Colleges and universities should require their students to spend at least one semester studying in a foreign country

Overseas exchange is all the rage in recent years. Universities clamber to sign collaborative programs to whisk their best students abroad while the students themselves dream of squeezing into the few offers that realize their hopes of studying in a foreign environment. The yearning for universities to send students into other countries is, perhaps, propelled by the close-knit global community that values such international experiences. However, despite its many advantages, students should not be required to study abroad by their universities.

Proponents of foreign study link such an experience with the greatest benefits for the students. Surely, the opportunity to learn and grow in another country will prepare them for a better future career. It allows them to broaden their views and embrace disparate cultures. Those who refuse must not understand till they try for themselves and see the value of spending time abroad. How are we to compete against experts across the world if we did not see how big the world is? Shouldn’t college students, who have now finally matured enough to venture out alone, be encouraged to challenge themselves outside of their comfort zone?

It is true that there is much to gain from foreign study. However, the choice should not be forced upon students who may very well have plans of their own. In a university environment where students are free to choose many of their classes, it makes little sense to then force these students to take classes abroad. Some might have internships that require their stay in their home country. If they are obligated to terminate these working experiences for the sake of “broadening their horizons,” they could lose a valuable chance to improve skills that could prove invaluable in finding work. Others might have plans of setting up their own company, and would waste precious time toiling away in a foreign country when they could have made significant progress on preparations at home. It makes little sense to drag such students abroad without consideration of their personal conditions.

Speaking of conditions, this requirement to study abroad would be even more egregious when applied to students from low-income families. These students would have to bear the necessary expenses to survive abroad; even if they travel to countries with cheaper costs, they would certainly face additional expenses to settle down in a new place. Language barriers could also result in conundrums, for students who have had little resources throughout life more often have poorer language skills. For example, there is a drastic difference between the English speaking abilities of rural and urban students in Taiwan. Despite the government’s attempts to close the gap in the education divide, students in rural areas continue to fall behind. If these students are obliged to go abroad with a paucity of funds and an incapability to communicate with locals, they might suffer more than they gain.

The idea of giving all college students the chance to seek study in a foreign country is laudable. However, it should not be made into an obligation. Students themselves have the free will to decide what is best for them, especially at an age where they are mature enough to make their own decisions. Some have their own study plans while others do not have the means. Instead of mindlessly shoving these students abroad, universities will do a better job of helping students make the best of their study experience with due consideration of their specific conditions.