Many people deem that students should be given a privilege to study whatever they like. While, others consider that they should permit to study career oriented major subjects namely science and technology. I partly agree with the statement because both of the views have some pros and cons.
Undoubtedly, to provide a freedom to pupils in order to elect their studies is a quite effective approach that will not only produce a positive effect in a society, but also brings a diversity in the world. For that degree of policies, allow learners to choose their syllabus in accordance with their attitude, rather than force to learn those, which one does not want to study. For example, some arts faculties in western universities permit arts pupils to adopt a technology, while the reverse is also true. Furthermore, every person is unique and have excellent skills in different domains. So, freedom is mandatory to grasp the real abilities of the young people.
Nevertheless, many humans focus on the latest knowledge of science and automation just because of their increasing demand. Nowadays, progress of any country depends on their scientists and technologists. Moreover, these departments also play an indispensable role in pharmaceutical industries. To take an interest in those literatures raises the chances to obtain a job in this challenging universe. For instance, according to a recent research, owners of several multinational companies have given a favour to a technical person who knows a theory behind several phenomena, rather than an artist.
To conclude, both sides have its own benefits and drawbacks. But, I personally believe that for a better community, university policies should design in such that they meets both of these criteria. Likewise; if everyone receives an employment oriented education, then who become the leader of the country.
Many
people
deem that students should be
given
a privilege to
study
whatever they like. While, others consider that they should permit to
study
career oriented major subjects
namely
science and technology. I partly
agree
with the statement
because
both of the views have
some
pros and cons.
Undoubtedly
, to provide
a freedom
to pupils in order to elect their
studies
is a quite effective approach that will not
only
produce a
positive
effect in a society,
but
also
brings a diversity in the world. For that degree of policies,
allow
learners to choose their syllabus in accordance with their attitude,
rather
than force to learn those, which one does not want to
study
.
For example
,
some
arts faculties in western universities permit arts pupils to adopt a technology, while the reverse is
also
true.
Furthermore
, every person is unique and have excellent
skills
in
different
domains.
So
, freedom is mandatory to grasp the real abilities of the young
people
.
Nevertheless
,
many
humans focus on the latest knowledge of science and automation
just
because
of their increasing demand. Nowadays, progress of any country depends on their scientists and technologists.
Moreover
, these departments
also
play an indispensable role in pharmaceutical industries. To take an interest in those literatures raises the chances to obtain a job in this challenging universe.
For instance
, according to a recent research, owners of several multinational
companies
have
given
a
favour
to a technical person who knows a theory behind several phenomena,
rather
than an artist.
To conclude
, both sides have its
own
benefits and drawbacks.
But
, I
personally
believe that for a better community, university policies should design in such that they
meets
both of these criteria.
Likewise
; if everyone receives an employment oriented education, then who become the leader of the country.