成功需要勤奋英语通用20篇

每个人都会有失败.失败乃成功之母,如果没有失败,那就不会有成功.的确,成功的人很幸福,他们拥有鲜花,掌声.但失败的人,拥有的只有寂寞和冷落.其实,我们更加应该去尊敬的是那些失败的人.因为,有了失败,才有成功. 失败并不表示你是一为失败者,失败只是表示你尚未成功; 失败并不表示你一无所成,失败表示你得到经验; 失败并不表示你是一个不知变通的蠢人,失败表示你有坚定的信念; 失败并不表示你必须一直压抑不快,失败表示你乐意尝试....... 这就是失败,宝贵的失败. 初一学习总结英语作文

有你们在，我便有了最好的时光。从此以后，所有的胆怯、懦弱都离开吧！ 人生道路上，我需以感恩、独立为主，坚忍、承担为辅，方能劈荆斩棘，勇往直前！

2018年8月17日的早晨，怀着对同学们和老师的满满思念，以及对接下来三天离开父母，与同学一起吃饭、住宿、玩耍的的激动心情，一大早坐上大巴车，与同学和家长一起，来到了翠华山野外拓展基地。初来咋到，这里给我的第一印象就是“荒山野岭”，而这，也仿佛为这三天不寻常的野外训练买下了伏笔。

换上迷彩服，整理好着装，便迎来了第一项挑战---高空中走独木桥。我和同学们来到场地，仔细聆听教官所讲述的安全知识，默默记下，为自己的安全加一道保证。当一切准备工作就绪后，惊心动魄的大戏便拉开了序幕。一个人，两个人……同队的同学们一个接一个地完成了挑战。轮到我了，望着那凌空八米之上的独木桥，我感到了无形的压力，不禁冷汗涔涔。我强颜欢笑地看着副队长帮我穿上安全衣，挂上安全扣。此时所能感觉到的心虚、腿软和害怕，也许只有自己才能够明白。我走到铁杆前，任由队友们推拉着，将我送到架子上，一步一步地向上爬，根本就不敢看底下是什么景象。我颤颤巍巍地走上独木桥，可是却始终不敢松开扶手，仿佛那便是我唯一的救命稻草，只要松手就会有生命危险。在起点僵持的两三分钟后，听着队友们为我加油的声音，看着队员们鼓励的眼神，那一刻，我的害怕和担忧几近消失了大半，在那一瞬间我忽然明白了。其实，我并不是一个人在孤军奋战，而是在与我的队友并肩作战！副队长一遍又一遍不厌其烦地为我检查安全措施的画面，队友们扶着我上去，用手作梯子抬着我的画面，拉拉队员涨红了脸为我呐喊加油的画面……，那一刻，全部一股脑儿地涌现在我的脑海。我终于咬了咬牙，横下一条心，迈出了第一步，心里不再是那么害怕，步伐也越来越坚定，不再有小鹿乱撞心跳加速呼吸急促的感觉，开始变得从容不迫和有条不紊。面对着队友们那一束束殷切的目光，心中除了感动，还是感动。

人的一生不可能是一帆风顺的，必定会遇到许多次的困难与失败。当我们遭遇这些人生的必修课时，是选择放弃呢?还是坚持呢? The life of a person cannot be smooth sailing, and he will encounter many difficulties and failures.When we encounter these compulsory courses of life, do we choose to give up? Or do we persist?

那是一个周末的早晨，太阳公公用一束束金光唤醒了我，我轻轻地用手揉了揉迷糊的眼睛，忽然间想起了昨天妈妈对我的交待：“进进，明天妈妈单位忙，没有时间回来了!你要一个人在家啦!”“妈妈，你不要担心，安心工作!我长大了，会照顾好自己!”

说干就干!好好照顾自己，怎么可能让自己饿肚子呢?这就来煎几个荷包蛋来当早餐。

先学着妈妈的样子，在平底锅里倒入少许油，再拿来一枚蛋往锅沿一敲，“哎呀!”力道重了些，蛋壳连着蛋液一起流到了锅里。顿时锅里发出“嚓嚓”声，油不停地往外溅!一眨眼的功夫锅里乌黑一片，面目全非了!煎个蛋怎么这么难?搞得我都打算放弃了!就在这时，叶老师经常鼓励我的话语又萦绕在我耳边：“倪进，做任何事都要坚持!遇到困难时要勇于面对，只要你肯动脑，办法总比困难多!”

想到这里，我又鼓足勇气再试一次。先把锅里的油热一下，用手在表面感觉一下，发现油热了赶紧把火调小。拿来一枚蛋不轻也不重地往锅沿边一敲，蛋清伴着蛋黄流进了锅里。不一会儿，看着鸡蛋边缘微微地变黄了就翻个身，接下来，我又做了几个。我看着胜利的成果，心里开心极了!拿来手机给妈妈发了一通短信：“妈妈，您上班辛苦了!回来给你加餐!”

这真是一次成功的尝试!我发现这次尝试后的成功让我无比的幸福，心情是无比的激动!通过尝试，我才发现生活是如此地美好。更重要的是妈妈眼中的小宝贝长大了!

伟大的发明家爱迪生曾经说过：“天才是由一分的灵感和九十九分的汗水组成。”的确，我们在站在平地上仰望那些巨人泰斗时，何曾想过，他们也曾与我们站在同一位置，不同的是他们找到了通往成功的阶梯勤奋。

如果说灵感是成功前的最后一道门，那么勤奋就是打开这道门的唯一钥匙。

我国伟大数学家陈景润，为解决数学界的明珠“哥德巴赫的猜想”，坚持每天清晨三点起来学习外语，每日浸在数学符号的海洋中，一日复一日，从未松懈，终于，在反复演算，灵光一闪，摘取了这颗璀璨的明珠。

成功并不一定要通过那扇门，你依旧可以通过勤奋的阶梯跨过，走向成功。

每一个人都熟知爱迪生发明了灯泡，却不知，在他很小时，就被冠以“一事无成”的称号，但他并不在意，他依旧用心研读，努力钻研，在不断的实践，不断地改正，用他的勤奋完成他的理想，最终发明了电灯泡。

有很多人在看到了成功的大门，却未能打开，最后碌碌无为，他们不能称为成功，他们只是失败者。

中国曾有一名年轻大学生钱某，他是十二岁就学会他人苦，学多年都不懂得微积分，被赞为神童，未来以他的天资，定会带领中国数学走向新高潮，但他却懒惰得不参加补习，只是闲逛，这使得他原有的天赋消失殆尽，最终成为一界庸才。

正如爱迪生说的那样，所有成功都离不开汗水，离不开勤奋。无论是否拥有天赋，勤奋永远都是不可缺少的一部分。

“落地生根”是我们常说的一个成语，在我们的认识中，植物只有根系稳定了才可以存活。然而“卷柏”却是个另类，让我们大开眼界，可谓刷新了我们的“世界观。”它是一种会“行走”的植物。每当它感觉到水分不足的时候，它便拔根而起，进行“搬家”。要让其它植物知道它的这项能力，得多么羡慕啊。然而，万事万物都是一体两面，有利有弊的。卷柏因为经常“行走”而始终不能茁壮成长，一直处于“营养不良”的状态，直到最后把根扎进土壤里，它才迎来了自己生长的“全盛期”。 "Rooting" is an idiom we often say. In our knowledge, the plant can survive only when the root system is stable.However, "cypress" is an alternative. Let us open the eyes and refresh our "worldview." It is a plant that can "walk".Whenever it feels insufficient moisture, it rises up and "moves".How envious is it to let other plants know this ability.However, everything is integrated on both sides, which are beneficial and disadvantaged.Juan Bai has never been able to thrive because he often "walks", and has been in a state of "malnutrition". It was not until the end of the soil that it ushered in the "full heyday" of its growth.

卷柏是这样，人何尝不是这样啊。职场生活中有一种“跳槽族”，顾名思义就是永远处在不停换工作、跳槽之中。这类人不是在跳槽的路上，就是正打算跳槽，今天在这个公司工作两天，发现这个公司有些地方让人不太满意，好，跳槽，换工作。明天在那个公司同事间关系处的不好，那就再换，再跳槽。日复一日，年复一年，终究碌碌而为。这正是典型的“卷柏”心态啊。这种人朝三暮四，心态不稳，浮浮躁躁，始终行走，终难成功。

但最终卷柏停下了脚步，打定心思不走了，把根深扎进了土壤里，长势日渐茂盛，迎来了属于它的“成功”。它用实际行动向我们展示了“扎根”的力量。

扎根，代表了一个人的态度，代表他愿意抛去浮躁，定下心思，沉着对待自己所处的环境，无论这个环境多么险恶。

扎根，可以说是成功之门的敲门砖。东晋大书法家王羲之，一幅作品《兰亭集序》被誉为“天下第一行书”，他本人被尊称为“书圣”，他的成就可不是“三天打鱼，两天晒网”取得的，他是凭着这种“扎根”精神，摒弃浮躁才取得的。他认准了书法行列，从此一头栽了进去，水池的水黑了，成了“墨池”，身上盖的被子也在每日的书写当中划破了。他将自己的根深深埋进了书法领域，从未动摇，从未生过“抽根”的念头，所以他成功了。

王羲之努力“扎根”，终于修成了正果。那些在其他领域取得成功的大师们何尝不是努力“扎根”才有所成就呢?他们努力扎根，所以他们成功了。卷柏稳定扎根定了，所以它成长了。我们难道不是也应该这样吗?

请记住，参天大树的根永远是深埋土壤的，小草小花的根才浮于表层。选择“扎根”，选择做棵“参天大树”吧!

成功，这个词对于我们来说亦近亦远，至于到底是远还是近，就完全取决于我们我们自身对于‘成功’的定义了。

成功是每个人都想要拥有的，同时又是每个人都能够拥有的。但成功真的容易吗?要想获得成功，我们就得付出相应的努力、相应的勤奋。爱因斯坦有一句名言:“成功等于百分之九十九的汗水加上百分之一的灵感。”世界上没有人能够一动不动就获得成功，受到万人瞩目的。对于成功者，你永远只看到了他光鲜亮丽的外表，殊不知他为此究竟付出了多少努力，流了都少汗水。

几乎每个人都有自己的偶像，粉丝心中的偶像自然是与众不同的，他们也理解自家偶像在舞台下的艰辛与努力。可是黑粉就不一样了，她们总是固执的认为那些明星就是一夜爆红的，不用费一丁点儿力，只是个没有实力的“花瓶”罢了。对于这些，我只想问一句，他真的见过那样的人吗?

其实每个人的成功都离不开“勤奋”二字。就拿“少女时代”来说，她们是在2007年出道的，一出道就遭记者黑，黑粉骂。在那之后她们有一个专访，主持人问她们想成为什么样的团体?她们毫不犹豫地回答道：“我们想成为最棒的女子团体。”主持人当时其实是很不屑的扫了她们一眼，因为她们不像其他的人一出道就让大家对其有很多期待;因为她们从不走在韩国娱乐圈司空见惯的道路……可是她们依然做到了，即使在从不缺少新人的韩国娱乐圈，她们还是创造了历史上的一个奇迹，一个从无法被人超越的奇迹。在今天，有一个时代叫“少女时代”。她们能在出道不到一年的时间就成为了韩国人气女子团体，从韩国人气女子团体到韩国第一女子团体，再到亚洲第一女子团体，以至于后来的世界第一，并且坚持自己的原则，靠的难道就只是脸吗?她们为此付出了多少努力，你知道吗?她们的所属公司SM，相信大家对其管理制度都有所耳闻，她们每天早上三点准时起床去练习，赶通告，经常要熬上几天几夜不睡觉，累了就直接躺地上睡。这就是我们看到的舞台上光鲜明亮的，获得各种奖项的她们的另一面。

其实谁的成功又能够白白的到来呢?

在我们的身边，这样的例子也有很多。以前总是感觉轮滑是一项很帅的运动项目，前几天，我弟弟学校让学轮滑，于是他开始了一次又一次的摔倒，再站起来。有时摔得真疼了，他就停一会再继续。不过，在不断的摔到之中，他也学会了这项我认为很帅的运动。当我们用自己的勤奋去换取到成功的那一刻，我们至少是开心的，不是吗?

事实告诉我们，每个人的成功，都不可能是天上掉下来的，只有勤奋了，才能更近一步的去接触成功，以至于后来能够取得成功。

所以说，勤奋是成功的必经途径。

成功从何而来？有人告诉我说，成功出自勤奋，我想这是很对的。因为有三句名人名言1、天才出自勤奋2、天才在于积累，聪明在于勤奋。3、终生努力，便成天才。

勤奋其实是来自内心的一种动力，没有刻苦是不可能有好成绩、成为天才的。

有些人并不真正懂得勤奋是怎么回事，如在学习上，他们总想走捷径，希望有什么秘诀、或作弊等来帮助他们。他们夸夸具谈，却不能静下心来读点书，他们总幻想着成功，坐等着明天，希望有一天从天上掉下一块馅饼来，这又怎么可能呢？不学开车就不会开车，没有勤奋就开不了好车，这是再好明白不过的道理。只要你尽力了，无论你最总的结果如何。你都是胜利者。因为你已经战胜你自己了。

那成功从何而来，有人告诉我说，成功出自坚持，我想这也是很对的。因为有一句流传得很广的话说：“坚持就是胜利。”

一个人坚持一会儿并不困难，难得是长期地坚持。这就不知不觉想到自己亲生经历的事情了。那是去年开校运会的一件事情，它让我体会到了，要想成功的话就必须坚持到最后。本来刚开始做事情的时候，我幻想着一跃而就，最好是刚开头就有结果，那该多好啊。但是我知道这是不可能的事情的啊。在800米赛跑中，我跑到200米时，我好想好想停下来，希望已经到达终点了，这不就是“痴人说梦”吗？忽然旁边拉拉队的声音是越来越大声，这时身上就好像有一股无穷的力量，使我不得不快速的向前跑，最终到达了重点。而且获胜了，但是只拿了第3名，可是我还是非常开心、心情像火花一样的勇猛的旺盛起来，同学们也都一一的拥抱而过。因为我坚持到了最后。跑步是辛苦的，学习是辛苦的，但是这份辛苦，这份坚持，是靠自己的努力而成功的。我们当然要为自己的努力而开心啊。因为我们的努力是有价值的。这也让明白了一个道理：“要想成功就必须努力的奋斗。”

你真的想成功吗？那么请你那出你的斗志和勇气，用勤奋和坚持去做每一件事情，那么成功一定会在终点迎侯您的。

恩里由来生害，故快意时须早回头;败后或反成功，故拂心处且莫放手。——题记

每个人一生不知道要经历多少困难与挑战，而我们也正是在战胜困难的过程中一步步地前行，并自我完善着。成功的过程就像小孩学步一样，只有亲身体验到失败，才能领悟到一条通往成功的的道路。叶子飞得再高也会落下来，因为它靠的是风的力量，行囊背得太多，也要学会放下，因为生命不能承受之重。实践证明：想取得成功，必须懂得放下。

坚定信念，需要执着。五代时桑维翰参加进士考试，主考官认为他的姓“桑”与“丧”同音，便心生厌恶，没有录取他。有人劝他不必再考进士，可以另辟蹊径，求得做官。桑维翰不肯，感慨万千，作《日出扶桑赋》以表明心志，又打造铁砚，对人说：“等这铁砚磨穿了，我再选择其他求官的方法。”成功就像一棵大树上的果实，并非可望而不可即的，只需不停的向上爬，努力拼搏，执着追求，就会摘到成功的果实。事实证明，桑维翰用他的执着和坚韧，终于敲开了成功的大门，上帝青睐那些坚定而执着的人士。

坚定执着，学会放弃。奥运冠军刘翔曾经宣称：“亚洲有我，中国有我”，面对种种质疑，刘翔自信地回答说：“一个人要对自己有信心，不论成功与失败，做每件事当然要注重结果，但更要注重过程，不断提升提炼的过程，相信自己奋斗的过程。”但是，面对荣誉、地位和金钱等身外之物，需要学会放弃，减轻身心的重量，轻装前进，才能迅速前行，实际刘翔也是这样做的，放下一个个辉煌，迎接一个个新的挑战，就能不断地进步。一种叫蝜蝂的小虫子，遇到东西总是背仔仔身上，重量越积越多，最后被压垮死掉。实践证明，无论身处顺境还是逆境，都应微笑平静地面对，放弃杂念，一心冲向目标，成功就有了希望。

抓住机会，付诸行动。当一个人有了信念，坚定执着，又懂得负重的时候，需要的就是抓住机会了。成功的机会是稍纵即逝的，常常与人们擦肩而过，留下许多遗憾。越王勾践在战败的情况下，被迫到吴国当奴隶，受尽耻辱，但他并没有自暴自弃，只是默默地忍受着，韬光养晦，期待时机，有所作为。吴王被勾践忠诚所迷惑，将他释放。勾践终于迎来重拾旧河山的机会。他用了十年壮大人口，富国强兵，最后一举灭掉吴国，报仇雪恨。事实明证，成功并不难，只要拥有坚定信念，执着的追求，迅速行动，以及善于把握机遇，就够了。

当我们走在通往成功的道路时，我们会面对一切困难的挑战。我们别无选择，只有坚定目标，执着追求，善于舍弃与放下，给生命之重卸载，才会轻装前进，达到梦想彼岸。

中国医学家李时珍，读了上千本医书，游历了几十个省份，尝尽了天下上千种草药，最终写成了世界最著名的医学著作之一—《本草纲目》，被后人尊称为“药王”。由此可见，成功源于勤奋。

所罗门王曾说过：“如果一个人一生勤勉，那么他将与国王同在，而不会跟小人为伍。”

唐朝高僧玄奘便是个例子，他为了求取真经，贞观三年八月，从长安万里跋涉至天竺。会使受到唐王李世民厚待，为其修筑大雁塔。同时他也为佛教在中国及到世界发展做出了不可磨灭的贡献。

然而，世上有许许多多的人。从古至今，不可胜数，为什么他们没有获得成功?可能是因为唐宋八大家之一韩语的那句话吧——“业精于勤，荒于嬉，行成于思，毁于随。”

曾国藩是中国近代史上最有影响力的人之一，然而他小时候并没有什么天分。有一天，他在家中背一篇文章，可读了许多遍，还是没背过。这时，他家中来了一个贼，潜伏在屋檐下，希望读书人睡着后能进来捞点好处。可是等了好久，就是不见曾国藩睡觉，还是翻来覆去的读着同一篇文章。贼人勃然大怒，跳出来说：“这种水平还读什么书?”然后将文章背诵了一遍，扬长而去。

难道那贼人真的是没钱读书吗?难道他就真的超越不了曾国藩吗?可能只是他不够勤奋，没有去想学习，才不如曾国藩吧!

就像中国近代科学家钱二强告诫我们的：“古往今来，凡是成就事业，对人类有作为的，无不是脚踏实地的艰苦攀登的结果。”

勤奋吧，也为了我们的未来。

成功是我们每一个人的追求与理想，那么，我们怎样才能获得成功呢?让我们一起来听一下历史杰出人物们的声音吧：

爱迪生说：成功需要99%的努力+1%的汗水。

爱因斯坦说：成功需要发达的头脑

哥伦布说：成功需要探索。

曾国藩说：成功需要专一，不能坐这山，望那山，否则一事无成。

而我却要说：成功更需要坚忍不拔的毅力!

我曾经听说过这样的一个故事：

在很久以前有一匹老骆驼在垂暮之年又一次的跨越了号称“死亡之海”的千里沙漠，当它凯旋归来之时一名记者上前采访道：“你能谈一谈您面对一片茫茫的沙漠你是怎样坚持到最后的吗?”

只见老骆驼顿了顿后，沉稳地说：“其实也没有什么好说的了，如果要说我为什么能坚持到最后，我只能够说你要看准目标，耐住性子，一步一步脚踏实地的往前走，就到达了目的地。老骆驼的话让这位记者思索了很久很久。最后这位记者感叹道，是啊!看准目标耐住性子就是成功的前提。

还有人认为，成功是一种毅力——如果你不信你去看——看金字塔顶的老鹰和蜗牛你就会明白了。

老鹰生来就会飞，它那雄健的双翅好像能够不费吹灰之力就能到达金字塔顶一样，而我却不认同这种观点。因为当老鹰还是雏鸟的时候，也只是胆小地畏缩在窝旁，看着深深的悬崖峭壁。但是如果不经历过无数次的跌落摔爬，它能翱翔于令人向往的蓝胆战心惊地望着大地?

但是总有那么一些人奢望道：“我要是一只老鹰该多好呀，喜欢到哪就到哪!”孰不知，就凭这种浅识，你若是一只老鹰也是一只永远畏缩在窝中的老鹰，不会有你同类直冲九天的胸怀。由此看来，金字塔顶的老鹰的出现并非出于偶然。它能振翼天宇，而原因是什么呢?那就是——毅力!

很多人对从不显眼的蜗牛很是鄙视，嘲笑它身上背负重重的壳，不论在哪一种场合，只要干什么慢就拿蜗牛说事：“你怎么比蜗牛还慢?”听听这话，能不让人生气吗?

可蜗牛却从不与人争辩，只是用行动让明自己的实力，金字塔顶蜗牛的身影，就是最好的证明。因为在蜗牛身后的一道道明亮的痕迹清晰可见，那就是蜗牛毅力的彰显。

再看看赛跑的乌龟和兔子，你还不能悟出成功究竟需要什么吗?那便是毅力。

阅读下面的材料，按照要求写一篇不少于800字的文章(60分)

有一个聪明的年轻人，很想在任何方面都比他身边的人强，他尤其想成为一名大学问家。可是许多年过去了，他的其他方面都不错，学业却没有长进。他很苦恼，就去向一个大师求教。

大师说：“去登山吧，到山顶就知道该如何做。山上有许多晶莹的小石头，煞是迷人。每见到他喜欢的石头，大师就让他装进袋子里背着，很快，他就吃不消了。“大师，如果再这样下去，别说到山顶了，恐怕连动也不能动了。”年轻人痛苦地看着大师。“是呀，那该怎么办呢?”大师微微一笑，“该放下不放下，背着石头怎么能登山呢?”大师道。年轻人一愣，忽然心中一亮，向大师道谢而去。之后，他刻苦学习，进步飞快……

要求：选准角度，明确立意，自选文体，自拟标题;不要脱离材料内容及含意的范围作文，不要套作，不得抄袭。

【范文】

成功，需要懂得放弃

每个人一生不知道要经历多少困难与挑战，而我们也正是在战胜困难的过程中一步步地前行，并自我完善着。成功的过程就像小孩学步一样，只有亲身体验到失败，才能领悟到一条通往成功的的道路。叶子飞得再高也会落下来，因为它靠的是风的力量，行囊背得太多，也要学会放下，因为生命不能承受之重。实践证明：想取得成功，必须懂得放下。

坚定信念，需要执着。五代时桑维翰参加进士考试，主考官认为他的姓“桑”与“丧”同音，便心生厌恶，没有录取他。有人劝他不必再考进士，可以另辟蹊径，求得做官。桑维翰不肯，感慨万千，作《日出扶桑赋》以表明心志，又打造铁砚，对人说：“等这铁砚磨穿了，我再选择其他求官的方法。”成功就像一棵大树上的果实，并非可望而不可即的，只需不停的向上爬，努力拼搏，执着追求，就会摘到成功的果实。事实证明，桑维翰用他的执着和坚韧，终于敲开了成功的大门，上帝青睐那些坚定而执着的人士。

坚定执着，学会放弃。奥运冠军刘翔曾经宣称：“亚洲有我，中国有我”，面对种种质疑，刘翔自信地回答说：“一个人要对自己有信心，不论成功与失败，做每件事当然要注重结果，但更要注重过程，不断提升提炼的过程，相信自己奋斗的过程。”但是，面对荣誉、地位和金钱等身外之物，需要学会放弃，减轻身心的重量，轻装前进，才能迅速前行，实际刘翔也是这样做的，放下一个个辉煌，迎接一个个新的挑战，就能不断地进步。一种叫蝜蝂的小虫子，遇到东西总是背仔仔身上，重量越积越多，最后被压垮死掉。实践证明，无论身处顺境还是逆境，都应微笑平静地面对，放弃杂念，一心冲向目标，成功就有了希望。

抓住机会，付诸行动。当一个人有了信念，坚定执着，又懂得负重的时候，需要的就是抓住机会了。成功的机会是稍纵即逝的，常常与人们擦肩而过，留下许多遗憾。越王勾践在战败的情况下，被迫到吴国当奴隶，受尽耻辱，但他并没有自暴自弃，只是默默地忍受着，韬光养晦，期待时机，有所作为。吴王被勾践忠诚所迷惑，将他释放。勾践终于迎来重拾旧河山的机会。他用了十年壮大人口，富国强兵，最后一举灭掉吴国，报仇雪恨。事实明证，成功并不难，只要拥有坚定信念，执着的追求，迅速行动，以及善于把握机遇，就够了。

当我们走在通往成功的道路时，我们会面对一切困难的挑战。我们别无选择，只有坚定目标，执着追求，善于舍弃与放下，给生命之重卸载，才会轻装前进，达到梦想彼岸。

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!

When it comes to success, most people will think about the great persons, such as Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, who are rich and powerful. The common thing for these successful persons is that they work very hard and spend a lot of time in their business. As a result, the family hours will be sacrificed. They dont have much time to play with their families, so when they give speech, they are always so thankful for the familys support and understanding. Success comes not easy. We need to work hard without question, but I would not sacrifice the family hour, because it means everything for me. I am so satisfied with the small happiness.

当谈及成功，大多数人都会想到伟大的人，如比尔盖茨和史蒂夫•乔布斯，都是有钱有势的人。这些成功人士的共同点在于，他们非常勤奋，每天都花大量的时间在工作上。因此，家庭时光就被牺牲了，他们没有太多的时间去和家人玩耍，所以当他们做演讲的时候，总是很感谢家人的支持和理解。成功是不容易的，我们肯定是需要努力工作的，但是我不会牺牲家庭时光，因为这对我来说意味着一切。我很满足于小小的幸福。

成功是每一个人都希望的，不管是学业还是事业。成功能给人们带来喜悦。

怎么才能成功呢?伟大的发明家爱迪生说过，天才是靠99%的勤奋和1%的灵感.要想取得成功就必须勤奋努力。如果不努力，是不可能获得成功的。

在爱迪生发明耐用电灯泡之前，他曾做过千多次实验，但仍没有办法使灯丝能耐住高温。旁边有人说：“算了吧!找不到就算了。你已经作了这么多次实验了，找不到，就不要白费力了，干点别的什么吧!”他却说：“我一定要找到一种能耐住高温的材料，一定要把他找出来。”工夫不负有心人，他终于发明了耐用电灯泡，使全世界人民得到幸福，被誉为20世纪最伟大的发明之一。

我们需要学习他这种精神的，如果他不是坚持不懈地努力，是不可能发明耐用电灯泡的，可见成功是需要条件的，只要达到了成功所要求的条件，成功就容易了。

抓住机遇也是成功的条件之一。举例来说吧!世界首富比尔盖茨读大学时，敏锐地认识到计算机这门新兴的产业蕴藏的巨大的商机，他从哈佛大学退学了，与自己的朋友开了一家名叫微软的电脑公司，当时他的亲朋好友都反对他的做法，但比尔盖茨说，时间将证明，我这样做是对的。现在，计算机在各行各业中的广泛应用，给人们的工作和生活带来了巨大的变化，微软成为了世界上最大的软件商之一.

成功的条件还有很多，比如说自己的科学文化素质.没有好的基础知识，纵然刻苦努力和有天赐良机，还是不能取得成功的.还有离开了别人的帮助，要走上成功的道路，也是异常艰难的.

要想取得成功，需要努力和机遇.

2008年北京奥运会，刘翔因伤退赛，两年后的广州亚运会上，“栏上飞人”又重新回到了赛场上，再一次夺得冠军。

两年的时间，我相信刘翔一定都是在坚持不懈地训练着，即使伤痛在无时无刻地影响着他，他也仍不放弃，继续坚持着。

回首往事，我似乎并不是一个能够坚持的人，直到那一天，那一个下着毛毛雨的早晨过后……

“啊，该死又失败了!”房间里不断传出我的抱怨声。物理老师要同学们回家做一个实验，可是我总因为几个小失误而导致实验失败，这对于缺乏耐心的我来说，简直是一种煎熬。我终于失去了最后的耐心，扔下了手中的实验器材，走出家门，想到外面走走，放松一下自己。

撑起一把伞，漫步在雨中，忽然看到前面一个小黑点，便走上前去看。原来是一只蜘蛛在编着网。我心想：我失败了，你同样也不会成功，你一定也编不好这张网，我要戳坏这张网。随即用伞把网给戳了一个大洞。你快点放弃织网吧。

没想到的是，蜘蛛竟然来到了破洞的地方，开始修补这张网。我心中十分不高兴，拿起了雨伞，把蛛网破坏得更不堪入目。令人更加难以置信的是，蜘蛛依然在修补着那张残破的网。雨一滴一滴从网上滑落下来，不知道晶莹的雨滴中是否还有包含着蜘蛛的汗水。

我静静地站在蛛网前，痴痴地看着蜘蛛把网织好。

此时此刻，心中掀起了巨大的波澜。蜘蛛一种多么弱小的动物，它却能告诉我们要坚持不懈。古往今来，古今中外，有多少英雄贤臣，名人伟人告诉我们要学会坚持，决不放弃。爱迪生在发明电灯的时候，实验失败了一千五百多次;越王勾践三年多来卧薪尝胆，终于完成了“三千越甲可吞吴”的大计;大思想家王阳明先生为了实现成为圣人的梦想，整整格了七天竹子……

这一切不都告诉我们坚持就一定能够成功。

小时候，妈妈经常语重心长的对我说：“勤奋是成功的关键”。这句话告诉我只要想做好一件事，就要付出汗水，如果你不勤奋，成功就会离你远去。对于这句话，我有深刻的体会。

我寒假里报了一个轮滑班，开始觉得很有趣，可后来非常苦，练习会基本姿式以后，开始练习，轮滑鞋不由自主地滑来滑去，控制不住就滑一跤，一节课下来，屁股快摔成8半了，可轮滑一点长进也没有，滑时，我脚下仍然象踩着一团黑黑的乌云，时刻都有被雷劈的危险，我只好无奈的对妈妈说：“轮滑太苦了，不好学，我不想学了”！妈妈再次语重心长的说：”你忘了妈妈以前说的话吗”？我豁然开朗，放弃了报怨，回到屋里写作业了，第二天，在我上轮滑的时候，我记住了那句铭记在心的话，上课时，我不停的练习，自由活动时，我还在练，终于，功夫不负有心人，在我的拚命练习下，我不但学会了老师教的，还自学了一种花样，再滑时，我脚下象踩了一朵幸福的云。

勤奋是成功的关键，这句话如同一个火苗，点燃了我的希望之火。

每个人都有自己的发现，当然我也不例外。通过这几次考试，我又有力一个新的发现，那就是：成功需要自信。

人人都渴望成功。我也希望成功。但成功最需要的是什么呢？是勤奋，是能力，还是好的方法？或者是环境，是机遇吗？这些都不是成功必备的条件。在这几次考试后，我更加留心观察我的同学，终于发现成功最需要的是自信，它才是成功首要的条件。

我的同桌经常说：自信是成功的第一秘诀！开始，我还不相信，现在看来不得不信了。确实，自信是成功的动力。有自信才会为成功而奋斗，因为自信是对自己能力的充分相信与认识，相信自己就一定会成功。试想，一个人如果自暴自弃，一蹶不振，或悲观自卑，连起码的自信心都没有，一切还未开始，就觉得自己不行，这样成功道路上的拦路虎还未来，自己就已经被自己的不自信所吓倒，还如何谈成功呢？

自信是战胜一切困难的法宝，不论成功者还是失败者都承认成功的道路不是坦途，路上充满了艰难，阻险。奋斗中，很多人被暂时打败了还要闯进去，并最终取得成功。成功者与失败者之间最大的区别就在于有无信心。没有信心的人一旦遇到了困难就没有了战胜他的勇气，斗志自然就会大减。这时要想获得成功真是难上加难不。而且这种人一旦失败，就会自暴自弃，一蹶不振。严格说起来这种人很大的程度上就是被自己打垮的。

再看充满信心的人，他们不管情况多么不利，都会始终保持着十分的信心，失败了重整旗数，再去努力。人们都知道这一样一个故事：一个将军打了六次败仗，当他在山洞里闷闷不乐时，看见蜘蛛在结网，结了七次才成功，将军很受鼓舞，率兵再次出战，终获大胜。人们都知道这是一个教育人做事要有耐心的故事，我觉得的这个故事也同样说明了用有自信心才会成功。因为战败了六次已灰心，若不是蜘蛛结网给了他自信，他又何来再战的信心呢？

我们还要谨记：自信不是自负，自负不但不会帮助你走向成功，还会适得其反。

因此，只有相信自己的实力，善于观察，善于汲取生活中的能量，我们的明天才会更加灿烂与辉煌。

我们要谨记一句名言：自信是成功的第一秘诀！

[自信需要成功作文

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

勤奋是通向成功的必经路。每个人都应该勤奋。

爱因斯坦曾经说过：“成功等于百分之九十九的勤奋加百分之一的灵感。”这句话是说，无论天资如何聪颖，没有勤奋，是无法成功的。古今中外的事实都证明：勤奋是成功的钥匙

晋代大书法家王羲之的儿子王献之，幼年时就开始练习书法。他自幼刻苦练习，对学习书法如痴如醉。王羲之十分看好这个儿子，觉得王献之能成大器。果然，王献之没有辜负父亲的期望，刻苦习字，在写完了家中“十八大缸水”后，他的书法技艺终于入木三分，成长为一个书法大家。试想，没有经过“十八大缸水”的刻苦练习，王献之就是再有书法的天资，也成不了书法家。

我国古代的著名天文学家张衡也曾经说过：“人生在勤，不索何获。”我认为，张衡的这句话正是说只要努力了、勤奋了，即使没有达到预期的目的，自己也别气馁，因为勤奋本来就应该是我们每一个人的一种生活态度。是庸庸碌碌、无所作为地度过一生，还是勤奋刻苦、多长本事、做一个对社会有贡献的一个人？这个答案不言自明。

我们现在每一个人都处在学知识、长本领、打基础的阶段。古人言，少壮不努力，老大徒伤悲。汉朝时的朱买臣，小时候因家境贫寒，为了维持生活，他每天都得上山砍柴，可他好学不倦，常常背着柴火，一边走一边看书学习，最终成为了国家的丞相。

居里夫人为了得到纯净的放射性元素，在一个破棚子里夜以继日的工作了四年，忍受着各种元素对他们身体的刺激。为了体验镭的生理效应，他们还不止一次被镭射线烫伤。她的勤奋使她一生两次获得诺贝尔奖。

现在我们的条件要比居里、朱买臣好得多，然而好的条件并没有让我们更加勤奋，反而是更加慵懒。勤奋正是现在人所缺的一种品质。如果我们也能像前辈们一样勤奋，那世界上一定会有更多成功的人。

愿我们勤奋努力，获取通向成功之门的钥匙。

13 岁的维克多·雨果在上学时，从不愿早睡觉。他觉得过早睡觉是白白浪费 时间。但是在学校里，他既不能点灯，也不能起床。

于是，雨果就长时间地凝望着窗外的星空。窗外星光灿烂，小雨果忽然捕捉了一句美妙的诗。从此，他默默地从思想和语汇的海洋里搜索着那些像珍珠一样闪光的诗句。一句，两句 ……很快，他想好了一首诗，又反复推敲、修改，准备天亮后写在笔记本上。正因为他的勤奋，才为以后的创作打下了基础，最终创作出了像《悲惨世界》、《巴黎圣母院》那样的巨著。

We Must Face FailureAs we all know, "Failure is the mother of success." But few people can really understand what the saying means.In the world, I am sure that no one dare say he hasnt met any trouble all his life. So we must face failure. In fact, failure is not fearful, but important thing is how to face it correctly. Facing failure, people will never take their fate lying down.They will try their best to work harder and harder until at last they succeed.Not being courageous to face setbacks, people have no chance to enjoy the pleasure of success. So they have nothing to do but feel sad and empty all day and all night. In fact, they lose the chance of success themselves.My friend, whenever in trouble, please remember, "Failure is the mother of success.

"我们必须面对失败我们都知道：“失败是成功之母。”但真正理解这句话的人却不多。我相信，世界上没有一个人敢说他一生中从没遇到过任何麻烦。因此，我们必须面对失败。其实，失败并不可怕，重要的是如何正确看待它。敢于面对失败，人们将不再由命运摆布。他们将全力以赴的辛勤工作，直到最后成功。不敢面对挫折，人们也就没有机会享受成功的喜悦。他们会无所事事，终日沮丧而空虚。事实上，是他们自己把成功的机会丧失了。朋友们，无论何时你遇到了困难，请记住：“失败是成功之母。”