▶ Your Answer :
In the post-industrial context, education has been a social concern for any nation state for its role in nurturing capable, responsible citizens. With the highly specialized labor market of today, educational institutions bear more significant responsibility than ever to encourage students to pursue a specific field of study that suits their interests and abilities. It is in this labor-oriented end that one may argue that higher education should discourage students from investing their time into disciplines that they do not show much potential to succeed. Although the statement’s argument appears sound initially, the claim eventually undermines the true role of educational institutions by reducing the concept of education to labor-specific training.
The given statement fundamentally assumes the role of educational institutions in the way that defines education in a narrow way: to train students for success in a specialized field. The probable reason why the statement even assumes that success is a prime goal of educational institutions arises from the context of highly specialized labor market of post-industrial society. It is admittedly true that specialization into a field of study to which a student shows proclivity would provide economic benefits in a short term. However, specialization only into a field of the student’s inclination implies a future harm. General education of various fields, even in which the student does not excel, provide him or her with well-rounded understanding of the world, which is becoming more necessary in a highly complex, interactive global world.
Discouraging students not to explore the fields in which they do not excel is a frustrating concept because it not only raises a narrow definition of success, but also undermines the role of education. Educational institutions are not merely job training sites for future workers. They provide students an interactive field in which they can learn from teachers and peers by teaching students not only to succeed, but also to fail--and more importantly, how to bounce back. We as humans fail during the course of our lives, not just once, but many, many times. Teaching students how to cope with failure is thus an important responsibility academic institutions must bear, not avoid.
Furthermore, how to determine whether a student is likely to succeed in a given field is an extremely difficult and arbitrary job for an educational institution. It is hard to measure students’ likeliness to succeed in the real world solely based on academic performances in a school setting. For example, the founder of Fedex devised his business plan during his years at Harvard Business School, one of the most prestigious academic institutions in the field. Although in retrospect, his business acumen eventually led him to establish a multibillion corporation successfully, the school discouraged his plan by giving his final proposal the grade of C. As shown in this case, it is not only hard for schools to judge likeliness of a student to succeed, but also in certain cases, they even fail to recognize the students' ability when students are too ahead of academic understanding of the world, which is often retrospective not proactive.
To summarize, premature judgement of teachers and schools in determining the likeliness of a student to succeed is not only narrow-minded, but also potentially harmful. It inhibits students from gaining wide range of knowledge as well as learning how to cope with failure; it may even cause harm for students by prohibiting success they may achieve outside the academic world. A true educational institution should not hinder students, but prepare students with various skill sets: both general and specific, not only for jobs but also for life in general. |