Nowadays, some people argue that children should study whatever they want whereas others believe that they have to follow the subjects which related to researchers and devices that will be beneficial in the future. In my opinion, the latter statement bears more truth in real-life contexts.
On the one hand, if students do all that they want they will become less organised and undisciplined students without ambition. A case in point that in the 1990s, one scientist named Sugata Mitra organised one project called Self-Organised Learning Environment (SOLE). There, the rules provide students learn what their soul wants, although, the results show its advantages as well as disadvantages. The advantage is that they became more motivated due to the fact that they learn only the subjects which appeal to them, however, at the same time they became undisciplined, which is why they did not make a breakthrough.
On the other hand, if individuals study scientific subjects such as physics, math, techniques, which would be useful both currently and in the future, they would make a splash. For instance, if a number of students study such difficult subjects they can develop their neurons to the limit and make a huge amount of scientific discoveries. In addition, in order to reach that, they become more disciplined and thoughtful people. As a result, they can change the world with their minds.
In conclusion, university students should have a little freedom in choices what they have to learn, but at the same time learning scientific items is superior. Both statements are significant, however, from my perspective, latter statement is more effective.