Some people think that all university students should study whatever they like. Others believe that they should 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.

On the one hand, allowing students to study whatever interests them can enhance both motivation and academic performance. To clarify, when learners pursue subjects they are genuinely passionate about, they invest greater effort into coursework and are less likely to abandon their studies prematurely. For instance, a student captivated by literature is likely to read extensively beyond the required syllabus, deepening expertise that could later translate into a successful writing or publishing career. Moreover, unrestricted choice permits a diversity of skills within a society, including in the arts and humanities, which technology-focused curricula alone cannot supply.

On the other hand, restricting study to subjects with clear future utility can safeguard graduates against unemployment and support national economic growth. To explain, fields such as engineering, computer science and medicine tend to have far greater job availability than niche humanities disciplines, meaning graduates in these areas secure stable employment more readily after finishing their degrees. Furthermore, since science and technology industries drive innovation and productivity, a workforce concentrated in these fields helps a country remain competitive internationally, funding public services through resulting tax revenue.

In my opinion, both approaches have merit depending on individual circumstances. Where a student demonstrates clear talent and dedication toward a subject regardless of its practicality, unrestricted choice should be respected, since forced disciplines often produce disengaged graduates. However, for students without a strong preference, universities should actively encourage enrolment in fields with stronger employment prospects, as this better serves both the individual and the wider economy.

In conclusion, while free choice of subject can nurture passion and a broader range of talents, steering undecided students toward practical fields protects their future employability. A combination of the two, tailored to the individual, offers the most balanced solution.