Unpaid community service, such as teaching local children sports skills, working for local charities and improving neighborhood relations, should be a compulsory part of secondary education. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Participating in volunteer community services is common in most universities in western countries as optional courses. However, some people think this activity should be promoted early for children from teenage and listed into the compulsory curriculums in secondary educational program. From my perspective, I do not agree with this suggestion and will prove it based on my knowledge and experience.
It is very difficult for secondary schools to arrange proper projects for young student as students in an early age cannot be competent in most volunteer works. For example, teaching children in community on physical training and holding activities to give out things to needy and homeless are very common community services which depend much on good communication skills with children, basic teaching skills and efficient organizing abilities of volunteers. However, teenage students are not mature enough who are still in the stage of being helped and educated. Therefore, rather than gaining valuable experiences or being taught something important from volunteer works, young students could give little help the community and waste time due to the unqualified and inefficiency working competence.
In addition, volunteer works might not be beneficial if it becomes compulsory. Unpaid community services such as cleaning trash on the highway or cleaning up local charities could contribute to the mental development of volunteers as to be with compassion and optimistic attitudes. However, once it become obligatory which means students are forced to work for the public for free otherwise they cannot graduate in the end. This mandatory policy bores the students who might deal with the works mechanically without any initiative and enthusiasm. Consequently, students involved in community works are wasting time which could help nothing to both themselves and employers at all.
In conclusion, even though unpaid social services could help needy while benefit giver, students at teenage seems too young to those works as age limit is one of the working requirements of most community activities. Furthermore, schools should not accept volunteer experiences as one of the compulsory conditions of graduation since it ruins the essence of volunteerism.
for young student as students in an early age cannot be competent => for young studentS (my suggestion: as they are hardly competent at such a young age)
give out things to needy and homeless => give things to THE needy and THE homeless (you mean needy and homeless people, right? So there must be "the" before the adjectives)
are very common => IS very common (because the subject is "teaching")
teenage students are not mature enough who are still in the stage of being helped and educated => Revise this sentence. My suggestion: teenage students still need to be helped and educated, hence, they are not mature enough for such volunteer activities.
give little help the community => give little help TO the community
as to be with => as THEY WORK with
it become obligatory which means => it becomeS obligatory, (use a comma) IT means THAT
for free otherwise => for free, (use a comma) otherwise
which could help nothing to both themselves and employers at all => My suggestion: which helps neither themselves nor employer.
Revise the first sentence of the conclusion. It is grammatically wrong.
Be careful with your expressions. Make sure you get your ideas across clearly.
Anw, good ideas that you have!