Post your essay. Get expert feedback. For free.We're trying to help students improve their writing the hard way. Do you know students who want critical essay reviews from a professor of English Literature? Click like to share. Click here to sign up and post your own essay. We offer no paid services. All reviews are completely free.
Governments Should Offer A Free University Education To Any Student Who Has Been Admitted To A University But Who Cannot Afford The Tuition.
Governments should offer a free university education to any student who has been admitted to a university but who cannot afford the tuition.
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 your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
The recommendation could bring significant benefits to the poor students and parents by offering them an equal education opportunity. However, I could not fully agree with the suggestion considering the possible negative effects it will bring. To avoid the obvious flaw, I come up with an improved proposal.
To begin with, the suggestion is beneficial to the students and parents, and also the reputation of the government from the following aspects.
Firstly, it could save those who can not afford the expensive tuitions from losing the valuable education opportunity that will change the destiny of the whole family. In previous education strategy, getting educated was a pure personal affair, and many students from the remote areas could not support themselves and had no choice but to drop out of school. But this lost opportunity means a lot the poor guy, in that it will help himself to find a good job in urban city, and his next generations would then avoid repeating the bitter experience as him.
Secondly, the subsidization from the government will help create a good reputation of the government, which further contributes to the stability and harmony of our society. Moreover, parents are also encouraged by the good news and they then stimulate their students to work hard to gain the opportunity of being supported to get higher education. In this sense, the level of education of the whole society will be enhanced.
However, this strategy is unexceptionally a coin of two sides. And there exists the following conspicuous negative effects.
For one thing, it will inevitably add to the financial burden of the government and the schools. Then how will our government collect funds to support the students? Usually, the government will increase the tax, but it is very likely that the other citizens will feel unfair and discontent. Worse, there may be rebellion upon this. Or the government curtails the funds on other aspects, like the fund on medical care, the fund on removal of environmental pollution, or the funds on stimulating the depressed economy. But, it is obvious imperfect for the government to pay the tuition for the students at the cost of the any lessening other government service funds.
For another, in order to get the financial support, some students and parents, may fake their economical conditions by telling lies to the school. The authorities then have to devote tremendous human and financial resources to check the credulity of materials. What is worse, this progress may cost a lot of time and maybe cause some students to miss the deadline of confirmation of enrollment.
Thirdly, the strategy may not necessarily help the students to cultivate them to be qualified graduates who could effectively contribute to our society. Many students may take it for granted to be supported. And without financial burden, they are less likely to be stimulated by poverty, and many students just forget they have the responsibility of working hard to live up to the requirement and promise the made when they applied for the support. Many such students who get supported by the government get addicted to computer games and fail to get the degree at the end of university life, and for them, the drawbacks overweigh the benefits.
To avoid the flaws, I bring up an improved proposal in which the government and schools do not directly subsidize any student, but provide the poor students with opportunities of doing part-time job in and out of the campus. And they are encouraged to get the scholarships specific for the poor students to cover the tuition through their hard work. As the popular Chinese saying goes, "Give him a fish, you feed him for one day; Show him how to fish, you feed him for life long.", the real responsibility of the government and schools lies in leading the poor students to work hard and support themselves by their own hands. Thus the improved proposal is superior to the suggestion of the speaker.