Given high unemployment rate, it is recommended that the government

only provide primary education and no secondary education. What do

you think?

Outline:

- Proponents:
What: Equal opportunities of employment
Why: There are those who can’t afford secondary education being left
unemployed
For what: Nevertheless: Compromise the quality of the workforce due to
a lack of knowledge -> Not an optimal solution

What: secondary school be kept, and provide scholarships for excellent

students but poor
Why: Important knowledge gained (eg: business, healthcare,...),
providing scholarships means reducing the number of unemployed
people
For What: Improve quality of the workforce whilst reducing
unemployment

Essay:

The high unemployment rate is an agonizing issue that needs to be tackled in

many countries worldwide. Some people suggest the solution is to remove
secondary education and merely provide elementary education probably
because they believe that many individuals’ inability to afford learning in
secondary schools causes disparities in employment. From my perspective,
this measure is not feasible as it can reduce the quality of the workforce, and I
suggest offering scholarships for excellent yet underprivileged students to
attain secondary education.

Proponents of the abolishment of secondary education may believe that this

movement can result in equality in employment. This belief can be valid
because some cannot get into secondary schools due to financial strains, and
they become unemployed whilst those who adequately receive secondary
education are prioritized to be employed. Without such priority, almost
everyone may be given equal employment opportunities, hence reducing the
number of unemployed people.
Nevertheless, this solution can deteriorate the quality of the workforce. As
students merely complete primary education, their level of knowledge are only
elementary, meaning that they lack knowledge in subjects and skills taught at
secondary education that are crucial to do any jobs effectively. Consider a
manufacturing industry that requires workers to operate advanced machinery.
Secondary education usually provides the foundational math and problem-
solving skills necessary for effective machine operation. Without this
education, workers might struggle to understand complex instructions, leading
to increased errors and reduced productivity. Thus, ommiting secondary
education may result in a future incompetent workforce.

I believe sustaining secondary education and providing scholarships for

excellent students with financial difficulties may be a better solution to
unemployment. This level of education is crucial as it provides students with
practical subjects that prepare students to enter the workforce such as
healthcare, business management and leadership. By providing excellent
students with scholarships, not only is the quality of the workforce maintained
or even boosted, the number of students who cannot afford secondary
education may be decreased, thus reducing the unemployment rate.
According to OCED’s statistics, in most countries, more people completing
secondary education would likely translate into the unemployment rate
dwindling.

In conclusion, in lieu of eschewing secondary education which can aggravate

the workforce quality, I suggest this level of education be kept and
scholarships for the best students with financial difficulties to enter secondary
schools be considered as a viable solution to the high unemployment rate.
6.5