Some people think that parents should teach their children how to be good members of society. Others, however, believe that school is the best place to learn this. Discuss both views and give your own opinion

Some people believe that

children

should be taught by their families about how to function as useful members of society,

while

others believe that sending kids to educational institutions is the best way for them to study

this

.

Although

the latter opinion can be beneficial in some cases, I believe that family upbringing plays a more important role in educating offspring to be good parts of the community. Schools can be considered suitable places for

children

to learn to be good citizens. With standardized educational methods, schools can foster offspring’s cognitive development so that they are able to contribute to society in the future.

For example

, Trung Vuong School and Vinschool are well known for having nurtured successful alumni

such

as Professor Ngo Bao, and Professor Nguyen Hung who have devoted their talents to the development of the country.

However

, these people only represent a small fraction of the total number of students attending the academy, and

thus

sending

children

to the academy cannot be the best method of educating them to be good members of the community. I believe that parents play a more important role in teaching them how to be good citizens. In Vietnam, the average class size is 20 students, which makes it difficult for educators to provide proper schooling for each student. One-to-one lessons at home,

on the other hand

, allow

children

to progress faster.

Furthermore

, families form stronger bonds with their offspring and

thus

, it is easier for them to shape

children

’s personalities at an early age.

For example

, by telling stories

such

as Robin Hood, and Cinderella before bedtime, parents can instil a sense of compassion and integrity into them. These kids are likely to become good members of the association when they grow up. To summarize, a robotic teacher does not have the necessary disciple to properly give instructions to students and actually works to retard the ability of a student to comprehend new lessons.

Therefore

,

it is clear that

the idea of running a classroom completely by a machine cannot be supported. After a thorough analysis of

this

subject, it is predicted that the adverse effects of the debate over technology-driven teaching will always be greater than the positive effects, and because of

this

, classroom teachers will never be substituted for technology.