雅思写作范文2篇 教育类

为了帮助考生们更好地复习雅思考试,网为各位考生整理了雅思考试大作文范文,供考生们参考使用。

雅思大作文范文：小孩犯罪家长应受惩罚吗?

There seem to be more senseless/unconsciouscrimes done by young children that appear to lack amotive or even indulge a whim. What a thornyissue to handle for both the parents and the victiminvolved! Some people may argue that children areproducts of environment, so the family should be responsible for all delinquency of them. Thisis absolutely wrong.

In modern society, parents are not the only influence on children. Generally a five-year-oldchild is sent to attend kindergarten. Obviously the young child spends a great deal of timeexposed to other influences such as the teachers, other children, other parents and television.Particularly in many contemporary families, both the parents are required to work, sometimesover time. This situation could possibly result in the little kids falling under more influence ofothers or media. If this is the case then too many people should be punished whenever youngchildren commit crimes. Undoubtedly this would be too impractical to implement.

What is the right age to justify a child starting to take charge of his or her actions? I think15 would be rational/justified. In China, nine-year compulsory education system can mould achild into a comparatively sensible and responsible person, because basic knowledge of lawhas been conducted and, consequently a 15-year-old teenager basically knows what qualitiesmake law-abiding citizens. Therefore, 15 or over, when committing a crime, he or she deservesa prize behind the bar.

Let there be no doubt, young children will grow older and eventually become the needs oftomorrow's labor force. Sufficient education and decent guidance from the parents, theschool,Governments and society can shape them into a no nonsense, responsible andrespectable citizen in future, and this is their blessed destiny.

雅思大作文范文：学生应该支付自己学习全部费用吗?

Someconclude that college students should bearknowledge expenses for their higher learning on thegeneralization that college graduates usually receive higher salaries for similar jobs than thosewithout a college degree. We can not deny that higher level of education, indeed, do associatewith better income. Still, build on such fact alone, the conclusion remains questionable whenmore aspects are taken into consideration.

The whole argument in question rests on an assumption that it is always the case thatpeople with higher education make more money than those less well-educated. But salary orincome is, in most cases, based on contributions made by employees to companies ororganizations in which they are employed. Statistics in the labor market indicate that peoplewith professional training tend to find jobs easier than college graduates do and that blue-collar workers who do not hold college degrees are becoming the hotties in the labor market.Employers prefer to hire and pay more to highly skilled and specially trained people rather thanfresh college graduates. In the auto industry, for instance, skilled technicians make two or threetimes more than their college educated counterparts who make the average salaries in othercompanies. And it is widely accepted that people's income is determined more by talent, hardwork, and willingness to take risks than solely by certain qualifications such as collegeeducation. Otherwise, the unemployment rate of college graduates would not be increasingevery year and the rule of supply and demand will lose much of power in controlling the labormarket. Admittedly in some knowledge extensive field such as research, teaching, and practiceof law the labor force are primarily consists of highly educated professionals. But such peoplemake up only a fraction of the labor market and are thus unrepresentative of the wholeemployment in general.

Considering the goal of education, we find that it is even more problematic for the countryto throw all the responsibility of financing college education to college students. The goal ofhigher education of a nation is to improve and strengthen the general level of intellectual andprofessional capacity of its labor force, thereby increasing the competency of the nation inthe global economy. As tax payers, parents all contributes to the education system andcountry in various ways. It is only reasonable and necessary that the country gives someforms of financially assistance to students to ease the burden of rising education costs. Suchhelp should go to not only students from needy or impoverished families but also outstandingstudents from affluent backgrounds. Doing so can significantly boost the motivation ofchildren from millions of families to engage in higher level of study. It is understandable thatthe general quality of people in a country will improve and its economy will benefit both nowand in years to follow.

If the burden of supporting children's higher education is dumped on parents and students,thousands of brilliant students will be deprived of chances to pursue their academicinspiration. Among those who suffer would definitely be future great scientists,businessmanagers, artists and statesmen. The loss will be disastrous and irreversible.

In conclusion, the idea that students should also pay the full cost of their study is wrongand harmful because it is wrong to assume that higher education necessarily equalize highincome. Moreover, it is in the best interest of a nation to take responsibility in financing collegeeducation so that the goal of higher education will be better met.