Topic:
Some people think that universities should provide graduates with the knowledge and skills needed in the workplace. Others think that the true function of a university should be to give access to knowledge for its own sake, regardless of whether the course is useful to an employer.
What, in your opinion, should be the main function of a university?
What should be the main function of university has long been an issue of controversy. Some people hold an opinion that university teaching should focus on students' individual skills on a practical level, while the opponents claim that universities, as academic institutions, should merely maintain theoretical knowledge teaching. I, personally, side with the former viewpoint. Arguments will be raised to strengthen the rectitude of the very practice in terms of students' study intention and their future career development.
On the one hand, a great deal of educational researches suggest that the main purpose for the majority of students who continues university study is to obtain graduation certificates and some other relevant qualifications, which are essential for their future job-hunting. If one wants to apply for a job as a gynaecologist, a bachelor degree in medical field is a must.
On the other hand, only by learning from practical experience, can students adapt to their future workplaces more easily and promptly, and thereby performing better in their career. On the contrary, if only theoretical knowledge is rendered by universities, students may end up managing to adjust themselves to meet job requirements after graduation. In other words, for the sake of students' future career development, practical knowledge and skills should be provided when they are in campus.
To sum up, the main task for universities is training a group of elites with practical knowledge and professional skills. Hence, the teaching conducted in universities should be oriented towards individuals' future development.
You seem to be arguing that teaching people knowledge for its own sake cultivates in them qualities that might make them useful to an employer, and so the dichotomy is a false one. This is an excellent argument, but I'd like to see you make it a bit more explicitly. At the moment, your way of discussing the issue (on the one hand . . . on the other) tends to reinforce rather than negate the existence of said dichotomy.
