成功需要勤奋英语20篇

“我们要全心全意默默地开花，以花来证明自己的存在。”当我翻开翻到《心田上的百合花》这个故事，读到这句话时，我的心被震撼了。

一株小小的百合花，长得和杂草一模一样的百合花，它的心中一直有一个念头：“我是一株百合，不是一株野草，唯一能证明我是百合的方法，就是开出美丽的花朵。”为了这个目标，它努力地吸收水分和阳光，深深地扎根，直直地挺起胸膛;为了这个目标，它忍受着他人的嘲讽，努力释放内心的力量。终于，它开花了，它那灵性的白和秀挺的风姿，成为断崖上最美丽的颜色。“有志者，事竟成。”百合开出鲜艳的花朵，靠的就是坚持不懈，它向我们诠释了这句话的真正含义。

许多作出卓越贡献的伟人无不是靠着这种持之以恒的精神才获得最终成功的。明代史学家谈迁用二十多年心血写成的《国榷》被小偷盗走，他却很快从痛苦中挣脱出来，从头撰写这部史书;诺贝尔为了发明炸药，投入了他的整个生命，实验中，弟弟被炸死，父亲被炸成残废，但是他毫不气馁，靠自己的毅力为人类做出了贡献;现代著名书画家齐白石，数十年艺术生涯中，始终没有停止挥毫作画，他的技艺才达到炉火纯青的境界……

其实，我们又何尝不需要这样的精神呢?学习上坚持不懈，能取得优异的成绩;生活中持之以恒，能够收获良好的习惯。记得上学期冬锻活动中，我们要绕着操场跑三圈。而体育却是我的弱项，跑到第二圈时，我觉得体力不支，两腿发软，真想停下来好好休息一会儿，可这时，我的脑海中跳出了两个字：坚持。那一个个靠坚持成功的例子不停地在我眼前出现，是的，我也要坚持。于是，我继续跑着。最后，成功地跑完两圈，我的心里万分激动：坚持，我不仅收获了成功，还享受到了成功的喜悦。

所以，我更加敬仰这株百合，“人的一生，应当像这美丽的花，自己无所求，而却给人以美。”这美不仅在于花朵的美，更在于它的坚持不懈，在于这种精神上的美。

同学们，曾经的无忧无虑离我们远去，丰富多彩的童年渐行渐远。时间，就像握在手中的沙子，你越想握紧它，它却流逝得越快。懵懵懂懂中，我们进入了中学，虽然说中学是学习的黄金时段，但是我们的生活却被语文，数学，英语，历史，生物，物理……等等科目填满。花开花落，一季又一季，如此单调无味，枯燥的生活，我们一定也时常期待幸运女神的降临，成功意外地发生在我们身上。但是，光阴荏苒，奇迹的成功对于我们依然难得一见。所以，我想对你们说：成功绝不是偶然，成功只能从一点一滴的勤奋开始。

古人说得好“书山有路勤为径，学海无涯苦作舟”这是对我们诉说着勤奋的重要性，勤奋是通向成功的最佳路径。虽然每一个勤奋的人不一定都成功，但成功的人却一定出自勤奋。在平常的生活中，总听到同学们抱怨，“为什么我不是天才？”“为什么我不能成功？”其实所谓的天才获得的成功，正是出于他们的勤奋和努力。众所周知，杂交水稻之父——袁隆平，他培育出来的讪型杂交水稻，被称为“东方魔稻”。袁隆平经历文化大革命，在没有任何研究器材，甚至在研究的过程中，还受到红卫兵、文革小组的阻挠。但他还是凭着自己的勤奋，日以继夜地找资料；凭着简陋的试验地，还有那拼了命保护的种子，年复一年地尝试。使中国用占世界7%的耕地养活了占世界22%的人口成为了一个奇迹。

古往今来，外国的成功者自己的奋斗历程也无一例外地向我们验证了这一成功的真谛。大发明家，爱迪生，少年家境贫困，仅仅读了3个月的书，当时他在班里成绩很低，但他并不灰心，依然勤奋。摘写了45万页的材料，从1600多种矿物质和600多种植物中研制出了灯泡和灯丝，发明了电灯，取得了成功。居里夫人在一间木制板架下经过4年坚持不懈的研究发现了镭……他们都是天才吗？不是！他们的成功都在于他们的勤奋。

这一切的一切，都告诉我们，没有意外的成功，只有通过勤奋地付出。虽然说只有经历过的人才知道，青涩的果子是如何成熟在枝头。但是，我希望还没有获得成功的同学们，一定要继续勤奋地学习，总有一天，你会获得成功！

一勤天下无难事。从古到今，有多少名人不是有勤奋而得来成功的?三国时吴国的吕蒙，近代数学家华罗庚，不都是经过了自己的勤奋而取得成功的吗?爱迪生还说过：“巨大的成就，出与长期的勤奋。”因此，成功来自勤奋。

成功与勤奋有着密不可分的关系，成功是勤奋的结果，而勤奋则是成功的必备条件。成功的关键在于勤奋，勤能补拙是良训，一分辛劳一分才，只有勤奋才能取得成功。传说古希腊有一个叫德摩斯梯尼的演说家，因小时口吃，登台演讲时，声音含混，发音不准，常常被雄辩的对手压倒。可是他气不馁，心不灰，为克服这个弱点，战胜雄辩的对手，便每天口含石子面对大海朗诵，不管春夏秋冬，坚持五十年如一日，连爬山，跑步也边走边做演说，终于成为全希腊一个最有名气的演说家。这样的事例不正说明勤奋可以克服一切困难，战胜一切，从而取得成功吗?不是正告诉人们，一切事物都要勤奋吗?

如果一个人天生有聪明的才智，可后天不注意培养，不勤奋，不学习，那他终究不会成功!宋代有个名叫方仲永的“神童”，五岁便会作诗，被乡里称为奇才，可谓聪明过人;但他出名后，不再勤奋上进，而是整天由他父亲带着到处吃喝受礼，结果诗才枯竭，终于“泯然众人矣”。看了这样的事例，一定感受颇深，如果方仲永不由他父亲摆布，如果他继续勤奋上进，那他一定回取得更大的成功!可见勤奋的重要性.再例如,伟大的物理学家爱因斯坦在上学的时候,并不是一名成绩出色的学生,老师甚至说他是"智能底下的人".可是他毫不泄气,勤于学习,虽只上了3个月的学校就被迫离开学校,但没有失去信心,反而成为了一名举世闻名的科学巨匠.还有,闻名世界的大发明家爱迪生,上小学的时候被老师称为"智能底下的人",只上了3个月的学就被迫离开了学校,但他并不因此而丧失了信心,反而以顽强的一直勤奋学习,最后终于成了举世闻名的大发明家.这一切都证明了成功来自勤奋,然而一个人学会了勤奋,也就意味着他必定会成功.

成功之路，哪里会有什么成功秘诀。成功之路，哪里会有什么捷径可走。那只不过只是自己在背后辛勤付出的结果罢了！也许成果能够对于我们来说是真的难，但我们想一想，生活没有了难，我们的生活将是无味的，将是无趣的，那样的生活，我们真想拥有吗？生活正以为有了各种的苦难，我们才会不断的去努力。那样的我们，才是真的快乐！成功路上没有捷径，却只有努力和机遇！命运是靠我们自己的，希望，会做得更好吧！

努力

努力，其实并不是一件坏事，因为我们是为了自己。正是为了自己，我们才会感到值得。正因为值得，我们才会用心去做！做好一切。也许努力了，就会比别人更加的优秀吧！或许现在的我们很差劲，但是唯一能够有改变我们的却只有自己了！因为自己的命运自己掌握！努力了总会有收获的，那就要看我们的行动了！相信自己，我能行！

机遇

机遇，其实是很难的。这要看我们是否能够抓住了！也许在生活中，机遇常常会从我们身边而过！但我们却无能为力。却只能感到惋惜！因为每一次的机遇都不是太容易来临的！也许一个机遇就能够改变一个人的一生！也许就遇就在我们身边，那就要看我们是否努力了！是否抓住了！相信，我们的成长，命运的改变，我们的成熟未来。机遇失去，便永不再来！请珍惜现在，做好自己。相信明天的明天将会更好！人生中有很多的路要走，而机遇错过了终究只是错过了。做好今天，相信，明天的明天将会更好吧！

成长需要努力和机遇，请相信，努力一定要多一些，因为失去了终究只是失去了！错过了终究只是错过了！机遇很少，尚且珍惜。不要让人生留下太多的遗憾，不要永远错失良机！因为有些事不能在重来的！

成功需要努力和机遇，相信，我们为了梦想，为了理想！不断的努力，明天的我们将会更好！

勤奋+尽力而为=成功上天很公平，他赐个勤奋的人丰富的果实，给尽力而为的人如愿以偿。那么你呢？你是否有获得上天赐给你的礼物？

首先来谈谈勤奋。勤奋就好像沸腾的水，但是，难道水壶一放到烧水炉上就能沸腾吗？不，沸腾的原因是因为水是炽热的，只有炽热才能产生沸腾。极度的炽热也就换回了极度的成功，极度的坚强，极度的荣誉。世界上难道有无缘无故成功的人吗？要想得到成功，你首先要学会付出，只有付出才有回报，不是吗？从现在开始，你不要羡慕别人的成就，你要知道，那成就里面凝聚了多少的艰辛，多少的付出！不要抱怨自己的天赋多么不好，不要抱怨自己的运气多么不佳。从现在开始，不要抱怨自己得到太少，而是先审视自己的不是。再问问自己：你的水是不是已经沸腾了？

其次再来看看尽力而为，有多少人能做到尽力而为呢？你去拼了，你尽力而为了，但是输了，这时，你不应该为自己的失败而垂头丧气，而是为自己的尽力而为感到高兴，“败”也“败”得无所畏惧。拼搏，可以让成功更进一步，尽力而为，可以让你在成功之路上跃过别人一步！尽力而为，这应当是人世间最容易而又最难做到的吧？你，从现在开始，尽力而为吧！

成功，来之不易。可成功，是有方法的。

文章采用总分总的结构，开篇提出论点，中间进行论述，结尾与开头相呼应，突出论点，层次清晰有条理，在内容上论据充分，论述合理，语言准确精炼富有感染力。

[勤奋+尽力而为=成功小学作文

下面的材料旨在丰富学生在是非问题写作方面的思想和语言，考生在复习时可以先分类阅读这些篇章，然后尝试写相关方面的作文题。

对于素材中用黑体字的部分，特别建议你熟读，背诵，因为它们在语言和观点上都值得吸收。学习语言的人应该明白，表达能力和思想深度都靠日积月累，潜移默化。从某种意义上说，提高英语写作能力无捷径可走，你必须大段背诵英语文章才能逐渐形成语感和用英语进行表达的能力。这一关，没有任何人能代替你过。

因此，建议你下点苦功夫，把背单词的精神拿出来背诵文章。何况，并不是要求你背了之后永远牢记在心：你可以这个星期背，下个星期忘。这没有关系，相信你的大脑具有神奇的能力。背了工具箱里的文章后，你会惊讶的发现：I can think in English now！

1.?????? Proverbs

1. A graduation ceremony is an event where the commencement speaker tells thousands of students dressed in identical caps and gowns that individuality is the key to success.

2. The primary purpose of a liberal education is to make one’s mind a pleasant place in which to spend one’s time.

3. Next in importance to freedom and justice is popular education, without which neither freedom nor justice can be permanently maintained.

4. The classroom--not the trench--is the frontier of freedom now and forevermore.

5. Education’s purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one.

6. It is the purpose of education to help us become autonomous, creative, inquiring people who have the will and intelligence to create our own destiny.

7. You see, real ongoing, lifelong education doesn’t answer questions; it provokes them.

8. People will pay more to be entertained than educated.

9.the most important function of education at any level is to develop the personality of the individual and the significance of his life to himself and to others. This is the basic architecture of a life; the rest is ornamentation and decoration of the structure.

10. The essence of our efforts to see that every child has a chance must be to assure each as equal opportunity, not to become equal, but to become different-to realize whatever unique potential of body, mind, and spirit he or she possesses.

11. A great teacher never strives to explain his vision-he simply invites you to stand beside him and see for yourself.

12. If you can read and don’, you are an illiterate by choice.

2. Damaging Research

A study by National Parent-Teacher Organization revealed that in the average American school, eighteen negatives are identified for every positive that is pointed out. The Wisconsin study revealed that when children enter the first grade, 80 percent of them feel pretty good themselves, but by the time they get to the sixth grade, only 10 percent of them have good self-images.

3. Education and Citizenship

An important aspect of education in the United States is the relationship between education and citizenship. Throughout its history this nation has emphasized public education as a means of transmitting democratic values, creating equality of opportunity, and preparing new generations of citizens to function in society. In addition, the schools have been expected to help shape society itself. During the 1950s, for example, efforts to combat racial segregation focused on the schools. Later, when the Soviet Union launched the first orbiting satellite, American schools and colleges came under intense pressure and were offered many incentives to improve their science and mathematics programs so that the nations would not fall behind the Soviet Union in scientific and technological capabilities.

Education is often viewed as a tool for solving social problems, especially social inequality. The schools, t is thought, can transform young people from vastly different backgrounds into competent, upwardly mobile adults. Yet these goals seem almost impossible to attain. In recent years, in fact, public education has been at the center of numerous controversies arising from the gap between the ideal and the reality. Part of the problem is that different groups in society have different have different expectations. Some feel that children should be taught basic job-related skills; still others believe education should not only prepare children to compete in society but also help them maintain their cultural identity (and, in the case of Hispanic children, their language). On the other hand, policymakers concerned with education emphasize the need to increase the level of student achievement and to improve parents in their children’s education.

Some reformers and critics have called attention to the need to link formal schooling with programs designed to address social problems. Sociologist Charles Moscos, for example, is a leader in the movement to expand programs like the Peace Corps, Vista, and Outward Bound into a system of voluntary national service. National service, as Moscos defines it, would entail “the full-time undertaking of public duties by young people whether as citizen soldiers or civilian servers-who are paid subsistence wages” and serve for at least one year. In return for this period of service, the volunteers would receive assistance in paying for college or other educational expenses.

Advocates of national service and school-to-work programs believe that education does not have to be confined to formal schooling. In devising strategies to provide opportunities for young people to serve their society, they emphasize the educational value of citizenship experiences gained outside the classroom. At this writing there is little indication that national service will become a new educational institution in the United States, although the concept is steadily gaining support among educators and social critics.

4. The Teacher’s Role

Given the undeniable importance of classroom experience, sociologists have done a considerable amount of research on what goes on in the classroom. Often they start from the premise that, along with the influence of peers, students’ experiences in the classroom are of central importance to their later development. One study examined the impact of a single first-grade teacher on her students’ subsequent adult status. The surprising results of this study have important implications. It is evident that good teachers can make a big difference in children’s lives, a fact that gives increased urgency to the need to improve the quality of primary-school teaching. The reforms carried out by educational leaders like James Comer suggest that when good teaching is combined with high levels of parental involvement the results can be even more dramatic.

Because the role of the teacher is to change the learner in some way, the teacher-student relationship is an important part of education. Sociologists have pointed out that this relationship is asymmetrical or unbalanced, with the teacher being in a position of authority and the student having little choice but to passively absorb the information provided by the teacher. In other words, in conventional classrooms there is little opportunity for the students to become actively involved in the learning process. On the other hand, students often develop strategies for undercutting the teacher’s authority: mentally withdrawing, interrupting, and the like. Hence, much current research assumes that students and teachers influence each other instead of assuming that the influence is always in a single direction.

5. Education Philosophy

For the past fifty years our schools have operated on the theories of John Dewey (1859-1953), an American educator and writer. Dewey believed hat the school’s job was to enhance the natural development of the growing child, rather than to pour information, for which the child had no context, into him or her. In the Dewey system, the child becomes the active agent in his own education, rather than a passive receptacle for facts.

Consequently, American schools are very enthusiastic about teaching “life skills” –logical thinking, analysis, creative problem--solving. The actual content of the lessons is secondary to the process, which is supposed to train the child to be able to handle whatever life may present, including all the unknowns of the future. Students and teachers both regard pure memorization as an uncreative and somewhat vulgar.

In addition to “life skills”, schools are assigned to solve the ever growing stoke of social problems. Racism, teenage pregnancy, alcoholism, drug use, reckless driving, and are just a few of the modern problems that have appeared on the school curriculum.

This all contributes to a high degree of social awareness in American youngsters.

6. Student Life

To the students, the most notable difference between elementary school and the higher levels is that in junior high they start “changing classes”. This means that rather than spending the day in one classroom, they switch classrooms to meet their different teachers. This gives them three or four minutes between classes in the hallways, where a great deal of the important social action of high school traditionally takes place. Students have lockers in these hallways, around which thy congregate.

Society in general does not take the business of studying very seriously. Schoolchildren have a great deal of free time, which they are encouraged to fill with extracurricular activities—sports, clubs, cheerleading, scouts—supposed to inculcate such qualities as leadership, sportsmanship, ability to organize, etc. those who don’t become engaged in such activities or have afterschool jobs have plenty of opportunity to “hang out”, listen to teenager music, and watch television.

Compared to other nations, American students do not have much homework. Studies also show that American parents have lower expectations for their children’s success in school than other nationalities do. (Historically, there has not been much correlation between American school success and success in later life.) “He’s just not a scholar”, the American parents might say, content that their son is on the swim team and doesn’t take drugs. (Some of the young do choose to study hard, for reason of their own, such as determining that the road to riches lies through Harvard Business School.)

What American schools do effectively teach is the competitive method. In innumerable ways children are pitted against each other—whether in classroom discussion, spelling bees, reading groups, or tests. Every classroom is expected to produce a scattering of A’s and F’s (teachers often grade A=excellent; B=good; C=average; D=poor; and F=failed). A teacher who gives all A’s looks too soft—so students are aware that they are competing for the limited number of top marks.

Foreign students sometimes don’t understand that copying from other people’s papers or from books is considered wrong and taken seriously. Here, it is important to show that you have done your own work and are displaying your own knowledge. It is more important than helping your friends to pass, whom we think do not deserve to pass unless they can provide their own answers. Group effort goes against the competitive grain, and American students do not study together as many Asians do. Many Asians in this country consider their group study habits a large contributor to their school success.

7. Adult Education

After complaining about many aspects of American life, a 40-year-old woman from Hong Kong concluded, “But where else could someone my age go back to school and get a degree in social work? Here you can change your whole life, start a new business, do what you really want to do.”

So at least to this person, school requirements weren’t inhibiting. And to millions of others, adult education is the path to a new career, or if not to a new career, to a new outlook. Schools generally encourage the older person who wants to start anew, and besides regular classes, schedule evening classes in special programs. Today there are so many people of retirement age in college that it is no longer remarkable.

8. Moral Relativism in American

Improving American education requires not doing new things but doing (and remembering) some good old things. At the time of our nation’s founding, Thomas Jefferson listed the requirements for a sound education in the Report of the Commissioners for the University of Virginia. In this landmark statement on American education, Jefferson wrote of the importance of education and writing, and of reading history, and geography. But he also emphasized the need “to instruct the mass of our citizens in these, their rights, interests, and duties, as men and citizens.” Jefferson believed education should aim at the improvement of both one’s “morals” and “faculties”. That has been the dominant view of the aims of American education for over two centuries. But a number of changes, most of them unsound, have diverted schools from these great pursuits. And the story of the loss of the school’s original moral mission explains a great deal.

Starting in the early seventies, “values clarification” programs started turning up in schools all over America. According to this philosophy, the schools were not to take part in their time-honored task of transmitting sound moral values; rather, they were to allow the child to “clarify” his own values (which adults, including parents, had no “rights” to criticize). The “values clarification” movement didn’t clarify values; it clarified wants and desires. This form of moral relativism said, in effect, that no set of values was right or wrong; everybody had an equal right to his own values; and all values were subjective, relative, and personal. This destructive view took hold with a vengeance.

In 1985 The York Times published an article quoting New York area educators, in slavish devotion to this new view, proclaiming, “They deliberately avoid trying to tell students what is ethically right and wrong.” The article told of one counseling session involving fifteen high school juniors and seniors. In the course of that session a student concluded that a fellow student had been foolish to return one thousand dollars she found in a purse at school. According to the article, when the youngsters asked the counselor’s opinion, “He told them he believed the girl had done the right thing, but that, of course, he would not try to force his values on them. ‘If I come from the position of what is wrong,’ he explained, ‘then I’m not their counselor.’”

Once upon a time, a counselor offered counselor, and he knew that an adult does not form character in the young by taking a stance of neutrality toward questions of right and wrong or by merely offering “choices” or “options”.

In response to the belief that adults and educators should teach children sound morals, one can expect from some quarters indignant objections (I’ve heard one version of it expressed countless times over the years): “Who are you to say what’s important?” or “Whose standards and judgments do we use?”

The correct response, it seems to me, is, is we ready to do away with standards and judgments? Is anyone going to argue seriously that a life of cheating and swindling is as worthy as a life of honest, hard work? Is anyone (with the exception of some literature professors at our elite universities) going to argue seriously the intellectual corollary, that a Marvel comic book is as good as Macbeth? Unless we are willing to embrace some pretty silly position, we’ve got to admit the need for moral and intellectual standards. The problem is that some people tend to regard anyone who would pronounce a definitive judgment as an unsophisticated Philistine or a closed-minded “elitist” trying to impose his view on everybody else.

The truth of the real world is that without standards and judgments, there can be no progress. Unless we are prepared to say irrational things—that nothing can be proven more valuable than anything else or that everything is equally worthless—we must ask the normative question. It may come, as a surprise to those who fell that to be “progressive” is to be value-neutral. But as Matthew Amold said, “the world is forwarded by having its attention fixed on the best things” and if the world can’t decide what the best things are, at least to some degree, then it follows that progress, and character, is in trouble. We shouldn’t be reluctant to declare that some things, some lives, books, ideas, and values are better than others. It is the responsibility of the schools to teach these better things.

At one time, we weren’t so reluctant to teach them. In the mid-nineteenth century, a diverse, widespread group of crusaders began to work for the public support of what was then called the “common school”, the forerunner of the public school. They were to be charged with the mission of school felt that the nation could fulfill its destiny only if every new generation was taught these values together in a common institution.

The leaders of the common school movement were mainly citizens who were prominent in their communities—businessmen, ministers, local civic and government officials. These people saw the schools as upholders of standards of individual morality and small incubators of civic and personal virtue; the founders of the public schools had faith that public education could teach good moral and civic character from a common ground of American values.

But in the past quarter century or so, some of the so-called experts became experts of value neutrality, and moral education was increasingly left in their hands. The commonsense view of parents and the publicthat schools should reinforce rather than undermine the values of home, family, and country, was increasingly rejected.

There are those today still that claim we are now too diverse a nation, that we consist of too many competing convictions and interests to instill common values. They are wrong. Of course we are a diverse people. We have always been a diverse people. And as Madison wrote in FederalistNo.10, the competing, balancing interests of a diverse people can help ensure the survival of liberty. But there are values that all American citizens share and that we should want all American students to know and to make their own: honesty, fairness, self-discipline, fidelity to task, friends, and family, personal responsibility, love of country, and belief in the principles of liberty, equality, and the freedom to practice one’s faith. The explicit teaching of these values is the legacy of the common schools, and it is a legacy to which we must return.

9. Schools Should Teach Values

People often said, “Yes, we should teach these values, but how do we teach them?” this question deserves a candid response, one that isn’t given often enough. It is by exposing our children to good character and inviting its imitation that we will transmit to them a moral foundation. This happens when teachers and principals, by their words and actions, embody sound convictions. As Oxford’s Mary Warnock has written, “You cannot teach morality without being committed to morality yourself; and you cannot be committed to morality yourself without holding that some things are right and others wrong.” The theologian Martin Buber wrote that the educator is distinguished from all other influences “by his will to take part in the stamping of character and by his consciousness that he represents in the eyes of the growing person a certain selection of what is, the selection of what is ‘right’, of what should be.” It is in this will, Buber says, in this clear standing for something, that the “vocation as an educator finds its fundamental expression.”

There is no escaping the fact that young people need as example principals and teachers who know the difference between right and wrong, good and bad, and who themselves exemplify high moral purpose.

As Education Secretary, I visited a class at Waterbury Elementary School in Waterbury, Vermont, and asked the students, “Is this a good school?” They answered, “Yes, this is a good school.” I asked them, “Why?” Among other things, one eight-year-old said, “The principal Mr. Riegel, makes good rules and everybody obeys them.” So I said, “Give me an example.” And another answered, “You can’t climb on the pipes in the bathroom. We don’t climb on the pipes and the principal doesn’t either.”

This example is probably too simple to please a lot of people who want to make the topic of moral education difficult, but there is something profound in the answer of those children, something education should pay more attention to. You can’t expect children to take messages about rules or morality seriously unless they see adults taking those rules seriously in their day-to-day affairs. Certain must be said, certain limits lay down, and certain examples set. There is no other way.

We should also do a better job at curriculum selection. The research shows that most “values education” exercises and separate courses in “moral reasoning” tend not to affect children’s behavior; if anything, they may leave children morally adrift. Where to turn? I believe our literature and our history are a rich quarry of moral literacy. We should mine that quarry. Children should have at their disposal a stock of examples illustrating what we believe to be right and wrong, good and bad—examples illustrating what are morally right and wrong can indeed be known and that there is a difference.

What kind of stories, historical events, and famous lives am I talking about? If we want our children to know about honesty, we should teach them about Abe Lincoln walking three miles to return six cents and conversely, about Aesop’s shepherd boy who cried wolf if we want them to know about courage, we should teach them about Joan of Arc, Horatius at the bridge, and Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad. If we want them to know about persistence in the face of adversity, they should know about the voyages of Columbus and the character of Washington during the Civil War. And our youngest should be told about the Little Engine That Could. If we want them to know about respect for the law, they should understand why Socrates told Crito: “No, I must submit to the decree of Athens.” If we want our children to respect the rights of others, they should read the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, the Gettysburg Address, and Martin Luther King, Jr.’ “Letter from Birmingham jail.” From the Bible they should know about Ruth’s loyalty to Naomi, Joseph’s forgiveness of his brothers, Jonathan’s friendship with David, the Good Samaritan’s kindness toward a stranger, and David’s cleverness and courage in facing Goliath.

These are only a few of the hundreds of examples we can call on. And we need not get into issues like nuclear war, abortion, creationism, or euthanasia. This may come as a disappointment to some people, but the fact is that the formation of character in young people is educationally a task different from, and prior to, the discussion of the great, difficult controversies of the day. First things come first. We should teach values the same way we teach other things: one step at a time. We should not use the fact that there are many difficult and controversial moral questions as an argument against basic instruction in the subject.

After all, we do not argue against teaching physics because laser physics is difficult, against teaching American history because there are heated disputes about the Founders’ intent. Every field has its complexities and its controversies. And every field has its basics, its fundamentals. So they are too with forming character and achieving moral literacy. As any parent knows, teaching character is a difficult task. But it is a crucial task, because we want our children to be healthy, happy, and successful but decent, strong, and good. None of this happens automatically; there is no genetic transmission of virtue. It takes the conscious, committed efforts of adults. It takes careful attention.

10. College Pressures

Mainly I try to remind that the road ahead is a long one and that it will have more unexpected turns than they think. There will be plenty of time to change jobs, change careers, change whole attitudes and approaches. They don not want to hear such liberating news. They want a map—right now – that they can follow unswervingly to career security, financial security, Social Security and, presumably, a prepaid grave.

What I wish for all students is some release from the clammy grip of the future. I wish them a chance to savor each segment of their education as an experience in itself and not as a grim preparation for the next step. I wish them the right to experiment, to trip and fall, to learn that defeat is as instructive as victory and is not the end of the world.

My wish, of course, is na?ve. One of the national gods venerated in our media—the million-dollar athlete, the wealthy executive—and glorified in our praise of possessions. In the presence of such a potent state religion, the young are growing up old.

I see four kinds of pressure working on college students today: economic pressure, parental pressure, peer pressure, and self-induced pressure. It is easy to look around for villains—to blame the colleges for charging too much money, the professors for assigning too much work, the parents for pushing their children too far, and the students for driving themselves too hard. But there are no villains: only victims.

“In the late 1960s.” one dean told me. “The typical question that I got from students was ‘Why is there so much suffering in the world’ or ‘how I can make a contribution?’ Today it’s ‘Do you think it would look better for getting into law school if I did a double major in history and political science, or just majored in one of them?’” many other deans confirmed this pattern. One said: “They are trying to find an edge—the intangible something that will look better on paper if two students are about equal.”

Note the emphasis on looking better. The transcript has become a sacred document, the passport to security. How one appears on paper is more important than how one appears in person. A is for Admirable and B is for Borderline, even though, in Yale’s official system of grading, A means “excellent” and B means “very good.” Today, looking very good is no longer good enough, especially for students who hope to go on to law school or medical school. They know that entrance into the better schools will be an entrance into the better law firms and better medical practices where they will make a lot of money. They also know that the odds are harsh. Yale Law School, for instance, matriculates 170students from an applicant pool of 3,700; Harvard enrolls 550 from a pool of 7,000.

It’s all very well for those of us who write letters of recommendation for our students to stress the qualities of humanity that will make them good lawyers or doctors. And it’s nice to think that admission officers are ready reading our letters and looking for the extra dimension of commitment or concern. Still, it would be hard for a student not to visualize these officers shuffling so many transcripts studded with As that they regard a B as positively shameful.

The pressure is almost as heavy on students who just want to graduate and get a job. Long gone are the days of the “gentleman’s C.” when students journeyed through college with a certain relaxation, sampling a wide variety of courses-music, art, philosophy, classics, anthropology, poetry, religion—that would send them out as liberally educated men and women. If I were an employer I would rather employ graduates who have this range and curiosity than those who narrowly pursued safe subjects and high grades. I know countless students whose inquiring minds exhilarate me. I like to hear the play of their ideas. I do not know if they are getting As or Cs, and I do not care. I also like them as people. The country needs them, and they will find satisfying jobs. I tell them to relax. They cannot.

Nor can I blame them. They live in a brutal economy. Tuition, room, and board at most private colleges now come to at least $7,000, not counting books and fees. This might seem to suggest that the colleges are getting rich. But they are equally battered by inflation. Tuition covers only 60 percent of what it costs to educate a student, and ordinarily the remainder comes from what college receives in endowments, grants, and gifts. Now, the remainder keeps being swallowed by the cruel costs—higher every year—of just opening the doors. Heating oil is up. Insurance is up. Postage is up. Health-premium costs are up. Everything is up. Deficits are up. We are witnessing in American the creation of a brotherhood of paupers—colleges, parents, and students, joined by the common bond of debt.

Today it is not unusual for a student, even if he works part time at college and full time during the summer, to accrue $5,000 in loans after four years—loans that he must start to repay within one year after graduation. Exhorted at commencement to go forth into the world, he is already behind as he goes forth. How could he not feel under pressure throughout college to prepare for this day of reckoning? I have used “he,” incidentally, only for brevity. Women at Yale are under no less pressure to justify their expensive education to themselves, their parents, and society. In fact, they are probably under more pressure. For although they leave college superbly equipped to bring fresh leadership to traditionally male jobs, society has not yet caught up with this fact.

Along with economic pressure goes parental pressure. Inevitably, the two are deeply intertwined.

I see many students taking pre-medical courses with joyless tenacity. They go off to their labs as if they were going to the dentist. It saddens me because I know tem in other corners of their life as cheerful people.

“Do you want to medical school?” I asked them.

“I guess so,” they say, without conviction, or “Not really.”

“Then why are you going?”

“Well, my parents want me to be a doctor. They are paying all this money and …”

Poor students, poor parents, they are caught in one of the oldest webs of love and duty and guilt. The parents mean will; they are trying to steer their sons and draughts toward a secure future. But the sons and daughter want to major in history or classics or philosophy—subjects with no “practical” value. Where’s the payoff on the humanities? It’s not easy to persuade such loving parents that the humanities do indeed pay off. The intellectual faculties developed by studying subjects like history and classics—an ability to synthesize and relate, to weigh cause and effect, to see events in perspective—are just the faculties that make creative leaders in business or almost any general field. Still, many fathers would rather put their money on courses that point toward specific profession—courses that are pre-law, pre-medical, pre-business, or, as I sometimes heard it put, “pre-rich.”

But the pressure on students is severe. They are truly torn. One part of them feels obliged to fulfill their parents’ expectations; after all, their parents are older and presumably wiser. Another part tells them that the expectations that are right for their parents are not right for them.

I know a student who wants to be an artist. She is very obviously an artist and will be a good one—she has already had several modest local exhibits. Meanwhile she is growing as a well-round person and taking humanistic subjects that will enrich the inner resources out of which her art will grow. But her father is strongly opposed. He thinks that an artist is a “dumb” thing to be. The student vacillates and tries to please everybody. She keeps up with her art somewhat furtively and takes some of the “dumb” courses her father wants her to take—at least they are dumb courses for her. She is a free spirit on a campus of tense students—no small achievement in it—and she deserves to follow her muse.

Peer pressure and self-induced pressure are also intertwined, and they begin almost at the beginning of freshman year.

“I had a freshman student I’ll call Linda,” one dean told me, “who came in and said she was under terrible pressure because her roommate, Barbara, was much brighter and studied all the time. I could not tell her that Barbara had come in two hours earlier to say the same thing about Linda.”

The story is almost funny—except that it is not. It is symptomatic of all the pressure put together. When every student thinks every other student is working harder and doing better, the only solution is to study harder still. I see students going off to the library every night after dinner and coming back when it closes at midnight. I wish they would sometimes forget about their peers and go to a movie. I hear the clacking of typewriters in the hours before dawn. I see the tension in their eyes when exams are approaching and papers are due: “Will I get everything done?”

Probably they won’t. They will get blocked. They will sleep. They will oversleep. They will bug out.

Part of the problem is that they are expected to do. A professor will assign five page papers. Several students will start writing ten page papers to impress him. Then more students will write ten page papers, and a few will raise the ante to fifteen. Pity the poor student who is still just doing the assignment.

“Once you have twenty or thirty percent of the student population deliberately overexerting,” one dean points out, “It’s bad for everybody. When a teacher gets more and more effort from his class, the student who is doing normal work can be perceived as not doing well. The tactic work, psychologically.”

Why cannot the professor just cut back and not accept longer papers? He can, and he probably will. But by then the term will be half over and the damage done. Grade fever is highly contagious and not easily reversed. Besides, the professor’s main concern is with his course. He knows his students only in relation to the course and does not know that they are also overexerting in their other courses. Nor is it really his business. He did not sign up for dealing with the student as a whole person and with all the emotional baggage the student brought along from home. That’s what deans, masters, chaplains, and psychiatrists are for.

To some extent this is nothing new: a certain number of professors have always been self-contained islands of scholarship and shyness, more comfortable with books than with people. But the new pauperism has widened the gap still further, for professors who actually like to spend time with students do not have as much time to spend. They are also overexerting. If they are young, they are busy trying to publish in order not to perish, hanging by their figure nails onto a shrinking profession.

If they are old and tenured, they are buried under the duties of administering departments—as departmental chairmen or members of committees—that have been thinned out by the budgetary axe.

Ultimately it will be the students’ own business to break the circles in which they are trapped. They are too young to be prisoners of their parents’ dreams and their classmates’ fears. They must be jolted into believing into themselves as unique men and women who have the power to shape their own future.

“Violence is being done to the undergraduate experience,” says Carlos Hortas. “College should be open-ended: at the end it should open many, many roads. Instead, students are choosing their goal in advance, and their choices narrow as they go along. It’s almost as if they think that the country has been codified in the type of jobs that exist-that they’ve got to fit into certain slots. Therefore, fit into the best paying slot.”

“They ought to take chances. Not taking chances will lead to life of colorless mediocrity. They’ll be comfortable. But something in the spirit will be missing.”

I have painted too drab a portrait of today’s students, making them seem a solemn lot. That is only half of their story; if they were so dreary I wouldn’t so thoroughly enjoy their company. The other half is that they are easy to like. They are quick to laugh and to offer friendship. They are not introverts. They are usually kind and are more considerate of one another than any student generation I have known.

Nor are they so obsessed with their studies that they avoid sports and extracurricular activities. On the contrary, they juggle their crowded hours to play on a variety of teams, perform with musical and dramatic groups, and write for campus publications. But this in turn is one more cause of anxiety. There are too many choices. Academically, they have 1,300 courses to select from; outside class they have to decide how much spare time they can spare and how to spend it.

This means that they engage in fewer extracurricular pursuits than their predecessors did. If they want to row on the crew and play in the symphony they will eliminate one; in the ‘60s they would have done both. They also tend to choose activities that are self-limiting. Drama, for instance, is flourishing in all twelve of Yale’s residential colleges, as it never has before. Students hurl themselves into these productions—as actors, directors, carpenters, and technicians—with a dedication to create the best possible play, knowing that the day will come when the run will end and they can get back to their studies.

They also cannot afford to be the willing slave of organizations like the Yale Daily News. Last spring at the one-hundredth anniversary banquet of that paper—who’s past chairmen include such once and future kings as Potter Stewart, Kingman Brewster, and William F. Buckley, Jr.—much was made of the fact that the editorial staff used to be small and totally committed and that “newsies” routinely worked fifty hours a week. In effect they belonged to a club; Newsies is how they defined themselves at Yale. Today’s students will one or two articles a week, when he can, and he defines himself as a student. I’ve never heard the word Newsie except at the banquet.

If I have described the modern undergraduate primarily as a driven creature who is largely ignoring the blithe spirit inside who keeps trying to come out and play, it’s because that’s where the crunch is, not only at Yale but throughout American education. It’s why I think we should all be worried about the values that are nurturing a generation so fearful of risk and so goal-obsessed at such an early age.

I tell students that there is no one “right” way to get ahead—that each of them is a different person, starting from a different point and bound for a different destination. I tell neither them that change is a tonic and that all the slots are not codified nor the frontiers closed. One of my ways of telling them is to invite men and women who have achieved success outside the academic world to come and talk informally with my students during the year. They are heads of companies or ad agencies, editors of magazines, politicians, public officials, television magnates, labor leaders, business executives, Broadway products, artists, writers, economists, photographers, scientists, historians—a mixed bag of achievers.

I asked them to say a few words about how they got started. The students assume that they started in their present profession and knew all along that it was what they wanted to do. Luckily for me, most of them got into their field by a circuitous route, to their surprise, after many detours. The students are startled. They can hardly conceive of a career that was not pre-planned. They can hardly imagine allowing the hand of God or chance to nudge them down some unforeseen trail.

11. To Err Is Wrong

In the summer of 1979, Boston Red Sox first baseman Carl Yastrzemski became the fifteenth player in baseball history to reach the three thousand hit plateaus. This event drew a lot of media attention, and for about a week prior to the attainment of this goal, hundreds of reports covered Yaz’s every more. Finally, one reporter asked, “Hey Yaz, aren’t you afraid all of this attention will go to your head?” Yastrzemski replied, “I look at this way: in my career I’ve been up to bat over ten thousand times. That means I’ve been unsuccessful at the plate over seven thousand times. That fact alone keeps me from getting a swollen head.”?

Most people consider success and failure as opposites, but they are actually both products of the same process. As Yaz suggest, an activity that produces a hit may also produce a miss. It is the same with creative thinking; the same energy that generates good creative ideas also produces errors.

Many people, however, are not comfortable with errors. Our educational system, based on “the right answer” belief, cultivates our thinking in another, more conservative way. From an early age, we are taught that right answers are good and incorrect answers are bad. This value is deeply embedded in the incentive system used in most schools:

Right over 90% of the time = “A”

Right over 80% of the time = “B~”

Right over 70% of the time = “C~” Right over 60% of the time = “D~” Less than 60% correct, you fail.

From this we learn to be right as often as possible and to keep our mistakes to a minimum. We learn, in other words, that “to err is wrong.

Playing It Safe

With this kind of attitude, you aren’t going to be taking too many chances. If you learn that failing even a litter penalizes you (e.g., being wrong only 15% of the time garners you only a “B” performance), you learn not to make mistakes. And more important, you learn not to put yourself to situation where you might fall. This leads to conservative thought pattern designed to avoid the stigma our society puts on “failure”.

I have a friend who recently graduated from college with a Master’s degree in Journalism. For the last six month, she has been trying to find a job, but to no avail. I talked with her about situation, and realized that her problem is that she doesn’t know how to fail. She went through eighteen years of schooling to try any approaches where she might fail. She has been conditioned to believe that failure is bad in and of itself, rather than a potential stepping-stone to new ideas.

Look around. How many middle managers, housewives, administrators, teachers, and other people do you see who are to try anything new because of this failure? Most of us have learned not to make mistakes in public. As a result, we remove ourselves from many learning experience except for those occurring in the most private of circumstances.

Different Logic

From a practical point of view, “to err is wrong” makes sense. Our survival in the everyday world requires us to perform thousand of small tasks without failure. Think about it: you wouldn’t last very long if you were to step out in front of traffic or stick your hand a pot of boiling water. In addition, engineers whose bridges collapse, stock brokers who lose money for their clients, and copywriters whose ad campaigns decrease sales won’t keep their jobs very long.

Nevertheless, too great an adherence to the belief “to err is wrong” can greatly undermine your attempts to generate new ideas. If you are more concerned with producing right answers than generating original ideas, you’ll probably make uncritical use of the rules, formulae, and procedures used to obtain these right answers. By doing this, you’ll by-pass the germinal phase of the creative process, and thus spend litter time testing assumptions, challenging the rules, asking what-if questions, or just playing around with the problem. All of these techniques will produce some incorrect answers, but in the germinal phase errors are viewed as a necessary by-product of creative thinking. As Yaz would put it, “if you want the hits, be prepared for the misses.” That’s the way the game of life goes.

Errors as Stepping Stones

Whenever an error pops up, the usual response is “Jeez, another screw up, what went wrong this time?” the creative thinker, on the other hand, will realize the potential value of errors, and perhaps say something like, “Would you look at that! Where can it lead our thinking?” and then he or she will go on to use the error as a stepping stone to a new idea. As a matter of fact, the whole history of discovery is filed with people who used erroneous assumptions and failed ideas as stepping-stones to new ideas. Columbus thought he was finding a shorter route to India. Johannes Kepler stumbled on to the idea of interplanetary gravity because of assumptions that were right for the wrong reasons. And, Thomas Edison knew 1800 ways not to build a light bulb.

The following story about the automotive genius Charles Kettering exemplifies the spirit of working through erroneous assumptions to good ideas. In 1912, when the automobile industry was just beginning to grow, Kettering was interested in improving gasoline engine efficiency. The problem he faced was“knockthe phenomenon in which gasoline takes too long to burn in the cylinder-thereby reducing efficiency.

Kettering began searching for ways to eliminate the “knock.” He thought to him, “How can I get the gasoline to combust in the cylinder at an earlier time?” the key concept here is “early”. Searching for analogous situations, he looked around for models of “things that happen early.” He thought of historical models, physical models, and biological models. Finally, he remembered a particular plant, the trailing arbutus, which “happens early,” i.e., it blooms in the snow (“earlier” than other plants). One of this plant’s chief characteristics is its’ red leaves, which help the plant retain light at certain wavelengths. Kettering figured that it must be the red color, which made the trailing arbutus bloom earlier.

Now came the critical step in Kettering’s chain of thought. He asked himself, “How can I make the gasoline red?” perhaps I’ll put red dye in the gasoline—maybe that’ll make it combust earlier.” He looked around his workshop, and found that he didn’t have any red dye. But he did happen to have some iodine—perhaps that would do. He added the iodine to the gasoline and, lo and behold, the engine didn’t “knock”.

[英语作文写作的需要背诵的部分

10月18日，天气晴朗，秋高气爽，正适合体育锻炼，我早早就起床了，今天我要参加邢周报小记者“广博健身总动员”活动了。

上午8点30分，我刚来到了邢台市体育馆东门，就听到立朦姐姐那熟悉的声音：“小记者们，来集合报数啦！”我赶紧跑了过去，和男生站成一排，报完数后，立朦姐姐带我们去广博健身。进去后，先是热烈奔放、富有活力的拉丁舞表演，后是充满激情的跆拳道表演，黑段高手就是厉害，一个旋风踢，好几块木板瞬间都已“粉身碎骨”，使我们惊叹不已。

看完精彩的表演，我们又来到乒乓球室，王老师给我们普及了一下乒乓球的基础知识，王老师的知识还真渊博，从乒乓球的重量到球台的高度，从邓亚萍到刘诗雯他都能记得很清楚。听完王老师的介绍，我感觉我们的祖国真的很伟大，几乎每届都囊括了全部金牌，总共拿到了100多枚金牌，我为我们的祖国感到骄傲和自豪。

过了一会儿，我们开始举行趣味乒乓球比赛，立朦姐姐把我们小记者分成四组，要求用球拍端乒乓球向前跑，而乒乓球不能落地。轮到我比赛时，就兴高采烈地拿起乒乓球放到球拍上，向前跑去，快要到终点时，心里一激动，乒乓球就落地了，功亏一篑，看来端乒乓球也不容易呀！后来，两位老师开始精彩的乒乓球表演，立朦姐姐把我们分成两组，说道：“先看怎么打，然后再体验……”看到两位老师打得很轻松、很精彩，感觉打乒乓球应该很容易，可真到我们和教练对打时，没打几个回合，就败下阵来，看来想打好乒乓球也不是件容易的事，这真是“台上三分钟，台下十年功”，两位老师之所以表演得如此精彩，这是他们经过30多年练习和积累的结果。

这次活动对我的印象很深，使我体会到要想成功，就需要勤奋学习、刻苦锻炼和长期积累。我以后还要多多参加小记者活动。

执着的精神是成功的润滑剂,有了执着,成功往往就会容易很多,一个人想要成就大事业也必须有执着的精神

对于执着,我的理想是坚持不懈,只有一生不懈做其事,才能最终成功.

小时候,爸爸总是叫我做奥数题,但我却总也做不出来,为什么呢?缺少执着呗!一会儿做做题,一会儿玩玩小熊,再回来做题,肯定是很难做出来的,因为原来的解体思路已经被全部打乱,总也理不出头绪,眼睛看着题,心中却想着看电视,怎么行?做不出题目也是必然了.

但是执着不等于一味埋头苦干,也要学会变通,例如愚公移山,愚公的精神是好的,可是这种执着却不被现代所提倡：明知道搬不走山却还要搬,这也太傻了,如果搬个家不是更好吗?如果强行搬山,说不定还会水土流失呢!这样可就是太得不偿失了.也许写出这个故事的作者本意是希望大家学习愚公执着的精神,可我认为执着应该用对地方,应会灵活变通,这样的效果才是最好的.

执着的精神自古就帮助着人们,人们执着的探索自然,研究科学,发现了π等于3.1415926,发现人体穴位的奥妙,还知道了几种简单的方程运算,人们就是在这些发现种渐渐成长起来的,渐渐地有了今天的发现和成绩,执着使人们不停探索,不停提高着生活水平和质量.

只要功夫深,铁杵磨成针,执着的故事激励人们要坚持不懈,执着成就了李白,王安石等大文豪.一位著名的科学家在获奖时,记者问他最要感谢的老师是,他说是执着.霍金凭借执着写成《时间简史》,张海迪凭借执着学成多门外语,执着是全世界人民共同的导师,缺少执着是人类共同的敌人.

执着是成功的前提,有了执着就有了一道护身符,它能保护你,能让你冲破困难的枷锁.

执着的故事不老,执着的花儿不败!

Success, as is known, is the pursuit of many ambitious people. It requires much of a person.

In my  above all, one should be a person of strong perseverance. Rome was not built in a day. On our long way to success, there are  undoubtedly many difficulties standing in the way. If we lose heart and give up

halfway, nothing can be achieved. Throughout history, we havehad many famous successful people in the world, of whom no one is weak-minded. Take the great American scientist Edison as an example, he tried experiment after experiment and had one failure after another before he finally invented the bulb, which lighted up the whole world. So we can conclude perseverance can surely be one of the secrets of success. Furthermore, one needs to work hard to realize his dream just as the famous saying goes “Hard work leads to success”.

Look at these around us and we’ll find diligent people are always the favor of our society. They usually achieve more than expected. Why do so many of our classmates of average intelligence go far ahead of othersHard work is definitely supposed to be the answer. And still, I hold that one must keep in pace with the informative world. There’s no denying that our world is changing every day. So one can never be locked alone inside his own room, doing his research work and dedicated to book knowledge

How can an isolated person be well-informed enough to go ahead of othersIf so, that could be ridiculous. Success is what one desires. So long as one is perseverant, hard working and up-to-date, I am sure success is near at hand

同样生活在戈壁上的种子，为什么一棵枯死了而另一棵却长成了一棵胡杨树呢?因为另一颗种子懂得坚持!

而坚持，一件看似容易的事情，实施起来却并没有那么容易。因为你需要对这件事情给予肯定，是对它很感兴趣，并且需要为之付出一直不断的努力的!而我们虽然都具有一颗好奇的心、探索的心但能够为了这件事一直坚持的人并不多。所以古今中外那些能够坚持下来的人就会显现的那么伟大：

王羲之，东晋时期著名的书法家，他练字十分刻苦，经常在水池边练字，池水都染黑了，后来因更换写字的木板，工匠得以发现他笔力强劲，字迹已透入木板三分深了。因此，他之所以能够成为著名的书法家，和他一直的坚持是分不开的!邓稼先，著名核物理学家，被称为“两弹元勋”，他通过不断的坚持努力和他的团队造就了原子弹和导弹。居里夫人，法国著名波兰裔科学家、物理学家、化学家，最著名的是发现了镭，而由于长期接触放射性物质而献出了自己的生命。

每一个优秀的人，都有一段沉默的时光。那一段时光，是付出了很多努力，忍受孤独和寂寞，不抱怨，不诉苦，而正是这段时光，成就了优秀的他们。

没有人为你的失败负责，只有人为你的成功喝彩。因此，我们要像另一颗种子那样学会坚持，成功需要坚持!

日常生活中，我们常常听到有人叹息自己天生笨拙。其实，这种叹息是没有必要的。常言道，勤能补拙，就是说，天资差，是可以通过后天的学习来弥补的。

事实不正是如此吗？

梅兰芳年青的时候去拜师学艺，师傅说他生着一双死鱼眼睛：呆滞，灰暗，根本不是学戏的材料，拒不收留。天资的欠缺并没有使梅兰芳灰心，反而使他更加勤奋。他喂鸽子，每天仰望天空，双眼紧跟飞翔的鸽子，穷追不舍；他养金鱼，每天俯视水底，双眼紧跟着遨游的双鱼，寻踪觅影。后来，梅兰芳那双眼变得如一汪清澈的秋水，闪闪生辉，终于成了著名的京剧大师。

闻名世界的大发明家爱迪生，上小学的时候被老师称为“智能低下的人”，只上了三个月的学就被迫离开了学校，但他并不因此而丧失信心，而是以顽强的意志勤奋学习，最后终于成了举世闻名的大发明家。

由此可见，一个天资笨拙的人，只要勤勤恳恳，做“人一能之，几百之；人十能之，几千之”，就能变得聪明起来，成为对社会有用的人才。

反过来说，一个人即使天资再好，若不勤奋求学，也是不能成才的。宋代有个叫“方仲永”的神童，五岁便会作诗，被乡里称为奇才，可谓聪明过人。但他出名后，不再勤奋上进，而是整天由他父亲带着到处吃喝受礼，结果诗才枯竭，终于“泯然众人矣”。类似的例子，在生活中也是屡见不鲜的。

华罗庚教授有句名言“勤能补拙是良训，一分辛苦一分才”。希望那些自以为没有天赋的人不要悲愤，要相信天才在于勤奋，只要自己肯在“勤”字上下功夫，朝着美好的目标坚持不懈地走下去，相信美好的生活就在那边等着你。

记住，生活需要勤奋！

爱因斯坦曾经说过：“天才是百分之九十九的勤奋和百分之一的灵感。”；鲁迅也曾经说过：“我只是没有浪费了别人用来喝咖啡的时间。”

是呀，通过观察这些名人的成功过程，我们并不难发现在每位名人的成功之路上“勤”都起了重要的作用。所以我认为“勤”是很重要的。

匡衡凿壁偷光成了大文人。匡衡小时侯虽然家里穷，但他仍不放弃读书的欲望，家里没有东西可以照明让他看书，他便在自家墙上凿了个洞好让邻家的光透过来，他就是借着这一束并不算太亮的光认真读书，而且十分勤奋。正因为他的勤奋，他才会想出办法学习，并且努力、认真地去学，那么难道不是“勤”造就了他吗？

居里夫人，伟大的女科学家，她成为了多少个21世纪的家长教育孩子所必提到的人呢？居里夫人是勤奋的，不是吗？儿时的她勤奋学习不去和姐姐们游戏，长大后她成功了，可即使她成功了，她也依然勤奋，因为有她的勤奋实验人们知道了镭、波等化学元素，因为她的勤奋使她越来越成功，使她获得了一个又一个的诺贝尔奖。她也证明了只要勤奋，女人也同样可以创造一个又一个的科学奇迹。

还有霍金，他也证明了即使是残疾人只要有勤奋也一样会成功。霍金他不为病痛所折服，他仍然勤奋学习，而且因为行动不便，他付出了大于常人许多倍的努力与勤奋，同样他也获得了常人少有的荣誉。

有勤奋才有成功，勤奋会成为你人生的耀点，勤奋会使你的人生走向光明之处。加油，让我们一起努力吧，记住一份耕耘才会有一份收获。我相信成功是用汗水凝成的。

What is the key to success in the end I think the answer may be not

unique,Different people have different thoughts.

Everyone wishes to be successful in life.It is widely believed that some

people are born lucky and successful, because they possess high intelligence.

But this is not true. High intelligence is not equal to success. Success lies in

not only the intelligence factors but also the non-intelligence factors.

In my opinion, opportunity is a part of success. Many great people found

great things by chance. It is true some successes

unexpected can be won help

don’t because of and come findings.butOpportunities

often.An opportunity just brings a promise but never realizes it on its

own.Hardworking, which is an useful way to success. It is necessary for

us.Hardworking, which is means we will try our best to do the things.

Therefore, I think success is brought about both by innate intelligence

factors and by non-intelligence factors.

爱迪生的坚持，给天下带来光明。

哥白尼的坚持，让“日心说”得以发扬。

老鹰的坚持，使自己获得甘旨。

……

——统统胜利源于坚持——这是名流留给咱们的经验，也是咱们从动物身上学到的处世哲学。

还明白的记得2008年五月十二日，中国年夜地上那场地震。它夺去了无数人的生命。但是，在收拾殒命名单的同时，咱们别忘了那一个个生命的事业。他们在废墟下、在荒山野林里，在那种没有食品、没有水，乃至生命时候遭到威逼的情况下，可以坚持数天、数十天，正由于他们的这类精神让生命成为事业。

着名哲学家柏拉图上学的时刻，一天，教师苏格拉底部署了一道特其它功课：天天做放手活动三十下。其时，全班同学都说太简单了。一个月后，教师问还有若干同砚在做，只有不到一半的门生在举手。两个月后，教师又问，已经只有几个门生举手了。1年后，教师再问，还有一个门生举手，他就是柏拉图。

一个他人不以为然的放手活动让柏拉图坚持了下来。但是，有谁知道恰是这类简单的坚持，却造诣了一个哲学家。

他是一个名不见经传的小人物，写了一个脚本。其时好莱坞有五百家电影公司，他拿着脚本去一家家要求拍，可五百家电影公司无一例外地回绝了他。面临百分之百的回绝，他没有悲观，又进行了第二轮、第三轮。效果都和第一轮同样。他还不死心，又进行了第四轮，到第三百五十五家电影公司时，那家公司终究赞成了。

他就是好莱坞着名影星席维斯·史泰龙，那部影片就是《洛奇》。

他一共遭受了一千八百五十五次回绝，面临这一千八百五十五次的回绝，他坚持了下来。他的坚持，让影坛涌现了一部《洛奇》，也涌现了一个席维斯·史泰龙。

胜利在于坚持，无数功成名就的人证明晰这条永不扭转的真谛。因而，咱们要胜利，就要坚持。只有朝着坚持这条路走下去，胜利才会离咱们愈来愈近。

“哪里有天才，只是在别人喝咖啡的时候，我在工作。”鲁迅先生的这句活人回响在我们耳边。确实，世界上有许多名人，他们的成功不是来源于聪明，而是来源于勤奋。

爱迪生被称为发明大王，他一生发明的东西有1000多件。谁能想到这么一个“发明大王”竟然连高中都没有读完。那么他到底是靠什么取的如此巨大的成功的呢？是勤奋，爱迪生在工作之余，努力地学习，不浪费一分一秒。这是他学到了发明必须得知识，为他之后的发明之路奠定了基础。在他发明电灯的过程中，他为了找到合适的材料当灯丝，废寝忘食地工作，找遍了所有有关这一方面的书籍，反复试验了3000多种材料。终于，在他坚持不懈的努力下，他成功了。就是靠着勤奋，他才能够发明出许多别人意想不到的东西。就连爱迪生自己也说：“天才是百分之一的灵感加上百分之九十九的汗水。”

在我国古代，也有类似的故事：车胤家境贫穷，连一盏灯都买不起。在白天他还能够看一些书，可是一但到了晚上，黑暗使他根本无法看书。他为了能够多看一点书，督学一些知识，想到了一个办法。抓一些萤火虫放在一个布袋中，借着萤火虫那微弱的光芒，车胤专心致志的看书。日复一日，年复一年，车胤终于成为了一个有学问的人。

记得在初一时我们学过一篇文言文，题目叫做《伤仲永》。故事的内容是这样的：有一个叫做方仲永的金溪人，到了该学习的年纪却因为家里没有钱而没有学习。有一天突然哭着求父亲想要读书，父亲没办法，只好重邻居那里借了几本书给他看，没有想到他一看就学会了，还以赡养父母为主题写了一首诗，亲自给诗提上了名字。村里的秀才看了都说他文采非常好。这件事被村里的人知道了，村人纷纷请他父亲去做客他的父亲人为之有利可图，就天天拉着仲永到处拜访村人，不让他学习。过了几年后，作者去询问仲永的情况，仲永已经变得和普通人一样了。作者在文章最后还写了一段话告诉我们仲永变成普通人的原因，具体内容我已记不清，只记得其中一句话的意思是：不勤奋学习天才尚且变成普通人，没有天资的人难道这样就停止了吗？实在是不可思议啊，一个拥有那么高的资天真的人，最终居然变成一个普通人。这其中根本的原因就是不努力学习。

通过以上几个事例，我们可以明白地得到一个道理，那就是成功来自于勤奋。一个人就算没有过人的智慧，只要他勤奋努力，也能够取得令人惊叹的成就。相反，一个人即使拥有非常高的天资，如果不勤奋，终将失败。

读了《钢铁是怎样炼成的》这本书后，我领悟到：一个人的毅力影响着他的一生。书中主人公保尔·柯察金，一生布满了坎坷，然而他凭借着自己的毅力跨过了一个个坎。是毅力给了他力量，创造了生命中的三次奇迹与辉煌。他十几岁参加卫国战争，身负重伤，住院治疗，战胜病魔，学习不停，革命不止。这是何等可贵的动力啊！

人生的不如意十之八九，而大家不能失去信心和勇气，因为毅力是挫折喂养的。大家都知道，一步登天之事时罕见的。很多有巨大成就的人就是在挫折中锻炼了自己，考验了自己。不要以为当作家写一本书是很容易的事情，其实他们是经历了很多的挫折和历练的。马克思写《资本论》用了40年，李时珍著《本草纲目》花了30年，司马迁编写《史记》历时20多年。古今中外，谁的成功是不凭毅力而取得的

毅力需要坚持，在坚持的同时，还要有生活的节律。大家不能一味蛮干，要毅力和节律并行，两方面都不能忽视。节律过快，频率太高，要想一直坚持下去是十分困难的。生活犹如长跑，一下子冲在前面，并不是一定就能夺标。相反，如果掌握好节律，就会稳步走向成功。

有毅力是取得成功的前提，名著《钢铁是怎样炼成的》给了我信念与力量。我真正的明白了“善读可以医愚”的道理。

谈到成功，人们都会想到什么呢？已经成功的人滔滔不绝，可以总结一箩筐成功的经验；遭遇失败的人羡慕不已，想象着成功以后的美好生活。然而，最值得关注的是那样一群人——正走在路上，坚持不懈的人。

历史学家汪衍振，耗费毕生精力研究晚清三大名臣，用二十一年时间才写了三部小说。终于在2011年出了名，成为当年开年最受关注的作家，被媒体誉为“中国最笨历史作家。”在这二十一年中，肯定有很多人嘲笑他，说他效率太低；肯定也会有人阻挠他，劝他另谋出路。可是他还是成功了，他为什么成功了呢？我想，是因为坚持。一个人二十一年埋头于史料、文稿，除了日常生活就是读书、写作，还能坚持下来，这样的人着实值得我们敬佩！

历史上，像汪衍振写书这样执著不懈的例子不胜枚举。唐朝著名高僧鉴真，一生之中六次东渡日本，就为了传播佛法。海上风浪滔天，前五次东渡均遭失败，甚至导致鉴真双目失明。但他没有放弃，凭借执著的信念，他坚持下来，终于到了日本，实现了自己的理想，并成为一代名僧，被日本人尊为律宗初祖、“天平之甍”。正是坚持，让鉴真名垂青史。

龟兔赛跑中，乌龟虽然跑得慢，但是坚持到了最后，最终获得胜利；兔子虽然跑的比乌龟快，但是半途而废睡起了大觉。可见，坚持是成功的必要条件，要想成功，必须坚持到最后。

坚持，虽不是什么成功的秘诀和金钥匙，却是你通向成功之门的路基。在那些成功的人身上，坚持始终闪耀着最灿烂的光芒！

我想，每个人一定体验过成功的喜悦和失败的沮丧，当然，我也不例外，那件刻苦铭心的事，记载着我成功时的喜悦心情！

我现在在学电子琴，已经六级了，前面的几次考级我都顺利通过，所以，我对自己的琴技很有信心。听熊老师讲，南昌市马上要举行才艺预赛，通过就可以参加江西省比赛。听熊老师这么一说，我们几个一起学琴的小伙伴十分兴奋，想到可以参加南昌市比赛，而且通过了还能在江西省比赛，就特别高兴。比赛前几个星期，我们天天刻苦练琴，夏日的炎热没有把我们赶出家门，屋外孩子们的嘻闹声失去了往日的吸引力。

功夫不负有心人，我们的曲子一天比一天弹得熟练，到最后，都能把曲子背下来了。我左盼右盼，终于盼到了比赛这一天，我们穿戴一样的衣服，兴致勃勃地来到比赛的地方。参加比赛的人还真不少，有不少人利用赛前一点时间还在练习呢！看到这一切，刚才还很高兴的我，一下子变得紧张起来。随着参赛的人一个接一个的上台演奏，我的心更加怦怦的跳个不停。终于轮到我们上场了，我们演奏的是《梁祝》，我努力让自己镇静了下来，一个个优美的音符从我的手指头中跳出来，评委被我们的琴声吸引住了，给了我们很高的分数，我们顺利通过了预赛，我们沉浸在无比喜悦中。在江西省的比赛中，我们表现出色，获得了金奖！我再一次尝到了成功时的喜悦。

成功永远属于努力拼搏、不怕艰辛的人，不信你去试试吧！

穿过时间的长廊，回首成长道路上所经历的奋斗里程，充满了感叹。那些人，那些经历，那些故事已深深埋藏在我心中。他们如阳光下的金沙，熠熠生辉，光彩夺目。翻开成长相册，那些美好的时光又在眼前浮现。为了美好未来所付出的勤奋与努力，为了成功人生所进行的奋斗与进取，那些难忘经历如海边那温暖双足的细沙让人眷恋、让人难忘。

《感悟成长的一百零八个故事》精选了108个关于勤奋与进取的小故事，它们像一曲曲时代赞歌，激励着我，坚定的前行。

成功固然重要，但对于人生来说，更具有意义的，让人记忆深刻的是努力奋斗的过程。也许这过程并不是那么美好，有时甚至是痛苦的，但不经过痛苦蜕变的蛹永远成不了美丽的蝴蝶。

成功和失败仿佛是两个不同的音符，人生如戏，不努力就没有机会，努力进取就有希望。为了梦想，不停进取，去抓住成功的门环，就有可能叩响成功之门!命运全靠自己掌握!让我们来读读林巧雅的故事吧。

林巧稚是我国著名的妇产科专家，她治好的病人不计其数，人们很尊敬她。然而，在她刚刚生下来的时候，家里却因为她是女孩子，一点也不喜欢她。转眼间，林巧稚到了上学的时候。看着哥哥、弟弟高高兴兴的背着书包去上学 。可她也想上，于是她就去求妈妈。妈妈一心软，就答应让她去试试。上学后，林巧稚学习很认真，许多男孩的成绩都比不过她。一次，期末考试快到了，同学们都在紧张的复习功课，课间休息时，巧稚和几个女同学在讨论问题。

这时，男生说：“这次你们准要考“糊”。”巧稚一听，说：我们怎么了，我们照样拿第一，咱们比比看!你们男生拿100分，我拿110分!”为了这句话，林巧稚加倍努力。别人看一遍的书，她看三遍;别人做一道题，她做十道;别人九点睡觉，她却要到深夜十一点或十二点钟睡，样样都要比别人多花功夫。

不久，考试到了。巧稚每堂考试都认真的答题，仔仔细细地计算。考完试了，成绩一公布，林巧稚果真拿了全班第一名。男生不得不佩服地说：“林巧稚真行!”

以后，林巧稚自己说的这句话深深地刻在她心里，样样都要拿“110分”，样样都要比男生强!她凭借着顽强的毅力、刻苦的精神，不断进取，努力奋斗，终于成为了我国第一流的妇产科女专家!

试想一想，林巧雅不努力读书，勤奋学习，追求上进，她能比别人强吗?像林巧雅这样的成长故事还有很多，很多。通过这本书，我明白了，做任何一件事，只要不断进取，努力奋斗，凭借顽强的毅力、刻苦的精神，就一定会获得成功!

学习是件非常有趣的事情!

小时候把学习当成是一项任务，默默地去学校，默默地上课，默默地完成老师布置的作业。从未想过自己为何要学习。长大一些以后开始讨厌学习。现在的我又爱上了学习，感觉学习是件非常有趣有意义的事。我觉得每门科目中都可以长痘一些不同的趣事，自从找到书中的乐趣以后我就非常乐意去学习。比如说：历史书，我可以了解到历史人物和历史事件等;语文书，我可以认识到许许多多的文字以及许多有名的作家;化学书，我认识到一些化学药物设计有什么元素组成的;生物书，我可以认识到动植物的种类大概有多少种以及认识一些未见过的动植物;地理书，我可以更好地去世界各地旅游，不用担心会迷路。。。。。。学习是件多么有趣的事情啊!

我爱上了学习，爱上了学习这个有趣的东西。

成长是需要磨练的。小时，刚开始学走路的时候，总摔跤，但是也因为了摔跤使我学会了走路；上小学的时候，因为刚开始的时候不用功，成绩不好，但是也因为那次的成绩使我发愤用功，让自己变成了优等生；上了中学，参加竞选，因为人缘不好，落选了，但是也因为那次的失败，使我注意到应当与同学融洽相处，在第二次的竞选中我成功了。由此，我得到这样一条经验：成长需要磨练。如果没有当初的摔跤，我可能现在都不会走路；如果没有当初的成绩，我可能现在还是一个差生；如果没有当初的落选，我现在还是一个自以为是,眼里没有他人的人

一粒沙砾进入蚌壳后，由于不停的磨练最终才变成一颗璀璨夺目的珍珠。只有不断的磨练，磨去各种棱棱角角，这样才能使自己变得更加圆润。

朋友当我们面对挫折的时候，不要灰心你大可以把它看做是一次磨练，阳光总在风雨后

成长需要磨练。

[成功需要磨练小学生作文