IELTSNetwork.com

Some people believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at primary school rather than secondary school. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
The virtues of learning foreign languages are too visible to be neglected. But is it wise to burden children with foreign language lessons from their primary school? I rather doubt it. From my perspective, it should be optional rather than compulsory.
On the one hand, it is an undeniable fact that learning foreign languages can develop the cognitive skills of children. It has been proved that bilingual people are more prone to see issues from different angles and their decision process is faster than their monolingual peers. Apart from that, this can also fuel their communication skills, so making friends would not be challenging for them. Moreover, knowing additional languages improves their career prospects, thereby their employability will be enhanced in their later life.
Even if having considered all these facts, would they enough to making language classes mandatory before secondary school? By no means, our future dreams should not be at the cost of children’s spare time. At their earlier ages, their freedom, desires, should be our first priority instead of imposing our preferences. We cannot want from them to sacrifice their childhood, all we can do is just to drum up more interest in such things which in turn will be very useful as time goes by. Taking into consideration that they have a long education life in times to come, it would be cruelty of us to demand more.
In conclusion, I reaffirm my position that we try to lighten children’s burden at their earlier ages and spending extra time on learning a foreign language should depend on their choices.

Hello!

There are two quite big problems with the arguments you have presented. First, you haven't compared learning at primary and secondary school. Second, you say it depends on the children's choices. Really? I honestly cannot think of an example of where children make their own education choices. (I'm sure somewhere in the world there are examples, but they are definitely not the norm!)

Your points in the second main paragraph may be true, but you haven't explained how your 'no education' fits with your 'long education life in times to come'. Furthermore, you simply dismiss all the your points in the first main paragraph without explanation.

Vocabulary and grammar appear to be good, but are certainly not used to create a coherent argument.

All the best,
David

Some people believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at primary school rather than secondary school. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

The benefits virtues (Virtue means the quality of high moral standards and ethics but not the merits)[/color] of learning foreign languages are too visible(OBVIOUS is a better word here) to be neglected. But is it wise to burden children with foreign language lessons from their primary school? I rather doubt it. (Try to avoid using rhetorical questions). (Instead of writing two simple sentences, you could have made a complex structure, so as to make it more appealing. Read the following. Though the benefits of learning foreign languages by children are too obviously important to be neglected, it makes one wonder, whether it’s expedient to make the young ones exposed to the burden of going through the rigmarole at the primary level of their education, when they should be given the freedom to enjoy their childhood days.) From my perspective, it should be optional rather than compulsory.

On the one hand,( This phrase ‘ on the one hand’ is redundant and is wrongly used. The reason is that when you say ‘on the one hand’, it should show a contrast with an opposite view and only then will it have effectiveness. For example, ‘On the one hand, the poor suffer, the rich, on the other hand flourish’. So, avoid this and start straight with the next wording). It is an undeniable fact that learning foreign languages in the growing years can develop the cognitive skills of among children. It has been proved (Where is it proved?) that bilingual people (Remember. The discussion is about children but not the people, which means all grown up people. So, this becomes a deviation. Use’ CHILDREN instead of PEOPLE) more likey ( Prone is not the appropriate word here, for it has unpleasant meaning. Please, check the dictionary) to see issues from different angles and their decision making process is faster than that of their monolingual peers( Comparison between what?). (This sentence has no relevance to the question) Apart from that, this it can also fuel enhance/improve (The figurative meaning of ‘ fuel’ is ‘to encourage or to stimulate but not IMPROVE) their communication skills, so making friends would not be a challenge challenging for them.( Your logic is not apt, for communication skills alone do not make one make friends with others) Moreover, knowing additional languages improves their career prospects, thereby their chances of employability will be enhanced in their later life.( This entire paragraph is irrelevant because you are supposed to discuss what is the outcome of making children learn a foreign language at their primary school level but in their future, as one viewpoint. And the next paragraph should deal with what prospects are there for children learning a foreign language in their secondary school level. But you have written about the benefits of learning a foreign language, in general, which is not what is asked in the question.)

Even if, all the above facts are considered (having considered all these facts, would they) will they be enough to make making language classes mandatory before secondary school? (Please, avoid being rhetorical. Make the sentence like this: Even if, all the above merits are considered, they will not justify the rationale of introducing the children at primary school level to a foreign language.) By no means, our future dreams should not be at the cost of children’s spare time.( NO RELEVANCE) (At their earlier ages) In their early age, the freedom and desires of the children (their freedom, desires,) should be our( OUR refers to whom?) first priority than (instead of imposing) our preferences. We ( Who are ‘ WE’ here? Make it specific) (cannot) should not expect (want from) them to sacrifice their childhood., ( A comma cannot join two sentences)All we can do is that drumming up (just to drum up) ( Use a gerund instead of an infinitive)more interest in them in such things that which, in turn, will be very useful to them, as time goes by. Taking into consideration that they have a long education life( You’d better frame the structure in the following way: Considering the fact that they will have to go through a long life full of education, in times to come (I don’t see eye to eye with your usage of this phrase. I would rather prefer’ In time to come”) , it would be (cruelty) cruel (But ,’ unfair’ is a better word)of us to demand more from them at their tender age.( Even, this paragraph also doesn’t nail the point home as to how it’s best to make children learn a foreign language at secondary level of education than at primary level( As if they have a choice !). So, your essay has lost relevance)

In conclusion, I reaffirm my position( When and where did you affirm to reaffirm?) that we should try to lighten the burden of children (children’s burden) ( Avoid using ‘ possessive case’) at their earlier ages, and that spending extra time by them on learning a foreign language should depend on their choices( It would be better, if written like this: and that the option of learning a foreign language should be left to their choice.

MY COMMENTS
Your views are not relevant.
There is a lot of deviation from the topic.
Sentence structures have gone wrong many times and thus your grammar has gone for a toss.
There is no clarity of views.
Since, there is some English worth reading and some phrases are good, your essay stands to get 6.5 Band, given a lenient view or else it’s worth 6 band.

Checked by
Prabhakar reddy
Professor of English and IELTS Tutor.

FOR ANY FURTHER CLARIFICATIONS AND DOUBTS, PLEASE CONTACT ME THROUGH E.Mail: preddy2407@gmail.com or on SKYPE ID. prabhakar.reddy2407 or by Phone +919550724029

David.IELTS.Examiner wrote:Hello!

There are two quite big problems with the arguments you have presented. First, you haven't compared learning at primary and secondary school. Second, you say it depends on the children's choices. Really? I honestly cannot think of an example of where children make their own education choices. (I'm sure somewhere in the world there are examples, but they are definitely not the norm!)

Your points in the second main paragraph may be true, but you haven't explained how your 'no education' fits with your 'long education life in times to come'. Furthermore, you simply dismiss all the your points in the first main paragraph without explanation.

Vocabulary and grammar appear to be good, but are certainly not used to create a coherent argument.

All the best,
David

Thanks for your feedback. I will take into consideration.

prabhakar reddy wrote:Some people believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at primary school rather than secondary school. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

The benefits virtues (Virtue means the quality of high moral standards and ethics but not the merits)[/color] of learning foreign languages are too visible(OBVIOUS is a better word here) to be neglected. But is it wise to burden children with foreign language lessons from their primary school? I rather doubt it. (Try to avoid using rhetorical questions). (Instead of writing two simple sentences, you could have made a complex structure, so as to make it more appealing. Read the following. Though the benefits of learning foreign languages by children are too obviously important to be neglected, it makes one wonder, whether it’s expedient to make the young ones exposed to the burden of going through the rigmarole at the primary level of their education, when they should be given the freedom to enjoy their childhood days.) From my perspective, it should be optional rather than compulsory.

On the one hand,( This phrase ‘ on the one hand’ is redundant and is wrongly used. The reason is that when you say ‘on the one hand’, it should show a contrast with an opposite view and only then will it have effectiveness. For example, ‘On the one hand, the poor suffer, the rich, on the other hand flourish’. So, avoid this and start straight with the next wording). It is an undeniable fact that learning foreign languages in the growing years can develop the cognitive skills of among children. It has been proved (Where is it proved?) that bilingual people (Remember. The discussion is about children but not the people, which means all grown up people. So, this becomes a deviation. Use’ CHILDREN instead of PEOPLE) more likey ( Prone is not the appropriate word here, for it has unpleasant meaning. Please, check the dictionary) to see issues from different angles and their decision making process is faster than that of their monolingual peers( Comparison between what?). (This sentence has no relevance to the question) Apart from that, this it can also fuel enhance/improve (The figurative meaning of ‘ fuel’ is ‘to encourage or to stimulate but not IMPROVE) their communication skills, so making friends would not be a challenge challenging for them.( Your logic is not apt, for communication skills alone do not make one make friends with others) Moreover, knowing additional languages improves their career prospects, thereby their chances of employability will be enhanced in their later life.( This entire paragraph is irrelevant because you are supposed to discuss what is the outcome of making children learn a foreign language at their primary school level but in their future, as one viewpoint. And the next paragraph should deal with what prospects are there for children learning a foreign language in their secondary school level. But you have written about the benefits of learning a foreign language, in general, which is not what is asked in the question.)

Even if, all the above facts are considered (having considered all these facts, would they) will they be enough to make making language classes mandatory before secondary school? (Please, avoid being rhetorical. Make the sentence like this: Even if, all the above merits are considered, they will not justify the rationale of introducing the children at primary school level to a foreign language.) By no means, our future dreams should not be at the cost of children’s spare time.( NO RELEVANCE) (At their earlier ages) In their early age, the freedom and desires of the children (their freedom, desires,) should be our( OUR refers to whom?) first priority than (instead of imposing) our preferences. We ( Who are ‘ WE’ here? Make it specific) (cannot) should not expect (want from) them to sacrifice their childhood., ( A comma cannot join two sentences)All we can do is that drumming up (just to drum up) ( Use a gerund instead of an infinitive)more interest in them in such things that which, in turn, will be very useful to them, as time goes by. Taking into consideration that they have a long education life( You’d better frame the structure in the following way: Considering the fact that they will have to go through a long life full of education, in times to come (I don’t see eye to eye with your usage of this phrase. I would rather prefer’ In time to come”) , it would be (cruelty) cruel (But ,’ unfair’ is a better word)of us to demand more from them at their tender age.( Even, this paragraph also doesn’t nail the point home as to how it’s best to make children learn a foreign language at secondary level of education than at primary level( As if they have a choice !). So, your essay has lost relevance)

In conclusion, I reaffirm my position( When and where did you affirm to reaffirm?) that we should try to lighten the burden of children (children’s burden) ( Avoid using ‘ possessive case’) at their earlier ages, and that spending extra time by them on learning a foreign language should depend on their choices( It would be better, if written like this: and that the option of learning a foreign language should be left to their choice.

MY COMMENTS
Your views are not relevant.
There is a lot of deviation from the topic.
Sentence structures have gone wrong many times and thus your grammar has gone for a toss.
There is no clarity of views.
Since, there is some English worth reading and some phrases are good, your essay stands to get 6.5 Band, given a lenient view or else it’s worth 6 band.

Checked by
Prabhakar reddy
Professor of English and IELTS Tutor.

FOR ANY FURTHER CLARIFICATIONS AND DOUBTS, PLEASE CONTACT ME THROUGH E.Mail: preddy2407@gmail.com or on SKYPE ID. prabhakar.reddy2407 or by Phone +919550724029

Thanks for your detailed explanation which will be very useful for me.

Very good analysis for task 2