Some education systems make students focus on certain subjects at the age of 15, while others require students to study a wide range of subjects until they leave school. What are the benefits of each system? Which is better?

the issue of whether the systems of education for children has been raising a lot of debates. Some might say that adolescents should have studied concrete case when they were 15 years old.

On the contrary

, others insist on the opinion that students are required to learn all classes before graduating. Viewing from a general perspective,

this

essay discusses both viewpoints, I personally agree with the former opinion for the following reasons.

To begin

with, focusing on certain lessons can substantially help kids receive a lot of benefits including knowledge and spirit.

Firstly

,the students will acquire in-depth understanding and skill mastery.

For example

, when the young just learn a few courses so they will have so much time to investigate it deeply ,

this

leads to them being able to expand their savvy in a particular area.

Secondly

, with the less heavy program, the child will not suffer from stress.

For instance

, if young people learn several objects rather than studying too much they will feel comfortable and have time for relaxing by entertaining activities

such

as playing games or sports and so on.

Finally

, when they leave school, with their understanding of the profession the students will have the opportunity for their career in the future.

On the other hand

, some people think that it is necessary to learn all the curriculum at school before graduation. It is simply because

this

system will supply adequate and diverse knowledge about their life.

However

, it is time-consuming to spend the whole time studying everything that may not be important and useless. In conclusion,an education system with a few lessons brings a beneficial effect on learners, namely less pressure which outweighs the wide range of study.