Society should identify those children who have special talents and provide training for them at an early age to develop their talents.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
I partly agree with the speaker that society do have duty to identity those gifted children and let them have access to special curriculums which focus on the student's needs, abilities, interests and learning styles, however, I don't agree with the point of view that those children should be trained at an early age. When students grow up and we can clearly find out the talents they have, training them in a special way can provide them a better environment and make more gifted students reach their highest potential.
To begin with, our society can hardly identified those geniuses when they are at an early age; if we simply divide the students in two parts: one is a group of talents and the other is consist of ordinary children, it is highly possible that people wrongly identify the students’ talents and even
regard gifted children as changeling.
For example, Albert Einstein, the most distinguished physicist of the20th century, was considered as changeling when he was at an early age, not mention to be discovered as talent. And another instance is De Broglie, a well-known physicist who has made tremendous contributions to the field of physics, but he was thought to have gifts in literature when he was young. So an early age is not a good time for the society to identify whether a student has talent or not.
"For every gifted child who is not allowed to reach his or her potential, there is a lost opportunity. That child might eventually have composed a concerto, found a cure for a terminal disease, or developed a formula for world peace" said by Carl Rogers. From his words, we can know that gifted students will make more progress when the curriculum teaching methods and materials are adapted for their needs; and these progresses have some possibility to change world. If we will have probability to enjoy a wonderful symphony, get rid of the danger of cancer, or live in a life without war, why don't we give those gifted students a better education and make them closer to the success.
Have we thought about this question that how many talents have been impeded or ignored by the traditional teaching system in the past centuries? I suppose the number will be countless because like other students with unique needs, gifted students will not reach their highest potential without differentiated instruction for their education, however, our conventional education couldn't put enough emphasis on the gifted children. Student who are really capable of high performance in some certain areas will not show their talent or contribute to society a lot, unless they have been trained since they were young. Mark Twain, an American author and humorist, once said that "Thousands of geniuses live and die undiscovered - either by themselves or by others", which indicates that geniuses wouldn't obtain success if they hadn't been found and fostered.
Besides the reasons I have mentioned before, from the purposes of education, we should also give the gifted students training when they are young because the responsibility of education is to develop individuals to their fullest potential. Therefore, a good education should begin by considering the need of individuals and be a student-centered learning whose environment is open, dynamic, and promoting the natural desire and curiosity to learn. In such a learner-centered education, teachers try to meet the need of gifted students is natural and reasonable.
Many people may think that we have limited educational resources so that those children who have no talents will have few materials if we put too much on the geniuses. But it is not true that we can give more resources on education since students are the future of country, and after that this problem will be solve.
In sum, the idea that we should identify those students who have special geniuses and provide them special training is correct, which is beneficial to both the gifted student and society. But when should we do this is a problem we have to think more carefully.作者: lovetian 时间: 2011-8-16 20:54:07
The following appeared in a letter to the school board in the town of Centerville.
All students should be required to take the driver's education course at Centerville High School. In the past two years, several accidents in and around Centerville have involved teenage drivers. Since a number of parents in Centerville have complained that they are too busy to teach their teenagers to drive, some other instruction is necessary to ensure that these teenagers are safe drivers. Although there are two driving schools in Centerville, parents on a tight budget cannot afford to pay for driving instruction. Therefore an effective and mandatory program sponsored by the high school is the only solution to this serious problem."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
While it may be sure that all the students have duty to learn how to drive a car at Centerville High School (CHS), this author’s argument does not make a cogent case for the necessity of driver’s education course at CHS. It is easy to understand why students should learn how to drive before they become real drivers, but this argument if rife with holes and assumptions, and thus, not strong enough to lead to additional courses.
Citing surveys of traffic accidents in and around Centerville, the author implies that most of the teenage drivers in the town of Centerville are poor in driving; however, it is not clear and even funny because a concrete connection between the level and the appearance of teenage drivers is not effectively made. Hardly can I accept that the arguer draw such a conclusion just speculation over several accidents but not a more professional research. As the argument indicates, some young drivers are involved in several accidents in the past two years, but the reason of these accidents may be bad weather, poor condition of road, mechanical breakdown, or other objective factors. Without getting a clear picture of these traffic accidents, the author cannot reach the sub conclusion that the students in Centerville need to accept the driver's education course.
Additionally, the author hold the view that those teenage drivers in the accidents could do nothing, despite they haven't systematically learn how to drive, because their parents have no time to teach them or their families cannot afford the bill of driver's education course in the two driving schools. There are several ways to resolve these two problems: the students whose parents are too busy to teach their children to drive can pay for driver's education course and the students whose families are on a tight budget can earn money by doing part-time jobs, which are better than the author's project. To strengthen his or her argument, the author would benefit from enumerating more benefits of his/her proposal than other possible solutions.
Even I concede that the students in Centerville are not safe drivers and we can do nothing but carry out the program that all the students are ordered to take driver's education course, the expense shouldn't be stood only by CHS. The bill of courses will be a huge cost which is hard to bear so it is unfair to CHS. As we all know, traffic safety, especially road safety, is a significant factor to define whether a city is a nice place for people to live so that the government of the town of Centerville should be responsible to this program. Consequently, if this program would be implemented by CHS, the government or some special instruction should pick up the tap. Regardless of whether the proposal will be carrying out, the author haven't thought comprehensively about the question of who would pay the piper.
Road safety often adds to a city's property values, leads to a high level of happiness and a better overall quality of life for residents. For these reasons, we should try to promote traffic safety so that we can live a better life. However, the author's argument is not likely successfully help the town government to achieve the target.
作者: winterfine 时间: 2011-8-16 20:56:00
本帖最后由 winterfine 于 2011-8-16 20:57 编辑
I partly agree with the speaker that society do have duty to identity those gifted children and let them have access to special curriculums which focus on the student's needs, abilities, interests and learning styles, however, I don't agree with the point of view that those children should be trained at an early age. When students grow up and we can clearly find out the talents they have, training them in a special way can provide them a better environment and make more gifted students reach their highest potential.
To begin with, our society can hardly identified those geniuses when they are at an early age; if we simply divide the students in two parts: one is a group of talents and the other is consist of ordinary children, it is highly possible that people wrongly identify the students’ talents and even regard gifted children as changeling. For example, Albert Einstein, the most distinguished physicist of the20th century, was considered as changeling (?) when he was at an early age, not mention to be discovered as talent. And another instance is De Broglie, a well-known physicist who has made tremendous contributions to the field of physics, but he was thought to have gifts in literature when he was young. So an early age is not a good time for the society to identify whether a student has talent or not.
"For every gifted child who is not allowed to reach his or her potential, there is a lost opportunity. That child might eventually have composed a concerto, found a cure for a terminal disease, or developed a formula for world peace" said by Carl Rogers. From his words, (仅仅通过一句名言得出这样的结论不够充分) we can know that gifted students will make more progress when the curriculum teaching methods and materials are adapted for their needs; and these progresses have some possibility to change world. If we will have probability to enjoy a wonderful symphony, get rid of the danger of cancer, or live in a life without war, why don't we give those gifted students a better education and make them closer to the success.
（1. methods and materials are adapted for their needs帮助天才发展
2. 天才的progresses have some possibility to change world
3. 社会因此应该give those gifted students a better education
本段3句话，一句一个意思，不是很透彻）
Have we thought about this question that how many talents have been impeded or ignored by the traditional teaching system in the past centuries? I suppose the number will be countless (后面的原因能推出数量上的countless？) because like other students with unique needs, gifted students will not reach their highest potential without differentiated instruction for their education, however, our conventional education couldn't put enough emphasis on the gifted children. (这是怎么得出来的？最好能举出一些例子) Student who are really capable of high performance in some certain areas will not show their talent or contribute to society a lot, unless they have been trained since they were young. Mark Twain, an American author and humorist, once said that "Thousands of geniuses live and die undiscovered - either by themselves or by others", which indicates that geniuses wouldn't obtain success if they hadn't been found and fostered.
整个段落都没有提出比较令人信服的事实作为依据。
Besides the reasons I have mentioned before, from the purposes of education, we should also give the gifted students training when they are young because the responsibility of education is to develop individuals to their fullest potential. Therefore, a good education should begin by considering the need of individuals and be a student-centered learning whose environment is open, dynamic, and promoting the natural desire and curiosity to learn. In such a learner-centered education, teachers try to meet the need of gifted students is natural and reasonable.
Many people may think that we have limited educational resources so that those children who have no talents will have few materials if we put too much on the geniuses. But it is not true that we can give more resources on education since students are the future of country, and after that this problem will be solve. （删了吧…）
In sum, the idea that we should identify those students who have special geniuses and provide them special training is correct, which is beneficial to both the gifted student and society. But when should we do this is a problem we have to think more carefully.
Whileit may be sure that all the students have duty to learn how to drive a car atCenterville High School (CHS), this author’s argument does not make a cogentcase for the necessity of driver’s education course at CHS. It is easy tounderstand why students should learn how to drive before they become realdrivers, but this argument if rife with holes and assumptions, and thus, not strongenough to lead to additional courses.(这里感觉怪怪的，是if么？感觉is更通点)
Citingsurveys of traffic accidents in and around Centerville, the author implies thatmost of the teenage drivers in the town of Centerville are poor in driving;however, it is not clear and even funny because a concrete connection betweenthe level and the appearance of teenage drivers is not effectively made. Hardlycan I accept that the arguer draw such a conclusion just speculation overseveral accidents but not a more professional research. As the argumentindicates, some young drivers are involved in several accidents in the past twoyears, but the reason of these accidents may be bad weather, poor condition ofroad, mechanical breakdown, or other objective factors. Without getting a clearpicture of these traffic accidents, the author cannot reach the sub conclusionthat the students in Centerville need to accept the driver's education course.
Additionally,the author hold the view that those teenage drivers in the accidents could donothing, despite they haven't systematically learn how to drive, because theirparents have no time to teach them or their families cannot afford the bill ofdriver's education course in the two driving schools. There are several ways toresolve these two problems: the students whose parents are too busy to teachtheir children to drive can pay for driver's education course and the studentswhose families are on a tight budget can earn money by doing part-time jobs,which are better than the author's project. To strengthen his or her argument,the author would benefit from enumerating more benefits of his/her proposalthan other possible solutions.（感觉这段说可以part-time job啊什么的感觉有点偏，没有说明到底为什么不可取）
Even Iconcede that the students in Centerville are not safe drivers and we can donothing but carry out the program that all the students are ordered to takedriver's education course, the expense shouldn't be stood only by CHS. The billof courses will be a huge cost which is hard to bear so it is unfair to CHS. Aswe all know, traffic safety, especially road safety, is a significant factor todefine whether a city is a nice place for people to live so that the governmentof the town of Centerville should be responsible to this program. Consequently,if this program would be implemented by CHS, the government or some specialinstruction should pick up the tap. Regardless of whether the proposal will becarrying out, the author haven't thought comprehensively about the question ofwho would pay the piper.
Roadsafety often adds to a city's property values, leads to a high level ofhappiness and a better overall quality of life for residents. For thesereasons, we should try to promote traffic safety so that we can live a betterlife. However, the author's argument is not likely successfully help（word显示是helping） the town government toachieve the target.
I partly agree with the speaker that society do have duty to identity those gifted children; however, I don't agree with the point of view that those children should be trained at an early age and only on their talents. In my point of view, learner-center education should be spread over the country; through this way, we can clearly find out the talents they have when students grow up and then, training them in a special way can provide them a better environment and make more gifted students reach their highest potential.
To begin with, our society can hardly identify those geniuses when they are at an early age by our conventional method. If we simply divide the students in two parts by the index of IQ: one is a group of talents and the other is consisted of ordinary children, it is highly possible that people wrongly identify the students’ talents and may even regard gifted children as changeling. For example, Albert Einstein, the most distinguished physicist of the20th century, was regarded as changeling when he was at an early age, not mention to be discovered as a talent. And another instance is De Broglie, a well-known physicist who has made tremendous contributions to the field of physics, but he was thought to have gifts in literature when he was young. So an early age is not a good time for the society to identify whether a student has talent or not.
Additionally, have we thought about this question that how many talents have been ignored or even impeded by the traditional teaching system in the past centuries? I suppose the number will be countless because like other students with unique needs, gifted students will not reach their highest potential without differentiated instruction for their education, however, our conventional education couldn't put enough emphasis on the gifted children and provide them special course for the limited resources. Students who really have capability of high performance in some certain areas will not show their talents, unless they have been identified. Mark Twain, an American author and humorist, once said that "Thousands of geniuses live and die undiscovered - either by themselves or by others", which indicates that geniuses wouldn't obtain success if they hadn't been found and fostered.
"For every gifted child who is not allowed to reach his or her potential, there is a lost opportunity. That child might eventually have composed a concerto, found a cure for a terminal disease, or developed a formula for world peace" said by Carl Rogers. From his words, we know that gifted students will make more progress when the curriculum teaching methods and materials are adapted for their needs; and these progresses have some possibility to change world. Since we have already enjoyed the Don Giovanni, a wonderful opera, get rid of the limit of darkness and live in a life with convenience, why don't we give those gifted students a better education, make them closer to the success .
Besides the reasons I have mentioned before, from the purposes of education, we should also give the gifted students training because the responsibility of education is to develop individuals to their fullest potential. Therefore, a good education should begin by considering the need of individuals and be a student-centered learning whose environment is open, dynamic, and promoting the natural desire and curiosity to learn. In such a learner-centered education, teachers try to meet the need of gifted students is natural and reasonable.
In sum, the idea that we should identify those students who have special geniuses and provide them special training is correct, which is beneficial to both the gifted student and society. But when should we do this is a problem we have to think more carefully.
借鉴了点橙子美眉的论证作者: lovetian 时间: 2011-8-17 21:38:16
While it may be sure that all the students have duty to learn how to drive a car at Centerville High School (CHS), this author’s argument does not make a cogent case for the necessity of driver’s education course at CHS. It is easy to understand why students should learn how to drive before they become real drivers, but this argument is rife with holes and assumptions, and thus, not strong enough to lead to additional courses.
Citing surveys of traffic accidents in and around Centerville, the author implies that most of the teenage drivers in the town of Centerville are poor in driving; however, it is not clear and even funny because a concrete connection between the level and the appearance of teenage drivers is not effectively made. Hardly can I accept that the arguer draw such a conclusion just speculation over several accidents but not a more professional research. As the argument indicates, some young drivers are involved in several accidents in the past two years, but the reason of these accidents may be bad weather, poor condition of road, mechanical breakdown, or other objective factors. Without getting a clear picture of these traffic accidents, the author cannot reach the sub conclusion that the students in Centerville need to accept the driver's education course.
Additionally, the author hold the view that those teenage drivers in the accidents could do nothing, despite they haven't systematically learn how to drive, because their parents have no time to teach them or their families cannot afford the bill of driver’s education course in the two driving schools. There are several ways to resolve these two problems except compelling all the students to take the course in CHS. Besides that, since we don’t even know how many students are facing such problems, the author hastily presumes all of the teenager need to be taught by the CHS is unwarranted. To strengthen his or her argument, he/she would benefit from enumerating more benefits of his/her proposal than other possible solutions.
Even I concede that the students in Centerville are not safe drivers and we can do nothing but carry out the program that all the students are ordered to take driver’s education course, the expense shouldn't be stood only by CHS. The bill of courses will be a huge cost which is hard to bear so it is unfair to CHS. As we all know, traffic safety, especially road safety, is a significant factor to define whether a city is a nice place for people to live so that the government of the town of Centerville should be responsible to this program. Consequently, if this program would be implemented by CHS, the government or some special instruction should pick up the tap. Regardless of whether the proposal will be carrying out, the author haven't thought comprehensively about the question of who would pay the piper.
Road safety often adds to a city's property values, leads to a high level of happiness and a better overall quality of life for residents. For these reasons, we should try to promote traffic safety so that we can live a better life. However, the author's argument is not likely successfully helping the town government to achieve the target