Sports and social activities at universities and colleges are important, yet in my view they are not as important as the academic activities. The main objective of universities still lies in training the students academically and conduct world class research to propel the world towards progression.
Since universities and colleges are non profit organizations, hence they always have limited funds. Now they have to justifiably allocate the funds so that the utility can be maximized. Keeping that in view, I disagree that sports and social activities should receive equal financial support. If the university or college is getting established then to create infrastructure it could be argued to an extent that funds can be shared equally. Now I will put forward three arguments to justify my position.
First, In my experience not all university or college students use sports facilities as well as social activities, hence it would not be optimum to spend almost half of the financial resources on students who are interested in using such facilities. If still institution wants to go ahead with that, then I would look for data evidence that actually how many students use the facilities. If there is substantial number then institutions can otherwise they must not.
Secondly, there are many students who need financial assistance and are from poor backgrounds. In order to complete the study, sometimes they need to opt for loans and other debt instruments. In my view rather than allocating half of financial resources, if some of that money can be given to financially needy students then university or college must start some scholarships to the students on need basis. This would appeal to students with poor background but who are exceptionally talented. This would help university to address the sole purpose of their existence.
Finally, the sports and social facilities can be brought under the purview of paid services and it can be done such that the students don't run away from activities. For example, university "x" spends 100,000 USD on sports and social facilities every year and they have 2000 students who use sport facilities then a model can be proposed where cost is shared in 50:50 ration. This way university "x" will bear annually 50,000 USD and students who use facilities will bear 50,000 USD. Hence the cost of maintenance per student will be 25 USD per student per year, which could easily be borne by students in order to keep the facilities in good shape.
So, universities and colleges must try to fulfill their main objectives and on the other hand keep on supporting student activities through innovative model which makes sense for university financially. Hence, arguments seeking equal financial support for sport and social activities can be rejected on grounds of objective of university and innovation required in financial spending on such facilities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 570, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ss the sole purpose of their existence. Finally, the sports and social facilitie...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 135, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...d it can be done such that the students dont run away from activities. For example, ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 297, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ery year and they have 2000 students who use sport facilities then a model can be...
^^
Line 9, column 505, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ho use facilities will bear 50,000 USD. Hence the cost of maintenance per student wil...
^^^^^
Line 11, column 405, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... financial spending on such facilities.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, finally, first, hence, if, look, second, secondly, so, still, then, well, for example, as well as, in my view, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 15.1003584229 139% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 25.0 9.8082437276 255% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 21.0 13.8261648746 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 43.0788530466 67% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 52.1666666667 98% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.0752688172 99% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2463.0 1977.66487455 125% => OK
No of words: 469.0 407.700716846 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25159914712 4.8611393121 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65364457471 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91731189909 2.67179642975 109% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 212.727598566 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.486140724947 0.524837075471 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 758.7 618.680645161 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6003584229 102% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.6338049556 48.9658058833 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.285714286 100.406767564 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3333333333 20.6045352989 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.80952380952 5.45110844103 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.53405017921 132% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 5.0 5.5376344086 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => 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: 0.147534147808 0.236089414692 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0587519411192 0.076458572812 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0818515754291 0.0737576698707 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0982371172594 0.150856017488 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0472416477959 0.0645574589148 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 11.7677419355 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 58.1214874552 85% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 10.9000537634 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.76 8.01818996416 97% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 86.8835125448 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => 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.