Some people thinkthat children should obey rules, while others argue that children who are controlled too much will not be well prepared for their adult life. Discussboth these views and give your own opinion.
学生原文：
The debate of whether children should actoraccording to the rules has deteriorates into invective and polemic. This ismainly caused by the future concerns as some people are worry about the poorabilities. From my perspective, I support the view that we should encouragechildren obey the law and respect the rules, then establish their own minds.
Conventional wisdom holds the stereotypethat rules serve as the paramount tools to cultivate children to be awell-rounded people and law-obey citizen. As children have insufficientabilities to distinguish between right and wrong. Faculties can teach childrenwith textbooks and educational programs to let them know the standards. Simultaneously,parental guide furnish children with abundant knowledge of morals and the boundaryline between right and wrong in daily life. Continuously, children who aredisciplinarian tend to be well-rounded people than the naughty group.
However, I argue that if children alwayslisten to the standards, obviously that they will weaken themselves in thelater life. For instance, those who never break the rules may devastate theircapabilities of issue-addressing and lack of a sense of competitive. Moreover,the requests will curb children’s creativity and enthusiasm to life as they arealways under the control and have no chance to explore themselves. This is notto say that we can disobey the rules. If only we act legally and respect therules can we kindle children’s appetite to figure out the unknown knowledge andtarget their own interesting.
In conclusion, I insist that be a law-obeypeople then be a excellent creator is the initially target of rules. All weneed to do is that to teach them laws and help them to sharpen their ownmindset.
小站教育老师批改后：
The debate of whether children should actoraccording to the rules has deteriorates into invective and polemic. This ismainly caused by the future concerns as some people are worry about the poorabilities. From my perspective, I support the view 【你支持这种观点，可是这种观点题目没有出现，不太妥当。直接说你的观点是什么就行】that we should encouragechildren (to) obey the law and respect the rules, then establish their own minds.
Conventional wisdom holds the stereotype that rules serve as the paramount tools to cultivate children to be awell-rounded people and law-obey citizen. As children have insufficientabilities to distinguish between right and wrong. Faculties can teach childrenwith textbooks and educational programs to let them know the standards. Simultaneously,parental guide furnish children with abundant knowledge of morals and the boundaryline between right and wrong in daily life. Continuously, children who aredisciplinarian tend to be well-rounded people than the naughty group. 【词语用的不错】
However, I argue 【不是你，而是其他人，这一段应该分析其他人的观点】that if children alwayslisten to the standards, obviously that they will weaken themselves in thelater life. For instance, those who never break the rules may devastate theircapabilities of issue-addressing and lack of a sense of competitive. (competition) Moreover,the requests will curb children’s creativity and enthusiasm to life as they arealways under the control and have no chance to explore themselves. This is notto say that we can disobey the rules. If only we act legally and respect therules can we kindle children’s appetite to figure out the unknown knowledge andtarget their own interesting.
In conclusion, I insist that be a law-obeypeople then be a excellent creator is the initially target of rules. All weneed to do is that to teach them laws and help them to sharpen their ownmindset.【中心论点很明确】
估分：5.5-6
评价：1.Discuss both these views and give your own opinion的思路是：先把题目中两者人的观点都分析一遍，这里面不涉及你自己的任何内容。
其次开始慢慢向你的观点过渡，比如：你同意第一种人的观点，那你就要阐述第二种观点的顾虑怎么可以解决。千万不能直接点出自己的观点，那样太突兀。
2.文章的一些表达要更准确，包括词语的用法。
