That homework should be banned
Do you always get homework from school? Homework is useful for us, why should it be banned? So, today’s motion is that homework should be banned. Before I go to my argument let me define the motion. What is Homework? Homework is schoolwork that a pupil is required to do at home.And What is Ban? Ban is preventing (someone) from doing something ( www.oxforddictionary.com). I disagree with that motion because homework increase academic achievement. Many people say that students can lose sleep and can limit their free time (http://classroom.synonym.com/). But with time management all of that can be reduced. So, on to my arguments.
My first argument is that homework can increase the student’s academic achievement. Why? Because Homework is like a summary for us. For example, you went home after school, and you get the homework about the lesson you just learned. You will remember the lesson that you just learned and do it quickly. Home work can increase the memory about the lesson in your brain.And you get good score . So, isn’t it useful for us. If you try to compare the students who are given homework and the students who are not, you can see the difference ( http://www.sedl.org/).
My second argument is that homework can make our time management good. How? If you want to do your homework, this is what you usually think, “ I will do my homework now and then after that I can do something else”. And almost everyone has a schedule when is the time you can study. For example, you have a lot of homework. You are confused which one to do first. And the best solution is by making a schedule for that , try and open http://pbskids.org/itsmylife/school/time/tips2.htm . Even though homework can sometimes makes us forget time, the solution is just time management. If you manage the time you will know that you will do the homework for 1 hour (for example),so that is from 7 am to 8 am (for example).
My third argument is that doing homework is a very good habit for us. How? We can be more diligent by doing homework. For example, there is a boy named Andi. He really likes to study but the problem is that he is lazy. He does his homework and think that actually if he is lazy it is useless.He keep on doing homework and his score got better. And that is true, about 70% students got a higher achievement because of doing homework(http://www.alfiekohn.org/) .
My last argument is that homework can teach us to learn how to be responsible. How? If you have a homework and you didn’t do it,you must take the risks. Self-esteem is a feeling that we are capable of doing things on our own (http://www.school-for-champions.com/). It means that we don’t depend much on other people. And that is good, for example you have a group and we want to make appointment you don’t know the place you want to choose and your friends choose a place you don’t like. So, having self-esteem is good for us.
So, my conclusion is that this motion should false and should fall because it can make the student’s achievement better, have good management, having a good habit of being diligent and make us responsible.
The government shouldn't give subsidy
to the people who choose unhealthy life style.
What is
Government? Government is the group of people with the authority to govern a
country or state. What is Subsidy? Subsidy is a sum of money granted to support
an undertaking held to be in the public interest. And the last, what is Life
style? Life style is the way in which a person lives. Every person's life style
is different. And the example of a government giving subsidy is like the
India's government ,they give subsidy to people who has small business. The
definition was based on www.oxforddictionaries.com.On to my argument.
My first
argument is that the government shouldn't give them subsidy because it can
become a habit for them. For example,
there is a person who likes to smoke, the government give him subsidy when he
wants to buy cigarettes. That person will think cigarettes are not expensive so
i can still buy it again. He won't stop to smoke. And smoking have many bad
impacts. Like get high cholesterol, poor vision and many types of cancer. That
means that the government shouldn't help them. The information is based on
www.healthline.com.
My second
argument is that the country will not move on. Why does the government keep on
giving them subsidy? Won't the country's finance will decrease? For example,
there is a person that likes to drink alcohol, the government gives him
subsidy, the person keeps on drinking. Slowly, the country's finance decreases.
And sometimes drunk people isn't good. It has many bad impacts, like there will
be pain in the pancreas, shifty eyes, stomach distress and many more. The
information is based on www.healthline.com.
My third
argument is that the society will also feel the bad impacts of a unhealthy life
style. Like i said before that smoking and drunk people are bad. If you smoke
when many people are around you, the people might inhale the smoke from your
cigarettes. And they might get cancer, heart disease, and yellow fingers. For
example, in Brunei there is a person that has a loss of vocal cords because she
inhale the smoke from the cigarettes. If the government give them subsidy, it
will become a awful thing to do.
So, my
conclusion is that the government shouldn't give subsidy to the person who
choose a unhealthy life style because it can make our country not moving on.
