Some people think that schools should reward students who show the best academic results, while others believe that it is more important to reward students who show improvements. Discuss both

Sample 1:

Offering rewards to good scorers is one of incentive programs which schools often launch after examination to motivate students. However, there is a suggestion that moderate achievers are worth being encouraged for their own endeavor, instead of straight A students. From my point of view, young learners, in any circumstance, should be deserved well as long as they are improving little by little.

The first reason is that this may cause mental illness to lower achievers, if their efforts are unappreciated. For example, a student is likely to suffer from negative mood such as feeling inferior or envious when he realizes that no matter how he attempts, he is just like a runner-up in tournaments. Therefore, it is necessary to pay compliments as well as monetary rewards to students even though their achievements are junior. Not only will this inspire learners to be more creative in their studies, but also it creates equity in schools where each personal value needs acknowledging.

On the other hand, without incentive grants for high scorers, they would lack motivation to step further as a foreseen outcome. In the long run, this may lead to brain drain referring to the emigration of intellectuals to other nations for better study environment. Apart from these, praising high scorers is the positive way to set shining examples for weaker students, which nurtures healthy competition in today schools. As a result, unless they do their best, they would find it hard to keep up with their peers.

In conclusion, I contend that any personal improvement, if modest, should be appreciated. More importantly, giving rewards needs to be due and well-prepared in order that each receiver realizes they should move forward, rather than being satisfied with achievements recorded.