• I think if governments prohibited cars in big cities, during first few days, it could be confusion for people. = I think if governments prohibited cars in big cities, during the first few days, it could be confusing for people.

 Added "the" before "first few days" and changed "confusion" to "confusing" to match the sentence structure.

•  Maybe they don't know how to get to their work place or some destination. = Maybe they wouldn't know how to get to their workplace or other destinations.

 "Wouldn't know" fits the hypothetical situation. "Workplace" is one word, and "other destinations" is more natural.

•  But after quiet a long time, the public transportation would be activated and increased. = But after quite a long time, public transportation would be improved and expanded.

"Quite" instead of "quiet," "public transportation" doesn’t need "the" here, and "improved and expanded" sounds more natural than "activated and increased."

•  Many people would use the public transportation in the big city and there would be no traffic rush or congestion. = Many people would use public transportation in the city, and there would be no traffic jams or congestion.

 Removed "the" before "public transportation," replaced "traffic rush" with "traffic jams," and added a comma before "and" for clarity.

ESSAY:

• "I think universities focus more on critical thinking" could be slightly stronger as "I believe universities should focus more on critical thinking…" to make your stance clear.

• "we already have skill focused academy" → should be "we already have skill-focused academies" for grammar and plural consistency. This also helps the paragraph flow logically: practical skills are taught elsewhere, so universities can focus on thinking.

• "University has its purpose of establishment and should focus on their goal to achieve." This is understandable but awkward. Better: "Universities have a specific purpose and should focus on achieving their academic goals."

• "Also, if universities concentrate on job-related skills, there would be no development in science field or technology." Coherence is okay, but "science field" → "the field of science," and "there would be no development" could be softened: "this could slow development in science and technology."

• "We have limited resources and if college uses it dividing into various section, then it leads to slower speed of development and it makes hard to reach innovation." Too long and clunky. Better: "Resources are limited, and if universities divide them among many vocational programs, progress would be slower and innovation harder to achieve."

• "So, I think universities should focus more on critical thinking related to academic theories or findings." Clear, but could be more concise: "Therefore, universities should prioritize critical thinking and academic research."