- 最后登录
- 2005-10-23
- 在线时间
- 0 小时
- 寄托币
- 802
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2004-11-8
- 阅读权限
- 20
- 帖子
- 1
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 354
- UID
- 185312
 
- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 802
- 注册时间
- 2004-11-8
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 1
|
Ar 240
------题目------
The following appeared in a memo written by a dean at Buckingham College.
"To serve the housing needs of our students, Buckingham College should build a new dormitory. Buckingham's enrollment is growing and, based on current trends, should double over the next fifty years, thus making existing dormitories inadequate. Moreover, the average rent for an apartment in our town has increased in recent years. Consequently, students will find it increasingly difficult to afford off-campus housing. Finally, an attractive new dormitory would make prospective students more likely to enroll at Buckingham.
------正文------
At first glance, the recommendation seems to be obvious that Buckingham College should build a new dormitory to serve the housing needs of students. A careful scrutiny, however, reveals that the argument suffers from several flaws which render it unpersuasive as it stands. First, is an attractive new dormitory one of the most important reasons for students to select Buckingham College? In addition, are the existing dormitories really inadequate in the near future? The argument also fails to convince us that the increase of rent for an apartment will inevitably make it difficult to afford off-campus housing for students. I will discuss each of these flaws in turn.
First of all, the speaker unfairly assumes that if an attractive new dormitory is built, students would more likely to enroll at Buckingham. However, this is often not the case. The argument fails to take into account several other aspects on which students depend to choose a college, such as, the reputation of the college, whether the arrangement of majors is comprehensive and reasonable, and how about the academic atmosphere? Common sense tells us that if these or other aspects of a college are not satisfying, just a new dormitory is inadequate to attract more students.
Moreover, we are not informed whether the growing enrollment based on current trends remains unchanged in the near future. Perhaps, for the decreasing of the number of teenager, the total students in Buckingham over the next fifty years will be less than now. Besides, there is no evidence provided that all of the growing enrollment in Buckingham will live in dormitory. It is entirely possible that the majority of the enrollment would prefer to live off-campus rather than in dormitory. It is also possible that most of these students choose long-distance learning, and they do not need to live in dormitory. Without ruling out these possibilities, the arguer cannot reasonably conclude that Buckingham College should build a new dormitory.
Finally, the average rent has increased does not necessarily mean that the rent for an apartment near Buckingham has also grown. What is more, the arguer does not tell us why the average rent has increased. Is it due to the inflation or the improvement of standard of living? The auger must provide clear evidence to persuade us that the rent for an apartment around Buckingham has increased and it surely brings difficulty to afford off-campus housing.
Overall, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer claims. The argument could be improved by providing clear evidence -perhaps by way of a reliable survey -that what percentage of the enrollment will select living in dormitory, and how many students feel the growing rent make them find difficult to afford off-campus housing. The information would be also useful that a new dormitory is a very important factor for attracting more students. In short, before any final decisions are made the arguer should think carefully. |
|