Writing Feedback / [IELTS ESSAY] Successful athletes can earn a great deal more money than others [2]

Successful sports professionals can earn a great deal more money than people in other important professions. Some people think this is fully justified while others think it is unfair.

Some sports professionals can earn a great deal of money after they become successful compared with other important professionals which make some people think that it is unfair while others assume that it's fully justified. Personally, I tend to believe that it is reasonable to make a fortune after they become success.

The big fortune is a reward to their many years' dedicated round-to-clock practices. As it's known to us all, success covers a multiple of blenders which only a small proportion of them can achieve their success. Their perseverance and diligent spirits pave the way to success which should be respected by the society and rewarded by an amount of monetary encouragement. In turn this kind of monetary reward can act a catalyst for change in improving the enthusiasm and motivation of other athletes. On the contrary, if an athletes' success couldn't be recognized by the society there would be more people who are discouraged from pursuing their career, which is unbeneficial to facilitate the influence power of a nation.

On the contrary, we should admit that the over-high income by some sports professionals might lead to others' dissatisfaction because people in other important professions such as research scientists and top doctors, who also make an indispensable contribution to our nation, should be retreated equally. What's more, athlete superstars' high salaries are demined by their popularity to the public instead of their contributions to the society.

As far as I can see, athlete superstars' success covers plenty of obstacles and they also suffer extreme painful practices which is unimaginable to the ordinary people. It is undeniable that they should be rewarded with a wealth of money.

Writing Feedback / [IELTS ESSAY] what, in your opinion, should be the main function of a university? [4]

Some people think that universities should provide graduates with the knowledge and skills needed in the work place. others think that the true function of a university should be to give access to knowledge for its own sake, regardless of whether the course is useful to an employer. what, in your opinion, should be the main function of a university?

Nowadays, what should be the real function of a university is an ongoing controversy. Some place the focus on requirements of students' future work, while others focus on students' own sake. Yet people's beliefs in the purpose of university education lie at the heart of their teaching behaviors. In this essay, I will compare and contrast the two typical opinions regarding this issue.

It is reasonable for some people to argue that universities should provide graduates with the knowledge and skills needed in the workplace. To begin with, the ultimate purpose for students attending university is to hunt for a decent job. It is easier for those who have skillfully mastered the specialized knowledge demanded by the work to compete for their desirable work position. Moreover, it might be a wise choice for graduates to spend their limited time on becoming specialists instead of generalists.

By contrast, a scathing response is printed from others who assume that the true function of a university should be to give students opportunities to acquire knowledge for their own sake, regardless of whether the course is useful to an employer. It is widely accepted that students are the ultimate beneficiaries who should have the right to acquire knowledge for their own interests. Plenty of evidence has shown that most of the successful individuals who have achieved great accomplishment are all to choose their study interests, which in turn proves that universities should be highly advisable to offer students more chances to fulfill their potentials. Another significant factor that should be taken into consideration is that cramming teaching approaches stifle students' imagination and creativity.

Having considered the arguments on both sides of the debate, I tend to believe that providing students more opportunities to study for their own sake would be beneficial to their comprehensive development. Universities couldn't deprive students of pursuing their own study interests.