Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? For the successful development of a country, it is more important for a government to send money to the education of very young children (five to ten years old) than to spend money on universities. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
Nine times out of ten, many people may encounter a lot of considerations and always figure out how to efficiently use the money for the education for the successful development of a country in this hustle and bustle of society. In that event, it may be argued that spending money on the education of very young children should be suggested first rather than universities when one has both positive and negative feedback. As far as I am concerned, proving the positive effect of the result in advance would be a successful method to increase people's willingness to accept comments. First of all, university students or academic institutions have many available sources of income. Nowadays, a lot of universities or colleges receive endless support from both the government and social organizations. However, the government's assistance for elementary schools and kindergartens is significantly lower than that of universities. The first illustration which can demonstrate my opinion can be the finance aids at Harvard. In 2022, Harvard is known as one of the top colleges in the world. In other words, huge endowments are supported by colleges by billionaires, foreign entities, and graduates. Thus, instead of sending money to the university, sending money for the education of very young children will be best for the successful development of the country. To be more specific, today's progenies are tomorrow's adults who are going to contribute to the collective efforts of members of the community in order to render a brighter future. In addition, discovering a young child's talent is very important. At an young age, children tend to show more creativity, imagination, interests, and some other peculiarities. Therefore, merely exhibiting the need for support for young children to the public can be an excellent solution to those adverse conformity effects. For instance, when I attended preschool, my school needed some financial support from the government. They even cut the spending on some of the most basic needs of students such as launching programs that were vital for low-income families. It is obvious that supporting young children is needed in this kind of situation. To sum up, in a world that is rapidly changing, it is not absurd to assert the advantages of government to send money to the education of very young children with respect to their preferences. This is because of financial differences between universities and preschool or elementary schools. To all appearances, the virtue of using the money for the education of very young children can never be overlooked.
Submitted by jihee05 on