The discourse of whether students should be permitted to choose what they study or follow a concrete curriculum is continuing. People who support student choice argue that because students’ passions drive motivation and creativity, making learning personally relevant gives students that motivation. When students’ interests align with what they are learning, it is likely that they will engage with it fully, attain higher outcomes, and build skill set aligned to their career interests.
On the other hand, those who support a fixed curriculum believe that structured learning supports students learning basic knowledge and skills. A given curriculum establishes the parameters of an education to maintain quality and uphold standards in education. A regular curriculum is important because it ensure that students progress onto higher education or employment as global citizens with important knowledge and skills. It allows educators to control for variability, and provide every student with a well rounded education including important learning areas such as mathematics, science and languages.
I would lean towards balanced approach: maintaining that some core subjects should be compulsory, to ensure all students have an understanding of these subjects, but allow students opportunities to pursue elective subjects as they see fit. I think this approach best supports and develops academic growth and personal growth, while preparing students for the modern world in which they will live. As much as education is about providing students with knowledge, it also needs to ignite a fire in students to pursue their passions and strength.