Some people argue that young people should concentrate on study or work, some people think it is better to put energy in activities designed to broaden their experiences, such as international travel and volunteering. Support with examples or cases.
A.I. Score
Each colour is one skill. Tap a colour to hide it. Tap it again to show it.
Debate persists over whether young people should prioritise formal study or employment, or invest time in experience-building activities such as travel and volunteering. While disciplined education and early careers create credentials and income, I argue that structured experiential activities deserve significant emphasis alongside work or study, because they develop transferable skills and informed career choices.
Focusing on study or work offers clear advantages. Academic training builds foundational knowledge, and continuous employment cultivates reliability and technical competence. For example, apprenticeships in engineering combine theory with supervised practice, enabling graduates to progress efficiently and contribute productively, which is particularly important for students from limited financial backgrounds.
However, activities designed to broaden experience can be equally, if not more, valuable. International travel exposes young adults to diverse cultures, enhancing adaptability and communication, while volunteering builds civic responsibility and leadership. A graduate who volunteers abroad may return with language skills and resilience that employers value and may also make wiser educational or career decisions.
Overall, an exclusive focus on either path is limiting. Young people benefit most when rigorous study or work is complemented by purposeful experiential learning. By balancing credentials with broadened perspectives, societies cultivate capable, reflective citizens who are prepared for complex labour markets and responsible global participation.
- Fully addresses the prompt in depth, showing full command of the argument by reformulating the issue in the writer's own words and expanding important points with specificity.
- The argument is supported convincingly with subsidiary points and relevant examples throughout the response.
- Has an effective logical structure, flows smoothly, and can be followed with ease.
- The argument is clear and cohesive and developed systematically at length; a well-developed introduction and conclusion are present, and ideas are organised cohesively into clear, logically sequenced paragraphs.
- Uses a variety of connective devices effectively and consistently to convey relationships between ideas.
- A variety of expressions and vocabulary are used appropriately to formulate ideas with ease and precision throughout the response.
- No signs of limitations restricting what can be communicated.
- Errors in language use, if present, are rare and minor, and meaning is completely clear.
- Shows consistent grammatical control of complex language. Errors are rare and difficult to spot.
- Good command of a broad lexical repertoire, idiomatic expressions and collocations.
- Correct spelling.
- Length is within the required 200 to 300 words.