【hawk】7月24日任务——Issue51

谦行天下UID: 2797557

51"Education will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet the individual needs and interests of each student."

请同学们占座两楼

互改顺序：
第一次互改：
小谦-maggie-adam(后改前)
第二次互改：
小谦-adam-maggie（后改前）

谦行天下UID: 2797557

我只写了300多字~~⊙﹏⊙b汗
The issue asserts that education will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet personal needs and interests. I agree, because in this way, education can inspire one’s talent and motivate one into success.

Take the preeminent American author Helen Keller for example. As we all know, Helen was the first deafblind person to earn a Bachelor of Arts degree. Without Keller's teacher, Anne Sullivan, who broke through the isolation imposed by a near complete lack of language, Helen cannot blossom. Helen learned to communicate that she wrote the famous article three days to see and became famous all over the world. Yes, she was a beneficiary of individualized education. It is never too hard to imagine without individualized education that Helen simply go to ordinary blinds school, and educate as others; it is impossible that Helen became success as she did.


But individualized education shouldn’t be overemphasized. We have several shortcomings when we apply every child with individualized education. First, if the application put into force, incalculable money and teachers are needed. We need reappraise the well-use of the investment. Second, it is hard for little kids to choose what is suit for them and what is not when they know nothing. At least, they should learn first some basic skills like how to talk and how to write.

General education shouldn’t be neglect. We can never find a scientist who hasn’t learned how to do math. Nor does a biologist who cann’t understand the structure of DNA. Also, general education is responsible for teaching students the morel standards. By mores, law, history education, children establish a system of evil and good. General education is good in the long run. The eight-gold medalist Michael Phelps, who holds the record for the most gold medals won in a single Olympics,
is addict to marijuana. This is a failure in the morel standards and in general education.

All in all, individualized education can maximize one’s hidden ability to success. But individualized education cost a lot of investment and general education shouldn’t be neglect for its useful.

==============第一次自改文===============================
谢Maggie，加了不少字！
The issue asserts that education will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet personal needs and interests. I partially agree, because in this way, education can inspire one’s talent and motivate one into success. In my point of view, education can be divided to individualized education and general education according to meeting individual needs and interests or not.


Individualized education defined as education that is specifically designed to meet the individual needs and interests is effective to make one success. Take the preeminent American author Helen Keller for example. As we all know, Helen was the first deaf-blind person to earn a Bachelor of Arts degree. Without Keller's teacher, Anne Sullivan, who broke through the isolation imposed by a near complete lack of language, Helen cannot blossom. Because of Anne’s dedicated education, Helen learned to communicate which definitely meet her needs. Helen’s article three days to see inspired hundreds and thousands of people and brought Helen’s story all over the world. Yes, she was a beneficiary of individualized education. It is never too hard to imagine without individualized education which meets Helen’s special needs that Helen simply go to ordinary blinds school, and educate as others; it is impossible that Helen became success as she did.

But individualized education shouldn’t be overemphasized. We have several shortcomings when we apply every child with individualized education. First, if the application put into force, incalculable money and teachers are needed. There is almost no country in the world could design a special education to every kid. When large investments are put into individualized education, the expenditure for educating teachers and improving facilities should be retrenched. Hence, we need to reappraise the well-use of the investment. Second, it is hard for little kids to choose what is suit for them and what is not when they know nothing. Few people show great talent in a specific area when they are young like Chopin who was a child-prodigy pianist and composer. Most children are common and it is difficult to design a special program to meet their needs and interests. According to children’s interests, children don’t like studying but playing games. So, it is reasonable to require ordinary children to require the general education which is contrast to individualized education.

General education shouldn’t be neglect. We can never find a scientist who hasn’t learned math. Nor can we find a biologist who can’t understand the structure of DNA. Also, general education is responsible for teaching students the morel standards. By mores, law, history education, children establish a system of evil and good. General education is good in the long run. The eight-gold medalist Michael Phelps, who holds the record for the most gold medals won in a single Olympics, is addict to marijuana. This is a failure in the morel standards and in general education.
Although he is educated well and earned highest award in his area, in long run he lost all his reputation and is notorious.

All in all, individualized education that meet one’s interests and needs can maximize one’s hidden ability to success. But individualized education is not practical and general education shouldn’t be neglect for its useful.

==========第二次自改文==============
多谢Adam
===============================第二次自改文==================
The issue asserts that education will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet personal needs and interests. I partially agree, because in this way, education can inspire one’s talent and motivate one into success. In my point of view, education can be divided to individualized education and general education according to whether it meets individual needs and interests or not.

Individualized education defined as education that is specifically designed to meet the individual needs and interests is effective to make one success. Take the preeminent American author Helen Keller for example. As we all know, Helen was the first deaf-blind person to earn a Bachelor of Arts degree. Without Keller's teacher, Anne Sullivan, who broke through the isolation imposed by a near complete lack of language, Helen cannot blossom. Because of Anne’s dedicated education, Helen learned to communicate which definitely meet her needs. Helen’s article three days to see inspired hundreds and thousands of people and brings Helen’s story all over the world. Yes, she was a beneficiary of individualized education. At that time, people don’t know how deaf-blind to communicate. It is never too hard to imagine without individualized education which meets Helen’s special needs that Helen simply go to ordinary blinds school, and educate as others; it is impossible that Helen learned to communicate and became success as she did.

But individualized education shouldn’t be overemphasized. We have several shortcomings when we apply every child with individualized education. First, if the application put into force, incalculable money and teachers are needed. There is almost no country (to Adam, 我觉得不说得那么绝对好一点，世界那么大，无奇不有。) in the world could design a special education to every kid. When large investments are put into individualized education, the expenditure for educating teachers and improving facilities should be retrenched. Hence, we need to reappraise the well-use of the investment. Second, it is hard for little kids to choose what is suit for them and what is not when they know nothing. The rate of people born with a special talent like Chopin who was a child-prodigy pianist and composer is near to zero. Most children are common and it is difficult to design a special program to meet their needs and interests. So, it is reasonable to require ordinary children to require the general education which is contrast to individualized education.

General education shouldn’t be neglect. We can never find a scientist who hasn’t learned math. Nor can we find a biologist who can’t understand the structure of DNA. Also, general education is responsible for teaching students the moral standards. By mores, law, history education, children establish a system of evil and good. General education is good in the long run. The eight-gold medalist Michael Phelps, who holds the record for the most gold medals won in a single Olympics, is addict to marijuana. This is a failure in the moral standards and in general education. Although he is educated well and earned highest award in his area, in long run he lost all his reputation and is notorious.

All in all, individualized education that meet one’s interests and needs can maximize one’s hidden ability to success. But individualized education is not practical and general education shouldn’t be neglect for its useful.

谦行天下UID: 2797557

改Adam
Wrong
New words for me
Good expression
Comment and Questions

提纲：
1.承认这个观点正确的地方，但是education应该分开来看待。
2.从purpose of education来推导出fundamental education应该针对所有人。
3.+，在非年轻人的地方同意作者观点。
4.指出在现实意义上的实际性。给出建议现在的education可能更因该关注xxx才是effective。
5.结尾，重申观点。

正文：
  It is true that the interests of[for] the[a] subject or field often affect students' ability of absorbing the knowledge sometimes. However the conclusion that Education[education] will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet the individual needs and interests of each student is to[too] hasty and the problem of effectiveness is much complicated when we scrutinize it from different aspects. Does effective means that the student can learn this subject quickly and remember the contents long or it only means that the students can use the knowledge in the later of their life.[?] From my point of view education should be divided into fundamental education and specific education. To the former one, it should be asked[可以用一个更高级的词汇！] to study by everyone. To the specific education, it may be possible to be chosen by interests.

  To answer this question we have to think about the purpose of education and then we can know this opinion's flaws. AS it is widely known "the purpose of education involves the cultivation of an innocent mind, the instilling of values and principle in the minds of children", we can easily get the standard, whether it can help the educator to fulfill the purpose, to test whether a method is effective or not.[你说得好拗口，我看了好几圈，这样说好不好？we can easily get the standard of effectiveness that is whether the method can help the educator to fulfill the purpose.] In this case "only meet the individual needs and interests" will not help. When we, human beings, are too young to know what the world contain and what we have. It is impossible for us to distinguish[identify would be better] what we should learn, what is the best choice, and even what we are actually interested in. Can you decide[know/distinguish] whether a baby, or a 4 or 5 years old kid, has the interest to learn the Math or Physics? So the common knowledge and the basis information should be transport to youth no matter how they think.

  After the youth have finished the fundamental knowledge, I do accept the idea that interest is their best teacher. For instance, the greater[great] America inventor Franklin only studies in primary school for 2 years. However, with the great and self-motivation by interesting[interests], Franklin never give up his dream[learning process][It is not suitable to say 'dream' here, when you have not mention what his dream is] and did the famous kite experiment which is cited as “catch the light from the sky”. The arguer may argue that Franklin is a talent while we are not. The fact is that if Franklin got better and more specific education in that era, he would finish more significant experiment and even may help the society to reveal what electric is. And if we can be a active learner, at least, and even become the next Franklin.

  However, the practicality of[delete] the specific design may be not enough to support everyone’s interests with[because of] limited teaching resources. Even in America, the most developed country in the world, the education resources is far less from the demand to classify[of classifying] each student by his/her interests.[Good point!] And the most important thing is to let those who do not have the ability[access] to go to school get the power[?] instead of let the rich have the power to get the education by their interests. Otherwise the wealth gap between the rich and poor would cause chaos in the whole society，[the gap cause chaos?]Which is definitely not effective to the whole society.

          In sum, the education must be treated as two parts,[we should veiw this issue from two aspects:] the fundamental education should face to the whole group and the specific education should be selectable. And to face the real world, before making the whole group get the chance to choose by interests, the effective education to the whole social should focus on the poor’s need instead of the rich’s demand.
整体思路很好！加油！

===============改Maggie的一改文==============================
Wrong
New words for me
Good expression
Comment and Questions

From this assertion it seems that the speaker put a premium on satisfying students’ needs and interests in education while the education would fail if teachers do not do it.与hwslqc同学讨论未果 I find this allegation to be specious. It wrongly suggests that in no circumstance can teaching succeed without meeting all the students' need. To a contrary this kind of pattern sometimes brings harmfulness. My points of contention with the speaker involve the fundamental objectives and nature of research, as discussed below.

First by scrutinizing some aspects of this assertion, indeed, carrying about one's truly needs and interests can bring up a student in a better way. One of the greatest scientists Newtown had a saying: the best teacher is called interest. Educants may feel valued【这个用法很怪，feel being valued】 and being respected when schools think a lot of what they really looking for, thus they perform better in their studying. For example, Samuel ChaoChung Ting who received the Nobel Prize was nurtured according to his own hobbies by his parents early in his life. "Just let him do what he interested in!", this is the father's answer while asked about how did he train a son of Nobel Prize-winning successfully[这句这么说还是疑问句，应该改为陈述句]. Parents guided Ding's learning orientation by his personal loving and then made Ding finally become a winner of Nobel Prize through letting go, trust and the type of respect of friends. Therefore, in this case we can learn that a personal interest plays an important part in one’s learning career.
正面支持观点。
However, there might cause a counter-effect in efficiency if such considering use into every student specially. Just suppose if there are 100 children who are holding different needs and interests totally, what could educator[用复数或者加冠词] do with the 100 kids? In terms of the speaker’s saying, first of all teacher【复数】 should find out the 100 kinds of needs and interests then design 100 methods of teaching on a one-to-one basis----there is no need to explain how much time will it【与上面一个错误一样，改为陈述句：it will】 takes, while students have already left school probably----then carrying out teaching programs on the students one by one. From this it appears that the speaker's suggestion is entirely low in efficiency.
反，会降低学习效率
Secondly, it would cause too much human and material cost.【该句作为本段主题句】 To treat each learner by different course[用复数] based on what he or she likes may lead to a consequence of admission of insufficient income which may result school【用复数】 no longer run down in worse. In addition, it is not so sure that scholasticals have already own the ability to perceive their social identity. They may not know what they really want clearly and may disable to figure out right judgments. Therefore there may has a minus effect if the instructor hands the initiative to the students blindly.【这句话似乎也是对后面接着的这个论点的总结，建议放到最后】 Furthermore, people always love to do what they are good at. If let the students choose the subjects only they are interested in randomly, students will probably miss plenty of significant learning content and what's more they may become more and more self-center of which in some circumstance may the school bring up incomplete-knowledge-structural students while the purpose of the education is to culture all-round development of human resources. If we separate education from the individual needs and interests of each student, the system of education would become formalistic and consequently, a students' potential is tempting to be neglected and buried forever.这句怎么好像突然新加了一个论点呢？我认为你冒然提到这一点并不好，你并没有足够的例子去支撑这一点！要么再加一段再说，要么不要提了。冒然一句话，不好！

这段总的来说逻辑有点混乱，本段说了三个小论点，我认为后两个论点，in addition 和 Furthermore, 不是属于主题句Secondly, it would cause too much human and material cost.，建议作者重新捋一下


To sum up, the author fails to recognize that not in all situations will the type of education meeting individual needs and interests of each student be effective. In the final analysis, to bring up a kid should pay attention to many aspects such as one's performance in morality, one's absorbing in important knowledge, one's self-care ability and so on----and I would be hard-pressed to imagine a worthier end.

===============改Itymoon===============
Wrong
New words for me
Good expression
Comment and Questions


I agree with the speaker to the extent that the education will be effective if it targets at satisfying students' tastes and needs.However, there is no necessity for the speaker to make the statement absolute by claiming that the specifical course design is the only key to effective education.
    First, in my opinion, when one's  needs are satisfied, he or she will be inspired and encouraged and then learn more from the courses,which is the result of their great interests.有些冗余 The interest plays as the motive and guidance for us to learn, study and overcome the numerous difficulties we come across. Take Michelangelo for example. Without the fantastic interest in arts, it is hard for him to carry on his work in arts as a poor and finally accomplished the outstanding and brilliant strucpultures such as the David. Besides, which people are fond of is usually the field they used to be skilled at or they are confident they have the talent to be skilled at. Then the education will benefit them much more because they already gain a considerate quantities of background knowledge and as a result be more fluent  than educating totally laymen.
     Unfortunately, it is not pratical[practical] for the university or college to provide each students with their dream courses. It is true that the number of our professor is small when compared to that of student. What makes the situation worse is that the professor are usually in charge of research work and can hardly afford the time to meet various kinds of needs.
     To take a step further, I wonder whether the individual's so-called interests are true or not. Sometimes, our feelings are not exact and sometimes even an illusion. When an individual doesn't look into the field, he or she lacks the information to judge whether he or she loves or not. While on the contrary, which seems to be boring at first turns out to be your dream work only if you put a deep eye into it. Take myself for example. When I first meet series of courses in mechanical engineering, I cannot imagine there is a major more banal and tough than mechanical engineering for the coutless calculating, obscure argot and strange rules to follow when designing. However, as time goes on, the feeling become more and more strong that the major is the one I just dream of and will be addicted to for it provides a chance for me to create something to improve people's life with my own ideas and imagination.
      In a word, I never deny the important role satisfying individual's interests and needs play in the course design. However, it will be unjustified when it becomes the only standard to measure whether the education is effective or not. The factors which infulence the effectiveness of education are complex and vary all the time, it is hard and impossible for us to decide which is the cardinal one.

PsMaggieUID: 2861847

7月24日作业
说明：有几句用了黄书里的句子。。。。
才写过两三篇ISSUE，新手，接受各种拍

TOPIC: ISSUE51 - "Education will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet the individual needs and interests of each student."
WORDS: 591          TIME: 00:54:39          DATE: 2010/7/22 11:35:16

From this assertion it seems that the speaker put a premium on satisfying students’ needs and interests in education while the education would fail if teachers do not do it. I find this allegation to be specious. It wrongly suggests that in no circumstance can teaching succeed without meeting all the students' need. To a contrary this kind of pattern sometimes brings harmfulness. My points of contention with the speaker involve the fundamental objectives and nature of research, as discussed below.

First by scrutinizing some aspects of this assertion, indeed, carrying about one's truly needs and interests can bring up a student in a better way. One of the greatest scientists Newtown had a saying: the best teacher is called interest. Educants may feel valued and being respected when schools think a lot of what they really looking for, thus they perform harder in their studying. For example, ChaoChung Ting who received the Nobel Prize was nurtured according to his own hobbies by his parents early in his life. "Don't care about him!", this is the father's answer while asked about how did he train a son of Nobel Prize-winning successfully. Parents guided Ding's learning orientation by his personal loving and then made Ding finally become a winner of Nobel Prize through letting go, trust and the type of respect of friends.

However, there might cause a counter-effect in efficiency if such considering use into every student specially. Just suppose if there are 100 children who are holding different needs and interests totally, what could educator do with the 100 kids? In terms of the speaker’s saying, first of all teacher should find out the 100 kinds of needs and interests then design 100 methods of teaching on a one-to-one basis----there is no need to explain how much time will it takes, while students have already left school probably----then carrying out teaching programs on the students one by one. From this it appears that the speaker's suggestion is entirely low in efficiency.

Secondly, it would cause too much human and material cost. To treat each learner by different course based on what he or she likes may lead to a consequence of admission of insufficient income which may result school no longer run down in worse. In addition, it is not so sure that scholasticals have already own the ability to perceive their social identity. They may not know what they really want clearly and may disable to figure out right judgments. Therefore there may has a minus effect if the instructor hands the initiative to the students blindly.

Furthermore, people always love to do what they are good at. If let the students choose the subjects only they are interested in randomly, students will probably miss plenty of significant learning content and what's more they may become more and more self-center of which in some circumstance may the school bring up incomplete-knowledge-structural students while the purpose of the education is to culture all-round development of human resources. If we separate education from the individual needs and interests of each student, the system of education would become formalistic and consequently, a students' potential is tempting to be neglected and buried forever.

To sum up, the author fails to recognize that not in all situations will the type of education meeting individual needs and interests of each student be effective. In the final analysis, to bring up a kid should pay attention to many aspects such as one's performance in morality, one's absorbing in important knowledge, one's self-care ability and so on----and I would be hard-pressed to imagine a worthier end.

讨论修改后：
From this assertion it seems that the speaker put a premium on satisfying students’ needs and interests in education while the education would fail if teachers do not do it.与hwslqc同学讨论未果 I find this allegation to be specious. It wrongly suggests that in no circumstance can teaching succeed without meeting all the students' need. To a contrary this kind of pattern sometimes brings harmfulness. My points of contention with the speaker involve the fundamental objectives and nature of research, as discussed below.

First by scrutinizing some aspects of this assertion, indeed, carrying about one's truly needs and interests can bring up a student in a better way. One of the greatest scientists Newtown had a saying: the best teacher is called interest. Educants may feel valued and being respected when schools think a lot of what they really looking for, thus they perform better in their studying. For example, Samuel ChaoChung Ting who received the Nobel Prize was nurtured according to his own hobbies by his parents early in his life. "Just let him do what he interested in!", this is the father's answer while asked about how did he train a son of Nobel Prize-winning successfully. Parents guided Ding's learning orientation by his personal loving and then made Ding finally become a winner of Nobel Prize through letting go, trust and the type of respect of friends. Therefore, in this case we can learn that a personal interest plays an important part in one’s learning career.

However, there might cause a counter-effect in efficiency if such considering use into every student specially. Just suppose if there are 100 children who are holding different needs and interests totally, what could educator do with the 100 kids? In terms of the speaker’s saying, first of all teacher should find out the 100 kinds of needs and interests then design 100 methods of teaching on a one-to-one basis----there is no need to explain how much time will it takes, while students have already left school probably----then carrying out teaching programs on the students one by one. From this it appears that the speaker's suggestion is entirely low in efficiency.

Secondly, it would cause too much human and material cost. To treat each learner by different course based on what he or she likes may lead to a consequence of admission of insufficient income which may result school no longer run down in worse. In addition, it is not so sure that scholasticals have already own the ability to perceive their social identity. They may not know what they really want clearly and may disable to figure out right judgments. Therefore there may has a minus effect if the instructor hands the initiative to the students blindly. Furthermore, people always love to do what they are good at. If let the students choose the subjects only they are interested in randomly, students will probably miss plenty of significant learning content and what's more they may become more and more self-center of which in some circumstance may the school bring up incomplete-knowledge-structural students while the purpose of the education is to culture all-round development of human resources. If we separate education from the individual needs and interests of each student, the system of education would become formalistic and consequently, a students' potential is tempting to be neglected and buried forever.

To sum up, the author fails to recognize that not in all situations will the type of education meeting individual needs and interests of each student be effective. In the final analysis, to bring up a kid should pay attention to many aspects such as one's performance in morality, one's absorbing in important knowledge, one's self-care ability and so on----and I would be hard-pressed to imagine a worthier end.

agnes2010UID: 2794922

1

agnes2010UID: 2794922

2

hwslqcUID: 2861597

8点半才知道进组了，然后才知道写这篇文章。。。。。
以上都是借口，这是第一篇Issue，还写的很匆忙（单词错误已经更改了）。肯定是问题巨大，不要给我面子，往死里拍（伸脸....）。
提纲：
1.承认这个观点正确的地方，但是education应该分开来看待。
2.从purpose of education来推导出fundamental education应该针对所有人。
3.+，在非年轻人的地方同意作者观点。
4.指出在现实意义上的实际性。给出建议现在的education可能更因该关注xxx才是effective。
5.结尾，重申观点。

正文：
  It is true that the interests of the subject or field often affect students' ability of absorb the knowledge sometimes. However the conclusion that Education will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet the individual needs and interests of each student is to hasty and the problem of effectiveness is much complicated when we scrutinize it from different aspects. Does effective means that the student can learn this subject quickly and remember the contents long or it only means that the students can use the knowledge in the later of their life. From my point of view education should be divided into fundamental education and specific education. To the former one, it should be asked to study by everyone. To the specific education, it may be possible to be chosen by interests.
  To answer this question we have to think about the purpose of education and then we can know this opinion's flaws. AS it is widely known "the purpose of education involves the cultivation of an innocent mind, the instilling of values and principle in the minds of children", we can easily get the standard, whether it can help the educator to fulfill the purpose, to test whether a method is effective or not. In this case "only meet the individual needs and interests" will not help. When we, human beings, are too young to know what the world contain and what we have. It is impossible for us to distinguish what we should learn, what is the best choice, and even what we actually interest. Can you decide whether a baby, 4 or 5 years old, has the interest to learn the Math or Physics? So the common knowledge and the basis information should be transport to youth no matter how they think.
  After the youth have finished the fundamental knowledge, I do accept the idea that interest is their best teacher. For instance, the greater America inventor Franklin only studies in primary school for 2 years. However, with the great and self-motivation by interesting, Franklin never give up his dream and did the famous kite experiment which is cited as “catch the light from the sky”. The arguer may argue that Franklin is a talent while we are not. The fact is if Franklin got better and more specific education in that era, he would finish more significant experiment and help the society to reveal what electric is. And if we can be a active learner, at least, and even become the next Franklin.
  However, the practicality of the specific design may be not enough to support everyone’s interests with limited teaching resources. Even in America, the most developed country in the world, the education resources is far less from the demand to classify each student by his interests. And the most important thing is to let those who do not have the ability to go to school get the power instead of let the rich have the power to get the education by their interests. Otherwise the wealth gap between the rich and poor would cause chaos in the whole society，Which is definitely not effective to the whole society.
          In sum, the education must be treated as two parts, the fundamental education should face to the whole group and the specific education should be selectable. And to face the real world, before making the whole group get the chance to choose by interests, the effective education to the whole social should focus on the poor’s need instead of the rich’s demand.





经拍砖2次后(果然是好多了~):

It is true that the interests for the subject or field often affect students' ability of absorbing the knowledge. However the conclusion that education will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet the individual needs and interests of each student is too hasty and the problem of effectiveness is much complicated when we scrutinize it from different aspects. Does effectiveness means that the student can learn this subject quickly and remember the contents long or
only means that the students can use the knowledge later in their life?
From my point of view, education should be divided into fundamental education and specific education. To the former one, everyone should be inquired to learn it. To the specific education, it may be possible to be chosen by interests.

  To answer this question we have to think about the purpose of education and then we can find out this opinion's flaws. As it is widely known "the purpose of education involves the cultivation of an innocent mind, the instilling of values and principle in the minds of children", we can easily get the standard, whether it can help the educator to fulfill the purpose, to test whether a method is effective or not. In this case "only meet the individual needs and interests" will not help. When we, human beings, are too young to know what the world contain and what we have, it is impossible for us to identify what we should learn, what is the best choice, and even what we are actually interested in. Can a baby, or a 4 or 5 years old kid, distinguish whether he or she has the interest to learn the Mathematics or Physics? So the common knowledge and the basis information should be transport to youth no matter what their interests or need is.

  After the youth have finished the fundamental knowledge, I do accept the idea that interest is their best teacher. For instance, the great America inventor Franklin only studies in primary school for 2 years. And after that, he learnt all the knowledge by self-teaching. Finally, he did the famous kite experiment which is cited as “catch the light from the sky”. The arguer may argue that Franklin is a talent so he can success while we are not. The fact is that without the great perseverance and self-motivation caused by interests, Franklin would give up
his learning process as soon as he left school. Then no matter how many gifts the god had given him, he will not be so success. And if we can learn by our interests and needs, we would be an active learner and focus on the subject wen are learning. The education is obviously more effective.

However, the limited teaching resource in the real world is not enough to support the specific design to meet the individual needs and interests of each student. Even in America, the most developed country in the world, the education resources is far less from the demand of classifying each student by his/her interests. And even if we get enough resources to fulfill this need, the time cost to identify each student’s need and interests may lead to the opposite of effective.

In sum, we should divide education into two types:
the fundamental education which should face to the whole group and the specific education which should be selectable. And when facing the real world, both the limited resources and the efficiency problem will keep the opinion from going for much.

hwslqcUID: 2861597

From this assertion it seems that the speaker put a premium on satisfying students’ needs and interests in education while the education would fail if teachers do not do it(do not do it…chinglish, 可以考虑用 “limited time and energy或者其它句式替换”). I find this allegation to be specious. It wrongly suggests that in no circumstance can teaching succeed(effective 不能简单的等同于succeed吧) without meeting all the students' need. To a contrary, this kind of pattern sometimes brings harmfulness. My points of contention with the speaker involve the fundamental objectives and nature of research, as discussed below.(第一段末尾给出, 如果这个算的话, 自己的意见应该更具体或者详尽.或者说应该带有key words)

First by scrutinizing some aspects of this assertion, indeed, carrying about one's truly needs and interests can bring up a student in a better way. One of the greatest scientists Newtown had a saying: the best teacher is called interest. Educants may feel valued and being respected when schools think a lot of what they really looking for, thus they perform harder(perform 不能对应harder吧…) in their studying. For example, ChaoChung Ting(上网查了一下,应该是Samuel Chaochung Ting吧,个人认为名字还是写全一点比较好.) who received the Nobel Prize was nurtured according to his own hobbies by his parents early in his life. "Don't care about him!", this is the father's answer while asked about how did he train a son of Nobel Prize-winning successfully. (这个例子貌似不能说明education应该specifically designed. Don’t care怎么也不是specifically designed吧.)Parents guided Ding's learning orientation by his personal loving and then made Ding finally become a winner of Nobel Prize through letting go, trust and the type of respect of friends.
本段的开头句还不错,点名本段中心.整段的是围绕这个中心写的.但是事例的使用还应该更仔细谨慎.同时,最后一句虽然也算是点题或者对应首句,但重点应该是By his personal interests 而本句未能突出这一重点.

However, there might cause a counter-effect in efficiency if such considering use into every student specially. Just suppose if there are 100 children who are holding different needs and interests totally, what could educator do with the 100 kids? In terms of the speaker’s saying, first of all teacher should find out the 100 kinds of needs and interests then design 100 methods of teaching on a one-to-one basis----there is no need to explain how much time will it takes, while students have already left school probably----then carrying out teaching programs on the students one by one. From this it appears that the speaker's suggestion is entirely low in efficiency.
本段读起来非常顺畅,立意明确,指出实际上这个opinion 并不会导致effective.


Secondly, it would cause too much human and material cost. To treat each learner by different course based on what he or she likes may lead to a consequence of admission of insufficient income which may result school no longer run down in worse. In addition, it is not so sure that scholastics have already own the ability to perceive their social identity. They may not know what they really want clearly and may disable to figure out right judgments. Therefore there may has a minus effect if the instructor hands the initiative to the students blindly.
段首的中心句和段中的论述不一.可以考虑把上半部分放在上一段,另起一段说明学生可能是blindly的.
Furthermore, people always love to do what they are good at. If let the students choose the subjects only they are interested in randomly, students will probably miss plenty of significant learning content and what's more they may become more and more self-center of which in some circumstance may the school bring up incomplete-knowledge-structural students(不确定有这种写法…觉得像chinglish) while the purpose of the education is to culture all-round development of human resources(human resources人力资源…). If we separate education from the individual needs and interests of each student, the system of education would become formalistic and consequently, a students' potential is tempting to be neglected and buried forever.
老问题,段首,段中,段尾阐述的东西不一样.建议看看范文.

To sum up, the author fails to recognize that not in all situations will the type of education meeting individual needs and interests of each student be effective. In the final analysis, to bring up a kid should pay attention to many aspects such as one's performance in morality, one's absorbing in important knowledge, one's self-care ability and so on----and I would be hard-pressed to imagine a worthier end.
文章中没有论述的东西不该出现在文章的末端(某大牛说的,具体忘了.)

建议: 行文之前打好提纲,确定每段的论点,展开来说.蜻蜓点水是没有意义的.每段与每段之间最好有练习.最好看看native的文字.

我也是刚看Issue,暂时就只能想到这么多,大家共同进步吧.

















改谦:

The issue asserts that education will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet personal needs and interests. I partially agree, because in this way, education can inspire one’s talent and motivate one into success. In my point of view, education can be divided to individualized education and general education according to meeting individual needs and interests or not. (meeting individual needs and interests.这是个陈述句,是不对的.比如说,”把书分成两类,根据[它]是黑色的”.这句话是不对的.应该是”把书分成两类,根据[它]是否是黑色的”.)

Individualized education defined as education that is specifically designed to meet the individual needs and interests is effective to make one success. Take the preeminent American author Helen Keller for example. As we all know, Helen was the first deaf-blind person to earn a Bachelor of Arts degree. Without Keller's teacher, Anne Sullivan, who broke through the isolation imposed by a near complete lack of language, Helen cannot blossom. Because of Anne’s dedicated education, Helen learned to communicate which definitely meet her needs. Helen’s article three days to see inspired hundreds and thousands of people and (缺少主语,谁买) brought Helen’s story all over the world. Yes, she was a beneficiary of individualized education. It is never too hard to imagine without individualized education which meets Helen’s special needs that Helen simply go to ordinary blinds school, and educate as others; it is impossible that Helen became success as she did. (例子还是感觉没有论述清楚,Helen为什么成功?是因为接到了education designed for her needs and interests. 如果是这样, 送到聋哑学校按照general education会怎样?也交会她communicate, 那算不算是成功了?感觉例子还是可以的,但是应该和题目联系更加紧密一点,比如说如果不是按照她的兴趣去写小说,而是教她数理化….或者说聋哑学校不能进入Helen的内心,满足她xxx的need,她也不会成功可能会更好.)
But individualized education shouldn’t be overemphasized. We have several shortcomings when we apply every child with individualized education. First, if the application put into force, incalculable money and teachers are needed. There is almost no country(almost no country 那就是还有?) in the world could design a special education to every kid. When large investments are put into individualized education, the expenditure for educating teachers and improving facilities should be retrenched. Hence, we need to reappraise the well-use of the investment. Second, it is hard for little kids to choose what is suit for them and what is not when they know nothing. Few people show great talent in a specific area when they are young like Chopin who was a child-prodigy pianist and composer(没必要举这个例子,因为这个例子是和本段的论点冲突的,除非是为了树立靶子,再攻击.否则这种例子是没有存在的理由的.). Most children are common and it is difficult to design a special program to meet their needs and interests. According to children’s interests, children don’t like studying but playing games(then what?你的arguer可能会说喜欢玩游戏就制造一种能边学边玩的方法.而且这句话和上下文联系貌似不太紧密,有种突然冒出这么一句的感觉.). So, it is reasonable to require ordinary children to require the general education which is contrast to individualized education.
General education shouldn’t be neglect. We can never find a scientist who hasn’t learned math. Nor can we find a biologist who can’t understand the structure of DNA. Also, general education is responsible for teaching students the moral standards. By mores, law, history education, children establish a system of evil and good. General education is good in the long run. The eight-gold medalist Michael Phelps, who holds the record for the most gold medals won in a single Olympics, is addict to marijuana. This is a failure in the moral standards and in general education. Although he is educated well and earned highest award in his area, in long run he lost all his reputation and is notorious. (好例子)

All in all, individualized education that meet one’s interests and needs can maximize one’s hidden ability to success. But individualized education is not practical and general education shouldn’t be neglect for its useful.

PsMaggieUID: 2861847

改2楼

The issue asserts that education will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet personal needs and interests. I agree, because in this way, education can inspire one’s talent and motivate one into success.感觉这两句就是在充字数的，就是重复了一遍题目，而且你在后面的时候反对了观点，不应该直接用agree，因为根据你的整篇文章，至多也就是部分赞同，所以最好加上个partially.

Take the preeminent American author Helen Keller for example. As we all know, Helen was the first deafblind（deaf-blind） person to earn a Bachelor of Arts degree. Without Keller's teacher, Anne Sullivan, who broke through the isolation imposed by a near complete lack of language, Helen cannot blossom. Helen learned to communicate that she wrote the famous article three days to see 这句有点奇怪，用that这个语法就表示了一个潜在的因果关系，那么这句话的意思是海伦学习与人沟通从而写出了假如给我三天光明这本书么？如果是这样的话那么这个逻辑就是有问题的，如果不是要表达这个意思那么这句英文写的就是有问题的and became famous all over the world. Yes, she was a beneficiary of individualized education. It is never too hard to imagine without individualized education that Helen simply go to ordinary blinds school, and educate as others; it is impossible that Helen became success as she did. 我觉得你在这里讨论的不是教育者是否应该按照学生的needs and interests来培养学生，而是在说如果当时海伦的父母没有给她找家庭教师而是送她进聋哑学校那么海伦就不会成功。这个跟论证论点貌似是没有关系的。。。
But individualized education shouldn’t be overemphasized. We have several shortcomings when we apply every child with individualized education. First, if the application put into force, incalculable money and teachers are needed. We need reappraise the well-use of the investment. Second, it is hard for little kids to choose what is suit for them and what is not when they know nothing. At least, they should learn first some basic skills like how to talk and how to write. 再扩展一点吧，感觉就是每一点就是一句话，没再多补充一些解释。
General education shouldn’t be neglect. We can never find a scientist who hasn’t learned how to do（去掉） math. Nor does a biologist who can’t understand the structure of DNA.can’t应该改成can，因为前面已经否定了 Also, general education is responsible for teaching students the morel standards. By mores, law, history education, children establish a system of evil and good. General education is good in the long run. The eight-gold medalist Michael Phelps, who holds the record for the most gold medals won in a single Olympics, is addict to marijuana. This is a failure in the morel standards and in general education. 这个例子是可以的，完全可以扩展一点来论证这一思路，要不感觉你的body很薄弱
All in all, individualized education can maximize one’s hidden ability to success. But individualized education cost a lot of investment and 换成while,要不这句话的意思就有问题了general education shouldn’t be neglect for its useful.
这文章有个非常大的问题，题目中说的是individual needs and interests,并不是individual education,这两者还是存在一些区别的，但是感觉作者在写的时候一直提到的是后者而不是前者。

ltymoonUID: 2685371

7.25才进群，幸亏有hwslqc提醒才知道有这个任务。。。
麻烦组长帮俺分一个人互改一下，多谢多谢~~
    I agree with the speaker that the education will be effective if it targets at satisfying students' tastes and needs.However, there is no necessity for the speaker to make the statement absolute by claiming that the specifical course design is the only key to effective education.
    First, in my opinion, when one's  needs are satisfied, he or she will be inspired and encouraged and then learn more from the courses,which is the result of their great interests. The interest plays as the motive and guidance for us to learn, study and overcome the numerous difficulties we come across. Take Michelangelo for example. Without the fantastic interest in arts, it is hard for him to carry on his work in arts as a poor and finally accomplished the outstanding and brilliant strucpultures such as the David. Besides, which people are fond of is usually the field they used to be skilled at or they are confident they have the talent to be skilled at. Then the education will benefit them much more because they already gain a considerate quantities of background knowledge and as a result be more fluent  than educating totally laymen.
     Unfortunately, it is not pratical for the university or college to provide each students with their dream courses. It is true that the number of our professor is small when compared to that of student. What makes the situation worse is that the professor are usually in charge of research work and can hardly afford the time to meet various kinds of needs.
     To take a step further, I wonder whether the individual's so-called interests are true or not. Sometimes, our feelings are not exact and sometimes even an illusion. When an individual doesn't look into the field, he or she lacks the information to judge whether he or she loves or not. While on the contrary, which seems to be boring at first turns out to be your dream work only if you put a deep eye into it. Take myself for example. When I first meet series of courses in mechanical engineering, I cannot imagine there is a major more banal and tough than mechanical engineering for the coutless calculating, obscure argot and strange rules to follow when designing. However, as time goes on, the feeling become more and more strong that the major is the one I just dream of and will be addicted to for it provides a chance for me to create something to improve people's life with my own ideas and imagination.
      In a word, I never deny the important role satisfying individual's interests and needs play in the course design. However, it will be unjustified when it becomes the only standard to measure whether the education is effective or not. The factors which infulence the effectiveness of education are complex and vary all the time, it is hard and impossible for us to decide which is the cardinal one.

PsMaggieUID: 2861847

改7楼

It is true that the interests for the subject or field often affect students' ability of absorbing the knowledge sometimes. （又often又sometimes…你懂的。。。）However the conclusion that education will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet the individual needs and interests of each student is too hasty and the problem of effectiveness is much complicated when we scrutinize it from different aspects. Does effective（这是个形容词啊） means that the student can learn this subject quickly and remember the contents long or it (去掉)only means that the students can use the knowledge in the later of their life（later in life 会不会更好一点？）? From my point of view （，）education should be divided into fundamental education and specific education. To the former one, it should be forced to study by everyone. （这个句子变成了人们必须被强制去学习教育这个东西，人们是要学习知识不是学习教育，这个study必须去掉。）To the specific education, it may be possible to be chosen by interests.

  To answer this question we have to think about the purpose of education and then we can know (find out是不是更好一点？) this opinion's flaws. As it is widely known "the purpose of education involves the cultivation of an innocent mind, the instilling of values and principle in the minds of children", we can easily get the standard, whether it can help the educator to fulfill the purpose, to test whether a method is effective or not. In this case "only meet the individual needs and interests" will not help. When we, human beings, are too young to know what the world contain and what we have. （你这里句号了？句号了的话这个句子就有问题了，它不是一个句子了，把句号换成逗号，后面It的I改成小写）It is impossible for us to identify what we should learn, what is the best choice, and even what we are actually interested in. Can you distinguish whether a baby, or a 4 or 5 years old kid, has the interest to learn the Mathematics or Physics（这个句子的意思是，你能不能区分开一个婴儿或者一个4到5岁的小孩是对数学感兴趣呢还是对物理感兴趣。那么这个句子的对象是你，而不是那个婴儿，但是你前面在论证的问题是学习者本人是否能清楚他自己想学的是什么，而不是别人是否能清楚这个学习者想学的是什么）? So the common knowledge and the basis information should be transport to youth no matter how they think.这里主语混乱了，no matter how they think里面的they,理论上来讲，指的是这个句子的主语也就是the common knowledge and the basis information，而不是youth.

  After the youth have finished the fundamental knowledge, I do accept the idea that interest is their best teacher. For instance, the great America inventor Franklin only studies in primary school for 2 years. However, with the great and self-motivation（一个形容词和一个名次并列？） by interests, Franklin never give up （过去时态）his learning process. and （大写。。。）did the famous kite experiment which is cited as “catch the light from the sky”. （这是一个问句还是一个陈述句？）The arguer may argue that Franklin is a talent while we are not. The fact is that if Franklin got better and more specific education in that era, he would finish more significant experiment and even may help the society to reveal what electric is. （这个论据有点奇怪，什么是more significant呢？你怎么来说明他做过的就less significant?）And if we can learn by our interests and needs, we would be an active learner, （这个逗号去掉啊，逗号不是这样加的）at least, and even become the next Franklin, at most.（同上）

However, the limited teaching resource in the real world is not enough to support the specific design to meet the individual needs and interests of each student. Even in America, the most developed country in the world, the education resources is far less from the demand of classifying each student by his/her interests. And the most important thing is to let those who do not have the access to go to school get the chance to be educated instead of let (instead of doing) the rich have the power to get the education by their interests. Otherwise the wealth gap between the rich and poor would cause chaos in the whole society, which is definitely not effective to the whole society. (你这里要表达的应该是对社会是没有好处的吧，你用effective,就变成是对社会是没有效果的，那是没有什么效果呢？)

In sum, we should view this issue from two aspects: the fundamental education should face to the whole group and the specific education should be selectable.(这个句子语法不对，两个should前面都要加个which )And to face the real world, before making the whole group get the chance to choose by interests, the effective education to the whole social should focus on the poor’s need instead of the rich’s demand.(这有个逻辑错误，穷困学生的需求是需要被重视的，但富人家的孩子的需求就不要被重视了？那富人家的孩子也太倒霉了，这个东西应该不存在哪个去代替哪个的，你可以说政府给穷困学生一些资助，但跟富有的学生没什么关系吧，他们上他们的学，只是不需要政府来免去他们一部分学费罢了，如果真要拿穷人和富人来比，那么中产阶级的人呢？他们的需求是要不要被满足呢？还有这个论点有点偏题了，主题是在说教育是否需要满足每个学生的要求和兴趣爱好吧)