Task #1: Integrated Writing
The article introduces the topic of driverless cars. More specifically, the writer discusses the benefits of using driverless car technology. The lecturer in the listening passage disagrees. He believes that driverless cars are potentially dangerous and attacks each of the claims made in the reading.
In the reading, the author begins by stating that driverless cars are safer than ones operated by humans. In the listening, the speaker mentions that driverless cars are made by humans, which implies that they can malfunction. On top of that, the example mentioned in the article about the car that drove thousands of miles without an incident actually got into an accident just last month.
The author also claims that driverless cars are safer for the environment because they will be more efficient in managing when to stop and start the engine. Again, the lecturer believes there are flaws in the writer’s logic. The speaker holds that more people will buy driverless cars because there will be fewer age restrictions. Younger teens and older seniors will be able to drive since they don’t have to control the vehicle, which, in turn, will lead to an increase in emissions.
Another reason why the author feels that driverless cars are a more efficient alternative to the curren driving system is that they provide passengers with increased time to focus on work and other important matters. The professor in the listening passage is doubtful that this extra time will be helpful. Most people enjoy the time they spend driving because they can listen to music and relax in a different type of environment. The lecturer believes that this extra time will be wasted with distracting entertainment or extra work.
To sum up, both the writer and professor hold conflicting views about driverless cars. It’s clear that they will have trouble finding some common ground on this issue.
Task #2: Writing for an Academic Discussion
In my opinion, STEM subjects should be prioritized over liberal art subjects. My personal belief is that students who are proficient in STEM subjects tend to get better jobs. For example, while in university, I studied computer programming, and when I graduated, I was offered over $200,000 per year to work in cyber security. The salary was so high because the demand was constantly increasing. In contrast, the number of available teaching or art history jobs remains relatively the same.
Additionally, a solid STEM background is required to use simple day-to-day products because technology is advancing rapidly. In fact, the average smartphone has many advanced programs, such as photo and video editing, which require basic technological know-how. Moreover, new programs like ChatGPT can allow people with a STEM background to take full advantage of the rapidly developing features in the field of AI.