A frequent debated topic whether children at school should be provided with a large number of subjects. While many people advocate it, I would contend that focusing much more on a narrow program of practical subjects is better, as will now be discussed.
On the one hand, there are those who claim that it is necessary to have courses having many subjects. Firstly, when accessing to a comprehensive learning programme with a wide range of subjects, children have more opportunities to develop their passion for a particular field. This helps children to grow thoroughly in almost aspects of life, paying the way for society to have more musicians, writers and painters. Secondly, small students are likely too young to define their career paths for life correctly at first, so teaching them a small number of subjects may limit their options for their future jobs.
On the other hand, I side with those who support the idea that learning hands – on subjects is better. Primarily, only spending a large amount of time studying practical subjects means that huge pressure of leaning jobs- irrelevant subjects will be put aside when they take exams. In addition, students certainly will have more time to concentrate on practical subjects, so they may be equipped with in - depth knowledge of their chosen career before entering labour market. For example, many children in Vietnam develop their interests in Computer Science at their early age, which allows them to have better understanding of Information technology and act as catalyst for their good head start when applying for IT companies.
In conclusion, I hold the view that schools’ curriculum based on a few practical subjects is praised for its contribution to more jobs opportunities when students finish studying despite the advantages of an education program with a variety of subjects.
A frequent debated topic whether
children
at school should
be provided
with
a large number of
subjects
. While
many
people
advocate it, I would contend that focusing much more on a narrow program of
practical
subjects
is better, as will
now
be discussed
.
On the one hand, there are those who claim that it is necessary to have courses having
many
subjects
.
Firstly
, when accessing to a comprehensive learning
programme
with a wide range of
subjects
,
children
have more opportunities to develop their passion for a particular field. This
helps
children
to grow
thoroughly
in almost aspects of life, paying the way for society to have more musicians, writers and painters.
Secondly
,
small
students are likely too young to define their career paths for life
correctly
at
first
,
so
teaching them a
small
number of
subjects
may limit their options for their future jobs.
On the other hand
, I side with those who support the
idea
that learning hands
–
on
subjects
is better.
Primarily
,
only
spending a large amount of time studying
practical
subjects
means that huge pressure of leaning jobs- irrelevant
subjects
will
be put
aside when they take exams.
In addition
, students
certainly
will have more time to concentrate on
practical
subjects
,
so
they may
be equipped
with in
-
depth knowledge of their chosen career
before
entering
labour
market.
For example
,
many
children
in Vietnam develop their interests in Computer Science at their early age, which
allows
them to have better understanding of Information technology and act as catalyst for their
good
head
start
when applying for IT
companies
.
In conclusion
, I hold the view that schools’ curriculum based on a few
practical
subjects
is praised
for its contribution to more jobs opportunities when students finish studying despite the advantages of an education program with a variety of
subjects
.