In countries where there is a high rate of unemployment, most pupils should be offered only primary education. There is no point in offering secondary education to those who have no hope of finding a job.

It is correct that in countries that encountered with high unemployment rates, most pupils should be educated to make progress and so it is offered only primary education rather than secondary. While I agree with this situation, I think that this is not very reasonable choice, and I do not agree on this. Firstly, we cannot predict ontrend of workforce, it is desperately difficult. After fixed time one demand for workers replaces another in many systems depends on a country's economy. Prices are expensive, and it is important to be sophisticated changes on education system of students and to provide the needs of employers. For example, when technology is indicating to place instead agriculture, vehicleand hard industry, it is coming upon new job places in other sectors. Although we cannot account for workforce how many young people to be educated very well, it is very essential. Secondly, I confirm that there are a chance to make progress the knowledge of younger rather than further education. We should give priority the consolidated education to ensure the demands of life. Secondary school can enable young people to help on developing their way of life. If populations of a country are given feedback and concentrated to these problems relating to welfare or wealth can be considered, a country can be capable of solving these problems. In conclusion, although in today's mads economy, any country's employment ability is depend on changes, but real purposes of education show that young people should get secondary qualification at least. By Nuriddinova Farangiz