Does the dual-health policy meet the needs of society?

The original intention of the policy of "double reduction in teaching and training" is definitely good. From my personal point of view, the advantages and disadvantages are in direct proportion, and the introduction of this policy has not been fully considered. As a public relations person, my starting point is to look at this policy based on the pros and cons, so it is also my personal point of view, I hope to understand!

Welfare 1. The purpose of "double reduction in teaching and training" is to alleviate children's learning pressure and parents' economic anxiety. It is understandable that it is forbidden for off-campus educational institutions to organize subject training on national statutory holidays, rest days and winter and summer vacations, which to a great extent gives students more spare time to relax. 2. Moreover, the introduction of the double reduction policy can also promote the development of art education. In addition to the main subjects, art education itself has a good development prospect by cultivating students' interest in art, and students can also develop morally, intellectually, physically and aesthetically, so it is really good to see the introduction of the policy of double reduction.

Disadvantage 1, but off-campus training institutions and organizations will also face losses and may not be able to do it. Most teachers in many training institutions rely on this meal. They exist to help children improve their academic performance. The double reduction policy is not good for them! 2. "One exam is for life", which has remained unchanged since ancient times. Policies can help children relieve stress, but learning will never go up. The exam is inevitable, and the final result is also the result that can affect the child's life. If it is really implemented, can children's grades only depend on school? Then this will test teachers' teaching ability and children's adaptability.

The most basic professional ethics of public relations people is to learn to distinguish between good and bad things and what benefits and influences the final result will bring. So for this policy, I know for the first time that its starting point is good, but its disadvantages have also been exposed. There has always been involution in education, and there is a heated discussion about whether "double reduction of lessons" can alleviate involution in education, which is good or bad. The policy will alleviate the pressure of children from rich and powerful families to a certain extent, because they can use videos and ask teachers to tutor at home. But for the children of ordinary families, they may not even have the opportunity to take the exam, and they have no money and no power. With the introduction of the double reduction policy, they can't even go to cram school.

The way to alleviate involution is not simply to let children measure quality with scores. Parents should attach importance to quality education, and can't just look at scores all the time, so as to really reduce the pressure on children. The requirement for children to be "strict and lenient" is limited to scores. If both are changed, the system will be different, and the attention of children and parents will be more than just scores.