With the pressure on today's young people to succeed academically,some people believe that non-academic subjects at school (eg physically education and cookery) should be removed from the syllabus so that children can concentrate wholly on...

The debate of what young people should study at school has been an intense issue and it certainly does not have one correct answer.

It is understandable that student must be pushed as hard as possible to achieve their best. It sounds a good idea to only expose the students to academic subjects as they can spend all of their school hours on studying areas that will get them into university and good jobs later in life. Moreover, with too much subjects in traditional curriculum, students are facing the pressure of studying at school. Therefore, if the number of irrelevant subjects is cut down, they can lighten their workload a well as have more free time to enjoy their childhood.

On the other hand, many people think that should be provided a rounded education with a mix of academic and non-academic subjects like sport, for example . Yong people have to learn to love sport so that they can keep themself fit and healthy later in life. It is also seen that a more rounded education would provide better individual . For instance, by studying cooking, wood work or metal work, students can benefit from a more vocational based education. Forcing academic studies on to them would lead to failure and the students leaving school too early.

In conclusion, I agree that although a wholly academic curriculum would suit and benefit some young people, non-academic subjects are also play an important role in their adult life.