It is argued whether college students should learn whatever as long as they are happy with it or they should only be given permission to dig into topics that will be necessary in the foreseeable future, such as those related to science and technology. I agree with the former opinion since being forced to learn subjects they are not interested in will obliterate the students’ motivation.
On the one hand, strict restrictions on subjects at university can benefit our society in the short term. With the curriculum adjusted to focus on a range of necessary fields, the government can gain the human resources it needs right away, in an enormous quantity. They no longer have to worry about shortages of doctors, psychiatrists, or any other professions that are currently neglected by a large number of college students. For example, by replacing art-related lessons with coding modules, an Asian country has solved its problem with its insufficient number of software developers.
On the other hand, university students should be given the freedom to study what they want for the nation to be able to sustain its own development. When people have no other choice but to go against their will, they are eaten away by the ferocious beast called boredom. If a person is bored out of his mind, he will have no energy to go on with his work. Thus, his overall productivity is low. Boredom also leads to a lack of learning. No one would want to deepen his or her knowledge about a topic that he or she is forced to study, and in which that person holds no interest in. Recent research found that half of the students who dropped out from university had been pressured to enroll in the college by their parents or relatives.
In conclusion, while the government can gain a decent amount of profit from forcefully changing the students’ curriculum, they have to let the m choose what to learn according to their will for the nation’s long-term benefits.