To prevent the deserts coming near, China has planted billions of trees—to replace destroyed forests and as barriers against the sand. This isn't a cure, though, say experts, as thirsty trees can make the problem worse by taking in groundwater.

    “Planting tress is one way, but it isn't that simple. It doesn't solve the basic issue of water resources,” says Wu Bo, a professor. “We need to calculate how much water the trees will absorb, or else it could have a negative effect.”

    Villagers in Zhengxin have taken on this challenge, with limited success. When the irrigation channels began to run dry, Lu Xianglin switched from wheat to cotton on his land. He also planted trees to protect his fields from sandstorms. He says he still gets good yields（产量） using flood irrigation and earns a good income for his family.

    Other farmers haven't stuck it out（坚持到底）: about one in three have left Zhengxin in the past 10 years after their wheat crops died. Young people who can find jobs in the towns rarely return.

    Last week, Mr Lu joined the other men in his village on a government-arranged trip to see the land that has been set aside for their relocation, nearly 40 miles to the south. The next day, he was back, shaking his head at the plan. The idea of uprooting his family troubles him, as does the idea of giving up the land that fed his forefathers. He prefers to stay and keep up the fight.

    “With enough water, this problem can be solved,” Lu says. “We can plant trees and grass, and they will grow bigger. That will stop the desert.”

    Experts say that farmers could switch to drip irrigation （滴灌）to lessen their water intake for growing crops. Elsewhere in the region, farmers have built brick greenhouses as part of a plan to grow vegetables using less water. Roadside signs urge farmers to “Save Water, Protect the Environment”.

    As countless unmade beds and unfinished homework assignments prove, kids need rules. Yet how parents make demands can powerfully influence a child's social skills, psychologists at the University of Virginia recently found after the conclusion of a study investigating the transition from adolescence to adulthood.

    Initially 184 13-year-olds filled out multiple surveys, including one to assess how often their parents employed psychologically controlling strategies, such as inducing guilt or threatening to withdraw affection. The kids rated, for example, how typical it would be for Dad to suggest that “if I really cared for him, I would not do things that caused him to worry”or for Mom to become “less friendly when I did not see things her way.”

    The researchers followed up with the subjects at ages 18 and 21, asking the young adults to bring along a close friend and, later, a romantic partner if they had one. These pairs were asked to answer hypothetical (假设的) questions that were purposefully written to inspire a difference of opinion. “We wanted to see whether they could navigate a disagreement in a healthy way, ”says study leader Barbara Oudekerk, now at the U. S. Department of Justice's bureau of statistics.

    In the October issue of Child Development, Oudekerk and her colleagues report that the 13-year-olds who had highly controlling parents struggled in friendly disagreements at age 18. They had difficulty stating their opinions in a confident, reasoned manner in comparison to the kids without controlling parents. And when they did speak up, they often failed to express themselves in warm and productive ways.

    The researchers suspect that pushy parents ruin their child's ability to learn how to argue his or her own viewpoint in other relationships. Although parents do need to set boundaries, domineering strategies imply that any disagreement will damage the bond itself. Separate findings suggest that parents who explain the reasons behind their rules and turn disagreements into conversations leave youngsters better prepared for future arguments.

    The consequences of tense or domineering relationships appear to get worse with time. This study also found that social difficulties at 18 predicted even poorer communication abilities at age 21. Psychologist Shmuel Shulman of Bar-Ilan University in Israel, who did not participate in the work, thinks these conclusions convincingly reveal how relationship patterns “carry forward” into new friendships.

    Are some people born clever, and others born stupid? Or is intelligence developed by our environment and our experience? Strangely enough, the answer to these questions is yes. To some degree our intelligence is given to us at birth, and no amount of education can make a genius out of a child born with low intelligence. On the other hand, a child who lives in a boring environment will develop his intelligence less than one who lives in rich and varied surroundings. Thus the limits of person's intelligence are fixed at birth, whether or not he reaches those limits will depend on his environment. This view, now held by most experts, can be supported in a number of ways.

    It is easy to show that intelligence is to some degree something we are born with. The closer the blood relationship between two people, the closer they are likely to be intelligent. Thus if we take two unrelated people at random from population, it is likely that their degree of intelligence will be completely different. If, on the other hand, we take two identical twins, they will very likely be as intelligent as each other. Relations like brothers and sisters, parents and children, usually have similar intelligence, and this clearly suggests that intelligence depends on birth. Imagine now that we take two identical twins and put them in different environments. We might send one, for example, to a university and the other to a factory where the work is boring. We would soon find differences in intelligence developing, and this indicates that environment as well as birth plays a part. This conclusion is also suggested by the fact that people who live in close contact with each other, but who are not related at all are likely to have similar degree of intelligence.

    On April 2, we said goodbye to Tiangong I, China's first space lab. According to the China Manned Space Agency（中国载人航天）, Tiangong I re-entered the Earth's atmosphere （大气层）and fell into the South Pacific Ocean.

    There are many spacecraft that are still in orbit above the Earth. They are flying at heights ranging from 300 to 1,000 kilometers. After finishing their trips, they will all re-enter the Earth's atmosphere like Tiangong I.

    There are two types of re-entries：controlled（受控的）re-entry and uncontrolled re-entry.

    Some satellites（卫星）and manned spacecraft come back to the Earth in a controlled re-entry. Scientists calculate（计算）the path of the falling spacecraft and its speed. They can guide the spacecraft to fall in a chosen area. In 2017,Tianzhou I, China's first cargo（货运）spacecraft, was directed to fall in the South Pacific Ocean.

    Some spacecraft may have problems while in space, or are simply no longer usable after a certain amount of time.  These craft come back in an uncontrolled re-entry.  It is hard to tell when and where these spacecraft will fall until the last few hours. The US space station Skylab came back partially uncontrolled in 1979. Parts of the station fell in western Australia, but no one was injured.

    During re-entry, most of the spacecraft will burn up while passing through the Earth's atmosphere. Only a small amount of the debris（碎片）will reach the ground.

    The debris typically ends up falling into the ocean, China Daily reported. Tiangong I weighs about 8.5tons. The amount of debris that falls to the Earth might be about 1 to 1.5 tons, the Beijing News reported.  That is about the same weight as a car.

    Whenever we see a button (按钮), we are eager to press it because we know something will happen. This is true in most cases, for example on a doorbell and on the “on/off” button on the TV. But some buttons are actually fake, like the “close” button on a lift.

    Many people are in the habit of pressing the “close” button because they don't have the patience to wait for the lift doors to shut. But lifts'" close" buttons are a complete scam, at least in the US—the doors will not close any faster no matter how hard you press.

    It started in the 1990s when the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed in the US, making sure that all lifts stayed open long enough so that people with disabilities could enter. Only US firefighters and repairmen can use the buttons to speed up the door-closing process if they have a code or special keys.

    But to normal lift riders, the buttons aren't completely useless. According to psychologists, fake buttons can actually make you feel better by offering you a sense of control.

    “Perceived (能够感知的) control is very important. It reduces stress and increases well-being," Ellen J. Langer, a psychology professor, said, “Having a lack of control is associated with depression.”

    Experts have revealed that a lot of buttons that don't do anything exist in our lives for this same purpose. For example  many offices in the US have fake thermostats (温度调节器) because people tend to feel better when they think they can control the temperature in their workspace.

    But psychologists found it interesting that even when people are aware of these little "white lies", they still continue to push fake buttons because as long as the doors eventually close, it is considered to be worth the effort.

    "That habit is here to stay," John Kounios, a psychology professor, said, ''Even though I have real doubts about the traffic light buttons, I always press them. After all, I've got nothing else to do while waiting. So why not press the button in the hope that this one will work?”

Welcome to Student Voice

    What is it?

    Student Voice aims to promote student engagement and success in Ontario's schools by listening to and learning from students. Student Voice provides you, the students, with a variety of ways to share your ideas with your school, the education community and the ministry about what would help support your engagement in your learning. Student Voice can help you take action to shape your learning environment while you build your skills.

    Check out this video to get an idea of what's changing for Ontario students!

    It all starts with you.

    Speak up! You have a voice and we want to hear what you have to say about your education. Your ideas and actions can make a difference in Ontario's publicly funded education system. We want to help you make your school a place where everyone feels welcome and where you are empowered to speak your mind, get involved and become active citizens and leaders.

    Students told as that you want to:

    ●share your ideas with government on how to strengthen student engagement and make Ontario's publicly funded education system even better.

     ●have a school culture where all students feel and know that they belong.

    ●work as partners with your teachers, and participate in school decisions that will shape your lives and the lives of other students.

    This is your education. Speak up and get involved! Let's all work together to ensure Ontario's publicly funded education system remains among the best in the world.

    Send your comments and ideas to studentvoice@ontario.ca