Schools should teach children the academic subjects which have a close relationship with their future careers, so other subjects like music and sports are not important. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is assumed that, children should be taught solely academic subjects that could be useful in the long run working progress, which leads extra-cirricular activities to be removed. This essay completely disagrees with aforementioned viewpoint and states that not all children were born to be academics or professors in special subjects and they might have an innate talent for other extra subjects such as music and sports. First and foremost, every child looks at his/her future job from different perspectives and most of them tend to choose occupations related to the atmosphere that he/she grew in. This means that, even if the school considers academic subjects as crucial and utilizes them on school curriculum, this might not disorientate children from their own choices. Let's take a school boy, who grew up in the atmosphere of mind sport like chess, as an example. The house, which boy lives in, filled with chess books and pictures of famous chess players. This proves that this boy might be a chess player even though he is being taugh academic subjects at school. Secondly, talent plays a supreme role when a child is choosing his/her future job. Subsequently, it might be better to stimulate an innate talent of a child rather than underscore him/her to the field that takes a long time to adapt. To sum up, even though the academic subjects are proven to imrove students' academic achievements, enhancing their potential for progression to further or higher education and job, extra-cirricular activities like arts and sports might have a great benefit for child's future job fulfillment according to their interests.