64
The following appeared in a memo from the Dean
of the College of Education at Omni State University.
"Only seven of our state's high schools offer even one course in Latin, but over 80 percent of the graduates who study Latin at those seven schools enroll in college. Furthermore, a recent study shows that students who have mastered Latin perform much better in logic and critical thinking. Thus, in order to increase the percentage of our high school students who graduate from college as well as to ensure that they receive a better education in critical thinking, Omni State University should begin an intensive program to prepare our future teachers to teach high school Latin."
In this Argument,the author makes conclusion that Omni State University should begin to prepare our future teachers to teach high school Latin.To support his statement,the author cites that over 80 percent of graduates who study Latin at high schools enroll in college.And according to a recent study that students who have mastered Latin perform much better in logic and critical thinking,he deduces setting up Latin class can help students foster a logical and critical thinking and increase the university enrollment rate.I find this argument logically unconvincing in several respects.
The argument's chief problem is no clear evidence indicates that setting up Latin class avails the logical and critical thinking and the university enrollment rate.First of all,the phenomenon that 80% percent of students who study Latin in 7 high schools enroll in college is not always relate the increase of university enrollment. The percent of students who do not learn Latin in the 7 high or other schools is uncharted.Without accurate contrast, we can't draw conclusion that students who learn Latin have an advantage over those those who do not.If the 7 high schools which setting up Latin class are the best institutions in the state, then the quality of students is good enough to enroll the college.So the enrollment of 80% percent of Latin learners is irrelevant to whether they learn Latin.
Secondly,the recent study that students who have mastered Latin perform much better in logic and critical thinking apply to students in high school.Students who mastered Latin learn it everyday and always ruminate over.To the contrary, high school students put their energy on their major classes such like verbal,science,even they are interested in Latin. The effect of Amateur learning are as diverse as the influence of day-by-day studying.It is unwarranted to conclude with any confidence that high school students who choose Latin have a stronger ability of logic and critical thinking.
Even if high school students can get some help from Latin in logic and critical thinking and the college enrollment,the reasons of setting up Latin class are not sufficient.As we all know,there are plenty of methods to increase the college enrollment and strengthen students' logical and critical thinking,such as improving the quality of teaching and attaching importance to philosophy class.Additionally,setting up Latin class needs vast financing and teachers to support which are badly off at present.Thereby,The Omni State University should think twice whether they will begin the intensive program to prepare future teachers to teach high school Latin.
In sum,the author's argument that Omni State University should begin an intensive program to prepare our future teachers to teach high school Latin is unconvincing.To strengthen the argument the author must provide clear evidence that high school students can benefit from Latin in logical and critical thinking and the college enrollment.To better evaluate the argument I would also need to know that setting up Latin is a better way than other methods to execute.