Class Supplement, TOEFL Essay, L 13, 2011

Writing Topic 1
Should a city try to preserve its old, historic buildings or destroy them and replace them with modern buildings? Use specific reasons and details to support your answer.

Let’s think
A historic building helps us remember incidents, an era, and the related people. Every city has many old, historic buildings and people have valued them, but it often happens that they have to give them up for development. Remember seeing an old structure surrounded by modern buildings. Did you like the scene? If you did not like it, do you still think the city should keep it? Why?

Your short response:
It is better
because …


For example,



If we lose the building,


Therefore,


♦old, historic buildings
1. They represent our culture, history, and identity. To lose them is to lose all these intangible assets of ours.
2. They help us learn from the past more effectively than textbooks.
3. Many old buildings have their distinct beauty.
4. They benefit tourism.

♦modern buildings
1. They are stronger, cleaner, and more durable than old buildings.
2. The street view will be more orderly.

Sample short response:
It is better not to destroy old, historic buildings.
because they effectively help us learn from the past.
For example, the Atomic Bomb Dome in Hiroshima is a tangible proof of the horror of nuclear weapons. Its bear “dome” on top whose curved steel beams indicate that it was covered with some materials and was a real dome a second before the bomb was dropped. The river next to the building is where people whose whole bodies were engulfed by fire jumped into to escape from pain and thirst and drowned.
If we lose the building, this story of horror, a strong message for disarmament, will seldom be told but in books. The city of Hiroshima is now thriving and is full of modern buildings, seemingly oblivious of the tragedy, which actually will never free the mind of the citizens, not to speak of the souls of the dead.
Therefore, we need to preserve the building to preserve our history and to save our future.


Essay for Ideas and Expressions
(Barron’s, Writing for the TOEFL iBT, p.281)
Of course a city should preserve its old, historic buildings. New buildings can always be built, but old ones can never be replaced. They are usually more beautiful than modern buildings, they represent the city’s history, and they can even help the city by attracting tourists. Historic buildings should always be preserved.

Old buildings are usually very beautiful. Depending on when they were built, they show different periods of architecture. They have a lot of character. They were made by hand, the old-fashioned way. You can feel the person and lives of the people who built them and of the people who have lived and worked in them. Modern buildings, on the other hand, are usually not so beautiful. They seem like impersonal giants that have no character.

Old buildings represent a city’s history. Important things may have taken place in an old building. Maybe a peace treaty was signed there or an important meeting took place. A famous person may have lived there. Maybe it was a former president or a famous writer. When we have historic buildings around us, we learn more about our history and we appreciate it.

Old buildings attract tourists to a city. People want to see old buildings because they are beautiful or because important things happened in them. If a city has a lot of old, interesting buildings, many tourists will visit the city. That is good for the city’s economy. People usually don’t visit a city in order to see its modern buildings.

A city’s old, historic buildings are among its greatest treasures. They are a source of beauty and a representations of history. It would be a crime to try to replace them.
Writing Topic 2
If you were an employer, which kind of worker would you prefer to hire: an inexperienced worker at a lower salary or an experienced worker at a higher salary? Use specific reasons and details to support your answer.

Let’s think
Paying less for an employee is more preferable for an employer for and obvious reason: He can cut costs. How about difference between an experienced worker and an inexperienced one? Is an experienced worker worth the extra money? Is lack of experience just a disadvantage?

Your short response:
I would hire …
because …


On the other hand, …

It is true that …

but


Ideas and Expressions
♦Advantages of hiring an inexperienced worker
1. Paying lower salary will save you money. Loss of money caused by mistakes inexperienced workers make can be avoided by training and communication.
2. He would be easier to train than an experienced worker because he is more ready to accept the company culture while an experienced worker often has difficulty in unlearning what he has already acquired in his previous work places.
3. He would work harder because he wants to learn anything related to his job and wants to be noticed.

♦Advantages of hiring an experienced worker
1. It lowers the risk of wasting the recruiting expenses. You would not know exactly how competent an inexperienced worker would be no matter how careful you are. He might be tardy or quit during the probation. Experienced workers are survivors. The fact that they have been in the industry for a long time shows that they have good work ethic, have no personality problems, and can do the job well enough.
2. He is valuable as an asset. Skills, knowledge, and the network of personal connections he has would be priceless for your company.


Sample short response:
I would hire an experienced worker at a higher salary.
because he can start work on the day he is hired. He knows what to do with his new position without asking other workers many questions.
On the other hand, inexperienced worker takes time to be full-fledged. He needs to be trained, which costs you time and money, and he will still need to learn on the job.
It is true that paying a high salary would reduce profit,
but, considering the cost for training and possible losses and damages caused by mistakes made by the inexperienced worker, I think giving the job to a person who is familiar with it would cost less in the long run.


Essay for Ideas and Expressions
(Barron’s, Writing for the TOEFL iBT, pp. 282-283)
If I were an employer, I would prefer to hire an inexperienced worker at a lower salary. Of course it would save me money, at least at first. I could also train an inexperienced person exactly as I want, and he or she might be willing o work longer hours, as well.

As an employer, my first concern is money. I have to make sure the business brings in more money than it spends. When I save on salaries, I save a lot of money. I don’t want to pay my employees less than the salary they expect, but I want to save on salaries when I can. Hiring inexperienced workers is one way to do this.

I like to train my employees to work according to my company’s methods. Experienced people are used to doing things a certain way. If they get their experience at another company first, it is hard to change their methods when they come to my company. It is much easier to train inexperienced workers to follow my company’s methods.

I don’t like to ask my employees to work overtime, but sometimes I have to. Sometimes we have a lot of work to do in a short period of time. Inexperienced workers want to gain experience, so they more often volunteer to work extra hours.

People may think it is not good for a company to hire inexperienced workers, but I disagree. I think everyone benefits this way. The workers get training and experienced and the company saves money. I think it is the best plan.