Critical reasoning — abolishing annual examinations up to Standard V: Should all yearly exams up to Class V be abolished, considering that young learners' natural growth may be hampered by such burdens, while also weighing the concern that automatic promotions could make students less serious about studies and harm their future preparedness?

Given data

• Statement: Abolish all annual examinations up to Std. V?
• Argument I (Yes): Exams burden very young students and may hamper natural growth.
• Argument II (No): Without exams (and with automatic promotion), students may not study seriously, affecting their future.

Concept/Approach (evaluate each argument on relevance, logical support, and prudence)
An argument is strong if it is directly relevant to the statement, non-trivial, and practically significant without relying on extreme assumptions.

Step 1: Assess Argument I
It highlights age-appropriateness and child development. Excessive evaluation stress at early ages can affect holistic growth—this is a logical, education-psychology–aligned concern.

Step 2: Assess Argument II
It warns of an incentive effect: automatic promotion may reduce study effort and harm long-term learning habits. This is also a reasonable and relevant policy concern.

Step 3: Synthesis
Both I and II raise distinct, policy-relevant, non-contradictory points (well-being vs. academic seriousness). Together they motivate a balanced approach rather than outright abolition without safeguards.

Common pitfalls
Do not assume that a strong "Yes" argument invalidates a strong "No" argument; in policy questions, multiple strong considerations can coexist.

Final Answer
Both I and II are strong.