Post your essay. Get expert feedback. For free.We're trying to help students improve their writing the hard way. Do you know students who want critical essay reviews from a professor of English Literature? Click like to share. Click here to sign up and post your own essay. We offer no paid services. All reviews are completely free.
Educational Institutions Have A Responsibility To Dissuade Students From Pursuing Fields Of Study In Which They Are Unlikely To Succeed - With A Free Essay Review
Prompt: “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.”
Some think that institutions have an obligation to deter students from studying field where they less likely to succeed. While it would be auspicious for students to know the right place to make a push, it is simple not possible.
On the one hand, it might be reasonable to admonish students not to invest time and energy into 100% failure endeavors. There is a lot at stake; in fact, the whole life of a person depends on the choice of right profession. If experts could unequivocally state that this particular person will never get a job or employ her of his knowledge someplace else, then it would be highly propitious for students to know this. The problem is-there is no way to know for sure that a person will fail.
Overwhelmingly, it is not a business of institutions to choose which specialty to take for students. When an applicant send documents and it is obvious that he is downright feeble for the program he or she is simple not enrolled. If someone if teetering between two or three majors (and this is likely the case for a high school student) he or she can seek personal career consultations. While institutions could give career consultation, using labor market researches and result of personal tests, it not explicit “dissuading”. Meanwhile, institutions have to dissuade PhD students from particular research focuses. Some tyro PhD students could not have full credentials in a field, thus consultation from an authority in the field is indispensable.
In conclusion, institutions have to give some career consultations, but this is hardly an unrestricted rule. The whole thing largely depends on context.
The essay is not as bad as your comments below suggest. You are right to state that “there is a lot at stake” and I think the essay could benefit from explaining more clearly than you do what exactly is at stake. Since one of the reasons that an educational institution might have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed is precisely the fact that so much is at stake, you ought to address that reason as completely as you can. That is especially the case if, on the one hand, you want to argue that institutions should not be in the business of interfering in a student’s choice, and, on the other hand, you want to respond directly to the prompt which instructs you to “ be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.”
If you’ve looked at my responses to other essays on this topic, you will know that I don’t think the argument that it is impossible to know whether a student will fail is a particularly relevant argument. The prompt presupposes that it is actually possible to tell if a student is “unlikely” to succeed, and that is the case that you need to deal with. It is reasonable to argue, however, that is it “not the business of institutions to choose” for the student, but you need then to argue why an educational institution should not take on that responsibility. Much of the rest of your essay is concerned to show that the whole “debate” is moot: if a student is unqualified, they won’t be admitted. That is probably true, but unfortunately the prompt (as silly as it seems) presupposes a situation where a student will be able to pursue a field of study in which she or he is unlikely to succeed, and you need to deal with that situation. As it happens, there are many educational institutions (or things that go by that name) that will admit a student (with money) whether or not the student is likely to succeed in her or his field of study. So your argument is really skirting the issue. You need to deal with the scenario imagined by the prompt, and actually discuss whether an educational institution has an ethical responsibility of the kind stated.