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 your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
Any government being a public entity uses public money for its work and motive of that money is obviously not profit oriented unlike private entities. Generally, it is believed that those who don’t have anything, they have governments because these public institutions are required to serve the public welfare and downtrodden people are their priorities. In the same way, governments help those who can’t afford education to realize their potential. However, some capitalist pundits think that governments should not take the burden of higher education of students belong to economically weaker section on their own shoulders.
I completely disagree with the above statement and believe that education is a basic right for every human being and higher education being a part of it also comes under this right, thus, nobody should be denied this right only on the basis of economic circumstances. If a student has fulfilled all the academic requirements of the course, she intends to pursue, that means, she has capability to complete the course. After completing the course, it is very much possible that she will pay to the society through her work. Thus, if government defray his university’s fee, then government would also get her services back to the economy. It is a clear case of win-win situation for both parties.
Moreover, offering free higher education to the deprived section helps to raise them on the ladder of poverty eradication. When they have this opportunity, even a prodigy of construction labourer can build his/her career and further help his family to rise economically. Many times, parents of poor children are just waiting for excuses to stop their children from studying further and forcefully put them in a labour. If there would be no option for these students to continue their higher studies then their future can’t be changed. Hence, governments can reach their universal poverty reduction goals through this financial help.
Some experts also put a view that these government sources can be directed to other productive works like building public infrastructure and funding for poor who want to pursue their higher education courses can be collected through philanthropic activities. This initially sounds good but it must be clear that governments already have the established mechanisms to distribute welfare goods. Nonprofit organisations can complement welfare activities but can’t supplant government entities in this regard. Thus, reach of public governments is wider than other institutions.
Therefore, it is our common obligation to give enough opportunities to those who deserve to change the world for a good by directing the public resources to their financial benefits. This will help to take their services for the economy in future and to help reduce the menace of poverty. This will not be possible without the gateway of government itself. Additionally, philanthropic donations can be used to reduce the burden of governments. It would be good to monitor the policy by regularly monitoring of those who take the benefits so that no one can use it in an illicit manner. In this manner, this policy can open hitherto closed doors for many needful students.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 565, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an illicit manner" with adverb for "illicit"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... the benefits so that no one can use it in an illicit manner. In this manner, this policy can open h...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, moreover, so, then, therefore, thus, in the same way
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.4196629213 161% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 61.0 33.0505617978 185% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 12.9106741573 163% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2716.0 2235.4752809 121% => OK
No of words: 513.0 442.535393258 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29434697856 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75914943092 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84098331497 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 271.0 215.323595506 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.528265107212 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 846.9 704.065955056 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 6.24550561798 224% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 0.0 4.99550561798 0% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.3728857245 60.3974514979 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.166666667 118.986275619 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.375 23.4991977007 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.45833333333 5.21951772744 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.151423052478 0.243740707755 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0472751300408 0.0831039109588 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0334852969566 0.0758088955206 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.092230708744 0.150359130593 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0262357047331 0.0667264976115 39% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.8420337079 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.4 12.1639044944 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.96 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 139.0 100.480337079 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.