Чтение и письмо: эссе с двумя сторонами (whereas, therefore)

Should schools abolish homework?
Few topics divide parents and teachers as sharply as homework. Supporters see it as essential practice; opponents see it as stress without benefit. This essay considers both positions before reaching a conclusion.
Those in favour of abolishing homework make two main points. First, the evidence for its benefit in primary schools is weak: a widely cited review of 180 studies found almost no link between homework and achievement for children under eleven. A case in point is Finland, whose pupils have among the lightest homework loads in Europe and among the highest results. Second, homework widens inequality. Whereas some children have a quiet desk and a parent who can help, others do not; the same task, therefore, rewards circumstances rather than effort.
On the other hand, those who defend homework argue that it builds habits which matter later. Although the effect is small at primary level, it grows steadily through secondary school, where the same review found a clear benefit for older pupils. Furthermore, homework is often the only regular link between school and home: it shows parents what their children are learning. Critics who point to Finland, it could be argued, overlook the fact that Finnish teachers are more highly trained and classes are smaller — the light homework load is a result of that system, not its cause.
In my view, the disagreement is really about age and design rather than homework itself. Given that the benefit is weak for young children and real for teenagers, it follows that primary schools should set little or none, while secondary schools should set homework that is short, purposeful and marked. Despite the strength of feeling on both sides, this is a conclusion that most teachers and parents could, on balance, accept.