Education has always been a topic of discussion. Generally speaking, China's economy is developing well and education is well implemented, but there is still a gap between the rich and the poor. Although we advocate educational equity, we all know that there is no absolute equity, and so is education. Many people have a question: is it better to allocate funds to poor areas to promote educational equity than to reduce points? From my point of view, the answer is yes.

First of all, funding can reduce the impact of economic differences on educational equity.

We all know that there is still a gap between the rich and the poor in China, and the gap between the rich and the poor will also affect educational equity. In areas with better economic conditions, school facilities are more advanced, multimedia can be used, more books can be contacted, and students learn better. On the contrary, for students in poor areas, it is good to have a place to study, with fewer teachers, fewer textbooks and less multimedia equipment. If funds can be allocated to poor areas, schools can use the money to improve the learning environment. Although it can't completely solve the problem, it can also reduce the impact of economy on educational equity.

Two: improve life, improve cognitive ability and sports ability.

Appropriation, as the name implies, is to donate money to poor areas. In poor areas, many children can't keep up with their nutrition because they can't eat, and their cognitive ability and sports ability are not as good as those in rich areas. If funds are allocated to schools in these poor areas, schools can improve their meals. Although they can't eat good food every day, they can also supplement a little nutrition, so that their cognitive ability and sports ability will be better and their study will be better.

Three: the deduction policy is not absolutely fair.

There is no absolute fairness in this world. For the college entrance examination, some places require low marks and some places require high marks, which is unfair. Therefore, even if the schools in poor areas implement the policy of lowering scores, it will not promote the absolute fairness of education, because there is also a gap between the rich and the poor in a region, and the admission scores are the same. Therefore, compared with the policy of reducing points, funding is more practical and can promote educational equity.

Whether it is subsidizing or implementing the policy of reducing scores, it is hoped that children in poor areas will have a chance to study. Comparatively speaking, funding may solve the problem from the source, and lowering the score will help the admission result!