Essay: Should Schools Cut Art And Music Out Of The Curriculum? Hello! I am trying to improve my writing skills that's why I write essays about different topics. It would be very helpful if someone could correct this one. The aim of the education is to prepare kids for the modern world. The skills that are most needed on the labour market were taught in subjects like English, math or physics. So, are art and music really necessary? Firstly, the amount of time which is used for these two subjects is - depending on the country - from two to four hours a week. If art and music are cut out, there would be more free time for the children available. Hence they can follow their personal interests, some might like music than art or vice versa. Secondly, most kids in this age cannot organise free time activity on their own. That is why it depends on the parents what the children actually do in their leisure. But in school art and music are obligatory, so everyone gets the opportunity to paint or play an instrument. Third, most subjects in school are mentally exhausting. Therefore music or art could be for a lot of pupils a very pleasant contrast. For example, having a music lesson after two hours of math can be really refreshing for body and mind. In conclusion, the subjects art and music are an opportunity for children who don't get support of their parents and additionally it is a refreshing contrast to other subjects. In my opinion a good compromise would be to obligate teaching in music and art only until sixth or seventh grade.

Essay: The impact of communication and socialisation online Hey guys, I'm trying to improve my writing skills. Could someone correct the following essay? Nowadays, it is not only common to communicate via social networks but also to be socialized because of the increasing time people spend online. Firstly, the aim of every social network is that you consume as much as possible. That's why most websites are include an almost endless timeline. Hence there is the risk that your life outside the internet suffer a lot and you end up with only online friends. However, it's easier than ever before to meet people with the same interests. This is also a good opportunity to get to know new cultures. Additionally it brings up a lot of advantages when you organize groups or events. Third, the suggestion that you get in social networks are based on your friends, the topics your are interested in, your search activity and other personal information. So you only get to know content that matches with your opinion. This effect - called filter bubble - can be the reason for why you may not understand other world views. In conclusion, with the socialisation online you have to opportunity to get to know new people with same the interests and world views. In contrast you risk to get isolated from real friends and only exist in your own 'filter bubble'.

Essay: How to help people who are homeless? Hello everybody, I am trying to train my writing skills. Could someone please correct this essay? As a tourist or an inhabitant - in almost every big city around the world you see people who live on the streets. Some people help them by giving money to them. But is this really the best solution? Firstly, in almost every western country there is the possibility to get financial support from the government if you cannot afford a flat on your own. Thus, theoretically, no one have to live on the streets. However, also in cities like London, Berlin or Paris exists the problem of homelessness. The reason for this is often the desperation of the people. For instance after a crisis in their lives, they just do not know where to get help. In this case it is supportive to talk with them and show them the possibility of government support. In the contrary, in the majority of the people especially in developing countries cannot use this opportunity. That is why there are even more people who have to live on the streets. For them money is decisive whether they remain homeless or not. So, in particular tourists who give the people money of foreign currency can help a lot because of the often relatively low prices in the country. But as well as the people could use this money for food, clothes or even saving it for a flat, they could also spend it on drugs or alcohol. In a lot of cases the addiction is the initial reason why they are homeless. In summary, you have to differentiate between people who are homeless in countries where a government support is available or in countries where is not. In the first case it is supportive to talk with the people and explain to them where to find help. In states in which homeless people cannot count on government support, it can be very helpful if you give them money also with the risk that they buy drugs or alcohol.

Essay: Should children already start to learn foreign languages during their primary school years? Good evening guys! I'm writing essays to improve my written English. It would be very nice if someone could correct this one: Today, speaking and writing in foreign languages brings up many advantages. That's why a lot of parents and teachers demand to start learning foreign languages already in primary school. Others say that they should start in secondary school. Firstly, for a lot of children it is not easy to accustom to the school life. Learning a language in the common way with vocabulary and grammar need a lot of time, so to prevent the kids from an overload, it can be better to do the primary school without foreign language teaching. Despite of this, it is scientifically proven that learning a new languages has very positive effects for mental health and development. This can lead to more success of the kids in secondary schools and later in the working life. Furthermore, most children in primary school are very enthusiastic and like to explore new situation. For this, learning new languages is perfectly suitable. For instance, you can explain a lot of knowledge very practical and organize it in games. In conclusion foreign language teaching is already in primary school suitable, but should start slowly to prevent an overload of the children. In my opinion the probably best method would be to begin with games in little groups where you not only get to know the language but also the culture of the specific country.

Essay: Why nowadays often both parents work? What are the effects to the children? The traditional family situation has changed over the last decades. Today, most parents are both working a lot. What are the causes? And do parents now have less time for their kids? Firstly, we will have a look at (western) Germany in the 1960s and 1970s. The economy was booming because of the currency reform and the new idea of a social market economy. Even for non-academic men, but working in the factories of BMW and Daimler it was possible to feed a whole family and to have a high standard of living at the same time. But as we know such boom do not persisting forever. So in the following decades after the fall of the Berlin wall, there were two reasons why especially the woman in western Germany started to work. On the one hand most family want to continue to increase their living standard, this was only affordable if both parents are working. And on the other hand, a lot of woman were fed up with the conservative family policy in western Germany and therefore they started working. So, how this change in society effect the children? It is often argued that since it is both parents are working, they have less time for their children. But caused by the developing of technology, nowadays a lot of parents have more free time which they can spent with their kids. The time which was necessary for household has strongly declined over the last 50 years because of inventions like vacuum cleaning robots or more efficient dishwashers. However, there still a lot of children who are not able to talk to their parents as much as they would. Despite of this, my opinion is that the employment of both parents has often more advantages than disadvantages.

Essay: Is online messaging the death of grammar and spelling rules? Good afternoon everyone, it would be very nice if someone could correct this essay, I'm practicing writing with good expression. Most people are using instant messengers to communicate. In this context, we often write very short and basic sentences with a lot of spelling mistakes, because it has to be done quickly. Is this probably leading to the death of grammar and spelling rules at all? Firstly, social networks and instant communication tools like "WhatsApp" were used more and more from younger children. While five years ago most children got a smartphone as teenagers, today it is normal that already children in the fifth grade have one. So, just after they went out of primary school where they learnt how to write, the pupils communicate via smartphones with their friends without using any spelling or grammar rules. Thus for a lot of children it is difficult to internalize this rules. However, writing with exact spelling and grammar is not optional in a lot of parts of our daily life. In most professions you have to express yourself very clearly to avoid mistakes for instance in a business contract or the diagnose from a doctor. So, as you can see writing in a precise language is often absolutely necessary and the basis for this is to comply the rules of spelling and grammar. Furthermore, there is also the question of style and aesthetic. For example if you would like to write an article which should be attractive to read, it is important that your text is written in a good language. So, you would probably rather choose a newspaper where sophisticated language is used than one which is written without points and commas. In summary, the short messages used in social media are a matter of time. Despite of this, in a lot of situations is a exact language essentially - and preferred. In my opinion there is no risk of a death of grammar spelling rules at all. But nevertheless are social networks and instant messengers often a reason why it is difficult for young children to learn how to write with grammar and spelling rules.

Essay: Should news be more objective than subjective? What is the main function of a newspaper? Hello guys, it would be very nice if someone can correct this essay. I'd like to practice writing in a good expression. Newspapers are for the most people the only source to get to know what happens in the world. But we are all aware of the fact that news are not fully objective. Is this a problem? First, for evaluating whether in news should be completely objective or if sometime also the opinion of the author should be included, it is important to clarify what the function of a newspaper is. As already written, the aim of the consumer is to inform himself about the current situation in the world. To guarantee this, it is necessary to give the information in an objective way because otherwise it would be influencing. Second, to write a profound and well researched article it is essentially to rate a certain circumstance. Thus the reader is not only informed about the rough facts but also about the consequences and the causes. Due to this, for the author it is really difficult to be non-objective. Additionally, for the consumer is it often interesting to see different perspectives of one topic. Therefore having newspapers with articles caused by the subjective views of the authors can be helpful. Surely, such an article should as well include reliable and true information. In conclusion, the aim of a newspaper should be at every time to inform the reader with true and objective facts. But to give a deeper view into a situation and show different perspectives, it is often also practical to argue with objective information in a subjective way.