School education is an important part of the journey toward a profession. It is still arguable whether it is better to provide a narrow range of particular subjects or standard range of basic subjects. My opinion is that secondary schools should provide basic education including history, biology, chemistry etc.
On the surface, it seems clear that the rage of certain subjects is better. Teenagers are not overwhelmed with unnecessary knowledge, and can concentrate on the main topics. As a result future students may be better prepared and ready for more profound learning. It is also predicted that after such specific education young people will be ready for a job immediately.
Meanwhile , there are a lot of hidden drawbacks behind this statement. Hardly ever teenagers are sure who they want to be. Therefore , it is quite difficult for them to select four or five subjects from the whole range . It may create additional pressure on them to make fatal mistake. Secondary school is too early for choosing a future career.
Furthermore, a limited list of subjects might deteriorate future prospects. For example, nowadays the youth is very flexible, they can change workplaces and even fields of occupation quite quickly. It is hardly even possible without an excellent basic education. The crucial goals of secondary school are to show the opportunities and reveal strengths and weaknesses of each pupil.
In conclusion, what is better to have deep knowledge in a narrow sphere or basic in many subjects is a controversial topic. Modern secondary schools in different countries give a precedence to a wide range of basic subjects . I can not agree more with it. As I definitely support such approach
