Tertiary education has become a matter of concern in recent years. The issue of whether this is preferable compared to vocational courses remains a source of controversy. While there is a strong case for the latter viewpoint, I am more inclined to the view that job seekers will still be required academic degrees in the future.
On the one hand, there are various reasons why many people agree that the latter approach is conductive to a student. It stands to reason that practical skills are prioritised in the new era as they are applicable to almost every aspect of life. For example, plumbers and electricians plays a vital role whenever there is a problem corrolated to water or electricity system. Alternatively, practical skills such as computer literacy are easy to learn in a short period of time as vocational training courses can provide its students with these competences within a year. Consequently, they can earn a lot of job opportunities after achieving license to work.
On the other hand, I would advocate with those who contend that academic knowledge would be far more important than the aforementioned pathway. Firstly, it is fair to say that certain professions do require theoretical knowledge only obtained through university or college programs, corrolating to the fact that learners will have to get relevant degrees to prove themselves as qualified workers. For instance, any person who aspire to become lawyer or doctor must have expertical knowledge which require higher education. Another rationale would be that university education also opens the door to well-paid jobs. In others words, bachelor or master degree holders are much more welcome by employers.
In conclusion, although practical skills benefit people as manual workers, I am more inclined to the acquisition of pure knowledge and undergraduate study.
Tertiary education has become a matter of concern in recent years. The issue of whether this is preferable compared to vocational courses remains a source of controversy. While there is a strong case for the latter viewpoint, I am more inclined to the view that job seekers will
still
be required
academic degrees in the future.
On the one hand, there are various reasons why
many
people
agree
that the latter approach is conductive to a student. It stands to reason that practical
skills
are
prioritised
in the new era as they are applicable to almost every aspect of life.
For example
, plumbers and electricians plays a vital role whenever there is a problem
corrolated
to water or electricity system.
Alternatively
, practical
skills
such as computer literacy are easy to learn in a short period of time as vocational training courses can provide its students with these competences within a year.
Consequently
, they can earn
a lot of
job opportunities after achieving license to work.
On the other hand
, I would advocate with those who contend that academic
knowledge
would be far more
important
than the aforementioned pathway.
Firstly
, it is
fair
to say that certain professions do require theoretical
knowledge
only
obtained through university or college programs,
corrolating
to the fact that learners will
have to
get
relevant degrees to prove themselves as qualified workers.
For instance
, any person who aspire to become lawyer or doctor
must
have
expertical
knowledge
which require higher education. Another rationale would be that university education
also
opens the door to well-paid jobs. In others words, bachelor or master degree holders are much more welcome by employers.
In conclusion
, although practical
skills
benefit
people
as manual workers, I am more inclined to the acquisition of pure
knowledge
and undergraduate study.