Statement: Should a compulsory course in personal finance be introduced in the final year of school? Arguments: I. Yes. Most students begin earning, borrowing or saving within a few years of leaving school, and very few learn these skills anywhere else. II. No. It would cut into the time available for the subjects students are examined on, and schools would need trained teachers they do not currently have. Which of the arguments is strong?

Question

Accepted Answer

Both I and II are strong. Argument I identifies a real and near-term need that is unmet elsewhere. Argument II identifies real costs — lost curriculum time and a shortage of qualified teachers — which are practical obstacles rather than mere opinion. Both engage the substance of the question, so both are strong.

Step-by-Step Solution

Master this topic in 30 minutes a day.

More Logical / Critical practice