The question asks whether primary education should be conducted in the mother tongue. We need to evaluate the strength of the two given arguments.

Argument 1 Analysis: Mother Tongue for Easy Understanding

Argument 1 states that using the mother tongue helps students understand concepts easily. This is a widely accepted pedagogical principle. Learning in a familiar language reduces cognitive load, allowing students to focus on grasping the subject matter rather than struggling with language barriers. Therefore, this argument is strong as it directly relates to the effectiveness of learning.

• Benefit: Easier comprehension of complex ideas.
• Focus: Directly addresses the learning process.
• Strength: Strong.

Argument 2 Analysis: Difficulty Finding Tuition Teachers

Argument 2 points out the difficulty in finding tuition teachers who use the mother tongue. While finding support outside the classroom can be a practical challenge, it doesn't undermine the core educational benefit of learning in one's native language within the primary school system itself. This argument addresses a secondary logistical issue, not the fundamental advantage of mother-tongue instruction.

• Issue: Availability of supplementary support.
• Focus: Practical challenge, not core learning benefit.
• Strength: Weak.

Conclusion on Argument Strength

Based on the analysis, Argument 1 presents a valid and strong reason supporting mother-tongue education at the primary level due to its direct impact on student understanding. Argument 2 presents a practical difficulty but does not outweigh the fundamental pedagogical advantages highlighted in Argument 1.

Therefore, only Argument 1 is strong.