Some people believe that unpaid community service should be a compulsory part pf high school programmes ( for example working for a charity, improving the neighbourhood or teaching sports to younger children). To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There are lots of thoughts about the after-classes educational system for kids and teenagers. A huge amount of people are declared about needful for youngsters to clean school territory inside or outside the building, help old public and homeless animals. Let's consider

this

Linking Words

hard question. On the one hand,

such

Linking Words

after-school lessons can develop in the pupils the most valuable qualities as in human beings. So they from a young age will understand

such

Linking Words

simple rules, as

for example

Linking Words

, charity or help unknown grannies and grandads. There are can be included

such

Linking Words

help as buying products in supermarkets, give money for the homeless population. In

this

Linking Words

way,their heads will be full of kindness to others.

On the other hand

Linking Words

, the teens must be full in education and,

consequently

Linking Words

, they would have less time for preparations if they worked in the evening. Because now they have a variety of different lessons and after these are the same count of home tasks.

For instance

Linking Words

, an average pupil in Russia spends more than one hour to complete the task, while an average lesson at school continues 4 minutes. So he spends more time on preparation than receiving new skills. To my mind, being considered these two different ways of thinking what is better. If be honest, I choose the

first

Linking Words

variant, in which children are helpful to others. Because only in

this

Linking Words

case we would grow the best community of society, even without a great education they would be educational in life situations and they would know how to deal with them.