a 144 希望好心人提提意见

wangyan1990UID: 2694065

TOPIC: ARGUMENT144 - According to a poll of 200 charitable organizations, donations of money to nonprofit groups increased by nearly 25 percent last year, though not all charities gained equally. Religious groups gained the most (30 percent), followed by environmental groups (23 percent), whereas educational institutions experienced only a very small increase in donations (3 percent). This poll indicates that more people are willing and able to give money to charities but that funding for education is not a priority for most people. These differences in donation rates must result from the perception that educational institutions are less in need of donations than are other kinds of institutions.


The writer cites the poll of 200 charitable organizations about donations rates, say, educational donation only increase 3 percent while other kinds of institutions reap a high increase. Then he comes to the conclusion that people would not donate to educational institutes for the reason that education is less in need of donation. This argument seems logically sound at the first glance. However, with more careful scrutiny, I find it questionable since the improper interpretation of poll as well as the unwarranted assumption for people's choice of institutions.

Firstly, the most obvious problem with the reasoning lies in the improper justification that people would not like to donate to education, especially only with some vague statistics. The poll is held only among 200 charitable organizations, which do not fully represent the overall national or international reality. It is possible that this 200 organizations are mostly made upof religious focused organization which the broadness as well as the reliability of the poll is open to doubt. Also, are these organization mostly from the same state or some nearby areas where education is extremely highly developed or citizens there just devote themselves more to religious affairs as well as environmental movements?
Furthermore, even given the 200 poll is scientific , without the total number of educational donation, conclusion that 3 percent rise seems poor is much too cursory. It is likely that education gets most of the donation every year, so, only 3 percent rise far outweighs other striking statistics of 30 percentage for example , education get 10billion dollars while religious just has 10million, the total number makes great differenceIf any of the above possibilities is right, the argument can hardly have any sense.

Secondly, simple put that education donation do not appeal to people any more , less need of donations is not the real reason or at least not the onlyor key reason. Other alternative explanations exist such as other kinds of institutions may do well in advertising, say, people watch more moving advertisements on TV or receive more poster around their communities, which means that people know better about other kind of charitable institutions. Or it is also likely that there are more offices of religious institutions around the community leading to easily and readily donations.

In sum, the writer falsely assumes that education charitable is no longer appealing to mass and the reason to it is education need less money. To justify these conclusion, the writer should provide
more details.

stanzyUID: 2629386

It is possible that this 200 organizations are mostly made up of religious focused organizations which the broadness as well as the reliability of the poll is open to doubt.我想你witch后面是定语从句吧？但是显然Which后面的内容不足以修饰organizations，所以我建议还是把Which 改成that 变成宾语从句吧：）
even given the 200 poll is scientific , without the total number of educational donation, conclusion that 3 percent rise seems poor is much too cursory. 这一句......还是改成大家通用语序吧。Even the given poll of 200 people is scientific, it is too cursory to make the conclusion that 3 percent rise is poor without the total n1umber of educational donation.

Secondely之后没看懂......唉，我的阅读又悲剧了......我想楼主是想解释教育捐款只增长了3%的其他合理解释吧？就是说明这个结果不一定代表人们认为教育不需要捐款了。可是这个......怎么又和看电视联系在一起了？

我觉得这篇也挺难的。要是让我找，我可能写不了那么多的字：（我觉得是200个慈善机构里，可能很少是教育机构，而多数是宗教和环保机构，所以显得教育机构收到的善款少。然后即使这个poll是没有问题的，那也可能说明教育机构已经从其他方面，譬如税收，收取学费拿到了一些的钱，所以人们捐得少。但不代表教育部门就不需要捐款了。当然，我觉得楼主的观点也是正确的，就是200个样本不够，不能说明全国的状况，而且捐款的人也许大多数是环保人士或者宗教活动者，所以poll不足为信。

wangyan1990UID: 2694065

2# stanzy


真是太感谢了。。