作文求拍~

betty9601UID：2931898

For successful development of a country, should a government focus its budget more on very young children education rather than on universities?

To become a powerful country or to remain the international stature of a country, the government must stress importance to the education of the young generation with equal treatment to different levels of education. In fact, however, I hold the idea that more budgets should be distributed on universities than young children education.

To begin with, let’s consider the expense both institutions cost. As we all know, youth education belongs to fundamental teaching. Teachers instruct reading, math and music etc in elementary schools. Even though make these elementary schools equip with the first-class educational settings, the cost is still relatively modest and measurable. Whereas education in university is a kind of further education, where students learn or delve into expertise by doing experiments or practical investigations, so universities will spend more money on scientific consumption. Furthermore, university is not just a place educating students; it’s a place performing basic and frontier research, design unbelievable buildings and explore outer space and so on. How much will these exploration cost? No one knows and maybe it’s probably countless.

However, I had to concede that young children education services for a wider population, after all not all students end up their educational life in college. Also, elementary teaching task is not including knowledge instruction, but is to edify children’s rational thinking and nice character, which shows the great importance of it. What we cannot neglect is the principal role that teacher play in it. This means that governments take responsibility to emphasis on the training of those teachers. I must reiterate that I suggest focus less on young children doesn’t equal to put them out of consideration.

I argue, as most would like to agree, that university makes more contribution to the country. If
governors want to see some progress in a short time, the optimal choice is to support universities. There’s any amount of undergraduates preparing and waiting to enter the society working on varieties of jobs. Whether they have the aptitude to construct the country or not directly depend on what universities teach them. But in young children education, there are too many unpredictable reasons that can influence the later growth of children, so financing it wouldn’t affect the development of the country immediately.

So, despite looking the issue from the perspective of the demand of both universities and elementary schools to the significance of both, a government focus its budgets more on universities can be better for the successful development of the country.

mpromanusUID：2565872

1# betty9601

For successful development of a country, should a government focus its budget more on very young children’s education rather than on universities?

To become a powerful country or to remain the international stature of a country (I’m not sure I’m understanding this at all..’保持国际形象’也不是这么翻译的..=.=), a government must stress importance to the education of the young generation with equal treatment to different levels of education. (I’m not sure I’m understanding this sentence either..’stress the importance OF education of the young generation’, and ‘equal treatment to different levels of education’ at the same time? How can you stress the importance of one thing and still have ‘equal’ treatment to everything at the same time? Are you saying the ‘stress the importance’ part is just lip service?) In fact, however (These two are quite unrelated connecting words. I don’t see why you need to use both.), I hold the idea that more budgets should be distributed on universities than young children’s education.

To begin with, let’s consider the expense of both institutions cost (What ‘institutions’ are the ‘both institutions’ you are talking about?). As we all know, youth education belongs to fundamental teaching (Um..that depends very much on your definition of ‘fundamental teaching’..). Teachers instruct in reading, math and music etc in elementary schools. Even though make these elementary schools may be equipped with the first-class educational settings facilities, the cost is still relatively modest and measurable (Why do you think this statement is true? This is neither statistically proven nor commonly acknowledged. You need to support your argument. And if you talk about ‘relatively’, what are you comparing with?). Whereas education in the university is a kind of further education, where students learn or delve into expertise by doing experiments or practical investigations (Um..not really..at least not the same for all disciplines in a modern university..), so universities will spend more money on scientific consumption? (What is ‘scientific consumption’?). Furthermore, a university is not just a place to educate (The place itself does NOT educate students. The people at the place do..ditto for ‘a place performing’ -> ‘a place to form’) students; it’s a place performing basic and frontier research (I don’t get this either. What’s so different between ‘basic’ and ‘frontier’ research that you must differentiate them?), design unbelievable buildings (You can’t really ‘believe’ in a building so it doesn’t make much sense to describe a building as ‘unbelievable’..) and explore the outer space and so on. How much will these explorations cost? No one knows and maybe it’s probably countless. (So…what’s your point? Universities cost a lot of money so they should be given more money? What does this have to do with the question, or with ‘successful development of a country’, for that matter? You need to spell out what your conclusion is and how you arrive at it, not just describe each noun in the question and wait for the reader to guess at your intention.)

However, I have to concede that young children’s education services for a wider population. After all, not all students end up their educational life in college. Also, the elementary teaching task is not including knowledge instruction, but (If you say this, then why do you need the ‘but’..? It doesn’t include instruction, so it must be something else, and this is consistent with the following sentence. The first sentence doesn’t have anything contrary to the second..there is nothing to ‘but’ from.) is to edify children’s rational thinking and nice character, which shows the great importance of it (..shows the great importance of what?). What we cannot neglect is the principal role that teacher play in it (What?). This means that governments take responsibility to emphasis on the training of those teachers. (I don’t get the logic here. If it’s really important then why do you say the governments are responsible just for ‘emphasizing’ teacher training? Shouldn’t they be more involved than just ‘emphasis’? ) I must reiterate that I suggest to focus less on young children, but this doesn’t equal to putting them out of consideration. (And again, what does all this have to do with ‘successful development of a country’?)

I argue, as most would like to agree, that the university makes more contribution to the country. (Now you suddenly turn back to the universities..I can’t see why you are laying out your paragraphs like this. The paragraphing seems to be rather random.) If governors want to see some progress in a short time, the optimal choice is to support universities. There’s any amount of undergraduates preparing and waiting to enter the society working on varieties of jobs. (I don’t get this sentence. Are you trying to say ‘There is a number of undergraduates..at any time.’?) Whether they have the aptitude to construct the country or not directly depends on what universities teach them. But in young children’s education, there are too many unpredictable reasons that can influence the later growth of children, so financing it wouldn’t affect the development of the country immediately.

So, despite looking at the issue from the perspective of the demand of both universities and elementary schools to the significance of both, a government that focuses its budgets more on universities can be better for the successful development of the country.

总结：

好吧只能说你的词汇量很不错但是基本到最后一段之前我都没全看懂大多数的句子，而且很多时候都看不出你是怎么创造出这些句子的。。基本的感觉是你是一个意群一个意群写下去但是完全不考虑句子整体的表意和语法。。

betty9601UID：2931898

谢谢姐姐~~姐姐改的巨认真呐。。。