Actually, think about it. What is the purpose of education? It is nothing more than training talents for this society and this country. So which is more conducive to cultivating talents? Personally, I think it is strict and lenient. We know that educational resources are limited, and it is meaningless for us to carry out higher education for all. And the so-called higher education is definitely not the only way to succeed. Can't you become a talent without receiving higher education? Will my life be over without higher education? Obviously not. It can be seen that higher education is nothing more than a life path for you to choose. Some people are suitable for this road, while others are not. I think there is no essential difference between the senior professionals trained by higher education and the so-called workers.
Since higher education needs professional education, those who receive education must have the ability to adapt to the requirements of the curriculum system, and the low threshold will undoubtedly reduce the quality. It is true that the ultimate goal of education is to cultivate talents rather than select talents. But we can't deny that selection is the premise of receiving education. Strict selection criteria are also for the sake of everyone who receives education. If you are not suitable for this field, but you have received higher education through loose selection, you will not learn well, and you will doubt yourself and your life, so you will not become a talent. Yan Jin may not be the ideal way, but at present it is the best way. Teaching students in accordance with their aptitude, you can't let everyone receive an education that he is not suitable for with loose standards.
Then why give up? We know that ability is more important than knowledge when we step into social work. What higher education gives you may not be so important, but what is more important is your concept and ability of lifelong learning. There are so many specialized courses, can I master only one and pass all the others? Can I really learn how to study through higher education? I may not have learned much through countless failures, but if you want me to learn something, I may have my own efficient learning methods. Forgiveness does not mean zero threshold, but allows students to have free play after choosing the right way to become talents. Confucius emphasized teaching students in accordance with their aptitude, so it is impossible to judge everyone's success with a unified standard. Everyone has his own success criteria, and no matter how difficult the paper is, it is meaningless for a person who doesn't want to learn. Those who can receive higher education through strict selection are all people with ideals, ambitions or at least goals. Can we give them more choices through relatively loose standards?
At present, the problem of college students' employment is nothing more than the lowering of the threshold for entering universities, and they only ignore the quality in pursuit of so-called equality. And the equality that allows all people to receive higher education is precisely the biggest inequality. Everyone receives higher education, and everyone is unwilling to do "low-level jobs". How is equality reflected? Nowadays, many people criticize exam-oriented education, but is exam-oriented education guilty? Most of those people hold a sour grape mentality, but they don't know that those who are truly capable must have the ability to adapt to various systems.