Farm animals and Vegetables
It has been suggested that primary children should learn how to grow vegetables and keep animals.
Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?
David Lang’s essay:
Some today have argued that it would be a sensible policy to teach children how to farm and raise animals at school. In my opinion, though this would require enormous resources, it would be beneficial in terms of both physical and intellectual development.
Those arguing against this proposal point out the resources needed. In order to implement such an ambitious programs, schools would firstly need land nearby where animals and crops be raised. This might be possible within a school’s pre-existing grounds, but there would still need to be significant investment in infrastructure. Schools would therefore have to reallocate a significant portion of their budget, potentially reducing the money for crucial facilities, staff, and teaching resources.
However, the advantages for the holistic development of children is overwhelming. Students today spend more time than ever before passively using technological devices. By spending more time outdoors learning about animals and crops, students will better understand their position within the natural food chain. Overtime, this may lead them to adopt environmentally friendlier, compassionate lifestyle choices such as becoming vegetarians or shopping locally rather than buying from large chains. Moreover, the work outdoors would necessarily involve physical exercise. Since obesity is a growing concern in most countries, this time outside could help to improve standards of physical fitness and establish healthy lifelong habits.
In conclusion, despite the money this reform would require, schools should adopt it when possible so as to achieve a more complete education for students. Governments should consider the long-term effects when deciding on such policies.
Chat gpt
The proposal to incorporate agricultural and animal husbandry education into primary school curricula has garnered attention. In my view, while such initiatives offer certain benefits, the potential drawbacks, particularly concerning resource allocation and health risks, are more significant.
Advocates highlight that engaging children in growing vegetables and caring for animals can foster responsibility and a connection to nature. These activities may enhance students’ understanding of food sources and promote environmental stewardship. However, implementing such programs requires substantial resources. Schools would need to invest in appropriate land, infrastructure, and trained personnel to oversee these activities. This financial commitment could divert funds from essential academic subjects, potentially compromising the quality of core education.
Moreover, there are health and safety concerns associated with young children handling soil and animals. Exposure to allergens, zoonotic diseases, and physical injuries are risks that cannot be overlooked. Ensuring proper hygiene and safety measures would necessitate additional oversight and training, further straining school resources.
In conclusion, while teaching primary children to cultivate plants and care for animals has educational merits, the associated disadvantages, particularly in terms of resource allocation and health risks, outweigh the benefits. Schools should prioritize core academic subjects and consider integrating environmental education through less resource-intensive methods.
💡 Why David Lang’s Essay Feels Simple but Scores High
- Clear structure
Introduction: Directly paraphrases the question + gives a clear opinion.
Body 1: Discusses the opposite view.
Body 2: Presents his own view (which he supports).
Conclusion: Restates the opinion and wraps up.
👉 Why it works: Examiners love clarity. They’re not grading you on how “fancy” your structure is — just that it’s logical and easy to follow.
- Precise vocabulary, not fancy vocabulary
He uses natural, topic-specific language, like:
“holistic development”
“environmentally friendlier”
“passively using technological devices”
👉 Why it works: Band 9 vocabulary is about being accurate and appropriate, not sounding like a thesaurus.
- Balanced ideas + developed examples
He acknowledges the disadvantages (cost, resources) and then shows why advantages outweigh them (fitness, habits, awareness). He explains his points — not just states them.
👉 Why it works: IELTS cares about depth more than how many ideas you list. One strong idea with support = better than five weak ones.
- Grammar is natural and controlled
He uses complex sentences when needed, not to show off.
👉 Example:
“Since obesity is a growing concern in most countries, this time outside could help…”
That’s complex, but clear. No over-complicated structures.
✅ How YOU Can Write Like David Lang
- Follow a clean structure
Intro: Paraphrase + opinion
Body 1: Opposing view
Body 2: Your view (with examples)
Conclusion: Restate opinion
- Use precise, topic-relevant words
Learn how to talk naturally about big topics (education, health, environment) with words that fit.
- Don’t list ideas — explain them
Pick 1–2 strong points per paragraph and expand with why, how, and an example.
- Write like you’re explaining, not performing
Pretend you’re talking to a smart friend, not an examiner. Make it natural and reasoned, not robotic or flowery.
✏️ Step 1: Write the Introduction
✅ What we need:
Paraphrase the question
Give a clear opinion
🧠 Example:
Some believe that it would be beneficial for young children to be taught farming skills at school. However, I believe that the drawbacks of such a policy outweigh the potential benefits.
🔍 Why this works:
It’s short.
Clear opinion.
No fancy words. Just focused.
Would you like to try writing your own version of the introduction before we move on?
Or should we go ahead to Body Paragraph 1?