Starting Age for Formal Education

Some people think that children should begin their formal education at a very early age. Some think they should begin at at least 7 years old. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Annotated response

3 correction notes

Showing 3 correction notes.

There has been growing momentum in recent years towards movements for children to start schooling after the age of 7. In my opinion, although going to school from a young age will help with social development, children should be allowed to grow outside school until the age of 7.

Proponents of early schooling often point out the clinical research on the impact of school on social skills. At home, children are exposed to a variety of different circumstances. They may or may not have siblings, their parents might take them out for playdates often or neglect them at home, hampering their social skills. Once children start school, they are all in more or less an equal environment where they must communicate with older and younger children, compromise when playing, learn to listen to their teachers, and start forming stable bonds based on empathy and shared interests with others.

Despite the social advantages, children can develop more uniquely if they are allowed to delay their entrance to formal schooling. A good example of this is in Finland, where students do not begin school until after the age of 7. Finland is renowned for its top-performing can be traced to a number of factors besides simply school age. However, the impact on individual development is apparent. According to research into child psychology, children form the basis of their personality between the ages of 4 and 7. is paramount to delay the age when they begin school in order to give them room to and ultimately produce a greater variety of voices in society at large as has been the case in Finland.

In my opinion, the social benefits of school do not outweigh the individual positives of delayed schooling to both the individual and society. Schools should continue to research this area so that they can better advise policymakers.

Overall assessment

Why this response received Band 7.0

The response directly addresses both views and sustains a clear personal opinion, with the strongest aspect being its well-developed, example-supported arguments. The main limitation is occasional imprecision in argumentation and word choice, such as the partially undercut Finland example and minor lexical slips, which keep the writing short of fully polished control.

IELTS criteria

How each score was decided

Task Response

7.0

The response addresses both views, presents a consistent opinion, and develops main ideas with explanation and an example, though the Finland evidence is partly conceded away and some support remains generalized.

Coherence and Cohesion

7.0

Ideas are organized into clear paragraphs with logical progression and effective cohesive devices, with only occasional mechanical linking and a slightly digressive concession in the third paragraph.

Lexical Resource

7.0

Vocabulary is reasonably varied and precise for the topic, showing some natural collocation, but includes occasional awkwardness and minor errors such as 'growing momentum towards movements' and 'room to breath'.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy

7.0

A range of complex structures is used with generally good flexibility and control, while minor grammatical slips and occasional wordiness do not impede communication.