- 最后登录
- 2022-7-5
- 在线时间
- 68 小时
- 寄托币
- 191
- 声望
- 2
- 注册时间
- 2010-2-19
- 阅读权限
- 10
- 帖子
- 4
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 14
- UID
- 2766563

- 声望
- 2
- 寄托币
- 191
- 注册时间
- 2010-2-19
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 4
|
本帖最后由 wjinli519 于 2010-8-5 18:59 编辑
09.05.30NA无尽的超时啊啊啊啊啊
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Younger school children (ages five to ten) should be required to study art and music in addition to math, science, history and language."
The childhood for most young children is no longer filled with happiness. They are inundated with various kinds of courses, like piano course, drawing introduction, and some science courses, which take up most of their leisure time. However, personally, I strongly disagree with the statement that younger school children should be required to study art and music, in addition to some traditional courses. Here are some reasons for this.
First, art and music courses squeezes children's free time to play. people cannot deny that from children's gut instinct, they prefer to play rather than taking those aesthetic courses. In most cases, those kids who ages from five to ten are so energetic that they can hardly dedicate themselves to drawing or playing piano, which both require meditation and frequent practice. At free time, they love playing football at the lawn in front of their house and shooting birds with toy guns or stones. If parents insist on compelling their children to study art or music, those children will surely have no time to indulge themselves with their friends.
Second, due to the inflation in China, especially the increase of tuition fee, art and music course will become a large expense for parents. If primary school is going to open art and music courses for students, the school has to hire some instructors who are specialized to teach art and music or accomplished in corresponding fields. And the salary of these teachers will expand the shool budget, which in turn raise the fee of the school. In short, it is those parents whose children will receive the course that have to pay extra money for the courses.
Furthermore, those art and music courses can almost do nothing helpful to the majority of children's future career. Mostly, some art and music techniques only limit in entertaining people. To most students, who don't have unparalleled interest or aptitude in art and music, can hardly rely on drawing or singing to make a living. That is to say, rather than teaching the aesthetic courses, schools should take more responsibility to socialize the children, more specifically, to teach them how to maintain a friendship, how to be obedient to their parents and how to communicate with strangers. The importance of learning how to be a member of family and society outweighs that of learning how to draw a painting or compose a song.
In conclusion, art and music should not become compulsory courses for children aging from 5 to 10 when people taking account of the loss of children's free time, the family expense and limited boost to future prospects. |
|