Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
At universities and colleges sports and social activities are just as important as classes and libraries and should receive equal financial support.
How should school financial resources be allocated among different agencies? The author argues that schools should offer same financial supports for sports and social activities as they do for classes and school libraries. While extracurricular interests such as sports and social activities should be encouraged by schools, they should by no means receive equal financial investment as courses and libraries.
To begin with, it is a common knowledge that school has limited financial resources, either from the government or from their endowment funds. Therefore, we can assume that if more funds are allocated to sports and social activities, the funds available for courses and library would be shrinked. The principal goal for schools is to impart knowledge and skills to students so that they can be more prepared to enter the society, and classes and libary are the primary approaches for students to lear. A valid case in point would be that, by spending more on sports and social activities, the school may loose the chance to recruit a distinguished professor at certain field thus prevent students to learn from great faculty. Therefore, it would be imprudent for schools to sacrifice the development of coureses and library to support extracurricular activities.
Secondly, only a certain portion of student population devote their time in sports and social activities, but definitely all students take classes and most of them will take advantage of the library resources. Accordingly, if, as opposed by the author, the school spend equal amount of money on extracurricular activities and courses and library, it would be unfair for those students who have no interests in sports and social activities. Therefore, I disagree with this proposal due to the consideration that it only benefit a limited group of students and thus make it an overall rather unfair policy.
Admittedly, classes and library are not the only place where students can learn, and sports and social activities can indeed help cultivate students in a more holistic way. For example, many social activities are conductive to students communication skills and leadership. However, it does not necessarily mean that school should financially support them. For instance, social activity groups can seek for sponsorship outside of schools and by doing so, will provide greater opportunities for students to grow their capacities.
To sum up, I stronly disagree with the proposal that calls for equal financial supports to sports and social activities. It sacrifices the potential development of classes and libraries, which is the most important agencies that serves the primary goals of colleges and universities. It is also an unfair policy because only certain students benefit from it. And lastly, sports and social activities should carry the burden to finance for themselve, which may lead to greater learning opportunities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 605, Rule ID: LOOSE_LOSE[4]
Message: Did you mean 'lose' (= miss, waste, suffer the loss etc.)?
Suggestion: lose
...s and social activities, the school may loose the chance to recruit a distinguished p...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, however, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, for instance, such as, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 9.8082437276 194% => OK
Conjunction : 29.0 13.8261648746 210% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 43.0788530466 72% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 52.1666666667 92% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.0752688172 136% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2474.0 1977.66487455 125% => OK
No of words: 456.0 407.700716846 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.42543859649 4.8611393121 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62105577807 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90516132015 2.67179642975 109% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 212.727598566 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.47149122807 0.524837075471 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 747.9 618.680645161 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 6.0 3.08781362007 194% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.1344086022 119% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.0131259124 48.9658058833 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.210526316 100.406767564 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 20.6045352989 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.21052631579 5.45110844103 151% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.267975201786 0.236089414692 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0994142184644 0.076458572812 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0655181807292 0.0737576698707 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180771044519 0.150856017488 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0649752411696 0.0645574589148 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 11.7677419355 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 58.1214874552 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.1575268817 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.51 10.9000537634 133% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.01818996416 102% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 86.8835125448 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.0537634409 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.