Behavioral patterns have declined generally, and it is worst among many young people in all levels, while this problem is attributed to the families where they come from, a lot more people blame this trend on the teachers and institutes of learning. This essay aims at reviewing the both parties as contributing factors, although it is most associated with the homes that breeds them.
First and foremost, the home plays a major role to the character molding among the already mentioned sets of individuals. That saying that charity begins at home clearly demonstrates this fact. For instance, a child's overall personality comes from the practical examples the observe from home which moulds his or her total perception in regards to what is right or wrong. Additionally, a child references his or her father and mother more than a mere teacher whose disciplinary measure may be limited by the law and policy of the the school. If this is so, the family stands a better chance to instill discipline better than any external body. These points presented prove that families are at better advantage, and the failure in the moral standards beckons on the people more related to the people concerned.
On the other hand, the place of learning ought not to be left out. This is because checks on the lapses of these derailing children is supposed to be corrected as a correctional institution. To exemplify, morale instructions are part of the school's curriculum which is supposed to double check the doings of their pupils to reshapen their behaviors. Again, life virtues such as love, obedience, respect and manners are part of the academic subjects. To trace back, during my social studies class in my elementary education, I was taught the duties of children to the family and society. When those facts were taught, it sunk deep and had remained a core system.
To sum up, even though the both institutions play a major role, the family has a larger share of the blame. Nonetheless, all hands should be on deck to raise a better generation.
There exist contrasting views about supervisors seeking some data, while employing new workers, about their likes and dislikes or their marital status that whether it is relevant or irrelevant to inquire about this information. There exist strong arguments in support of both sides of this debate, which implies it is worth examining both points of view before reaching any conclusion.
To commence with, it is vital to collect the necessary data about the fresh entrants in any organisation because it would give an idea about providing incentives to particular worker to boost the morale. Precisely, the management would be able to decide that whether reward should be monetary or non-monetary. To illustrate, a strong economy of Japan is evident because of contented workers due to the perfect recognition methodology adopted by the industrialists. It is, therefore, imperative to gather the requisite data to utilise it at a correct time.
On the contrary, every human has a different psychological pattern, and some employees may consider this as a wrong practice. As they would be creating a false and negative image about the company at a very initial stage, it would affect their output level deleteriously. A recent research in Europe, for example, proved that a colossal number of young working professionals did not perform well in beginning of their job because they were not pleased with the questions being asked during their interview. Hence, the reason of asking questions should be mentioned on company’s website to avoid any conflicts.
In conclusion, it can be reiterated that whereas demanding some information about their families from a fresh entrant could be proved advantageous for rewarding them, it might lead to a negative approach about the company. However, it would be a smart move, in my perspective, for strengthening the bond between factory and its workers.