Some people think that children under 18 years old should receive full-time education. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

These days, many feel that students should be required to attend full-time classes until the age of 18. In my opinion, when economically viable

this

mandate is advisable. On the one hand, the reason to support compulsory full-time education to the age of 18 is it will form a foundation for

children

’s future orientation. To be specific,

children

and adolescents with full-time classes will be fully equipped with intellectual knowledge and social skills,

therefore

, determining for themselves the right direction and potential career in the future.

For instance

, an individual who has learned a variety of subjects and graduated from formal schooling can apply either for higher education or a job that requires a high school certificate.

As a result

,

this

leads to a lower unemployment rate and opens up more opportunities for teenagers to approach the modern world.

On the other hand

, those who oppose

this

policy are likely in more rural areas. In

such

locations,

children

and teenagers often do not have convenient access to schools and they often assist their parents with farms or other work.

For instance

, in many rural areas in South Asia, even young

children

must help work to raise crops and livestock.

Therefore

, they think modern schooling may not be necessary.

However

, these contexts are becoming rare as individuals migrate to cities and the countryside receives improved infrastructure. In conclusion,

although

there are various reasons that exist in rural communities to de-emphasize education, it is worthwhile to enforce mandatory schooling for all

children

and teenagers. It is now more important than ever as job markets are becoming more competitive.