Ai có lòng chữa hộ mình bài writing này với ai(;´༎ຶٹ༎ຶ`)

Some people believe that people have the right to university education, and government should make it free no matter what their financial background. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is argued that people are entitled to follow tertiary education, and central authorities should fully pay all tuition fees irrespective of students' social economic status. While there is no denying the benefits, I disagree with this idea because it takes a heavy toll on individuals and society.

On the one hand, the option of waiving tuition fees has some benefits. On the individual levels, poor students can stand a chance to attend higher education. Many underprivileged students, for example, are very hardworking and intelligent, but they can ill afford tuition fees. On a social level, when young generations can be facilitated to have access to university’s knowledge, the national leaders may create an educated and civilized workforce contributing to the development of a nation.

Nevertheless, I lean toward the idea that governments shouldn’t cover tuition fees. Firstly, students who pursue college without fees can take it for granted and don’t have the sense of responsibility for studying. As a result, they are inclined to neglect classes and may drop out of school. Secondly, enacting free college policy can put a strain on the administration. As a huge amount of money is allocated for a host of universities, it can trigger the budgets deficits in state coffers. National officials then need to cut some kinds of costs related to other essential sectors such as health care, transportation which also play a pivotal role in society. If not enough money is invested on fundamental social issues, people’s living standards can’t be improved.

In conclusion, while the statement of abolishing university education costs is valid to some extent, my own view is that it has more adverse effects on many sides of society.

Mình không rành lắm về writing IELTS nên chưa thể nhận xét về cách lập luận với đưa ra luận điểm được, chỉ nhận xét về ngữ pháp và từ vựng thôi.

Về phần từ vựng thì mình thấy ổn, nhưng bạn coi lại từ "budgets deficits" nha, mình thấy từ đó hơi cấn cấn. Ngữ pháp có vẻ hơi lặp lại, nhất là động từ "can". Nói chung mình thấy phần ngữ pháp hơi thiếu đa dạng tí thôi. Tổng thể bài viết vẫn khá tốt rồi.

Mình sẽ đăng full một bài viết của thầy mình (đề bài khác) ở đây để bạn tiện so sánh đối chiếu nhé.

---

Some are of the opinion that people are naturally born as good leaders while others feel that leadership skills can be learned.

The myth about what makes a leader still fascinates us until this day. Whether someone born inherits the attributes characteristic of a future leader or they have to learn and upskill over time to strengthen their leadership remains controversial. In my opinion, however, it requires a combination of inborn and nurtured characteristics to be successful leaders.

Some people are undeniably endowed with unique traits typical of leaders. Their charismatic physique, inspiring tone of voice, seemingly approachable personality, and the tendency to initiate ideas and take the lead could easily command people. People with such genetic makeup will always unite, inspire, and instill beliefs in their sidekicks and other fellows, whether they are in power or displaced.

However, humans are imperfect, so are their gifts. Some may not be competent at articulating ideas in all contexts; some may mismanage their anger during escalating tensions; some may fail to ponder over all possibilities before making crucial decisions. This is particularly evident when they are immature and inexperienced.

As time passes, while training in their own field of expertise and working under auspices of predecessors, they build up other interpersonal skills that receive recognition of both their mentors and colleagues, and, most importantly, an unimaginable influence over others. By the end of this gradual maturity, they would have mastered the necessary skills of manipulating people, delegating tasks, planning strategies, and envisioning outcomes.

There are so-called courses out there aimed at cultivating skills and characteristics of talented leaders. They teach a multitude of on-the-surface competencies including public speaking and management skills. But what matters is participants with inborn talents rise most outstandingly, and the rest are just mediocre graduates.

On balance, to be the best leaders, one must possess innate qualities that set them apart, but they still need predecessor’s guidance, models to learn from, and self-improvement. People can train to do the job of a leader, but they may never be as successful as naturally talented peers.