I'm practising to improve my writing skill, so hope you have a look and give me your feedbacks alongside the band that you think I can get. Thanks a lot!
TOPIC : SOME PEOPLE ARGUE THAT THE SUBJECTS TAUGHT AT SCHOOL ARE NOT RELEVANT TO REAL LIFE, AND YOUNG PEOPLE ARE ILL-PREPARED FOR SURVIVAL IN TODAY'S COMPETITIVE WORLD OF WORK. OTHERS CONTEND THAT IT IS DUTY OF THE OLDER GENERATION TO PROVIDE THE YOUNGER ONE WITH A GENERAL EDUCATION OF ACADEMIC VALUE AND LIBERAL ARTS, REGARDLESS OF THE SKILLS NEEDED TO SURVIVE IN THE JOB MARKET. TO WHAT EXTENT DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE?
It is hard to overstate the importance of schooling: it decides what kind of career we will have and what kind of life we will lead. So, what should and should not be taught at school has been a perennial debate. Some assert that the responsibility to teaching academic subjects belongs to the older generation, while others state that does so is redundant and students need to hone practical skills in today's competitive world of occupation. Both viewpoints are justifiable, but I personally lean towards the former.
On the one hand, it is understandable why some people subscribe to the second view. First, those proponents may argue that this practice will enable students to pursue their dream job and land high-paid job effortlessly through their academic degrees. However, this thinking is flawed, although there will be more educated workforce since the larger enrolment and influx of students into the labour market are actually a primary driving force behind the rising youth unemployment due to its intense competitions. Second, the provision of the old generation in academic value alongside liberal arts education can take a heavy toll on students, because they can take it for granted, so they can be indifferent to its value and lose the drive to work hard. Therefore, students will fail to benefit from their education.
On the other hand, there are many compelling reasons why students should be taught for their preparation against today's competitive world of work. Today, the job market has become very competitive as it is, even for seekers with college qualifications, therefore, without being equipped carefully, it will be a burdensome task to assimilate into society and apply for a job, let alone getting access to a high wage. Consequently, it could be said that the foremost objective of students who attend school is to have a financially viable career after they finish. To this end, essential skill sets, which is related to their area of work, should be taught so as to help students get detailed career guidance, identify a suitable career path and cultivate relevant job skills.
In conclusion, while the provision of academic value and liberal arts education makes it seem like a good idea, I believe that teaching necessary skills to succeed in the society of job competition should be given precedence instead of theoretical subjects at school.
Writing ielts task 2 about education
TOPIC : SOME PEOPLE ARGUE THAT THE SUBJECTS TAUGHT AT SCHOOL ARE NOT RELEVANT TO REAL LIFE, AND YOUNG PEOPLE ARE ILL-PREPARED FOR SURVIVAL IN TODAY'S COMPETITIVE WORLD OF WORK. OTHERS CONTEND THAT IT IS DUTY OF THE OLDER GENERATION TO PROVIDE THE YOUNGER ONE WITH A GENERAL EDUCATION OF ACADEMIC VALUE AND LIBERAL ARTS, REGARDLESS OF THE SKILLS NEEDED TO SURVIVE IN THE JOB MARKET. TO WHAT EXTENT DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE?
It is hard to overstate the importance of schooling: it decides what kind of career we will have and what kind of life we will lead. So, what should and should not be taught at school has been a perennial debate. Some assert that the responsibility to teaching academic subjects belongs to the older generation, while others state that does so is redundant and students need to hone practical skills in today's competitive world of occupation. Both viewpoints are justifiable, but I personally lean towards the former.
On the one hand, it is understandable why some people subscribe to the second view. First, those proponents may argue that this practice will enable students to pursue their dream job and land high-paid job effortlessly through their academic degrees. However, this thinking is flawed, although there will be more educated workforce since the larger enrolment and influx of students into the labour market are actually a primary driving force behind the rising youth unemployment due to its intense competitions. Second, the provision of the old generation in academic value alongside liberal arts education can take a heavy toll on students, because they can take it for granted, so they can be indifferent to its value and lose the drive to work hard. Therefore, students will fail to benefit from their education.
On the other hand, there are many compelling reasons why students should be taught for their preparation against today's competitive world of work. Today, the job market has become very competitive as it is, even for seekers with college qualifications, therefore, without being equipped carefully, it will be a burdensome task to assimilate into society and apply for a job, let alone getting access to a high wage. Consequently, it could be said that the foremost objective of students who attend school is to have a financially viable career after they finish. To this end, essential skill sets, which is related to their area of work, should be taught so as to help students get detailed career guidance, identify a suitable career path and cultivate relevant job skills.
In conclusion, while the provision of academic value and liberal arts education makes it seem like a good idea, I believe that teaching necessary skills to succeed in the society of job competition should be given precedence instead of theoretical subjects at school.
