Is there any mistake in this sentence ? When I read an IELTS writing book I feel something wrong in this sentence below : "Overseas students often feel disoriented and depressed for lack of adequate knowledge and understanding of the local customs and lifestyle" Should it be 'lacking of ' instead of 'lack of ' ?

The thinking of exam I tend to believe that exams have more negative than positive effects on students and education. Today, many parents want to secure a good future for their children in this world that is full of competitiveness.They believe if their kids are to get higher education, depends on exam results. To help their children score a good mark in the exams becomes a priority to them . So they cost a good deal on their children's tutoring lessons and remedial education. Over time ,the students would be in a state of high pressure ,they even believe that examinations are the purpose of learning . However, a good education should， among other things， train you to think for yourself. The examination system does anything but that. What has to be learnt is rigidly laid down by a syllabus， so the student is encouraged to memorize. Examinations do not motivate a student to read widely， but to restrict his reading； they do not enable him to seek more and more knowledge， but induce cramming. They lower the standards of teaching， for they deprive the teacher of all freedoms. Teachers themselves are often judged by examination results and instead of teaching their subjects， they are reduced to training their students in exam techniques which they despise. The most successful candidates are not always the best educated, they are the best trained in exam techniques. But I have to admit that ,for the time being ,examination is the most effective and relatively fair way to choose talent. We can know our defects in learning via exams, which will promote us to improve our studying method further . And , to a large extent, exams develop our sense of honor and competition, also could help us commit the knowledge to memories. Therefore, I think how to make the examination more scientific is very important.

Pros and cons of exams I tend to believe that negative effects of examinations are beyond the positive effects that examinations bring to education . Today, many parents want to secure a good future for their children in this world that is full of competitiveness.They believe if their kids are to get higher education, depends on exam results. To help their children score a good mark in the exams becomes a priority to them . So they cost a good deal on their children's tutoring lessons and remedial education. Over time ,the students would be in a state high pressure ,they even believe that examinations are the purpose of learning . However, a good education should， among other things， train you to think for yourself. The examination system does anything but that. What has to be learnt is rigidly laid down by a syllabus， so the student is encouraged to memorize. Examinations do not motivate a student to read widely， but to restrict his reading； they do not enable him to seek more and more knowledge， but induce cramming. They lower the standards of teaching， for they deprive the teacher of all freedoms. Teachers themselves are often judged by examination results and instead of teaching their subjects， they are reduced to training their students in exam techniques which they despise. The most successful candidates are not always the best educated, they are the best trained in exam techniques. But I have to admit that ,for the time being ,examination is the most effective and relatively fair way to choose talent. We can know our defects in learning via exams, which will promote us to improve our studying method further . And , to a large extent, exams develop our sense of honor and competition, also could help us commit the knowledge to memories. Therefore, I think how to make the examination more scientific is very important.

Whether should government pay for the university students' tuition fees This is a topic of IELTS writting , the original topic is : Some people say university students should pay for their tuition fees. Some others say the government should pay for the tuition fees. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. This is my work below : Ever since the compulsory education arrived ,it is under debate that whether the government is obliged to pay tuition fees for the university students . If the government pay for the tuition fees ,it is not hard to imagine that the rate of people who get the high education oppotunities will be mounting . While , the benefit of having a well educated population is obvious to the nation. The society today is coming into knowledge economy era , education plays an important role in promoting the all-round development of our society.Education has become a strong lever to promote social productivity. But the negative effect alongside the government's paying shouldn't be ignored. It can be taken as welfare from the government ,so it will increase the number of those who shouldn't have gone to the university , but they will go , benefitting from the government . So it is some kind of waste of resource and also reinforce the burden of government. In the meanwhile ,it will delay the entering of the labour force to market , breeding a second time waste of resource . In short, this doesn't help to put the right person in the right place. Therefore, I think, the schoolarships fix this issue a little bit ,it can help those who have troubles with finance but who are also capable of acceptting high education.

What does "got to " mean ? "got to " tend to be used in oral English , I could't relate it well . "got to " shows up three times in a paragrah below . "A lot of children pretend to be superheroes for fun, but thanks to the Make-A-Wish foundation, one boy got to be one for real for a day. Seven-year-old Alex ..., has leukemia. He loves watching "Batman" ..... The Anaheim Police Department teamed up with the Make-A-Wish foundation to make it happen. After getting sworn in by the police at the station, Alex got to ride around in the Batmobile to Knott's Berry Farm and then...., where he ....... He then got to ride in a helicopter to Angel Stadium.... Please explain these three "got to " to me . I also check it in the dictionary , it gives me example "We also got to ride on a pirate ship." Why can't I just say :' We also rode on a pirate ship.' ?

Anyone would like to correct this sentence for me ,please ? I translated a Chinese sentence , please check it out , thanks . ' There are only two firms in the world produce the engine of big passenger aircraft . It's not that there's too much technology ,but for the manufactured engine ,the requirement of reliability is extremely high. If errors occur to the engine during the flight, the plane is most likely to fall from the sky. ' I wonder if I did it in a very 'Chinese' expression .

Is there any error in this sentence? Antelope will not run fast without cheetah. What really inspires you to walk out of the predicament is not the flowers and applause, but it is your opponent. I translated it from a Chinese sentence, please correct for me ,thank you very much.

I was especially puzzled by this sentence ,please help me out. ‘ It is noticeable that for both types of household with children , a higher than average proportion were living in poverty at this time .’ I couldn't understand the grammatical construction of ‘ a higher than average proportion ’ May I reword it like this "It is noticeable that for both types of household with children , with a higher proportion than average , were living in poverty at this time ." Thanks.

Is there any subtle difference between these two sentences ? ' If not for the police he might be alive today ' , she says . ' Had it not been for the police he might be alive today ' , she says . ( PS: I made up the second sentence .)