Làm thử Thi thử tốt nghiệp THPT năm 2026 · Tiếng Anh · Sở GD&ĐT Quảng Ninh · Năm học 2025-2026

The Vietnam Jewellery Queen 2026 pageant, (1) ____________ is organized by the Vietnam
Gemstone Jewellery Art Craft Association (VGJA), the Vietnam Association of Artisans and Brands and
the Hue Monuments Conservation Center, will take place in Hue city, with the participation of
professionals, artisans and media representatives.
The pageant aims to honour the beauty of Vietnamese women and highlight the (2) ____________
and craftsmanship of jewellery artisans. The competition (3) ____________ every two years since 2003
has gone through 11 editions and has established its position among beauty contests in Vietnam, while
contributing to the promotion of the country’s goldsmithing and gemstone craft sector.
The event is expected to help promote the image of Vietnamese culture and people, contribute to
tourism, services and the local economy, and introduce jewellery craftsmanship to international partners.
The contest officially (4) ____________ on March 16th, and the final round will take place from October
13th to 18th. (5) ____________ participants are Vietnamese women aged between 18 and 33, living,
studying or working in Vietnam or abroad. The pageant is expected to add to a wide (6) ____________
of activities of Hue Festival 2026 and help promote Vietnamese culture internationally.
(Adapted from https://english.vov.vn)

The Vietnam Jewellery Queen 2026 pageant, (1) ____________ is organized by the Vietnam
Gemstone Jewellery Art Craft Association (VGJA), the Vietnam Association of Artisans and Brands and
the Hue Monuments Conservation Center, will take place in Hue city, with the participation of
professionals, artisans and media representatives.
The pageant aims to honour the beauty of Vietnamese women and highlight the (2) ____________
and craftsmanship of jewellery artisans. The competition (3) ____________ every two years since 2003
has gone through 11 editions and has established its position among beauty contests in Vietnam, while
contributing to the promotion of the country’s goldsmithing and gemstone craft sector.
The event is expected to help promote the image of Vietnamese culture and people, contribute to
tourism, services and the local economy, and introduce jewellery craftsmanship to international partners.
The contest officially (4) ____________ on March 16th, and the final round will take place from October
13th to 18th. (5) ____________ participants are Vietnamese women aged between 18 and 33, living,
studying or working in Vietnam or abroad. The pageant is expected to add to a wide (6) ____________
of activities of Hue Festival 2026 and help promote Vietnamese culture internationally.
(Adapted from https://english.vov.vn)

The Vietnam Jewellery Queen 2026 pageant, (1) ____________ is organized by the Vietnam
Gemstone Jewellery Art Craft Association (VGJA), the Vietnam Association of Artisans and Brands and
the Hue Monuments Conservation Center, will take place in Hue city, with the participation of
professionals, artisans and media representatives.
The pageant aims to honour the beauty of Vietnamese women and highlight the (2) ____________
and craftsmanship of jewellery artisans. The competition (3) ____________ every two years since 2003
has gone through 11 editions and has established its position among beauty contests in Vietnam, while
contributing to the promotion of the country’s goldsmithing and gemstone craft sector.
The event is expected to help promote the image of Vietnamese culture and people, contribute to
tourism, services and the local economy, and introduce jewellery craftsmanship to international partners.
The contest officially (4) ____________ on March 16th, and the final round will take place from October
13th to 18th. (5) ____________ participants are Vietnamese women aged between 18 and 33, living,
studying or working in Vietnam or abroad. The pageant is expected to add to a wide (6) ____________
of activities of Hue Festival 2026 and help promote Vietnamese culture internationally.
(Adapted from https://english.vov.vn)

The Vietnam Jewellery Queen 2026 pageant, (1) ____________ is organized by the Vietnam
Gemstone Jewellery Art Craft Association (VGJA), the Vietnam Association of Artisans and Brands and
the Hue Monuments Conservation Center, will take place in Hue city, with the participation of
professionals, artisans and media representatives.
The pageant aims to honour the beauty of Vietnamese women and highlight the (2) ____________
and craftsmanship of jewellery artisans. The competition (3) ____________ every two years since 2003
has gone through 11 editions and has established its position among beauty contests in Vietnam, while
contributing to the promotion of the country’s goldsmithing and gemstone craft sector.
The event is expected to help promote the image of Vietnamese culture and people, contribute to
tourism, services and the local economy, and introduce jewellery craftsmanship to international partners.
The contest officially (4) ____________ on March 16th, and the final round will take place from October
13th to 18th. (5) ____________ participants are Vietnamese women aged between 18 and 33, living,
studying or working in Vietnam or abroad. The pageant is expected to add to a wide (6) ____________
of activities of Hue Festival 2026 and help promote Vietnamese culture internationally.
(Adapted from https://english.vov.vn)

The Vietnam Jewellery Queen 2026 pageant, (1) ____________ is organized by the Vietnam
Gemstone Jewellery Art Craft Association (VGJA), the Vietnam Association of Artisans and Brands and
the Hue Monuments Conservation Center, will take place in Hue city, with the participation of
professionals, artisans and media representatives.
The pageant aims to honour the beauty of Vietnamese women and highlight the (2) ____________
and craftsmanship of jewellery artisans. The competition (3) ____________ every two years since 2003
has gone through 11 editions and has established its position among beauty contests in Vietnam, while
contributing to the promotion of the country’s goldsmithing and gemstone craft sector.
The event is expected to help promote the image of Vietnamese culture and people, contribute to
tourism, services and the local economy, and introduce jewellery craftsmanship to international partners.
The contest officially (4) ____________ on March 16th, and the final round will take place from October
13th to 18th. (5) ____________ participants are Vietnamese women aged between 18 and 33, living,
studying or working in Vietnam or abroad. The pageant is expected to add to a wide (6) ____________
of activities of Hue Festival 2026 and help promote Vietnamese culture internationally.
(Adapted from https://english.vov.vn)

The Vietnam Jewellery Queen 2026 pageant, (1) ____________ is organized by the Vietnam
Gemstone Jewellery Art Craft Association (VGJA), the Vietnam Association of Artisans and Brands and
the Hue Monuments Conservation Center, will take place in Hue city, with the participation of
professionals, artisans and media representatives.
The pageant aims to honour the beauty of Vietnamese women and highlight the (2) ____________
and craftsmanship of jewellery artisans. The competition (3) ____________ every two years since 2003
has gone through 11 editions and has established its position among beauty contests in Vietnam, while
contributing to the promotion of the country’s goldsmithing and gemstone craft sector.
The event is expected to help promote the image of Vietnamese culture and people, contribute to
tourism, services and the local economy, and introduce jewellery craftsmanship to international partners.
The contest officially (4) ____________ on March 16th, and the final round will take place from October
13th to 18th. (5) ____________ participants are Vietnamese women aged between 18 and 33, living,
studying or working in Vietnam or abroad. The pageant is expected to add to a wide (6) ____________
of activities of Hue Festival 2026 and help promote Vietnamese culture internationally.
(Adapted from https://english.vov.vn)

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK
plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024,
according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been
concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes
respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to
non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.
Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries,
often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation
and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to
manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the
costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.
In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have
implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD
countries. The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the
responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations
continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network.
When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow
geography" of disposal.
These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting
plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability
along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact
effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs
of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing
this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift
towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/)

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK
plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024,
according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been
concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes
respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to
non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.
Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries,
often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation
and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to
manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the
costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.
In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have
implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD
countries. The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the
responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations
continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network.
When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow
geography" of disposal.
These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting
plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability
along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact
effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs
of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing
this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift
towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/)

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK
plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024,
according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been
concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes
respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to
non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.
Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries,
often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation
and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to
manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the
costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.
In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have
implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD
countries. The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the
responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations
continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network.
When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow
geography" of disposal.
These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting
plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability
along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact
effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs
of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing
this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift
towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/)

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK
plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024,
according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been
concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes
respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to
non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.
Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries,
often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation
and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to
manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the
costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.
In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have
implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD
countries. The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the
responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations
continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network.
When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow
geography" of disposal.
These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting
plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability
along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact
effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs
of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing
this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift
towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/)

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK
plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024,
according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been
concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes
respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to
non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.
Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries,
often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation
and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to
manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the
costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.
In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have
implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD
countries. The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the
responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations
continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network.
When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow
geography" of disposal.
These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting
plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability
along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact
effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs
of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing
this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift
towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/)

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK
plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024,
according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been
concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes
respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to
non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.
Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries,
often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation
and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to
manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the
costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.
In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have
implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD
countries. The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the
responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations
continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network.
When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow
geography" of disposal.
These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting
plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability
along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact
effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs
of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing
this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift
towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/)

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK
plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024,
according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been
concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes
respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to
non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.
Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries,
often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation
and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to
manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the
costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.
In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have
implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD
countries. The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the
responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations
continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network.
When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow
geography" of disposal.
These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting
plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability
along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact
effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs
of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing
this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift
towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/)

The global trade in plastic waste has become a significant environmental and ethical concern. UK
plastic waste exports have soared this year, rising by 84% in the first half of 2025 compared with 2024,
according to UN Comtrade analysis compiled by The Last Beach Cleanup. The surge has been
concentrated in Malaysia and Indonesia, with shipments jumping to 28,667 tonnes and 24,006 tonnes
respectively. While aggregate volumes remained above 317,000 tonnes, the portion routed directly to
non-OECD destinations climbed from 11% to 20%.
Historically, developed nations have exported vast quantities of plastic scrap to developing countries,
often under the guise of recycling. However, this practice frequently leads to environmental degradation
and social injustice in the recipient nations, which may lack the infrastructure or regulatory capacity to
manage the influx. This pattern has been labeled "waste imperialism," as it effectively externalizes the
costs and burdens of waste management on nations with weaker environmental enforcement.
In response to these growing concerns, some major economic blocs, such as the European Union, have
implemented stringent regulations, including prohibiting the export of plastic waste to non-OECD
countries. The rationale behind such bans is to encourage domestic recycling and ensure that the
responsibility for waste management remains with the originating countries. However, other nations
continue to export substantial volumes, often resulting in a complex and mercurial global trade network.
When one destination tightens import rules, waste is frequently re-routed to others, creating a "shadow
geography" of disposal.
These shifting trade flows highlight a critical issue: the economic incentive often makes exporting
plastic waste cheaper than processing it domestically. This financial disparity can obscure accountability
along the transboundary chain, making it difficult to track and manage the environmental impact
effectively. Critics argue that nations producing plastic packaging should internalize the true costs
of its disposal and invest more heavily in domestic recycling infrastructure. Ultimately, addressing
this global challenge requires international cooperation, stricter regulations, and a fundamental shift
towards a circular economy where waste is minimized and resources are reused.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/)

Question 15. a. This enclosed environment creates stable conditions that help plants grow consistently, even in regions
facing harsh climates or poor soil quality.
b. Container farming is an innovative method of growing crops inside repurposed shipping containers,
allowing farmers to control light, temperature, and nutrients with remarkable precision.
c. The compact design also enables year-round cultivation, giving small businesses a reliable supply of
produce regardless of seasonal changes.
d. As a result, many urban growers view it as a practical way to produce fresh vegetables closer to
consumers, reducing transportation costs and environmental impact.
e. With these advantages, container farming is steadily becoming a promising solution for communities
seeking sustainable and efficient food production.

Question 16. a. Mia: That'd be awesome. We could get some professional advice and figure out our strengths.
b. Mia: Yeah, I've been considering a few options, especially marketing. It's a lot more competitive than
I thought!
c. Mark: Perfect! Let's meet outside the counseling office after our afternoon classes.
d. Mark: Hey, have you made up your mind about which university major to apply for?
e. Mark: Tell me about it! I'm in two minds about economics and IT. Want to see the career counselor
together this Friday?

Question 18. Dear Sir or Madam,
a. I am writing to apply for the position of part-time shop assistant advertised on your company’s website.
b. I am confident that my strong communication skills and ability to work under pressure make me a
suitable candidate for this role.
c. As a school leaver seeking to enter the workforce, I am highly adaptable and eager to gain practical
work experience.
d. I would welcome the opportunity to attend an interview if I am shortlisted for this position.
e. I have attached my CV outlining my relevant qualifications, and I look forward to hearing from you
soon.
Yours faithfully,

Question 19. a. Following this, the percentage of urban residents climbed steadily to 45% in 2020, and it is expected
to surpass the rural figure, reaching 60% by the end of the period.
b. The line graph illustrates the demographic shift between urban and rural populations in a developing
country over a period of 50 years, starting from 2000.
c. On the other hand, the urban population started at exactly 30% in 2000, representing a minority of the
country's total population at that time.
d. Overall, there is a clear upward trend in the proportion of city dwellers, whereas the percentage of
people living in the countryside shows a steady decline.
e. In 2000, the rural population was dominant, standing at 70%, but this figure gradually fell to 55% in
2020 and is projected to drop further to 40% by 2050.

Digital media have dramatically changed how we consume information, largely due to the effects of
social media. These digital sites provide users with highly personalized news feeds, carefully curated to
align with their past interactions such as what they have liked, followed, commented on, etc. This
algorithmic tailoring often leads to the formation of “echo chambers”, situations where individuals are
mainly exposed to information that reinforces their existing beliefs. Such selective exposure not only
limits intellectual growth but also cultivates a fragmented understanding of complex issues, where
diverse perspectives are systematically sidelined. Because of this lack of variety, a shared reality can
become elusive, replaced by separate, one-sided versions.
[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It
drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs,
while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social
media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue,
unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current
belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter
challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting,
significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users'
access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate
societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying
environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group
relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual
understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating
digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating
content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive
measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering
a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Digital media have dramatically changed how we consume information, largely due to the effects of
social media. These digital sites provide users with highly personalized news feeds, carefully curated to
align with their past interactions such as what they have liked, followed, commented on, etc. This
algorithmic tailoring often leads to the formation of “echo chambers”, situations where individuals are
mainly exposed to information that reinforces their existing beliefs. Such selective exposure not only
limits intellectual growth but also cultivates a fragmented understanding of complex issues, where
diverse perspectives are systematically sidelined. Because of this lack of variety, a shared reality can
become elusive, replaced by separate, one-sided versions.
[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It
drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs,
while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social
media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue,
unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current
belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter
challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting,
significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users'
access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate
societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying
environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group
relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual
understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating
digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating
content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive
measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering
a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Digital media have dramatically changed how we consume information, largely due to the effects of
social media. These digital sites provide users with highly personalized news feeds, carefully curated to
align with their past interactions such as what they have liked, followed, commented on, etc. This
algorithmic tailoring often leads to the formation of “echo chambers”, situations where individuals are
mainly exposed to information that reinforces their existing beliefs. Such selective exposure not only
limits intellectual growth but also cultivates a fragmented understanding of complex issues, where
diverse perspectives are systematically sidelined. Because of this lack of variety, a shared reality can
become elusive, replaced by separate, one-sided versions.
[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It
drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs,
while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social
media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue,
unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current
belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter
challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting,
significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users'
access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate
societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying
environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group
relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual
understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating
digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating
content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive
measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering
a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Digital media have dramatically changed how we consume information, largely due to the effects of
social media. These digital sites provide users with highly personalized news feeds, carefully curated to
align with their past interactions such as what they have liked, followed, commented on, etc. This
algorithmic tailoring often leads to the formation of “echo chambers”, situations where individuals are
mainly exposed to information that reinforces their existing beliefs. Such selective exposure not only
limits intellectual growth but also cultivates a fragmented understanding of complex issues, where
diverse perspectives are systematically sidelined. Because of this lack of variety, a shared reality can
become elusive, replaced by separate, one-sided versions.
[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It
drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs,
while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social
media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue,
unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current
belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter
challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting,
significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users'
access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate
societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying
environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group
relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual
understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating
digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating
content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive
measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering
a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Digital media have dramatically changed how we consume information, largely due to the effects of
social media. These digital sites provide users with highly personalized news feeds, carefully curated to
align with their past interactions such as what they have liked, followed, commented on, etc. This
algorithmic tailoring often leads to the formation of “echo chambers”, situations where individuals are
mainly exposed to information that reinforces their existing beliefs. Such selective exposure not only
limits intellectual growth but also cultivates a fragmented understanding of complex issues, where
diverse perspectives are systematically sidelined. Because of this lack of variety, a shared reality can
become elusive, replaced by separate, one-sided versions.
[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It
drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs,
while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social
media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue,
unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current
belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter
challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting,
significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users'
access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate
societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying
environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group
relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual
understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating
digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating
content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive
measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering
a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Digital media have dramatically changed how we consume information, largely due to the effects of
social media. These digital sites provide users with highly personalized news feeds, carefully curated to
align with their past interactions such as what they have liked, followed, commented on, etc. This
algorithmic tailoring often leads to the formation of “echo chambers”, situations where individuals are
mainly exposed to information that reinforces their existing beliefs. Such selective exposure not only
limits intellectual growth but also cultivates a fragmented understanding of complex issues, where
diverse perspectives are systematically sidelined. Because of this lack of variety, a shared reality can
become elusive, replaced by separate, one-sided versions.
[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It
drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs,
while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social
media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue,
unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current
belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter
challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting,
significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users'
access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate
societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying
environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group
relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual
understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating
digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating
content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive
measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering
a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Digital media have dramatically changed how we consume information, largely due to the effects of
social media. These digital sites provide users with highly personalized news feeds, carefully curated to
align with their past interactions such as what they have liked, followed, commented on, etc. This
algorithmic tailoring often leads to the formation of “echo chambers”, situations where individuals are
mainly exposed to information that reinforces their existing beliefs. Such selective exposure not only
limits intellectual growth but also cultivates a fragmented understanding of complex issues, where
diverse perspectives are systematically sidelined. Because of this lack of variety, a shared reality can
become elusive, replaced by separate, one-sided versions.
[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It
drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs,
while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social
media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue,
unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current
belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter
challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting,
significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users'
access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate
societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying
environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group
relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual
understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating
digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating
content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive
measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering
a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Digital media have dramatically changed how we consume information, largely due to the effects of
social media. These digital sites provide users with highly personalized news feeds, carefully curated to
align with their past interactions such as what they have liked, followed, commented on, etc. This
algorithmic tailoring often leads to the formation of “echo chambers”, situations where individuals are
mainly exposed to information that reinforces their existing beliefs. Such selective exposure not only
limits intellectual growth but also cultivates a fragmented understanding of complex issues, where
diverse perspectives are systematically sidelined. Because of this lack of variety, a shared reality can
become elusive, replaced by separate, one-sided versions.
[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It
drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs,
while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social
media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue,
unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current
belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter
challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting,
significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users'
access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate
societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying
environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group
relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual
understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating
digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating
content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive
measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering
a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Digital media have dramatically changed how we consume information, largely due to the effects of
social media. These digital sites provide users with highly personalized news feeds, carefully curated to
align with their past interactions such as what they have liked, followed, commented on, etc. This
algorithmic tailoring often leads to the formation of “echo chambers”, situations where individuals are
mainly exposed to information that reinforces their existing beliefs. Such selective exposure not only
limits intellectual growth but also cultivates a fragmented understanding of complex issues, where
diverse perspectives are systematically sidelined. Because of this lack of variety, a shared reality can
become elusive, replaced by separate, one-sided versions.
[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It
drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs,
while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social
media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue,
unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current
belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter
challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting,
significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users'
access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate
societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying
environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group
relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual
understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating
digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating
content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive
measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering
a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

Digital media have dramatically changed how we consume information, largely due to the effects of
social media. These digital sites provide users with highly personalized news feeds, carefully curated to
align with their past interactions such as what they have liked, followed, commented on, etc. This
algorithmic tailoring often leads to the formation of “echo chambers”, situations where individuals are
mainly exposed to information that reinforces their existing beliefs. Such selective exposure not only
limits intellectual growth but also cultivates a fragmented understanding of complex issues, where
diverse perspectives are systematically sidelined. Because of this lack of variety, a shared reality can
become elusive, replaced by separate, one-sided versions.
[I] The root cause of these echo chambers lies in confirmation bias, a human cognitive tendency. It
drives individuals to seek out, interpret, and favor information that supports their pre-existing beliefs,
while simultaneously downplaying or rejecting information that contradicts those views. Every social
media platform, in pursuit of maximizing user engagement and, consequently, advertising revenue,
unintentionally amplifies this natural tendency. By prioritizing content that resonates with a user's current
belief system, its algorithms create a feedback loop, making it less likely for individuals to encounter
challenging or differing viewpoints. This continuous validation, while psychologically comforting,
significantly impedes the development of critical thinking skills and open-mindedness. [II]
The impact of echo chambers on society is also concerning. Social media sites that restrict users'
access to opposing viewpoints and reinforce their existing viewpoints could potentially exacerbate
societal division. For instance, on the issue of climate change, one user might only see posts downplaying
environmental risks, while another is exposed exclusively to catastrophic warnings. Since each group
relies on completely disparate bodies of fact, there is little basis for them to share any kind of mutual
understanding. [III]
Breaking free from these echo chambers requires a conscious effort. Doing so involves cultivating
digital literacy, actively seeking out diverse and credible sources of information, and critically evaluating
content rather than passively consuming what algorithms present to us. Only through such proactive
measures can individuals cultivate a more comprehensive understanding of the world, thereby fostering
a more inclusive exchange of ideas across the increasingly fractured digital landscape. [IV]
(Adapted from https://www.wired.com)

The Cambridge Dictionary has recently named "parasocial" as its word of the year, defining it as a
one-sided connection that people feel with individuals they do not know, or even with artificial
intelligence. This phenomenon, (30) ____________, involves a sense of intimacy that is not reciprocated
by the other party. A common example is the emotional attachment fans develop towards celebrities like
Taylor Swift, despite never having met them.
Generally, most parasocial relationships are healthy, serving as a normal way to explore thoughts and
emotions about others. They allow individuals (31) ____________, and to find inspiration from
accomplishments, even from long-dead writers. (32) ____________, these connections are a
fundamentally healthy expression of emotional and social desires, provided they do not interfere with
mutual relationships in the physical world.
However, these relationships become problematic if they dominate a person's thoughts or impede
independent decision-making. This concern is particularly relevant with AI chatbots (33) ____________.
Such highly customized interactions, often designed to flatter or agree, pose a real risk. (34)
____________. This dependency can hinder the development of crucial social and empathetic skills
necessary for genuine human connection.
(Adapted from: https://www.bbc.com)

The Cambridge Dictionary has recently named "parasocial" as its word of the year, defining it as a
one-sided connection that people feel with individuals they do not know, or even with artificial
intelligence. This phenomenon, (30) ____________, involves a sense of intimacy that is not reciprocated
by the other party. A common example is the emotional attachment fans develop towards celebrities like
Taylor Swift, despite never having met them.
Generally, most parasocial relationships are healthy, serving as a normal way to explore thoughts and
emotions about others. They allow individuals (31) ____________, and to find inspiration from
accomplishments, even from long-dead writers. (32) ____________, these connections are a
fundamentally healthy expression of emotional and social desires, provided they do not interfere with
mutual relationships in the physical world.
However, these relationships become problematic if they dominate a person's thoughts or impede
independent decision-making. This concern is particularly relevant with AI chatbots (33) ____________.
Such highly customized interactions, often designed to flatter or agree, pose a real risk. (34)
____________. This dependency can hinder the development of crucial social and empathetic skills
necessary for genuine human connection.
(Adapted from: https://www.bbc.com)

The Cambridge Dictionary has recently named "parasocial" as its word of the year, defining it as a
one-sided connection that people feel with individuals they do not know, or even with artificial
intelligence. This phenomenon, (30) ____________, involves a sense of intimacy that is not reciprocated
by the other party. A common example is the emotional attachment fans develop towards celebrities like
Taylor Swift, despite never having met them.
Generally, most parasocial relationships are healthy, serving as a normal way to explore thoughts and
emotions about others. They allow individuals (31) ____________, and to find inspiration from
accomplishments, even from long-dead writers. (32) ____________, these connections are a
fundamentally healthy expression of emotional and social desires, provided they do not interfere with
mutual relationships in the physical world.
However, these relationships become problematic if they dominate a person's thoughts or impede
independent decision-making. This concern is particularly relevant with AI chatbots (33) ____________.
Such highly customized interactions, often designed to flatter or agree, pose a real risk. (34)
____________. This dependency can hinder the development of crucial social and empathetic skills
necessary for genuine human connection.
(Adapted from: https://www.bbc.com)

The Cambridge Dictionary has recently named "parasocial" as its word of the year, defining it as a
one-sided connection that people feel with individuals they do not know, or even with artificial
intelligence. This phenomenon, (30) ____________, involves a sense of intimacy that is not reciprocated
by the other party. A common example is the emotional attachment fans develop towards celebrities like
Taylor Swift, despite never having met them.
Generally, most parasocial relationships are healthy, serving as a normal way to explore thoughts and
emotions about others. They allow individuals (31) ____________, and to find inspiration from
accomplishments, even from long-dead writers. (32) ____________, these connections are a
fundamentally healthy expression of emotional and social desires, provided they do not interfere with
mutual relationships in the physical world.
However, these relationships become problematic if they dominate a person's thoughts or impede
independent decision-making. This concern is particularly relevant with AI chatbots (33) ____________.
Such highly customized interactions, often designed to flatter or agree, pose a real risk. (34)
____________. This dependency can hinder the development of crucial social and empathetic skills
necessary for genuine human connection.
(Adapted from: https://www.bbc.com)

The Cambridge Dictionary has recently named "parasocial" as its word of the year, defining it as a
one-sided connection that people feel with individuals they do not know, or even with artificial
intelligence. This phenomenon, (30) ____________, involves a sense of intimacy that is not reciprocated
by the other party. A common example is the emotional attachment fans develop towards celebrities like
Taylor Swift, despite never having met them.
Generally, most parasocial relationships are healthy, serving as a normal way to explore thoughts and
emotions about others. They allow individuals (31) ____________, and to find inspiration from
accomplishments, even from long-dead writers. (32) ____________, these connections are a
fundamentally healthy expression of emotional and social desires, provided they do not interfere with
mutual relationships in the physical world.
However, these relationships become problematic if they dominate a person's thoughts or impede
independent decision-making. This concern is particularly relevant with AI chatbots (33) ____________.
Such highly customized interactions, often designed to flatter or agree, pose a real risk. (34)
____________. This dependency can hinder the development of crucial social and empathetic skills
necessary for genuine human connection.
(Adapted from: https://www.bbc.com)

When choosing your future career, you may find the rapid growth of AI to be a major concern.
However, by cultivating unique human-centric skills, you can turn this challenge into a great opportunity.
To stay competitive, you should:
Commit yourself (35) ____________ honing your creative thinking and emotional intelligence.
Choose a major that requires human depth, (36) ____________ these fields are the least likely to be
fully automated by machines.
During your university years, strive to gain (37) ____________ through internships or exchange
programs.
Don't study in isolation; try to collaborate with (38) ____________ ambitious peers to learn how to
use technology effectively.
Instead of viewing AI as a threat, try (39) ____________ its potential to assist your research and
learning process.
Ultimately, your early dedication to self-improvement and adaptability will (40) ____________
throughout your professional life.

When choosing your future career, you may find the rapid growth of AI to be a major concern.
However, by cultivating unique human-centric skills, you can turn this challenge into a great opportunity.
To stay competitive, you should:
Commit yourself (35) ____________ honing your creative thinking and emotional intelligence.
Choose a major that requires human depth, (36) ____________ these fields are the least likely to be
fully automated by machines.
During your university years, strive to gain (37) ____________ through internships or exchange
programs.
Don't study in isolation; try to collaborate with (38) ____________ ambitious peers to learn how to
use technology effectively.
Instead of viewing AI as a threat, try (39) ____________ its potential to assist your research and
learning process.
Ultimately, your early dedication to self-improvement and adaptability will (40) ____________
throughout your professional life.

When choosing your future career, you may find the rapid growth of AI to be a major concern.
However, by cultivating unique human-centric skills, you can turn this challenge into a great opportunity.
To stay competitive, you should:
Commit yourself (35) ____________ honing your creative thinking and emotional intelligence.
Choose a major that requires human depth, (36) ____________ these fields are the least likely to be
fully automated by machines.
During your university years, strive to gain (37) ____________ through internships or exchange
programs.
Don't study in isolation; try to collaborate with (38) ____________ ambitious peers to learn how to
use technology effectively.
Instead of viewing AI as a threat, try (39) ____________ its potential to assist your research and
learning process.
Ultimately, your early dedication to self-improvement and adaptability will (40) ____________
throughout your professional life.

When choosing your future career, you may find the rapid growth of AI to be a major concern.
However, by cultivating unique human-centric skills, you can turn this challenge into a great opportunity.
To stay competitive, you should:
Commit yourself (35) ____________ honing your creative thinking and emotional intelligence.
Choose a major that requires human depth, (36) ____________ these fields are the least likely to be
fully automated by machines.
During your university years, strive to gain (37) ____________ through internships or exchange
programs.
Don't study in isolation; try to collaborate with (38) ____________ ambitious peers to learn how to
use technology effectively.
Instead of viewing AI as a threat, try (39) ____________ its potential to assist your research and
learning process.
Ultimately, your early dedication to self-improvement and adaptability will (40) ____________
throughout your professional life.

When choosing your future career, you may find the rapid growth of AI to be a major concern.
However, by cultivating unique human-centric skills, you can turn this challenge into a great opportunity.
To stay competitive, you should:
Commit yourself (35) ____________ honing your creative thinking and emotional intelligence.
Choose a major that requires human depth, (36) ____________ these fields are the least likely to be
fully automated by machines.
During your university years, strive to gain (37) ____________ through internships or exchange
programs.
Don't study in isolation; try to collaborate with (38) ____________ ambitious peers to learn how to
use technology effectively.
Instead of viewing AI as a threat, try (39) ____________ its potential to assist your research and
learning process.
Ultimately, your early dedication to self-improvement and adaptability will (40) ____________
throughout your professional life.

When choosing your future career, you may find the rapid growth of AI to be a major concern.
However, by cultivating unique human-centric skills, you can turn this challenge into a great opportunity.
To stay competitive, you should:
Commit yourself (35) ____________ honing your creative thinking and emotional intelligence.
Choose a major that requires human depth, (36) ____________ these fields are the least likely to be
fully automated by machines.
During your university years, strive to gain (37) ____________ through internships or exchange
programs.
Don't study in isolation; try to collaborate with (38) ____________ ambitious peers to learn how to
use technology effectively.
Instead of viewing AI as a threat, try (39) ____________ its potential to assist your research and
learning process.
Ultimately, your early dedication to self-improvement and adaptability will (40) ____________
throughout your professional life.