A government should focus its budget more on young children education than on universities.
Should a government focus its budget more on young children’s education than on universities? The answer is yes. I concede that university education now mostly relies on government funding. However, early education has a stronger need for additional funding in order to guarantee quality education and school facilities.
Children aged five to eighteen years old are at the most crucial stage of their intellectual development, therefore deserving better educators. According to the latest research reported by the China Children Health Fund (CCHF), a child’s intelligence develops mostly from five to eighteen, thus requiring excellent educators in their early development. Besides, the training and education of well-qualified teachers in primary schools or secondary schools are often quite costly, and teachers need to be paid a relatively high salary. As the number of qualified teachers in the primary schools and secondary schools increases, K-18 education becomes more unaffordable for parents. As a result, the government should subsidize early education to relieve the burden.
Good facilities are another essential component of comprehensive learning programs for children. Although universities can argue that post-secondary education also requires funding, the world has seen many brilliant inventions and much useful research done without much funding. Some of the most remarkable scientific discoveries in the past decade, such as the latest quick-charge batteries and artificial chemical lighting, were done with little to no government funding. Meanwhile, such discoveries could not be made without proper education stimulating one’s creative and analytical faculties.
Admittedly, university education does need money. Usually, salaries of college professors are high and schooling instruments are costly. However, college education should mainly rely on donations from social organizations, large corporations and accomplished alumni. These groups can relieve much of the financial pressures universities face. What is more, considered as the education of elites, a college career is optional—therefore, colleges should not impose their burden on the general public and should instead charge students higher tuition fees for enrolling in university.
To conclude, although universities need funding to build campuses, remodel laboratories and refill libraries, many social organizations, companies and individuals can raise the funds for them. The government, with a limited budget spread across many fields, should place their priority in early education in order to ensure a healthy future for the country.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-06 | qbuer | 80 | view |
| 2019-05-11 | curiousnoob | 83 | view |
| 2018-06-19 | Mehrdad.imn | 73 | view |
- People should insist on a challenging plan rather than a practical plan. 70
- Do you agree or disagree with following statement: All the university students should take history courses no matter what field they major in. 83
- People should insist on a challenging plan rather than a practical plan. 70
- A government should focus its budget more on young children’s education than on universities. 81
- Do you agree or disagree with following statement: All the university students should take history courses no matter what field they major in. 81
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 127, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to better', 'to well'
Suggestion: to better; to well
...ectual development, therefore deserving better educators. According to the latest rese...
^^^^^^
Line 13, column 484, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...s should not impose their burden on the general public and should instead charge students high...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, however, if, second, so, therefore, thus, well, while, such as, as a result, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 15.1003584229 73% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 9.8082437276 143% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 11.0286738351 18% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 43.0788530466 23% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 52.1666666667 79% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 8.0752688172 272% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2289.0 1977.66487455 116% => OK
No of words: 377.0 407.700716846 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.07161803714 4.8611393121 125% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4064143971 4.48103885553 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18900631439 2.67179642975 119% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 212.727598566 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.596816976127 0.524837075471 114% => OK
syllable_count: 708.3 618.680645161 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.51630824373 125% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 9.59856630824 21% => OK
Article: 7.0 3.08781362007 227% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.8818732111 48.9658058833 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.45 100.406767564 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.85 20.6045352989 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.2 5.45110844103 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 11.8709677419 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.296061658856 0.236089414692 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0970091970995 0.076458572812 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.162803719749 0.0737576698707 221% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.17600411408 0.150856017488 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.147660652566 0.0645574589148 229% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 11.7677419355 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.83 58.1214874552 48% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.9 10.1575268817 137% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.93 10.9000537634 164% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.89 8.01818996416 123% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 86.8835125448 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.