Some systems require students to speacialize in a limited range of subjects from the age of fifteen. Other systems require students to study a wide range of subjects until they leave school? What are the benefits of two education systems and what is better ?
Although it is observed that in some fields, students need to be specialized in little variety of subjects from the certain age, other systems have various subjects to be in place for students when they are in school. There are advantages of the both systems, however, according to me, a wide selection of subjects for children is better as it provides more several options for teenagers for their future. To commence with, it has been seen that students who are in school have more subjects to learn as they are not enough mature when it comes to the selection of the subjects for their career. Therefore, In school level, students have exercised subject, physics, maths, history and so on as at the early stage they can enhance sufficient knowledge of each subject. In a result, when students move towards higher secondary school, they have one aim to focus. However, when students do have limited subjects to choose for their career when they turn fifteen, they have just a few subjects to learn. Consequently, students can concentrate more rather wide variety of subject which are not useful in their particular field. For example, if students select information technology field after school, they need to concentrate on how they can be mastered on this subject rather thinking of other fields at the same time. In conclusion, while there are some benefits of the education with limited range of subjects, a wide selection of subjects is helpful not only for their academic life but also for their future career.
Submitted by Jay Dudhat on