Some people believe that children can learn from TV effectively, so children should be encouraged to watch TV regularly both at home and at school. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
题目大意
一些人认为孩子可以从电视有效地学习，所以孩子应该被鼓励在家和在学校有规律的看电视。在多大程度上同意或不同意？
思路解析
小孩子有应不应该被鼓励在学校和家里有规律看电视，如果这个我是这个小朋友一定会支持哈哈，电视它不香么。不过作为正经的雅思写作，我们还是要来看下“通过看电视学习”的利弊到底有哪些。
首先，我们来看下好处。
1. 电视有丰富的图像和声音，这些相比书本其实更能吸引孩子的注意，孩子注意力集中后更容易吸收相关知识信息。
2. 电视上有更丰富的节目形式，能够提升孩子兴趣度的同时，给孩子呈现更多的知识内容，或者从不同的角度来讲解对某个事物的看法。（这点对任何人都一样）。比如《小猪佩奇》包含了基本的英语表达、《我在故宫修文物》展现了很多文物的相关知识，还有很多同类型动画片、纪录片或者其它节目，都是可以起到这样的作用。
那这样做的坏处是什么呢？大家可以回忆下小时候看电视时候爸妈的唠叨。
1. 过多的看电视会对视力有不好的影响，而且会导致孩子花更少的时间在运动上，进而缺乏运动。
2. 孩子本身缺乏自控力和判断力，因此太多的电视节目同样也可能分散学生的注意力，或者包含很多没有学习价值的信息，进而干扰到学生的学习。
3. 学生在阅读一本书的时候，书是不会“说话”的，所以需要通过思考和理解来吸收里面的知识，这本身也是一种锻炼的过程。但电视会非常具象的把画面直接呈现给受众，这样反而限制了受众想象力和缺少了锻炼想象力的机会。比如，当我们在看哈利波特这本书时，每个人对霍格沃兹的想象可能都不一样，但如果我们看了电影，那我们脑海中的霍格沃兹可能就永远是电影中的样子。
我们回到这道题目本身。当题目是讨论一种人们的普遍 "观点"。问同意或不同意时，我们写作需要给出清晰的立场，建议使用倾向型或完全一边倒结构。
如果你是持反对观点的，那么还有一个点可以切入，那就是题目观点中的“regularly”，具体到底是多少。多久一次？一次多少时间？因为对于小孩子来说，几乎每天不是在家里就是在学校。如果对这个频率没有明确的定义话，那我们又如何知道这个观点是否合理呢？
提纲
范文示例
In spite of the fact that the world is undergoing various changes in recent years, education remains one of the most heatedly discussed issues, especially the one related to the appropriate approach of teaching. There are some people who contend that as children can achieve high efficiency in learning through watching television, they should access the TV programme both at home and school. Personally, I can't entirely agree with this opinion.
First of all, assuming that children can actually learn effectively from TV, which would be doubted subsequently, this will adversely affect children's physical development, by which I mean children should not be persuaded to watch TV regularly both at home and outside. On the one hand, although the topic does not give a clear frequency for the term of regularity, considering that family life and school life almost occupy the whole time of a child, watching TV too often will definitely impair the immature retina of children and eventually lead to pseudomyopia. Meanwhile, in the process of watching TV, children would need to be sedentary, which leads to the lack of outdoor exercise, which is extremely unfavourable to the physical conditions of children.
Admittedly，it is acknowledged that TV education programs, full of vivid pictures and various sound effects, can really attract children. In other words，according to the characteristics of children's psychological development in childhood, they would prefer vivid colours and diverse forms of teaching methods，which may arouse their learning motivation and enthusiasm. However，what should be mentioned here is that the programs on TV are actually diverse, and there are even many programs that are not suitable for children to watch, such as movies involving pornographic and violent plots, or other cartoons that no relationships with instructive meaning. If parents and schools do not effectively screen the selection, watching TV for children is more interference in learning than the effects that suppose to be brought about. Besides，another reason why watching TV should be persuaded is that using TV as a way of learning may substantially undermine children's imagination. To imagine something requires the ability to figure out concertized,that is to say, the more presentative the input is, the more imagination one would be trained to develop. However, once the television gives too much concrete information, it is difficult for children to have the opportunities to exercise imagination, by which I mean too concrete interpretation to the utterance would be seen as the confine of mentality, since conventional thinking would be fostered when one is injected too much with visualized inputs.
In conclusion，it seems to me that watching TV is just a teaching method which is really emerged and children should not be permitted to watch regularly as the effectiveness of this means is quite questionable. Besides, this learning approach should be applied sensitively under the guidance of parents and teachers.
