Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
Educational institutions are temples of knowledge that shape the character of an individual. Their roles are next to that of parents for inculcating moral, social, cultural and intellectual skills in a child right from the beginning and that continues throughout the developmental stages of the individual. These institutions have a crucial role to play in shaping the career and guiding the students to excel in the field, which interests them the most. However, these institutions, in no way, should restrict the student to pursue some fields that are more promising and exaggerated about their likely hood of success than others. This is because such an approach will have a disastrous effect, creating a chunk of stereotyped mindsets and annihilating the creativity of individual and thus, a severe loss of innovativeness and inventiveness.
The statement provided attempts to persuade students to pursue fields in which they are more likely to succeed. However, it fails to perfectly determine the meaning of success for every individual. For some individuals success would mean money and fame whereas for others success can be personal satisfaction and honing their creativity through their work. For instance, many students even after graduating from esteemed colleges like IITs prefer to become an elementary school teacher or work in a Non-Governmental Organization in order to achieve a gratifying feeling of uplifting the weakest segment of society rather than being attracted to lucrative jobs. Therefore, institutions can help students to develop teaching skills and other social and cultural skills that aid the eradication of major societal problems.
In addition, if educational institutions frame academic curriculum that focuses most on science, Mathematics, English and computer education, it will surely limit the options for students who will not get much opportunity for exploring themselves. Thus, the students have to cultivate an interest choosing a subject from a prescribed list compromising on their actual interest or inherent skills. For example, some students would prefer to become a sportsperson, a writer, a painter, a musician or a dancer and exhibit their innovativeness rather than becoming an engineer or a doctor. History has seen plethora of students who opted for less popular fields and excelled in their fields. For example, Sachin Tendulkar, considered the God of cricket, was hardly interested in the conventional school curriculum but proved to be a prodigy in cricket. Had his school not included sports in their curriculum (which is given little weightage as compared to core theoretical subjects), the world would have been deprived of such an extraordinary cricketer. Therefore, educational institutions should provide a wide spectrum of fields and let the students explore the areas, which suit them the most. In this way, students can really excel in their respective fields and achieve awards and rewards.
Thus, I strongly believe that educational institutes should in no way dissuade students to pursue a field, which is unlikely to be profitable. They should rather encourage students to follow their gut feeling and strife hard to achieve their goals, however seemingly impossible the task may appear. When one establishes a career where his heart belongs, he is capable to taking the venture at hand to the highest possible level. Therefore, educational institutes should be opened up to all possible career options, urging the students to identify the fields in which they are most comfortable.