It has been an issue of debate that whether the university offer admit to those young students, who got higher marks or they gave admission to pupils of all age groups with low grades. This essay will discuss both sides of the argument in detail and provide evidence as to why institutes gave admit to young students who got high percentage in their secondary classes.
Some people believe that, courses that studied in institutes are more difficult and also a teacher studied all topics in depth to the students. So, if they gave admission to those students who scored less marks in their previous study, then it's difficult for them to pass the exam. Additionally, if they failed, then they will include them in some criminal activity. For example, in the year 2016, according to Times News, 20% students in the academy, failed in their first year because of the little basic knowledge of their subjects. Therefore, the college should give entry to young students those who performed very well in their school.
On the opposite side, some people claim that, getting good tertiary education from the reputed institute is the right of the individual and it does not depend upon the age and grades that they score in their schools. Secondly, institue can not judge the ability of any student on the basis of marks they scored. For an instance, according to the New York Times, Canada is the only nation that provide university education to all age group of pupils and also give entry to those students who scored less marks. Therefore, if pupils of the nation are literate then it's beneficial not only for the individual, but also important for the nation too.
In conclusion, Although academy education is beneficial for the growth of the individual of all age groups, but in order to pass the university exam and survive in this competitive era, it's good for the student's if university gave admission to those young students only who scored high marks. Notwithstanding, students who capable of affording university courses, should not be profitable from national funding for education.
It has been an issue of debate that whether the
university
offer admit to those
young
students
,
who
got
higher
marks or
they
gave
admission to pupils of all
age
groups with low grades. This essay will discuss both sides of the argument in detail and provide evidence as to why institutes
gave
admit to
young
students
who
got
high percentage in their secondary classes.
Some
people
believe that, courses that studied in institutes are more difficult and
also
a teacher studied all topics in depth to the
students
.
So
, if they
gave
admission to those
students
who
scored
less
marks
in their previous study, then it's difficult for them to pass the exam.
Additionally
, if they failed, then they will include them in
some
criminal activity.
For example
, in the year 2016, according to Times News, 20%
students
in the academy, failed in their
first
year
because
of the
little
basic knowledge of their subjects.
Therefore
, the college should give entry to
young
students
those
who
performed
very
well in their school.
On the opposite side,
some
people
claim that, getting
good
tertiary
education
from the reputed institute is the right of the individual and it does not depend upon the
age
and grades that they score in their schools.
Secondly
,
institue
can not judge the ability of any
student
on the basis of
marks
they
scored
. For an instance, according to the New York Times, Canada is the
only
nation that provide
university
education
to all
age
group of pupils and
also
give entry to those
students
who
scored
less
marks
.
Therefore
, if pupils of the nation are literate then it's beneficial not
only
for the individual,
but
also
important
for the nation too.
In conclusion
, Although academy
education
is beneficial for the growth of the individual of all
age
groups,
but
in order to pass the
university
exam and survive in this competitive era, it's
good
for the student's if
university
gave
admission to those
young
students
only
who
scored
high
marks
. Notwithstanding,
students
who
capable of affording
university
courses, should not be profitable from national funding for
education
.