Constraint Breeds Resentment by Tyler

Constraint Breeds Resentment by Tyler - March 2016 Scholarship Essay

An age-old saying warns prospective parents of a hotly contested truth: Strict parents raise mistrustful kids. Of course, many dispute this principle, in particular parents who may favor a more restrictive style of rearing their children. Regardless of whether said line of logic applies to child-raising specifically, however, the general idea that more freedom leads to more success can be applied almost universally across several different schools of thought and has been a staple of American culture for years in all areas: Freedom of speech allows for diversity of opinion which results in a better-educated and more varied populace. Freedom of and from religion opens the door to critical thinking and scientific and philosophical engagement. Free (moderately regulated) enterprise has been embraced for its providing a variety of options to consumers and supposed self-regulation where costs are concerned, and though I, myself, may favor a better-regulated, less clumsy economic policy, the fact remains that free market capitalism has become a cornerstone of the modern American identity.
The question remains, then, why secondary and post-secondary institutions have not caught onto the laissez-faire style of running things which seems to have all but taken over every other aspect of society in the United States. It is my firm belief that educational requirements beyond the eighth grade should be entirely individually-constructed in order to ensure optimal individual success. With that said, it only seems logical that students not be required to participate in extracurricular studies – including study abroad programs.
On the flip side, however, the benefits of studying abroad should be impressed upon pupils extensively; the opportunity to travel to another country as part of growing oneself and maturing into a better adult is invaluable and should be treated as such by educators, but coming from a trilingual geography nerd with insatiable wanderlust, there is absolutely no point in forcing a life-changing experience (like going abroad) on someone who won’t understand its value. Such is a waste of money for either the school or traveler, and given that the proposal at hand is to make studying abroad mandatory, I would assume that the cost would fall on the institution which could make much better use of its money than to forcibly send an unwilling student halfway across the world.
Yet in the same breath, given the opportunity, I believe without a doubt that a large majority of students would make the choice to study abroad and that the option should always be open to qualifying pupils. The intrinsic purpose of education is to prepare young people for success as not-so-young people, and hardly anyone would argue that studying in a foreign country broadens one’s horizons and makes one a better candidate for success in interpersonal communication and critical thought in the real world. By virtue of its stated purpose, then, it seems only right that post-secondary institutions provide domestically successful students with a subsidized opportunity to gain knowledge in places that aren’t the good old U.S. of A.
Some students might not see the value in such an opportunity and choose not to take advantage of it, and that’s okay – no student should be forced to partake in any program they wish not to so long as said student is paying for his, her, or their education (provided their major does not mandate it, as fields such as culture, language, and global studies may). At any rate, however, the offer to study abroad should always be extended to willing and deserving students; after all, they’ve worked hard to get into college and are there to learn more about their respective fields, the world, and themselves; haven’t they earned it?