[a习作temp] Argument174 请大家随便拍，谢谢. 请留下链接，方便回拍 [复制链接]

Archer1123
UID: 206148

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 0
寄托币: 1719
注册时间: 2005-4-18
精华: 1
帖子: 1

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-12-29 15:57:19 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

174
The following recommendation was made by the president and administrative staff of Grove College, a private institution, to the college's governing committee.
"We recommend that Grove College preserve its century-old tradition of all-female education rather than admit men into its programs. It is true that a majority of faculty members voted in favor of coeducation, arguing that it would encourage more students to apply to Grove. But eighty percent of the students responding to a survey conducted by the student government wanted the school to remain all female, and over half of the alumni who answered a separate survey also opposed coeducation. Keeping the college all-female, therefore, will improve morale among students and convince alumni to keep supporting the college financially."
1. 学生会调查的科学性和可靠性
2. 对校友调查的可信度，未提另外一部分校友的意见，而且影响捐赠的因素很多
3. 忽略教师的意见，影响士气
4. 忽略了男女同校的优点，增加生源和收入，提高老师和学生的士气

In the argument, the author claims that Grove College (GC) should maintain all-female education tradition, which will improve morale among students and keep the endowment from alumna. At the first glance, the argument seems plausible and reasonable, because the author quotes two surveys to substantiate the conclusion, however, this statement is not persuasive as it seems and cannot be accepted under careful examination and scrutiny.

To begin with, the author renders the survey conducted by student government to support the conclusion; nevertheless the survey is a questionable and unreliable. The student government is not a professional institution to draw a scientific questionnaire, perhaps the questionnaire subliminally lead responders to hope GC to remain all female. Even though it is objective, the survey is too vague to be accepted. How about the survey procedure and sample quantity, whether the sampling is chosen randomly, whether the sample can represent the whole view of students in GC, the detailed information can be found in the argument. It is possible that only a small part of students responding to the survey, that is to say, eighty percent of the students responding to the survey is a smaller proportion among students in GC. The possibility cannot be excluded that the other students who did not respond to the survey are desired to coeducation.

The author makes the similar mistake on the survey of GC alumna. The donation, as we know, is influenced by the combination of a host of factors, such as whole economic status, the affection. The author does not provide solid evidence to prove that financial support will really reduce if GC becomes a coeducational college. Furthermore, we are told nothing about the attitude of the rest alumnae, maybe they are will contribute much to coeducational GC than all female. That is to say, the donation maybe increases rather than decreases after coeducation. If so, the author’s conclusion would be weakened greatly.

In addition, the author neglects the importance of the view of most faculty members in GC, who are in favor of coeducation. The faculties are educationalists and have more advisable insight than students in educational field. In the argument, there is not any evidence to explain the reason to overlook faculty’s standpoints. The author gives little emphasis on staff, which perhaps does harm to the morale in teachers; consequently it has deleterious effect on morale among students.

Last but not the least, the author fails to take into account the advantage of coeducation. Admitting men into GC will attract more students possibly, not only male but also female. More students would bring about more tuitions and other profit, which will augment the whole income of GC. Simultaneously, coeducation will improve the morale among teachers. The possibility cannot be excluded that the coeducation will be helpful to improve the morale among students directly and indirectly.

To sum up, based on what has been discussed and analyzed above, it is obvious that the argument is invalid and misleading, and the conclusion reached in the argument is too presumptuous to be accepted. In order to make the conclusion more convincing, the author should provide the scientific and believable survey to prove all female in GC will really improve the morale among students and keep the donation from alumna.

回应
0

使用道具举报

mayl
UID: 2162549

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 270
注册时间: 2005-11-28
精华: 0
帖子: 0

沙发

发表于 2006-1-1 15:08:03 |只看该作者

174
The following recommendation was made by the president and administrative staff of Grove College, a private institution, to the college's governing committee.
"We recommend that Grove College preserve its century-old tradition of all-female education rather than admit men into its programs. It is true that a majority of faculty members voted in favor of coeducation, arguing that it would encourage more students to apply to Grove. But eighty percent of the students responding to a survey conducted by the student government wanted the school to remain all female, and over half of the alumni who answered a separate survey also opposed coeducation. Keeping the college all-female, therefore, will improve morale among students and convince alumni to keep supporting the college financially."
1.       学生会调查的科学性和可靠性
2.       对校友调查的可信度，未提另外一部分校友的意见，而且影响捐赠的因素很多
3.       忽略教师的意见，影响士气
4.       忽略了男女同校的优点，增加生源和收入，提高老师和学生的士气
逻辑挺好的
In the argument, the author claims that Grove College (GC) should maintain all-female education tradition, which will improve morale among students and keep the endowment from alumna. At the first glance, the argument seems plausible plausible本身就有似乎的意思吧 and reasonable, because the author quotes two surveys to substantiate the conclusion, however, this statement is not persuasive as it seems and cannot be accepted under careful examination and scrutiny.
模板不错
To begin with, the author renders the survey conducted by student government to support the conclusion; nevertheless the survey is a questionable and unreliable. The student government is not a professional institution to draw a scientific questionnaire, perhaps the questionnaire subliminally lead responders to hope GC to remain all female. 应该是引导回答者下意识，而不是自己下意识 Even though it is objective, the survey is too vague to be accepted. How about the survey procedure and sample quantity, whether the sampling is chosen randomly, whether the sample can represent the whole view of students in GC, the detailed information can be found in the argument. It is possible that only a small part of students responding to the survey, that is to say, eighty eight吧？ percent of the students responding to the survey is a smaller proportion among students in GC. The possibility cannot be excluded that the other students who did not respond to the survey are desired to coeducation. 将调查的错误批的淋漓尽致

The author makes the similar mistake on the survey of GC alumna. The donation, as we know, is influenced by the combination of a host of factors, such as whole economic status, the affection. The author does not provide solid evidence to prove that financial support will really reduce if GC becomes a coeducational college. Furthermore, we are told nothing about the attitude of the rest alumnae, maybe they are will contribute much to coeducational GC than all female. That is to say, the donation maybe increases rather than decreases after coeducation. If so, the author’s conclusion would be weakened greatly.感觉可以再深入一些

In addition, the author neglects the importance of the view of most faculty members in GC, who are in favor of coeducation. The faculties are educationalists and have more advisable insight than students in educational field. In the argument, there is not any evidence to explain the reason to overlook faculty’s standpoints. The author gives little emphasis on staff, which perhaps does harm to the morale in teachers if they support coeducation; consequently it has deleterious effect on morale among students.

Last but not the least, the author fails to take into account the advantage of coeducation. Admitting men into GC will attract more students possibly, not only male but also female.最好说明why female?跟着bf？ More students would bring about more tuitions and other profit, which will augment the whole income of GC. Simultaneously, coeducation will improve the morale among teachers. The possibility cannot be excluded that the coeducation will be helpful to improve the morale among students directly and indirectly. 能批判道不全面思维，如果时间足够的话，很强的

To sum up, based on what has been discussed and analyzed above, it is obvious that the argument is invalid and misleading, and the conclusion reached in the argument is too presumptuous to be accepted. In order to make the conclusion more convincing, the author should provide the scientific and believable survey to prove all female in GC will really improve the morale among students and keep the donation from alumna.
总结改进是不是加上老师的意见和不全面思维啊

【2025FALL】全站祈福已开放~~来领祈福章，求offer得offer

使用道具举报