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 a 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 defrays 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 some kind of 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, kind of, in the same way
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.9520958084 154% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 61.0 28.8173652695 212% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2727.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 516.0 441.139720559 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28488372093 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.76609204519 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83825951144 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 272.0 204.123752495 133% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.527131782946 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 850.5 705.55239521 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 4.96107784431 282% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 0.0 8.76447105788 0% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.5520093772 57.8364921388 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.625 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.83333333333 5.70786347227 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.151047002614 0.218282227539 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0472410010337 0.0743258471296 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0335155052593 0.0701772020484 48% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0921177157145 0.128457276422 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0263306469442 0.0628817314937 42% => 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 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 139.0 98.500998004 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.