SOME PEOPLE THINK THAT PARENT SHOULD TEACH CHILDREN HOW TO BE GOOD MEMBER OF SOCIETY.
OTHERS, HOWEVER, BELIEVE THAT SCHOOL IS THE PLACE TO LEARN THIS.
DISCUSS BOTH THESE VIEWS AND GIVE YOUR OPINION.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One thing can be termed as common between Children and Tree. We need to nurture both of them for their better growth. As good cultivation, watering can help trees to grow; good care & nurturing can help children grow mentally, emotionally and help them to be a good member of the society. One section of the society feels parents should teach children how to be a good member of the society where another section thinks it is school's duty. These points of view will be discussed in the same order.
A part of Society believes that Parent should hold the duty to teach children to be good member of society. In a way it can be true because children spends their most time of a day with their parents which helps them to bond with their children. Parents know their children's nature very well. These factors can help them to teach children well. However, excess love can spoil a child as well; a possibility which cannot be ruled out. Thus, we can say that the belief is not entirely wrong.
On the other hand, A fraction thinks that the duty lies on the shoulders of Schools. There are many examples to support the claim like Schools have a very disciplined and controlled environment which can help school teachers to impart good habits in children. The training given to teachers to guide children in a gentle way can play a great role in the mission to groom the children. Saying all of the above, The schools also have some limitations like they cannot focus on an individual child as compared to parents. By analysing these facts, It is clear why some support this claim.
For reasons related the matter of teaching children to be a good member of society by Parents or bye School are supported and refuted by many. However, after analysing both the points, It is evident that grooming the children is a collective effort. It looks impossible imagine parents mentor the children without the help of school and visa versa. Thus, Both arguments are supported and refuted at the same time.
Please review my Task 2 writing
-
David.IELTS.Examiner
- IELTS Examiner
- Posts: 1371
- Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 4:34 am
Re: Please review my Task 2 writing
Hello!
Sorry, but I have to jump straight in with a very naughty observation. Trees have been getting along just fine for millions of years without humans nurturing them!
As we move to the first argument, I have to ask whether children really spend most of their time with their parents. A brief look at essays on this forum will confirm that the vast majority of people think that children spend more time studying and/or playing computer games than with their parents, who are working from dawn to midnight (apparently!).
Why can't schools focus on individual children? This is actually exactly what all good schools claim to do, so more evidence is required.
The conclusion does not clearly contain your opinion. You need to use 'I' rather than referring to the general opinion of other people.
Overall, arguments are weak and undeveloped. Grammar and vocabulary are good.
All the best,
David
Sorry, but I have to jump straight in with a very naughty observation. Trees have been getting along just fine for millions of years without humans nurturing them!
As we move to the first argument, I have to ask whether children really spend most of their time with their parents. A brief look at essays on this forum will confirm that the vast majority of people think that children spend more time studying and/or playing computer games than with their parents, who are working from dawn to midnight (apparently!).
Why can't schools focus on individual children? This is actually exactly what all good schools claim to do, so more evidence is required.
The conclusion does not clearly contain your opinion. You need to use 'I' rather than referring to the general opinion of other people.
Overall, arguments are weak and undeveloped. Grammar and vocabulary are good.
All the best,
David