The evidence for harmony may not be obvious in some families. But it seems that four out of five young people now get on well with their parents, which is the opposite of the popularly-held image of unhappy teenagers locked in their room after endless family quarrels.

    An important new study into teenage attitudes surprisingly shows that their family life is more harmonious than it had ever been in the past. “We were surprised by just how positive today's young people seem to be about their families,” said one member of the research team. “They're expected to be rebellious(叛逆的) and selfish but actually they have other things on their minds: they want a car and material goods, and they worry about whether school is serving them well. There's more negotiation(商议) and discussion between parents and children, and children expect to take part in the family decision-making process. They don't want to rock the boat.”

    So it seems that this generation of parents is much more likely than parents of 30 years ago to treat their children as friends. “My parents are happy to discuss things with me and willing to listen to me,” says 17-year-old Daniel Lazall. “I always tell them when I'm going out clubbing. As long as they know what I'm doing, they're fine with me.” Susan Crome, who is now 21, agrees. “Looking back on the last 10 years, there was a lot of what you could call negotiation. For example, as long as I'd done all my homework, I could go out on a Saturday night. But I think my grandparents were a lot stricter with my parents than that.”

    Maybe this positive view of family life should not be unexpected. It is possible that the idea of teenage rebellion(反抗) is not rooted in real facts. A researcher comments, “Our surprise that teenagers say they get along well with their parents comes because of a brief period in our social history when teenagers were regarded as different beings. But that idea of rebelling and breaking away from their parents really only happened during that one time in the 1960s when everyone rebelled. The normal situation throughout history has been a smooth change from helping out with the family business to taking it over. ”

    Standing in the shower waiting for the water to het up could be a thing of the past, along with all the wasted water. Three and a half years ago, Lindy Honeychurch, a thirty-year-old Australian full-time mum living on a farm outside Launceston, didn't consider herself a very good water saver. Neither did her partner who often complained about it with good reasons. Their farm had to rely on tank water and solar power, which meant water had to be trucked in if he tank water ran out in summer.

    “I looked at where I could save because I could lead an easier life without the complaint,” she said. Modeling her idea on a car thermostat(恒温器), Lindy used her kids' magnetic(磁的)drawing board to design a device that diverts the cold water back down the hot water pipe. “The first aim when I started designing was to keep it really small and simple without having to use power. I wanted to keep it as something that everyone could use,” said Lindy.

    She got a patent for her design and took it to some engineers to have it tested out. At first, even though the engineers were amazed that she wasn't an engineer, she said she sometimes found it hard to be taken seriously. “My age was a real factor because in the plumbing(管路系统)and manufacturing industries you're dealing with people who've got a lot of experiences,” she said. But the engineers soon saw the potential of her design, which she estimated would save average families between 14,000 to 22,000 liters per year.” when you transfer that to the dollar savings on tank water that you have to buy, it can be a saving of $600 per year,” said Lindy.

    Armed with positive feedback from engineers and people using rainwater tanks, her design proved a great success. Soon she found a manufacturer early this year, and completed a state government commercial ready course to help her research, her markets and distribution channels. With an Australian Standard for her device just approved, she's about to start manufacturing and wishes to see her products on the shelves within the next few months. Once that happens, Lindy plans to return to being a full-time mum.

    Do you intend to study at an American university? It takes a long time to get accepted at most American schools, perhaps as much as a year. That's why you should start choosing a school as soon as possible. It's a good idea to apply to several different institutions, so that you'll have a better chance of acceptance at one. You should start looking for information now, because the more information you have about each college, the better choice you can make.

    There are two good ways to get information you need. One is a general reference (参考) book, called Guide to American Colleges and Universities. The other good source of information is the catalogue (目录) published by each school.

    You can study the general guide in almost any American library. This book has many useful statistics, such as the number of students, the average test scores for people accepted to the school, the number of books in the library, and the number of teachers. You can also find the address of each school in this book.

    Although the general guidebook has helpful information, some of the facts may be out-of-date. For example, many schools raise their tuition every year. Since you'll need to know what your education will cost, out-of-date information will not be good enough. Also, schools sometimes change their requirements for entrance. To be sure that you are getting present information, write to the university and ask for its catalogue. The catalogue has more detailed information. For example, the catalogue can tell you if there is a special foreign student advisor, what kind of courses are offered, and what kind of housing is available. Some universities have dormitories, but at others you have to find your own place to live.

    With all of this information, you should be able to pick out several good schools.

    Even by the standards of poor countries, India is alarmingly — and unnecessarily — dirty. It needs to clean up. Most time of year, its capital, Delhi，smells as if something is burning. That is because of many things: the carcinogenic diesel（柴油）that supplies three quarters of the city's motor fuel, the dirty coal that supplies most of its power, the rice stalks that nearby farmers want to clear after the harvest and so on. All these make Delhi's air the most poisonous of any big city.

    This does not just make life unpleasant for a lot of Indians. It kills them. Recent estimates put the annual death toll from breathing PM 2.5 alone at 1.2—2.2 million a year. The lifespan of Delhi residents is shortened by more than ten years, says the University of Chicago-Consumption of dirty water directly causes 200,000 deaths a year, a government think-tank estimates, without measuring its contribution to slower killers such as kidney disease. Some 600 million Indians, nearly half the country, live in areas where clean water is in short supply. As pollutants taint groundwater, and global warming makes the vital monsoon（季风）rains more abnormal, the country is poisoning its own future.

    Indian pollution is a danger to the rest of the world, too. Widespread dumping of antibiotics（抗生素）in rivers has made the country a hotspot for anti-microbial（抗微生物）resistance. Emissions of carbon dioxide, the most common greenhouse gas, grew by 6% a year between 2000 and 2016, compared with 1.3% a year for the world as a whole.

    In the past India has explained its failure to clean up its act by pleading poverty, noting that richer countries were once just as dirty and that its output of waste per person still lags far behind theirs. But India is notably grubby（肮脏的）not just in absolute terms, but also relative to its level of development And it is becoming grubbier.

    It is true that some ways of cutting pollution are expensive. But there are also cheap solutions，such as undoing mistakes that Indian bureaucrats（官僚）have themselves made. By funding rice farmers, for instance, the government has in effect cheered on the overusing of groundwater and the burning of stalks. Rules that encourage the use of coal have not made India more self-reliant, as intended, but instead have led to big imports of foreign coal while blackening India's skies. Much cleaner gas-fired power plants, meanwhile, sit idle.

    Reliant on big business for funding and on the poor for votes, politicians have long ignored middle-class complaints about pollution, failing to give officials the backing to enforce rules. That is a pity, because when India does apply itself to ambitious goals, it often achieves them

    Next year it will send its second rocket to the Moon.

    Narendra Modi, the prime minister, promised with admirable frankness when he took over to rid the country of open defecation（缺陷）. Four and a half years and some $9 billion later, his Clean India campaign claims to have sponsored the building of an astonishing 90 million toilets. This is impressive, but India is still not clean. Its skies, its streets, its rivers and coasts will remain dangerously dirty until they receive similar attention.

    Going to university is supposed to be a mind-broadening experience.

    That assumption is possibly made in contrast to training for work straight after school. But is it actually true? Jessika Golle of the University of Tubingen, Germany, thought she would try to find out.

    Her result, however, is not quite what might be expected. It shows that those who have been to university do indeed seem to leave with broader and more inquiring minds than those who have spent their immediate post-school years in vocational training for work. However, it is not the case that university broadens minds. Rather, work seems to narrow them.

    After studying the early career of 2095 German youngsters, Dr. Golle reached the conclusion.

    During the period under investigation, Germany had three tracks in its schools: a low one for pupils who would most probably leave school early and enter vocational training; a high one for those almost certain to enter university; and an intermediate one, from which there was a choice between the academic and vocational routes.

    The team used two standardized tests to assess their volunteers. One was of personality traits and the other of attitudes. They administered both tests twice once towards the end of each volunteer's time at school, and then again six years later.

    Of the original group, 382 were on the intermediate track, and it was on these that the researchers focused. Of them, 212 went to university and the remaining 170 chosen for vocational training and a job.

    When it came to the second round of tests, Dr Golle found that the personalities of those who had gone to university had not apparently changed. Those who had undergone vocational training and then got jobs were not that much changed in personality, either except in one crucial respect they had become more responsible.

    That sounds like a good thing, compared with the common public image of undergraduates as a bunch of pampered layabouts(娇生惯养的闲人). But changes in attitude the researchers recorded were more worrying. In the university group, again, none were detectable. But those who had chosen the vocational route showed marked drops in interest in tasks that are investigative and enterprising in nature.

    And that might restrict their choice of careers. Some investigative and enterprising jobs, such as scientific research, are, indeed off limits to the degreeless.

    But many, particularly in Germany, with its tradition of vocational training, are not. The researchers mention, for example, computer programmers, finance-sector workers and entrepreneurs as careers requiring these attributes.

    If Dr Golle is correct, and changes in attitude brought about by the very training Germany prides itself on are narrowing people's choices, that is indeed a matter of concern.

Edward Ndiritu joined Lewa Wildlife Reserve in central Kenya in 1996 as a rhino monitor. Back then, illegal hunting had greatly reduced the country's black rhino population. Worried that they might become extinct, he worked his way up to lead Lewa's anti-hunting team. In 2015, his team's community-focused conservation method won him the first Wildlife Ranger Award from conservation charity Tusk.

He grew up in a village between Mount Kenya and the Aberdare Forest, which was once a wildlife route for migrating elephants and black rhinos. He saw them disappear gradually. He realized that hunting and the disruptive actions of the community were the reasons. The demand for rhino horn(角), which is very valuable in Asia, drives hunters. They are part of a big and rich crime network. There are people who help them by giving them equipment. In 2011 and 2012, Lewa had many difficulties. They lost rhinos. It was found that those involved in hunting were also linked to human smuggling(走私) and other illegal activities.

The hunting challenge has changed. Hunters now have networks, get information from the local community, and use technology like phones and motorbikes. Edward's team has adapted by using cameras, sensors, trackers, and a system that tells them when and where hunting might happen. They also work closely with the community, which is now the first 

line of defense. Lewa gives agricultural training, medical help, and business support to rural women. This makes locals more likely to report hunting before it happens.

To be a good forest guard, one needs to be honest, tough, and motivated. Edward now knows that making sure the forest guards are happy and well is very important. He is hopeful about wildlife conservation in Lewa. Funding is a problem, but organizations like Tusk are helping. Conservation is about people. Looking after those outside the reserve is necessary for the future of wildlife. Only when communities can live in harmony with the animals they see every day will there be a good future for wildlife.