雅思写作优秀高分作文范文（通用20篇）

雅思写作优秀高分作文范文（通用20篇）

在平日的学习、工作和生活里，大家最不陌生的就是作文了吧，写作文是培养人们的观察力、联想力、想象力、思考力和记忆力的重要手段。你写作文时总是无从下笔？以下是小编精心整理的雅思写作优秀高分作文范文，仅供参考，希望能够帮助到大家。

St can education bring us? Is “high mark” the real destiny of education? As researchers and scholars are investigating this subject， the accurate definition of education begins to have slight difference from what was in people‘s mind before. Education， the bridge between teachers and students， the mediator between individual and society， means more than knowledge transmit， but being a wholly developed person in the society.

First，education brings us basic knowledge and skill to survive. From primary school on， students learn subjects like Maths， Physics， English， or in other words， academic subjects to gain the initial knowledge of the nature and world， which are extremely useful for our future career. Upon this， students also learn skills like sewing， cooking， and mending bicycles， which help them a lot in their future family life. To this extend， education provided us with fundamental concepts of living.

Second，education can cultivate our sentiment. Apart from academic subjects， art subjects such as music and art seems more interesting toward students. From these subjects， one can enjoy the pleasure of listening to music， try to guess a composer‘s emotion when writing a music chapter， or understand the meaning of a piece of drawing， from which process they themselves are edified and assimilated， and finally have their own clear opinion on what is beauty.

Third，education makes an individual adapted to the society. Being innocent and naive， young people always find it hard to immerge into the complicated environment， and feel frustrated. Through education like communication skills， students may know the essence of getting on with other people. This kind of education influences our personality and views everyone as a whole individual in the big family of society.

Above all，knowledge，emotion，and personality form the most important part of the content of education. The aim of education is to teach a per son become a completely developed individual.

Some people believe that it is beneficial for children to spend time on TV, video and PC games, while some hold the opposite view. Talk about these two views and give your own opinion.

When it comes to whether children shall spend their spare time watching TV, video and playing PC games, people’s opinions diverse greatly. Some say it is basically a waste of children’s time, while others argue that children can benefit a lot from such activities.

It is firmly maintained by many parents and teachers that children’s main purpose is to pursue outstanding academic achievements at school. To beat their competitors, they must make the best use of every precious minute. Therefore, they can not afford to indulge themselves before the “idiot box” as TV or in playing the senseless virtual games. Moreover, watching TV and playing PC games are addictive for many poorly-disciplined children, consuming their interest in study and eroding their academic aspirations.

However, many other people hold different views, arguing that if properly guided and supervised, children can expand vision and knowledge as well as foster their creativity from those fun activities. There are many educational programs on TV such as Discovery which feed children extensive knowledge in science and arts. By sparking children’s interest and imagination in various topics, these programs are often more enlightening than textbooks. Furthermore, when playing PC games, children can foster a stronger sense of cooperation as well as competition, and sharpening their mind against possible risks in the real world. Last but not least, watching cartoons and science fiction movies definitely stimulates children’s imagination and creativity. Many youngsters have been inspired to come up with novel inventions of become engineering elites in later life exactly with the inspirations from those sources.

From the above discussion, it is evident that if children can balance their study and fun time properly, watching TV, video programs and playing PC games will unquestionably bring them more benefits than harm. After all, books are not the only source of useful knowledge; in order to grow healthily in modern times, children need to accumulate knowledge and skills from various channels, and suitable time for relaxation and inspiration is surely more welcome than not.

Parents generally believe it is their responsibility to plan the careers for their children. They claim that they know their children well enough to decide what kind of job suits them. Hoping that their children will go in for professions that will bring them the greatest prestige and economic benefit, many parents think that their children are too young to see this for themselves. There are some parents who even expect their children to take over the careers of their fathers. For these reasons, many parents insist that theirchildren should obey them in choosing careers.

But many children suggest that they should be left free to choose their own careers. For one thing, parents and children may not share the same interest. A job that appeals is likely to be boring for their children. For another, children have been brought up in a different age from their parents’, and therefore, should be allowed to cultivate a spirit of independence and self-reliance. In short, children should be free to make their own decisions as to future careers.

In my opinion, in this case as in many other things, mutual understanding is important. On the one hand, parents’ view does reflect theirconcern for the well-being of their children. On the other hand, after all it is the children who will be doing the jobs. Therefore, it will be wise for parents to give them this freedom while for the children they should consult their parents when it is necessary. (249 words).

Some people think the university education is to prepare students for employment. While we admit that preparation for employment is an important function of education, it is not the only one. We should see this issue with an all-sided view. In the perspective of society, education is for improvement. Students make use of what they have learned to create new theories and tools. This is the way in which our human society develops. And also, through education, government can teach people how to be appropriate citizens, thus in this way, people’s moralities and behaviors are constrained in a value system and the social stability can be maintained.

In the perspective of individuals, education can enrich personal lives. Through education, we can explore different cultures and customs. Thus in this way education can open our eyes and broaden our mind. And education can also meet interests of each student.

While of course, all the functions mentioned above have one common prerequisite: one can make a living in the first place. For this society is practical, many university students have studied for four years, but their ability to deal with practical things is too low to be acceptable. So education should provide the basic general knowledge to university students, so that they can be get employed and make a living. And if a nation wants to develop and to compete with other nations, it needs skilled workers to support economic development and to maintain the people creative, which can only be achieved through education.

So it has some sense to realize that students’ preparation for employment is the function of education, but it has far more function which should not be neglected.

The most prominent memory of my trip to Europe in 1983 was not the excitement of traveling abroad for the first time but the discomfort of flying in a smoke-filled airplane for almost six hours. Even in the non-smoking section, I was coughing and choking during the entire flight. And whenever I had to use the restroom, I had to hold my nose as I passed through the smoking area to the lavatory.

If I ruled the world, I would certainly outlaw cigarette smoking in all public places. Fortunately for smokers everywhere, I don t rule the world. Nevertheless, I fully support the idea behind the New York State legislature s recent bill to ban smoking in all restaurants in New York State.

According to the New York Times, officials in both houses of the legislature say the legislation is very close to fruition. California is the only other state I know that has banned smoking in restaurants and bars, and despite the predictions of some restaurant owners, I haven t read any reports that restaurant attendance has fallen off significantly since the bill passed. Why should it? Food is a necessity. People need to eat.

Assigning designated smoking and non smoking areas in restaurants is not enough. Smoke travels quickly beyond the imaginary boundaries set up between tables and booths. As a patron, I should be able to enjoy my meal without choking on someone else s smoke. The same is true in bars and nightclubs, although I would exercise more legislative restraint in this setting because dancing and drinking are not as essential as eating. Still, why should I have to endanger my lungs just to go dancing?

I would ban smoking on public sidewalks and streets as well. What you do in the privacy of your own home is your business, but once you pollute the rest of the world with cancer-inducing toxic fumes, it becomes the government s business. I m tired of asking people to put out their cigarettes or asking waiters to patrol the boundaries of their restaurant s smoking section. So if this new bill becomes law, as I hope it does, non-smokers will finally be able to enjoy their restaurant meals without having to police the artificial lines of separation that divide the two sections in restaurants.

The government should control the amount of violence in films and on elevision in order to decrease the violent crimes in society. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this issue?

Whether the government should control the amount of violence in films and on television in order to decrease the violent crimes in society involves a conflict between our right of free speech and the duty of the government to protect its citizenry from potential harm. In my view, our societal nterest in preventing the harm that exposure to violence produces takes recedence over the rights of individuals to broadcast this type of content.

First of all, I believe that exposure to violence does indeed cause similar behavior on the part of those who are exposed to it. Although we may not have conclusive scientific evidence of a cause-effect relationship, ample anecdotal evidence establishes a significant correlation. Moreover, both common sense and our experiences with children inform us that people tend to mimic the behavior they are exposed to.

Secondly, I believe that violence is indeed harmful to a society. The harm it produces is, in my view, both palpable and profound. For the individual, it has a debasing impact on vital human relationships; for the society, it promotes a tendency toward antisocial behavior. Both outcomes, in turn, tear apart the social fabric that holds a society together.

Those who advocate unbridled individual expression might point out that the right of free speech is intrinsic to a democracy and necessary to its urvival. Even so, this right is not absolute, nor is it the most critical element. In my assessment, the interests served by restricting violence in broadcast media are, on balance, more crucial to the survival of a society.

In sum, it is in our best interest as a society for the government to censor broadcast media for violence. Exposure to such media content tends to harm society and its citizenry in ways that are worth preventing, even in light of the resulting infringement of our right of free expression.

What are the causes for losing varieties in languages and cultures?

Every human society has a culture that includes arts, customs, language, etc. Every culture changes and the main causes for losing varieties in language and culture, in my opinion, are: contact with other cultures, and development of science and technology.

When two cultures have continuous contact with each other, the two cultures may blend or adopt their cultural traits, such as language, clothing, etc. thus losing their individual cultural varieties. When people of one culture who move to a country where another culture dominates may give up their old ways and become part of the dominant culture. For example, groups of people from many countries have settled in the United States. Most of these people gradually abandoned the way of life of their homeland, and adopted an American way of life. They learned the language, adopted the customs, and followed the traditions.

The development of science and technology, on the other hand, may attribute to changes in a culture. The invention of steam engine, for example, produced great changes in the way people lived. The invention of the computer in the mid 20th century has also had enormous impact. It has brought far-reaching changes in communication, education, entertainment, and numerous other areas of modern life.

In conclusion, to lose varieties in language and culture is to lose richness in them. Therefore, to my mind, multiculturalism should prevail in (桃花仙人是谁？唐寅，《桃花庵歌》是诗人唐寅创作的一首七言古诗。诗中诗人以桃花仙人自喻，以“老死花酒间”与“鞠躬车马前”分别代指两种截然不同的生活方式，又以富贵与贫贱的各有所失，形成鲜明强烈的对比，表现了自己平凡真实中带有庸俗消极一面的真实内心，带有愤世嫉俗之意气。)the contemporary world, so that ethnic groups can bring variety and richness to a society by introducing their own ideas and customs.

Some people think that university should not provide theoretical knowledge, but to give practical training that is beneficial to society.

Do you agree or disagree?

The current hot issues concerning higher education include the one of whether university should provide theoretical knowledge or practical training. In my opinion, this issue is closely related to the different aims of different universities and the needs of the economic development of the respective country.

As we know, university education gives a student a better appreciation of such fields as art, literature, history, science, and human relations. Therefore, it is necessary for the university to provide theoretical knowledge for those students who intend to receive liberal education.

Most universities also have professional colleges that prepare students for careers, such as teachers colleges, agricultural or dental colleges. These colleges, apart from offering some liberal arts courses, usually allocate a certain period of time for professional training. For example, a student at teachers college usually takes a field training at a high school as a student teacher for two or three months.

Another important factor on this issue is the needs of the economic development of a respective county. For instance, in China, a great number of advanced professional personnel are needed to keep the pace with the rapid economic development. Therefore, cooperative education that combines classroom studies with practical work experience is more appropriate an education China needs at the present time.

In a word, how much emphasis that should be laid on theoretical knowledge or practical training is determined by the needs of the economy of a respective country and the needs of all-round personnel for a democratic society.

Some feel that the children of low income families are better equipped to deal with difficulties posed by the “real world” when they grow up and they also believe the privileged children of wealthy families are less fit to deal with these difficulties.The implications and veracity of this argument seem self-evident,but in fact require closer examination.

The popular wisdom is that children of poorer families learn early on the value of a buck ,and are thus naturally better suited to stretching money when times get tough in adulthood. Inversely, the children of wealthy families,thoseborn with a silver spoon in their mouths,are believed to be completely ignorant of the tentimes erroneously expecting the same situation in adulthood.They are believed to be prone to overspending and financial irresponsibility. This belief,though logical,overlooks one key point which is,of course,education.

The basis of this argument is,of course,knowing the value of money ,and the idea that children of the poor know this,and those of the wealthy do not.Who though,is in a better position to teach their children the value of money,someone skilled in earning and keeping it,the wealthy parent,or someone who can not seem to acquire it,the poor parent? Both wealthy and poor children are equally likely to acquire an education in money,whether it is formal,or in the school of hard knocks. Conversely, both children are as likely to ignore this education.

A poor child may believe that one can get along,if not as easily,without wealthy.A wealthy child may be well trained by a parent steeped in the knowledge of money management,the key to developing this skill is education.

I am from Saint-Petersburg, Russia. I believe that building a large factory near my community has advantages as well as disadvantages. In the following paragraphs I will list basic benefits and losses that will be brought by a new factory.

For several reasons, I think that a new factory will not be a good addition to my neighborhood. First of all, factories often bring pollution. They are prone to contaminating the local air and water. Second of all, factories make noise. Another important aspect of building a new factory near by is that it will make the local traffic heavy. As a result of this, the amount of traffic congestions will increase, as well as contamination of the air. So, all these obviously will not make one s life happier and healthier in my community.

From the other side, I believe that a new factory will bring some advantages to my community. First of all, it will bring new job opportunities. Many specialists will be required to work there. Second of all, I think many local community facilities will have to be renovated to obtain reliable supply of water and electricity. So, some old pipes may be changed. Another important benefit of this is that the local roads in order to manage the increasing traffic will be rebuilt and widened.

However, I do not think that listed above benefits are worth all these troubles including water contamination and the constant pollution of air. From my point of view all factories must be built far from the people communities because they can be really harmful for people s health.

There is nothing unusual about energy like coals and oils being consumed, principally because economic development depends on natural resources all the time. But what is happening today is extraordinary judged by the standards of the past. It is energy depletion on a massive scale and this problem is so knotty that should deserve our closer heed.

Amongst the diverse factors contributing to the energy crises around the world, government’s short-sighted policies and citizens’ extravagant use of automobiles are probably the two most significant ones. By presuming on their natural resources, quite a few countries, especially developing ones, are eager to develop their economy in order to gain an edge over their rivals. Admittedly, their intensive use of the energy facilitates, to some extent, the developments of other industries in short term. Additionally, the amount of private cars increases at such a breakneck speed that the petroleum used amounts to an intimidating proportion of the natural resources.

The consequences are undoubtedly disastrous for human beings. Although countries can boast their growth of GDP, their citizens have to endure the ever deteriorated environment with stinking gas belching from factories and vehicles, polluted water due to fuels infiltrating underground, even ultraviolet radiation in the absence of ozone layer and, therefore, their quality of life is by no means improved. Also, sustainable development can never come into true in this situation, meaning that our descendants can benefit nothing except sterile land and polluted air and water from their ancestors.

Therefore, our government must take serious steps to attack those problems. The first and foremost is that governments have to reverse their mindset and no longer deem the growth of GDP their first goal. Rather, the betterment of citizens’ quality of life should deserve more attention than the economic growth. Furthermore, the use of private cars should be discouraged by authorities, who must shoulder the responsibility of improving public transportation in order to facilitate people as well as release the burden of energy consumption.

In conclusion, to avoid the phrase “filthy rich” added to themselves, countries must pay more heed to the efficient use of their energy and the issue of environmental protection, while they develop their economy; otherwise, environmental apocalypse and energy crisis are feared to happen in the horizon

Which kind of courses should universities provide: theoretical knowledge or practical training? Some people prefer the later one and assert that the practical training can benefit our society. Personally, I strongly disagree with their point of view for three reasons.

Among countless factors which influence my propensity, there is a most conspicuous one: practical experience should be accumulated in society, not in universities. I can think of no better illustration than the saying: “society is another kind of university”.Literarily, in society people can study practical knowledge as well as studying theoretical knowledge in universities. Besides, campus is full of academic atmosphere, and there is Idontknowlly different from the circumstance in society. Thus, it is difficult for students to accumulate the real practical experience in campus.

The second aspect relates to the importance of theoretical knowledge. Apparently, it would seem that some academic subjects, such as mathematics or sociology, cannot benefit companies or society directly. In fact, however, they are the basis of practical subjects, such as management or finance. For example, it is almost impossible to talk of economics without mentioning the fundamental roles played by statistics and mathematics.

Furthermore, universities are where theoretical knowledge is handed down from generation to generation. As we know, form Oxford University to Yale University, from Beijing University to MIT, universities congregate a lot of preeminent scholars and professors whose main jobs are the academic research. They are responsible to impart the academic knowledge to the young generation in case of they are faded from our memory.

In summary, from what has been discussed above, we may safely arrive at the conclusion that the theoretical courses are not as obsolete, profitless and unimportant as some people believed. And our universities should be responsible to provide the theoretical knowledge

The discussion about whether English becoming a global language has brought us more benefits than risks is a very controversial one. People can hardly reach a consensus on this issue. Before presenting my view, I would like to explore both sides of the argument.

It is very clear that English as a global language has brought us enormous benefits in all aspects of society, which has greatly promoted our economic development. To begin with， as a tool of cross-cultural communication, English promotes mutual understanding and friendship， removing prejudice and h123lity. It is no exaggeration to say that English helps maintain the world peace. Moreover, English offers us a good opportunity to learn from developed countries. For instance, China, a developing country, is in great need of advanced knowledge and technology. English as a global language removes the language barriers for us, so that we can introduce foreign experts to our country more conveniently

However, it can not be denied that English also exerts a negative influence on our human civilization. Since English becomes a dominant language, a large number of indigenous languages are on the verge of extinction, which poses potential risks to the cultural diversity. Just imagine, if everyone in the world looks the same, speaks the same, and thinks the same, our world will become a homogenous one. How terrible it is! It is widely accepted that language is the vehicle of culture, so killing language equals killing culture. In doing so, we erase whole histories and bury entire stories, the richness of which the world loses forever.

Obviously, English like anything else, has more than one face. Its advantages should never keep us from their drawbacks. From my perspective, English and other languages can go side by side with each other, each shinning more brilliantly in the other’s company.

The given pie charts shows data on the main energy sources in the United States of America for two decades. As is presented in the pie charts, oil was the main energy source for the USA both on 80s and 90s.

According to the given data, oil was the main energy source in the USA which was 42% in 1980. The second largest energy source in this decade was the natural gas which supplied 26% of total energy in the same period. Then coal supplied more than 20 percent energy demand in USA while hydroelectric power and Nuclear power both supplied 5% of the total energy.

In the next decade, the Nuclear power produced one tenth of total energy demand and that was almost double that it was in the previous decade. The hydroelectric power as an energy source remained unchanged as it provided 5% of total energy demand in this decade also. The two other main sources for energy in the USA remained almost unchanged in this decade and those two sources were Coal and Natural Gas. Finally the use of oil as an energy sources reduced to 33%, which is almost 10% less than the previous decade, but remained the largest source albeit the reduction in this 90s decade.

In summary, the use of oil and coal had reduced and their places as energy sources were replaced by the use of Nuclear power in the USA.

The two bar charts not only show the number of marriages and divorces in the USA between 1970 and 2000, but also illustrate the marital status of the Americans.

According to the first bar chart, within the thirty years, the number of marriages was always larger than that of divorces. From 1970 to 1980, the number of marriages remained unchanged . But 1990 saw a decline. In the following decade, the trend continued, dropping to the nadir of 2 million. Noticeably, the highest divorce rate was in 1980, when about 1.4 million divorces attracted the attention. In comparison, 1970 witnessed only 1 million, equal to that in 2000. By contrast, 1990 saw 1.2million.

The second bar chart indicates that in 1970 about 70% Americans married, but in 2000 the figure was 59%. The percentage of divorced and never married increased from 3% to 7% and 12% to 20% respectively.

In sum, the marital status from 1970 to 2000 were complex.

This line chart shows the changes in the proportion of the elderly people in three countries from 1940 till today. Moreover, it offers predictions for a period to 2040.

During the three score years, the USA generally outweighed Sweden in terms of the proportion of those aged 65 and over. But the gaps between have never been remarkable. In stark contrast, Sweden strikingly eclipsed Japan in this aspect evidenced by the fact that in 1940 the proportion for the USA was about 9%, clearly higher than 5% for Japan.

Whereas Japan experienced declines from 5% to 3% , both Sweden and the USA climbed. Put it in detail, by the year 1983, the figures have peaked at 15% and 13% in the USA and Sweden respectively. Noticeably, in 1997 the proportion in the USA was equal to that in Sweden.

According to the forecast, from now on, all of the three countries will skyrocket although exceptions might happen. However, by 2040 the proportion will have peaked at 27%, 25%, and 23% in Japan, Sweden, and the USA respectively.

In sum, the three countries are different in the field under study.

Some people think that advertising may have positive economic effects, while others think that advertising has social effects because individuals are not satisfied with who they are. They discuss two views and give your opinion + 9 brainstorming. When it comes to the effect of advertising, some people think that advertising can promote, but others think that on the one hand, advertising may produce some social effects, such as psychology Imbalance, advertising can stimulate consumers to buy more goods and promote economic growth.

Therefore, people realize that the purpose of advertising is to introduce the characteristics and characteristics of products to consumers through television, radio, Internet and other channels. When consumers see some new items in advertisements, some of them will decide to buy these new products to meet their needs. Such purchase behavior will help manufacturers to obtain more profits and expand their industry On the other hand, advertising does have some negative social effects.

At present, many well-known and even luxury brands spend a lot of money on advertising to make them more influential among consumers. However, for the poor, they may not be able to afford any luxury goods they see in advertisements. The fact that some consumers, especially poor consumers, are ignored by these brands can explain why they do not Satisfaction.

From my personal point of view, these economic and social effects of advertising exist at the same time. If consumers only regard advertising as a source of information for new products, if consumers are envious of the numbers in advertisements and complain about their low quality of life, economic development will be promoted. In order to avoid such negative consequences, the government needs to filter out some no in advertisements Appropriate content, for example, some advertisements suggest that life can be boring and boring if one does not pay for recommended items.

Therefore, the government needs to better regulate advertising to reduce this negative impact.

Schools are places where students acquire knowledge and skills needed for further achievements. Given the pressure that students are facing, some cannot help wondering whether art classes should still be compulsory.

Those holding the view that art classes should not be compulsory might think that art consumes too much of students time. Fierce competitions students will face When applying for universities necessitate total devotion to academic subjects. College students who intend to take science as their major are even expected to be fluent in foreign languages now so that essays written by foreign scholars are not barriers in their academic pursuit. In other words, high school students are supposed to show higher levels of academic competence,which seemingly makes art unessential.

However, art classes are by no means only intended for entertainment. Children even dabbling in art tend to be more creative in mind. Those skilled in music or painting can interpret the world in a way that we cannot expect from a layman. This kind of ingenuity is also a rare quality constantly found in great scientists, whose contributions have served to create a totally new field for the latter generations. In his reply to a question about death, Albert Einstein considered his departure from the mortal world to be forever farewell to another great musician. With a sigh he answered I cannot listen to Mozart anymore . Thus, can we simply regard art classes to be selective?

In conclusion, although stricter academic requirements are imposed on students, this cannot be an excuse for excluding art subjects from their curricula. Whatever kind of art can stimulate and inspire students, paving way for their future academic attainment.

As a result of constant media attention, sports professionals in my country have become stars and celebrities, and those at the top are paid huge salaries. Just like movie stars, they live extravagantlifestyles with huge houses and cars.

Many people find their rewards unfair, especially when comparing these super salaries with those of top surgeons or research scientists, or even leading politicians who have the responsibilityof governing the country. However, sports salaries are not determined by considering the contribution to society a person makes, or the level of responsibility he or she holds. Instead, they reflect the public popularity of sport in general and the level of public support that successful stars can generate. So the notion of ‘fairness’ is not the issue.

Those who feel that sports stars’ salaries are justified might argue that the number of professionals with real talent are very few, and the money is a recognition of the skills and dedication a person needs to be successful. Competition is constant and a player is tested every time they perform. in their relatively short career. The pressure from the media is intense and there is little privacy out of the spotlight. So all of thesefactors may justify the huge earnings.

Personally, I think that the amount of money such sports stars make is more justified than the huge earnings of movie stars, but at the same time, it indicatesthat our society places more value on sport than on more essential professions and achievements.

One of the most important social developments that helped to make possible a shift in thinking about the role of public education was the effect of the baby boom of the 1950’s and 1960’s on the schools. In the 1920’s, but especially in the Depression conditions of the 1930’s, the United States experienced a declining birth rate --- every thousand women aged fifteen to forty-four gave birth to about 118 live children in 1920, 89.2 in 1930, 75.8 in 1936, and 80 in 1940. With the growing prosperity brought on by the Second World War and the economic boom that followed it young people married and established households earlier and began to raise larger families than had their predecessors during the Depression. Birth rates rose to 102 per thousand in 1946,106.2 in 1950, and 118 in 1955.

Although economics was probably the most important determinant, it is not the only explanation for the baby boom. The increased value placed on the idea of the family also helps to explain this rise in birth rates. The baby boomers began streaming into the first grade by the mid 1940’s and became a flood by 1950. The public school system suddenly found itself overtaxed. While the number of schoolchildren rose because of wartime and postwar conditions, these same conditions made the schools even less prepared to cope with thefood. The wartime economy meant that few new schools were built between 1940 and 1945. Moreover, during the war and in the boom times that followed, large numbers of teachers left their profession for better- paying jobs elsewhere in the economy.

Therefore in the 1950’s and 1960’s, the baby boom hit an antiquated and inadequate school system. Consequently, the “ custodial rhetoric” of the 1930’s and early 1940’s no longer made sense that is, keeping youths aged sixteen and older out of the labor market by keeping them in school could no longer be a high priority for an institution unable to find space and staff to teach younger children aged five to sixteen. With the baby boom, the focus of educators and of laymen interested in education inevitably turned toward the lower grades and back to basic academic skills and discipline. The system no longer had much interest in offering nontraditional, new, and extra services to older youths.

【雅思写作优秀高分作文】相关文章：

雅思写作高分句精选01-22

雅思写作高分秘籍03-29

雅思写作高分范文对比03-20

雅思写作高分经验分享03-11

雅思写作考试高分技巧03-25

雅思写作高分句型01-22

雅思写作高分提分技巧03-14

雅思写作高分从句句型03-14

雅思写作高分范文及结构分析03-14

如何高分通过雅思写作关03-03