argument61 欢迎拍砖，留链互拍

bryanshawUID: 2239455

ARGUMENT61 - The following appeared in a report by the School District of Eyleria.

"Nationally, the average ratio of computers to students in kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12) is 1:5. Educators indicate that this is very good ratio. This means that across the country, all students have access to and can use computers daily in their classrooms. In Eyleria's K-12 schools, the ratio of computers to students is 1:7. This number is sufficient to ensure that all of Eyleria's students, by the time they graduate from high school, will be fully proficient in the use of computer technology. Thus, there is no reason to spend any of the schools' budget on computers or other technology in the next few years."

In this argument, the author claims that no more budget should be spend on computers or other technology in School District of Eyleria. It sounds good but suffers a lot of logic flaws.

First, the author cites an average ratio of computers in kindergarten nationally, which is 1:5. Based on this average ratio, the author assumes that the ratio of computers in Eyleria which is only 1:7 shows computers are sufficient to students in Eyleria. It is apparently absurd, the national ratio is an average statistic, it can not reveal the real situation of the computer use in every district. Maybe in big cities the ratio is much higher and when it comes to countryside, the ratio lows down. Though the final ratio of the average is 1:5, there must be students who do not have a chance to use computers. Furthermore, the Eyleria's ratio is 1:7, even lower than the average of national level. So there is no evidence to show computers in Eyleria's kindergarten are sufficient. The assumption proves to be an unfounded one, and the author should not claim that computers are sufficient.

Second, even if there is a possibility that every student has a chance to use computer in school, they will never become proficient in the use of computer technology, unless they have enough time to use computers and a course of computer technology. The author of the argument does not mention how much time can a student spend on computers every week, and what do they do by computer. So, it is highly possible that, one student can only have a ten minutes on a computer in a total week, and what they do are no more than video games, which is result from lacking devices and teachers. Consequently, without giving a detail study of the situation of the kindergarten in Eyleria, the author will not make the conclusion convinced.

The last but not least, the author makes a conclusion that budget of other technology is also not necessary in the future, which is not substantiated by no reason. The good education of computer does not represent that the same is happened to other technologies, maybe many schools are lack of experimental instruments which will block the education. What's more, even if in this year, schools need no more computers or other technology, the author fails to give any evidence to persuade the schools cut the budget. Thus, schools should not reduce the budget in the next few years for the reasons the author provides.

In sum, the author has few reasonable evidence to support his opinion. And he should make a further study of the education condition of School District of Eyleria, which will make his argument more than an emotional appeal.

(2008-1-24 下午 03:46:30)

Doria_ICUID: 2368482

In this argument, the author claims that no more budget should be spend on computers or other technology in School District of Eyleria. It sounds good but suffers (from) a lot of logic flaws.

First, the author cites an average ratio of computers in kindergarten nationally, which is 1:5. Based on this average ratio, the author assumes that the ratio of computers in Eyleria which is only 1:7 shows (in order to show that) computers are sufficient to students in Eyleria. It is apparently absurd, the national ratio is an average statistic, (and) it can not reveal the real situation of the computer use in every district. Maybe in big cities the ratio is much higher and when it comes to countryside, the ratio lows down. Though the final ratio of the average is 1:5, there must be students who do not have a chance to use computers. Furthermore, the Eyleria's ratio is 1:7, even lower than the average of national level. So there is no evidence to show computers in Eyleria's kindergarten are sufficient. The assumption proves to be an unfounded one, and the author should not claim that computers are sufficient.

Second, even if there is a possibility that every student has a chance to use computer in school, they will never become proficient in the use of computer technology, unless they have enough time to use computers and a course of computer technology. (这个会不会太绝对了？即使加上unless，也太绝对了？而且，use a course 好像不太搭配) The author of the argument does not mention how much time can a student spend on computers every week, and what do they do by computer. So, it is highly possible that, one student can only have a (去掉a)ten minutes on a computer in a total week, and what they do are no more than video games, which is result (results)from lacking devices and teachers. Consequently, without giving a detail study of the situation of the kindergarten(貌似是12-school) in Eyleria, the author will not make the conclusion convinced.（感觉这段分析的理由偏了，原题的意思是说他们不用给计算机和其他技术做预算了，是因为机子数量够用了）

The last but not least, the author makes a conclusion that budget of other technology is also not necessary in the future, which is not substantiated by no reason. The good education of computer does not represent that the same is happened to other technologies; maybe many schools are lack of experimental instruments which will block（hamper） the education. What's more, even if in this year, schools need no more computers or other technology, the author fails to give any evidence to persuade the schools cut the budget.(感觉这句话没说完，作者给理由了，只是给错了)Thus, schools should not reduce the budget in the next few years for the reasons the author provides.

In sum, the author has few（word建议改little，我觉得few对着呢） reasonable evidence to support his opinion. And he should make a further study of the education condition of School District of Eyleria, which will make his argument more than an emotional appeal.

很好，学习下。欢迎回拍：https://bbs.gter.net/thread-793705-1-1.html

[ 本帖最后由 Doria_IC 于 2008-1-24 20:01 编辑 ]

dragonthuUID: 2450865

ARGUMENT61 - The following appeared in a report by the School District of Eyleria.

"Nationally, the average ratio of computers to students in kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12) is 1:5. Educators indicate that this is very good ratio. This means that across the country, all students have access to and can use computers daily in their classrooms. In Eyleria's K-12 schools, the ratio of computers to students is 1:7. This number is sufficient to ensure that all of Eyleria's students, by the time they graduate from high school, will be fully proficient in the use of computer technology. Thus, there is no reason to spend any of the schools' budget on computers or other technology in the next few years."

In this argument, the author claims that no more budget should be spend on computers or other technology in School District of Eyleria. It sounds good but suffers a lot of logic flaws.
开头段似乎有点少，可以把原作者的思路写的再清楚点吧~
First, the author cites an average ratio of computers in kindergarten nationally, which is 1:5. Based on this average ratio, the author assumes that the ratio of computers in Eyler
这应该用firstly 或者first of all吧                                                       这个从句有点短，读起来很怪，不如不用这个宾语从句
ia which is only 1:7 shows computers are sufficient to students in Eyleria. It is apparently absurd, the national ratio is an average statistic, it can not reveal the real situation of t
                                这个show是谁的谓语？                                       This 更好                                                   这儿应该另分一句，后面连着好几句这样的
he computer use in every district. Maybe in big cities the ratio is much higher and when it comes to countryside, the ratio lows down. Though the final ratio of the average is
                                                                                                                                                                                                                      low是adj或者adv，不是v
1:5, there must be students who do not have a chance to use computers. Furthermore, the Eyleria's ratio is 1:7, even lower than the average of national level. So there is no evidence to show computers in Eyleria's kindergarten are sufficient. The assumption proves to be an unfounded one, and the author should not claim that computers are sufficient.

Second, even if there is a possibility that every student has a chance to use computer in school, they will never become proficient in the use of computer technology, unless th
                                            开不可数名词吧                                                                                                                                                  这个unless有点奇怪
ey have enough time to use computers and a course of computer technology. The author of the argument does not mention how much time can a student spend on computers
                                                                         这里是想借用and前面的have做为共有的动词么？不是很清晰，不如加一个have
every week, and what do they do by computer. So, it is highly possible that, one student can only have a ten minutes on a computer in a total week, and what they do are no m
                                                                                                                                                                                        a ten
ore than video games, which is result from lacking devices and teachers. Consequently, without giving a detail study of the situation of the kindergarten in Eyleria, the author
             playing，用动名词        resulted？
will not make the conclusion convinced.

The last but not least, the author makes a conclusion that budget of other technology is also not necessary in the future, which is not substantiated by no reason. The good education of computer does not represent that the same is happened to other technologies, maybe many schools are lack of experimental instruments which will block the education. What's more, even if in this year, schools need no more computers or other technology, the author fails to give any evidence to persuade the schools cut the budget. Thus, schools should not reduce the budget in the next few years for the reasons the author provides.
cut和不增加预算还是不一样的，（这一段没时间细看了，觉得语句有些混乱）
In sum, the author has few reasonable evidence to support his opinion. And he should make a further study of the education condition of School District of Eyleria, which will make his argument more than an emotional appeal.

这是我第一次帮人改AW作文，疏漏之处还请指教
我的注意力似乎大部分集中在具体语句上，也许和G的要求不太符合了：）
行文结构上没有什么问题吧，开头结尾该写的都写了，但是觉得短了点，尤其是结尾段，话没说清楚，也没有总结的意思~
中间三段反驳和我想的差不多，能够反驳的地方也就是：
    1：7比1：5少
    1：5只是个平均数字，不能保证所有人的情况一致
    光有设备不够，还需要师资和课程保证
    几年以后情况可能发生变化
也许还欠缺的就是没什么闪光的句子了，这一篇里面的长句写的都不是很好
就这些吧，第一次改，多多指教~~!

这个是我的：）~
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-793721-1-1.html

[ 本帖最后由 dragonthu 于 2008-1-24 21:27 编辑 ]