Câu hỏi:

10/01/2025 243 Lưu

It is better for college students to live far away from home than to live at home with their parents. Do you agree or disagree?

Quảng cáo

Trả lời:

verified
Giải bởi Vietjack

Sample 1:

There has been a topic of debate as to whether it is better for students to live independently away from their parents whilst studying at university. Although some people agree with this, my firm conviction is that it depends on the culture of the region where the students are from.

This practice is popular in Western-based societies, like the US or the UK. Independence from parents at a young age is largely accepted and encouraged, especially when students reach the age of eighteen and are able to earn a living on their own. A large majority of students seek temporary employment near their school to earn money or gain valuable work experience, while others will spend time participating in university clubs and activities on campus. This element, I believe, is closely linked to their further development and future success.

However, in many Asian countries such as Vietnam, where traditional values of strong family bonds play a significant role in the lives of the youth and the national ethos, I suspect that it could bring more harm than good. It is, however, common for family members to live separately when they are pursuing tertiary education because most universities in Vietnam are located in major or municipal cities. Students from other provinces have to stay in dormitory accommodation or rent a room off campus in order to complete their study. I consider this to have a detrimental impact on family relationships because it can possibly lead to the unfortunate disappearance of the country’s long-standing culture.

In conclusion, I do consider that living close to schools and universities, away from family, is beneficial for a student’s studies, though it can have a significant negative impact on family relationships depending on the student’s cultural background.

Sample 2:

Student accommodation wields direct influences in their life and academic performance. I uphold the conviction that it is more necessary for student life to be spent a long distance from their parents.

Life on campus may be more advantageous for university students. It is undeniable that with the absence of parental care, students seem to have a chance to shoulder almost all the blame for their private life, ranging from doing household chores to managing personal finance, meticulously preparing certain life skills for their later life. Additionally, thanks to their shared accommodation, students might learn how to live and work in harmony with others, giving rise to improvements in social skills. Finally, students can accomplish higher academic outcomes by dint of mutual aid and support from friends by sharing learning materials or developing proper study strategies for each other, facilitating their study when sharing the room.

However, although living with parents during student life may bring several benefits ranging from parental care to feeling of safety, this lifestyle can be more detrimental. In fact, commuting to universities from home daily may deprive various students of a remarkable time which should have been allocated for for participating in recreational and extracurricular activities or sports events with a view to enhancing their physical health and developing their teamwork skills or communication competences. This physical stamina and these soft skills are prerequisites for paving the way for academic as well as professional success. In other words, were it not for these soft skills which appear easier to be developed in a self-reliant life, students would be at a disadvantage in the process of accumulating academic knowledge and professional qualifications for future employment.

In conclusion, based on the aforementioned explanations, it seems to me that enjoying campus life far from their parents is a more sensible decision than living under the same roof with their parents.

Sample 3:

While some people think that students ought to live alone whilst studying at university, it is believed by others that it is better for them to remain living at home. In my opinion, I think students benefit from living alone unless their finances prevent it.

Firstly, one of the main reasons why it is advantageous for students to live alone is that they become totally independent of their parents and able to think for themselves. University is a time for students to spread their wings and try new ideas or ways of thinking and learn to cope with making life changing decisions. By living alone, without the influence of their parents, they develop rounder, decisive characters able to function well in the world.

Another advantage to students fleeing the parental nest is that they learn to manage money. Most students see university as a steppingstone to adulthood and so by learning to live on a budget, they develop the skills needed once they are earning a salary and balancing their finances. Renting property also comes with responsibilities to both landlords and housemates, and this is a further lesion to learn in useful life skills.

Finally, however, regardless of how beneficial living alone might be for university students, it might be financially impractical for some. For a small proportion of university students, their finances might require them to stay at home for as long as possible until they are finally able to support themselves through paid work.

In conclusion, while it might not be feasible for all students, living away from parents helps university students develop strength of character and useful life skills needed for when they enter working life.

Sample 4:

College is considered a big change in a student’s life. It is one of the first major decisions a person has to make, and it can be life-changing. For many, it’s the first time they move out of their hometown. College can be an overwhelming experience for most, as it is the first time a person truly feels responsible for oneself. Most people think it is better for college students to live far away from home than to live at home with their parents. In this essay, we will first look at both sides of this argument and then arrive at a conclusion.

One of the main reasons why people think it’s better for college students to move out of their hometown is because, when one lives with their parents, they are in their comfort zone. But to move out to a different city for college would compel a student to move out of his/her comfort zone and learn to survive in the real world. Of course, there will be challenges but these challenges will mould the students to become more responsible individuals. Studying in a different city also opens up many new opportunities for the students to explore. This helps the students to grow and have a better perspective of themselves. Staying alone teaches them to be more independent and in due course they learn the value of money, as they get fixed allowances.

There are many students who prefer to stay with their parents and not go to a college which is far away from home. There are various reasons why people stay back. One of the main reasons is the inability to afford college in a different city. Living far away from home can be very expensive and for many it’s not worth the expense, as they can get the same quality of education by staying back.

In my opinion, the deciding factor when it comes to choosing a college should be the quality of education. Because at the end of the day, college is a place where one wants to excel academically. Living away from home should be secondary and should follow the above decision. It is true that living away from home inculcates essential life skills, but they can also be acquired in some other ways, but the quality of education cannot be compromised for that.

Sample 5:

Most people believe that it is better for college students to stay far away from home than to live at home with their parents. Living away from college does have its own benefits but there are also a lot of disadvantages which are often overlooked. I disagree with this popular belief, as I think no matter where the students live, they will eventually inculcate the essential life skills and become independent while studying.

College environment is very individualistic where each one has to make their own independent decisions to achieve excellence. Unlike school, college doesn’t force any students to compulsorily participate in activities. College is a steppingstone to individual freedom, and it doesn’t matter if the college is far away from home or near it. The most popular argument for people to believe that college students should live far away from home is that it makes them independent and self-sufficient. But I think independence is something innate about college life and every student has to be equally enterprising to excel in college both academically and on the extracurricular front as well.

In my opinion, staying at home and pursuing college is a better option as the student doesn’t need to take up extra jobs to pay for his living as staying away from home has many added expenses. They can use that time wisely and excel in academics and engage in extracurricular activities to sharpen their skills. College is a huge transition for most students which leads to emotional turmoil but staying at home makes them feel secure as they know it’s a safe place for them, this isn’t usually an option when someone is far away from home.

In my opinion, college makes every individual independent and for that staying away from home isn’t always necessary.

Sample 6:

College is the transition period for most students, as after college they have to face the real world and enter into the professional realm. College is what prepares everyone for these challenges. Therefore, many believe that it’s better for college students to stay far away from home than living with their parents, as it moulds them to take on their own responsibilities. I completely agree with this view, as staying away from home teaches a student many little things which add up to make them a complete individual full of awareness and strength.

Staying away from home in a different city for college directly inculcates habits which become beneficial to students once they become working professionals after graduating. It teaches them to be self-sufficient and not rely on anyone to get things done for them. This essentially cultivates them to take initiative, which is a very important trait in any profession. Staying far away from parents also enables them to take small financial decisions independently which eventually make them better at financial planning.

College students are exposed to a wide range of opportunities. At times, staying at home restricts them to their comfort zone and they fear stepping out of it. But once away from home, it gives them the courage to explore all the available opportunities and make the best out of their situation. Indian parents are usually restricting in nature which often discourages students to try new things but staying away from home gives them the liberty to follow their passion and work towards it.

Most people have various family issues which at times impact their education. Staying away from home helps students to concentrate more on their education and excel academically. Unknowingly, staying all by oneself while studying helps students to gain more clarity on what they want in life and how to attain it, as there isn’t anyone around overpowering their decisions, which often happens a lot in the Indian setting. So, in my opinion, staying away from home broadens a college student's horizon and helps them grow as an individual.

Sample 7:

It is a highly debated issue whether it is better for university students to live far away from home than to live at home with their parents. There are pros and cons of both approaches. It is necessary to look at both sides of the argument before forming an opinion.

There are definite benefits of staying at home. To begin with it is much more economical to stay at home than to stay near the university. If you choose to stay at the university then you either stay at the university dormitory or rent your own apartment. Both university options are more expensive compared to home. Then you have to do your own cooking and cleaning, which is not the case if you stay at home where your mother looks after all these things. You do spend some time commuting to and from the university but then you save your time on cooking and cleaning. The disadvantage of staying at home is that you may be disturbed by siblings, and you have to help with household chores.

There are many advantages of staying near the university. University education is a time for you to mix with people of different backgrounds and cultures. This cultural exchange usually occurs after class hours. If you have to return home, then you miss out on this golden opportunity. Secondly, there are good study facilities such as the library, the computer lab etc. if you are on or near the campus. You also get to experience some independence. The downside is that it is expensive and to cut the cost you may have to share your apartment with someone you don’t like.

In my opinion, it is definitely worthwhile living at the university than with your parents even if you have to shell out some extra money for that because it is a golden opportunity to interact with people from different parts of the world and you get to enjoy the benefits of facilities like the library and sports stadiums and gyms.

To put it in a nutshell, I am pending down saying that there are benefits and drawbacks of both approaches and the decision is purely subjective. However, in my opinion staying near the university is better.

Sample 8:

These days, moving out to another place for pursuing higher education has become a common trend. It poses a dilemma before the majority of us. In my opinion the latter is far more favorable as it opens one up to a wide range of prospects. This essay will talk about the reasons to support my agreement.

There are innumerable cases wherein people from rural areas with simple personalities have been molded into dynamic thinkers and problem solvers. There have been many people including various famous personalities who gained sophistication and were transformed after living away from their homes, on their own. This genuinely proves how a student living away from home can or has to transform himself. Keeping in mind situations when no one else is around to offer direct unconditional help as parents do.

In addition to this, when students need to spread their wings to soar in the sky of successes and failures, they need to go out and get their own experiences. They need to understand the world for themselves while managing their limited finances. This first-hand experience teaches them about tackling different situations and grappling with all sorts of challenges with dexterity. This falsifies the apprehensions and hypothetical worries of their parents about them. As a matter of fact, this is possible only if they get an opportunity to live on their own away from the patronizing home atmosphere.

Finally, students living with parents owing to lack of finances maybe, or any other reason whatsoever, might not get such an opportunity. But in such cases, they always have other ways to achieve a wholesome personality development. To sum it up, it is highly necessary to stay away from one’s home during the course of higher education, as of course, it is the foundation to their future, especially, professional life.

Sample 9:

It is a highly debated issue whether to stay home with parents or live far away from their family while students study in universities. Some people are strongly convinced that the best choice for them is living close to their family. Others are in favour of living in a different place for getting higher education.

In my opinion, living-away students have a variety of benefits which the family-oriented students hardly gain. Firstly, students have the opportunity to lead a more independent life regarding both academic performance and personal affairs. Secondly, living in a different place offers young people a chance to learn about new people and cultures apart from those of their own when they live at home. Finally, students develop their personality when they have to learn to live in harmony with their roommates.

However, some young people prefer living at home, because they can enjoy better living conditions than ones living far from home. To begin with, it is much more economical to stay at home, because living together can reduce the burden on family budget. Additionally, the presence of the family members and old friends allow young people to get healthy food and emotional support, to save their time on cooking and cleaning.

I disagree with the opponent's point of view. Personally, I believe that students living with parents do not gain any understanding about the realities of earning, saving money and managing it wisely. Also, thanks to independent life, young people can flexibly spend time on learning, surfing websites and doing daily chores.

All in all, there are two different points of view on the problem. Though some young people prefer sharing places with their parents, I believe that students should take priority to living away from home to improve problem-solving skills and develop strength of character needed for their working life.

CÂU HỎI HOT CÙNG CHỦ ĐỀ

Lời giải

Sample 1:

Many young people work on a voluntary basis, and this can only be beneficial for both the individual and society as a whole. However, I do not agree that we should therefore force all teenagers to do unpaid work.

Most young people are already under enough pressure with their studies, without being given the added responsibility of working in their spare time. School is just as demanding as a full-time job, and teachers expect their students to do homework and exam revision on top of attending lessons every day. When young people do have some free time, we should encourage them to enjoy it with their friends or to spend it doing sports and other leisure activities. They have many years of work ahead of them when they finish their studies.

At the same time, I do not believe that society has anything to gain from obliging young people to do unpaid work. In fact, I would argue that it goes against the values of a free and fair society to force a group of people to do something against their will. Doing this can only lead to resentment amongst young people, who would feel that they were being used, and parents, who would not want to be told how to raise their children. Currently, nobody is forced to volunteer, and this is surely the best system.

In conclusion, teenagers may choose to work for free and help others, but in my opinion, we should not make this compulsory.

Sample 2:

Some individuals nowadays feel that youngsters should accomplish unpaid volunteer work in their leisure time for the benefit of society. I completely believe that it is critical to involve children in volunteer activity. The primary issues will be discussed with examples in this essay.

To begin with, teenagers who participate in unpaid employment are more responsible for local society. When adolescents interact with other individuals, they become aware of the issues that people face daily, such as poverty, pollution, and others. Furthermore, we have all been affected by the present COVID-19 outbreak, and many people have suffered a loss. According to "The Voice of Vietnam - VOV” a volunteer who is anti-virus and empathizes with the mental pain that the patients are experiencing, he always gives oxygen and food to those who need it the most. As a result, volunteering helps students become the most responsible citizens in the country.

Furthermore, unpaid employment can assist youngsters in broadening their social contacts and developing soft skills. Because when they work in an unpaid job, they will meet a variety of individuals and acquire a range of skills and abilities from others, such as leadership, teamwork, communication, and dealing with challenging situations. For example, a recent study in Japan discovered that students who participate in volunteer work are more sociable, enthusiastic, and tolerant of others. They will grow more extroverted, energetic, and hard-working as compared to youngsters who do not perform unpaid employment.

To conclude, I feel that rather than paying, young people should perform unpaid social work because they can acquire many important skills and are more responsible to society.

Sample 3:

There is a growing debate about whether all adolescents should be asked to perform mandatory volunteer work in their leisure time to help assist the surrounding area. Although there are a variety of benefits associated with this topic, there are also some notable drawbacks, as will now be discussed.

The advantages of teenagers doing voluntary work are self-evident. The first relevant idea is work experience. A valid illustration of this would be to increase their tangible skills. For example, an adolescent who volunteers to help in a customer service department will learn how to communicate effectively with people in different age groups. On a psychological level, the youth’s life skills will also be enhanced by having empathy towards others. This can be demonstrated by volunteering and assisting families living in low socio-economic backgrounds with their day-to-day tasks.

There are, however, also drawbacks that need to be considered. On an intellectual level, the teenager may get distracted from their study. This situation, for instance, can be seen when voluntary work is also being undertaken during school terms. There would be time constraints for both areas. On a physiological level, youth might experience fatigue as they are unaware of the acceptable working or volunteering hours and, as a result, sometimes they can be overworked.

In summary, we can see that this is clearly a complex issue as there are significant advantages and disadvantages. I personally believe that it would be better not to encourage the youths to do compulsory work because their studies might take them to a higher level in society, whereas volunteering could restrict this progress.

Sample 4:

Children are the backbone of every country. So, there are people who tend to believe that youngsters should be encouraged to initiate social work as it will result in flourished society and individualistic growth of youngsters themselves. I, too, believe that this motivation has more benefits than its drawbacks.

To begin with, social work by children can be easily associated with personality development because, during this drive, they tend to communicate with the variety of people, which leads to polished verbal skills. For example, if they start convincing rural people to send their children to school, they have to adopt a convincing attitude along with developed verbal skills to deal with the diverse kinds of people they encounter. This improved skill will help them lifelong in every arena. Apart from this, the true values of life like tolerance, patience, team spirit, and cooperation can be learned. Besides that, young minds serve the country with full enthusiasm that gives the feeling of fulfillment and self-satisfaction. This sense of worthiness boosts their self-confidence and patriotic feelings. Moreover, experiencing multiple cultures and traditions broadens their horizons and adds another feather to their cap.

However, it is truly said, no rose without thrones. Can the drawbacks of this initiation be ignored? Children go to school, participate in different curriculum activities, endure the pressure of peers, parents, and teachers and in the competitive world, they should not be expected to serve society without their self-benefits. This kind of pressure might bring resentment in their mind.

In conclusion, I believe, the notion of a teenager doing unpaid work is indeed good but proper monitoring and care should be given to avoid untoward consequences.

Sample 5:

Youngsters are the building blocks of the nation and they play an important role in serving society because at this age they are full of energy not only mentally but physically also. Some people think that the youth should do some voluntary work for society in their free time, and it would be beneficial for both of them. I agree with the statement. It has numerous benefits which will be discussed in the upcoming paragraphs.

To begin with, they could do a lot of activities and make their spare time fruitful. First of all, they can teach children to live in slum areas because they are unable to afford education in schools or colleges. As a result, they will become civilized individuals and do not indulge in antisocial activities. By doing this they could gain a lot of experience and become responsible towards society. It would be beneficial in their future perspective.

In addition to this, they learn a sense of cooperation and sharing with other people of the society. for instance, they could grow plants and trees at public places, and this would be helpful not only to make the surrounding clean and green but reduce the pollution also to great extent. Moreover, they could arrange awareness programmes in society and set an example among the natives of the state. This will make the social bonding strong between the individuals and this will also enhance their social skills.

In conclusion, they can “kill two birds with one stone” because it has a great advantage both for the society and for the adolescents. Both the parents, as well as teachers, should encourage the teens to take part in the activities of serving the community in their free time.

Lời giải

The graph shows the number of people taking part in 4 kinds of sports in a particular region between 1985 and 2005. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. Write at least 150 words. (ảnh 1)

Sample 1:

The line chart illustrates how many people participated in 4 distinct types of sports in a particular area from 1985 to 2005.

Overall, rugby was the most popular sport in the first half of the period while tennis took the lead in the second half. In addition, rugby saw a downward trend while tennis took the opposite direction; moreover, the trends for basketball and badminton were relatively stable.

In 1995, the number of people playing rugby stood at just under 250, surpassing the figure for tennis players by around 100. Basketball and badminton had comparatively lower participation rates, with around 80 and 50 participants in turn.

Afterwards, the number of people participating in rugby plunged, hitting a low of 50 in 2005, equal to the figure for badminton in the same year. In contrast, the trend for tennis was upward, with its participation rate increasing to roughly 220 people at the end of the period, establishing it as the leading sport. Finally, the figures for basketball and badminton underwent negligible changes, hovering around 80 and 50 participants respectively.

Sample 2:

The line graph illustrates how many people participated in four types of sports in a specific area from 1985 to 2005. Overall, there was a significant decrease in the number of people playing rugby in this region, whereas tennis showed a gradual upward trend to become the most popular sport in the second half of the period. Additionally, throughout the period, the trends for basketball and badminton were relatively stable and comparable, with the latter sport remaining the least common. 

In the first decade, rugby had the highest number of players, despite witnessing a steady fall from nearly 250 to exactly 200 participants. From 1995 onwards, this sport kept losing popularity as its figure plummeted, reaching parity with badminton (at 50 people) in the final year.

In contrast, tennis was gaining popularity and had become the dominant category by the end of the timeframe. Specifically, starting at the second highest (at 150), the number of people engaging in tennis rose continually, overtaking that of rugby in 1995 before ending at approximately 250 players.

Meanwhile, roughly 80 people played basketball initially, after which it stayed virtually unchanged until the end of the period. Badminton almost exactly mirrored this trend, albeit at a lower rate, consistently hovering around the 50 mark.

Sample 3:

The line chart compares the number of participants in basketball, tennis, badminton and rugby over a 20-year period from 1985 in a specific area.

Overall, more people played tennis throughout the period, and it was the most common sport since 1995, while rugby's popularity declined. Notably, basketball and badminton mostly had stable numbers of players.

In terms of tennis and rugby, both sports indicated inverted trends. Although rugby started at the highest point with nearly 250 players, the figure declined continually to about 200 players in 1995, when this sport was no longer the most popular. Since then, the number of people playing rugby dropped more steeply, reaching 50 in 2005. In contrast, from 1985 onwards, the figure for tennis increased steadily from second place with 150 participants. By 2005, it had reached its highest point of roughly 220 players.

In comparison, there were far fewer people who took up basketball and badminton. However, these sports remained relatively stable, with basketball having about 70 participants every year, while badminton was always the least popular with approximately 50 players each year.

Sample 4:

The line graph provides information about the number of individuals engaging in four types of sports in a specific area from 1985 to 2005.

Overall, while tennis underwent a surge in popularity, rugby experienced a decrease in participation within this region over time, with basketball and badminton remaining relatively stable. Moreover, the most drastic shift in popularity was witnessed in rugby.

At the start of the period, in 1985, rugby was the most played sport, with 240 individuals participating, and it significantly outnumbered the next sport, tennis, which had only 150 participants. Thereafter, the number of people playing rugby dropped to 200 in 1995, before plummeting to a 20-year low of 50 in the final year. This stood in stark contrast to the rise in the popularity of tennis, which saw a steady increase in participants to a peak of about 220 in 2005, making it by far the most played sport at the end of the period.

Turning to the remaining sports, in the first year, 80 individuals played basketball, almost 25 more than badminton. Over the following decade, the participant numbers for basketball rose to about 90, while those for badminton dropped to a low of 45 in 1995. In the remaining period, these two sports maintained their popularity, as the numbers participating stayed at roughly the same level until 2005.

Sample 5:

The line chart delineates the participation levels in four distinct sports in a specific area from 1985 to 2005.

Primarily, rugby emerged as the most favored sport in the initial half of the period, while tennis took precedence in the latter half. Moreover, rugby exhibited a declining trend, whereas tennis experienced a converse trajectory. Meanwhile, the engagement rates for basketball and badminton remained relatively consistent.

In 1985, the number of rugby participants stood at just below 250, exceeding the tennis players by approximately 150 individuals. Simultaneously, basketball and badminton showcased lower participation rates, with around 80 and 50 individuals involved in each sport, respectively.

Subsequently, rugby participation plummeted significantly, reaching a nadir of 50 participants in 2005, akin to the number engaged in badminton during the same year. Conversely, tennis experienced an upward trend, escalating to nearly 220 individuals by the conclusion of the period, solidifying its status as the predominant sport. In contrast, the figures for basketball and badminton remained relatively stable, with approximately 80 and 50 participants, respectively, throughout the entire duration.

Sample 6:

The given line graph delineates the participation levels in 4 different sports, namely basketball, tennis, badminton, and rugby within a specific region over a span of 20 years.

Overall, it is evident that the number of individuals participating in tennis witnessed a consistent and notable increase, contrasting sharply with the downward trend observed in rugby participation. Meanwhile, while basketball and badminton recorded lower participation rates compared to other sports, they remained relatively stable throughout the entire period.

Turning to the number of tennis players, the figures began at a relatively moderate level of 150 individuals in 1985. Subsequently, it experienced a gradual and consistent increase in participation, reaching a pinnacle of nearly 230 participants by 2005. In stark contrast, the trend of rugby involvement presented a distinctive pattern. Commencing at a relatively high level of almost 240 people, the numbers steadily declined over time and by the end of the 20-year period, rugby participants had dwindled to 50, matching the level of engagement observed in badminton. Interestingly, a point of convergence occurred in 1995, where both tennis and rugby shared a similar number of participants, with approximately 200 individuals engaging in each sport.

In regard to the remaining sports participants, the numbers for both badminton and basketball remained relatively stable over the given time frame. Beginning with approximately 50 individuals engaging in badminton and around 80 individuals involved in basketball in 1985, these figures persisted with little variation until 2005. Consequently, by the end of the period, both sports witnessed a culmination with nearly the same number of participants as they had at the beginning.

Lời giải

Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.

Nâng cấp VIP

Lời giải

Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.

Nâng cấp VIP

Lời giải

Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.

Nâng cấp VIP

Lời giải

Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.

Nâng cấp VIP

Lời giải

Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.

Nâng cấp VIP