Argumentative Essay

The five-paragraph argumentative essay is a common format used to present and support an argument or
claim. It consists of five paragraphs, each serving a specific purpose and contributing to the overall
structure of the essay. Here is the typical format of a five-paragraph argumentative essay:
Title:
Write a catchy title to attract the attention of your readers.
Introduction:

Hook: Start with an attention-grabbing statement, question, or anecdote to engage the reader.
Background information: Provide context and necessary background information about the topic.
Thesis statement: Present a clear and concise statement that expresses your argument or claim.
Body Paragraph 1:

Topic sentence: Introduce the main point or supporting argument that reinforces your thesis statement.
Explanation: Provide detailed explanations, evidence, and examples to support your argument.
Transition: Connect the current paragraph to the next one.
Body Paragraph 2:

Topic sentence: Introduce the second main point or supporting argument.

Explanation: Present supporting evidence and examples to strengthen your argument.
Counterargument: Acknowledge and address a potential opposing viewpoint or counterargument.
Refutation: Refute the counterargument and explain why it is flawed or not as strong as your own
position.
Transition: Connect the current paragraph to the next one.
Body Paragraph 3:

Topic sentence: Introduce the third main point or supporting argument.

Explanation: Provide supporting evidence and examples to further bolster your argument.
Counterargument: Address another potential opposing viewpoint or counterargument.
Refutation: Refute the counterargument and explain why it is invalid or less persuasive.
Transition: Connect the current paragraph to the conclusion.
Conclusion:

Restate thesis: Recapitulate your thesis statement, emphasizing the main argument or claim.
Summarize main points: Provide a brief summary of the main points discussed in the body paragraphs.
Closing thoughts: Conclude with a thought-provoking statement, call to action, or implication of your
argument.
Final remarks: Leave the reader with a lasting impression and encourage further consideration of the
topic
Samples
c) Should Bhutanese youth be encouraged to leave their homes at the age of 18 so as
to make them responsible and independent individuals? (BHSEC,2019

Pattern 3:
Thesis statement:
CON idea 1 -----> Refutation
CON idea 2 -----> Refutation
CON idea 3 -----> Refutation
Conclusion

Title: The Importance of Encouraging Bhutanese Youth to Stay at Home: Fostering Responsibility and
Independence

Introduction:

(Hook) Bhutan, a country known for its unique Gross National Happiness index, places a high value on
the well-being and development of its citizens. (Background)One question that arises is whether
Bhutanese youth should be encouraged to leave their homes at the age of 18 to foster responsibility and
independence. (Con Ideas 1.2.3)However, it is argued that encouraging youth to stay at home can
deprive them of an independent life, supportive environment for their growth and development, and do
not encourage them to be financially self-reliant individuals.(Thesis cum taking a stand) Since I do not
agree with this view, I will present a rational rebuttal against the idea of pushing Bhutanese youth to
leave their homes.
CON idea 1 - Lack of Independence:

(Point)One common concern is that Bhutanese youth may struggle to develop independence if they
remain at home. (Evidence) However, it is important to recognize that independence is not solely
dependent on physical separation from the home environment. (Explain)Independence can be nurtured
through various means, such as encouraging youth to take on responsibilities within the or engaging in
community activities. (Link)By actively involving youth in decision-making processes, they can develop
crucial life household skills while still benefiting from the support and guidance of their families.

CON idea 2 - Limited Exposure to the Real World:

Another argument against Bhutanese youth staying at home is that they may have limited exposure to
the real world. However, this perspective overlooks the potential for diverse experiences within their
own communities. Bhutan is a country with rich cultural traditions and a strong sense of community. By
encouraging youth to explore their own cultural heritage, engage with local organizations, and
participate in community service initiatives, they can gain a deeper understanding of the real world
while remaining rooted in their own cultural identity.

CON idea 3 - Delayed Financial Independence:

Critics suggest that Bhutanese youth who remain at home may be delayed in achieving financial
independence. However, financial independence is a multifaceted concept that extends beyond leaving
home at a specific age. Rather than pushing youth into unfamiliar environments prematurely, families
can provide guidance and support in developing financial literacy and skills. This can be achieved
through discussions about money management, savings, and encouraging part-time employment
opportunities. By empowering youth with financial knowledge, they can make informed decisions about
their future while benefiting from a stable foundation.

Conclusion:
(Restatement of thesis) Encouraging Bhutanese youth to stay at home beyond the age of 18 can provide
numerous advantages in their personal growth and development. (Summary of para 2,3,4)The concerns
raised about the lack of independence, limited exposure to the real world, and delayed financial
independence can be effectively addressed within the supportive family and community structures that
Bhutanese society offers. The youth have to be given platform in decision-making processes, exposing
them to diverse experiences within their communities, and providing guidance in financial matters.
(Closing thoughts)Thus, Bhutan can foster responsible and independent individuals who are equipped to
contribute positively to their society. (Final remarks) It is through this balance of support and
encouragement that Bhutanese youth can truly thrive.

c) Parents should not interfere in their children’s career choices. (BHSEC,2020)

Parents should not interfere in their children’s career choices

The question of parental involvement in their children's career choices is a contentious one. While
parents often have the best intentions at heart, interfering in their children's career decisions can have
negative consequences. In this essay, we will explore the reasons why parents should not interfere in
their children's career choices. By allowing children the freedom to explore their own interests and make
independent decisions, they can gain valuable experiences and develop the necessary skills to succeed in
their chosen path.

One compelling argument against parental interference in career choices is the importance of personal
growth and self-discovery. Each individual has unique talents, passions, and aspirations. By allowing
children the freedom to explore different career options, they can discover their true interests and
aptitudes. Through this process, they gain a better understanding of their strengths and weaknesses,
enabling them to make informed decisions about their future. Parental interference may limit the child's
exploration and hinder their ability to develop a sense of self-identity and purpose. Some may argue that
parents have more life experience and can provide valuable guidance in career choices. They may argue
that children lack the necessary knowledge and foresight to make informed decisions. While parental
guidance is essential, it is crucial to strike a balance between providing advice and allowing children to
make their own choices. By giving children the freedom to explore their interests, parents can support
them in their journey towards self-discovery.

Another crucial aspect to consider is the development of resilience and responsibility. When children are
allowed to make their own career choices, they learn to take ownership of their decisions and face the
consequences, whether positive or negative. This process builds resilience and helps them develop
problem-solving skills, adaptability, and perseverance. Shielding children from failure by dictating their
career choices deprives them of these valuable life lessons, which are essential for personal and
professional growth. Opponents may argue that parents have a duty to protect their children from
making mistakes that could have long-lasting consequences. However, it is important to distinguish
between major life-altering decisions and minor setbacks. Parents can still provide emotional support
and guidance without imposing their own aspirations on their children. Allowing children to navigate
their own career path does not mean abandoning them; rather, it empowers them to become self-reliant
individuals.

One of the primary reasons children should have autonomy in career choices is the pursuit of passion
and personal fulfillment. When individuals are passionate about their work, they are more likely to be
motivated, dedicated, and successful in their chosen field. By imposing their own desires on their
children, parents may inadvertently push them into careers that do not align with their interests, resulting
in dissatisfaction and unhappiness. Allowing children to follow their passion ensures that they have a
higher chance of finding fulfillment and leading fulfilling lives. Detractors may argue that practical
considerations, such as financial stability, should outweigh personal passion. While financial stability is
undoubtedly important, it should not be the sole determining factor in career decisions. Parents can
encourage their children to explore ways of aligning their passions with practicality, rather than dictating
their choices outright. By offering support and guidance, parents can help children strike a balance
between their passions and practical considerations.
In conclusion, parents should refrain from interfering in their children's career choices. By doing so,
children are given the opportunity to grow personally, discover their true interests, and develop
important life skills. They learn resilience and responsibility and are more likely to find fulfillment in
their chosen path. While parental guidance is essential, it should be offered in a supportive manner,
respecting the autonomy of the child. Ultimately, by allowing children to make their own career
decisions, parents empower them to lead successful and fulfilling lives.

b) Slow and steady does not win the race in today’s world.(BHSEC, 2018)

Slow and Steady Does Not Win the Race in Today's World

In today's fast-paced world, the adage "slow and steady wins the race" seems outdated. With
advancements in technology and fierce competition, it is argued that a slow and steady approach is no
longer effective. While there may be merits to a steady pace in certain contexts, this essay aims to
present arguments and counterarguments regarding why slow and steady does not guarantee success in
today's world.

One of the primary reasons why slow and steady does not win the race in today's world is the rapid pace
of technological advancements. In this digital age, industries are evolving swiftly, and those who are
slow to adapt risk being left behind. Companies that embrace innovation and rapidly implement new
technologies gain a competitive edge over their competitors. For instance, in the field of e-commerce,
businesses that prioritize seamless online experiences, quick delivery, and efficient customer service
often outperform their slower counterparts. In this context, speed and agility are crucial for success.
Some may argue that a slow and steady approach ensures quality and attention to detail, which can lead
to long-term success. They claim that rushing into adopting new technologies without proper evaluation
may result in costly mistakes or compromised product/service quality. However, it is important to note
that the ability to adapt quickly and make informed decisions in a fast-paced environment is equally
essential to seize emerging opportunities.

In today's interconnected world, global markets are highly competitive. Slow and steady progress often
means falling behind competitors who are more proactive and agile. The rise of startups and disruptive
business models exemplifies this phenomenon. Startups, fueled by innovation and a willingness to take
risks, can swiftly gain market share and challenge established players. They disrupt traditional industries
by offering faster, more efficient solutions. Established companies that fail to respond promptly to such
challenges can find themselves struggling to catch up. Opponents may argue that slow and steady
progress can be more sustainable, as it allows for careful planning, market research, and strategic
decision-making. They contend that rushing into new ventures without a solid foundation may lead to
costly failures. While there is merit in cautious planning, the ability to balance calculated risk-taking and
timely execution is crucial to capitalize on market opportunities and gain an advantage in today's
competitive landscape. Consumer preferences and expectations are evolving rapidly in today's world.
The rise of social media and instant communication has given consumers more power and influence.
They demand quick responses, personalized experiences, and constant innovation. Slow and steady
approaches can fail to meet these expectations and result in loss of market share. Companies that
understand and adapt to changing consumer needs, offering fast and convenient solutions, are more
likely to succeed. Critics may argue that slow and steady progress can lead to better product
development and customer satisfaction. They claim that rushing to meet consumer demands may result
in subpar products or services. While it is essential to ensure quality, businesses must strike a balance by
leveraging customer feedback, embracing agility, and continuously improving their offerings to stay
relevant and competitive.
In conclusion, the notion that slow and steady wins the race has lost its relevance in today's world. The
rapid pace of technological advancements, global market competition, and changing consumer
preferences necessitate a more agile and proactive approach. While there may be instances where a slow
and steady approach is appropriate, in most cases, embracing speed and adaptability is crucial for
success. To thrive in the current environment, individuals and organizations must be prepared to
embrace change, take calculated risks, and leverage the advantages that a fast-paced world offers.

Question: Are the teachers of NCS fair to their students?

Unveiling the Inequity

Fairness is a fundamental principle that should be upheld in every educational institution. As American
author and educator John Holt once said, "Fairness does not mean everyone gets the same. Fairness
means everyone gets what they need." However, when it comes to Norbugang Central School and its
teachers, it is evident that fairness is not a priority. Students at this school are subjected to biased and
unjust treatment, which hinders their academic growth and overall well-being. Despite potential
counterarguments, the lack of fairness in the actions and attitudes of Norbugang Central School teachers
cannot be ignored.

Firstly, one prominent aspect that highlights the unfairness of Norbugang Central School teachers is
their unequal distribution of attention and resources. Teachers tend to favor certain students, providing
them with more opportunities, attention, and resources while neglecting others. This creates an
environment where some students feel neglected and overlooked, leading to a decline in their motivation
and performance. Even though proponents of the school's teachers may argue that this uneven
distribution is based on merit, it fails to recognize the potential in students who are not favored and
denies them the chance to thrive academically.

Additionally, another issue that demonstrates the unfairness of Norbugang Central School teachers is
their biased grading system. It is disheartening to witness teachers favoring certain students and granting
them higher grades, not based on their actual performance, but rather on personal preferences or biases.
This unfair grading system not only creates a sense of injustice among students but also fails to prepare
them for future challenges where their abilities and skills will be assessed objectively. Instead of
fostering an environment of healthy competition and equal opportunities, the teachers perpetuate a
system that undermines the principles of fairness and hinders the growth and development of their
students.

Furthermore, the lack of fairness in the treatment of students is evident in the discipline measures
employed by Norbugang Central School teachers. Instead of addressing behavioral issues impartially,
teachers often resort to subjective punishments, often depending on their personal relationships with the
students involved. This arbitrary approach undermines the principles of fairness and fails to promote a
sense of accountability among students. It also creates a toxic atmosphere where students perceive
favoritism, leading to resentment and a breakdown in trust between the students and their teachers.

Opponents may argue that fairness is subjective and that different teachers may have different
approaches to maintaining discipline. However, it is essential to recognize that fairness, in its essence,
should be consistent and unbiased. It should provide equal opportunities and treatment to all students,
regardless of their backgrounds or personal relationships with teachers. By employing a fair and just
approach to discipline, Norbugang Central School teachers can create a supportive and nurturing
environment that encourages students to learn and grow.
In conclusion, fairness is a vital principle that should be the cornerstone of any educational institution.
Unfortunately, Norbugang Central School and its teachers fail to uphold this principle. The unequal
distribution of attention and resources, biased grading systems, and arbitrary discipline measures all
contribute to the overall lack of fairness experienced by the students. It is essential for the school
administration to address these issues and ensure that the teachers are accountable for their actions,
promoting an environment where fairness is prioritized, and every student can thrive academically and
personally. As John Holt rightly stated, "Fairness means everyone gets what they need." It is high time
that Norbugang Central School and its teachers embraced this notion and strive to create a fair and
equitable learning environment for all students.

a) Students studying in boarding schools are more independent and self-sufficient than the

ones studying in day schools.(BHSEC, 2016)

Becoming Independent and Self-Reliant

Boarding schools are known for helping students become independent and self-sufficient. Some people
say that day schools can also nurture independence, but it's clear that the unique living arrangements and
immersive experiences in boarding schools offer special chances for personal growth. In this essay, we
will look at why students in boarding schools tend to be more independent and self-sufficient than those
in day schools.

Some people argue that day schools can also teach independence by offering extracurricular activities
and personal development opportunities. But we need to consider the big difference between boarding
schools and day schools. Living on campus, away from home and family, makes students adapt and take
responsibility for their daily routines, like managing schedules and doing chores. This self-reliance
fosters independence as students learn to make decisions and manage time effectively.

Another argument is that day schools can teach independence by letting students have after-school jobs
or volunteer work. These activities can definitely help personal growth, but they often happen separately
from academics. In boarding schools, though, the whole community works together, encouraging
students to be involved in different aspects of school life. They can join student-run clubs and take on
leadership roles in student governments. By doing this, boarding school students gain practical
experience in working together, being responsible, and solving problems, which helps them become
independent and self-sufficient.
Some people might say that boarding schools have strict rules that hinder students' independence. But
they miss the point behind these rules. Boarding schools provide a structured environment where
students can thrive and learn to manage their lives effectively. By setting clear expectations and
guidelines, boarding schools create a supportive yet disciplined atmosphere that helps students develop
self-discipline, organizational skills, and a sense of personal responsibility.
Day schools offer valuable chances for personal growth, but the unique living arrangements and
immersive experiences in boarding schools make them especially effective in fostering independence
and self-sufficiency among students. The immersive environment allows students to develop important
life skills, adaptability, and the ability to make independent decisions. By actively participating in a
community that supports personal growth and teaches responsibility, boarding school students gain an
advantage in becoming independent and self-sufficient individuals. Therefore, boarding schools are an
ideal choice for students seeking a comprehensive education that nurtures independence and self-
sufficiency.

c) Examinations do not test the ability of a child. (BHSEC,2017)

Examinations Fail to Test the True Abilities of Children

Examinations have long been a staple of the education system, intended to assess a student's knowledge
and understanding of various subjects. However, it is increasingly recognized that examinations do not
effectively gauge a child's true abilities. This essay will discuss the limitations of examinations as an
accurate measure of a child's capabilities.

One of the main arguments in favor of examinations is that they provide a standardized way to evaluate
students' knowledge. Proponents argue that exams assess a child's ability to recall and apply information,
demonstrating their understanding of the subject matter. However, this overlooks the fact that
examinations predominantly focus on memorization and regurgitation of facts rather than encouraging
critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Thus, exams fail to capture the full range of a child's
abilities beyond mere memorization.

Another common argument is that examinations prepare children for real-world situations where they
will face assessments and deadlines. While it is true that examinations can instill a sense of discipline
and time management, the reality is that the format and structure of exams often do not mirror real-
world challenges. In the professional world, success is not solely dependent on memorization or the
ability to answer multiple-choice questions within a set time limit. Real-life situations demand
adaptability, creativity, and collaboration, skills that are not adequately tested through traditional exams.

Critics of this view might contend that exams provide a fair and unbiased method of evaluation, as all
students are subjected to the same conditions. However, this argument fails to account for the diverse
learning styles and abilities of individual children. Examinations primarily favor those who excel at rote
memorization and regurgitation, neglecting the talents and potential of students who may have different
strengths, such as creative thinking, practical skills, or emotional intelligence. Consequently, exams
create an incomplete picture of a child's abilities and can lead to an underestimation of their true
potential.
While examinations have long been a cornerstone of education, they fall short in accurately assessing a
child's abilities. The emphasis on memorization and regurgitation neglects critical thinking and problem-
solving skills, which are vital in the real world. Moreover, exams fail to account for individual
differences and can limit a child's potential by favoring specific learning styles. To foster a more
comprehensive evaluation of a child's abilities, alternative assessment methods that focus on practical
application and continuous evaluation should be embraced. By doing so, we can ensure a more equitable
and accurate representation of a child's true potential in our education system.

a) Is free education one of the factors responsible for unemployment of youth today? (BHSEC,2020)

The Complicated Connection Between Free Education and Youth Unemployment

Youth unemployment is a big problem in today's globalized world. Some people say that free education
is one of the reasons why many young people can't find jobs. But if we look closer, we can see that the
relationship between free education and youth unemployment is more complicated than that. While free
education has some drawbacks, its benefits are much greater than any negative

One downside of free education is that it can lead to too many graduates competing for jobs. When
education is free, more people can go to college or university, which means there are more graduates.
But this isn't the main reason for youth unemployment. The real issue is that the skills learned in
education often don't match what the job market needs. This happens because students don't always get
the right career guidance, the curriculum is outdated, and the job market is always changing. So, it's not
fair to blame free education alone for unemployment because there are other important factors involved.

Another downside of free education is that it might make students less motivated and discourage
entrepreneurship. Critics argue that when education is free, students might not take it seriously and lack
the drive to do well. But this argument ignores the power of personal ambition and motivation. Even if
education is free, individuals still want to succeed. In fact, free education can actually help aspiring
entrepreneurs by giving them the knowledge and skills they need to start their own businesses. We
should remember that entrepreneurship depends on many factors, not just the cost of education.

A third downside of free education is that it puts a strain on government resources and limits investment
in other areas. Providing free education does cost money, and this means governments might have to
take funds away from other things. But this argument doesn't consider the long-term benefits of
investing in education. When people are well-educated, it boosts the economy by promoting innovation,
increasing productivity, and reducing poverty. Additionally, countries that prioritize education often
attract investments from other countries and create a skilled workforce that can support different
industries. So, while there might be short-term limitations, free education can lead to sustainable
economic growth.

Although some people think that free education contributes to youth unemployment, a closer look
reveals that the relationship is more complicated. Blaming free education alone oversimplifies the issue
and ignores other important factors that contribute to unemployment. Instead of demonizing free
education, we should focus on improving career guidance, aligning education with the job market, and
investing in vocational training programs. Free education is important for giving everyone a chance to
succeed and promoting equality. It empowers individuals to pursue their dreams and contributes to long-
term economic development.