Opinions are divided on whether a country should provide tertiary education opportunities for a high percentage of younger generations. Personally, I partly agree with this viewpoint, as will be shown in the following essay.
On the one hand, the government offers university places gradually, because the investment does not need to be made all at once, it becomes more achievable, meaning that they can mobilize financial resources from multiple sources and avoid the government paying the total cost.At present, modern technology and online learning make it easier to increase student intake, moreover our country should join in international collaboration to expand tertiary education places. As a result, there are more chances to study in college for students in difficult circumstances, such as families living in mountain regions or areas prone to natural disasters.
On the other hand, I contend that a country making many university spots available can lead to degree inflation, not only does their value certainly decrease but also there would be no competition among learners. This is the reason that people who are great at hands-on professional skills more than learning theoretical knowledge, if persistently producing a large number of graduates can create a lack of skilled workers and result in a waste of resources. It is costly but ineffective, requires high targets and reduces the overall quality of the education program, such as many universities cannot expand their facilities quickly enough, leading to overcrowded classes and a shortage of highly qualified teachers.
In conclusion, although offering more university places has some benefits, I believe that giving places to an extensive number of young people is possible but not useful.