argument139 by tequilawine 有拍必回

tequilawineUID: 2702008

TOPIC: ARGUMENT139 - The following appeared in the editorial section of an educational publication.

"One study at Lee University found that first-semester grades of teenage students who had always attended public, tax-supported schools were slightly lower than the grades of students who had received some home schooling instruction by parents at home, although the grade differences disappeared in the second semester. These results suggest that home schooling is the best way to educate teenage children. Therefore, instead of spending more money on public education, the government should provide financial incentives so that home schooling is an option for more parents. After all, children schooled at home receive more attention, since they are taught by the best possible teacher: a parent who has a high stake in educating them well."
WORDS: 246          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2010-2-24 15:43:28




In this argument, the arguer concludes that government should provide financial incentives so that home schooling is an option for more parents. It seems plausible at first sight, but with deeper considering, you can find many stigmas in it.





First that comes in sight is that evidence support assumption that home schooling is the best way to educate children. I wonder if you can get this just from the grades of teenage students, putting all the other aspects aside. It betrays marrows of our modern education system which pursues encouraging students well-rounder. Grade maybe part of this, but never can be whole of this. Without public education, how could teenage students get socialization? Only through parents at home? You must be kidding on me.  We all know that we acquaint this skill in our whole life with cooperating with others. Being absent from this environment, our children just lost most valuable treasure he should have in school.





Following the unilateral comparison, our author broaden his suggestion to the scope of the money spending on providing home schooling instead of public education by government. Under the doubtful assumption of better would be at home, auguser exaggerate his conclusion that government should support more home schooling instead of public education. Without any further more evidence to document this assumption, most of us think we can not enact any policy only basing of this point-merely grade.




Moreover, author has told us that the nuance in grade between the two kinds of teenagers vanished during the second semester. That means the advantages lying in home is not so convincing. In addition to that, we get last nip into end of passage, how could you be so sure that parents will be best possible teachers?




In summary, i think we need to be a little more discreet about this suggestion. Before we take action, more cogent and statistic surveys should be done, and take all the factor into account.

prettywraithUID: 197049

Leadership demands so many features, so as to fulfill his duty for the mass, further more, to be an effective one, is it enough only to apply for the highest ethical and moral standards.(注意furthermore不是连词，这句话多了一个谓语，要么加个连词要么改成两句话) What about others, i （I）mean, ability to deal with the hot potatoes, to cooperate with others, to be brave and determined under higher pressure.
No one defy（defies） the importance of the morality. However to be a compelling one, does it necessitates the highest of morality（the highest of morality是什么意思，这句话没太读懂）? No. What we need is not a saint, who are willing to undertake human hardship, but a warrior, who are strong enough to lead us to fight against the devil, maybe by the end of that, companying with us to the land of dreaming. President maybe a little extreme, but there is no better than that, which can clarify so clearly. What about Bill Clinton?（太口语了，或者改为What about Bill Clinton is？） Generally speaking, people all over the world knew the scandal of him, because of that, he is nearly dragged down, but can we deny that during his period, American experience the longest booming economy under his operation.（这句话改一下，不符合语法规范）

Moreover, we should consider more about this, being totally absent from morality and ethics, i （I）think we called it tyrants or authoritarian, and that is exactly what we are against for the democracy in the world. Think about Nazi, sweeping the whole Europe into war, we take the cost of millions lives to defend our democracy, from then on, we will never let anyone without morality or ethics in control of the country again. (问题和前面的语法错误类似，注意一个句子只能有一个谓语，如果有多余的谓语一定要有相应的连词连接)


At the same time, let take a look at the leader from the other side, the ability of the person. The aim of the leader, that we have chosen from thousands of candidates, is to serve our country, （and）to lend us a better tomorrow. How could it happen, if the blessed one doesn't have any abilities but an （a） sympathetic hear? Dating back to our dynasty of our Chinese history, as is known to all, by killing emperor Li Yu, the first emperor of Song Dynasty establish his empire. And the former is known for his kindness to his people and his talent in arts, literature etc. The virtues didn't prevent his country from being defeated,（都好换句号或者加and） more worse, some of them even result in death. Yes be it leader, sometimes, you need to good at managing and handling, even with some diplomatic tackles, far from this, （和前面相同的语法问题）you also need sacrifice some of your other talents in order to be a good one.

At last, what we can learn from the virtues of leaders, under the purpose to be a good one, is demanding and painful for everyone, because you have to be moral and ethic one, with excellent managerial aptitude, even more, are ready for take expense of abandoning you other talents or hobbies.


文章语言上最大的问题是连词和谓语关系的问题比较多；这个查一下资料看一下吧。另外长句太多。
字数，这个个人偏好，但无论怎么讲一篇issue都得400多字，兄弟加油啊！
另外内容和题目你在理解一下我有点对不上，开头段说除了伦理道德其他方面也很重要，但是题目是说“一个好领导必须要恪守伦理道德”，其他方面可以谈，但是重点我个人理解还是到底要不要坚持伦理道德。