《决战三月》组第一次作业

ZeldashdjnUID: 2701581

我组目前共有9人，第一次作业内容：1、完成issue28；2、完成argument10；3、完成提纲（Issue）：4、94 ,153。本次作业总评：
第一次作业(10月10日)已经进入尾声，我们遇到的问题还是有点小多的，注意就是有个别同学太不积极，作业晚交，批改工作不及时！
批评：fallenautumn自己的作文和批改工作都没有按时完成，还失踪了2天
        儒乡居士，批改工作没有按时完成，作业在告诉我的情况下没有按时完成
        叉布，批改工作没有按时完成
表扬：皮皮，流连七月，姜葱蒜，饼干+cheese，作业按时完成，批改任务高质量完成
       希望大家都向他们学习哦~

被批评的同学不要难过哦，这个没有任何针对*，我只是监督大家好好完成作业。还有你不批改作业，咱们组的批改链就在你那里断掉了，希望大家下次努力，我们全组要共同进步，一个都不能少呀！

组员“皮皮”对组员“亲爱的小雨“的作业批改情况：

Issue 28 “Students should memorize facts only after they have studied the ideas ,trends ,and concepts that help explain those facts .Students who have learned very little .”<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Outline:

Statement:学生在学习知识时是应该学习知识的来龙去脉，但在某些问题上这种追根溯源的学习方法是不切实际的。

MI 1:学生在学习过程中如果只是单纯从形式上强制背过了，那最后很容易就把知识忘记。而如果了解了这些知识内部的运作原理，就可以记得更牢固，还可以用这种本质上的特性更容易更轻松地理解其他东西，而且通过了解事物背景知识的过程还可以学习一种推理的逻辑思维。

MI 2:然而有些事物的内在本质不是所有阶段的学习者都可以理解并接受的，如果把这些对于这个学习者很难明白的事物本质告诉他，反而会使他迷惑，可能会造成他学习的混乱，而影响他的学习效果。（例：给孩子讲有关自然的一些知识时，我们并不需要把其中的物理本质都告诉他们，那超出了他们的认知范围，反而会会把他们弄糊涂）

MI 3:学生在学习过程中不应一味死记硬背，也不应总是不论问题的追根溯源，在自己的能力范围内把知识弄懂才是最合适的。

Conclusion:重申立场

According to the speaker's assertion, it is indispensable for students to be in the height of having studied the ideas ,trends ,and concepts that help explain facts which they suppose(are supposed) to know before they memorize those facts. Besides ,in the speaker's eyes ,there are little can students learned by merely learn facts themselves(there is little that can be learned by students through learning facts) .This perception seems to be plausible .Yet ,with just a little further scrutiny ,you can easily find its unpractical essence .

Initiatively ,I must concede that learning the ideas ,trends ,and concepts will serve as an rewarding role in both processes of
learning the facts they are concerning (that are concerning with them) and other facts that even seem to have nothing to do with them on the surface .By this I mean the ideas ,trends ,and concepts behind the facts are invariably useful background knowledge by providing sufficient information surrounding the facts to render you realize the facts from the very beginning .In addition ,owing to the similar features possessed by amounts of (large numbers of )things ,knowing the essence of one matter probably holding(holds) the common characteristics of a chin of things .Furthermore ,if we focus on the process of
learning background knowledge instead of just a consequence which will help us comprehend the facts ,we can definitely find something more precious --the logic hided behind the occurrence .In the process of learning background knowledge ,the logical line of things will emerge in front of our eyes .Every single step we make in this very process may be a milestone in our mind ,being (which is )the result of the cause-and-effect relevance between background knowledge and facts (that) is fruitful with rational recognition which(and)will obviously give you a jump in your perception .Therefore ,without any denying ,learning the background knowledge can do pro effects on us .


Nevertheless ,can we consider those background knowledge as such significant factors under all circumstances ?Emphatically ,no .Since ,the daily life informs us that sometimes too much background knowledge will lead to an incredible burden--which can go too far to render the learners to understand whether the background knowledge or the facts .To be more precise ,we must face the fact that in some certain circumstances those background knowledge can be too rough to understand for (be understood by) the learners .So attempts of forcing those learners to accept the background knowledge always can not escape from failure .Additionally ,query whether this way of learning will make students learn anything more ,or whether this way can make them(可以删去吧) clear about the facts they incline to learn in the first place .Bolstering this view ,we need to look no further than the class in elementary school ,where students learn the natural phenomenon alone .Mere those natural phenomenon without the physical theory behind them ,you may wonder ,can it be able to make the students obtain the knowledge .Apparently ,it can and can do better than the method of teaching them those ideas ,trends ,and concepts first .It is because that those background knowledge is not appropriate for the students in elementary school .And there is a great chance for them to mix everything up by learning the background knowledge .


So in the light of the two paragraphs above ,it can be comparatively easy to achieve the truth that learning the ideas ,trends ,and concepts before learning the facts is not a（an） universally wise choice in every fact .It require(requires) to think about all the possibilities before we do it .Without a thorough observation ,it will be dangerous to make the learners to study the ideas, trends, and concepts .


In sum ,accordingly(只写一个就够了) ,we can safely gain the conclusion that we should not study the ideas, trends, and concepts first in every circumstances .For each fact ,each student ,and each period of studying ,the very consequence may be in every way distinct .

1.
整体层次不错，如果说理性内容少些，加些例子会更有说服力

2.
语言方面，有些副词和句式用的挺好，有些可以简洁的地方尽量简单些，保证文章中没有废词。

3.
background
Knowledge 重复次数太多 可以换别的词试试

4.
加油 O(∩_∩)O~


4、"No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study."

Outline:

Statement:现在所有学科之间都有着密切的联系，几乎每个学科都多多少少需要其他学科的帮助。

MI 1:各个学科都不是孤立存在的，他们都需要其他的不同学科的支持才能得到真正的发展。其他学科介入个别学科，会让该学科借助他们学科的帮助，个别学科可以得到前所未有的新的视角，新的技术，从而得到发展。

MI 2:可能有人会说想音乐美术这样的学科不需要其他学科的支持，但事实上这些学科也需要例如物理，机械制造的支持。而像哲学这样思想高度极高的学科也是需要其他学科的帮助，很多伟大的哲学家都同时是伟大的数学家、物理学家，这是因为他们可以在其他学科中得到启发得到证实，以提升他们的思想高度。

MI 3: 如果某个学科想脱离整体，线。不借助其他学科的力量，自己发展，那它永远都不可能有大的突破，因为它永远都用自己的狭隘的眼光看自己的学科，不能结合其他学科的帮助，就不能突破其原有的界

Conclusion:重申立场



94"Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student's field of study because acquiring knowledge of various academic disciplines is the best way to become truly educated."

Outline:

Statement:在大学中学生被要求去学习与自己学科不同的知识有利于学生的综合能力的培养，但并不是所有学生都适合，这个想法对于某些学生或学校是不切实际的。

MI 1:大学的学习应该培养学生的能力，而去学习与本专业不同的学科，可以很好的做到这一点。通过对不同学科的认识，可以扩展学生的眼界，多一个视角，也会有助于本学科的学习。

MI 2:然而，不是所有学生都适合这种学习方式，这样跨学科的学习要求学生有很强的接受能力，而有些学生可能并没有多余的时间和能力接受另一门学科的学习。而且这项要求对学校也是个考验，如果每个学生都增加学习与本专业不同的学科，学校就要投入更多的人力物力，这是很不切实际的。

MI 3:各个学校可以根据自己的实力对有这方面需求的学生提供这项计划，这会很好的帮助学生培养他们的综合能力。

Conclusion:重申立场



153"Students should bring a certain skepticism to whatever they study. They should question what they are taught instead of accepting it passively."

Outline:

Statement:学生不应该总是被动的接受老师传授的知识，而是应该报着一种怀疑的态度去审视这些知识，但在学习某些显然成立的知识时就不应该在怀疑它上耽误时间。

MI 1:在学习知识时，学生应该去自己思考那些被传授的知识的可信*，而不应该盲目的相信，因为老师肯定也会有出错的时候。而且不论最后学生接受还是不接受老师讲授的知识，在怀疑这些知识并自己实践去证明他们的时候，学生对这个问题的理解肯定会更加深一步，也提高了一种自己解决问题的能力。

MI 2:但在某些情况下，老师给予的知识是经过前人无数次的检验和实践才得出的，它的可信度很高，如果学生在这种事实上怀疑考虑过多反而会浪费时间，最终还不一定把问题弄懂。

MI 3:学生如果像作者说的那样在学任何知识的时候都持有这样的怀疑态度，那教学的过程会变的异常艰难，每个学生都不再相信老师传授的知识，都要去自己探索所有得到知识的真实*，那些由前人研究的知识成果将被无数次的再证明，这显然浪费了很多时间，所以在某些显而易见的知识面前学生应该相信而不是不加思考的就怀疑。

Conclusion:重申立场

最好找点例子，就perfect了



ARGUMENT10 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a Batavia newspaper.



"The department of agriculture in Batavia reports that the number of dairy farms throughout the country is now 25 percent greater than it was 10 years ago. During this same time period, however, the price of milk at the local Excello Food Market has increased from $1.50 to over $3.00 per gallon. To prevent farmers from continuing to receive excessive profits on an apparently increased supply of milk, the Batavia government should begin to regulate retail milk prices. Such regulation is necessary to ensure both lower prices and an adequate supply of milk for consumers."



In this argument ,the arguer suggests the Batavia government to establish a standard on retail milk prices .To bolster the suggestion ,the arguer provides a data ,compared to the one 10 years ago ,which indicate（indicates） a(an) increment about 25 percent concerning the number of dairy farms .Simultaneously ,however ,the price of milk at the local Excello Food Market rise (rises) from $1.50 to $3.00 ,which is considered as excessive profits by the arguer .So the arguer recommends the Batavia government to present a management on retail milk prices .On the first glance ,this recommendation seems to be tempting to believe ,yet a careful examination will show that how groundless this argument is .Suffering from at least 3 logic flaws ,this argument is far from being established .



Initiatively ,the arguer assumes that the national statistics about the number of dairy farms applies equally to every place including Batavia ,but it is not the case at all ,for a myriad of possible reasons .As the incretion of number of dairy farms emerges throughout the country ,it has a great chance that the number of dairy farms is running to the opposite side in Batavia ,reducing in a dramatic speed .Therefore the supply of milk in Batavia is adversely insufficient for consumers .Even if the number of dairy farms in Batavia is in the same trend with the country ,increasing a lot ,the arguer still can not gain the conclusion that there is an adequate supply of milk for consumers in Batavia .Since ,it is the number of both dairy farms as well as consumers ultimately determine whether the supply of milk is adequate .And perhaps the number of consumers in Batavia increase in the same or even faster speed of the one of dairy farms .Apparently ,without ruling out those possibilities ,the arguer's assumption can not be established .



Another threshold problem with the argument involves how the profits build up .The arguer comes to the conclusion that there are excessive profits only by taking the increased price into consideration ,which is obviously far from validity .In this way ,the recognition of the profits overlooks the production costs .It is totally probable that the production costs of milk raise during the 10 years ,for there are a lot of possibilities that will lead to a larger production costs .Perhaps the feedstuff is in a higher price .And perhaps farms introduced amounts of advanced equipment .Subsequently ,supposing the production costs do not raise ,there still will be the raised consumptive level results the addition of milk price .Therefore if the arguer can not explain all those possibilities ,the conclusion will be unconvincing .



One additional problem open to attack is that the regulation rendered by government probably will bring us nothing like the arguer supposed .An adequate supply of milk for consumers will not be a result of the management. Since (, because) an adequate supply of milk largely based on the comparative rate concerning the numbers of dairy farms and consumers. Besides, being partly controlled by the government, the milk market may be in an unprecedented mass .So the suggestion given by the arguer can guarantee nothing about the consequence.



In sum, this argument engaged with numbers of fallacies .Before its establishment, it requires an amply of evidences.

注意单复数啊！