Writing Feedback / TOEFL: schools should provide equal financial support to different courses [3]

Question: 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.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.

I agree with the school should provide equal financial support to courses, libraries and sports, social activities. A better education system should include various courses and activity. Thus, universities showing support to different classes and area to help them develop is significant. If the school takes side with only certain area, there must be some negative effect and thus having a bad influence on school. The following are my reasons.

I think a diversely university should take care of all kinds of students with different strength. By equal financial support, students can develop their own interests. Students who are good at sport can receive the help from school. School try its best to employee a couch to train, to teach students to be a better player, athletes; students who are interested in English literature, philosophy may spend time in library reading, discussing. As a result, school should build spaces to let students discuss, so that student's abilities may enhance. My cousin already graduated from college. She sometimes talks about the lives when she was an undergraduate. Her school allows students to take class regardless of your major. So she took different courses from English literature to sports. The every class she took didn't disappoint her, because she thought the school hire the best instructor to guide the students and in each department, the resources are updated very often.

Then what happens to a university that doesn't provide equal financial support? The parts being ignored loose their resources to develop their interests, so the school may loose great students, because school doesn't pay attentions to certain students. In my country, most schools don't put a lot emphasis on sports. So, students good at sports rather than math, English will loose their confidence and eventually give up their interests. Thus, the futures of the students are ruined. Isn't it misery? Also, the parts being ignored may have negative thought to school. When the students graduate from, or leave the school, they may be harmful to the school's reputation, because their unequal experience in university. One of my friends, he is a transferred student to my school. He told me about the school he went, and what he said made me a horrible impression on the school. The school spend lots budget on facilities for college of science. However, some facilities were broken and old enough to be renew for a long time in department of physical education.

As you can see, a university that cares about the students and it's own future will try it's best to make all the students satisfy with their learning experiences at school. Students are the most important part of the school, so providing equal support to different area can show the school's sincerity.

Writing Feedback / TOEFL: working three or five days a week? "killing two birds with one stone" [3]

Question: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
It's more enjoyable to have a job where you work only three days a week for long hours than to have a job where you work five days a week for shorten hours.

Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.

The topic about working for long hours within three days or shorter hours for five days becomes a popular topic. For most people, working is tiring and annoying, but the form to complete the work for a week is often relative to how you feel when you work. I am the type of person who would condense my hard time to feel better. The following are reasons why I prefer working long hours in three days to shorter hours in five days.

To begin with, condensing my work allows me to do my own stuff in "complete days". A complete day means a lot to me, because there is only one thing to focus on in one day. If the day is for work, then try your best to complete the work within twenty-four hours. After the day, all the work is done, and the rest time is all yours. There is nothing to worry about and you can concentrate on your own entertainment or spend time with family. My cousin works at a corporation, the system is the same as I mentioned. So he spends the other two days fishing, climbing, doing what ever he wants to do, and on weekends, he spends time with family and friends. He told me the working day is stressful, however as you pass the three days, you can arrange your activity, also it's a good way to release the pressure and maintain your own health included mentally and physically. Isn't it a good way to live?

Second, in the shoes of companies on this issue, making the work done in three days rather than five days seems more efficient to customers. Though the hour of working is the same, the finished date is different. That is to say, if there is a project takes 15 hours to finish, then, the corporation work for longer hours can submit their final product in three days only; on the other hands, the company work for five days a week will spend tow more days to hand the completed work. So, if you are a customer, what will you do? Will you choose the company spending three days or five days to work with? Once I need to printed posters, I asked many copy stores when would they finish printing my posters, if they stated that day. My ultimate choice was the fattest copy store. There is always something more out there need to be done. As the posters were printed, I need to post them in several different spots. So as the business, everyone is in a hurry to make their work done so they could move to the next steps. Thus, more working hours, fewer working days can also brings business to the company.

As you can see, working for long hours but fewer days can benefit the employees and the company, customers. Employees have more private time and the company is famous for their high efficiency in customer's view, but actually the working time is the same as other five-days companies. Why don't you try such a killing-two-birds-with-one-stone form?

Writing Feedback / TOEFL writing; I'm against providing more money to professors [5]

Question: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
To improve the quality of education, universities should spend more money in salaries for university professors.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.

University education is always an important part of one's life. That's why education in university is discussed all the time. What is the best way to orientate the students? Raising the salaries of professors so? I would say no. The professors are essential, however, the schools are established for students. Money should spend on facilities in school or update resources, which are beneficial to school rather than just instructors. The following are my opinions.

To begin with, the school should put more emphasis on students instead of professors. I think the most efficient way to improve the education is to guide the students to learn actively. By renewing some facilities in school so students will spend more time at school doing assignment. A comfortable environment can attract people to stay longer. Thus, students spend more time on school to make a good circulation of learning. That is to say, students have a better environment to working on their assignments so the quality of their assignments will improve. Thus, the competition between peers enhances and forms a circulation. In my school, the classrooms in my university are old and kind of shabby. For me, I prefer spending money in a coffee shop to staying at school to finish my assignment. It's unpleasant to stay at school. However, coffee shops are not always quiet, so my classmates and I often finish our work roughly.

Besides, the ultimate purpose is to change, to motivate students to be better. To improve education, spending more money to raise professors' salary is inappropriate. In addition, will the university filter all the professors overall? Some professors don't deserve the money at all, then, what's the point to spend money on them? High-salary instructors don't teach students harder because they earn more money. There won't be any effect if school does so. There was news about raising professors' salary in my country. This event provoked a demonstration composing of students mostly. The proposal of the demonstration was eliminating the raising salaries. As you can see, if the policy of raising salary was supported, the demonstration would not happen.

At school, students are priority. Students' tuition is not only for the professors but also for their quality of learning at university. That's the main reason I against providing more money to professors. Students are those who suppose to enjoy the use of their tuition.

thanks for correcting errors.