Question

You have recently read the following magazine article:

Is it the end of the printed book as we know it?

According to internet experts, the book is dead. What they are predicting is that by
2020 90% of everything we read will be in electronic form. So the form of the book that
has been around for 1300 years will become extinct...

Write a letter to the editor of 'Future Net' giving your views (220-260 words).

Dear Sir

I am writing with the reference to the article in the January edition of "Future Net",
which predicts that in the foreseeable future electronic books will replace printed ones.
Obviously, the electronic book is no longer the stuff of science fiction. The e-book boom is
under way. I am concerned about this matter and feel involved in this digital revolution.

Undoubtedly, the electronic book provides several advantages over the traditional book.

Firstly, a book in digital format offers today's readers additional opportunities such as a
keyword search, the retrieval of information. Another advantage is that doing index look-ups
on a digital book is a very fast process so an e-book is likely to become a perfect reference tool.
Besides this, an e-book has one more advantage, especially to distance learners or people living
in outlying areas without access to large libraries, which lies in the e-book's availability through
dial up access.

However, the e-book has some disadvantages and its concept is still foreign to the general
public. Firstly, computer software is needed for reading e-books. Moreover, there are some
difficulties in reading on a screen with poor resolution, a problem not expected to be solved in
the near future. The poor resolution hurts eyes and makes online reading less enjoyable
compared to traditional books.

The importance of printed books must not be overlooked, particularly when it comes to reading
for pleasure. Book lovers like holding a nicely bound book, flipping pages, enjoying its touch
and smell. Most readers like putting hardbacks on bookshelves and watching their personal
library growing. So, printed books have enormous advantages. But on the other hand, we
should keep in mind the problem of deforestation since many forests are being cut down for the
paper industry.

Will the e-book mean the end of printed books? Personally, I am convinced that the bound
books have a future. So, let's do not say goodbye to a hardcover yet. Even under the best
circumstances, it will take years before you see e-books on every street corner. Nobody knows
if the majority will take to digitized reading. As for me, I much prefer printed books over digital
ones. If I want to read some fiction, I'd rather curl up with a good old paperback. I don't
share the opinion about the extinction of printed books. In my opinion, traditional books will
survive, just as radio survived TV, and the film lived on after video. They will continue to
amuse, influence and impress for centuries. 

I am a dedicated reader of your magazine and I hope you will take my views into account
in the future editions of your magazine. 

____________________________________________________________________________

Dear Sir,

I am writing to you after reading the article about the influence of computers on printed books.
I want to share my opinion with you and all readers. 

The article says that according to the internet experts, books are dead and will soon become
extinct. The predictions for 2020 that you stated are very alarming.

Computers have become very common in recent years. Every month the number of people
using the Internet is increasing. Despite this fact I do not think that printed books will be
replaced with electronic ones.

The biggest advantage of reading in electronic format is that we can modify (copy, cut, paste,
underline etc) the text whenever we want. Pages will never ever grow yellow. Buying
electronic books on cd-rom or downloading from the Internet is (in my country) cheaper (and
easier, of course). They can consist of attractive pictures and multimedia presentations. You can
easily print a selected piece of a chapter or find a word you are looking for.

However, after considering all these advantages, I am not even a little bit convinced by the
arguments for using electronic books.  Reading from a computer monitor tires your eyes very
much and soon you can simply become bored and lose heart. You can only read when there is a
computer nearby. never on the bus or train. What is more, a large number of people are used
to the printed forms of books. It is even said that they have souls, can feel and miss when they
have not been read for a long time. Although there are more advantages to using electronic
books, personally I will never give up using and reading printed versions. I partly agree with
the writer of the article because one can never fully foresee what the situation is going to be in
20 years. In my opinion, only if prices of computers decrease and more and more people can
afford to use the Internet, will we be able to start thinking that the printed form of book will
become extinct. But we have nothing to worry about now.

Yours faithfully,

Anna Zagorna
Question
You are reading your favourite newspaper and you come across a letter which attacks the education system in your
country (or a country that you know well):

...What a pity our school system is so out-of- date. I would suggest that some major
educational reforms are needed in this new century!

Yours sincerely
Prof Collins

To give YOUR view contact the editor by writing to...

Write a letter to the editor of the newspaper giving your response to Prof. Collins' letter (220-260 words)

Dear Sir,

I am writing this letter in response to Prof Collins' letter, published in your newspaper one week
ago. In his letter, Prof. Collins expressed his concern about our school system, defined by him
as "out-of-date", and suggesting, at the same time, the urgent need for necessary educational
reform.  I wish to take this opportunity to express my personal opinion, which is only
partly in agreement with Prof. Collins' view. According to Prof. Collins, the process of school
modernization should pass through three main features: the need for better teachers, practical
skills learning and more investment in school equipment.

As for the first point, it seems to me that the real problem is not the need for "better" teachers
but, on the contrary, the need for a new way of teaching. In my opinion, what is really "out-of-
date" is the traditional methodological approach, which is still too much linked to mnemonic
and abstract learning and too little concerned about real social context.

Closely connected to this problem is the need for the students to achieve professional
competence. This means that the school reform should consider the importance of creating and
supporting  professional training courses, stages and temporary direct work experience in
a real working context. As for the third point, I completely agree with Prof.Collins' view about
the need for major investment in school equipment. They should mainly consist of the purchase
of computers, of technical equipment in order to create modern scientific and linguistic
laboratories as well as new and updated libraries.

I wish to close my letter with a doubt which might require further reflections on this delicate
subject. My personal doubt is about the risk of giving birth to a school system too little
sensitive towards students' personalities and too little concerned about their emotional
wellbeing.

Yours faithfully,

S.P.
Read this extract from a letter to a newspaper. Write a letter to the newspaper saying whether
you agree or disagree with David Wallace’s opinion and why, and saying what you believe
should happen in the future. Write your letter in 300-350 words. Do not write any postal
address.

Dear Editor

Many recent letter writers have called for the rapid expansion of renewable energy. I agree
that the burning of fossil fuels is a major cause of global warming and climate change and
needs to be phased out. But renewable energy sources like solar and wind power will never
provide enough energy to allow us to reduce our dependence on coal and oil or enable
developing countries to expand their industries. Only nuclear power can do this.

David Wallace

Melbourne, Australia

Dear Editor,

David Wallace is wrong to say that we need more nuclear power stations. Until the issue of
what to do with nuclear waste is resolved, nuclear power can never be the answer to our energy
needs. He seems to forget that as the number of power stations increases, so does the chance o f
another huge nuclear disaster on the scale of Chernobyl.

He claims that developing countries must have nuclear power stations, but few developing
countries have access to the huge amounts of money needed to build them. He also overlooks
the fact that technological developments in coming years are likely to lead to a rapid expansion
in the use of renewable energy. Although not all countries have available to them the full range
of renewable energy sources - hydro, wind, solar, tidal and geothermal energy - each country
has the potential to develop at least one major source.

Many countries in Africa and the Middle East have massive potential for developing solar
energy provided cheap technology becomes available. Eventually, they may even be able to sell
their energy to other countries, enabling them to develop still further economically.

Good examples of what might be done already exist around the world. Iceland, for example, is
aiming to become a carbon neutral country, and already 99.9% of its energy comes from
renewable sources, mainly hydroelectric and geothermal power. Germany is Europe’s leading
generator of wind energy, accounting for around 4% of all its energy use. Each country has to
consider how best to exploit the renewable energy resources it has available.

I do not believe, then, that it is necessary to drastically increase the number of nuclear power
stations. This would simply divert funds from the research into new technologies that is needed
for the expansion of renewable energy. We have to face the fact that renewable energy sources
are the only answer and all our money and effort should be directed towards their development.
Yours sincerely,

Laura Hernandez

Dear Prof Collins,

I am writing to express my agreement with the criticisms that you expressed in the news
concerning the problems (flaws) within our school system.

As you suitably mentioned, in the new century, named by researchers as the

information age we'd better have our children well prepared to face the future job market,
otherwise they will not be able to compete in a global economy.

Nevertheless, I have already realized that, as it is an ordinary concern in the population's

opinion, drawing the politicians’ attention to solve this problem might be an excellent short cut
to raise funds to acquire the necessary resources for schools.

Regarding the reforms that you've suggested, I would say that not only are the schools poorly
prepared but our teachers do not have the necessary tact to interact with the students. Maybe
a compulsory retraining course could be a good way to take them away from their desktop.
It would probably cost less than replacing the whole team.

I would be grateful if you could look into my suggestion. In case of further comments,  I am
happy to be contacted by email at name@gmail.com

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Augusto Yassuo Teoi