Agree or disagree — Schools teach academics, families teach life skills

It is sometimes argued that schools should concentrate on academic subjects and leave practical skills such as cooking and money management to parents. While I accept that academic learning must remain the core of schooling, I strongly disagree that practical skills can safely be left to families alone.

The case for prioritising academic subjects is sound. Literacy, mathematics and science are cumulative disciplines that become extremely difficult to acquire later in life, and they open the widest range of options for a young person. Schools also possess the trained staff, laboratories and structured curriculum needed to teach them properly, none of which the average household could replicate at home. Nothing should be allowed to crowd out this core, and I would oppose any reform that cut it back.

The problem lies in the assumption that families will reliably teach everything else. Many parents are themselves burdened with debt, work long hours or never learned to cook a balanced meal, so their children simply inherit the same gaps; the pupils who most need practical guidance are precisely those least likely to receive it at home. Leaving the task to families therefore does not distribute responsibility, it entrenches inequality. A single term of budgeting and nutrition in school costs very little and reaches every child, including those whose parents cannot help.

In conclusion, academic subjects should remain the backbone of education, but essential life skills belong in the timetable as well. They matter far too much to be left to the lottery of birth.