The passage discusses the perception that younger generations are apathetic. It describes how the author was inspired to write about this topic after interviewing a student organizing Haiti earthquake relief who hoped their efforts would disprove claims that youth are apathetic. While older generations accuse youth of lacking political engagement, the author argues youth face immense pressures including heavy academic workloads, internship expectations, and constant competition that leave little free time for politics. Younger people may appear apathetic to politics due to prioritizing their futures under significant stress rather than a lack of passion.

1. Lesson 11 – A rise of apathy?
Part 1. Read the following passage and answer the questions.
An "Apathetic" Generation
About two months ago, I wrote a story for my campus newspaper on Haiti earthquake relief at UC
Davis. When I interviewed a graduate who was organizing relief efforts, he told me he hoped a
campus-wide relief effort would help prove that ours is not an apathetic generation. The idea of my
generation being remembered as apathetic does not sit well with me. Who drew these conclusions
about our generation? Are we apathetic? And if we are apathetic, why?
The accusations come from mine and my parents' generations alike. In 2007, New York Times
columnist Thomas Friedman wrote that he was "baffled" that people of my generation are so much
less radical and politically engaged than we need to be. I admit I too have found myself baffled by
my peers' apparent disinterest in politics and worldly affairs, yet I don't think radicalism and
political engagement define an active generation. Cameron Russell, author of "Your Generation of
Hypocrisy Begat my Apathetic (!?) One," writes that our generation is baffled instead by the world
we have inherited, what he calls a "world of hypocrisy and crisis; a world on the brink of collapse
yet at the height of human civilization." True, our generation has inherited something wicked from
our predecessors, but apathy as a result of a collapsing civilization doesn't seem to match up.
Veronica Hefner agreed with Friedman's sentiment in a University of Tulsa opinion piece, "Few
people seem to get passionate about anything. If you show more than an average, nonchalant
interest in something - you're labeled a fanatic fruit loop." I believe my last blog on the March 4th
protests, and the wave of news coverage that followed the protests more than negate the issue of my
generation being passionate about anything. What Friedman, Russell, and Hefner have not
mentioned is the tremendous pressure facing students today.
On April 4th, the Daily Beast ranked America's 50 Most Stressful Colleges based on five criteria:
the cost, competitiveness, acceptance rate, engineering, and crime on campus. What is most
significant about this post is not the criteria, but that such a ranking even exists. College is
romanticized as the best years of our lives, but what is the quality of those years if they are spent
under tremendous pressure?
While our predecessor's are unimpressed by our lack of political affinity, they fail to see that many
members of our generation are driven by a different force. We are the generation that faces immense
pressure, a pressure that begins in elementary school. Anyone remember the rolling backpacks that
became to popular about 10 years ago? The rolling backpack wasn't so much a fashion statement as
a chiropractor's prescription. School children's books were so heavy that they couldn't carry the
books on their backs. When high school came students, at least at my school and I assume at many
others, were placed in a hierarchy. The so-called A-level students at my high school ended up in the
AP and honors classes while the B, and C level students (did these categories also signify grade
expectations?), were placed in less advanced classes. And so went the hierarchy and the
competition. In high school students are over saturated with what the universities like to see, extra-
curricular activities, because no one likes to see an apathetic college applicant.
In college, we're told to get 'real life' experience. This 'real life' experience is usually unpaid, and
usually means forgoing a paid job. And what are internships for? Experience of course, because
we're expected to be out of college in four years, and expected to get jobs out of the gate. In four
years we have to 1) get a degree, 2) gain as much 'real-life' experience as possible via internships, 3)
get the grades to get into grad school if we so choose, and 4) try to have a social life.
Is it any wonder we seem apathetic toward politics? When we aren't in class, in an internship, or
studying, how can we be expected to kick back and turn on C-SPAN? Our time is spent in a
competitive mode, where we are constantly trying to get ahead. While we may seem apathetic

2. toward politics, we surely are not apathetic about our futures. From those who deem us apathetic,
we have not only inherited a country up to its neck in debt, but a society and lifestyle in which we
are constantly expected to outperform each other. For students generally uninterested in politics, an
intense course load combined with little free time leaves little room for political inquiry or
investigation.
For all the accusations of apathy, fewer seem to recognize the weight college students carry on their
backs. If these truly are the best years of our lives, should universities moderate competition, and
place less pressure on students?
Answer the following questions based on what you have just read in the text.
1. What inspired the author to write this article?
While writing an article on the Haiti earthquake, he met a student who said he hoped that their
efforts would prove that theirs is not an apathetic generation.
2. Only older generations accuse today's youth generation of being apathetic: true or false?
False – the writer also says that accusations come from his own generation.
3. The writer doesn't understand about his generation?
He doesn't understand why his generation are so politically inactive and disinterested in world
affairs (paragraph 2).
4. What is Cameron Russell's explanation of the modern generation's lack of interest in politics
and world affairs?
He suggests that it is because the modern generation has inherited a world in crisis and a world
based on hypocrisy.
5. The writer offers an alternative explanation; what it is?
He suggests that the modern generation are not apathetic but rather they face a lot of more
pressure than previous generations.
6. What sort of additional pressures does the writer think young people face today?
Any of the following answers:
 A lot more to read at school
 Pressure to be in the top performing class at school
 Pressure to do extra-curricular activities
 Pressure to have 'real-life' experience (internships, work experience etc;)
 Far greater competition
Part 2. Answer the following questions.
1. In your own words, what does it mean to be apathetic?
To be apathetic means to show little enthusiasm, motivation, interest or concern for issues or the
things going on around us.
2. Do you think it's fair to accuse today's young people of being apathetic? Give reasons to
support your answer.
Depending on your point of view, you might cite:
 Yes – lower participation in political groups, less interest in social issues, higher rate of
youth crime etcc.
 No – different/more pressure on youth today, young people are engaged in different types
of activities but are still active (student groups, charities etc.), different form of
engagement (social media, internet etc.)

3. Part 3. Short essay
Write about the following topic:
“Some people prefer to spend their lives doing the same things and avoiding change. Others,
however, think that change is always a good thing. Discuss both these views and give your own
opinion.”
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or
experience.
Write at least 250 words.
This model has been prepared by an examiner as an example of a very good answer. However,
please note that this is just one example out of many possible approaches.
Over the last half century the pace of change in the life of human beings has increased beyond our
wildest expectations. This has been driven by technological and scientific breakthroughs that are
changing the whole way we view the world on an almost daily basis. This means that change is not
always a personal option, but an inescapable fact of life, and we need to constantly adapt to keep
pace with it.
Those people who believe they have achieved some security by doing the same, familiar things are
living in denial. Even when people believe they are resisting change themselves, they cannot stop
the world around them from changing. Sooner or later they will find that the familiar jobs no longer
exist, or that the ‘safe’ patterns of behaviour are no longer appropriate.
However, reaching the conclusion that change is inevitable is not the same as assuming that ‘change
is always for the better’. Unfortunately, it is not always the case that new things are promoted
because they have good impacts for the majority of people. A lot of innovations are made with the
aim of making money for a few. This is because it is the rich and powerful people in our society
who are able to impose changes (such as in working conditions or property developments) that are
in their own interests.
In conclusion, I would say that change can be stimulating and energising for individuals when they
pursue it themselves, but that all change, including that which is imposed on people, does not
necessarily have good outcomes.