In this era, whilst artists hold the view that art is a crucial subject to enable pupils to absorb many other subjects, some educators argue otherwise. I am of the belief that art should not be compulsory because it wastes students’ time, and it may prevent students from spending ample time learning other scientific materials.
On the one hand, despite disagreeing that art should be an obligatory subject like other core materials, some advocates believe that art facilitatesthe intellectual development of children. This means that when learners’ minds are armed with creative skills, they can learn other information promptly and efficiently. For example, a study conducted by the University of Oxford, England, revealed that art students learn new lessons faster than their peers who have no artistic inclinations. Hence, what can be said is that not only is such a field of study indispensable in strengthening learners’ academic qualifications, but also mental stimulation is pivotal to reviving cognitive skills.
Nevertheless, opponents and I are convinced that art is not a practical subject and incorporating it into the school curriculum could negatively affect pupils because this might jeopardize their future. In other words, when students focus on the major subjects rather than extra-curricular activities, they consider this a gateway to securing a position in multinational companies. To illustrate, a recent survey conducted by Time magazine has shown that many science graduates receive better job offers, whereassome artists struggle to earn their livelihood. Hence, technical subjects are not only pivotal to attaining thriving occupations, but also, they empower graduates to apply to prestigious universities.
In conclusion, by examining the above-mentioned points, it can be reiterated that even though art would rekindle brain power, other subjects are quintessential to achieving high qualifications. Therefore, I am convinced that art is a complete loss of time and cannot be obligatory to earn a living.