2019年8月1日雅思写作题目：Some people think learning history in school is important. Some others think learning subjects more relevant to life is important. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
It is true that history should be played an essential part in school. While many people suppose that this may suit for educational system recently, I would argue that practical subjects which can apply on a daily basis are much more necessary than others.
On the one hand, there are two prime reasons why all students should be exposed to history at school. Firstly, they can know their roots and how modern civilisation has come to surely make them much more appreciative of our predecessors. For instance, thanks to history, I broaden my horizon that Vietnam’s liberation in 1975 could be considered one of the biggest milestones in the history of Vietnam, making our country free from colonisation. Secondly, historical events are the meaningful lessons which enable them to learn from past mistake and ensure it never happens again. To be specific, history lessons help them understand change including successes and failures, and how others are affected by it. Thus, they would avoid the similar outcomes in the future.
On the other hand, I believe that children should learn other subjects relating to children’s lives. One reason is that the way history is taught in most schools is rather tedious, so it would waste a lot of time for useful subjects like English or math. Children would be much more confident when they mastered in foreign language compared to historical events, as it is a better way to catch up with the global knowledge-based economy. In addition, informatics could help students nurturing and developing vital soft skills through leading-edge technologies. Thus, they might gain countless opportunities to seek a good job, because ‘Information Technology’ is one of the most popular jobs with not only high salary but also the dynamic working environment.
In conclusion, although it has benefits for children to study history, it seems to me that actual subjects are the perfect alternative to in class history lessons.
History has long been a typical part of students’ list of required courses throughout their school years. But, does history deserve a place as important as science and mathematics in the curriculum?
To begin with, history does play an inspirational role in a well-rounded education. That role is for students to develop a sound awareness of the past of their own country and of the wide world, with illuminating insights into the present and the future. However, how will children learn about history if they do not even study it in school? In a certain sense, the removal of history as a core subject from school curriculum would turn out to be a tragedy for children’s education. It would be frightening to imagine that many children are likely to leave schools without a bit of knowledge of history as a source of inspiration.
My point, however, is not to argue in favor of history and against other subjects like science and mathematics. Rather, the latter two disciplines are commonly considered as more valuable than history since they are more immediately relevant to children’s development. As compared with history, science and mathematics usually can provide learners with such concrete knowledge regarding the number, distance, speed, and size of things in the universe. That is to say, these two courses are viewed as more practical, and therefore more valuable not only in school but also later in life.
In conclusion, history is as important as science and mathematics, although in different ways. History makes children more open-minded, while science and mathematics make them more practical. If it is the responsibility for schools to train all-rounded students, then both history and science and mathematics should remain compulsory subjects.