagreements begin and eventually the violence erupts. Besides, the government is unable to prevent the widespread poverty which could resulted in theft and other crimes increase. At last but not least, by population augmentation the traffic jams became heavier which leads to more polluted air and also poses a serious threat to residents' health. In conclusion, when the governments start to implement such plans (urbanization), they must provide its needed infrastructure too. In my opinion, one simple solution could be that the government offer producers subsidies to relocate their factory to somewhere else out of messed up town.

جهت مشاهده Writing تصحیح شده فایل PDF را دانلود نمایید.

Bringing in foreign workers to fill positions that domestic workers are unwilling to do can cause problems in the local community and should therefore be stopped. to what extent do you agree with this? Domestic laborers are usually reluctant to do go insignificant/menial work,; therefore, those are occupied by foreigners, hence unemployment problems in such countries. For this reason, some believe that it should be restricted. Although finding a job is important for each person, but some people keep away from doing some kinds of work, especially both physical and difficult work with low/fewer income. Without that doubt, those jobs are given to get with strangers who leave their own country for finding a job. I opine they are obliged to accept this condition, because most of them need it for their livings and it is their immigration's reason. On the other hand, it may cause to serious problems and it also has negative side effects. For instance, it leads youth to unemployment. In other words, if had local individuals did done those jobs, unemployment would have decreased. As a result, the crime rate will increase. Another flipside is related to foreign people's inhabitancy place of residence. Simply put, not only does it lead to urban sprawl, but also living on the countryside will increase as well as crime. In a nutshell, from my point of view, it is incumbent upon administrations to pave the way for employing their own residents in wide varieties of jobs either whether low or high levels. Only when we could either employ in or benefit from other workers, would they have a specific expertise. On the other hand, working in other countries, aliens are inevitable. Besides, we should pay attention that the status quo is not deteriorated/ to the current condition which does not become worse/go to the worse.