Choosing University Subjects: Personal Interest vs Useful Fields

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.

Annotated response

5 correction notes

Showing 5 correction notes.

Whether university students should study subjects of their own choice to study career-oriented subjects like technology and science is a widely debated issue. Both of these views have arguments for and against them. This essay delves into both views and expresses an opinion that tertiary education should grant freedom to its students when it comes to the subject they want to study.

On the one hand, the supporters of university students studying career-oriented subjects contend that offering a wide range of subjects according to learners' choice has little practical value. A recent study shows that a predefined syllabus at a university bound a student to study regularly and prepare for the exam while the freedom to take any subject or major they like dramatically increases the number of . This is an alarming outcome, and this is why the university authority needs to think twice before implementing the policy. Furthermore, the development of a nation, these days, highly depends on a technologically sound workforce and universities should for the country. From this perspective, it seems quite logical for universities to teach technology and science-related subjects to most of their .

On the other hand, others opine that a university is the highest citadel for education, and helps build the next generation who would lead the country. In this regard, the education and teaching policy of the university affects the whole nation. When students at the university are given certain freedom while picking their majors, it helps create all-rounded individuals who are ready to lead the nation. Forcing them to study some selected subjects for future employment would make them become workers for offices, not leaders for the country. They also express that letting them study a wide range of subjects, including history, arts, commerce and so on, would make them far more knowledgeable and prepared to take on future challenges. Society needs artists, filmmakers, writers, journalists, politicians and so on, and not only scientists, doctors and engineers.

To conclude, universities have to consider the pros and cons of any policy adopted including whether the students are free to pick their subjects or not. Personally, I believe that letting university students has far more benefits and seems more logical in a broader sense.

Overall assessment

Why this response received Band 7.0

The response's strongest aspect is its clear, consistent position supporting free subject choice, developed with relevant reasoning and examples across both views. The main limitation is occasional imprecision in vocabulary and phrasing, with some arguments that could be more tightly developed.

IELTS criteria

How each score was decided

Task Response

7.0

The response addresses both views and presents a clear, consistent personal opinion with developed, relevant supporting ideas, though some arguments rely on assertion rather than fuller elaboration.

Coherence and Cohesion

7.0

Ideas progress logically through clearly organised paragraphs with a range of cohesive devices used mostly naturally, despite occasional slightly mechanical linking.

Lexical Resource

7.0

The response uses a sufficient range of vocabulary with some flexibility and less common items such as 'citadel' and 'tertiary education', though occasional imprecise collocations and phrasing reduce precision.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy

7.0

A variety of complex structures is used with generally good control, and frequent error-free sentences are present, with only minor non-impeding slips in grammar and word form.