Should arts be compulsory in schools: discuss both views

The debate regarding whether arts and music should be mandatory in school curricula or if academic subjects should take precedence remains a significant educational issue. While some argue that academic rigour is the foundation of future success, others contend that creative disciplines are equally important. This essay will examine both perspectives and argue that a well-rounded education must integrate both areas.

Proponents of mandatory arts education suggest that these subjects are fundamental to the development of a child's cognitive and emotional capabilities. Engaging in music or painting encourages students to think laterally and express themselves, which can enhance problem-solving skills in other areas of study. For example, learning a musical instrument has been shown to improve mathematical ability and spatial reasoning in pupils, demonstrating that artistic engagement provides benefits far beyond the studio.

Conversely, those who advocate for a focus on academic subjects argue that core disciplines such as mathematics, science, and literature are the primary drivers of professional advancement. In an increasingly technical world, they believe that students must dedicate their limited time to mastering knowledge that directly contributes to economic productivity. For instance, high-achieving students who specialise in STEM subjects often secure better employment opportunities, suggesting that prioritising traditional academics is a more pragmatic approach to preparing young people for the demands of the labour market.

In my view, neither arts nor academic subjects should be sacrificed, as they serve complementary purposes in a student’s growth. A curriculum that mandates both ensures that children become not only technically proficient but also creative and empathetic individuals. By balancing these domains, schools can better equip students to navigate the complexities of adulthood, fostering both societal progress and personal fulfilment.