Prompt: Some people think that because some children find some subjects such as mathematics and philosophy difficult they ought to be optional instead of compulsory. To what extent do you agree?

Whereas some people argue that some subjects should be optional for children, which find them hard, others claim that some subjects must be taught either way. In my opinion, although some children might face difficulties in learning some subjects, these topics should be compulsory. Ċ First of all, focusing on teaching a child based on his or her strength can be positive. Thus, it is reasonable to leave out from the course programme subjects which are a burden for the youth. For example, if a child has demonstrated potential in learning either mathematics or history, courses which might compromise learning these preferred subjects should be optional. Consequently, by doing that the school will be teaching based on the children's strengths and not on their weaknesses. Ċ On the other hand, it is important that children have a strong fundamental knowledge in different topics. Hence, presenting children to a broad range of subjects can be useful for them learning other topics. For instance, in order to understand more complex topics such as economy learning about not only mathematics but also history might be extremely useful. Therefore, learning about many subjects in the youth can be useful later in life for understanding more complex topics. Ċ In conclusion, while narrowing the subjects of study, according to children's preference might be useful for working their strengths, the youth studying a broad range of subjects can be useful for them in creating a solid fundamental knowledge. Then, I believe that children should take some compulsory courses as these might be important for them later.