The debate revolves around the question whether all subjects must be compulsory for students to learn or not. Some argue that, it is mandatory, owing to the fact that their range of age are still immature. On the contrary, others contend that they should study on field that they fascinate about because it will give them a better vision in the future . Both perspective warrant consideration, taking into account the advantages and disadvantages of each stance.
One school of thought maintains that children must learn all subjects due to the fact that most youngsters have an immature mind. It is believe that there are still in development process in life, where they cannot practically making and informed decision. Therefore, giving exposure to numerous fields will increase their critical thinking. For instance, if they have been given choice of subjects, some kids tend to make decision because they are influenced by their peers. Ultimately, regulating all subjects could avoid aformentioned situation to accur.
Conversely, although it seems to be benefits, this practice can be perceived as unfair since some children grown up to reach maturity early. For group of children like this, studying subjects their keen on will give them a plus point because it will lead them to diverse more details on that particular course. To illustrate, a well-known blockbuster called Matilda potrayed a young girl who have a great talent in Mathematics. Thus, by entering her to a specific mathematics tutor class polished her skill untill she became a famous professor.
In conclusion, I advocate for children to learn all subjects at school since instil essential life skills such as decision-making. However, it is imperative to give theem choice on certain subjects too since its giving the betterment of their upcoming life.