In many developed countries, parents frequently take care of their children to facilitate full-time education until they are over 18. However, critics debate that students under 18 should have their own autonomy to decide how much and in what manner they desire to study. Personally, I fully agree with the latter view. This essay will provide several reasons and explanations to support this idea of mine.
Every student has his or her own wishes and different styles, strengths, and interests in education. In this term, allowing students to decide how and what they study fosters a more personalized study, improving motivation and engagement. A rigid, specific approach can stifle creativity and limit the potential for individual growth. As a consequence of this issue, teenagers become more unsociable due to limits on leisure time to spend on their hobbies; at the very least, they are incapable of expressing themselves.
Secondly, and no less significant, full-time education until 18 can lead to immense academic pressure and mental health issues for some students. Allowing flexibility in how much students study could reduce stress and allow for a better balance between academic pursuits, personal growth, and mental well-being. For example, in countries like Finland, where students are given more autonomy over their learning pace and curriculum choices, there is less academic pressure compared to countries with more rigid systems. As a result, Finnish students consistently report lower levels of stress and anxiety, while maintaining high levels of academic achievement and well-being.
In conclusion, granting students autonomy over their education allows for a personalized approach, reduces stress, and promotes both academic success and mental well-being, as seen in countries with more flexible education systems.