argu139, 最后一天了！！！无论如何给点意见

saltsberryUID: 156561

Argument139  第1篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：30分3秒     481 words
从2004年3月10日15时51分到2004年3月10日16时30分
------题目------
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.'
------正文------
In the editorial section, the author claims that home schooling is the best way to educate children based on the fact that some first-semester grades of teenage students who had receive some schooling at home are better than those students who had always attended public, tax-supported schools. The author also suggests  financial incentives for home schooling. The recommendations of the argument seems to be reasonable and understandable at first glance. However, careful examination of the argument would reveal that it suffers several critical flaws and not convincing.

First of all, the study at Lee University amounts to scanty evidence that children without home schooling will perform worse than those who had. From the information provided by the author, we cannot see the details of the study such as how many students participated in the study, how their preformance are evaluated etc. Without such kind of information, we have good reason to cast doubt on the objectiveness and representativeness of  the study. It is entirely possible the result apply to only a very small proportion of students in the study and lacks generality when all the school students are taken into consideration. Therefore, the argument may rest its concclusion on gratuitous assumptions.

Furthermore, granted that home schooling does contribute to the grads of first-grade students in the first semester, there is no evidence indicating that home schooling plays an important role in the students' future academic life except in the first semester in the university. The study points out that the discrepancy of students' grades performance disappeared in the second semester. Thus, home schooling does not help very much in the students' future university life in terms of grades. With this slim information about the benefits of home schooling, there is no need for the government to provide financial incentives to encourage home schooling instead of public education.

Finally, even if home schooling has been acknowledged to be of great help in children's academic performance, there is no guarantee that parents are the best possible teacher at all. The role of parents in children's education should be acknowledged, but never should be overamplified. There are many aspects that home schooling are not so good as public education, for instance, in terms of equipment, the scope of accessible knowledge, the cooperation among students. All of the mentioned above are vital to children's future development not only academically but also socially.

In conclusion, the author's conclusion seems premature because the evidence he cited does not lend strong support to what he maintains. To make his conclusion more convincing, the author has to provide more information concerning the comparative study of the two types of students. To better evaluate the argument, an investigation should be conducted to assess the all-round effects of home shooling so that we can make a general judgment of whether the government should provide financial incentives for home shooling or not.

DriverEntryUID: 143979

写得不错。此外，suffers（这里要加个FROM） several critical flaws
祝愿取得好成绩！

saltsberryUID: 156561

谢diverentry审阅，有没有批判性意见呀？？？

ArmArmUID: 159736

up一下

ArmArmUID: 159736

小建一把：
开头短一点，restate尽量简洁；
时间多花在中间的论点
留下3-5分钟检查

saltsberryUID: 156561

最初由 ArmArm 发布
[B]小建一把：
开头短一点，restate尽量简洁；
时间多花在中间的论点
留下3-5分钟检查 [/B]

精辟！！！于我心有其其炎。。。。

LSDUID: 157855

等，但愿改完了你还在:p

LSDUID: 157855

先写上我挑的错误：
1。反驳study ：样本含量；是否随机抽样
2。以偏概全：第一学期的成绩不能代表学生以后的表现，更不能说明家教的优越性
3。无理假设：家教不可能成为很多家长和学生的选择，家长们有自己的工作，生活，不可能每天教自己的子女
4。证据不足：家长是最好的老师。学校的老师更能帮助学生进步，他们受过专业教育，掌握教书技巧。

bqjieUID: 144997

上面说的我不复述了。

觉得在归纳错误的时候有点问题。
body1 在说调查不具代表性，论述的很到位落
body2 body3其实可以归在一起的，都是在讲家庭教育是否最好的这点。我觉得body3后面有些论述显得罗嗦的些，倒像在写issue了
其实我觉得还有一个错误应该抓出来了。。就是即使家长是最好的老师也不等于学校教育不用钱。而且那些incensitive是否能保证home schooling is an option for more parents呢？这里的推理断了一环了。
With this slim information about the benefits of home schooling, there is no need for the government to provide financial incentives to encourage home schooling instead of public education.
这是你body2的最后一句，，仔细想想就觉得有些逻辑上的不通了。
家长不是最好的老师就应该不用给予incentives了吗？

楼主限时写了这么多，，好羡慕阿。省点时间写开头结尾，多构思一下错误归纳会更好的

加油！

flyingfUID: 152189

好羡慕，不错，祝你考个好成绩！！！

saltsberryUID: 156561

最初由 bqjie 发布
[B]With this slim information about the benefits of home schooling, there is no need for the government to provide financial incentives to encourage home schooling instead of public education.
这是你body2的最后一句，，仔细想想就觉得有些逻辑上的不通了[/B]

这句细看是有问题，改为
..........benefits of home schooling, there is no sufficient evidence indicating that home schooling palys such a siginificant role in children's education that the government should provide incentives to encourage it.
是否逻辑更好一点

money for education 确实忽略掉了，是一个驳斥点

十分感谢 bqjie ，如此认真细致和超强逻辑！！！

saltsberryUID: 156561

最初由 LSD 发布
[B]3。无理假设：家教不可能成为很多家长和学生的选择，家长们有自己的工作，生活，不可能每天教自己的子女
B]

这一点我觉得不是一种批驳，而成了论述
就像bqjie指出的body3后半部分在写issue的感觉了
不知赞同否？

LSDUID: 157855

没人规定ARG一定要写成那种形式吧:p
只是新东方的老师讲过写成批驳的形式比较简单
+U+U

bqjieUID: 144997

呵呵，，改了以后是显得客观了很多！

我同意saltsberry的观点，，这样写确实是有别出议论之感。
换一个说法也许好点
关于家长是最好的老师，我觉得应该从原文出发，只说了学校教育和家庭教育就断然说某一个是最好的，，忽略了其他的，如自学等。。这样论述是不是好一点

SearongUID: 154885

写得不错！

提个小小的建议，中间论述的部分每段结尾处最好有回应，比如说上文第三段是不是该加一句：Thus the conclusion based on this is really untenable.
另外，第三个错误分析的不够力度，可以再说明一下：Most parents have not been trained to teach their children. The teachers in the public school can normally give better instruction to the children.