Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? A university education should be provided free of charge to all interested students. Use examples and reasons to support your position. [closed]

Question

In recent years, in some parts of the world, the governments have sought to increase the amount of learners pay for studying as part of their education export strategy while in others, the authorities offer tuition-free opportunities for most students attending public universities. Personally, I completely agree with the idea of abolishing tuition fees for those are in need of higher education.

First and foremost, university education generally offers positive externality benefits for society. It is true that higher education leads to a more educated and productive workforce; therefore, possessing such high quality labor force could open up avenues for advancement and improved manufacturers. Nations which have higher rates of university education normally have higher levels of innovation and productivity growth. Consequently, there is a justification for the government subsidizing higher education.

In addition, no cost universities could also act as an embodiment of equality opportunity amongst students coming from different walks of life. If they have to pay for university education, this may deter them from acquiring college degrees, especially for people who have low income parents and come from deprived communities. In theory, students could take loans or work part-time; however, this may be insufficient for those who have to support their families and instead discourage them from studying to enter the job market earlier.

Further, enshrining the policy of financing higher education could catalyze a substantial change in the society. It is found that there is positive correlation between happiness and education as citizens who are better educated usually report a higher level of health and contentment. In truth, societies with a higher proportion of degree attainment are more likely to have lower crime rates and higher rates of social welfare.

In conclusion, it seems evident that making university education affordable for the public are advantageous in many ways.

Answer 1

In recent years, in some parts of the world, the governments have sought to increase the amount of fee or raise tuition fees learners pay for studying as part of their education export strategy while in others, the authorities offer tuition-free opportunities for most students attending public universities. Personally, I completely agree with the idea of abolishing tuition fees for those are in need (I suggest using "pursuit" here) of higher education.

First and foremost, university education generally offers positive externality benefits (correct: externalities) for society. It is true that higher education leads to a more educated and productive workforce;. therefore, possessing such high quality labor force could open up avenues for advancement and improved manufacturers (correct: manufacturing). Nations which have higher rates of university education normally have higher levels of innovation and productivity growth. Consequently, there is a justification for the government subsidizing higher education.

In addition, no cost (correct: (tuition-)free) universities could also act as an embodiment of equality (correct: equal) opportunity amongst students coming from different walks of life. If they have to pay for university education, this may deter them from acquiring college degrees, especially for people who have low-income parents and come from deprived communities. In theory, students could take loans or work part-time; however, this may be insufficient for those who have to support their families and instead discourage them from studying to enter the job market earlier (I'd say: "undesirably discourage them from their study and force them to seek labour prematurely).

Further, enshrining the policy of financing higher education could catalyze a substantial change in the society. It is found that there is positive correlation between happiness and education as citizens who are better educated usually report a higher level of health and contentment. In truth, societies with a higher proportion of degree (correct: academic) attainment are more likely to have lower crime rates and higher rates of social welfare.

In conclusion, it seems evident that making university education affordable for the public are advantageous in many ways.

---

Pros:

- Good reasoning

- Wide range of vocabulary

- Good use of grammar

- Acceptable flow of ideas

Cons:

- Mistakes in vocabulary usage, sometimes in expression, persist .

My score for you: 7.5

Keep it up!

Comments

Hi, thank you for your effort, I do appreciate it.
However, I still want to make it clear at some point.
When you said that you know which phrases native speakers use and which they do not. Please give proofs because I can give proof they did use some of these above phrases.

"Externality benefit" => https://books.google.com.vn/books?id=tmzCuVXxg2sC&pg=PA52&lpg=PA52&dq=%22externality+benefit%22&source=bl&ots=GlZHpUMJLZ&sig=AdHCluIfSNkYt44PA4Ggbml5trs&hl=en&sa=X&ei=yiXrVPDVJeTRmAXVrIHYDg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22externality%20benefit%22&f=false

"Degree attainment" => http://www.schev.edu/Reportstats/TJ21GraduationRates.pdf?from=

I agree with equality of opportunity

After all, my point is that when you said "foreigners would not get it" is not a convincing way and would raise a lot of doubt about it. Since I suppose you are Vietnamese too, and I do not think that you would know if they understand or not.
You better support it with reasons (like explain in term of grammar) or use proofs. In fact, you make me feel like your comments based on your guess mostly and not on real logic.

---

Hi, ok, I'd like to apologize for not having done an exhaustive research before correcting you.

My judgement is both based on personal opinions and results on Google.
Previously I only thought that the usage that gained the most linguistic currency would surface but perhaps failed to bargain for those that did not appear in the results, the latter I guess could be words of less popularity but still acceptable.

Second, you can note from the above that I disclaimed the fact that my interpretation of natives' views is entirely correct. I may not be a native. However, let just say that when you have studied and been immersed in a language for some time, you'll know what phrases or words, when used in a particular context or with a specific shade of meaning, will sound natural or not. This is, I think, a normal skill every language learner should acquire at some stage during the course of their study.

Furthermore, I didn't say that they would find your phrases incomprehensible. Instead, I said that without making some efforts, they could hardly grasp it at first glance.

Since you insisted, I'll review the errors:

increase the amount of learners pay
=> I interpreted this in two ways
+ You were referring to the number of learners: learner is a countable noun. Therefore, its quantifier must be a count-quantifier such as "number", not a non- count one like "amount". Second, it should be correct only if either you place behind "learners" a relative pronoun, in this case "who" or "that", or you change "pay" into a gerund, i.e paying.
+ You were implying that learners have to pay more: in this case, the error is conspicuous and doesn't require further explanation, right?

no cost university

This should only be grammatically acceptable if you place a hyphen between "no" and "cost".

instead discourage them from studying to enter the job market earlier

This is mostly based on my feeling. Since there is not a definite structure that can govern the whole phrase, I cannot judge this to be wrong from a grammatical viewpoint.

That's basically all of it, isn't it?

Finally, it's just my advice to be mindful whether one of is of official and popular use when writing, you can take it or lump it :D

---

haha okey. Thanks for your incredible patience. I thought you would be mad at me.
Can I have ur facebook?