More and more students at university today are not choosing to study science.

Why is this
happening? What are the effects of this?
Recent years have witnessed a noticeable decline in the number of university students
choosing to major in science-related disciplines. This essay attempts to outline the
underlying reasons behind this phenomenon before shedding light on several negative
consequences of this trend.
There are two main reasons explaining why fewer students are pursuing science subjects at
the tertiary level. Chief among these is the challenging nature of science courses. Subjects
such as physics, chemistry, and mathematics are often seen as highly theoretical,
demanding, and time-consuming. As a result, many students feel discouraged from choosing
them, especially when compared to other majors that appear less rigorous and more
manageable. In addition to this, science education tends to be more expensive due to the
need for laboratories, specialized equipment, and practical training. This can place a heavy
financial burden on students and their families. Furthermore, in today’s digital and business-
oriented world, science degrees are often regarded as having lower practical value or
limited career prospects compared to more commercially appealing majors such as
economics, business administration, or computer science. This perception has led many to
opt for fields that seem more directly linked to financial success.
The dwindling interest among students in studying science can give rise to far-reaching
repercussions. Firstly, a decline in the number of science graduates may result in a shortage
of skilled professionals in essential fields like medicine, engineering, and environmental
science. This could lead to slower innovation and reduced work productivity, both of which
are crucial for economic growth and technological advancement. On a grander scale, the
lack of scientific expertise can hinder social development. Science plays a vital role in solving
global challenges such as climate change, renewable energy, and public health. Without a
strong foundation in science education, societies may struggle to develop new technologies
or find sustainable solutions to pressing issues. In the long run, this could place nations at a
disadvantage in the global arena, both economically and scientifically.
In conclusion, the increasing reluctance to study science among university students can be
attributed to the subject’s difficulty, high cost, and perceived lack of practicality. However,
this issue is far from insoluble, if educational institutions, policymakers, and society as a
whole recognize the importance of science and take steps to make it more accessible and
appealing to younger generations.
In some countries, people spend long hours at work. Why does this happen? Is it positive or
negative development?
Recent years have witnessed a sharp increase in the number of people working long hours
in certain countries. This essay attempts to shed light on the underlying reasons behind this
phenomenon before arguing that it is a predominantly negative development.
This tendency can be attributed to two main reasons. One primary reason is the rising cost
of living in modern society. In order to meet basic needs such as housing, food, and
education, many individuals are forced to work overtime or take on multiple jobs. This is
especially true for those who are raising families or living in urban areas where daily
expenses are high. In addition to this, people today are increasingly obsessed by financial
success and tend to define their worth through income and social status. As a result, some
individuals work long hours not only to earn more money but also to prove their values and
gain recognition.
Although working long hours may help ensure financial stability to some extent, this trend is
largely negative. Extended working hours often lead to stress, burnout, and even severe
mental health problems such as depression or anxiety. Over time, fatigue not only reduces
productivity but also takes a toll on an individual's overall well-being. Beyond that, those
who spend most of their time at work usually have little or no time left for family, friends, or
social engagement. In the long term, this lack of connection can weaken family bonds and
contribute to broader social issues such as juvenile delinquency or social isolation.
In conclusion, rising living costs and the growing emphasis on financial achievement are two
major factors that give rise to long working hours. However, this issue is far from insoluble,
if both individuals and societies learn to redefine success and prioritize work-life balance.

Some people think that young people should be required to do unpaid work helping people
in the community. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
The idea of requiring young people to participate in unpaid community work is gaining more
traction in various countries. While this has admittedly certain benefits, I would contend
that these are outweighed by the drawbacks.
On the one hand, proponents of community service for youth often emphasize two primary
advantages. Chief among these is that such work can help sharpen interpersonal and
communication skills. This is because volunteering often requires young people to interact
with others from different backgrounds, which in turn builds their confidence and teamwork
ability. Additionally, community work can foster a sense of social responsibility and
solidarity among residents. When young people contribute to their neighborhoods, they
tend to develop a stronger connection to society and become more active, caring citizens.
Nevertheless, the aforementioned advantages are questionable at best. Although unpaid
work may seem to enhance communication skills, the reality is that many young people may
view such activities as forced labor, leading to disengagement and a lack of genuine effort.
In such cases, the expected personal development is unlikely to materialize. Moreover,
while building solidarity is a noble goal, making volunteering mandatory can undermine the
spirit of volunteerism. Instead of being driven by compassion, students may simply perform
the tasks mechanically to fulfill a requirement, which defeats the purpose of meaningful
contribution.
On the other hand, I am convinced that the disadvantages of this trend are far more glaring.
One legitimate concern is that mandatory unpaid work may put additional pressure on
already overburdened students, who often struggle to balance academic demands and part-
time jobs. This is because many young people work to support themselves or their families
financially, and adding unpaid obligations could exacerbate stress and burnout. Another
drawback could be the economic unfairness of making young people work for free,
especially those from low-income families who could otherwise use that time to earn money
or develop practical skills for future employment. Such a policy might unintentionally widen
the gap between social classes.
In conclusion, despite certain benefits of encouraging young people to engage in unpaid
community service, I am of the opinion that its drawbacks, including psychological strain
and weakened social ties, are far more significant and concerning.