The Pros and Cons of Nuclear Power

Since the disaster at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan in 2011, a debate has been raging (1) the future of atomic energy. Consequently, the safety risks have been well publicized in the global media. But do the risks outweigh the damage that could be done to the planet because of our ongoing addiction to fossil fuels?

Even environmentalists don’t have the answer. They are split over nuclear (2) , and its pros and cons. Some say it is neither safe nor economical because it produces potentially (3) radioactive waste, and reactors are so costly to build. However, others believe nuclear energy is a necessary evil. They say we should continue using it until (4) energy sources, like wind turbines and solar panels, can meet global demand. Supporters also argue that nuclear energy helps cut down on carbon emissions from fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas, which are linked to global warming and pollute the environment. They say this is because nuclear reactors produce a tiny fraction of the carbon dioxide generated by burning coal.

But perhaps the biggest hurdle for atomic energy to overcome is its image problem. Despite industry claims of a strong safety record, critics remain unconvinced because each reactor annually produces up to 30 tons of nuclear waste, which can continue to be radioactive and hazardous for thousands of years. Furthermore, the Chernobyl disaster in 1986 left the public with vivid images of the impact of a nuclear meltdown, including deformed babies, mutated vegetables, and abandoned towns.

While nuclear reactors may continue to be installed in some countries for decades to come, after Fukushima others have decided to rethink their energy policies. For example, the German government has revealed plans for a “green” renewable energy plan, even though it has relied on nuclear power for up to 23 percent of its consumption in the past. It has been announced that all seventeen nuclear power plants would be phased out by 2022. The policy will also promote energy-saving measures encouraging people to insulate their homes, recycle, and reduce waste. Experts argue it could be a risky strategy because Germany doesn’t have natural gas or oil supplies, and coal supplies have been depleted.

Meanwhile, in Brazil, there is just one nuclear plant at Angra dos Reis. Nuclear power represents only three per cent of Brazil’s energy production. After sharp oil price rises in the 1970s, the country’s leaders anticipated future energy supply problems. So they concentrated on developing alternative energy sources including biofuel, hydroelectric schemes, and wind power. 

This approach seems to be working because by May 2012 plans to build more nuclear reactors were shelved by Brazilian officials. The move was welcomed by environmental lobby groups, which had feared a potential ecological catastrophe in case of an accident. If a big country like Brazil, which is the tenth largest energy consumer in the world, can survive and improve its economy without much nuclear power, maybe others can do so, too.

Read the following article and answer question based on the text.

Faced with the unprecedented stream of migrants fleeing war and trauma in the Middle East and North Africa, Europe needs to take clear-sighted action.

        For its part, the UK has agreed to take 20,000 refugees, a significant portion of whom will likely be children and orphans according to report. One key aspect in ensuring their smooth settlement in the UK will be providing these refugees with language training.

       Many Syrians are well-educated and many speak fluent English. Others, however, do not speak English well enough to function professionally within the UK. The issue of language is so fundamental to our lives that we often overlook it. Several multi-million pound training contracts have failed to be delivered on account of not addressing the language barrier. All the goodwill, financial backing, and technical expertise to deliver needed medical, economic, military,engineering, or navigational training may be present; but unless there is a shared language in which to impart that knowledge, little will be accomplished.

        One of the biggest misconceptions about language is that if you “just go to the country,” you’ll pick it up. Many people believe that immersion will guarantee fluency; yet you may well know several immigrants who have been in this country for years and still only speak broken English. You might also know dozens of expats in various countries across the world who have failed to pick up the local languages of their host countries. Training and effort are both necessary.

        Though not a guarantee of fluency, immersion is a wonderful opportunity. The first issue we need to address with respect to refugees is ensuring that those who come will actually be immersed. That is, that they will be welcomed as part of larger communities, and not simply join communities of other refugees. On the other hand, immersion is just an opportunity, and in order to take full advantage of it, training and education are required. In terms of refugees, we need to consider options for the provision of language training, whether by self-study, classroom instruction, private tuition, or some combination of the three.        

       The array of needs is staggering. In truth, every language learner has a different set of learning objectives, and will require different training to meet those objectives. Coordinating the actual needs with providers in different regions and accounting for different personal schedules and start dates is a significant challenge. It is, however, a challenge that must be addressed immediately, as proficiency in English will be a key enabler of success for refugees in this country.

(Adapted from Aaron Ralby http://www.blogs.jbs.cam.ac.uk/ socialinnovation/2015/11/16/)

TEXT III

Important reasons for teaching kindness in schools

Most people have heard the phrase random acts of kindness, which refers to a selfless act of giving

resulting in the happiness of another person. Terms like this are increasing in popularity around the

world, as more people identify a deficiency in their lives that can only be fulfilled by altruism.

It seems we just can't get enough of those addictive feel good emotions and with good reason.

5 Scientific studies have shown that kindness has a great number of physical and emotional benefits,

and that children require a healthy dose of the warm and fuzzies in order to flourish as health, happy,

well-rounded individuals.

Patty O'Grady, PhD, is an expert in the area of neuroscience, emotional learning, and positive

psychology with special attention to the educational arena. She believes that kindness changes the brain

10 by the experience of kindness. Children and adolescents do not learn kindness by only thinking about it and

talking about it. Kindness is best learned by feeling it so that they can reproduce it. Kindness is an emotion that

students feel and empathy is a strength that they share.

A great number of benefits have been reported to support the theory of teaching kindness in schools:

1. Happy Children

15 Science explains that the good feelings we experience when being kind are produced by endorphins

that activate areas of the brain that are associated with pleasure, social connection and trust, and it's

proven that these feelings of joyfulness are contagious, encouraging more kind behaviour by the giver

and recipient.

2. Increased Peer Acceptance

20 Research on the subject has determined that kindness increases our ability to form meaningful

connections with others. Studies show that kind, happy children enjoy greater peer acceptance

because they are well-liked and that better than average mental health is reported in classrooms that

practice more inclusive behaviour due to an even distribution of popularity.

3. Improved Health and Less Stress

25 It's widely documented that being kind can trigger a release of the hormone oxytocin which has a

number of physical and mental health benefits as it can significantly increase a person's level of

happiness and reduce stress. More recently though, it's been found it plays a significant role in the

cardiovascular system, helping protect the heart by lowering blood pressure and reducing free

radicals and inflammation, which incidentally speed up the aging process.

30 4. Greater Sense of Belonging and Improved Self Esteem

Studies show that people experience a 'helpers high' when they do a good deed, a rush of endorphins

that creates a lasting sense of pride, wellbeing and an enriched sense of belonging. Even small acts of

kindness are reported to heighten our sense of wellbeing, increase energy and give a wonderful

feeling of optimism and self worth.

35 5. Increased Feelings of Gratitude

When children are part of projects that help others less fortunate than themselves, it provides them

with a real sense of perspective and helps them appreciate the good things in their own lives.

6. Better Concentration and Improved Results

As it increases serotonin, which plays an important part in learning, memory, mood, sleep, health and

40 digestion, kindness is a key ingredient that helps children feel good. Having a positive outlook allows

them greater attentions spans and enables more creative thinking to produce better results at school.

7. Less Bullying

Two Penn State Harrisburg faculty researchers, Shanetia Clark and Barbara Marinak say, unlike

previous generations, today's adolescents are victimizing each other at alarming rates. They argue adolescent

45 bullying and youth violence can be confronted through in-school programs that integrate kindness the

antithesis of victimization.

Many traditional anti-bullying programs focus on the negative actions that cause children anxiety and

often with little impact. Teaching kindness and compassion in schools, not only fosters the positive

behaviour that creates warm and inclusive school environments, but helps children feel that they

50 belong. It's documented that the effects of bullying can be significantly reduced by integrating

kindness based programs in schools.

8. Reduced Depression

Dr. Wayne Dyer, internationally renowned author and speaker, says research has discovered that an

act of kindness increases levels of serotonin (a natural chemical responsible for improving mood) in

55 the brain. It's also found that serotonin levels are increased in both the giver and receiver of an act of

kindness, as well as anyone who witnesses that kindness, making it a wonderful natural

antidepressant.

Maurice Elias, a professor at Rutgers University Psychology Department says that as a citizen,

grandparent, father, and professional, it is clear to me that the mission of schools must include teaching kindness.

60 Without it, communities, families, schools, and classrooms become places of incivility where lasting learning is

unlikely to take place.

We need to be prepared to teach kindness, because it can be delayed due to maltreatment early in life. It can be

smothered under the weight of poverty, and it can be derailed by victimization later in life. Yet despite these and

other travails, the receipt of kindness and the ability to show kindness through service are both growth enhancing

65 and soul cleansing.

Kindness can be taught, and it is a defining aspect of civilized human life. It belongs in every home, school,

neighborhood, and society.

It's become quite clear that modern education must encompass more than just academics, that in order

for children to develop into happy, confident, well-rounded individuals, matters of the heart must be

70 taken seriously and nurtured as a matter of priority.

Disponível em: <http://edarticle.com/8-important-reasons-for-teaching-kindness-in-schools/>. Acesso em: 15 set. 2016.

From interactivity to passivity

    Observers have noted that the Internet is moving away from its original model of cooperative communication based on exchange, and tending towards the logic of a mass broadcasting media, resulting in a concentration of producers and the progressive disappearance of interactivity. This tendency towards passivity in the use of the new media can, we believe, be counterbalanced effectively in an approach to FLT which encourages cooperative, collaborative procedures, where teachers abandon traditional roles and act more as guides and mentors, exploring the new media themselves as learners and thus acting as role models for their learners. Case studies show that there is closer interaction between teacher and students when the new media are employed. Language learners who have experienced this kind of approach are most likely to transfer the skills acquired to their daily practice in the use of the new media in the mother tongue. And, above all, this experience should lead to the development of a “user culture”, implying appropriate behaviour, which respects other people as well as the diversity of their opinions.

(Available: http://iite.unesco.org/pics/publications/en/file.)

INSTRUCTIONS: Read the following text and answer question.

It has been estimated that some 60 percent of today’sworld population is multilingual. Both from a contemporary and a historical perspective, bilingualism or multilingualism is the norm rather than the exception. It is fair, then, to say that throughout history foreign language learning has always been an important practical concern. Whereas today English is the world’s most widely studied foreign language, five hundred years ago it was Latin, for it was the dominant language of education, commerce, religion, and government in the Western world. In the sixteenth century, however, French, Italian, and English gained in importance as a result of political changes in Europe, and Latin gradually became displaced as a language of spoken and written communication.

As the status of Latin diminished from that of a living language to that of an “occasional” subject in the school curriculum, the study of Latin took on a different function. The study of classical Latin (the Latin in which the classical works of Virgil, Ovid, and Cicero were written) and an analysis of its grammar and rhetoric became the model for foreign language study from the seventeenth to the nineteenth centuries. Children entering “grammar school” in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries in England were initially given a rigorous introduction to Latin grammar, which was taught through rote learning of grammar rules, study of declensions and conjugations, translation, and practice in writing sample sentences, sometimes with the use of parallel bilingual texts and dialogue (Kelly 1969; Howatt 1984). Once basic proficiency was established, students were introduced to the advanced study of grammar and rhetoric. School learning must have been a deadening experience for children, for lapses in knowledge were often met with brutal punishment. There were occasional attempts to promote alternative approaches to education; Roger Ascham and Montaigne in the sixteenth century and Comenius and John Locke in the seventeenth century, for example, had made specific proposals for curriculum reform and for changes in the way Latin was taught (Kelly 1969; Howatt 1984), but since Latin (and, to a lesser extent, Greek) had for so long been regarded as the classical and therefore most ideal form of language, it was not surprising that ideas about the role of language study in the curriculum reflected the long-established status of Latin.

The decline of Latin also brought with it a new justification for teaching Latin. Latin was said to develop intellectual abilities, and the study of Latin grammar became an end in itself.

Source: RICHARDS, J.C.; RODGERS, T. S. Approaches

and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1999 (1st edition 1986). pp. 1-2.

History and Debate of Internet Censorship

Censorship refers to any action taken by a society to control access to ideas and information. Throughout history, many different types of societies, including democracies, have used censorship in various ways. The issue is increasingly important due to the rapid development of new communication technology. As innovators continue to create new ways for people to share information, many people are now arguing over the issue of censorship. 

Pros and Cons of the Internet Censorship Debate

For the proponents of censorship, restricting the access of information is something that can provide benefits to society. By censoring pornography on the internet, children are less likely to encounter it. By censoring certain types of images and videos, society can prevent offensive or vulgar material from offending those that it targets. For example, some would argue that society should censor material that is insulting to a particular religion in order to maintain societal harmony. In this way, censorship is viewed as a way to protect society as a whole or certain segments of society from material that is seen as offensive or damaging. 

Some argue that censorship is necessary to preserve national security. Without using any kind of censorship, they argue that it is impossible to maintain the secrecy of information necessary for protecting the nation. For this purpose, censorship protects a state's military or security secrets from its enemies who can use that information against the state. 

Those who are against censorship argue that the practice limits the freedoms of speech, the press and expression and that these limitations are ultimately a detriment to society. By preventing free access to information, it is argued that society is fostering ignorance in its citizens. Through this ignorance, citizens are more easily controlled by special interest groups, and groups that are able to take power are able to use censorship to maintain themselves. Additionally, they argue that censorship limits a society's ability to advance in its understanding of the world. 

Another main issue for those who are against censorship is a history of censorship abuse. Those who argue against censorship can point to a number of examples of dictators who used censorship to create flattering yet untrue images of themselves for the purpose of maintaining control over a society. They argue that people should control the government instead of the government controlling its people.

(SOURCE: http://www.debate.org/internet-censorship/ accessed on 19/02/16 at 3:10 pm).