argument 193 限时的，马上就 要考了，请高人们评点，必回拍，多谢！

nuno_axlUID: 187806

   限时30，460左右字，马上就要进考场了，有些着急。请 XDJM们指点！先谢过了！

  题目：193 The Department of Education in the state of Attra recommends that high school students be assigned homework every day. Yet a recent statewide survey of high school math and science teachers calls the usefulness of daily homework into question. In the district of Sanlee, 86 percent of the teachers reported assigning homework three to five times a week, whereas in the district of Marlee, less than 25 percent of the teachers reported assigning homework three to five times a week. Yet the students in Marlee earn better grades overall and are less likely to be required to repeat a year of school than are the students in Sanlee. Therefore, all teachers in our high schools should assign homework no more than twice a week, if at all.

   In this argument, the author reaches the conclusion that all teachers in high school of Attra state should assign homework no more than twice a week. To justify this recommendation the author cites a recent statewide survey of high school math and science teachers, which calls value of daily homework into question. Meanwhile, the author provides the evidence that students in M, who are assigned homework no more than once a week, earn better grades and are less likely to be required to repeat a year of school than are the students in S, who has to do their home work every night. The argument suffers from several critical flaws and is consequently unpersuasive as it stands.


    To begin with, the author provides no assurances that the survey on which the argument depends is statistically steadfast. Without knowing the sample of math and science was representative of teachers in all subjects, it is impossible to confidently apply the author’s advice to every high school in Attra state. Moreover, the author provides no evidence that high school in S and M is statistically significant or that the two distinct are representative of all districts in general. Lacking the verification of a sufficiently representative sample, the author cannot justifiably depend on the survey to draw any conclusion whatsoever.


     Secondly, the author’s recommendation relies on partly on the assumption that frequency in assign homework is the cause of the students’ performance. However, this need not be the case. Yet, logic and common senses inform us that the results might have been due instead to one or more other factors. Perhaps the teachers in S are stricter with their students. Or perhaps the students in M are cleverer and more diligence than those in S. Without taking into consideration such possibilities, the author simply cannot reasonably make the conclusion.


Thirdly, the mere fact that students in S perform better because of less homework is scant evidence that students in M would achieve better or even the same. Maybe the same course of action would be ineffective on students’ study due to geographic difference between the two distinct. Thus, the author’s suggestion would be ineffective in general.
  

In sum, the argument is not convincing as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, the speaker would have to show that the situation in math and science also affect in the same way in other subjects, and the survey in M and S are representative overall. Additionally, the speaker would have to find out the real casual relationship between the assigned homework and the students’ performance. Finally, to better assess the argument we would need to know whether the students of the two areas are comparable. Only with more convincing support could this argument become more than just an emotional appeal.

mythztUID: 162409

In this argument, the author reaches the conclusion that all teachers in high school of Attra state should assign homework no more than twice a week. To justify this recommendation the author cites a recent statewide survey of high school math and science teachers, which calls value of daily homework into question. Meanwhile, the author provides the evidence that students in M, who are assigned homework no more than once a week(不超过一次？好像题目没这么说啊), earn better grades and are less likely to be required to repeat a year of school than are the students in S, who has to do their home work every night. The argument suffers from several critical flaws and is consequently unpersuasive as it stands.(楼主的开头段略长了点，个人觉得有些细节可以一笔代过)


To begin with, the author provides no assurances(这个词可数吗？我不大确定) that the survey on which the argument depends is statistically steadfast. Without knowing the sample of math and science was(were) representative of teachers(前面是学科，后面怎么变老师了?) in all subjects, it is impossible to confidently apply the author’s advice to every high school in Attra state. Moreover, the author provides no evidence that high school in S and M is statistically significant or that the two distinct(districts) are representative of all districts in general. Lacking the verification of a sufficiently representative sample, the author cannot justifiably depend on the survey to draw any conclusion whatsoever.


Secondly, the author’s recommendation relies on partly on the assumption that frequency in assign(assigning) homework is the cause of the students’ performance. However, this need not be the case(有这种用法吗?感觉有点怪呵). Yet, logic and common senses inform us that the results might have been due instead to one or more other factors. Perhaps the teachers in S are stricter with their students. Or perhaps the students in M are cleverer and more diligence(diligent) than those in S. Without taking into consideration such possibilities, the author simply cannot reasonably make the conclusion.


Thirdly, the mere fact that students in S perform better because of less homework is scant evidence that students in M would achieve better or even the same. Maybe the same course of action would be ineffective on students’ study due to geographic difference between the two distinct(geographic difference似乎有点牵强了，最好能指出两个学校的具体差别，比如M的老师的教学可能比较effective). Thus, the author’s suggestion would be ineffective in general.


In sum, the argument is not convincing as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, the speaker would have to show that the situation in math and science also affect in the same way in other subjects, and the survey in M and S are representative overall. Additionally, the speaker would have to find out the real casual relationship between the assigned homework and the students’ performance. Finally, to better assess the argument we would need to know whether the students of the two areas are comparable. Only with more convincing support could this argument become more than just an emotional appeal(这个表达很不错！).

限时达到这水平很不错啊！我觉得还有题中作者的建议也可以攻击一下，难道只有少于两词才好吗？说不定不布置更好。一点愚见，多多包涵！

nuno_axlUID: 187806

多谢呀，时间有点紧张，到后来就着急了，谢谢提了不少优秀的建议，仁兄有文章小弟必回拍

hanyuxingUID: 173529

补充两句

The Department of Education in the state of Attra recommends that high school students be assigned homework every day. Yet a recent statewide survey of high school math and science teachers calls the usefulness of daily homework into question. In the district of Sanlee, 86 percent of the teachers reported assigning homework three to five times a week, whereas in the district of Marlee, less than 25 percent of the teachers reported assigning homework three to five times a week. Yet the students in Marlee earn better grades overall and are less likely to be required to repeat a year of school than are the students in Sanlee. Therefore, all teachers in our high schools should assign homework no more than twice a week, if at all.

还可以攻击:
1. The scant survey only represent math and science teacher’s responds cannot reveal the overall disciplines.
2,according to the survey it is possible that the percentage of teachers there who assign more than 5 times is about 75%.
3,the two districts' teachers can not stands for the whole state and their district might be the exception of the state.
4, the arguer fails to take into account if those students all hand in their assignments in time.


愚见 :)

晨曦UID: 177893

请问楼主回拍了谁了？