Modern societies need specialists in certain fields, but not in others. Some people, therefore, think that governments should pay university fees for students who study subjects that are needed by society. Those who choose to study less relevant subjects should not receive government funding. Would the advantages of such an educational policy outweigh the disadvantages?
In contemporary world, academic background of people has become the most substantial factor which enables them to gain authority among society and get a well-paid job. Majority consider that government should financially back up students who chose the field of education that is beneficial to society. However, I agree that the drawbacks of this method outweigh the positive influences.
On the one hand, providing financial support for students who study in such significant fields as medicine and economics could be effective because of the fact that that it could ensure sufficient employees in these particular specialties. To illustrate, if governments offer more monitory grants for those who study in medicine faculties, they can encourage a vast number of school graduates to choose this area of education as their majors. Consequently, there will be plenty of breakthroughs and great advancements in the field of medicine which result in improvement of public health.
Nonetheless, I personally believe that all educational subjects should be valued equally and every student have rights to receive funding supports in order that they can pursue their education, no matter in what field they study. In contrast, if governments support only some specific fields of education while ignoring other ones, the rate of unemployment in the country will gradually increase. For instance, since great facilities in particular educational areas attract more applicants despite their own interests and capacities, they will be more liable to fail the university exams. Consequently, they can't find appropriate jobs for themselves due to the fact that companies prefer to hire employees who have the level of higher education and experience.
In conclusion, I believe that negative consequences of financially supporting the limited number of students will cause a big number of problems which outweigh the short-term benefits of this policy.
Modern
societies
need specialists in certain
fields
,
but
not in others.
Some
people
,
therefore
,
think
that
governments
should pay university fees for
students
who
study
subjects that
are needed
by
society
. Those
who
choose to
study
less relevant subjects should not receive
government
funding. Would the advantages of such an educational policy outweigh the disadvantages?
In contemporary world, academic background of
people
has become the most substantial factor which enables them to gain authority among
society
and
get
a well-paid job. Majority
consider
that
government
should
financially
back up
students
who
chose the
field
of
education
that is
beneficial to
society
.
However
, I
agree
that the drawbacks of this method outweigh the
positive
influences.
On the one hand, providing financial support for
students
who
study
in such significant
fields
as medicine and economics could be effective
because of the fact that
that it could ensure sufficient employees in these particular specialties. To illustrate, if
governments
offer more monitory grants for those
who
study
in medicine faculties, they can encourage a vast number of school graduates to choose this area of
education
as their majors.
Consequently
, there will be
plenty
of breakthroughs and great advancements in the
field
of medicine which result in improvement of public health.
Nonetheless, I
personally
believe that all educational subjects should
be valued
equally
and every
student
have rights to receive funding supports in order that they can pursue their
education
, no matter in what
field
they
study
.
In contrast
, if
governments
support
only
some
specific
fields
of
education
while ignoring other ones, the rate of unemployment in the country will
gradually
increase.
For instance
, since great facilities
in particular
educational areas attract more applicants despite their
own
interests and capacities, they will be more liable to fail the university exams.
Consequently
, they can't find appropriate jobs for themselves due to the fact that
companies
prefer to hire employees
who
have the level of higher
education
and experience.
In conclusion
, I believe that
negative
consequences of
financially
supporting the limited number of
students
will cause a
big
number of problems which outweigh the short-term benefits of this policy.