In countries where there is high unemployment, most pupils should be offered only primary education. There is no point in offering secondary education to those who will have no hope of finding a job. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Nowadays, it is argued that in countries which suffer from high unemployment rate, most students should be provided only primary education and it is not necessary/needed to provide advanced education because the little chance of finding a job. From my perspective, I completely dis agree with this point of view due to a great number of detrimental impacts it creates and this essay will demonstrates it in details. It is undoubtedly at offering secondary education benefit both individuals and economy. Firstly, I argue that the purpose of education is much more fundamental than simply to prepare young people for the world of work. Education is nothing less than the acquisition of lifelong skills in their thinking about all aspects of life. Secondly, education plays an essential role in helping young people to develop this critical skills like teamwork Spirit, cooperation and communication skills which improves their future career. In this way, those who are considered unemployable with their primary education would become competitive applicants to the job Market. Secondly, highly educated students are required in many sectors of economy. Although technology advance has cut down a significant number of labors in some field namely Agriculture, transport and the heavy industry, is also creating a new jobs demand for profession trained labors in other certain sectors like researching as well as legal consulting. In conclusion, I completely dispute the statement that nation in high unemployment should not offer secondary education to people who are not capable to find job. I argue that these countries should concentrate on providing higher educational services to their workers, especially those having no hope of finding a job.