Antiremed Kelas 12 Bahasa Inggris

CH 4 - Discussion Text - Exercise

Doc Name: AR12ING0204 Version: 2016-05 | halaman 1

Should the Driving Age Be Raised? "Traffic accidents are a big problem in the
Many teenagers fell victims to car accidents. United States. In 2007, there were more than 6
Some say they are getting behind the wheel too million accidents on America's roads, resulting in
early. more than 40,000 deaths. There is an entire fed-
Now Adrian Lund, a president of Insurance In- eral agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety
stitute for Highway Safety, proposes the increase Administration, devoted to reducing these num-
of driving age: bers, but it has proven very difficult. So some
people just want a quick fix. It's easy for politi-
"Although most teenagers don't like the idea of
cians and interest groups to put the blame on
waiting longer to get their licenses, raising the
young people, who can't fight back. Blame a
driving age to 17 or 18 would reduce crashes
group that doesn't have high-powered lobbyists
involving young drivers and, in turn, save lives.
to defend them. Blame a group of people who
Most states allow driving at age 16, 17, or some- can't even vote.
where in between, although the minimum age in
The truth is that the vast majority of teens are
South Dakota is only 14 and 3 months. Only
safe and responsible drivers. Those who want to
New Jersey holds off until 17. Last year, the In-
raise the driving age have labeled teens guilty
surance Institute of Highway Safety conducted a
before they've gotten into an accident or before
review of research on the subject, and it clearly
they've even sat behind the wheel of a car. They
indicates that an older driving age substantially
believe that because of your birth date, you are
reduces crash rates for young drivers.
by definition dangerous.
The same conclusion has been reached in Great
But driving tests, which everyone has to pass to
Britain, where the driving age is 17, and in the
get a license, are supposed to weed out danger-
rest of the European Union, where most nations
ous drivers whether they're 16 or 30. Besides, it's
set the driving age at 18. The trade-off is, of
inexperience, not age, which causes many acci-
course, less mobility, but surveys of New Jersey
dents. Raising the driving age would just create
teens show that they're just as active in school,
inexperienced, accident-prone drivers at age 18
work, and social activities as teens in surround-
instead of 16.
ing states.
Cars are necessary for mobility in this country.
Research indicates that when teens begin driving
Teens need the ability to drive just as much as
at a later age, they're less likely to get into
anyone else–to get to school, to get to work, to
crashes during their first years on the road. Some
get to sports or band practice, or just to go out
say more driver education is the answer. Studies,
with their friends. Politicians should roll up their
however, show no difference in crash rates for
sleeves and tackle the bigger problem of driving
teens who take drivers education, compared with
safety in general–and pick on someone their own
those who don't.
size."
In 2007, more than 4,000 teens died as occu-
pants of passenger vehicles; 61 percent of them 01. Who is against driving-age increase?
were in vehicles driven by other teens. Ulti- (A) Andrian Lund.
mately, it's a political question: Is increased mo- (B) Alex Koroknay-Palicz
bility worth the additional deaths? It may be a
tough sell for teens, but raising the driving age 02. State the arguments for driving-age increase:
makes sense." __________.
Despite the argument, Alex Koroknay-Palicz, the
Executive Director at National Youth Rights 03. State the arguments against driving-age in-
Association voices his opposition: crease:

04. Does this essay have conclusion? If yes,

which one?
Kunci dan pembahasan soal ini bisa dilihat di www.zenius.net dengan memasukkan kode 4072 ke menu search.
Copyright © 2016 Zenius Education
 Antiremed Kelas 12 Bahasa Inggris, CH 4 - Discussion Text - Exercise
doc name : AR12ING0204 version : 2016-05 |
Video Games: Good or Bad?
Three thug-looking dudes are approaching a
man. In a split second, there will be booms and
bangs. Enough with the storytelling, as you
might have guessed it will all lead to blood.
Now you can imagine the same scene: three thug
-looking dudes are approaching the same man.
Then the man will have to make a split-second
decisionwhich needs the man's thinking brain
to survive the journey. If the man fails, he will
repeat the scene. To succeed, he must develop
and experiment with alternative tactics until he
gets through that puzzling problem. And there
comes the blood.
The opponents of video games, including anti-
violence activists and some parents and educa-
tors, imagine the former when they hear the
phrase "video games". The latter is pictured by
the proponents of video games, which include
gamers and the addicts. The dawn of these pros
and cons can be attributed to the increasing
number of gamers, which accounts to around
500 million people around the world, according
to Jane McGonigal, a game researcher, in her
2010 TED conference. Additionally, according
to NPD research, consumer spending in the
game industry in 2012 has reached $20.77 bil-
lion, the amount slightly more than the total Af-
ghanistan production in the same year. Now the
debate continues: are video games good or not?
The first yell against video games is about the
amount of violence in our video-game contents.
The California law defines violent video games
as "a video game in which the range of options
available to a player includes killing, maiming,
dismembering, or sexually assaulting an image of
a human being". While not all video games con-
tain violence, allegedly the best-selling games are
the most violent ones. The violence in video
games is not benign. A study conducted by
Douglas et al from Iowa State University in 2014
shows that children repetitively playing violent
video games are prone to aggressive ways of
thinking and behaving. Furthermore, another
research by Taylor and Francis shows that vio-
lent video games delay development of moral
reasoningjudgment about what is right and
wrongin teenagers.
Kunci dan pembahasan soal ini bisa dilihat di www.zenius.net dengan memasukkan kode 4072 ke menu search.
Copyright © 2016 Zenius Education
halaman 2
On the other hand, a study from Markey and
Harris in 2010 shows that the people affected by
violent video games are those who have person-
ality traits indicative of psychotic tendency. It
means there is a predisposition toward violence
in certain people, and therefore, not everyone
playing violent video games tend to resort to
violence when they face conflicts. Next, while it
is true that some people are at-risk for playing
video games, game industry has minimized their
bad impact through independent control, the
ESRB. The ESRB has established the video
game ratings based on age groups and suitability
of contents, such as violence, language, sexuality,
gambling, etc. Do video game retailers comply
with the rules? Apparently, 80% of underage
people were turned away when trying to buy or
rent the Mature-rated games, based on nation
wide research by the ERSB. Now the responsi-
bility lies with usparents, educators brothers
and sisters, shopkeepersin preventing violent
games from falling into the wrong hands, espe-
cially non-adults.
Apart from violence, the second yell at video
games comes from parents and educators who
see their children or students play games instead
of doing schoolwork or playing outside. Lack of
intelligence and ambition, and avoidance of so-
cial activities are among their worst fear for their
little ones. Parents and educators may not wait a
long time until the children's behaviors lead to
addiction. In fact, excessive video gaming actu-
ally has most of the symptoms of drug addic-
tions. The American Psychiatric Association has
included video game addiction as a diagnosis in
the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Dis-
orders because of its prevalence, not only in chil-
dren but also in adults. If our people are prone
to addiction, how can we expect them to be-
come responsible adults?
But, many researches have also shown that video
games actually boost our brains. Brian Glass et
al, researchers from Queen Mary University,
have shown that certain video games develop the
brain's ability to think about multiple ideas to
solve problems. Scientists name it "cognitive
flexibility". It is the foundation of intelligence as
creative problem solving requires cognitive flexi-
bility. Even in the previous research, according
to Brian Glass, shows that action video games
can speed up decision-making. A research in
 Antiremed Kelas 12 Bahasa Inggris, CH 4 - Discussion Text - Exercise
doc name : AR12ING0204 version : 2016-05 |
2007 by Jim Feng et. Al, from University of
Toronto, has shown that playing an action video
game increases spatial cognition, a skill that is
important in engineering and mathematics. This
latter research even reduces gender differences
in spatial cognition, a fact that has been generally
accepted by many researches. Lastly, researchers
from UC-San Francisco found that senior citi-
zens have improved their cognitive abilities by
playing a video game designed by UCSF team.
To sum up, video games give rise to good and
bad effects. They remain a controversy in some
countries. I think it is unwise if we outlaw video
gaming considering its positive benefits. The
best way to approach video games is through
responsible gaming which is achievable through
certain controls: play games according to your
age, manage your time, and if you can't impose
control on yourself, ask for others' help.
05. State the arguments for video games:
_________.
06. State the arguments against video games:
_________.
07. What is the conclusion of this essay?
_________.
Is Standardized Testing Good for Us?
Try visiting a day-care in your spare time. You'll
see how children behave. One may play with a
doll; another with a board game; another may
run around the room with the friends they have
made; another may sit in the cornerwho knows
where his or her mind wanders. Then try visiting
them in ten years. The doll child may be busy
with his or her basketball game, the board-game
child may be busy getting high, and maybe the
rest two childrenthe running and the corner
childrenget together in a science club.
In another two years, all of them may leave eve-
rything behind for a new pursuit, a status as a
university student. Before you realize it, they
might start buying those booksAce this exam,
500 common questions for that exam, and so
forth. Yes, here we are talking about standard-
ized tests. A standardized test means a test that is
standardized in many aspects: procedures (how,
where, how long, and when you do it); the ques-
tions and their interpretations; the assessment.
Kunci dan pembahasan soal ini bisa dilihat di www.zenius.net dengan memasukkan kode 4072 ke menu search.
Copyright © 2016 Zenius Education
halaman 3
You may call them IELTS, TOEFL, SAT, ACT,
and whatever alphabetical tests you can name.
Imagine millions of people around the world,
each year, taking those tests. Despite a huge
number of those people, the existences of
standardized tests remain a controversy. While
some people understand the need of those
tests, some others view these tests in a negative
light.
Firstly, people around the world have equal op-
portunity to pursue their dreams. But, similar
to the child anecdote at the beginning, we are
born unique, with certain aptitudes, hobbies,
personalities, and so on. Oftentimes, they share
the same dreams with other thousands of
people. Now imagine if you are looking for
only one person to join your mission, to realize
your shared dream: who would you choose
from that pool of thousand people? I bet you'll
choose the top-notch candidate. But how can
you choose them? We suddenly fall into an in-
volved and time-consuming situation. This is
the very condition where standardized tests
come in handy. Standardized tests are consis-
tent and controlled. They also give quantifiable
information about a person's quality. There-
fore, they put every test-takers in a fair situa-
tion where the outcomes are measurable and
comparable. There you go, you might find your
one recruit. But a country needs thousands of
quality educators, teachers, policymakers, entre-
preneurs, and anybody else to run this country.
Without standardized tests, how does it ensure
getting the best people?
Next, as standardized tests give measurable re-
sults, you can go beyond choosing a candidate.
Many organizations or people use standardized
tests as feedback tools. Parents may find devel-
opmental delay in their children when their
children's test results fall below norms. Gov-
ernment may determine quantifiable goals that
help design an incentive system for educators,
detect the success of a program, or cut some
policies. Teachers may know whether some
students fall behind their peers or they must
change their teaching method. Standardized
tests provide a powerful advantage as feedback
tools.
Thirdly, standardized tests analyze skills such as
problem solving and critical thinking because
they throw high-quality problems to test-takers.
 Antiremed Kelas 12 Bahasa Inggris, CH 4 - Discussion Text - Exercise
doc name : AR12ING0204 version : 2016-05 | halaman 4

Independent organizations ensure quality con- 08. State the arguments for standardized tests:
trol of these tests so that they really measure __________.
analytical ability, not memory. Consequently,
people who learn to answer these problems 09. State the arguments against standardized
will sharpen their basic skills. Because of that, tests:
standardized tests can foster learning in people. __________.
Despite the advantages, standardized tests are
not free from criticisms. The opponents of
standardized testing claim that standardized
tests destroy people, especially students.
To begin with, the proponents claim that stan-
dardized tests provide a fair situation for test
takers and therefore, comparable and measur-
able results. Nevertheless, similar to the begin-
ning anecdote, people are born different from
others. A might be good at jumping and B at
walking. Moreover, standardized tests only
measure parochial abilities. How do you think
if you test A and B based on their walking abil-
ity per se? How if someone has a learning dis-
ability? Are standardized tests ever fair in that
situation? Therefore, claiming that standardized
tests provide fair situation is nonsense. Then,
the results are measurable, but never compara-
ble.
Next, standardized tests limit people's point of
view about learning. When people face stan-
dardized tests, they focus on the mark. They
don't learn the problem, but they learn how to
answer certain types of questions to increase
their score. Problem is, learning is never that
short-sighted mission.
Moreover, standardized tests do not mimic life.
First, the tests are often timed. On the other
hand, people will have more than a few min-
utes to answer problems in life. Second, test
takers are not expected to ask other people for
help. But, at work, at schools, at labs, people
are expected to collaborate when they try to
tackle some problems. Moreover, problems in
our society keep evolving, simply learning to
answer specific questions in a contrived situa-
tion does not prepare them for the problems
of tomorrow.
And now the debate continues. I think stan-
dardized tests are useful in many cases, such as
university entrance or work application. De-
spite that, it is never enough if we judge some-
one solely based on the standardized-test re-
sults.

Kunci dan pembahasan soal ini bisa dilihat di www.zenius.net dengan memasukkan kode 4072 ke menu search.
Copyright © 2016 Zenius Education