The issue of whether students who study abroad should come back to their homeland after graduation has sparked a considerable debate. Some argue alumni have to return their home countries, while others are convinced that they have rights to choose where they live. This essay will examine both views before suggesting my own opinion.
Supporters of the first view argue that students should return for contributing to the origin country after graduation. They believe that brain circulation is essential for a country to maximize the growth and innovation. When educated professionals come back to their country, they can foster the development of new generations by consultation and mentoring. Therefore, it is understandable why many people support this argument.
On the other hand, critics are of the opinion that individual should be able to select their workplace independently. One of the main reasons of this viewpoint is the belief that students have rights to search for better career opportunities. For example, if there is economic instability, political unrest, corruption, and limited career advancement opportunities, people tend to leave the country to obtain better life standards. Thus, this argument also carries a significant weight.
In my opinion, people should have autonomy to decide where they work. The government should provide merit-based system and research infrastructure to hinder brain drain, slower growth, and wasted education budgets. Otherwise, students have rights to choose higher standards of living and political and economic stability. This approach will promote growth for both countries and alumni.
In conclusion, while some argue that students who study abroad should return to their country after graduation, others insist that they should be independent to decide where they settle. In my opinion, an encouraging approach is the best both for origin countries and alumni.