[Essay] please grade this eassy on a scale of 5

Status
Not open for further replies.

Raymott

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Australia
Current Location
Australia
1. Do you agree or disagree with the given statement.
There is nothing that an uneducated person can teach an educated person.

Education is of utmost importance in today’s world. It increases people’s abilities as after education, they have [STRIKE]the[/STRIKE] knowledge and awareness about technology.
[Only if they were educated in technology]
However, I do not agree with the given statement that an uneducated person has nothing to teach an educated person. I believe this due to
[STRIKE]some[/STRIKE] several reasons.
The first reason [STRIKE]why I believe this[/STRIKE] is that, in schools, students learn theory but are generally unaware about [STRIKE]the[/STRIKE] practical knowledge. Thus, educated people have certificates but sometimes lack a practical perspective.
[It's a fallacy that educated people somehow lack something that non-educated people have (apart from a lack of education)]
In contrast, uneducated people learn through their experiences and this helps them to provide better outcomes.
[Also, some uneducated people learn absolutely nothing, so it's not an either/or proposition.]
Thus, uneducated people have a better approach and practical knowledge which they can teach to educated people.
[Hmm, some may have.]
Secondly, schools and colleges can teach languages, vocabulary, grammar and more but cannot force and teach students to be polite and influential. The best example, here, is late. Mr. Dhirubhai Ambani. Although he was not a very educated person, he proved himself a revolutionary businessman of India. His optimistic attitude and courage to undertake risks, not his education, was his key to success.
[A successful uneducated polite man is not an example of how an education can't teach manners. You need to cite an educated, non-polite, non-influential person to illustrate this.]

On the other hand, some may counter argue that an uneducated person cannot teach anything to an educated person. This is because they believe that with knowledge, one can develop various special characteristics. Moreover, educated people have awareness about the latest technology [see above], expertise about a subject and the most important degree which is the sign of their knowledge and prestige.
Thus, in the light of above decision [what decision?] , it can be said that education makes a person [STRIKE]perfect[/STRIKE][?] and advanced, however, there are still a lot of things which are essential for great success in life and [STRIKE]can[/STRIKE] might be learned from anyone, even an uneducated person. These things include the inner approach, courage and ideology of an individual.
Good grammatically.

The argument: It's true that some uneducated people have a lot to teach school-educated people. But they don't achieve this simply by being uneducated.
While your argument is understandable, a lot of your points are logically unsustainable, the way they are written.

PS: Since you want marks: 4.7 for grammar, 3.0 for argument.
 

Tdol

Editor, UsingEnglish.com
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
The arguments is not very persuasive to me:
Thus educated people have certificates but lack in practical perspective.- What all of them?
In contrast, uneducated people learn through their experiences and this helps them to provide better outcomes.- What all of them?
and teach students to be polite and influential.- None of them?
His optimistic attitude and courage to undertake risks, not his education, was his key to success.- Why can't an educated person take risks?

The argument seems based on too many such generalisations to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top