【咖啡盐作文修改铺子】*请先仔细阅读首页要求再附文

咖啡盐UID: 2973669

29# pswpswpsw

The following appeared in a memorandum from the planning department of an electric power company.
"Several recent surveys indicate that homeowners are increasingly eager to conserve energy(1) and manufacturers are now marketing many home appliances(2), such as refrigerators and air conditioners, that are almost twice as energy-efficient as those sold a decade ago. Also, new technologies for better home insulation and passive solar heating(2) are readily available to reduce the energy needed for home heating. Therefore, we anticipate that the total demand for electricity in our area will not increase(3), and may decline slightly. Since our three electric generating plants in operation(5) for the past 20 years have always met our needs, construction of new generating plants should not be necessary(4)."


正文：
The writer of the memorandum who claims that construction of new generating plants will not be necessary, seems to offer an cogent argument. However, she/he makes a lot of tenable stated and unstated assumptions ,even the superficial correlations are seemingly logical. And there is a list of the results of those assumptions above examined as follows,revealing the fallacies in his/her reasoning.

  First of all, the writer cites several recent surveys to reinforce his/her argument in that these surveys indicate that home owners are increasingly eager to conserve energy, with an obvious assumption that these surveys could also apply to their area, and also give the credit to these surveys. However, it is entirely possible that the home owner in their area is not eager to conserve energy, perhaps instead a profusion on energy. And, perhaps these surveys are conducted by the manufacturers which are making home appliances with excellent energy efficiences and have the purpose of inducement of wide usage of energy efficient appliances,while the fact may be opposite. Thus, with the lack of evidence to support the assumptions, the writer couldn't convince me that the total energy is going to decline.

  Secondly, the writer assumes pontifically that the more energy efficient, the less energy consumption there will be. However, it is not always true. For example, it is also possible that the total energy consumption is rising with excellent efficience due to the augment in need of increasing in numbers of home appliances.

  Even if energy efficient ones do consume less energy than the older one, the writer also assumes unjustly that the most appliances in our area are made up of the energy-efficient appliances which the manufacturers are marketing. Nevertheless, it is possible that most appliances are still the older ones, which is not that efficient and cost less energy. Thus, it is unfair to conclude such a claim that the total demand for electricity in their area will not increase-and may decline, without checking the reliability of the assumptions above.

  However, the writer also assumes that for the past twenty years have always met their needs doesn't necessarily means next year ,then the needs would also be able met as well. On one hand,considering the development of society, it is entirely possible that the energy would increase as more and more appliances come into everyone home. Anyway, it is natural that things would change with the time flies. On the other hand, what if the tendency of the demand of electricity in their area is increasing, and in the last year the demand just met the supply? Then it is natural to predict that in the next year the demand would likely to be over the supply.

  Without evaluation of these dubious assumptions, the writer cannot convince me of the argument that the construction of new generating plants will not be necessary.

================================================================================

看了下，结构乱不清，段与段之间联系不紧密，没有环环相扣的感觉，这是argument写作中的大忌。其次，论证过程中没有很好地具体论述，相对而言太过模糊，每每谈及具体事物都有些捣糨糊，说了几句不痛不痒的就结束了，没有给人紧扣主题的感觉。

其次，文章主旨在于论证是否需要建设新的发电厂以支持当地的能源消耗。相对于一个城市而言，家电能耗只是很小一部分，LZ却死抓不放，着眼点有些狭隘。尤其在body最后一段，关于建设新发电厂的可行性上，以家电为依据不靠谱，可以涉及到城市建设和科技发展上去。而另一方面则写得太过抽象，恕我才疏学浅，没能理解其中真意。

再一个就是body第二段的论述，论据并不能在原文中找到依托，属LZ个人臆断，不可取。文章只言热能方面的节能，什么时候说过整体的节能了？

另外，body第一段和第三段两段论述相同内容，却被一段不想干内容割裂开。其次，两段可以合并，不宜分段论述。

建议LZ在写作之前好好思考下文章的逻辑关系，动笔之前先理清文章思路，再整理自己接下来写作中的逻辑顺序，先不论段落的论述，至少在整体上要先保证逻辑关系清晰，逻辑链完整，搭出整体的结构骨架。再次，LZ对于文章逻辑方面还要多多总结，看准文章的发展与核心。

咖啡盐UID: 2973669

24The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.


Is 【it true that】 the best way to teach 【is】 to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones, as the speaker contends?【删】 In my view, to praise positive actions is necessary for education, while to ignore negative ones might not be appropriate.【既然持和题目相同的观点，可以适当变换下句型。开篇引语给出了一个疑问句，接下来可以巧妙一点使之成为一个引起热论的形式 e.g.Some people hold the view that encouraging students consistently may foment them shiftless, while I stably side with the statement that we should praise positive actions in education. 我这粗糙的句子看看就过了吧...类似这一种的，首先抛出一个话题，然后营造一种议论的氛围，有人同意有人不同意，这样呢，下面就可以向别人展示，为什么你是持这种观点的。 】

【To begin with, 】I agree that praising is essentially significant in education toward everyone. Common sense 【这个就太含糊啦，不能就这么一句常识告诉我们blablabla...要是常识的话，还用得着论证什么吗？】informs us that the core of education lies in broadening one’s horizon of knowledge【拓宽眼界，加深知识】, rendering others with behavior instructions,【整个排比句都是在论述教育对个人的作用，怎么突然来个others呢？继续one's嘛。correcting one's behavior, 】 and helping establish 【perfecting】one’s value system,【个人觉得value就够了，不需要再加个system，略显累赘】 which aids in making one’s own choices in his or her life.【没太看明白】 By praising positive actions, education offers us an active respond to our righteous behaviors, which are beneficial not only for ourselves, but also for the society. Consider, for example, how parents teach us in our infant times. We are imbued with the correct value system of characteristics such as tolerance, brevity, generosity and so forth. Parents praise us whenever we exhibit these traits, so that we get an incipient comprehension of beneficial behaviors.【本段论证力度不够。从发展来看，本段论证的主题是为什么要表扬学生。但是没有说出为什么。开端你给出说表扬对于每一个人在接受教育的时候都是很重要的。但是接下来的发展就不是很恰当了，你扯到了教育的核心，不能说没用，但是对于本段来说不是主题。既然同意了表扬很重要，接下来理所应当指出表扬的作用在哪里？为什么表扬是很重要的。可以说在学生时代，尤其是小的时候，老师的表扬对于我们来说是一种荣耀，我们会因为老师的表扬而感到骄傲，每当我们做了件对的事情，就会受到表扬，之后呢我们就会一直延续这样的精神blablabla的....（忽视我这恶心的例子....看思想看思想）。接下来才是教育的作用，通过这样的作用，我们才会树立一种正确的价值观啊，人生观啊，道德体系啊之类的。】

On the other hand, 【删，on the other hand必须和on one hand连用。】however, it completely misses the point that to ignore negative actions is  the best way when teaching. 【是不是写错了吖？the function of emphasizing negative actions can not be ignored as well.】It is dangerous to do so for the reason that to overlook others’ undesirable behaviors is essentially a silent assent, or even a support in a way.【这里也缺点联系，默许会造成犯错的人认为所做的是对的，或者呢，认为这么做没人管就更无法无天了。不经指出他们就会一直这样下去，长此以往，犯下更大的错啊....这是一条比较完成的逻辑关系。】 If these faults are ignored rather than pointed out, people would go with these negative actions again and again without being aware of its hazard.【这里可以加一句，To make things worse, if we go on like this, blablabla....既然要说不好之处，索性说得更糟糕些，才能突出重要性。】 Obviously, any of the cases above 【你没有给出任何case，以上的论述只是泛指。case是具体的例子。而且没有any，only one。】in education would prevent people from improvement, which may accumulate to thwarting the entire society from development and to a stasis in our science areas.【最后这句总结性的语句倒是把逻辑说得挺全的，但是前面的论述却没有这么多内容。要记住，总结是总结前面的论述，重申主旨，顺便告诉readers你没有跑题，还在论点上。但是名不副实的总结反而扰乱视听。写完总结之后你也可以再看看前面的论述，有什么你在总结中想到了，却没有论证进去的东西。前后要照应着。】

In my view,【所有的都是你的view，不需要在强调下....Furthermore之类的就好啦。】 confronting negative actions, teachers should point them out immediately.【body三段，按照发展来看，褒奖的作用，忽视错误的害处，如果按照递进逻辑，第三段写接受指正不当之处的好处。就比较能造成紧密的逻辑联系。人无完人，虚心接受促进步嘛。孔子也说三人行必有我师，五日三省吾身嘛。这方面的例子也比较好写，对于时间紧迫的末尾阶段，比较容易凑字数神马的。】 In fact, correcting one’s behavior is exactly where the value of education lies, because it accords with the nature of education. For instance, in the history of constant correcting, we human beings have abandoned the notion of sun-centered universe,【我们放弃的是地心说...接受的是日心说】 the unfair slavery, the autocratic government as well as misperceived philosophical awareness of ourselves. Besides, as a student, one should take affirmative measures for facing his or her behaviors bravely. Without determination to alter negative actions, chances are low for anyone to achieve high accomplishments.

In sum, the speaker over-generalizes when it comes to the best way to teach.【不需要批评题目】 Educators should not only praise positive actions, but also help students to correct negative ones. In addition, without similar endeavors from students, education cannot demonstrate its true effect.【Issue的结尾重申下总论点就好了。赞扬积极和指出消极两者皆不可少啊，相辅相成啊，什么的。】

26# fandesai

=====================================================================================

整篇文章结构还行，比较清晰，论证思路可以，比起很多人好了不少，知道论据佐以例证，做到理有所依。在论据和例证的联系上还要加强，给出了论据，就要想到为什么你这么认为的。把为什么说出来，自己知道为什么还不够，要告诉reader为什么，而不是“是什么”。

咖啡盐UID: 2973669

版主，江湖救急，3月G。
题目：Educational institutions have a responsiblility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.
提纲：1.成功是由后天努力和先天因 ...
santaimen3176 发表于 2012-2-4 22:55

这篇文章我有改过一个类似的

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1327976-1-3.html

你可以先看看，希望对你有帮助，相同文章我不会改得太频繁

咖啡盐UID: 2973669

26# fandesai

我写的也很慢。总是没法树立信心。
请问版版当时写issue的时候，是边想边写的呢，还是很顺畅的就打完一篇了？
我总感觉自己的表达不是很跟的上，一句话要想好长时间才知道怎么写。

我当时也算是运气好，人品爆发吧，抽到的题目正好是进考场之前看过的一篇自己精写过的一篇，所以不用什么思考就直接长篇大论了

表达跟不上就不要去想那些复杂的表达，简单清楚地写上去。文章完整，结构清晰，思路明了才是首要的，华丽的辞藻终究只是一点润滑剂。

fandesaiUID: 3008257

34# 咖啡盐

谢啦~继续努力ing。

不过我又发现一个事实，官方范文里面Issue的5分4分的文章也就390字左右。而Argument4分3分的文章甚至连300字都没有。
这是不是说字数并不是核心？关键在思路？
算是给自己一点信心吧~

咖啡盐UID: 2973669

34# 咖啡盐  

谢啦~继续努力ing。

不过我又发现一个事实，官方范文里面Issue的5分4分的文章也就390字左右。而Argument4分3分的文章甚至连300字都没有。
这是不是说字数并不是核心？关键在思路？
算是给自己 ...
fandesai 发表于 2012-2-5 16:40

关键本来就不在字数上，AW的要求中并没有字数这一限制，只要你能论证清楚，200字也是可以接受的。只不过大量的数据证明500字左右对于我们这样的非native speaker来说是比较保险的，即至少会有个3分左右的水平。

潇湘锁铃儿UID: 3137221

24# 咖啡盐 谢谢啊~~~容我仔细研究下

潇湘锁铃儿UID: 3137221

24# 咖啡盐
1 two 【you sure?】是语法问题还是观点问题？是说你觉得there will be contradiction NO between the two?
2 其中一段这样展开够了吗？看上去混乱吗？
A set of just laws is a kind of achievement which may enhance its peoples’ welfare. By setting up just laws, it set up a standard of what kind of behavior is to be punished. Due to its justice, it is more convincing, thus, it will be more powerful. People will be more willing to obey convincing standards. Also, it will be more possible to carry out just laws than unjust ones. Unjust ones may set up one standard in some situations and different ones in other situations, which will be problematic to actualize. Peoples’ willingness to obey the law and easy implement guarantees less illegal behaviors. Less illegal behaviors mean less harmful actions. Then people are less in danger of being hurt. Therefor their welfare is enhanced.

3原文如果删掉rulers achievements will decrease the welfare of people 这一观点，that is delete the second paragraph and the second part of the third paragraph 还混乱吗？斑竹说的混乱具体是指？

呵呵 时间不够 观点上的问题以后再讨论哈~~~可能是我对achievement 的理解和你不太一样。

santaimen3176UID: 3242149

这篇文章我有改过一个类似的

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1327976-1-3.html

你可以先看看，希望对你有帮助，相同文章我不会改得太频繁
咖啡盐 发表于 2012-2-5 14:26

谢谢斑竹，我也犯了同样的错，没有把educational institution responsibility 考虑进去，而把那些 对学生不太成功的方面 作为重点论述,觉得这篇文章很容易犯理解上的偏差，而且看完题目第一眼的反应就是，教育机构根本不能知道学生现在是否能在某领域成功与否，于是就展开论述啦，想问问这是不是题目设置的陷阱？？？
还有，看到许多Issue题目中都有all,every之类的敏感词，导致很多建议本身都是不能实现的，再问问版主这些敏感词是否可以把它淡化，而是针对每个问题不同主题进行论述？？？是否能这样认为

潇湘锁铃儿UID: 3137221

31# 咖啡盐
还有能不能帮看一段argument 的展开 我不确定算不算展开了~~~~本人思维本来就比常人跳跃~~~

题目
The following recommendation was made by the president and administrative staff of Grove College, a private institution, to the college's governing committee.
We recommend that Grove College preserve its century-old tradition of all-female education rather than admit men into its programs. It is true that a majority of faculty members voted in favor of coeducation, arguing that it would encourage more students to apply to Grove. But 80 percent of the students responding to a survey conducted by the student government wanted the school to remain all female, and over half of the alumnae who answered a separate survey also opposed coeducation. Keeping the college all female will improve morale among students and convince alumnae to keep supporting the college financially.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

Even if the survey conducted is convincing, we need to consider more to conclude remaining the current way of education will improve morale among students. We need to know the preference of future students. Maybe many high schools have changed into coeducation ones, so the new generation is more adaptive to coeducation. Or it may be the case that due to more studies on education, more people believe coeducation is better for a child's growth. (我觉得这句不是很相关，对吗？)Thus, the coming students may be more satisfied with coeducation, leading to a better morale in a coeducation school. Furthermore, as the argument mentions, the majority of the faculty favors coeducation. If the faculty has a more significant impact on morale, coeducation instead of all-female education will improve the morale. For example, if a teacher is in a low mood, he/she will have little incentive to keep the way of teaching interesting, which decreases the morale. Besides, most of the faculty may have read a lot of papers and research results among which most show coeducation will improve morale, so the faculty supports it. On the other hand, however, the students who responded to the survey took no consideration on morale. So, it may turn out that the faculty’s opinion is more founded than that of students about which pattern will improve the morale. Then it is more likely that morale will be improved by changing to coeducation. We need to consider both faculty and students' preference, including that of the future students to determine which pattern will improve the morale. We also need to consider the priority of them.

PS og里说要写出other explanation 的 impact， 我觉得在实际操作中impact除了写造成assumption X不成立外，想不出什么impact啊~~~比如上例中，什么是impact啊？

留学2013UID: 3187846

我331考。特别想问的是，第2段和第3段算不算重复？都是就同一个假设“大多数人找到了工作”进行反驳。还有就是3个正文段的论证透不透彻？还有没有必要写得更深入？谢谢

题目 A72：The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a national newspaper.
"Your recent article on corporate downsizing* in Elthyria maintains that the majority of competent workers who have lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship, often for years, before finding other suitable employment. But this claim is undermined by a recent report on the Elthyrian economy, which found that since 1999 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated, bringing the unemployment rate in Elthyria to its lowest level in decades. Moreover, two-thirds of these newly created jobs have been in industries that tend to pay above-average wages, and the vast majority of these jobs are full-time."
*Downsizing is the process whereby corporations deliberately make themselves smaller, reducing the number of their employees.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
  
文章：
The arguer concludes that the majority of copetent workers who have lost jobs have get jobs and they get above-average salary.To support this conclusion,he cites a recent report showing the Employment Situation and points out that many jobs they get are in industries which tend to pey above-average wages.However,his reasoning is flawed in some aspects.

Firstly,to substantiate the arguer’s implication that the majority of competent workers who have lost jobs have find jobs after downsizing in Elthyria,we need evidence that enough jobs created are suitable for those competent workers and they are likely to take these jobs.Although the report cited points out that since 1999 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated,but the arguer fails to rule out some possibilities.Perhaps most of those jobs created require some other fields’s skills which those workers do not have,or perhaps those jobs only hire employees under 25 but the majority of those workers are above 30.The arguer fails to take these scenarios where those workers could hardly get a job into account so that his implication is unconvncing.

Secondly,without evidence that the reemployment rate of the competent workers who have lost jobs is high,we cannot be able to assess the arguer’s underlie assumption that the majority of those workers indeed find jobs.Even though the arguer claims that the unemployment rate in Elthyria comes to its lowest level in decades ,but we still know what exactly the rate is.10%,5%,2%is equally possible.Even if the rate is 1%,the arguer still cannot convince us that the majority of those workers have find jobs. It is probable that those workers constitute that 1%,namely all of them have not find jobs.To warrant his assumption,the arguer must give us evidence to show the reemployment rate of those workers.

Finally,the arguer assumes that those workers who find jobs in industries would get wages higher than the average,but gives no evidence to support it.The arguer only says that jobs in industries tend to pay above-average wages,but he give no evidence that laid-off workers who find jobs in industries get jobs of which wages are higher than the average.Common sense tells us that workers who have different jobs in industries would have different wages,and that there possibly exist jobs of which are lower wages than the average in industries .So it is entirely possible that those workers only get jobs of which have lower wages, even though their jobs are in industries .Lacking of effective and direct evidence,the arguer’s assumption is unwarranted.

To sum it up,the arguer does give several evidence to undermine the claim that the majority of competent workers who have lost jobs face serious economic hardship,but he ignores some possibilities which would weaken his assumptions.Without enough evidence directly showing those workers would get jobs of considerable wages,the argument is untenable.
正文段（2、3、4段）是基于两点反驳：大多数人找到了工作，找到工业领域的工作的人获得了高工资。
我觉得我主要问题是不熟练，时间不够用，这是我的第三篇A，昨天用了50分钟才写完，今天花了20分钟修改。望楼主狠拍，如果能给我一点建议提高写作速度就更好了哈！

SakuraguoqiUID: 3148198

本人331 昨天第一次写Issue 望楼主狠拍
101.原题：Although innovations such as video, computers, and the Internet seem to offer schools improved methods for instruction students, there technologies all too often distract from real learning.
作文：
In the essay, the author mentioned that “innovations all too often distract front real learning” which problematically overlooked some important factors, thus result in questionable conclusion. As I see it, innovations of science and technology don’t distract "real learning". Instead, it enables the process of real learning.
I agree that the innovations such as video, computers and the Internet do distract some of the attention of the student result from their mighty capacity of information. For instance, the explosion of too many slide shows and relative documents uploaded on the internet may blind out the essence of this subject and make it inconvenient to understand the core of knowledge, so result in, ironically, low efficiency on after-class study. Nevertheless, these innovations don not distract "real learning” from student because of the following reasons.
First of all, what is a "real learning”? In common definition, real learning is a self-depend process to acknowledge, understand, critical absorb and, finally, be able to apply the knowledge to practice with one's learning ability. It merely based on learners themselves to choose a way they like to learn. Thus, whether it is distract by innovations of technology depend on different people's accesses of learning.Take video for example,it provides a new way of learning with vivid visual information, highly flexibility of the demonstrating procedure and no interact with teacher, which students may and may not chose because of their own taste of learning. Some students are probably unable to concentrate on knowledge on the video only because of their lack of self control and less adaptability to this way of learning rather than video itself. Consequently, it's unreasonable to assert that "innovations all too often distract from real learning". Innovations of technology doesn’t block out students from real learning.
What's more, with its own advantage of more information of study, multiple media demonstration, better access to different knowledge and grater space for students to choose themselves, innovations of technology consequently not only doesn't distract "real learning”, but instead plays a strong role in the access of "real learning”. For example, a student would not have the chance to choose a number of online classes from various schools from the world without the help of innovations of technology such as video and Internet. As a conclusion, innovations of technology provide more choice of study tools and given students a lot more space of self-learning, thus gets students closer to the essence of "real learning".
In a word, science and technology improved methods for instructing students and does not practically distract from real learning. Because it provides better access to different knowledge and grater space for students to choose themselves, it is a strong tool to in the access of "real learning”
字数：454
提纲：1.论点：部分同意
      2.让步+e.g.
         3.分队原因一：更多学习自主权；eg
         4.反对原因二：多形式：eg
         5.总结
看完北美范文以后已经有不少收获，看出很多问题，最大问题是角度，范文从老师角度写，从而归为教育类，有很多地方可以发挥；我从学生角度写，发挥范围窄，只能在real learning定义上做文章（写之前一直觉得是科技类= =还没准备教育）文章思路太简单，论证比较无力。
总觉得题目里的too often 有很强主观色彩，很碍眼，又不知道要不要辩驳，而大部分提纲都是趋近于同意，这点不太明白；
此外，北美范文说不要复述题目，到底要不要呢？
还有就是之前没有准备模板，所以行文还是不够流畅，没有节奏感，惨不忍睹啊，感谢LZ大大坚持看完^^

chocoletUID: 3214699

2.18 G，请指教~ 之前改得很受教育，辛苦楼主！

Issue 74
Knowing about the past cannot help people to make important decisions today.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

Our world today is quite different from the ages ago: modern world is characterized as the age of global village, the era of computer technology. When looking back into history, some people may believe that the experience of the predecessor have no meaning for our decision-making today considering the hugh discrepancy, since we are facing the situation no body else has faced before. However, despite the superficial differences, the past do have a lot to teach us about how should we make decisions
today.

Take the international politics for example. Current world is a society of nation states, and the politicians today need to have a good knowledge of diplomacy to keep the world peace. Where can they learn from? Actually the Greek historian Thucydides, 2500 years ago already had the answer for the complex situation today. In his masterpiece The Peloponnesian Wars concerning the war between Athen and Sparta, Thucydides pointed out that the origin of the war is that the Athen city had became so powerful thus the balance of Greek cities were endangered and the Sparta felt potential threat of its safety, thus the two cities declared war. Although this war happened 2500 years ago, it did have a lesson for the peace among nations, that is, the peace should be maintained only through balanced power between nations, which means every nation feel safe in the society of countries and felt no potential danger. Today's political leaders who want to enhance a peaceful world should make every possible effort to clear out tensions among nations and keep the world power balanced, as indicated by Thucydides

In domestic politics, the past also serves a great role for helping the politicians to make decisions. What laws should be made to have desired effect?
Looking back at history, we can learn that the law should not be to severe, as in the case of Draco, the governer of Athen in the 5 A.D. His law was so cruel that every one who brake the law was sentenced to death, and his government lasted only a short time. Then the law-makers should learn that when they are making laws, they should advocate a discriminative law.

What about private life? The past also has a lot to say about this level. It is crucial for a person to decide what life style should he adopt to have a healthy and happy life. Then how can he make a right decision? Just look back at history! Those who lead a healthy and happy life all have something in common, like they are always abstemious, having several good friends, keep a habit of exercise and make a difference to the society. Then the happiness pursuer knows what to do and he will keep away from the wrong-doings and achieve his goal.

In conclusion, though we are living in a world totally different from any preceding ages, the history does have a lot to do when we are making decisions. As times goes by, the content we are dealing with may differ, but the hidden spirit remains similar, thus we are able to learn a great deal from the past to make the right decisions.

咖啡盐UID: 2973669

谢谢斑竹，我也犯了同样的错，没有把educational institution responsibility 考虑进去，而把那些 对学生不太成功的方面 作为重点论述,觉得这篇文章很容易犯理解上的偏差，而且看完题目第一眼的反应就是，教育机构根本不能知道学生现在是否能在某领域成功与否，于是就展开论述啦，想问问这是不是题目设置的陷阱？？？
还有，看到许多Issue题目中都有all,every之类的敏感词，导致很多建议本身都是不能实现的，再问问版主这些敏感词是否可以把它淡化，而是针对每个问题不同主题进行论述？？？是否能这样认为
santaimen3176 发表于 2012-2-5 21:16

1、是不是陷阱我不能肯定，就我个人对这道题目的理解来看，如果单单讨论什么是成功这个定义对于这样一种出题形式肯定是偏颇了的。如果可以讨论学生对于成功的定义那么前面何必费这么大段文字说些无关紧要的呢？所以我更偏向于讨论教育机构的职能问题。而对于成功的定义，在我看来只算是写反对观点时，无话可说或者为丰富论证在第三段进行补充论述，从而来支撑自己的立场，教育机构是不应该这样做。

2、关于极端词的问题，还是要视具体情况来定义。但是在大多数的题目中还都是比较清晰的反对观点。

咖啡盐UID: 2973669

41# 留学2013

题目 A72：The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a national newspaper.
"Your recent article on corporate downsizing* in Elthyria maintains that the majority of competent workers who have lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship, often for years, before finding other suitable employment. But this claim is undermined by a recent report on the Elthyrian economy, which found that since 1999 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated, bringing the unemployment rate in Elthyria to its lowest level in decades. Moreover, two-thirds of these newly created jobs have been in industries that tend to pay above-average wages, and the vast majority of these jobs are full-time."
*Downsizing is the process whereby corporations deliberately make themselves smaller, reducing the number of their employees.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.


          ‖
  
文章：
The arguer concludes that the majority of competent workers who have lost jobs have get jobs and they get above-average salary.【这是别人的论据而不是结论，题目的结论是competent workers did not face any economic hardship as the editor claimed.】To support this conclusion,he cites a recent report showing the Employment Situation and points out that many jobs they get are in industries which tend to pey above-average wages.【当这句话再度出现的时候你没有意识到有什么问题吗？】However,his reasoning is flawed in some aspects.【中规中矩，以后多细心点】

Firstly,to substantiate the arguer’s implication that the majority of competent workers who have lost jobs have find jobs after downsizing in Elthyria,we need evidence that enough jobs created are suitable for those competent workers and they are likely to take these jobs.【第一段最后一句才说作者的推断中有很多错误，请问这错误在哪？你总的先具体指出人家的错误再来给人家改正吧？】Although the report cited points out that since 1999 far more jobs have been created than have been 【删】eliminated,but the arguer fails to rule out some possibilities.Perhaps most of those jobs created require some other fields’s skills which those workers do not have,or perhaps those jobs only hire employees under 25 but the majority of those workers are above 30.The arguer fails to take these scenarios where those workers could hardly get a job into account so that his implication is unconvncing.【犯了个很大的错误。你不能说作者欠考虑，你怎么知道他没有考虑或者调查？仅仅因为他没有写？就说他没考虑？这显然是站不住脚的。这种时候只能说从题目给出的信息中不足以说明问题。因为文中没有某一方面的信息，所以可能产生什么样的可能性。由题目内容来质疑题目的论断。】

Secondly,without evidence that the reemployment rate of the competent workers who have lost jobs is high,【这句话说得不够好。必须要知道重新雇用率才能得出信息吗？直接说具体的数据关于这些在裁员中下岗的工作人员如今的工作情况就好了，把自己这边的信息拉得宽泛一点也就少给别人一些把柄。】we cannot be able to assess the arguer’s underlie assumption that the majority of those workers indeed find jobs.【严格点说，作者可没说过他们找到工作。】Even though the arguer claims that the unemployment rate in Elthyria comes to its lowest level in decades ,but we still know what exactly the rate is.10%,5%,2%is equally possible.【you know？how could you know this？so abrupt...你怎么就知道人家这个超低不是0.5%呢？】Even if the rate is 1%,the arguer still cannot convince us that the majority of those workers have find jobs. It is probable that those workers constitute that 1%,namely all of them have not find jobs.To warrant his assumption,the arguer must give us evidence to show the reemployment rate of those workers.【这段个人很不能认同LZ的这种臆断。信息点找的没错，但是论述就有点无语了，没有找准问题的关键。失业率低=被裁掉的人就业了？不能吧？失业率新低不能代表这些被裁员的人重新就业了。直接从这个最直接的方式上去论证就好啦，何必整出些什么失业率的数字问题？何况这些数字还是人家没有出具的。找工作的人总不会只有那些被裁掉的吧？应届学生、外来务工人员、跳槽的....这么多部分人员组成的一个群体，那些被裁掉的人能不能找到本身就是问题了。】

Finally,the arguer assumes that those workers who find jobs in industries would get wages higher than the average,but gives no evidence to support it.The arguer only says that jobs in industries tend to pay above-average wages,but he give no evidence that laid-off workers who find jobs in industries get jobs of which wages are higher than the average.【这两句话重复率太高...】Common sense 【这个词最犯忌讳了...】tells us that workers who have different jobs in industries would have different wages,and that there possibly exist jobs of which are lower wages than the average in industries .So it is entirely possible that those workers only get jobs of which have lower wages, even though their jobs are in industries .Lacking of effective and direct evidence,the arguer’s assumption is unwarranted.【不知所云。想想清楚这段你要论证的是什么？你通过这一段是要达到一个什么样的目的？说了半天风马牛不相及。看论据部分，论据部分The arguer only says that jobs in industries tend to pay above-average wages,but he give no evidence that laid-off workers who find jobs in industries get jobs of which wages are higher than the average.你的论据给人感觉你这段要说他们不一定能拿到所谓的高于平均工资的收入。每一个部门有不同的工资标准是没错，难道你打算用同样的标准来衡量这些人的收入情况吗？你自己都知道不同的岗位工资是不一样的，但是在你的衡量标准中却要把这些不同的人一起衡量？工资收入从来只是同行业比较，难道你要扫地工和老总比收入么？童鞋，你论证到此处已经可以说跑题了，题目的结论是这些在裁员中被辞退的工作人员的生活没有如编辑所报道的那样困苦。就算你这段论证完美，请问你这段的论证对文章发展有何作用？就算他们工资收入不是比平均高的，那么又怎么样呢？你证明这个问题的目的在哪？这段到结尾可看出LZ你自己都不知道你的目标在哪里了，剩下的你只是在纯粹地驳斥题目了。收入比平均高，高了又怎么样呢？这项工资收入能否保证他们的正常生活呢？应该从这方面入手。】

To sum it up,the arguer does give several evidence to undermine the claim that the majority of competent workers who have lost jobs face serious economic hardship,but he ignores some possibilities which would weaken his assumptions.Without enough evidence directly showing those workers would get jobs of considerable wages,the argument is untenable.

========================================================================================
感觉LZ的思路很乱，段与段之间的联系不强，没有很清楚的逻辑感。论证方面也是有待加强。

1、Elthyrian economy的报导==>当地失业率新低            ‖
2、2/3的新工作是工业方面的倾向于支付高于平均收入的工资  ‖==>这些在裁员中失去工作的工作人员并没有经济困难
3、在这2/3的工作中大量的全职                                     ‖

个人粗粗整理了这么一个思路。大致地理了下题目的逻辑推论。这样可以帮助你比较清晰地把握题目的脉络。

很明显可以看到当地失业率低的报导出自当地的一份读物，那么它是否真有这么可靠的公信力？会不会是为了当地的经济发展而按照他们的一些标准来整理的信息所以得出当地失业率新低？这其实也是一条值得质疑的地方。其次就算这份报纸中的信息可以参考，但是这失业率低不代表被裁撤的员工能找到工作。就算他们找到了工作也不能证明他们能摆脱经济困难。在反驳题目信息的同时自己也应该存在一条文脉。

建议LZ平时多看看范文，多学习下别人的论证方法和思路，你的思路会更开阔。