Some people think that all university students should study whatever they like. Others believe that they shiuld only be allowed to study subjects that will be useful in the future, such as those related to science and technology. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

The courses offered by university programs are a controversial topic nowadays. It is contended by some people that higher education institutions should liberate students to learn their respective interests,

while

others are convinced that only practical

subjects

for instance

natural art and machinery should be permitted to be taught in college classrooms.

However

, I staunchly endorse the first viewpoint.

Although

subjects

which are perceived as useful are considered to be the shortcuts to successfully land a job, the youngsters have the opportunity to deepen other skills. On one hand, it is believed that human beings are born with varying interests and gifts outside of science and automation. By restricting college

subjects

to only particular areas of study, prospective enlistment will lose their chances to train their specific competencies under expert supervision and they will no longer have a pathway to achieve their dream jobs.

For instance

, emerging artists and musicians will no longer have a high-quality curriculum to hone their creativity if colleges are only allowed to teach science and technology.

Thus

, they will be forced to take the only offered options and become mediocre technicians or scientists because their capacities are in other fields of expertise.

On the other hand

, the public, particularly older generations, are more likely to believe studying rigid science equals a better future.

This

is because they perceive a community

who

Correct pronoun usage

that

show examples

study

Correct subject-verb agreement

studies

show examples

natural sciences

are

Correct subject-verb agreement

is

show examples

generally smarter than others,

thus

making them able to land highly-valued jobs relatively easier. One clear example is the flexibility of STEM graduates to switch careers to business like consultation and banking, proven by the requirements needed by big corporations namely McKinsey and BCG are dominated by strong mathematics skills.

Therefore

, creating boundaries regarding the

subjects

being taught in higher education is considered essential to make admissions receive intensive and focused lessons of useful knowledge. In my opinion, both views have their own benefits but there can be no doubt that academic institutions should provide a wider range of

subjects

for their students.

This

is because an individual is uniquely interested in various things and ideally should be supported to reach their maximum potential. Prospective experts in unpopular fields like poets, painters, or musicians should not be abandoned just because the area of study is traditionally viewed as useless. In conclusion, opposing standpoints regarding university

subjects

are divided into those who believe should learn whatever they like and those who disagree with

such

view. I stand with the first point of view because people have the right to be given opportunities to flourish themselves, even though what is perceived as useful

subjects

are in fact powerful successfully secure careers.