From an individual perspective, today’s developing world requires more practical abilities compared to previous years. For instance, candidates who can think critically, interpret situations comprehensively, and work unswervingly are better options for employers. Furthermore, practical instruction enables individuals to work effectively under intense pressure and demonstrates how to alleviate stress in challenging circumstances. This fact is a non-negligible and fundamental part of productive work. On the other hand, practical instruction such as internships equips individuals to predict what they will encounter in their careers. As can be clearly observed, these are the most crucial reasons supporting the thesis that universities should provide more practical instruction.
On the contrary, some universities defend the argument that theoretical knowledge should be in the foreground rather than real-life experience. Since they believe knowledge is the foundation of work, they implement policies that prioritize theoretical learning. In addition, some universities’ curricula are entirely based on theoretical knowledge, which lacks sufficient practical experience. Theoretical knowledge should not be disregarded; nevertheless, it should be strengthened through practical experience.
In conclusion, there are two contrasting approaches to university education systems and policies. Subjectively, I strongly agree with the perspective that universities should focus intensively on practical instruction. Even though theoretical knowledge is the foundation of an occupation, a business will never be competitive in industry without employees’ practical abilities. A Turkish general once stated that life itself is based on practice.