1006G【clover】备考日志 by 七七夕夕－{如果可以重来。。。那就重来吧!｝

七七夕夕UID：2753801

1006G 【clover】备考日志 by 七七夕夕（6）

Argument Benchmark Analysis

benchmark 6

Six months ago the region of Forestville increased the speed limit for vehicles traveling on the region's highways by ten miles per hour.  Since that change took effect, the number of automobile accidents in that region has increased by 15 percent.  But the speed limit in Elmsford, a region neighboring Forestville, remained unchanged, and automobile accidents declined slightly during the same six-month period.  Therefore, if the citizens of Forestville want to reduce the number of automobile accidents on the region's highways, they should campaign to reduce Forestville's speed limit to what it was before the increase.

关键逻辑支撑点：neighboring， the same six-month period. （假设同时邻地情况就具有可比性）

The agrument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned.  By making a comparison of the region of Forestville, the town with the higher speed limit and therefore automobile accidents, with the region of Elmsford, an area of a lower speed limit and subsequently fewer accidents, the argument for reducing Forestville's speed limits in order to decrease accidents seems logical.

[短文的目的，手段。By... ；in order to...
手段内推理的逻辑关系，即 therefore; subsequently
自己的初步评价：well-presented，not thoroughly well-reasoned，seems logical.

However, the citizens of Forestville are failing to consider other possible alternatives to the increasing car accidents after the raise in speed limit.  Such alternatives may include the fact that there are less reliable cars traveling the roads in Forestville, or that the age bracket of those in Elmsford may be more conducive to driving safely.  It is possible that there are more younger, inexperienced, or more elderly, unsafe drivers in Forestville than there are in Elmsford.  In addition, the citizens have failed to consider thegeographical and physical terrain of the two different areas.  Perhaps Forestville's highway is in an area of more dangerous curves, sharp turns, or has many intersections or merging points where accidents are more likely to occur.  It appears reasonable, therefore, for the citizens to focus on these trouble spots than to reduce the speed in the entire area.  Elmsford may be an area of easier driving conditions where accidents are less likely to occur regardless of the speed limit.

反驳neighboring：相邻不能说明对车祸有关系的驾驶员和地形特征相同

A six-month period is not a particularly long time frame for the citizens to determine that speed limit has influenced the number of automobile accidents in the area.  It is mentioned in the argument that Elmsford accidents decreased during the time period.  This may have been a time, such as during harsh weather conditions, when less people were driving on the road and therefore the number of accidents decreased.  However, Forestville citizens, perhaps coerced by employment or other requirements, were unable to avoid driving on the roads.  Again, the demographics of the population are important.  It is possible that Elmsford citizens do not have to travel far from work or work from their home, or do not work at all.  Are there more people in Forestville than there were sic months ago?  If so, there may be an increased number of accidents due to more automobiles on the road, and not due to the increased speed limits.  Also in reference to the activities of the population, it is possible that Forestville inhabitants were traveling during less safe times of the day, such as early in the morning, or during twilight.  Work or family habits may have encouraged citizens to drive during this time when Elmsford residents may not have been forced to do so.

反驳 the same six-month period：这个时间并不够长而具有代表性，有可能这个时间内具有与车祸有关的特征，如坏天气。
由换天气引出而两处的易感性如居民的人口特征，出行特点和活动习惯也可能不同。

Overall, the reasoning behind decreasing Forestville's speed limit back to its original seems logical as presented above since the citizens are acting in their own best interests and want to protect their safety. However, before any final decisions are made about the reduction in speed limit, the citizens and officials of Forestville should evaluate all possible alternatives and causes for the increased number of accidents over the six-month period as compared to Elmsford.

总结提出这个想法的正当的，但是建议要更加谨慎。（避免找茬的语气）

COMMENTARY

This outstanding essay begins by noting that the argument "seems logical."  It then proceeds to discuss possible alternative explanations for the increase in car accidents and provides an impressively full analysis.  Alternatives mentioned are that
-- the two regions might have drivers of different ages and experience;
-- Forestville's topography, geography, cars, and/or roads might contribute to accidents;
-- six months might be an insufficient amount of time for determining that the speed limit is linked to the accident rate;
-- demographics might play a role in auto accidents;
-- population and auto density should be considered; and
-- the times of day when drivers in the two regions travel might be relevant.

The points are cogently developed and are linked in such a way as to create a logically organized essay.  Transitions together with interior connections create a smoothly integrated presentation.  For the most part, the writer uses language correctly and well and provides excellent variety in syntax.  The minor flaws (e.g., using "less" instead of "fewer") do not detract from the overall high quality of the critique.  This is an impressive 6 paper.

benchmark 6

The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.
"Five years ago, we residents of Morganton voted to keep the publicly owned piece of land known as Scott Woods in a natural, undeveloped state.  Our thinking was that, if no shopping centers or houses were built there, Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as a natural parkland.  But now that our town planning committee wants to purchase the land and build a school there, we should reconsider this issue.  If the land becomes a school site, no shopping centers or houses can be built there, and substantial acreage would probably be devoted to athletic fields.  There would be no better use of land in our community than this, since a large majority of our children participate in sports, and Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as natural parkland."

短文关键逻辑支撑点：benefit， a large majority of our children（benefita large majority of our children＝benefit our community）(shopping centers? 不要胡乱猜测,做与题无关的不必要的假设 )  
漏洞：是否benefita large majority of our children＝benefit our community是否benefita large majority of our children=benefit all children

This letter to the editor begins by stating the reasons the residents of Morganton voted to keep Scott Woods in an undeveloped state.  The letter states that the entire community could benefit from an undeveloped parkland.  The residents of the town wanted to ensure that no shopping centers or houses would be built there.  This, in turn, would provide everyone in the community with a valuable resource, a natural park.

The letter then continues by addressing the issue of building a school on the land.  The author reasons that this would also benefit the entire community as a natural parkland since much of the land would be devoted to athletic fields.  The author of the letter comes to the conclusion that building a school on the land would be the best thing for everyone in the community.

在首段暗含自己可能驳斥的点（bold），并不只是单纯的重复短文内容，而是根据自己看出的要驳斥的点，暗含进去。下面即要就暗含的内容进行驳斥了。

This letter is a one-sided argument about the best use of the land known as Scott Woods.  The author may be a parent whose child would benefit from a new school, a teacher who thinks a school would boost the community, or just a resident of Morganton.  Regardless of who the author is, there are many aspects of this plan that he or she has overlooked or chosen to ignore.

自己对短文的初步评价和看法。

Using a piece of land to build a school is not the same thing as using it for a natural parkland.  While all the members of the community could potentially benefit from a parkland, only a percentage of the population would realistically benefit from a new school. The author fails to recognize people like the senior citizens of the community.  What interest do they have in a new school?  It only means higher taxes for them to pay.  They will likely never to and utilize the school for anything.  On the other hand, anyone can go to a park and enjoy the natural beauty and peacefulness.  The use of the land for a school would destroy the benefit of a park for everyone.  In turn, it would supply a school only to groups of people in exactly the right age range, not too young or too old, to reap the benefits.

不是所有人都得益。

Another point the author stresses is that the use of the land for things like athletic fields somehow rationalizes the destruction of the park.  What about children who don't play sports?  Without the school, they could enjoy the land for anything.  A playing field is a playing field.  Children are not going to go out there unless they are into sports.  There are many children in schools who are not interested in or are not able to play sports.  This is yet another group who will be left out of the grand benefits of a school that the author talks about.

不是所有孩子都得益。

The author's conclusion that "there would be no better use of land in our community than this...""is easily arguable.   The destruction of Scott Woods for the purpose of building a school would not only affect the ambience of Morganton, it would affect who would and would not be able to utilize the space.  If the residents as a whole voted to keep Scott Woods in an undeveloped state, this argument will not sway their decision.  The use of the land for a school will probably benefit even less people than a shopping center would（作者假设了大家不想建商店是为了造福更多人）.  The whole purpose of the vote was to keep the land as an asset for everyone.  The only way to do this is to keep it in an undeveloped state.  Using the land for a school does not accomplish this.


COMMENTARY

This outstanding response begins somewhat hesitantly; the opening paragraphs summarize but do not immediately engage the argument.  However, the subsequent paragraphs target the central flaws in the argument and analyze them in almost microscopic detail.

The writer's main rebuttal points out that "using a piece of land to build a school is not the same thing as using it for natural parkland."  Several subpoints develop this critique, offering perceptive reasons to counter the argument's unsubstantiated assumptions.  This is linked to a related discussion that pointedly exposes another piece of faulty reasoning: that using land for athletic fields "rationalizes the destruction of the park."

The extensively developed and organically organized analysis continues into a final paragraph that takes issue with the argument's conclusion that "there would be no better use of land in our community than this."

Diction and syntax are varied and sophisticated, and the writer is fully in control of the standard conventions.  While there may be stronger papers that merit a score of 6, this essay demonstrates insightful analysis, cogent development, and mastery of writing.  It clearly earns a 6.

benchmark 6

A recent survey of dental patients showed that people who use Smile-Bright toothpaste are most likely to have capped teeth -- artificial but natural-looking protective coverings placed by dentists on individual teeth.  Those people who had begun using Smile-Bright toothpaste early in life were more likely to have capped teeth than were people who had begun using Smile-Bright later in life.  In addition, those who reported brushing their teeth more than twice a day with Smile-Bright toothpaste were more likely to have caps on their teeth than were those who reported brushing with Smile-Bright less frequently.  Therefore, people wishing to avoid having their teeth capped should not use Smile-Bright toothpaste.


短文关键逻辑支撑点：  early， twice －－－－s－b 导致 c－t（相关等于因果）

The argument contains several facets that are questionable.  First, the reliability and generalizability  of the survey are open to quesiton.  In addition, the argument assumes a correlation amounts to a causal relationship.  The argument also fails to examine alternative explanations.  I will discuss each of these facets in turn.

简要评价，指出漏洞。

In evaluating the evidence of the survey, one must consider how the survey was conducted.  If the questions were leading or if the survey relied on self reports, the results might be unreliable -- people might just respond with the expected answer.   One must also consider how broad the survey was.  If the survey was limited to a few patients of a certain dentist, the results might be attributable to those particular individuals and that particular dentist.  Hence, the generalization drawn might not apply to most people.  In addition, even if the survey was broader, one must consider whether it was limited in certain ways.  For example, were the survey respondents old people?  Was the survey limited to a certain city or geographic region?  Factors such as these could explain the survey results and could undermine the generalizability of the survey results.

survey的reliability and generaliability

Even if one accepts the survey results, the argument remains questionable.  The argument assumes that the correlation between the use of SMILEBRIGHT and capped teeth means that SMILE BRIGHT causes the need for capped teeth.  But the argument fails to provide sufficient evidence to support the conclusion.  In addition, the argument fails to consider the possibility that people who already have capped teeth might prefer SMILEBRIGHT as a toothpaste because it works better on capped teeth.

correlation 不等于 causal relationship,有可能是治疗性的，而程度是与本身病的程度有关，越胖越吃减肥药的道理。

Finally, the argument's author fails to rule out alternative explanations.  For instance, people who brush their teeth more than twice a day might be those who are prone to the need to have their teeth capped. It might also be the case that starting with SMILEBRIGHT early in life damages the teeth so that capped teeth will be needed later. It also might be the case that SMILEBRIGHT users tend to be the kind of people who are excessively concerned with the appearance of their teeth, perhaps theyre actors, and so are the kind of people who might, sooner or later, want to have their teeth capped anyway.

他因性分析：（逐点用常识解释其它可能性，很精彩）

用牙膏两次的人可能倾向于让它们的牙齿capped。（爱干净，爱美的人）
早期用s－b牙膏的人损害了牙齿以致于后来需要capped。（早期用会受损害，但可能不影响成人？）
爱美的人倾向于用s－b牙膏，并同时很有可能将牙齿capped。（与第一点不同，前者倾向于两次与爱美的人，后者倾向于s－b与爱美的人的关系）


In conclusion, the argument, while it seems logocal at first, has several flaws as discussed above.  The argument could be improved by providing evidence that the correlation is indeed a causal relationship -- that using the toothpaste actually causes the need for capped teeth.  It could be further improved by ruling out alternative explanations for the supposed causal relationship.

总结，增强建议。

两个事物，A和B，同向增多，有哪些可能性？
1、A引起B增多（因果）坏牙齿
2、B引起A增多（因果）适应症
3、A和B相互影响甚至正反馈（非因果）比如高消费、臭美人群刚好容易选择BS和CT，甚至是他们这个圈子的流行趋势。

COMMENTARY
This outstanding response begins by announcing that the argument "contains several facets that are questionable."  The author then develops the critique around three main points:

-- the reliability and generalizability of the survey results are open to question;（前提）
-- the argument assumes that a correlation amounts to a causal relationship; and（主线）
-- there are alternative explanations for the facts uncovered by the survey.（其它）

Each of these points is analyzed insightfully and in great detail.

The writer demonstrates mastery of the elements of effective writing.  The organization is clear and logical; in fact, the organizational plan outlined in the first paragraph is followed to the letter in the second through fourth paragraphs.  The writing is fluent -- transitions guide the reader from point to point in each paragraph; sentence structures are varied appropriately; diction is apt.  Minor flaws (e.g., the typographical error "quesiton") do not detract from the overall outstanding quality of this critique.  For all of these reasons, the essay earns a score of 6.

benchmark 6

The University of Claria is generally considered one of the best universities in the world because of its instructors' reputation, which is based primarily on the extensive research and publishing record of certain faculty members.  In addition, several faculty members are internationally renowned as leaders in their fields.  For example, many of the faculty from the English department are regularly invited to teach at universities in other countries.  Furthermore, two recent graduates of the physics department have gone on to become candidates for the Nobel Prize in Physics.  And 75 percent of the students are able to find employment after graduating.  Therefore, because of the reputation of its faculty, the University of Claria should be the obvious choice for anyone seeking a quality education.

短文关键逻辑支撑点： instructors' reputation in English and physics department＋two recent graduates of the physics department have gone on to become candidates for the Nobel Prize in Physics+ 75 percent of the students are able to find employment after graduating＝a quality education（各个点的漏洞＋忽略掉的因素）

SAMPLE-1 (score 6)
While the University of Claria appears to have an excellent reputation based on the accomplishments and reputations of its faculty, one would also wish to consider other issues before deciding upon this particular institution for undergraduate or graduate training.  The Physics and English departments are internationally known, but these are only two of the areas in which one might study.  Other departments are not listed; is this because no others are worth mentioning, or because no other departments bothered to turn in their accomplishments and kudos to the publicity office?

初步看法
两个部门不能说明全部

The assumption is that because English and Physics have excellent brains in the faculty offices, their teaching skills and their abilities to pass on knowledge and the love of learning to their students are equally laudable. Unfortunately, this is often not the case.  A prospective student would certainly be advised to investigate thoroughly the teaching talents and attitudes of the professors, the library and research facilities, the physical plant of the departments in which he or she was planning to study, as well as the living arrangements on or off campus, and the facilities available for leisure activities and entertainment.

两个部门自身不能说明问题
其它忽略的问题

This evaluation of the University of Claria is too brief, and too general.  Nothing is mentioned about the quality of overall education; it only praises the accomplishments of a few recent graduates and professors.  More important than invitations to teach elsewhere, which might have been engineered by their own departmental heads in an attempt to remove them from the campus for a semester or two, is the relationship between teacher and student.  Are the teaching faculty approachable?  Are they helpful?  Have they an interest in passing on their knowledge?  Are they working for the future benefit of the student or to get another year closer to retirement?  How enthusiastic are the students about the courses being taught and the faculty members who teach those classes?  Are there sufficient classes available for the number of students?  Are the campus buildings accessible; how is the University handling all those cars?  Is the University a pleasant, encouraging, interesting, challenging place to attend school?  What are its attitudes about education, students, student ideas and innovations, faculty suggestions for improvement?

invitations不能说明问题
其它忽略掉的问题

What about that 75% employment record?  Were those students employed in the field of their choice, or are they flipping burgers and emptying wastebaskets while they search for something they are trained to do.  A more specific statement about the employability of students from this University is needed in order to make the argument forceful.

75% employment不能说明问题

The paragraph given merely scratches the surface of what must be said about this University in order to entice students and to convince them that this is the best place to obtain a quality education.  Much more work is needed by the public relations department before this can be made into a four-color brochure and handed out to prospective students.


建议总结

总体结构有些乱，但是每个点都写到了，而且语言能力很好。（对于忽略掉很多关键因素的argument大概可以这样驳吧？）

COMMENTARY

The writer of this outstanding response acknowledges that the University of Claria may "appear" to have a sterling reputation, but cogently argues that such a reputation is perhaps unwarranted in light of the thin and misleading information provided.  The essay's insightful critique targets several instances of unsound reasoning in the argument:

-- that the argument identifies academic achievements in only two
departments;
-- that publications and research prove little about the quality of teaching at Claria; and
-- that the student employment statistic lacks specificity and may be entirely bogus.

The writer probes each questionable assumption and offers alternative explanations, pointing out, for instance, that invitations for faculty to teach elsewhere may have been purposely arranged in order to temporarily remove them from campus and that the employed students may be "flipping burgers and emptying wastebaskets."

In addition, the response perceptively analyzes many features -- omitted by the argument -- that could more convincingly make the case that Claria is "the obvious choice."  The essay suggests that the search for a quality education would, at least, need to investigate the teaching strengths of the faculty; ideally one would also ask about research facilities, the university's physical plant, availability of classes, even parking arrangements!

Although the fourth paragraph ("What about that 75% employment record?") interrupts this discussion, the essay is, on the whole, logically and effectively organized.  Each paragraph develops the central premise: that the argument is uncompelling because it fails to use more valid indices of educational quality.

The writing is succinct, graceful, and virtually error-free, distinguished by impressive diction ("kudos," "laudable," "engineered," "entice"), as well as syntactic sophistication.  For all of these reasons, the essay earns a 6.

七七夕夕UID：2753801

续上
benchmark 6

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument.

The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Silver Screen Movie Production Company.
"According to a recent report from our marketing department, fewer people attended movies produced by Silver Screen during the past year than in any other year.  And yet the percentage of generally favorable comments by movie reviewers about specific Silver Screen movies actually increased during this period.  Clearly, the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of our prospective viewers; so the problem lies not with the quality of our movies but with the public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available.  Silver Screen should therefore spend more of its budget next year on reaching the public through advertising and less on producing new movies."

短文关键逻辑支撑点: fewer people than in any other year, more favorable comments during same period-------the problem lies not with the quality of our movies but with the public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available(people will attend movies for good quality or for favorable comments)---- advertising will be helpful (any type of advertising will be helpful)

SAMPLE-1 (score 6)
The argument presented above is relatively sound, however, the author fails to recognize all the elements necessary to evaluate his situation.  The idea that more money be invested in advertising may be a helpful one, but perhaps not because people are unaware of the current reviews.  To clarify, it may be necessary to advertise more in order to increase sales, however that could be due to many circumstances such as a decrease in the public's overall attendance, an increase in the cost of movies, or a lack of trust in the opinions of the reviewers.

总体评价，表态。
忽略的点的概括。

The advertising director first needs to determine the relative proportion of movie goers that choose to see Silver Screen films.  That will help him to understand his market share.  If the population in general is attending less, then he may still be out-profiting his competitors, despite his individual sales decrease.  In fact, his relative sales could be increasing. Determining where he stands in his market will help him to create and implement an action plan.

绝对数字和相对数字来正确评价所处形势

Another important thing to consder is the relative cost of attending movies to the current standard of living.  If the standard of living is decreasing, it may contribute to an overall decrease in attendance.  In that case, advertising could be very helpful, in that a clever campaign could emphasize the low cost of movies as compared to many other leisure activities.  This could offset financial anxieties of potential customers.

成本因素

Finally, it is important to remember that people rarely trust movie reviewers.  For that reason, it is important that the films appeal to the populus, and not critics alone.  The best advertisement in many cases is word of mouth.  No matter what critics say, people tend to take the opinions of friends more seriously.  This supports continual funding to produce quality movies that will appeal to the average person.

电影本身因素

There is no reason that silver screen should not spend more on advertisement, however, there is reason to continue to invest in diverse, quality films.  Furthermore, the company must consider carefully what it chooses to emphasize in its advertisement.

问题解决型题，作者把重心放在怎样才可以更好的评价困难和怎样解决问题，而不是去评判本身的弱点。自己有道理大于别人没道理。

COMMENTARY
Although the essay begins by stating that the argument "is relatively sound," it immediately goes on to develop a critique.  The essay identifies three major flaws in the argument and provides a careful and thorough analysis.  The main points discussed are that

-- the fall-off in attendance might be industry wide
-- the general state of the economy might have affected movie attendance
-- movie goers "rarely trust movie reviewers"

Each of these points is developed; together they are presented within the context of a larger idea: that while spending more money on advertising may be helpful, the company should "continue to invest in diverse, quality films."

This is a smoothly written, well-developed analysis in which syntactic variety and the excellent use of transitions make for a virtually seamless essay.  This paper clearly merits a score of 6.


b]benchmark 6/b]

The country Myria, which charges fees for the use of national parks, reports little evidence of environmental damage. this strongly suggests that for the country Illium, the best way to preserve public lands is to charge people more money when they are using national parks and wilderness areas for activities with heavy environmental impact. By collecting fees from those people who overuse public lands, Illium will help preserve those lands for present and future generations.

短文关键逻辑支撑点：  country Myria charges fees for the use of national parks，reports little evidence of environmental damage－－－little environmental damage（本身）

                                          country Illium collecting fees from those people who overuse public lands－－－ Illium will help preserve those lands for present and future generations（比较）

Essay Response—Score 6

This argument is not cogent because it assumes that the stated correlation implies causation, which is not necessarily the case. The argument asserts that because the country of Myria charges fees for the use of its national parks, there is little evidence of environmental damage. But there are several reasons why one cannot assume that the lack of evidence of environmental damage is a result of the fact that individuals are charged to use these parks.

总体评价，找出主要逻辑错误。简要说明分析。

First, just because there is a lack of evidence does not preclude the fact that environmental damage may in fact be occurring. The individuals who are testing the area for evidence of damages may not have the proper scientific instruments or educational training necessary to detect damage that may be present. In fact, certain kinds of environmental damage may not be detectable in the short term even using the most sophisticated scientific methods. Imbalance in ecosystems, for example, may only become apparent over a long period of time.

由于时间，技术等原因使得环境污染可能暂时不可测。

Second, even if we concede that there is in fact negligible amounts of environmental damage, this does not necessarily mean that by collecting money from individuals who are using the parks one can use these funds to maintain the land for future generations. An alternative explanation may be that because the country charges a fee to use the national parks, people are less inclined to use the parks. It then stands to reason that with fewer people in the parks, there will be less of a detrimental impact on the environment. In addition, even if people are willing to pay the fee, the funds collected may be insufficient to cover the costs of maintaining and preserving the parkland.

收来的钱可能不够保护。（暗含可能有其它原因，下段指出）（这一段学习，学习，在想其它原因之前要想为什么本身原因不成立，不然就太牵强）

Finally, even if we accept that the situation in Myria is successful in that country, we cannot assume that this same scenario will work in Illium. There are a myriad of variables that can contribute to the success of this type of environmental maintenance and restoration program. Pre-existing and uncontrollable environmental conditions such as the rate of erosion and the overall climate may cause damage that cannot be rectified by monetary solutions. In addition, cultural norms regarding how one views his or her responsibility and role in terms of preserving the environment may influence the intensity of environmental damage that may be sustained. Thus, although the strategy of charging citizens of Myria for the use of its parks in order to collect funds for any restoration that may be required may be successful in Myria, this reality alone does not conclusively suggest that such a strategy would be effective in Illium or any other country.

其它原因使他们环境不污染，在这点上不具比较性。
关于参照别人情况型题。首先，分析别人情况是不是成立，其次，题目认为的主要因素成不成立，最后，是不是有其它的必要相关因素。同时，对比自己的因素。



benchmark 6

The following appeared in a memo from the human resources department of Rifco Computer Company to the company president. “In order to prevent conflicts in the workplace, Rifco Computer Company should require all its employees to attend workshops that teach the technique of ‘active listening,’ a technique in which people express feelings without assigning blame. This technique has clearly benefited Terland Publishing Company: five years ago, two hundred recently hired Terland employees volunteered to participate in a one-day active-listening workshop. Five years later, only five percent of these employees had filed formal complaints with the human resources department, whereas the company as a whole had a fifteen percent complaint rate during that period.”

短文关键逻辑支撑点： two hundred recently hired Terland employees volunteered to participate in a one-day active-listening workshop－－－people express feelings without assigning blame－－Five years later, only five percent of these employees had filed formal complaints with the human resources department, whereas the company as a whole had a fifteen percent complaint rate during that period.”

Essay Response—Score 6

The Rifco Company president should not require its employees to attend these workshops based solely upon the information she receives in this memo. In fact, she can draw very few conclusions regarding the efficacy of this workshop without requesting additional information from the human resource department at Terland Publishing Company.

个人建议，看法。

Several variables have been left out of this report which, if included, would have made this claim more valid. For example, the company president needs to know what percentage of the employees who attended this workshop five years ago are still with the company at the present time. It is possible that this workshop had disastrous effects which resulted in 175 of the participants’ quitting their jobs. Granted, this possibility may be unlikely, but it is certainly not impossible given the information provided by the memo. Similarly, the company president needs to know how many employees work at Terland Publishing Company overall. Even if all 200 employees who attended the seminar were still working there, the numbers mean little if there are only 220 employees in the company. If this were the case, and if one can assume that the 15% of the company as a whole excludes those who participated in the original workshop, than the 15% overall complaint rate would be explained by 3 disgruntled employees. If the 15% includes the employees who attended the workshop, the numbers are even less meaningful. This argument would be strengthened if it was discovered that the majority of employees who attended this workshop were still employed at Terland, and the overall employee population numbered in the thousands.

相对数和绝对数

The argument appears to assume that the workshop attendees were representative of all of Terland employees. There is nothing in the argument to establish this representativeness, and the assumption seems suspect, since the attendees differed in an important respect from other Terland employees: they were newly hired. People tend to be especially cooperative when they are first hired for a job and this alone might explain their willingness to volunteer, unlike other employees. Even if Terland’s work shop participants could be shown to be representative of all Terland employees, there is no reason to assume that they would be representative of Rifco’s employees. Before such an assumption could be warranted, comparisons would need to be made between Rifco and Terland in order to determine whether or not these results could be generalized. Are the companies (one is a computer company and the other is a publishing company) even similar enough to justify the assumption that the workshops would be equally successful with both groups of employees? Perhaps listening is a more important and valued skill in the publishing industry than it is in the computer industry.

抽样的代表性，对比的可靠性

Perhaps Rifco’s staff listens so actively that they succeed in avoiding conflicts the majority of the time—this memo does not even tell the reader whether
conflicts are a problem in the Rifco workplace. The company president should in fact become suspicious. Perhaps the author of this memo has just purchased a great deal of stock in the company which performs these workshops! The Rifco human resource department could, in fact, be correct in its argument that these workshops have benefited Terland. This argument, however, is not well-supported by the paucity of details they have provided in this memo. Based upon the information here, the company president can certainly discount the claim that all employees should be required to attend this workshop. The only action that should be incited by this memo would be a deeper investigation of its claims.

更多更详细的建议。


benchmark 6
The following appeared in a popular health and fitness magazine. “A ten-year study of a group of 552 men from Elysia showed that long-term consumption of caffeinated black tea was associated with a much lower risk of stroke. Of these men, those who drank more than three cups of black tea a day had a 70 percent lower risk of stroke than those who drank no tea. These results suggest that health conscious people should consume at least three cups of black tea a day, beginning early in life.”

短文关键逻辑支撑点：those who drank more than three cups of black tea a day had a 70 percent lower risk of stroke than those who drank no tea－－－ at least three cups of black tea a day,beginning early in life, is needed for health conscious people

Essay Response—Score 6

Before prescribing large quantities of black tea to the general population, the evidence given in the argument should be examined from several other angles. the researchers who conducted the Elysia study seem to have assumed that drinking three cups of black tea a day has preserved the health of some of the Elysian men without examining any other factors which may have affected the results of the study.

提出主要逻辑漏洞

First of all, for an experiment to be accurate, it must be controlled, with a balance between the experimental and the control groups. In the above study, though, we know nothing about the ages, backgrounds, and general health of the men involved. We also do not know if the tea drinkers were of the same age, background, and general health as those who did not drink tea. Further, if the tea drinking men in the study were all quite young when the study began, they might only be 35years old today and thus be at small risk if stroke just because of their age. The same is true of their general health. If they exercised regularly, ate healthily and never smoked, then their decreased risk of stroke might have nothing to do with consumption of black tea and might simply be an indication of a healthy lifestyle.


We might also ask: How do the two groups of men break down in terms of ethnicity? Do all the men in one group belong to one ethnic group and all the men in the other belong to a different ethnic group? Perhaps the tea drinkers are from an ethnic group whose members have a low risk for stroke as compared with the ethnic group of those who drank no tea. If this were the case, the study’s results would be questionable, at best.

控制比较组和对照组的其它因素是否相同（就控制因素充分展开很重要） ages,  general health，backgrounds

Another element to consider is this: perhaps the group who have a higher risk of stroke have this higher risk not because they abstain from drinking tea but because they are heavy smokers, or are grossly overweight, or because they are all in their 70s and 80s and are in poor health and havecirculatory problems. We just don’t know. Furthermore, even if Elysian tea in certain amounts is beneficial to men, what about women? The argument says nothing about tea’s effect on women, so it therefore cannot make the recommendation that all people should drink the tea. Perhaps there is something in the tea which would adversely affect women. Perhaps there is something in the tea which, when drunk in prescribed amounts, will adversely affect a women’s ability to bear healthy children. The point is a generalization about women cannot be made from studies done on men; studies done exclusively on men on the risk of heart attack have taught us that much. In addition, the argument fails to rule out possible side-effects that might make tea drinking inadvisable for some people. What if we consider some important terminology in the argument? For example, what does “long term” mean? In the ten years of the study, does “long term” mean all ten years? Or does it mean several months at a time over a period of X number of years? And what does “lower risk of strike” mean? Does it mean that the tea-drinking men will still probably suffer strokes, but not until their later years? Or that they absolutely will not have a stroke, no matter what?

用设问句，反问句的形势排比出非主逻辑漏洞的其它原因（演绎比归纳在argument中似乎很重要？）

The problem is that key terms in the argument are too vague to be meaningful. In conclusion, any legitimate experiment must be strictly controlled and include a broad cross-section of the population. The Elysian study fails to do that.

总结问题。

Reader Commentary for Essay Response—Score 6

This cogent and well-articulated response presents an insightful analysis of three central problems in the argument: —apparent absence of necessary controls in the study of Elysian men (e.g., the study failed to consider variables such as subjects’ age, diet, and general health, and did not necessarily have balanced experimental and control groups)—unwarranted generalization (e.g., from Elysian men to Elysian women and children) —use of vague terminology (e.g., “long-term” and “lower risk”) Development of each of these points is both thorough and cogent. The writer asks effective rhetorical questions and provides specific examples of the kinds of details that are missing from the argument. In addition, overall organization is exceptionally clear, and transitions both between and within paragraphs are smooth. Throughout the response, the writer clearly establishes logical connections with the use of phrases such as “Another element to consider,” and “The same is true.”
The writing is generally free of errors. Indeed, sentences are typically gracefully constructed with careful embedding and subordination that suit the complexity of the writer’s analysis. In summary, this response is outstanding; it offers a compelling critique of the argument’s flaws and conveys meaning skillfully.

七七夕夕UID：2753801

1006G 【clover】备考日志 by 七七夕夕（7）

argument精华总结（感谢奉献这些精华和参与讨论的斑竹和板油们，给了我很多很多启发。。。）

关于开头

开头的最大的作用应该在于帮助写作的时候理清文章的脉络，一个好的开头应该就是一个文章的缩影，应该给阅卷的老师三个直观的印象：1. 这些逻辑点确实是来自于文章的抽象2. 这个学生抓的逻辑点都是正确的。3.从这些逻辑点的顺序当中可以猜测到该生的正文论证顺序。

个人对范文开头的总结：

1.对短文的初步印象。表达了自己对argument的态度倾向，是觉得初衷是好的，但是逻辑不太好？还是觉得带有私心的建议是片面的？还是觉得有些部分是合理的，至少表面上看起来是的，但是有些部分还是有问题？还是觉得完全不靠谱？

写初步印象也很重要，可以给整个文章定个基调，是建议型的口吻，还是驳斥性的口吻。也确定了自己承认哪些内容，否认哪些内容。

(1)The agrument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned.(提出这样的建议是好的，只是逻辑欠妥)
(2)This letter is a one-sided argument about。。。Regardless of who the author is, there are many aspects of this plan that he or she has overlooked or chosen to ignore.(文章是片面的，不管提出的人是谁，这个计划里都有很多方面是作者忽略或者故意忽略的)
(3）The argument contains several facets that are questionable。（多方面都有问题）
(4）While the University of Claria appears to have an excellent reputation based on the accomplishments and reputations of its faculty, one would also wish to consider other issues before deciding upon this particular institution for undergraduate or graduate training.（当。。。表面上看起来还可以，我们还应该。。。）
(5）The argument presented above is relatively sound, however, the author fails to recognize all the elements necessary to evaluate his situation.  The idea that more money be invested in advertising may be a helpful one, but perhaps not because people are unaware of the current reviews.（文章相对来说还是合理的。。。可是。。。有帮助的。。。但是。。。）
(6）This argument is not cogent because it assumes that the stated correlation implies causation, which is not necessarily the case.（文章是不严密的。。。）
(7）In fact, she can draw very few conclusions regarding the efficacy of this workshop without requesting additional information from the human resource department at Terland Publishing Company（关于。。。几乎不能得出任何结论）
(8）Before prescribing large quantities of black tea to the general population, the evidence given in the argument should be examined from several other angles.

2. 理清文章的逻辑脉络，不是照抄文章，而是要理清作者暗含的推理思路，并切入自己将要驳斥的点。分清主次。

（1）By making a comparison of the region of Forestville, the town with the higher speed limit and therefore automobile accidents, with the region of Elmsford, an area of a lower speed limit and subsequently fewer accidents, the argument for reducing Forestville's speed limits in order to decrease accidents seems logical.
（2）This letter to the editor begins by stating the reasons the residents of Morganton voted to keep Scott Woods in an undeveloped state.  The letter states that the entire community could benefit from an undeveloped parkland.  The residents of the town wanted to ensure that no shopping centers or houses would be built there.  This, in turn, would provide everyone in the community with a valuable resource, a natural park.
       The letter then continues by addressing the issue of building a school on the land.  The author reasons that this would also benefit the entire community as a natural parkland since much of the land would be devoted to athletic fields.  The author of the letter comes to the conclusion that building a school on the land would be the best thing for everyone in the community.（虽然题目里没有entire，everyone，但是暗含了这个词，也是作者要驳斥的关键）
（3）First, the reliability and generalizability  of the survey are open to quesiton. In addition, the argument assumes a correlation amounts to a causal relationship.  The argument also fails to examine alternative explanations.  I will discuss each of these facets in turn.
（5）The idea that more money be invested in advertising may be a helpful one, but perhaps not because people are unaware of the current reviews. To clarify, it may be necessary to advertise more in order to increase sales, however that could be due to many circumstances such as a decrease in the public's overall attendance, an increase in the cost of movies, or a lack of trust in the opinions of the reviewers.（要广告，但是不是为了影评做广告，暗含原文因为没有广告使得观众没有意识到影评，而看电影的人减少的推理）
（6）This argument is not cogent because it assumes that the stated correlation implies causation, which is not necessarily the case. The argument asserts that because the country of Myria charges fees for the use of its national parks, there is little evidence of environmental damage. But there are several reasons why one cannot assume that the lack of evidence of environmental damage is a result of the fact that individuals are charged to use these parks.（从主要到次要）
（8）the researchers who conducted the Elysia study seem to have assumed that drinking three cups of black tea a day has preserved the health of some of the Elysian men without examining any other factors which may have affected the results of the study.（指出原文的推理）

[Do not spend a lot of time summarizing the argument unless you think it will effectively develop your critique.  Readers know which Argument topic you were
assigned.]  [ Do not depend on general statement.]


关于让步


看了66的贴子和其它人的跟贴受到启发后自己的想法：
TEST 1: ARGUMENT TOPIC
The country Myria, which charges fees for the use of national parks, reports little evidence of environmental damage. This strongly suggests that for the country Illium, the best way to preserve public lands is to charge people more money when they are using national parks and wilderness areas for activities with heavy environmental impact. By collecting fees from people who overuse public lands, Illium will help preserve those lands for present and future generations.

它的让步过程：
Second, even if we concede that there is in fact negligible amounts of environmental damage, this does not necessarily mean that by collecting money from individuals who are using the parks one can use these funds to maintain the land for future generations.

Finally, even if we accept that the situation in Myria is successful in that country, we cannot assume that this same scenario will work in Illium.

题目的逻辑链：  reports little evidence of environmental damage（事实1）－a－in fact negligible amounts of environmental damage（推论1）＋ charges fees for the use of national parks（事实2）－b－one can use these funds to maintain the land for future generations（推论2）＋collecting fees from people who overuse public lands in Illium（建议）－c－Illium will help preserve those lands for present and future generations（结论）

（类比的题目都是一个倒推的对称的逻辑链过程，即A的结果－－－ A的原因－－B的原因（建议）＋ A的与结果相关的其它原因与 B相同－－ B的结果（预期））

我对范文让步的理解：
事实1－－推论1 是个假设。
even if 推论1为事实＋事实2 也不可能退出推论2（还有收的钱不够maintain the land 等的其它原因）
even if 推论2是事实＋建议（即将发生的事实）也不可能推出结论（还要两个国家的其它与结论相关的情况一致的假设）
两个让步是为了推翻链b和链c。

所以这两个让步只是不同的两种表达方法：
（1）实际情况是推论＋事实＋其它原因（很多）－－－结论，就算承认作者的推论为事实，事实＋事实也不能推出结论，还有其它原因。
（2）实际情况是推论＋事实＋其它原因（唯一）－－－结论，就算承认作者的推论为事实，也没办法假设这个唯一的其它原因也是事实。（暗含如果这个是事实，就能推导出结论了）


所以，让步应该是基于作者给出的一个自以为是的推论，（例如这个范文里的链a）而不是事实，因为如果是事实，就不用让步了。意思就是，我不再追究你这个a链中的错误了。但是就算这样，你b链还是出问题了。。。以此类推～

注意：让步驳的是链，而不是某个推论。

关于怎么论证

如何使你的文章更有说服力？这个步骤中很重要的一步就是“常识”，符合常识的，即为合理推断，无关常识的，为一般推断，不符合常识的，为脑残推断。所谓的“论据不足”，根本上讲就是因为这些论据不足以填满我们常识中需要形成固定结果的条件，因此它才不足。写ARGUMENT的时候怎么说明这种不足就成了很重要的话题。常识就是生活，充分运用生活的情商

如何使论述更加符合常识性？
事实上，任何一个论述，都是有一套完整的前提A，论据 B,推论C和背景D的，正是这三个东西加上一些推理性的词语，构成了整个逻辑的链接，一般来讲就是：
A +B－－C(基于D的背景下)，无论ABCD哪一个出了问题，都无法支持这个推理，现在我们所面临的最大问题就是：思维僵化，只会从B当中找突破口。其实如果是从C或D为基点出发，找到一些与A有关的可能性，同样能够推翻作者的推理。
当想不到合适的论证方式的时候，不妨从背景和结果的角度来重新审核你所要批驳的内容，从而启发灵感，使文章更加有说服力。在熟练的分析题目的段落逻辑结构以后，可以很快的明确A,B,C,D的关键词从而综合的考虑辩证角度。

逻辑错误和猜测其它可能性的区别：
例如：
A产品的功能很多很全，
A产品还能帮助人体改善XXX－－－大家都会买A产品
A产品还挺便宜，

批驳没有提到A产品比起同类产品都好，是攻击逻辑错误。因为正确的逻辑是
A产品的功能很多很全，
A产品还能帮助人体改善XXX，＋ A产品比起同类产品都好－－－大家都会买A产品
A产品还挺便宜，

而攻击以下为猜测其它可能性。
A产品的功能很多很全
它不一定很全

A产品还能帮助人体改善XXX
他可能会有副作用

A产品还挺便宜
它只是在大城市看起来便宜，农民还是买不起

A-B-C的怎么攻击？
你要是觉得前一个->重要性大于后一个，就放弃后一个
否则放弃前一个，如果觉得两个都在文章中占很大的错误比重，那就都拿下呗

A\
B-->D的怎么攻击？
C/

你绝对不能写 1.A不能推出D 2.B不能退出D 3.C不能退出D，所以这个逻辑有错
3个共同推断的，不能拆散的分析

总的来说，攻击链即事实和推论间的联系就是攻击逻辑，而攻击提供的论据的可信度极为猜测可能性。

所以不能算作最重要的辩驳点，最重要的是逻辑链。可把最重要的放在最前面来说。可猜测论据的可能性则较为次要。一般不攻击前提，除非前提实在是不太符合常识和推理才可挑战下。

survey和report也算是个前提，usually ETS wants us to accept that the presented info is true; in other words, it's best to assume the information is reliable unless of course the reported information could be faulted in the way it was gathered.     

若要攻击前提，关键要找出argument中间找出推理中的动态缺陷，孤立静止的内容,也就是材料中间给出的前提,包括那些survey,都应该是假定他们本身是没有错误的,我们要找的是他们一旦与下面的逻辑推理或者结论相关起来的时候,那些动态推理步骤中间的错误,这个时候可能会涉及到survey的本身的问题~

关于论证的充实深入

1。单独列出条目是不够的，如果说such as other skills的话，为什么不写出来到底是什么skill？如果说improvements cannot be embodied（这个词用的有问题？） in their work，那到底体现在哪里了？如果说they actually made improvements，哪些方面，多大程度？etc.
2。非常具体的情景（一句话也可以体现）和发展还有for example的详细非常能够说明问题。False analogy总是虚的，而说清楚因为A地区成天种棉花B地区成天盖房子从而FALSE analogy才是具体的。
3。必须把必要的内容给予充分的交代，把整个过程为什么出现fallacy分析清楚。
4。分析范文，找出论据深入的元素

一五一十提出大大小小“实际”的反驳意见——这才是有用的。Analytical Writing——不管立论还是驳论，就是要跟人家说明why，而且是Specifically discuss why。

关于问句
一篇文章中的问句，通常情况下来说，有两种不同的作用：

1.引起读者的兴趣，让她们把更多的注意力放在你接下来需要讨论的方面。（问句的作用是勾起别人的兴趣，你既然都勾起了，就要负责解释清楚，论证段落里面拿出一个问句就宣布论证结束，比一个陈述句就结束的后果更严重）

2.表达一种强调语气，这些问题或者是不言自明，毋需回答；或者是问得人无言以对，无法回答，其作用是强调自己观点的正确性。

在Argument这种学术性，逻辑性很强的驳论文当中，问句运用的更多是属于第二种作用，加强自己文章的语气，力争驳到作者哑口无言。从辩论的角度来看，这是通过用作者的观点无法解释的方面来证明其错误性，当然，也是最有辩驳力的一种手段。

如何在恰当的时候用上问句来为你的文章增色？如何正确的使用问句，避免进入一些误区？

Other departments are not listed; is this because no others are worth mentioning, or because no other departments bothered to turn in their accomplishments and kudos to the publicity office?（将刻意隐瞒的可能性用问句表达出来，语气更强烈）

This evaluation of the University of Claria is too brief, and too general.Nothing is mentioned about the quality of overall education; it only praises the accomplishments of a few recent graduates and professors.More important than invitations to teach elsewhere, which might have been engineered by their own departmental heads in an attempt to remove them from the campus for a semester or two, is the relationship between teacher and student（alternative point）.
Are the teaching faculty approachable?
Are they helpful?
Have they an interest in passing on their knowledge?
Are they working for the future benefit of the student or to get another year closer to retirement?
How enthusiastic are the students about the courses being taught and the faculty members who teach those classes?
Are there sufficient classes available for the number of students?
Are the campus buildings accessible; how is the University handling all those cars?
Is the University a pleasant, encouraging, interesting, challenging place to attend school?
What are its attitudes about education, students, student ideas and innovations, faculty suggestions for improvement?
[table][tr][td]从上面的分析我们可以看出两点：
1.所有的这么长一串的问句，彼此间关联的结构到底是递进，还是并列我们先不谈，仅从分类上就能发现它们全部是属于第二种情况的问句：通过让人无言以对的问题，表达强调的意思。
2.所有这么长一串问句的作用，功能性的目的仅仅是为了支持作者提出的那个alternative point，而不是为了引起下文，更不是为了表达作者的疑惑，因此是属于无需回答的问题。

关于段落顺序

合理组织文章结构：所以你首先需要确定你要选出批驳的－－然后根据它在逻辑链中的位置－－确定文章的结构，整个文章的结构尽量具有逻辑性，且做到“smooth transition”。

一些基础

Proposition --
T or F in an argument, but not alone. Can be a premise or conclusion. Is not equal to a sentence.
Premise --
Proposition used as evidence in an argument.
Conclusion --
Proposition used as a thesis in an argument.
Argument --
A group of propositions of which one is claimed to follow from the others.
Induction --
A process through which the premises provide some basis for the conclusion
Deduction --
A process through which the premises provide conclusive proof for the conclusion.

deductive argument: A是B, C是A，所以C是B. (valid or sound)
inductive argument:  A通常是B（前提），A现在的情况（论据）。所以A现在应该是B.（结论）(strong, weak, cogent, uncogent)