studying art in school improves students' performance in othr subjects,because it is easier for multi-skilled students to learn new things.That's why art should be obligatory in schools. Do you agree or disagree?

It is often argued that it is more advantageous for pupils to study

art

in school because it helps children to enhance their performance;

therefore

,

art

should be compulsory in educational institutions. I completely disagree with

this

opinion and think that nothing should be obligatory for students. First of all, I believe that crafts are not an essential subject for apprentices to learn, and they should devote time to their favourite subjects and the specific major they want to pursue in the future.

In other words

, spending time studying crafts wouldn'

t

have a beneficial effect on their education.

For example

, students who want to study physics in the future wouldn'

t

gain something important from crafts;

by contrast

, it distorts their path and confuses them.

On the other hand

,

art

will not help children develop useful skills. It just motivates people who are really gifted and enjoy it

while

studying it.

Secondly

, some children don'

t

have any talent in

art

, or they don'

t

have any attraction toward it;

hence

, obligating them to study

art

like painting, sculpture, or dancing destroys their self-confidence and depresses them.

For instance

, trainees who haven'

t

any aptitude may detest school if they fail to do their homework related to

art

matters, and it leads to drop off school in the future.

Thus

, not only do they not have any progress in their studies, but

also

they leave their original subjects.

To conclude

, I strongly believe that

art

shouldn'

t

be obligatory in schools because it ruins pupils' self-esteem and is not a vital subject;

therefore

, it’s time-consuming.