Some people think that a sense of competition in children should be encouraged. Others believe that children who are taught to co-operate rather than compete become more useful adults. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

In

this

contemporary epoch where a common mantra of survival of the fittest is a baseline for most of the people in society, a group challenges that notion with an argument that kids who are educated to help each other grow to be better adults. Both conventions will be critiqued before expressing my stand. Referring to the believers of competition, the foremost argument they put forth is that it plays a vital role in building a tough and strong child in adverse situations. The main aim behind

this

is to prepare them well for future cut-throat competitions.

For instance

, a child who has experienced wins and losses at school will be able to handle the big stressors of life better.

Secondly

, poul youngsters learn to be proactive in their preparations.

Thus

helping them to handle the anticipated uncertainties more sportily.

On the other hand

, a different approach of supporting a peer over competing with them ameliorates the children's moral values. By

this

, a child evolves to be an empathetic, humble, caring and considerate human being. An eminent example of

this

would be Malala who fought against terrorists for the education of all the girls in Pakistan.

Such

kids become to be excellent team players and are selfless in nature. To conclude and give my opinion,

although

the world runs with the principal motive to win a race, imparting the value of kindness and cooperation to the young ones is very much necessary in today's time. I am a staunch believer that we all need to educate kids to help one another and seek out group progress rather than be selfish for individual growth.