Short statement & En-En VOCA (1)

 【Short statement & En-En VOCA】

＃A good school should lead to a good job.
＃University should not only be made up of the Top 10% of students in the country.
＃Using slang in a job interview does not shows you are friendly.
＃MOFs (metal-organic frameworks )

A good school should lead to a good job.

I should(could) say it is good merit that a good school should (therefore) result in a good job, and there is a lot of reason for that line of thinking. If education aims at something else, then it is not mere(just) knowledge rather, it prepares a person to face practical challenges in life, including the struggle for a job.

Firstly, if a school provides not only theoretical knowledge but also focuses on practical skills and real-world applications, students are better equipped to meet the demands of employers. This could include internships, work placements, or hands-on projects that mimic(specific) real-world scenarios. Such experiences make students more attractive to potential employers, as they have already demonstrated their ability to apply their learning in practical settings.

Secondly, if a school fosters(facilitate) strong connections with industries and businesses, it can open up pathways for students into the job market that might otherwise be inaccessible. Networking opportunities, mentorship programs, and industry-specific training can give students an edge in highly competitive job markets. This is especially important in fields where the theoretical knowledge needs to be complemented with practical skills and industry norms.

In conclusion, while a direct correlation between a good school and a good job is highly desirable, the true measure of a school's success lies in its ability to prepare students for a range of outcomes. This includes not only securing employment but also equipping them with the skills needed to adapt to change, pursue continuous learning, and make meaningful contributions to society.

*mere
*mimic
*fosters

University should not only be made up of the Top 10% of students in the country.

Personally, I disagree with the statement that universities should only be made up of the top 10% of students in a country. There are a couple of key reasons to support this viewpoint.

Firstly, if universities were to limit their intake to only the top 10% of students, it could potentially stifle(restrict) diversity and inclusivity within higher education. Education thrives on the exchange of ideas among students from varied backgrounds, abilities, and perspectives. A diverse student body fosters(facilitate) a richer educational environment where students learn not only from their professors but also from each other. This diversity includes not just academic abilities but also cultural, socio-economic, and experiential differences, which are crucial for a comprehensive education.

Secondly, if we consider the role of universities in society, it's not just to further academic excellence but also to provide opportunities for upward mobility in (hierarchy) and personal development. Limiting access to only the academic elite ignores the potential and ambition of those who may not perform well in standardized tests but have other talents and the drive to succeed. Universities should be (get) spaces that nurture(grow) potential in various fields, including the arts, sports, entrepreneurship, and social services, which do not always correlate with academic performance.

In conclusion, while academic excellence is undoubtedly important, universities should serve a broader purpose. They should aim to cultivate a diverse community of learners who can contribute to society in various ways. Limiting university admission to only the top 10% of students would not only diminish(reduce) the richness of the educational experience but also hinder(prevent) societal progress (by overlooking the potential contributions of those outside this narrow academic bracket).

*stifle
*fosters
*hierarchy
*nurture
*nature
*diminish
*prevent

Using slang in a job interview does not shows you are friendly.

In my view, using slang in a job interview does not necessarily convey friendliness and may not be appropriate in most professional settings(talkings). There are a couple of significant reasons for this stance.

Firstly, if we consider the context of a job interview, it's a professional setting(talking) where first impressions are crucial. Using slang can be perceived(damage) as too casual or even unprofessional, potentially undermining the applicant's credibility and seriousness about the position. In many industries and corporate cultures, adhering(respect) to a certain level of formal communication, especially in first meetings, is seen as a sign of respect and professionalism. Therefore, maintaining a professional demeanor(mannar) helps establish a positive first impression.

Secondly, if an applicant(participation) uses slang during an interview, there is a risk that the interviewer may not be familiar with the terms used, leading to misunderstandings or a lack of clarity in communication. The purpose of a job interview is to clearly articulate(measure) one's abilities, experiences, and how one can contribute to the company. Clarity in communication is key, and using language that might not be universally understood can hinder(damage) this objective.

In conclusion, while using slang might seem like a way to appear more approachable or friendly, it's generally not advisable in a job interview setting(talking). Understanding the company culture and adjusting(accepting) one's communication style accordingly is key. There are numerous ways to demonstrate friendliness and enthusiasm during an interview that do not compromise(give up) professional communication standards.


*perceived
*demeanor
*adhering
*applicant
*articulate
*hinder
*adjusting
*compromise

MOFs (metal-organic frameworks )

Droughts have been making headlines across the world in recent years, from the California water crisis to Cape Town's severe water shortage. Research suggests 25 percent of the globe could eventually be left in permanent drought due to climate change. But what if you could simply pull water from the air?

That's the *premise of a new technology developed by University of California, Berkeley researchers. It's a water harvester that can extract water from the air, even in extremely dry climates. It uses no energy other than *ambient sunlight.

The key to the water harvester is a new class of materials called metal-organic frameworks (MOFs). These MOFs are solid but *porous materials with enormous surface areas. A MOF the size of a sugar cube can have an internal surface area as big as many football fields.

This means that they can absorb gases and liquids, and then release them quickly when heat is added.

"Certain MOFs have an extraordinary ability to suck in water *vapor from the atmosphere, but then at the same time do not hold on to the water *molecules inside their *pores too tightly so that it is easy to get the water out," says Omar Yaghi.

He is a professor of chemistry at Berkeley and led the research.

The researchers tested the harvester in Scottsdale, Arizona. It is a desert town with a high of 40 percent *humidity at night and 8 percent humidity during the day. The researchers believe that the harvester could ultimately extract about 3 ounces of water per pound of MOF per day.

The harvester itself is a box inside a box. The inner box contains a bed of MOFs. The outer box is a two-foot *transparent plastic cube. At night, the researchers left the top off the outer box to let air flow past the MOFs. In the day, they put the top back on, so the box would be heated by the sun. The heat would pull the water out of the MOFs, where it would condense on the inner walls of the plastic cube before dripping to the bottom, where it could be collected.

"The most important aspect of this technology is that it is completely energy-passive," says Eugene Kapustin, a Berkeley graduate student who worked on the research. That is to say, it needs no energy besides the sun. This makes it environmentally friendly and accessible to people in places with limited electricity. The results of the *trials were published in the journal Science Advances (Fathieh, 2018).

The team needs to conduct more trials on the current models to figure out which factors most affect how much water can be harvested. They also hope to learn more about how specific climate conditions affect water yield. The next trial is planned for late summer in Death Valley, where the nighttime humidity can be as low as 25 percent.

Yaghi has also developed a new aluminum-based MOF. He says it is 150 times cheaper and can capture twice as much water as the current MOFs. He and his team are designing a new water harvester that actively pulls air into the MOFs at high speed. It thus delivers a much larger volume of water.

The team is now partnering with the industry to test harvesters on an industrial scale. They also continue to search for newer, better, and cheaper MOFs. "I am very happy to see that more and more researchers around the world are joining our efforts in this regard," Yaghi says.

The idea of sucking water out of the atmosphere is not new, says Eric Hoek. He is an engineering professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, and editor of the journal Clean Water. It's long been noted that when you run an air conditioner, water drips out. This is because the machine is cooling the air to the *dew point, the temperature at which the air is *saturated with water vapor and *condensation occurs.

But creating water harvesters based on cooling technology is incredibly energy intense.

In very dry climates, the dew point is below zero.

Cooling the air to that temperature at any large scale is *unfeasible.

"The real innovation [of Yaghi's research] is a materials innovation," Hoek says. "These materials [the MOFs] pull water out and more easily give it up." But the concept is challenging to scale, Hoek cautions, as the amount of water produced per square inch of the harvester is relatively low. Thus a large harvester would potentially take up a huge amount of land. "But maybe for a household or village, it could be a very interesting way for someone to get fresh water," Hoek says.

Yaghi imagines exactly that: a future where everyone without easy access to fresh water has a harvester in their yard.

"My vision is to achieve personalized water; where people in water-stressed regions have a device at home running on ambient solar, delivering the water that satisfies the basic needs of the individuals," he says. "More than one-third of the population in the world lives in water-stressed regions or is suffering from a lack of clean water. The potential implications of this technology in transforming people's lives and improving the global public health conditions are *tremendous."

premise
porous
vapor
molecules
pores
humidity
transparent
trials
dew
saturated
condensation
unfeasible
tremendous