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 suppo

The speaker puts forth that educational institutions should take a proactive role towards guiding students away from fields of study where they might not succeed. There is plausibility in such claim because educational institutions, which have holistic view of different fields accompanied with data on how the student is performing. In short, educational institutes are in better position to guide the students. However, since success depends on different factors which educational institution might not have access to, it might be counterproductive in some cases.

Educational Institutions are not only center for education, but also they nurture the students through powerful interactions with other students, faculty, and dynamics of learning. They contribute towards development of individuals, and are the stepping stones for further education, work, or research. Educational Institutions have much better understanding of variety of fields of studies. They also possess data on performance of a student in particular subject of study. Hence, as they are in better position to guide individuals, it is plausible for them to have responsibility to help students.

In addition to that, students who are biased due to their predilection towards particular field, might overlook how they are performing. More than often, we can see examples of misplaced priorities and wrong decision making ruining lives of students, which can lead to changing majors or dropping off entirely. Social pressure is also an important factor in choosing fields of study. Parental pressure and peer pressure can lead to a student choosing an overtly ambitious fields of study. Such a decision will cause discomfort to the student in near future. Hampering his growth, as well as wastage of resources used on particular student. Hence, taking into note that a student can suffer from undue bias and societal pressure, it is apt for the educational institution to guide students towards their fields of study.

However, success in particular field of study depends on multitudes of factors - determination, motivation, passion, guidance, methods of learning, peers, background, etc. An educational institution has access to some but not all information about the student. Taking a decision based on limited information would prove to be hazardous. Considering an examples of a student whose family situation is not good at particular time, and this might cause decrease in grades in demanding subjects. Upon analyzed by the educational institution, they might be inclined to suggest less demanding field of study. However, if the student is passionate and ambitious, and only thing that is responsible for causing such waning in grades is temporary familial problem, then suggesting less demanding field of study would prove to be counterproductive. This might also have detrimental effect if the student wishes to continue in more demanding field of study, as it might demotivate him or her. Hence, while taking decisions on guiding the students away from field of study, where they might fail, various factors shall be taken into account. This can be dealt with by employing career counselors who specialize in this domain.

Summing up, it can be concluded that as educational institutions are in better position to take responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing field of study in which they are less likely to succeed. In addition to that, students might make wrong decisions due to societal pressures, hence, educational institution can play a better role. However, while guiding students, educational institutions should take caution and employ career counselors for better results.