Governments should not spend more money in support of the arts than in support of athletics such as state-sponsored Olympic teams.

TOEFL, IELTS, Personal Statement and CV Proofreading Services. TOEFL Writing Governments should not spend more money in support of the arts than in support of athletics such as state-sponsored Olympic teams.

  • kkming
    University: Tianjin University
    Nationality: Chinese
    November 19, 2020 at 10:39 am

    Governments should not spend more money in support of the arts than in support of athletics such as state-sponsored Olympic teams.

    When it comes to whether to provide more financial support to art than to athletics, there always are some people arguing that government should provide more support to art, while others disapprove. From my perspective, I indeed think the former proposal is wrong. There need more deeply thought about this issue.

    There is no such judgement that art is more important than athletics. Though art does inspire human a lot on all aspects of society. It could not directly lead to conclusion that art is more vital to human than athletics. Since athletics always pursues higher, faster, stronger, human truly benefits from this positive goal. In some situations, athletics could offer more directly interests to the whole country and civilians. For example, In the Olympic Games held in Beijing in 2008, which is the most splendid and lavish game than ever, athletics from all over the world competed together to get higher grades among the human history. If who got a gold medal, it is not only for him to be honorable, but also led the country the winner represents got respect from all over the world. The delight of winning would also pull economic flourish, therefore, through such wins, all countries could benefit from it.  In this term, how could people endorse that governments should offer more aids to art?

    If the governments do support more on art than athletics, it means that country has not pay enough attention to athletics. We still have to focus on more practical fields such as economic, sports games, living horizontal and so on.  Nowadays, mainstream value system deems that if a country did not get enough gold medal, it could not be considered as a powerful country. In other words , a country could improve its international status by supporting more on athletics.

    So, points I just described explicitly express which opinion I lean on. Though art seems to be more vital to human, it is more wisely to think from country’s angle. For more benefit a country can get, we should aid more on athletics.

    Administrator
    University: University of Wisconsin
    November 20, 2020 at 2:57 pm

    Score: ungraded

    Issues:

    1. About 30% of the sentences exceed 20 words. Shorten/split them.
    2. Lengthy paragraphs. Restrict each paragraph to 90 words.
    3. Article errors
    4. Spelling errors
    5. Do not just restate the question in your introduction, establish your argument instead.

    I will send you screenshots to illustrate specific problems/errors.

    kkming
    University: Tianjin University
    Nationality: Chinese
    November 22, 2020 at 10:17 am

    When it comes to whether to provide more financial support to art than to athletics, there always are some people arguing that governments should offer more support to art, while others disapprove. From my perspective, I prefer that the former proposal is wrong. There need more sophisticated thought about this issue.

    There is no such judgment that art is more important than athletics. Though art does inspire humans a lot in all fabrics of society. It could not come to conclusion that this field is more vital to humans than athletics. Sports games always pursue the positive goal that achieving higher, faster and stronger. It is well known that humans indeed benefit from this goal. In some situations, athletics could offer more directly interests to the whole country and civilians. For example, In the Olympic Games held in Beijing in 2008, the most splendid and lavish game ever, athletics all over the world competed together to get higher grades in humans’ history. If someone got a gold medal, there is no doubt that he was honorable. Further, the country the winner represented would receive respects from other countries. The delight of winning would pull economic flourish, through such wins, all countries could benefit from it.  In this term, how could people endorse that governments should offer more aids to art?

    If the governments support more on art than athletics, it means that country has not paid enough attention to athletics. Well, countries couldn’t get any visible gains.Thus, the governments should focus more on practical fields such as economic, sports games, standard of living, and so on.  Nowadays, the mainstream value deems that a country isn’t considered a powerful country without enough gold medals . In other words, a nation could improve its international status by supporting more on athletics.

    So, the points I just described express which opinion I lean. Though art seems to be more vital to humans, it is more practical to think from the country’s angle. For more benefit a country can get, we should aid more on athletics.

    Administrator
    University: University of Wisconsin
    November 23, 2020 at 6:52 pm

    Score: 59.3

    Issues:

    1. About 15% of the sentences are passive. Convert some of them into their active counterparts.
    2. Lengthy paragraphs. Restrict each paragraph to 90 words.
    3. Verb form errors
    4. Preposition errors

    I will send you screenshots to illustrate specific problems/errors.