[b]Some practical skills such as money management should be taught in high school. Do you agree or disagree? Give your opinion and real life examples [/b]
The idea that practical skills should be thought in high school seems at the first glance a fair statement, nevertheless it may make assumption that school teachers teach not only academic subjects, but also practical skills such as money management. As I shall argue this is not the whole picture, there are compelling reasons why students should concentrate just on basic science and life skills can be taught outside of school.
To begin with, we live in a knowledge-based economy world in which we need to know how to solve many problems. To learn how to solve these problems, we need to have analyzing mind and independent thinking. These skills can be resulted from studying math, physic and chemistry in which many problems can be solved by definite algorithms. Since learning these algorithms affect our minds, they practice to make different algorithms for various problems including social, economical and political problems.
The other root of such a grave idea is that practical skills can be learned outside of school. These skills can be taught in houses by parents, because children should manage their budgets through the use of pocket money. For example, when children are from primary school to high school, they do not work, and all their expenses are paid by their parents.
In final analysis, I once again would like to argue that schools have the best curriculum, based on traditional subjects. If students learn practical skills in school, they will lose their time to learn some other important subjects. They are better off learning practical skills in their spare time.
essay- task2- give your opinion
Re: essay- task2- give your opinion
sarasajedi wrote:[b]Some practical skills such as money management should be taught in high school. Do you agree or disagree? Give your opinion and real life examples [/b]
The idea that practical skills should be taught in high school seems at the first glance a fair statement. Nevertheless this means that school teachers teach not only academic subjects, but also practical skills such as money management. As I shall argue this is not the whole picture, there are compelling reasons why students should concentrate just on basic science, and life skills can be taught outside of school.
To begin with, we live in a knowledge-based economy in which we need to know how to solve many problems. To learn how to solve these problems, we need to have analytical minds and independent thinking. These skills can be gained from studying math, physics and chemistry in which many problems can be solved by definite algorithms. Since learning these algorithms affects our minds, they (<--who?) practice making different algorithms for various problems including social, economic and political problems.
The other root of such a grave idea is that practical skills can be learned outside of school. These skills can be taught at home because children should manage their budgets through the use of pocket money. For example, from primary school to high school, children do not work, and all their expenses are paid by their parents.
In summary, I once again would like to argue that schools have the best curriculum based on traditional subjects. If students learn practical skills in school, they will lose their time to learn some other important subjects. They are better off learning practical skills in their spare time.