Many people believe that more investment should be made in educating children science subjects instead of the others in order to benefit the country. While a strong emphasis on science competency of the youth might benefit the country economically, I believe the other subjects play an equally important role in youth development and their future contribution to the country’s welfare.
On the one hand, an increase in educational budget can result in significantly more competitive tech talents in the labour market, which are considered one of the most important assets of one’s country. Such a change can benefit citizens as they can find it easier to compete in the international labour market due to their accumulated technical skills. Thus, their country’s GDP can benefit as they may bring in foreign currency or international projects. However, while this policy promises remarkable economic benefits for its country, it fails to address other aspects of the country’s development, such as gross national happiness or political stability.
On the other hand, while it is hard to argue the obvious and almost immediate materialistic benefits of leaning towards science education, other subjects play just as important a role in youth development. Human-related subjects such as the humanities, arts, or social sciences foster creativity, critical thinking, effective communication, and leadership, which are all invaluable assets in the social and professional life of many youngsters. Subjects like philosophy and ethics nurture moral values among the youth, which sets the stage for the sustainable development of the country. For example, early life ethical education has helped many great leaders in the world to fulfil their corporate social responsibility, while maintaining profits.]
Overall, I oppose the view that countries must allocate more financial resources to educating science talents for the country to thrive. In my opinion, the government should seek a point of balance between science education and humanities education.