Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed

Education, as John Dewey says, is a process of gaining knowledge, ideas, beliefs and values. The fundamental duty of any educational institution is to facilitate this process and shape their students into successful professionals and responsible citizens. The author contends that educational institutes are responsible to dissuade children from pursuing field of interest in which they are unlikely to succeed. The statement may find some justification in the fact that there are some students pursuing unrealistic passions needing the light of the day to see external realities and rationalities. However, such a step would actually amount to be the abdication of the responsibilities entrusted upon educational institutions.

Verily, every field of study or endeavor demands specific mental or physical characteristics from students. For example, curiosity is the key for scientists; perspicacity of mind is essential for a prosecutor; physical abilities are necessary for athletes and so on. Similarly, every student possesses a unique combination of latent skills and talent. This is further corroborated by the Gardener’s theory of multiple intelligences that classifies skill-sets of children into different categories such as word-smart, Maths-smart, sound-smart, etc. A match between a field’s required skill requisites and a student’s qualities is imperative for the latter’s academic and professional success. Otherwise, the result would be a stream of unskilled laymen unable to contribute towards one’s profession, and hence looking into a bleak future. Particularly due to the enormous financial investment that any professional education entails, this prospect of failure cannot be ignored. The educational institutions, therefore, have a duty to at least aware the students about the challenges they may face in their chosen field of study.

However, beyond this, there are significant caveats with the recommendation. Firstly, putting the onus on educational institutions to dissuade student from pursuing any field they are unlikely to succeed in, has an underlying apocryphal assumption that they are effective in evaluating students’ skill-sets- through the grade point average, teacher comments, and some quizzes or competitions here and there-and extrapolate and correlate the same with their chances of success in any stream. This also fails to account the fact that merely current abilities cannot decide one chances of succeeding in future. Secondly, dissuading students from pursuing his interest bears the risk of demotivating them entirely from every academic pursuit. Students, many times, are very passionate about their chosen dream professions. They may get disheartened and lose complete interest when persuaded to chose any another area of study. Even if their skill-set is compatible with that area, without interest and motivation, they are doomed for failure.

Moreover, development psychologists argue that skills, if not gifted, can also be through proper training and practice. That is to say, though a student may not be compatible initially for a given field of study or endeavor, he may well become one through his dedication. There are several rags to riches stories of individuals who, through sheer hard-work, reached the summit despite personal limitations, and early failures. For instance, in India there are myriad examples of differently-able aspirants cracking, and in fact, topping the country’s most difficult civil services examinations. Similarly, success stories of Walt Disney, J.K Rowling, Colonel Sanders, etc., all corroborate that dedication and love for a particular field is more important than inherent compatible skills. It is, in fact, the fundamental responsibility of the educational institution to facilitate a learning environment and resources to carve such passionate students for their interested field rather than dissuading them citing their lack of skills.

In conclusion, the educational institutes must aware students about challenges of pursuing a given field and skill-mismatch. However, their primary duty is to motivate students and provide them training and learning to overcome the gaps in skills, rather dissuading them from pursuing their passions based on unreliable assessment and extrapolation. Students can always overcome personal limitations if motivated; whereas no skill-set can suffice for success without motivation – a scenario that the recommendation may well invoke.