It is sometimes argued that teenagers should be required to carry out unpaid work for their communities as a condition of finishing school. I largely agree with this proposal, since the benefits to both students and society are considerable, though it must be implemented thoughtfully.
The strongest argument in favour is educational. Classrooms teach knowledge, but they rarely teach young people what it feels like to be relied upon by others. Volunteering in a care home, a food bank, or a conservation project exposes students to lives very different from their own and develops qualities — empathy, responsibility, teamwork — that no examination can measure. A student who has spent a term helping elderly residents is likely to leave school with a maturity that purely academic study cannot provide.
Society benefits in turn. Many valuable services depend on volunteers and are chronically short of them; a steady supply of young helpers would ease that shortage while forging a habit of civic participation that often lasts into adulthood. Communities whose schools are actively involved tend to be more cohesive and less divided by age or background.
The obvious objection is that compulsion contradicts the spirit of volunteering. This concern is real but manageable. If students are allowed to choose causes that genuinely interest them, and if the hours required are modest, the experience feels less like forced labour and more like a guided introduction to service.
In conclusion, while the scheme must be designed with care, I believe that making community service a compulsory part of secondary education would enrich young people and strengthen the communities around them.