Is schooling in rural areas better than schooling in urban areas?

  • Teachers in the rural area take themselves as champions without gaining more knowledge

    There are various qualified teachers in the city schools.The reason for this is not far-fetched.They are here because they have the stuff and would want to deliver it to the student instead of teaching in the village where there are no challenges either on the part of the students or other colleagues who are local champions

  • Yes it is better. BY ODIEGWU FIDELIS

    Students are always absent from school and no one will find out because of their large number. Students in urban areas posses weapons for riots in school, which destroys life. Students in urban areas are corrupt and some girls there blocks their future with pregnancy. They do not read after school but they watch televisions.

  • Environment is vitally significant.

    Education in cities, in comparison with countryside, is far more better due to the outlook of students in there. As given by science, outlook is impacted by many factors such as compression of population, ads on roads, internet and so on. Provided that pupils have rather remarkable outlook, they can easily determine relevant solutions to the some inqueries such as whether to be educated, what to learn, where to find resourses, something like those as given above. But, I barely think that it's dependent on teachers. I would presumably suggest that it's more alike to have relations with students as they acquire knowledge, not teachers.

  • Urban education is better

    I believe this because with urban education the teachers are trained and knowledgeable about their subject. Also the curriculum used in urban schools is more effective. Another advantage is that the children are exposed to different religions, technologies and political and economic ideas, all of these lead to the development of a country or community. Plus, when educated in an urban area, the children are better prepared for their various years of tertiary education (university)
    Joshua D
    Age: 13
    Rutlish school london

  • Pupils in urban schools are far more better than those pupils in rural schools

    The students in rural schools take themselves as champions not knowing that there are a lot of students in urban schools that are far more better than them take for example there was A boy named Abdulkareem in a rural school thinking that he is the best at the end he failed the external exam he went for.

  • Schooling in rural areas is not better than schooling in urban areas.

    Schooling in rural areas is not better than schooling in urban areas. When kids go to school in a rural area, they have less choices in teachers and subjects. Also, the teachers may not be the best, but it is hard to fire a teacher when you know that there will not be another teacher applying for the job.

  • No, schooling quality is unique to each urban and rural neighborhood, and things are changing.

    Schooling in rural areas versus urban areas is dependent on the school system and the teachers, and what quality they can offer to students. It's unique to each situation, so that neither one has to be better than the other. In rural areas, sometimes it's possible to have a better teacher to student ratio, which can help with learning. But urban areas--which definitely do have a harder time--can work on various factors to increase quality of education. It's more challenging in urban areas, but that doesn't mean that the education a student will get in a rural area need necessarily outshine one a child can get in an urban setting. In fact, the government reported in December 2013 that urban schools are doing better now in reading and math improvement, and that urban students are getting closer to rural peers. It takes hard work, but it can be done.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.