There is a debate about whether students should have the freedom to choose their field of study or if they can only study subjects that are considered to be useful for their career. This essay will discuss both perspectives and suggest that a balance between the two will be the most effective approach.
On the one hand, those who argue that students should study as their choices, believe that passion is the key to success. There are many reasons to advocate that study field should be selected according to their preference. When a learner is deeply engaged in their major subjects, it can lead to a way of innovation. It is true that when students study a subject that they like, they are more creative, motivated and likely to excel. Furthermore, all academic disciplines contribute to the society equally. For example, fields like sociology or literature can help pupils to understand society better, which is essential for a well-functioning society.
On the other hand, many recommend that there should be a regulation in choosing academic background. It cannot be denied that STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) subjects are directly linked with technological advancement and economic growth. Prioritizing ‘useful’ subjects can help reducing graduate unemployment and ensuring well-paid jobs.
In my opinion, a balanced approach is necessary. While it is true that a workforce skilled in science and technology is needed, society also needs individuals with critical thinking and creativity from the humanities and arts.
In conclusion, while there are strong arguments for both sides, I believe that the best outcome comes from not restricting choice but by allowing students to follow their interests.