Writing Feedback / Schools should contain some obligatory courses that are necessary for students [2]

It is really idealistic for students to read what they want. However, almost the entire schools offer limited course options and students have to study according to the schedule that the school offers. Recently, some people argue that if secondary students have freedom to study what they like, their efficiency will be improved. As far as I concerned, I think high schools should offer courses according to the educational program of their country. I will discuss the reasons for my view in following paragraphs.

In the first place, the main purpose of a high school is to prepare students for their future studies. The course schedule of a secondary school should include some basic lessons that allow students to get primary understanding of all existing university majors. Therefore, it should involve some basic course on natural science, social science, humanity and art. At the first students do not have sufficient information to choice what can be beneficial for their future study. After a acquiring initial knowledge about each field of study, they can choose their field of study. Then, they have to study essential courses of chosen field. In addition, there are number of other restrictions that do not allow schools to offer courses according to students favors. Simply, schools cannot afford all requirements for various studies. Beyond the teachers' salary, they may not find teachers with appropriate education to teach students. There would be restrictions in the number of classes and all school's equipment.

However, there are lots of advantages to provide students with optional choices. If students have a chance to study what they are interested in, their performance in school will be improved. This is especially good motivation for those students that cannot stand the structured environments of the schools. Some optional extra curriculum can satisfies these needs .In this case students can participate in their desired classes, and meanwhile follow the school's programs.

In conclusion, in my view, secondary schools should contain some obligatory courses that are necessary for students' education and some optional courses that are according to the majority of students' desire.

Writing Feedback / What do you want to change about your school? [5]

If you could make one important change in a school that you attended, what change would you make? Use reasons and specific examples to support your answer.

Almost the entire of students would like to change something in their school. Talking of making an important change in my school, I'd like to alter school budget management. The reason goes as follow.

The school that I attend has poor financial management. There are less connection between what students need and what are bought for the school. For instance, there are number of advanced computers in the computer room which no one take use of them, while in laboratory there is not sufficient advanced equipment, which students require for their studies. Even the lab equipments that are bought are useless. As a result, although students are hardworking and talented, their outcomes are limited.

If budget management be improved and direct efficiently, both the school and the students will benefit. Efficient management requires that the manager concerns teachers and students' needs. for example, there should be more classes that are equipped by projectors and laboratory equipment should be provided according to research requirements that supervisors conduct. In this case, teachers will provide updated teaching style and research topics, students will learn more and improve their results. As a consequence, successful students will enhance the school's reputation.

To sum up, I think the most important thing that should be changed about my school is its poor budget management. If this happen, the teachers will teach efficiently, students improve their performance and school gain better reputation.

Writing Feedback / IELTS: I believe that poorer countries require rich ones support to develop their countries [3]

Please help me to improve my writing
Present a written argument or case to an educated reader with no specialist knowledge of the
following topic.
Improvements in health, education and trade are essential for the development of poorer
nations. However, the governments of richer nations should take more responsibility for
helping the poorer nations in such areas.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Advancement in poorer countries depends on progress in health, education and economic. Considering financial and management state of those countries, development would be inaccessible without affluent nations' help. I believe that rich countries have main responsibility to help development in poorer countries.

In the first place, poorer countries do not have sufficient financial resources to invest on education, heath. They require foreign aid to build basic organizations which provide them with educational and health care facilities. In the second place, poorer countries have less knowledge and experience to enhance their economic. They have fewer numbers of experts to work on crucial areas such as education, health and trade. Advanced nations can help poorer ones with their experts in these areas.

However there would be significant problems with just financial assistance and foreign experts. First, they are not a long lasting solution. Second, these funds can cause poorer countries to lose their independence, and be influenced by foreign countries. Third, they would exacerbate the situation in poorer countries. This kind of aids would be end in huge debts for poor countries and it would benefit more affluent countries rather than poorer ones.

The best way to solve these problems and meanwhile to help the poorer nations is cooperating with those nations to improve their knowledge and to explore their own potential resources. Advance countries can share their knowledge and management experiences with poorer ones to train higher professional experts from the people of those countries. In addition, advanced countries can set researches in poor countries to find their potential wealth such as row materials or touristic sites and they can teach them how to explore those wealth.

In conclusion, I believe that poorer countries require rich ones helps to develop their countries. The permanent assistance would be training experts, sharing knowledge and exploring the potential wealth of poorer countries.

Thanks in advance