|More and more young people from wealthy countries are spending a short time doing unpaid work such as teaching or building houses for communities in poorer countries. Why young people choose to do so? Who will benefit more: young people or the communities?|
Volunteering at third-world communities has been a trend among the youth from the developing countries. There are some underlying reasons for this and I believe that the local communities gain more benefits than the volunteers themselves. Perhaps experience is the main contribution to this phenomenon.
People who volunteer tend to seek for the valuable skills and knowledge. In addition, they can get the opportunities to form some interpersonal relationships, which might be a huge advantage for their future career. Furthermore, as a volunteer leader, a young person would gain the adequacy to express one’s idea and connect with people who have the same perspectives to bring it into reality. Finally, young volunteering can be attributable to fulfillment. Volunteers seem to enjoy the feeling that they are to some extent making the contribution to help poor people. Besides, the bonding activities bring a lot of fun and create a cozy atmosphere between the wellintended participations and local people.
Turning to the positive effects on the host communities. Firstly, the developing countries receive the intense amount of human resource to support the local projects. For example, they can be deployed to constructing house and schools for the poor people or in rural areas. Furthermore, volunteering plays a pivotal role in the recovery effort in the response to natural disasters such as tsunamis, floods, and droughts. For instance, the 2004 Indian tsunami and earthquake attract a large number of volunteers to support the host organizations and government. Finally, voluntary activities can reduce stereotypes, increase appreciation of the local culture and on the worldwide level, the education activities accelerate the globalization process.
In conclusion, although the growing number of young volunteers is attributable to the great advantages they would gain for their life, I firmly believe that the host communities benefit more from this phenomenon.
|In many countries, children are engaged in some kind of paid work. Some people regard this as completely wrong, while others consider it as valuable work experience, important for learning and taking responsibility. What are your opinions on this issue?|
The development of communities requires the vibrant energy of young blood. There are many volunteer programs, in most communities, where the young utilize their vigour for the good of men. But, to ascertain the involvement of the young adult in community development, I believe monetary incentives should be there.
It is true that one should not wait for material advantages before trying to contribute to his society. The drive for helping others should be an integral part of one’s moral integrity. But too often the modern man is compelled to shun that which is moral and embrace what is beneficial materially, directly, and to himself. Aside from the weakness of character shown in such cases, by man, often his morality succumbs to the rising need for sustaining oneself independently. Ages ago the youth was spared from such desperation, by the cooperative social structure of then. But now, every adult is out on his own. So, to neutralize the economic pressure blocking the adult young from participating in community development, the people should arrange for them monetary incentives. That way they can sustain themselves and the community at the same time.
A more practical perspective may tell us that today’s age is really not so much compatible with volunteering. In many developed countries, even the police force is run profitably. And CSR of profit motivated enterprises has started replacing non-profit philanthropy. So to expect adults, young or not, to volunteer for community development is only cacophony amidst the modern melody of social building and maintenance. In the end, though, a conclusion to this argument relies on circumstantial judgement, and balancing of individual and social interests. While money will motivate a permanent source of energy for developing communities, youths should not wait for a cost benefit analysis before saving a community in dire straits.
The idea of businesses having children as employees has been highly contentious across various nations. While I accept that such an early involvement in working activities can be harmful to children’s development in certain ways, I believe that it could benefit them as long as the work is adequate. On the one hand, using child labour obviously imposes an imminent threat to some extent. In particular, some children need to carry some hazardous activities at work such as working under harsh conditions, carrying overly heavy items or being exposed to dangerous chemical materials. Undoubtedly, this puts them at risk for some serious diseases and injuries. For example, it was a common scene at tile factories that a number of boys were being forced to work under extreme heat, as well as come in contact with poisonous substances, which can damage their respiratory systems.
On the other hand, I personally support those businesses, which offer them with valuable experiences to stimulate their personal development. In fact, it enables them to practice a wide range of necessary skills in their transition into adulthood. For instance, a child who works as a waiter or waitress in Mc Donald’s is likely to learn to bear greater responsibility, which contributes enormously to his future employment. Moreover, working to earn their own money encourages them to be more economical. In other words, their skill of financial management can be enhanced.
In conclusion, while in some cases, children’s engagement in work may hinder their personal development, I would argue that some businesses are offering them a valuable chance to gain essential skills and earn pocket money simultaneously.
|Some people believe that unpaid community service should be a compulsory part of high school programmes (for example working for a charity, improving the neighborhood or teaching sports to younger children). To what extent do you agree or disagree?|
Some people think that free social activities should be a mandatory part of high school programs. While students who take part in these activities may face some unexpected issues, I agree that educators should design required community services for their high school students without any payments.
On the one hand, the most considerable trouble affects students when participating in public activities is the shortage of time. Particularly, they may be less focused on their core lessons in class, even lack leisure time because of spending too much time for community services. Besides, there are obligatory services which do not suit to everyone. For example, working for a charity at mountainous places or suburban areas requires students to have to go far away or teaching sports to younger children at outdoor stadium demands a good health. All of these types of work do not fit to the weak girls or unhealthy students.
On the other hand, attending unpaid public services will bring great benefits to high school students. Firstly, these programs create a positive environment for students to be raised in a holistic way, not only improving their social knowledge but also motivate their perception about the outdoor life. This is really an appropriate method to train them on how to work for the interest of community instead of living only for themselves. Secondly, taking part in public activities such as volunteer campaigns and charity organizations is a highlighted point which makes their resume brilliant. If an applicant who has the same qualification, as well as experiences with other candidates, would like to apply for a scholarship or a competitive job, his past activities for the interest of community may make an outstanding contribution in helping him defeat the others.
In conclusion, although there are some disadvantages, it seems to me that we should design more unpaid obligatory community programs for high school students.
It is agreed that students should partake in unpaid community service as a mandatory part of their curriculum in high schools. I believe this opinion is reasonable based on many factors.
Firstly, through serving the community freely, teenagers can be grown up beyond our imagination. When working voluntarily, students learn how to solve an unexpected problem without the instructions from their teachers or parents. As a result, they are able to be more independent rather than the period they learn academic knowledge at school. Moreover, teenagers involving in community service volunteer to complete the required tasks. Because they think that they are contributing to develop their own society and their actions have impacts on other’s lives, they are motivated to finish all the workload. Therefore, they become more responsible for all the works they will attend in the future.
Secondly, partaking in unpaid community service boasts a myriad of personal benefits. If students serve the community without payment, especially working for a charity, they will have a chance to meet different people, many of whom are orphans, disabled children or the elderly in nursing homes. Therefore, they are more empathetic for other’s destiny. Besides, the value of labor is perceived by students when they perform the work without payment, they feel deeper gratitude to the labor result. For example, many teenagers born in a full materialistic condition tend to waste their time and money on useless things. If schools require them to engage in unpaid community service, they will know how hard is it to complete the work and what the meaningful life is, which leads to the fact that they can study more diligently.
In conclusion, I am strong of the view that doing unpaid work can be advantageous for students and the high school should consider putting it in the curriculum as a compulsory part.