Government funding should only be provided for the best students as scholarships. Other funding of universities should come from student fees and private organizations. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Sample 1:

Around the world, there are various ways that universities receive their funding. Some people believe that they should be partly funded through the government by means of scholarships for particularly gifted students, but that generally their funding should come from tuition and other sources. I agree with this position, but only up to a point.

Every government has some attitude towards educational funding, but most provide some sort of assistance to their country’s institutes of higher learning. In some cases, like in Scotland or Norway, governments pay for all students to study at university. However, in other countries they provide some support to excellent students, and let the universities obtain their own general funding. This system works well, but I think it should be expanded not just to include the most gifted students, but also to ensure diversity, which is also important for education and society as a whole.

We must also be careful in considering where other sources of income come from, as these will undoubtedly affect the quality of education provided. In many places, corporations and religious institutes will make contributions to a university; however, these may influence the university in some negative way. On the other hand, these donations provide valuable resources for universities that may otherwise struggle to raise funds.

In conclusion, there is no perfect way to operate a university, and a variety of sources for funding is probably the best that could be expected. The government should certainly contribute something, but perhaps it is unfair that they only cover expenses for the most intelligent students. We must also be wary of the influence of those who fund our schools.

Sample 2:

It is argued that a university scholarship should be awarded to the most effective students only. While I accept that rewarding the most excellent students alone is beneficial to some extent, I would argue that some other subjects should be taken into account when awarding scholarships.

Undoubtedly, the best learners deserve a scholarship for several reasons. Firstly, it is common sense that the most excellent students pay full attention to lectures and allocate the majority of their time to study further after school. Consequently, their academic results are impressive and a scholarship to motivate and stimulate them to persist in their excellent performance is essential. Additionally, awarding a scholarship to excellent school performers alone may save the governments a whole host of money. The key explanation for this argument is that the number of universities is too large, which may entail huge state expenditure if other subjects are taken into account. As a result, this might remove the financial burden on the national budget and the goverments could spare a larger proportion of tax revenue on other priorities such as healthcare or security.

Despite all arguments above, I strongly believe that a scholarship should also be awarded to some other subjects. First, disadvantaged students who have decent academic results, albeit not the best, should be recognized as well. In fact, their dreams of approaching tertiary education may fail to be fulfilled if they have to pay all enormous tuition fees incurred or seek private sponsorship which may take a long time and have no guarantee. Second, students who make the most progress also deserve to receive government funding. A scholarship may act as a key motivator for their diligence, encourage them to study harder and get better qualifications. If state support is always for the best, this goal may be too unrelistic for less skilled students. As a result, they tend to be demotivated and ignore their study.

In conclusion, although a performance-based scholarship system bears several benefits, it seems to me that national sponsorship for impoverished and less skilled but diligent students is also necessary.

Sample 3:

The allocation of government funding for scholarships to exclusively support the best students while relying on student fees and private organizations for other university funding is a topic that has generated considerable debate. While it is essential to recognize the value of merit-based scholarships, I fundamentally disagree with the notion that government funding should be limited to the best students alone.

First and foremost, the idea of reserving government scholarships for only the best students fails to account for the diverse talents, backgrounds, and potential hidden within the broader student population. This article is from laokaoya website. Education is not just about rewarding those who have excelled academically but also about identifying and nurturing untapped potential. Many successful individuals did not shine academically but showed remarkable skills and innovation in their later careers. Limiting scholarships to the best students may stifle the development of these talents and restrict opportunities for individuals who may excel in non-traditional ways.

Furthermore, limiting government funding to the best students perpetuates social inequalities. It often leads to a scenario where individuals from privileged backgrounds, who have access to better preparatory education and resources, are more likely to secure scholarships. This approach exacerbates existing disparities, denying access to higher education to many talented individuals who may not have had the same opportunities in their formative years.

On the other hand, government funding should be seen as an investment in the future workforce and the betterment of society as a whole. A more equitable distribution of scholarships and financial aid can lead to a diverse, skilled, and talented workforce that contributes to innovation, economic growth, and social progress.

In conclusion, limiting government scholarships to the best students is a myopic approach that neglects the potential of many deserving individuals and reinforces social inequalities. A more inclusive funding model that considers various factors, including financial need and non-academic talents, is essential to ensure that higher education remains accessible and equitable for all.