Writing Feedback / [Toefl ibt-Opinion Essay] Should Attendance Be Required in College? [5]

College study is a higher from of education which is required in many jobs. In our journey of learning, beside the tests and experiments, attendance is also one of the most important factors that decide our results. People who have their own situation and cannot go to class every day, but the policy of college do not allow to missing too three times. Although many people feel that attendance is the most important things, I believe that attendance should be optional for three reasons.

The first reason is that most the people who attend a college are adults, so they should be responsible in their life. In college, we do not only learn about what in the textbook is, but college also teaches us how to show our thinking, how to work with others, how to get life's experiences, and how to be responsible. Therefore, people who are in college have the right way to decide to go to class or not because they are not children or teenagers anymore. They are supposed to figure out that they go to class because they need to, and they have thought about school clearly, so that they can notice the important of college in their life. If they choose to stay at home instead of going to classes, they were willing to deal with the result. So there is no reason to make attendance to be imperative.

Second, nowadays, most college classes use computers to control all work, and most teachers have a private web-page for their own class. For instance, my friend Peter, who had been in a serious car accident, was luckily secured on last Christmas. Unfortunately, he has had to stay in the hospital for six months, but he is international student and must come to school legally to stay in the United States. Both his teachers agreed to give him a priority to study through the computer instead of going to classes. After that semester, he came back to school without problem about attendance and graduated with an excellent degree. How it could happen? That is because the computers can have all information, such as lectures, handouts, schedule, grades, events, or homework, so that the student can know everything just by staying at home. That is why attendance is becoming less and less importance in college.

Finally, attendance should not be required because our society has a diversity of people in college including single, married, and workers. Moreover, every single person has their own situations to prevent them make a perfect attendance. To single people, they might go to school every day, but to married and workers, most of the time college cannot be a first choice for them. For example, some they might have family members sick, they have to work extra time to get money for their life, or most college and children's school don't have the same holiday. In that case, parents have to decide stay home instead of being an outstanding student. So if attendance is required and someone fails because of it with a justifiable reason, it will be a pity for them even though the can still catch up with the class. Vanessa, one of my classmates, told me," I am going to fail my classes because I missed too many hours. I do not want to, but my son, he is really sick, and he might have just only 3 months left. I am his mother, so that my son is the most importance to me."

To summarize, attendance is importance in education, but college is a place of people who are intelligent and responsible enough to make their own decisions. There are many difficult reasons to prevent students going to classes every day. Therefore, the attendance should be optional in college to help some unlucky people who will complete their course works even if they do not attend classes.

Writing Feedback / The Argumentative Essay - Eliminating Extreme Poverty [3]

Poverty is one of the most arduous challenges facing the world today. According to the website Social & Economic Injustice, there is a staggering number with over 40 percent of the world's population living in extreme poverty, and more than 1.2 billion people, or about 20 percent of the world population, living on $1 to survive every day. In addition, there is no doubt that both the poor and the rich all exist in the world. In "Can Extreme Poverty Be Eliminated," Jeffrey Sachs mentions that "For the first time in history," (7) representatives of every country from prosperous to extreme poor gathered together to discuss eradicating extreme poverty. This possibility will seem imaginary to some, but it has been proven with the extraordinary outburst of China, India, and "other low-income parts of Asia over the past 25 years" (8). It is true that without the world's support, it could have been challenging for these countries to overcome poverty. Although many people believe that great power comes with great responsibility, which means that affluent countries should help the poor, I believe that they should not assume all the financial burden of eliminating extreme poverty in the world for two main reasons.

First of all, every country has problems to deal with regardless of its economic condition. Similar to the poor, wealthy countries are also facing many social problems such as poverty, crime, and addiction every day. Therefore, poor countries need take responsibility for their problems and try to handle it before asking for help. Throughout history, there are many examples of countries that have overcome poverty and rebuilt their economics by the effort of themselves. One good example is Japan, where there is a lack of natural resources, and they are often affected by tsunamis and earthquakes, yet, Japanese, these people have not been frustrated. They have taken their abilities to confront obstacles in order to overcome indigence and raise Japan's economics to be the third best economy in the world today. Another example is Singapore, which used to be a British colony. After independence, like many countries, Singapore had to face many social problems, and poverty was one of the most difficult objective to their country. Singaporeans devotedly afforded to eliminate pauperism in their nation, and now Singapore has become one the richest countries in the world. In short, these countries managed to become strong, wealthy countries because they understood their problems and worked hard to solve them. Therefore, to eradicate extreme poverty, every nation should take their responsibility to understand the roots of their impoverishment, and then with the support from affluent countries would able to find a solution that works. For example, Japan understood the barriers to its economic development was a lack of natural resources. They have started importing raw materials such as crude petroleum, iron ore, and petroleum gas and transforming them into something more valuable like refined petroleum and hot-rolled iron. After all, where there is the problem, there is solution. Each poor nation in the world can become as prosperous as a developed nation if it understands its limitations and works towards finding solutions.

Finally, there will always be the poor in life. If wealthy countries choose to send financial aid to impoverished ones, it will be a very large amount of money. I believe that we should try another way to help the poor escape from poverty because the poor do not only need money, but they also need skills to overcome indigence. There is an old saying that says give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. In other words, the wealthy may not support the poor financial aid forever. However, affluent nations can show them how to use the money in the right way, which one does to one's money to get wealthy. In my opinion, instead of undertaking their financial burden, the affluent countries should help them invest in their lack of expenses by a loan. The affluent countries can also educate and teach the poor countries how to face their difficulties and how to use that loan effectively to get rid of poverty once and for all.

Many people believe that the poor do not cause poverty. The failures of structures, ineffective economics, and social systems are the main reasons that propel nations to extreme impoverishment. What Jeffrey Sachs points out-that the investment in basic government services such as infrastructure, education, and scientific and technological innovation may bring a solution to the most difficult cases of pauperism and stimulate economic growth- (10) may be correct. Investment seems to be a good way to help the poor overcome indigence. While it is true that lack of efficiency of the state systems is the source of poverty, wealthy countries should not send large amounts of financial aid to invest in unfamiliar neighborhoods. The evident objective is that one country cannot understand the roots of others' problems. In addition, there are many things that relate to a country that contribute to its economics such as culture, government, education, or religion. For example, the inherent cultures which keep most impoverished countries away from moving forward to other wealthy one, or some governments that want to hold the power like to engulf the human right and keep the communities poor can be a problem leads to poverty. Because of these situations, the idea of sending a large amount of money to invest in basic state systems is not a good one at this time.

In conclusion, there are ways to help the impoverished people that are better than to assume all their financial responsibility. Not only do the poor need money, but they also need skills to run into obstacles. Affluent countries can educate the poor to understand the difficulties that impoverished nations are facing and how to overcome poverty. In addition, the rich can help the poor by giving them financial aid with loans and simultaneously teaching them necessary skills for life. Therefore, in an indirect way, the poor may gain the ability to revise their nations which are trapped in impoverishment.