Governments offering a free university education to any student who has been admitted to a university but who cannot afford the tuition may look plausible idea. But it is impractical for the governments to provide the funding for every university student who is not capable of paying the tuition.
It is true that illiteracy and poverty go hand in hand. If the government was able to eradicate illiteracy, poverty would be eradicated concurrently. In other words, helping poor people to gain the proper education promote their ability to build their own career and be financially independent. Many programs in the US established to help poor and unemployed individuals to gain education to reduce their dependency on the government. Also, providing proper education for poor people will be beneficial for the society and boost the economy as well. Though, government funding for other aspects of the economy should be given a priority. Governmental funding for free university education will produce numerous numbers of graduates. Meanwhile, the government should promote the economy to create a fitting jobs market for these graduates. Moreover, government funding for university education should give the priority for the majors which are more demanded in the jobs market.
Another aspect should be given into consideration, that free university education will lessen the value of the education. Many students would misuse the funding provided for educations, and they might tend to not taking it seriously. As a result, an excessive waste of the government resource may occur. Also, this will increase the quantity of the university graduate but may affect the quality of the education itself. Since more students will apply for university admission, some universities may increase their admission rates to increase their profits. That is to say, governments funding should be provided to improve the quality of university education as well. In addition, governments funding should be given the priority to exceptional students, whom the financial impede shouldn't hinder their academic excellence, which would benefit their society, even more, the whole country from their achievements.
As a result, while free university education for students who can't afford it has many benefits for individuals and communities, it should not have a priority over the other aspects of the development. Also, there are many points which should be taken into consideration when the government funds university education.
- Society should identify those children who have special talents and provide training for them at an early age to develop their talents.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your 54
- Teachers' salaries should be based on their students' academic performance. 66
- It is more harmful to compromise one's own beliefs than to adhere to them.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting 66
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones. 58
- Teachers' salaries should be based on their students' academic performance. 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...is not capable of paying the tuition. It is true that illiteracy and poverty g...
^^^
Line 5, column 783, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
...nal students, whom the financial impede shouldnt hinder their academic excellence, which...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 63, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...e university education for students who cant afford it has many benefits for individ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, look, may, moreover, so, well, while, in addition, as a result, in other words, it is true, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.4196629213 177% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 33.0505617978 64% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 58.6224719101 60% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 26.0 12.9106741573 201% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2134.0 2235.4752809 95% => OK
No of words: 388.0 442.535393258 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.5 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43821085614 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9297356616 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 215.323595506 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.471649484536 0.4932671777 96% => OK
syllable_count: 684.0 704.065955056 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.5380548413 60.3974514979 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.7 118.986275619 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4 23.4991977007 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.05 5.21951772744 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.383700040131 0.243740707755 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.134875209816 0.0831039109588 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.163542828215 0.0758088955206 216% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.324817419896 0.150359130593 216% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.206232323771 0.0667264976115 309% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 48.8420337079 72% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.1743820225 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.62 12.1639044944 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 100.480337079 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.