Agree or disagree. Government should spend more on early education than on college education.
From broad perspective, in the current state of affairs we face, in which education has been accounted as the absolute necessity for establishing the bright future for children, it is not far-fetched to presume that governmental financial supports play undeniable role to that end. However, which stage of education requires more investment is considered as a contentious issue. There is a growing segments of people who contend that rudimentary school needs more attention in terms of allocating the governmental budget rather than higher degrees such as college. I personally concur with this statement. In the ensuing paragraph this statement will be further elaborated.
First and foremost, primary school built up the fundamentals knowledge of the next generation. There is no denying to the fact that knowledge is like the building, therefore, if it had not been gained on the basis of accurate principals, it would not work appropriately. According to the latest research attributing to Dr. Kevin Rudd, a prominent and highly respected professor in Department of sociology at Macquarie University, a substantial rise in unemployment rate in 2015 in the Sydney is closely associated with the numbers of graduated people who have high degree education. He said that most of whom were rejected from the companies due to not having adequate knowledge. Furthermore, the matter of time is another notable item in this regard. In fact, so capable is the human brain that there is not any restrained factors to hinder a person's learning but how much time needs in order to obtain the new material can be controversial nonetheless. In other words, the older the human is, the less his capability to get new information. This is another proof providing further legitimacy for the idea that spending money for rudimentary children brings a variety of advantages.
Another crucial point that should be taken into consideration is the fragile personality of children in early education. It is not goes without saying that education system does not follow merely the intention of learning the knowledge to the students. Undoubtedly, the ultimate purpose is make them prepare to enter into the real society in the near future and deal with a plethora of coming obstacles. Subsequently, since children are impressionable to a great extent toward their surrounding areas in primary school, it would be sensible if government invested sufficient money to protect from this vulnerable kids. For instance, they should have experts recognizing the students who are more prone to suffering depression disorder or low self-confidence problems. In addition, monetary issues is an integral part of some families. The older people are, the more protection they can have. As an example, compare an 8-year-old boy with his teenager brother. Apparently, the older siblings have more options to scarp a living, from working in other times of the day to spend their money economically, but government should make a point of thinking each of these destitute kids.
To wrap up, it is more judicious to say that the remarkable amount of the education budget should be assigned to early education. Not only does this allocation guarantee their future knowledge, but also it takes care of this susceptible portion of the society.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 49, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'fundamentals'' or 'fundamental's'?
Suggestion: fundamentals'; fundamental's
...d foremost, primary school built up the fundamentals knowledge of the next generation. There...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, first, furthermore, however, if, nonetheless, so, therefore, for instance, in addition, in fact, such as, in other words, to a great extent
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 15.1003584229 179% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 13.8261648746 51% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 43.0788530466 84% => OK
Preposition: 76.0 52.1666666667 146% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 8.0752688172 310% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2777.0 1977.66487455 140% => OK
No of words: 529.0 407.700716846 130% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24952741021 4.8611393121 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79583152331 4.48103885553 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99556503862 2.67179642975 112% => OK
Unique words: 304.0 212.727598566 143% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.574669187146 0.524837075471 109% => OK
syllable_count: 876.6 618.680645161 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.994623655914 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 3.08781362007 291% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.94265232975 223% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.6003584229 117% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.2464900835 48.9658058833 141% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.708333333 100.406767564 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0416666667 20.6045352989 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.75 5.45110844103 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 11.8709677419 67% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.88709677419 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.177371478944 0.236089414692 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0425964916949 0.076458572812 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0624420039933 0.0737576698707 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111326889661 0.150856017488 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0577801135803 0.0645574589148 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 11.7677419355 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 58.1214874552 70% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 10.1575268817 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 10.9000537634 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.53 8.01818996416 119% => OK
difficult_words: 161.0 86.8835125448 185% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.002688172 120% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.247311828 137% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.