Education

10
Main function of university
Nowadays, some universities offer graduate students skills that assist them to find
employment, but some people believe that the main function of university should be to
access to knowledge for its sake. What is your opinion?
Some people believe that the main function of university is to provide theoretical knowledge
instead of occupational skills. In this essay, however, I will challenge this school of thought.
One might argue that practical and technical skills should be taught in vocational courses in
lieu of university ones. This is predicated on the assumption that theories and abstract
conceptual knowledge are the fundamentals of tertiary education and therefore should be
placed sole importance on. However, this line of reasoning is not sound since without bridging
theory and practice, education will possess little value. This is particularly true in the current
job market where many well-paid jobs even in the field of science and technology require
intense use of technical skills. Thus, it is a mistake to think that universities should solely
place importance on theoretical knowledge.
What is more, apart from technical skills and theory, universities should also provide students
with life skills. These could range from recognizing other people’s feelings, to dealing with
confrontations and giving feedback in constructive ways, and setting realistic and attainable
goals, to name just a few. These interpersonal and transferable skills will make them more
employable, less dependent on the health of a certain industry and stand them in good stead
when they enter the workplace. To this end, universities can organize sports and physical
activities to enhance students’ teamwork skills and team assessments can be designed to
facilitate students’ group discussion and information-sharing skills.
In conclusion, by no means should the main function of university be to provide theoretical
knowledge. I take this view on account of the fact that by equipping undergraduates with job
and life skills, university education will become more rounded and consequently produce
more well-rounded, fruitful individuals.

11
Main function of school
Some people think that the main function of schools is to turn children into good citizens
and workers, rather than to benefit them as individuals.
Do you agree or disagree?
Some people believe that the main purpose of schools is to produce productive members of
society, rather than to help students develop individually. In this essay, however, I will
challenge this school of thought.
One might argue that schooling is simply a vehicle for the government to produce effective
citizens and the nation’s workforce. This is predicated on the assumption that schooling is a
transfer of knowledge from teacher to learner, and should serve this function as such.
According to this theory, schools should provide children with sufficient understanding of
what is expected of them in society, and the necessary skills and knowledge to function well
in the workplace. As a result, children will grow up to be law-abiding citizens and productive
workers, leading to lower crime rates and sustainable economic growth.
However, this line of reasoning is not sound because the well-educated workforce, and the
low rates of crime, mentioned above, should only be seen as some of the positive byproducts
of schooling, not purposes. Education should never be about indoctrinating children to
believe certain sets of beliefs and ideas, but educating them to be individual thinkers who
can criticize and challenge the values and traditions of society, and come up with innovative
ideas that can tackle existing problems and change our lives for the better. This should be
the main purpose of schooling.
In concluding, the main function of schools should be to educate young people as individuals,
nurturing their talents, and empowering them to succeed later in life, rather than to turn
them into fruitful citizens and workers.

12
Study hard
Do you think it is good to push students to study hard in their youth?
Some people think that it is acceptable to push young students to strive for academic
achievements. In this essay, however, I will challenge this school of thought.
One might argue that pushing school children to study hard can prepare them for future
success. This is predicated on the assumption that children are often unaware of the benefits
of studying hard and good academic achievements, and therefore, it is essential for parents
and teachers to force young people to apply themselves to their studies in an effort to
increase the odds of success. In addition to this, by pushing students to study harder and
harder, teachers and parents can help children build resilience, which plays a pivotal role on
the journey to success.
However, this line of reasoning is not sound because it fails to factor in the fact that there is
more to success than being hardworking and getting good grades. In order to achieve
success, one needs to be able to work with others, understand others’ feelings, learn from
mistakes and learn to achieve a healthy balance between work and recreation, to name but
a few. All of these skills are certainly not achieved by studying harder but by playing team
sports, experimenting with one’s interests or exchanging ideas in group discussions.
Furthermore, pushing children too hard may backfire, causing children to develop a negative
attitude towards learning, if they fail to cope with stress.
In conclusion, although forcing children to study hard could help children perform
academically better and foster resilience in them, it does not help young people become
more well-rounded individuals and may even be counter-productive.

13
Single sex schools vs coed schools
Some people think it is better to educate boys and girls in separate schools. Others,
however, believe that boys and girls benefit from attending mixed schools.
Discuss both sides and give your opinion.
Some people think that single-sex schools are better than co-educational ones for children. In
this essay, however, I will challenge this school of thought, for I believe that the reverse is often
the case.
Granted, one might argue that single-sex schools better prepare schoolchildren for their future
success. This is predicated on the assumption that, without the presence of the opposite sex,
both boys and girls are less likely to develop relationships at too early an age, and
consequently they are able to focus more on their studies. Added to this is the learning
environment in single-sex schools, which is often more relaxed and therefore children are less
afraid of being judged when choosing and studying subjects that are dominated by the
opposite sex. With good academic performance, they have better opportunities to go to
college, increasing the odds of future success.
However, this line of reasoning is not sound because it fails to factor in the fact that there is
more to success than achieving good academic results. In order to function well and achieve
success in the workplace, one needs to be able to work well with others and treat them as
equal, regardless of their genders. To this end, perhaps educating boys and girls together
appears to be the only way. Otherwise, girls may develop negative or obsessive attitudes
towards boys, or vice versa, as a result of insufficient interactions with children of the opposite
sex, and both boys and girls will have a hard time adapting, let alone thriving at work later in
life.
In conclusion, co-educational schools are better than single-sex ones because growing up with
an understanding of the opposite sex is more important than acquiring good academic results.

14
Student exchange
Some teachers think that international student exchange would be beneficial for all teenage
school students.
Do you think its advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
Some educators believe that students receive many benefits when enrolling in a student
exchange program. While I acknowledge the drawbacks of this educational initiative, they are
outstripped by benefits.
Admittedly, the negative ramifications of student exchange programs are indeed in plain sight.
Firstly, young people are presented with financial problems. They will no longer be living under
their parent’s roof and will therefore have to pay for their own accommodation along with
utilities and food. This can come as quite a shock for many young people who have never had
to pay a bill in their lives. Secondly, those who have low levels of discipline may neglect their
studies and waste time on playing computer games, or other unhelpful activities. This is less
likely to happen if they stay with their family and go to a day school.
Despite the negatives mentioned above, the positive outcomes of exchange programs are more
significant. Students who enroll in these programs need to make daily decisions by themselves,
learn to cook, keep their room clean and tidy, and manage their diets and budget. As a result,
their self-reliance and independence can both be bolstered, which will then stand them in
good stead when they are adults. Another benefit is that exchange students have the
opportunity to come in contact with and learn from people from vastly different socio-
economic backgrounds. This is particularly desirable in today’s job market where we are
expected to work with people from different countries and cultures.
In conclusion, while the disadvantages of student exchange courses are clear, such negative
outcomes pale in comparison with the aforementioned potential benefits.

15
Punishment
It is important for children to learn the difference between right and wrong at an early age.
Punishment is necessary to help them learn this distinction.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
What sort of punishment should parents and teachers be allowed to use to teach good
behavior to children?
Some people believe that parents should punish their children to teach them whether
something is right or wrong. I personally think that there is little to disagree with in this school
of thought; however, the punishment should never be violent in any way.
Granted, one might argue that using punishment to teach children the distinction between
right and wrong is unnecessary. This is predicated on the assumption that small children, such
as toddlers, are unable to understand why they are being punished. However, this line of
reasoning is not sound because many habits, such as crying for parents’ attention, are
developed since children are only a few months old. This can further be seen in the way most
two-year-olds could recognize that a stern look or warning voice means they have done
something wrong. Thus, proper punishments should be employed to teach children whether
their actions are acceptable or not.
However, punishment should never be violent in any way because it teaches the child that the
answer to a problem is to beat someone and this could result in a young person that is prone
to violence. A study by Queen’s University concluded that over three quarters of all violent
offenders in some British prisons experienced kind of physical punishment as children. Better
punishments could range from taking away something the child treasures, such as his favorite
toy or TV show to stopping him seeing their best friend. These disciplinary techniques allow
parents to instill responsibility and discipline in their children without resorting to physical
abuse.
In conclusion, for the reasons outlined above, it stands to reason that punishment can teach
the child about what is acceptable later in life; however, it should always be non-violent.

16
Rewards
Some people think that schools should reward students with the best academic results, while
others believe it is more important to reward students who show improvements.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Some people champion the idea that it is better to reward students who excel in their studies,
while others believe that those who make progress should be rewarded. Personally, I am of the
latter school of thought for several reasons.
Granted, one may argue that elite students have applied themselves to their studies, and
therefore deserve the praises and privileges. However, this line of reasoning is not sound
because it fails to factor in the fact that the aim of rewarding certain individuals is to encourage
them and other students to study more diligently. Since only a small number of smart students
can top exams and receive the rewards, chances are that others may feel overwhelmed and
disheartened and gradually lose the incentive to study. This makes it clear that rewarding
students with the best academic results can be counter-productive.
On the other hand, rewarding students who show improvements would incentivize all students
to be diligent in their studies, which would be of direct benefit to everybody’s progress,
including those who already achieve top performance in class. This form of encouragement
helps students understand that they should never stop improving themselves, regardless of
how well they have been or are performing. An increase in the number of such individuals can
certainly improve the overall productivity of the workforce act as a precursor to bolstering
economic growth.
In conclusion, even though it is justifiable to reward top students exclusively, schools should
reward those who show signs of improvement, because in this way, every student, those
with best performance included, is motivated to apply themselves harder.

17
Literature and history
Some people believe that it is more important to teach children the literature and history of
their own country, rather than the literature and history of other countries.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Some people believe that the teaching focus should be on national instead of international
history and literature. I personally think that there is little to disagree with in this school of
thought, as I will explain now.
Firstly, by studying the ideas, culture and history of their own country, children begin to
develop a sense of identity and patriotism. Vietnamese children, for example, who read “the
lore of Banh Chung” would understand why such a staple food is used in Tet, fostering shared
ideas and values among fellow citizens of the nation. By the very same token, learning about
the Battle of Dien Bien Phu thoroughly, they would understand that much blood has been
shed and millions of lives have been sacrificed so that the sovereignty of their fatherland
could be ensured.
To add further credence to my assertion, I note that the study of global events and foreign
novels could cause unnecessary difficulty and confusion for school pupils. For example, I do
not see the point in presenting Russian or Chinese history to a Vietnamese child who has not
yet studied the history of his or her own country in detail. Similarly, any exposure to
international literature is likely to require the teaching of a foreign language or the use of
translations. Young people at primary or secondary school age are simply not ready for such
complications.
In conclusion, for the reasons outlined above, I would argue that it is undesirable for schools
to cover aspects of foreign history and literature; they should ground their pupils in the local
culture instead.

18
Free education

In order to study at university students are required to pay expensive tuition fees. Not all
students can afford them so some people think that university education should be free for
everyone.
To what extent do you agree?
Some people believe that university should be free for all people, regardless of their
background. In this essay, however, I will challenge this school of thought.
One might argue that making university accessible to everyone begets a more productive
workforce, which, in turn, begets economic growth and, consequently, an improved quality of
life for everyone. However, this line of reasoning is not sound because free university
education for everyone would put a tremendous financial strain on a country since doing this
means taking funds from other much needed areas in order to allocate money to universities.
This capital allocation is not efficient and may even exacerbate many problems at hand, such
as poverty, and insufficient funding for the health care system, and is obviously unpopular and
not viable for most countries, especially underdeveloped and developing ones.
What is more, offering all people free tertiary education would tempt many people to enter
university whether they were interested or not. In other words, rather than choosing to get a
job, some young people would opt for doing a degree to which they would only half-heartedly
apply themselves. Perhaps, they would drop out after a short time studying or working in the
future. This would not only be a waste of a country’s finances but also a waste of human
resources. For these reasons, the idea that providing free higher education for everyone should
not be supported.
In conclusion, for the reasons outlined above, it stands to reason that abolishing university
fees is not feasible for most countries and could be a waste of country’s resources.

19
Student behavior
In many countries schools have severe problems with student behaviour.
What do you think are the causes of this? What solutions can you suggest?
It is true that the behaviour of school pupils in some parts of the world has been getting worse
in recent years. Several reasons can be adduced to explain this state of affairs and this essay
will suggest several viable solutions to remedy the situation.
What seems to be at the core of the way young people behave at school nowadays is related
to parents and celebrities. With regard to the former, modern parents tend to be too lenient
or permissive. This leads to many children becoming accustomed to getting whatever they
want, and they find it difficult to accept the demands of teachers or the limits imposed on
them by school rules. Added to this is the fact that children are all too often influenced by and
immitate the behaviour of celebrities, many of whom portray the idea that success can be
achieved without finishing school.
To address the problem of students misbehaving at school, I believe that the change must start
with parents, who need to be persuaded that it is important to set firm rules for their children.
When children misbehave or break the rules, parents should use reasonable punishments to
demonstrate that actions have consequences. These disciplinary techniques could range from
depriving them of things that they treasure, such as their favorite toy or TV show, to stoping
them seeing their friends. Also, famous people, such as musicians and football players, need
to understand the responsibility that they have to act as role models to children.
In conclusion, schools increasingly facing discipline problems can be ascribed to parents’
leniency and famous people’s behavior, and the solutions lie in changing parents’ ways of
disciplining their children and making famous figures realize the amount of bearing they have
on young people, who often idolize and emulate them.

20
Competition vs co-operation
Some people think that a sense of competition in children should be encouraged. Others
believe that children who are taught to co-operate rather than compete become more useful
adults. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

While some people champion the idea that children should be taught to be competitive,
others believe that the ability to co-operate is more important. Personally, I am of the latter
school of thought for several reasons.

One might argue that competition can be a great source of motivation for children. For
example, when teachers use games or prizes to introduce an element of competitiveness
into lessons, it can encourage children to work harder to outdo their peers in the class. This
kind of healthy rivalry, while pushing them to work independently and progress more
quickly, may help to build children’s self-confidence, determination and the ability to work
alone. These important virtues will help them in competitive situations such as job interviews
after they leave school. Therefore, it is reasonable to think that competition should be
encouraged in order to prepare children for adult life.

On the other hand, it is perhaps even more important to prepare children for the many
aspects of adult life that require co-operation. In the workplace, adults are expected to work
in teams, follow instructions given by their superiors, or supervise and support the more
junior members of staff. More importantly, when they have a family of their own, it is vital
that they be able to live in harmony with their marriage partner, resolve conflicts and
confrontations in constructive ways and make decisions together. For these reasons, it is
sensible to arrive at the conclusion that team collaboration skills are much more useful than a
competitive determination to win.

In conclusion, having analyze the arguments in some depths, I have arrived at the conclusion
that a co-operative attitude is much more desirable in adult life. I take this view on account
of the fact that although fostering a competitive attitude in children can benefit them in
some work situations, they need to have cooperation skills to manage many other aspects
both in the workplace and especially in family life.

21
Children learning another language
Some experts believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at
primary school rather than secondary school.
Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?
Some people believe that school children should start learning foreign languages at primary or
at secondary school. I believe that the disadvantages of starting other languages early are
exaggerated.
One might argue that it is disadvantageous to teach young schoolchildren a second language
when they first start school, because they need to master the complexities of their own
language first. This is predicated on the assumption that, if children attempt to learn a second
language at too early an age, they may be confused by different alphabets and grammar
structures, as well as by the vocabulary. According to this theory, as a result of the confusion,
they will fail to learn either language thoroughly, and they may be disadvantaged throughout
their lives.
However, this line of reasoning is not sound because it fails to factor children’s ability to learn
into the equation. In fact, children are naturally gifted at learning when they are very young,
and their capacity to do so is almost infinite. Evidence for this can be seen in Vietnam, where
there is an immigrant population whose children do not speak Vietnamese before they start
school. Despite this, these children invariably learn the native language so quickly that within
a year, their Vietnamese ability is indistinguishable from that of the native population.
In conclusion, I believe that parents who insist on their children’s mastery of their native
tongue first are overestimating the disadvantages involved, and that if they are taught foreign
languages at primary school they will learn easily without confusion.

22
Online learning
Some universities now offer their courses on the Internet so that people can study online.
Is this a positive or negative development?
It is true that online courses are becoming a common feature of university education. While I
acknowledge the drawbacks of Internet-based learning, I believe that it is a very positive
development.
The drawbacks of the trend towards offering and attending online university courses are
indeed in plain sight. Firstly, there is invariably less direct interaction between students and
their professors. Given the complexity of knowledge in university courses, this could have a
negative impact on students’ understanding of the concepts learned and their performance at
school. Secondly, these learners may also lack the motivation and element of competition that
conventional lectures bring. This can be seen in the way many students zealously raise their
hand in the class to showcase the depth of their intellect.
Despite the negatives mentioned above, I believe that online university courses are a positive
development for various reasons. The most important benefit is that they allow learners to
study in a flexible way, meaning that they can work whenever and wherever is convenient,
and they can cover the material at their own pace. A person who works during the day, for
example, now can pursue his education from the comfort of his own home by taking online
classes, which would have been impossible in the days before internet-based education.
Distance learning, in other words, makes university education accessible to anybody who is
willing to study, regardless of age, profession, location, ability and background.
In conclusion, while some positive aspects of traditional university classes such as face-to-face
discussion, and the competitive nature of these classes are marginalized, I believe online
learning to be a positive development overall because it offers online learners flexibility and
accessibility.

23
Online study
Some people consider online study courses better than classroom studies, while others
think classroom study is better. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Thanks to technological innovations, there has unquestionably been a surge in the popularity
of internet-based learning. Which type of course is appropriate will depend on factors such as
the personality and personal circumstances of the student, as well as the nature and level of
difficulty of the course undertaken.
There is little doubt that some learners, especially extroverts, thrive in a social environment
whilst others, possibly introverts, enjoy working in solitude and at their own pace. For some,
being able to raise their hand in the classroom is essential; for others, pleasure and a feeling
of satisfaction come from quietly working out solutions alone.
Similarly, learners’ lifestyles will partly determine how they should study. Full-time workers
and those bringing up families are simply unable to attend classes on a regular basis and
need to study online whenever the opportunity arises. Retired individuals, however, may
have a less demanding schedule and manage to accommodate regular evening classes in
educational establishments. My octogenarian uncle exemplifies this point: he has time on his
hands and studies interior design at his local college every Thursday.
Finally, the complexity of the material matters. For more challenging subjects such as
astrophysics it might be crucial to be able to discuss issues face-to-face in the real world.
Likewise, subjects requiring social interaction, including foreign languages, are probably
better learnt in a traditional setting. Simpler subjects possibly lend themselves better to
online study.
Overall, it seems reasonable to say that whether would-be learners choose to study online or
not is dependent upon various points. It is impossible to draw a general conclusion. We can
only hope that everyone contemplating study thinks seriously about which will be the most
rewarding method.

24
Homework
Some people believe that school children should not be given homework by their teachers,
whereas others argue that homework plays an important role in the education of children.
Discuss both of these views and give your own opinion.
Some people champion the idea that school children should not be given homework, while
others believe that the setting of homework is a necessary aspect of education. Personally, I
agree with the latter school of thought for several reasons.
One might argue that homework is an unnecessary burden on children. The essence of this
argument is that homework does nothing to improve educational outcomes. Finland, where
school children are not given homework, regularly top international educational league tables
and outperform nations where setting homework is the norm. However, this line of reasoning
is not sound because Korea, Japan and many other countries still place tremendous emphasis
on the setting of homework, and these countries are also ranked very high worldwide.
Therefore, it would be wrong to arrive at the conclusion that homework does not help improve
students’ academic results and capabilities.
What is more, homework encourages independent learning and helps children develop strong
work ethic, as they are challenged to work through tasks alone and at their own pace. For
example, by doing mathematics exercises at home, students consolidate their understanding
of the concepts taught by their teacher at school. This helps them develop an independent
study habit, while pushing them to work harder. These are particularly important because they
train children to become used to and function well under pressure and heavy workload, all of
which will stand them in good stead when they enter the job market.
In conclusion, homework does have an important role to play in children’s schooling and
should be perpetuated. I take this view on account of the fact that homework helps foster
independence and the ability to handle tasks given to them.

25
Some parents want teachers to give their kids homework every day so that they can develop
the necessary skills for success in adulthood. Some teachers, meanwhile, argue that a lot of
homework does not actually help students.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Some people believe that homework plays a role in preparing a child for his or her future
success, while others think otherwise. Personally, I am of the latter school of thought for several
reasons.
One might argue that homework allows children to reinforce the lessons learned in class and
to develop a strong work ethic. According to this theory, they will consequently have better
test scores, which may lead to better opportunities when it comes to further education, and
possibly in the workplace as well. However, this line of reasoning is not sound because it fails
to factor in the fact that many students only do homework to avoid getting punished by their
parents and teachers. This leads school children to develop a negative attitude towards
learning, and they would fail to benefit from their education as a result.
Another reason to reject the setting of homework is that children who are given the time and
space to experiment with their passions will probably associate with others who share their
interests. This will enable them to harness stronger social skills than children who spend their
evening hours at home alone with their tasks. A child who plays a team sport, for instance,
will learn things that are simply not taught in books, such as how to win and lose graciously
and how to strategize and understand an adversary. Added to this is that this child will learn
how to separate work and play time, and such an important skill will stand him in good stead
in the future when he enters the workplace.
In conclusion, parents who insist on teachers giving their children more homework are
overestimating the bearing that homework has on their children’s future success.

26
Living at home vs boarding
It is better for college students to live in schools than live at home with their parents.
Do you agree or disagree?
Some people believe that university students should board at school rather than live with
their parents. I personally think that there is little to disagree with in this school of thought as
I will explain now.
Firstly, we need to factor in the fact that very few students choose to attend a local college.
Given the long distance they have to travel to and from their residence, the idea of them
staying at home during school term is simply unjustifiable. This can be seen in developing
nations, such as Vietnam, where most colleges are concentrated in urban centers. Traveling
from neighboring provinces to Hanoi would normally take at least an hour and it is always
cheaper to rent a small apartment or live in a dormitory than to spending money on
commuting. As such, on-campus housing enables students to save both time and money.
To add further credence to my assertion, I note that living away from family fosters personal
growth in ways that are otherwise not possible if students choose to live at home. For
instance, when boarding at a dormitory, students with discrepant preferences would learn to
make compromises. This is not necessary if they live with their parents, who are generally
more accommodating. In addition, living away from home also teaches students to be more
independent, because they need to be in charge of their time, cook for themselves and
manage their personal finance, all of which are necessary life skills and will stand them in
good stead when they are adults and enter the workforce as a result.
In conclusion, I believe that student accommodation is the optimal choice for
undergraduates. I take this view on account of the fact that living with parents is not always a
plausible option and that living in schools could be a potential character-building
opportunity.

27
Many parents encourage young people to leave home when they become older, while
others think they should stay at home with the family. Discuss both views and give your
own opinion.

Some people think that young adults should leave home before getting married, while others
think otherwise, claiming that staying with their siblings and parents is a better option for
these people. Personally, I am of the former school of thought for several reasons.

Granted, one might argue that those moving out early lose a parental safety net that
safeguards financial stability. This is predicated on the assumption that young people will
have to contend with rent, food, transportation costs, and allowances for leisure activities.
These monetary hardships could prove overwhelming and force them to take a job that is not
their passion to pay their bills. They also have to clean their house, cook for themselves, and
manage their own time as their parents are not around to help them with housework or
wake them up for work.

However, the aforementioned hurdles can be easily overcome if young people actively try to
get used to their new independent life. They learn to take first baby steps towards looking
after themselves, for example by doing their own laundry, managing their finances to an
extent, and taking a job to provide for themselves financially. Once they develop the habit
of taking care of themselves and spending more responsibly, they are more prepared to
enter adult life where these qualities, of frugality and responsibility, will stand them in good
stead in both the workplace and family life.

In conclusion, although having to live independently for the first time may present young
adults with financial and household problems, the added responsibility fosters
independence and prepares them for adult life.

28
Some people believe that it is good for children to stay away from their family and go to a
boarding school, others suggest that children live with their families and attend a day
school. What is your opinion?
While some people champion the idea of children going to a boarding school, others think
that children should stay with their families and attend a day school. Personally, I am of the
former school of thought.
One might argue that school children living with their family members often achieve better
academic results. This is predicated on the assumption that many young people do not have
to do the laundry or cook for themselves like those living in a dormitory room, thereby
having more time to devote to their studies. However, this line of reasoning is not sound as
students who board at school do not need to spend an hour every day traveling to and from
school, and therefore this amount of time saved can certainly offset the amount they spend
doing household chores.
What is more, the choice of living at school is reinforced by the fact that it fosters personal
growth in ways that are otherwise not possible if students choose to live at home. When
living in on-campus housing, students with discrepant preferences would learn to make
compromises. This is not necessary if they live with their parents, who are generally more
accommodating. In addition to this, living away from home, students have to make daily
decisions by themselves, manage their diets, and budget and keep their room clean and
tidy. As a result, their self-reliance and independence are both bolstered, standing them in
good stead when they are adults.
In conclusion, for the reasons outlined above, it stands to reason that boarding at school is the
optimum choice for students.

29
University vs Work
Some people believe that studying at university or college is the best route to a successful
career, while others believe that it is better to get a job straight after school.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Some people champion the idea that it is better for school leavers to get a job right after
school, while others believe that these students should continue their education. Personally, I
am of the latter school of thought for several reasons.
One might argue that going to university straight away after graduating, school leavers can
achieve success faster. This is predicated on the assumption that after gaining a certain
degree after four or five years in university, these students can enjoy a much wider range of
job possibilities compared to those who choose to work after high school. However, this line
of reasoning is not sound since many high school graduates do not know what their passions
are because they never experience what it is like to work in a certain job. Choosing what
major to study in university appears to be a guesswork. More often than not, they end up
wasting time studying what they do not like, applying themselves only half-heartedly to
their studies or worse, dropping out after one or two years.
What is more, most universities place tremendous importance on theories and abstract
knowledge, while employers these days value one’s practical skills and experience to deliver
results rather than one’s qualifications. Furthermore, choosing to work different jobs in the
first a few years after high school instead of going to university right away enables one to
experiment with his or her passions. After this period, they can always pursue higher
education if it is needed for their jobs. Even without any academic qualifications, one can still
opt to become an entrepreneur after a few years accumulating experience and skills.

In conclusion, students can avoid wasting time and are more likely to be successful in their
careers if they engage in some sort of employment as soon as they finish high school.

30
University subjects
Some people think that all university students should study whatever they like. Others
believe that they should only be allowed to study subjects that will be useful in the future,
such as those related to science and technology.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

While some people believe that it would be better if students are forced into certain key
subject areas, others think that they should have the autonomy to study the course of their
choice. Personally, I am of the latter school of thought for several reasons.

One might argue that by forcing people to opt for particular university subjects, governments
can ensure that any knowledge and skill gaps in the economy are covered. However, this line
of reasoning is not sound because it fails to factor in the fact that the main purpose of
schooling is to enable students to develop as individuals, not to turn them into fruitful
workers. The well-educated workforce that can act as a precursor to sustaining and
bolstering economic growth should only be seen as one of the positive byproducts of
education. Therefore, it is a mistake to think that university students should only be allowed
to study some so-called “useful subjects”.

Another reason to allow students to study whatever they like is that society will benefit more
if students are passionate about what they are learning. Everyone will realize this in their life
when they use a service or a product created with passion. What tends to clinch the
argument is that nobody can really predict which areas of knowledge will be most useful to
society in the future. Given the prevalence of robots in the workplace, many employers start
to value creative thinking skills more, and even above practical or technical skills. If this
trend continues, students of art, history and philosophy will find it easier to find a high-
paying job than those of science or technology.

In conclusion, having analyzed the argument in some depth, I have arrived at the conclusion
that young people should have the right to study whatever they like.

31
Student numbers in university subjects
Universities should accept equal numbers of male and female students in every subject.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some people believe that universities should accept equal proportions of each gender in all
subjects. In this essay, however, I will challenge this school of thought because this selection
is impractical and could promote sexism.

Having the same number of men and women on all degree courses is simply unrealistic. For
example, nursing courses tend to attract more female applicants, and it would be extremely
difficult to fill these courses if fifty percent of the places needed to go to males. By the very
same token, science subjects where the vast majority of students are men would experience
the same problem. In other words, since many courses are more popular with one gender
than the other, it would not be practical to aim for equal proportions.

One might argue that it is fair to base admission to university courses on gender. This is
predicated on the assumption that both men and women should have equal opportunities, or
in other words, same numbers of places in every course, and this would promote equality
among sexes. However, this line of reasoning is not sound. For example, if a female student is
the best candidate for a place on a course, it is surely wrong to reject her in favor of a male
student with lower grades or fewer qualifications. This example makes it clear that the
selection of university students should be based on merit, not gender.

In conclusion, for the reasons outlined above, it stands to reason that it would be both
problematic and unfair to change to a selection procedure based on gender rather than
academic capabilities and qualifications.

32
Private schools – tax
Families who send their children to private schools should not be required to pay taxes that
support the state education system.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

Some people believe that parents of children who attend private schools should not need to
contribute to state schools through taxes. In this essay, however, I will challenge this school
of thought.

One might argue that it would be fair to reduce taxes for families who pay for private
education. This is predicated on the assumption that their children do not attend public
school but they still need to pay money that supports the public system. However, this line of
reasoning is not sound because it fails to factor in the fact that we all pay a certain amount of
tax for public services that we may not use. For example, most people are fortunate enough
not to have to call the police or fire brigade at any time in their lives, but they would not
expect a tax reduction for this.
To add further credence to my assertion, I note the impracticality of such a pricing scheme. In
my view, it would be impossible to calculate the exact amount of how much money should
be deducted for each family whose children go to private school. Apart from this, I believe
that we should all be happy to pay our share of the money that supports public schools
because it is beneficial for all members of society to have a high-quality education system
with equal opportunities for all young people. This will result in a well-educated workforce, a
more productive and prosperous nation, and in turn an increased quality of life for
everyone.

In conclusion, for the reasons outlined above, it stands to reason that no financial concessions
should be made for people who choose private education.

33
Uniforms
Some schools make all students wear uniforms, while other schools allow the students to
choose what they wear.
Which approach do you think is better for students’ overall development? Why?

Some people think that school children should be forced to wear uniforms, while others believe
that they should be allowed to wear whatever they like. Personally, I am of the former school
of thought for several reasons.
One might argue that allowing children to dress as they please prepares them for the real
world. This is predicated on the assumption that when they are adults, they often compete with
one another both in and out of the workplace, and quite often these contests are judged by
materials standards, such as one’s car or one’s clothes. By allowing children to dress freely,
schools can give them a taste of adult social reality. However, this line of reasoning is not sound
because it condones and perpetuates unhealthy rivalry between people. There is, indeed,
more to life than having material things, and this is the attitude that I believe schools should
foster in children instead of promoting social competition between them.
To add further credence to my assertion, I note that mandating uniforms creates an
atmosphere of academic. In other words, students can differentiate themselves not by the
labels on their shirts, but by the scores they achieve on tests. This argument is reinforced by
studies demonstrating that institutions requiring uniforms experience fewer incidents of
bullying, a key feature of which is the singling out of anyone deemed vulnerable based solely
on their outward appearance. Uniforms, then, remove these social struggles so that these
young learners may develop academically.
In conclusion, for the reasons outlined above, it stands to reason that uniforms can be a vehicle
to create a positive learning environment from which schoolchildren benefit academically.

Other ideas:
One key reason which supporters of uniforms point to relates to fairness. If all children are
obliged to wear clothes which look exactly the same, youngsters cannot be picked on or
bullied for being less fashion-conscious or for not being wealthy enough to afford top
quality or trendy jeans and trainers.
A second point worth considering is connected to unity. Schoolchildren develop a feeling of
pride and belonging when they put on their uniform. The uniform promotes harmony,
togetherness and mutual respect. It is highly likely that educational establishments where
uniforms are compulsory actually experience lower levels of bullying and fewer problems
with discipline.

34
However, detractors maintain that having a uniform is a violation of the freedom of choice.
They believe that we have the right to express ourselves in whichever ways we want. This
includes the right to wear what we choose to. It is thought by some that forcing young
children and adolescents to put on uniforms represses creativity and self-expression.
It is also worth pointing out that uniforms can be almost prohibitively expensive for families
on lower incomes. They simply cannot afford the costly outfits. Many parents bitterly
complain that it would be far cheaper if their sons and daughters were allowed to attend
classes wearing clothes which they already owned.

35
Academic tests
Over the last few years, school boards have increasingly utilized standardized tests to
measure their students’ performance. Many people believe these tests do not accurately
reflect most students’ academic abilities and should therefore be stopped.
Do you agree with this belief?
What are some other ways students can be assessed for achievement?

Some people believe that standardized testing is not fair and should be replaced with other
forms of assessment. I personally think that there is little to disagree with in this school of
thought, as I will explain now.
One might argue that standardized tests put everyone on an equal footing. This is predicated
on the assumption that these tests are designed to assess what school children learned in class,
and therefore, those who prepare well will do well. However, this line of reasoning is not sound
because it fails to factor people’s differences into the equation. For example, while taking the
SAT, an American university entrance exam, it is quite common for some test takers to “go
blank”, meaning their anxiety overtakes their ability to think rationally and coherently. As a
result, they score poorly, which by no means reflects their actual ability or intellect. This
elucidates why standardized tests are unfair.
There are other more acceptable forms of academic evaluation. For example, students may
be asked to complete a research essay, collaborate on a team project, or deliver a speech to
an audience. By allowing students to engage in forms of assessment that best suit their
characters, they will be better able to showcase their abilities and thrive. This helps young
people develop as individuals and better prepares them for the real world where nothing is
standard and merit is based on individual achievement.
In conclusion, boards of education must realize that individual students are diverse in their
characters and, consequently, in their strengths and weaknesses. They should, therefore, be
evaluated accordingly in order to accurately assess their academic capabilities.
Bullying
More and more schools are adopting a zero-tolerance policy towards bullying, meaning that
a student caught bullying others is automatically expelled.
Do the advantages of such a policy outweigh the disadvantages? Why?

It is true that extreme measures, such as zero-tolerance policies are increasingly being
adopted to deal with incidents of violence and emotional or mental abuse at school. I believe
that the benefits of this trend are over-rated.
One might argue that expelling a bully in schools will keep him away from his victim and
unable to repeat his offences. However, this line of reasoning is not sound because there are
no assurances the bully will indeed stay away from his victim after school hours, or that his
expulsion will not drive him to increase his attacks as a means of revenge. In fact, studies
have shown that students who had been expelled tend to become more violent as they age,
not less so. Thus, while the institution and the bullied child may find relief, society in general
loses.
A better approach, and the duty of the education system, is to try to help the bully. For
example, guidance counsellors at the school need to get involved and determine the root
causes of the bully’s motivations. These may include a troubled home life, difficulties with
his academic or social life, or other reasons. Thus, by keeping the child enrolled and helping
him, rather than casting him out and shifting the problem to others, educators can help the
individual and the greater community at once by ensuring his troubled mind does not
degenerate into something even worse and more dangerous.
To conclude, removing a bully may be the most convenient action, but it is certainly not the
best. Bullies are not born bad; as such, the source of their troubles can be discovered and help
can be given as long as someone cares enough to do this.
(285 words)
School children vs sports
Some people believe that sport is an essential part of school life for children, while others
feel it should be purely optional. Discuss these opposing views and give your own opinion.

Some people believe that sport should be made compulsory in the school curriculum,
while others think whether a child chooses to take up such a subject should depend
entirely on his or her wishes. Personally, I am of the former school of thought for several
reasons.

Granted, one might argue that sport uses up time which could be better spent on academic
subjects such as exam preparation. This is predicated on the assumption that by spending
time solely on sharpening their mind, they will achieve better academic results, leading to
better opportunities when it comes to pursuing higher education, and possibly in the
workplace in later life. In addition, it might be said that it is unwise to force children to do
activities which they have no interest in. After all, some youngsters are just not sporty, and
should be allowed to study instead.

However, this line of reasoning is not sound as if all of their time was spent studying, they
would become unfit and their minds would eventually suffer. Furthermore, a competitive
spirit, so important today, should be fostered in children, and this can be done by having
them participating in such sports as football or hockey at an early age. The benefits of being
accustomed to competition can be seen, for example, in the way many successful business
people excelled in sport at school. Children also learn that sometimes in life they have to do
things that they do not like for the sake of greater good, and in this case, their health.

In conclusion, I feel that sport should be compulsory for school children, because the
positive effect on their mental and physical development outweighs the negatives.

(277 words)
Gap year
Some people believe that a gap year between school and university is a good idea, while
others disagree strongly. Consider both sides of this debate and present your own opinion.

While some people consider gap years to be beneficial to school leavers, others believe the
reverse. Personally, I am of the former school of thought for several reasons.

On the one hand, opponents of gap years point to the cost involved in areas such as air
fares, accommodation and living expenses. All this money has to come from the student’s
family, or even from borrowing to be paid later. Secondly, it is often said that gap years take
a young person’s focus away from studying, and allows them to get involved in distractions
such as travelling. This can make it hard to adjust to university life, damaging the student’s
performance. Finally, there is a concern over the safety of young people if they are
travelling to remote places. Being kidnapped or mugged is a poor start to an academic
career, after all.

On the other hand, I agree with those who say that the skills learned outweigh the
disadvantages. First, we need to factor in the independence and assertiveness that a student
will acquire, in areas such as time management and interpersonal skills. These skills are
crucial and can lead to greater career success later in life, thus cancelling out the costs
involved. Furthermore, there are many examples of young people using gap years to achieve
something significant, whether in voluntary work or in a sector of business that interests
them.

In conclusion, I believe that a year off can indeed be a useful activity, with the experience
leading to improved skills that are invaluable in the future. Of course, this is provided that
the year is planned carefully and used for something genuinely worthwhile.

(275 words)
Other ideas:
There are major advantages for most students in taking a period of time away from
education before embarking on a degree course. Individuals will often become more mature
and well-rounded and appreciate how fortunate they are to have the chance to study.

There are several significant arguments in favour of a gap year. At the age of eighteen, many
school-leavers are not actually mentally mature enough to cope with university life. Some
adolescents have had a sheltered upbringing and are not yet ready to be thrown into
adulthood. It is very important that they are given a year to mature intellectually, socially
and perhaps spiritually.
Even more important is the idea that slightly older students will benefit more from university
study. An undergraduate who has taken a year out to earn money or see the world is far
more likely than other university applicants to appreciate how lucky she or he is. Such a
student will realise that it is a privilege to study and will take full advantage of the
opportunity.

It is fair to say that there are drawbacks to taking a year out. Some teens are genuinely ready
for study at eighteen. Others leave school, take a year away from academia and never
return. It is therefore reasonable to suggest that each student should decide - with the
support of family and teachers - whether a gap year is appropriate or not.
School-leavers vs unemployment
‘Unemployment remains the biggest challenge to school-leavers in most countries’
How far do you agree with this assessment? What other challenges face young people
today?
(school-leavers = young people who leave school without going on to further studies.)

Youth unemployment is certainly a worrying challenge for most countries, with some people
claiming that it is the most serious problem presented to high school graduates, especially at
a time of economic instability and social unrest. In this essay, however, I will challenge this
school of thought since I believe that to say that this is the largest issue is to overlook a range
of equally pressing matters.

It must be admitted that joblessness can undermine a young person’s economic prospects
and consequent social mobility. Nevertheless, this issue can be ameliorated by coordinated
action between the state and the private sector, as we have seen, for instance, in Canada
recently. When this is realized, we can see that other concerns are at least as serious.
Foremost among these is perhaps the issue of age demographics, whereby young people
bear the burden for an increasingly elderly population with high longevity. This means that
young people will pay higher taxes and work longer hours, possibly forcing them to migrate
to countries where this pressure is lower.

Furthermore, we must remember that a substantial proportion of young people globally face
existential threats such as famine, drought or outbreaks of disease. These problems are
often caused by (or are compounded by) civil war, political instability or the corruption of
people in power locally. Such risks are a danger to their safety in addition to their livelihood,
and so would appear to be far more serious than unemployment.

In conclusion, although it is certainly true that joblessness is a major challenge for young
people, persistent trends in demographics among developed countries and the presence of
physical dangers in developing countries should be regarded as at least as severe.

(283 words)
The internet vs course books
‘The Internet will never replace traditional course books in schools.’
How far do you agree with this prediction?

Some people believe that there will always be a place for course books in the school
curriculum, despite the many benefits of the Internet. I personally think that there is little to
disagree with in this school of thought, as I will explain now.

Firstly, we need to factor in the fact that course books have been developed and tested by
pedagogical experts. This means that they are proven to improve students’ academic
achievement, and teachers can measure this through testing procedures such as formal
examinations or continuous assessment. Furthermore, the use of modern course books
allows pupils to coordinate their studies as part of group work, hopefully making their
lessons less teacher-led and more about autonomous learning. This in itself teaches study
skills such as independent research and synthesizing sources, rather than old-fashioned
rote-learning.
Granted, one might argue that students these days no longer need course books because of
the wide availability of knowledge online. Nevertheless, the use of the Internet should only
remain a guided learning process, and not an exercise in data-gathering from Internet
sources which may be unreliable or even misleading. It is true that the Internet can be
invaluable for adults (for example in distance learning or self-study modules) who are able to
discriminate between sources and sift information to marshal their facts. This is, however, a
mature skill and we should not assume that school age children are ready to do this.

In conclusion, it appears that course books, with their quality and depth of material, are set
to remain an integral part of the syllabus. The internet can be judged a useful supplement to
the learning process, but it can never replace course books completely.
University cost
Many people today find that the cost of attaining a University-level education is extremely
high for the students and their families. What are the causes of this situation, and how can
governments, Universities and the students themselves overcome the problem?

Over recent decades, there has been a surge in the number of young people attending
university, but it has to be acknowledged that the expense involved can be prohibitive in
some cases. Some reasons can be adduced to explain this state of affairs, and a number of
solutions can be adopted to remedy the situation.

What seems to be at the core of the high cost of university education is the reduction in
government subsidy for university courses. For instance, in the Vietnam, such courses were
virtually free to the student until recently, but now cost around £5,000 per year. This pattern
appears to be global, with the result that students and their families need to meet the costs
directly. Another driving factor is the increasing cost of living in many countries, meaning
that the cost of day to day life (in addition to fees) can be almost overwhelming for
students. Finally, we need to factor in the difficulty in finding part-time work while a student
is studying. Such work tends to be poorly paid, while taking up time that students should use
for their studies.

Turning to possible solutions, an obvious step would be to restore some element of state
funding to university degree courses. Although public budgets are under pressure these
days, if we took this step it would greatly enhance access to courses for people from lower
income-brackets. A second remedy might be for universities to offer shorter courses, or
more courses that allow students to be paid while studying. If such courses were more
available, the issue of living expenses would be addressed to some extent. Finally, students
themselves should perhaps opt for online learning, which eliminates the additional cost of
accommodation and is substantially cheaper.

In conclusion, the factors of government funding, increased cost of living and difficulty in
finding ways to supplement their incomes appear to be the main causes of higher university
tuition fees. A coordinated response by the state, the institutions and the individuals may well
lessen the severity of the situation.

(341 words)
Private tutors
Many parents today pay for private tutors to teach their children after school hours. Do
you think this is a positive or negative development?

It is increasingly common for families to employ teachers to help their sons and daughters
with schoolwork during evenings and weekends. Although this can certainly be beneficial, I
agree with experts in education and child-rearing who express concerns about the practice.
It has to be acknowledged that pupils who receive extra tuition are likely to succeed. Their
exam results may well improve and their attitude towards schooling could easily get better.
These fortunate individuals will probably leave education with decent qualifications and
manage to get a rewarding and well-paid job.
However, we should not ignore the potential downsides. Firstly, youngsters who spend time
being tutored obviously have less opportunity to relax and play. Experts suggest that this
may affect their imagination and social skills. In addition, they do not enjoy as much quality
time with family members as their peers. Research has indicated that this has potentially
negative consequences for a child’s emotional growth. Just as worrying is the fact that
children in this situation often feel under pressure. They are aware that a great deal of
money has been spent on their learning and feel they must do brilliantly in the classroom.
Finally, this issue should be viewed from a social perspective: only affluent parents can afford
expensive tutors who get the best results. This exacerbates the inequality which already
exists within society.
In conclusion, as has been indicated in the previous paragraphs, bringing in a teacher to
support one’s child may seem wise, but has significant drawbacks. Although we should do
everything within our power to enable children to flourish and prosper, parents need to
appreciate that this well-intentioned approach may do more harm than good.
Lower numbers of teachers
Fewer and fewer young people are choosing to become teachers. Why do young people not
want to be teachers? How could this be changed?

Over recent decades, a reduction in the number of graduates choosing to become classroom
teachers has been reported. Several reasons can be adduced to explain this worrying trend,
and ways of encouraging university-leavers to enter the teaching profession will be explored
in this essay.
The fall in popularity of teaching is related to economic and social factors, as well as health
concerns. Firstly, salaries paid by schools are comparatively low. Well-qualified graduates
can usually earn more by working in the financial sector, industry or even tourism. In
addition, teachers no longer benefit from the respect they previously enjoyed. Those
working in education used to have the same social status as lawyers, doctors and scientists,
but this is not now the case. Finally, the job seems extremely unattractive. Prospective
teachers are put off by the thought of long working hours and disruptive students. It is
widely acknowledged that many working in primary schools or secondary education suffer
from stress, depression and other mental and emotional conditions.
A range of strategies might be used to arrest this decline. Firstly, Ministers of Education
should give teachers a pay-rise or offer financial incentives to newly-qualified recruits or
those who prove to be successful. This would make the profession a more attractive
proposition. In addition, governments ought to launch awareness-raising campaigns to
remind the general public about the importance and value of teachers. This might begin to
restore teachers' status as valued citizens. Finally, steps could be taken to reduce the
workload of teaching staff and give them powers to discipline poorly-behaved children. This
could make teaching a far more pleasant experience.
In conclusion, the decline in the number of applicants for jobs in schools can be ascribed to
economic and social reasons as the unhealthy nature of the profession. The solutions would
lie in giving teachers financial incentives, raising awareness to restore the social status that
teachers used to enjoy and improving the teaching experience.
Exams
Students at school and university have to take too many tests and exams. These tests make
it harder to teach and harder to learn and put students under unnecessary pressure. Is this
a fair comment?

It is widely acknowledged that students in every corner of the globe are regularly tested in
academic institutions to measure their improvement. There is no doubt that, in the correct
circumstances, testing can be a valuable tool. However, when used wrongly or excessively,
the test may become a dangerous weapon and be detrimental both to the tutor and the
learner.

Educators can point to a number of advantages of testing. Setting tests can help to develop a
positive sense of competition amongst students, which can inspire them to learn more
effectively and perform successfully. Similarly, exams can demonstrate to pupils how much
progress they have made and the areas in which they are doing well, which could be
extremely motivating. Furthermore, exams demonstrate to teachers what their pupils have
learnt and what needs to be revised later, making teaching more effective.

At the same time however, it is necessary to acknowledge the potential weaknesses and
dangers associated with examining. Firstly, tests can be excessively stressful for candidates
and may even lead to nervous breakdowns or, in the worst-case scenario, attempted
suicide. Likewise, they can result in too much competitiveness between fellow students and
those who achieve lower scores may experience lower self-esteem or suffer from being
bullied. Finally, exams can be extremely unfair. Some students consistently achieve low
exam scores despite being academically bright. These individuals are unlikely to reach
institutions of higher education, even though they deserve to.

In conclusion, it is fair to say that testing can be of great benefit both to those who teach and
those who study. Nevertheless, tests must be used sparingly and with caution as they can, at
times, be both damaging and unjust.
(281 words)
Studying art at school
These days, more and more schools focus on science and social science subjects and choose
not to teach children to sing, paint, sculpt, write creatively or dance. Should school-children
study the arts?

In the past, schools and academic institutions tended to focus on giving their pupils and
students a well-rounded education. These days, the curriculum is often crammed with more
academic classes and lessons in the arts have often disappeared altogether. The decision to
prioritize science and social science over the arts is deeply troubling.
Probably the most significant reason for teaching singing, dance and painting relates to self-
expression. Although classes in physics or business studies can help youngsters develop vital
thinking strategies, understand theoretical concepts, they do not offer them the chance to
explore new ways of interpreting their world, for example via poems, paintings or songs.
Connected to this point is the notion of balance. A person who understands everything from
a scientific perspective can hardly be described as well-rounded and mature. Indeed,
research suggests that the best scientists and business leaders tend to love creative activities
such as drawing. It therefore seems that studying the arts has major intellectual benefits for
those who wish to be scientific researchers or business executives.
Finally, one often overlooked point is that children enjoy the arts. Young learners have fun
developing skills like sculpting. They adore both the practical aspects of painting or singing
and the more technical or theoretical elements. When academic study can be so tedious
and seemingly pointless, it is essential to offer pupils something which they can be
enthusiastic about.
In conclusion, I would say that the arts should play a major role in a child’s education and
upbringing. I take this view on account of the fact that lessons in the arts enable children to
express themselves, understand the world in different ways and develop creativity and
imagination as well as offer them a chance to have fun.
(290 words)
Studying history
Some people say history is one the most important school subjects. Other people think
that, in today’s world, subjects like science and technology are more important than
history. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Some people maintain that history is just as important as science subjects, while others
believe the reverse, saying that given the fact that history does not have discernible impact
on most future careers, it is only secondary to science and technology. Personally, I am of the
latter school of thought for several reasons.

The main reason why students should study some history in school is that it provides crucial
insights into nations around the world and events that shaped the world order as we know
it. They should understand why war often starts, how a certain war was fought, and what
sacrifices have been made to ensure the sovereignty of a nation. By learning these, young
people also learn to value liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and the responsibility of
citizens to vote in a representative democracy and develop a sense of patriotism. Thus,
history should still be taught.

However, the practical sciences should be prioritized because these are more likely to have
an impact on a child’s future career. Very few students will end up with careers in history, as
historians or professors, but a large percentage will work in jobs that require technical and
scientific knowledge. If schools emphasize maths at school then this will better prepare them
to make calculations in complex engineering projects or when working at a bank or
accountancy firm. Countries that devote more of their educational budget towards these
practical subjects will give students a head start on a potential future career and increase
their chances of having a higher standard of living.

In conclusion, school administrators should not remove history from the timetable but they
should devote more time and resources to the teaching of subjects related to technology,
given the domination of the technology industry in the present-day and future job market.
(302 words)
Supporting weaker students
Many students struggle in class and do not leave school with good educational
qualifications. Why do some pupils struggle? What do you think should be done to help
students who find studying difficult?

Although some youngsters thrive in class, many teenagers are desperate to leave formal
education and do so without recognised qualifications and with few relevant skills. Several
reasons can be adduced to explain this state of affairs and several solutions can be taken to
help students learn better.
What seems to be at the core of some youths having such a negative experience in the
classroom is connected to the quality of teaching, material and a wider social factor.
Regularly, incompetent, unmotivated or uncaring teachers are unable to control and inspire
their students, leading to high levels of disruption and even truancy. In addition, it is
important to note that sometimes the material used is too sophisticated or too easy, leading
to young people losing interests in studying. Finally, we live in a world which values wealth
and physical appearance but not necessarily intelligence or the acquisition of knowledge.
Those who excel at school are no longer held in high regard by their peers, disincentivizing
them to study more diligently.
Probably the most effective approach would be to focus on the quality of teachers, the
curriculum and course content. It is essential that teachers lacking the necessary abilities
are re-trained or dismissed. Similarly, experts in pedagogy need to assess the course-books
and websites used to ensure that they are relevant and appropriate. It is true that making
fundamental changes in social attitudes could also radically improve students’ performance.
However, this would require a huge amount of work and may not be achievable in the short
run.
In conclusion, the reasons why some young learners experience difficulty in studying are
related to the teaching quality and the underestimation of academic achievement. The
solutions seem to lie in improving the quality of teaching.
(290 words)
When to leave school
In some countries, children under 16 years old are not allowed by law to leave school and
get full-time work. Is this a good or bad thing? Discuss your opinion.

Some governments permit those aged sixteen to stop studying and seek employment
instead whilst others expect adolescents to continue in further or higher education. Which
approach is more sensible depends on the nation’s economic requirements and the wishes of
the children concerned.
Political leaders should formulate policies based on the needs of the state. If a country is
experiencing a shortage of manual workers, it makes sense to give teenagers the right to
take these jobs. Similarly, if there is a poverty of highly-qualified doctors, lawyers and
engineers, those in power need to incentivize youngsters to remain in full-time education
and prevent them from abandoning their studies early. This is precisely what has happened
in developing nations, such as Vietnam.
Obviously, the appropriate approach may change, according to a child’s goals, strengths and
aspirations. Those who thrive in an educational setting and perform well in examinations
should be encouraged to go to colleges. However, there is little point forcing unwilling
students to attend. They will respond by misbehaving, disrupting classes, refusing to work
and playing truant. A personal example would be that I endured two years of poor-quality
classes because the tutors had to concentrate on controlling poorly-behaved classmates
who would have felt more fulfilled elsewhere.
Having considered this matter in some depth, I have reached the conclusion that a flexible
approach is necessary. It would be sensible for Ministries of Education to offer the best of
both worlds: seventeen-year-olds could be offered apprenticeships, which allow them to
combine work and study. Similarly, colleges could link their academic programmes to
relevant work-based skills.
(263 words)
Everyone should stay at school until 18. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some people believe that not until one reaches the age of 18 can he or she be allowed to
leave school. Personally, I disagree with this school of thought for several reasons.

Firstly, we need to factor in the plight of many children who cannot stay at school until they
are 18. To provide a supporting example, one need look no further than an orphan or a child
born into a homeless family. Such a child’s only worry is probably about whether or when he
has his next meal, and as such, even if his tuition fees were fully subsidized, he would still
struggle to study whole-heartedly due to his survival needs not being met. Thus, making
school compulsory for everyone is problematic at best.

To add further credence to my assertion, I note the fact that many individuals who have
talent for sports, arts or other disciplines should not be forced to stay at school. In my view,
as conventional schools are far from ideal places to nurture individuals with special gifts and
needs, allowing them to pursue their passions elsewhere would ensure that they can reach
their fullest potential. In other words, for a talented footballer or singer whose ability to
perform in a football match or on the stage is what matters most, learning things such as
algebra or complex math problems at school can be seen as unnecessary or even a waste of
their precious time.

In conclusion, forcing every child to complete his high school education would simply be
impractical and, in some cases, counterproductive.
(260 words)
Truancy
In many countries, truancy is a worrying problem for both parents and educators. What are
the causes of truancy, and what may be the effects on the child and the wider community?

Truancy is an activity which some children regard as amusing or even exciting, but which can
have serious impacts on their future and on society as a whole. Several reasons can be
adduced to explain why truancy is becoming increasingly common in many educational
establishments around the world, and two main effects relating to this will be outlined.

What seems to be at the core of truancy is a sense of boredom or frustration with school itself,
for instance with the content, pace or organisation of the lessons. This can be seen in the way
that pupils often avoid certain lessons but not others, suggesting that particular subjects or
teachers are the personal grievance. Added to this is peer pressure, meaning that pupils feel
obliged to play truant because some of their peers or friends are doing this. We can see that
the child’s desire to be popular among a peer group may be higher than the motivation to
study and progress.

Turning to possible effects, the tendency to underperform academically is probably the most
serious impact on a pupil’s life, leading to poor exam results and weak career progression in
later life. Another effect may be the temptation to participate in petty crime or antisocial
behaviour while the child is unsupervised, potentially opening a pathway into more serious
crimes later on. For example, a child who commits vandalism may progress to theft and
robbery, a trend we see in some major South American cities such as Rio or Buenos Aires.
In conclusion, the causes of truancy generally relate to the quality of teaching or peer
pressures, while the effects are seen in individual under-achievement and in minor crime
against the community as a whole.
AI in classrooms

As artificial intelligence advances and becomes a common part of everyday life, some
people worry that computerized systems will make many jobs obsolete. Some even worry
that AI will eventually do this to teachers and take over their children’s and grandchildren’s
classrooms.
Do you think a computer can replace a human teacher?

Given the fact that many groundbreaking breakthroughs in AI technology have been made
recently, some people believe that AI will even permeate future classrooms where the
presence of teachers will no longer be needed. Personally, I disagree with this school of
thought for several reasons.

One might argue that the role of a teacher in traditional classrooms is fundamentally about
transferring knowledge to learners, which could totally be done by AI teachers. This is
predicated on the assumption that AI teachers’ knowledge would be invariably superior to
that of their human counterparts, and this would render AI teachers capable of delivering
lessons better than human ones normally do. However, this line of reasoning is not sound
because it fails to factor in the fact that such lessons would be incredibly boring and clinical,
causing young people to lose interest in learning. This is much less likely to happen in a
traditional classroom since human teachers have the ability to recognize how their students
feel towards their lessons and make quick adjustments to their teaching plans to keep
learners engaged.

To add further credence to my assertion, I note the frightening scenario where AI teachers
could actually take over classrooms successfully, which would mean that they would have
the ability to recognize children’s emotions, appeal to their feelings, and deal with
children’s unpredictable behaviors, all of which are part-and-parcel of the teaching job. This
would also mean that AI teachers could make decisions by themselves, and decide what
course of action should be taken to deal with a misbehaved child. Some punishments that
are thought to be necessary and suitable by AI teachers might turn out to be morally wrong
or even dangerous. For this very reason, it is very unlikely that we would ever develop an AI
to the point where it can substitute a real teacher in classrooms.

In conclusion, it is a mistake to assume that human teachers would ever be replaced by

robots. I take this view on account of the fact that lessons delivered by AI teachers would not
arouse students’ interest and that it would be dangerous to let AI teachers take complete
control of the classroom.
The study of literature

Some people believe that it is more important to teach children the literature of their own
country than that of other countries. Do you agree or disagree?

Some people believe that school children should be taught the literature of their own
countries rather than international ones. Personally, I agree with this school of thought for
several reasons.

Firstly, we need to factor in the sense of identity that can be instilled in children who are
taught the same pieces of literature that are closely connected with their culture. To provide
a supporting example, one need look no further than an overseas Vietnamese student
studying in America. This student, while having a conversation with others who also come
from his country, would certainly understand the reference of Mac Dinh Chi, whom every
primary student in Vietnam learns about, to being hardworking. Undoubtedly, this sense of
identity is mostly achieved by Vietnamese schools placing sole importance on national
literature.

To add further credence to my assertion, I note the cultural differences that often cause
unnecessary confusion for young people. An example that aptly illustrates this principle is
that of Gone With The Wind, which Vietnamese students learn in highs chool as a summer
assignment. I remember that it was challenging for me to picture how life in America in the
40s was and why the female main character, Margaret Mitchell, acted the way she did
because of the differences between the two cultures, not to mention the fact that the
translation of the text was sometimes bewildering. Therefore, it is sensible to say that most
students simply are not ready for such confusion.

In conclusion, having analyzed the arguments in some depth, I have arrived at the conclusion
that schools should only teach the literature of their own country. I take this view on account
of the fact that this approach would help children foster a sense of identity and eliminate
unnecessary confusion.
(294 words)
Parents’ influence vs teachers’

For school children, their teachers have more influence on their intelligence and social
development than their parents. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some people think that children’s cognitive and social development is affected more by their
teachers rather than their parents. In this essay, however, I will challenge this school of
thought.

Firstly, we need to factor in the influence of parents on a child’s intellect. According to many
research, early education given by parents in the first three years is the most important
element that determines a child’s cognitive and intellectual ability, not the education that
he receives in primary schools onwards. This theory is further confirmed by the sheer number
of high-achievers in all levels who come from families where parents are committed to giving
their offspring the best possible early education. In other words, the importance of the
upbringing that a child receives in those first formative years renders the role of teachers
who transfer knowledge to him later on in schools secondary to that of parents.

To add further credence to my assertion, I note the overwhelming bearing that parents have
on their children’s social development. In my view, young children tend to try to mimic their
parents’ behaviors, whether these be bad or good, that become second nature to them
when they are older. To provide a supporting example, one need look no further than a child
misbehaving while he is having dinner with his family. This child, while being persuaded to
change his bad table manners, will also learn what to say or what needed to be done to
convince other people, especially those who are in disagreement with them.

In conclusion, for the reasons outlined above, it stands to reason that the influence of
teachers on children’s social and cognitive development pales in comparison with that of
parents.
(283 words)

Other ideas:
Amongst younger children, parents, grandparents and older siblings play a fundamental role.
They are the source of knowledge and information and youngsters below the age of twelve
often admire and look up to their mothers and fathers and aspire to follow in their
footsteps. A personal example would be that I used to hope to become a brave and
courageous fire-fighter, just like my father.

However, teens undergo several radical and inter-connected changes. Firstly, they begin to
notice their parents’ imperfections and, as a response to this, start to develop independent
character traits. They learn to express themselves creatively, through music, art or sport. At
the same time, they create strong emotional bonds with their classmates and others of a
similar age. Consequently, their life outside the home, and particularly around school, takes
on greater significance. A final point is that those attending secondary schools study material
which is more intellectually advanced and which those at home might struggle to explain.
Therefore, adolescents become dependent upon their teachers for academic growth.
Computer skills

Writing, reading and maths are the three recognized traditional subjects. Computer skill
should also be the fourth largest branch. Do you agree or disagree?

Some people think that just as many lessons on computer skills as literacy and maths should
be incorporated into school curriculum. I personally think that there is little to disagree with
in this school of thought, as I will explain now.

Firstly, we need to factor in the indisputably increasing importance of computer skills in a

child’s day-to-day life. In my view, children with sufficient computer skills could learn faster,
and become more independent learners as they could get access to an almost infinite
amount of knowledge available on the internet. For example, a child struggling to solve a
math problem can get online and post his question on math forums where people who are
more proficient in this subject could share their thoughts and possibly help him with his
struggle.

To add further credence to my assertion, I note the possible scenario where computers
would render handwriting and physical books unnecessary. In my observation, in the
contemporary workplace, hardly ever does an adult pick up a pen to jot down ideas, let
alone write a page long report, given the same functions can be found and be done with
much ease on computers. Undoubtedly, it is not a far-fetched possibility that children would
only bring a laptop or a tablet to school and to the workplace. Thus, preparing young people
for such a future by equipping them with sufficient computer skills when they are still at
school is utmost necessary.

In conclusion, schools should place as much importance on computer-literacy as on literacy

and maths, so that school children are best prepared for their future. I take this view on
account of the fact that being computer-literate can assist young people in building
independent learning habits, and that it helps them become familiarized with their future
workplace.

(298 words)
Teachers vs online sources

Students learn far more with their teachers than other sources (internet or television). To
what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some people think that teachers can teach school children much more than other media of
knowledge do. I personally think that there is little to disagree with in this school of thought,
as I will explain now.

Firstly, we need to factor in the interactive and trustworthy nature of lessons given by
teachers. With regard to the former, children have the opportunity to ask questions and
receive answers right away during class, but this very important aspect of learning is
woefully lost when they read an article online or watch a lesson on TV. More importantly,
when they study online, it is challenging, nay, impossible for them to verify the source of
information, and perhaps, they may be misled or learn the wrong things as a result. These
reasons surely render teachers superior to other sources of knowledge.

To add further credence to my assertion, I note the fact that children can learn to develop as
a person when they study with their teachers. In my view, they can learn how to talk to older
people in an appropriate manner through everyday conversations with their teachers in
classrooms. In addition to this, they can observe the way a teacher delivers a lesson and try
to do the same when they have to give a presentation in class or in the workplace later on.
Finally, they also learn what disciplinary techniques should be employed when dealing with
misbehaved children, which can stand them in good stead when they are adults and have a
family of their own. These lessons are hardly ever learned if children watch TV or surf the
internet.

In conclusion, given the interaction of traditional lessons and the trustworthiness of

teachers, and the opportunity for children to develop as a person, young learn the most
when studying with their teachers rather than watching television or taking online lessons.
(310 words)
Some people think that children should begin their formal education at a very early age.
Some think they should begin at least 7 years old. Discuss both views give opinions.

Opinions are divided on whether or not children who are from 3 to 6 years old should be
given formal education. I believe that not until they reach the age of 7 should they be taught
formally; if anything, it would potentially be counter-productive.

One might argue that giving six-year-olds and under formal schooling can enhance their
cognitive and intellectual development to the fullest potential, and as a result, they may
become more successful individuals later in life. However, this line of reasoning is not sound
as there is more to success than intelligence. In fact, social skills, such as communication
ones, and the ability to recognize and appeal to others’ emotions, are repeatedly proven to
contribute more to the likelihood of one being successful, and these skills are best
developed by letting young children spend their formative 6 years with their friends, not by
forcing them to learn subjects like maths or biology.

Other reasons to reject the idea of providing academic knowledge for children under 6 years
old pertain to their inability to withstand stress and pressure from schoolwork and their
creativity being stifled. With regard to the former, one can imagine how difficult it would be
for a 5-year-old child to spend an hour every day preparing for his lessons the next day or
only doing his homework. Chances are that he would fail to cope with the stress, resulting in
him developing a negative attitude towards studying. In addition, being deprived of the
chance to explore the world on their own terms in their most important years because of
schoolwork would possibly have a negative impact on their creativity and originality.

In conclusion, the benefits of the formal teaching of children from 3 to 6 years old are
exaggerated and such a proposal would probably do more harm than good.
(285 words)

Other ideas:
Proponents of early schooling often point out the clinical research on the impact of school on
social skills. At home, children are exposed to a variety of different circumstances. They may
or may not have siblings, their parents might take them out for playdates often or neglect
them at home, hampering their social skills. Once children start school, they are all in more
or less an equal environment where they must communicate with older and younger
children, compromise when playing, learn to listen to their teachers, and start forming
stable bonds based on empathy and shared interests with others.

Despite the social advantages, children can develop more uniquely if they are allowed to
delay their entrance to formal schooling. A good example of this is in Finland, where
students do not begin school until after the age of 7. Finland is renowned for its top-
performing students but this can be traced to a number of factors besides simply school age.
However, the impact on individual development is apparent. According to research into child
psychology, children form the basis of their personality between the ages of 4 and 7.