Issue51 [老兵小组] 第一次作业

wy86917UID: 2335014

TOPIC: ISSUE51 - "Education will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet the individual needs and interests of each student."
WORDS: 556         TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2008-2-1 下午 11:21:25
提纲：
1有保留的反对
2承认专才教育的优势
3反对一：得不同时间用不用的方法，一些基础的科目即使小孩不愿学也得学
4反对二：正视人力财力有限的事实，需要权衡从小专才教育的代价
5反对三：用EFFECTIVE衡量education就不合适，人生不完全取决于教育，故看不到结果的不能用EFFECTIV衡量（个人这段有点扯，起码摆放的位置不好）
6总结


I agree with the speaker's broad assertion that it is a good method to teach by meeting the individual needs. However, the standard of efficiency by the speaker to measure education is unjustifiable; what is more, another contention of mine with the speaker is that we should appropriately use the method mentioned above in certain situations while never ignoring another traditional way.

First of all, I concede that the method supported by the speaker has its own advantages. Actually, it is widely accepted in the advanced education today, like the master and doctor education. In a word, the higher analysis, the more freedom the learner owns. On the professional teaching side, it is easy to understand the benefits of such method, for the reason that the individual has got enough professional knowledge and skills, formed a series of theory along with experience. Compared to such background, the needs and interests play a vital role in stimulating one's potential and provide the individual endless of power, thus it may be easy to answer some researchers plunging themselves in experiments while forgetting eating and resting.

However, I have to point out that the speaker's assertion is just a method, which does nothing to absolutely help the achievement of education, let alone the saying of being efficient. This point of contention infers the goal of education, which aims at nurturing a better generation, compared to their parents, no matter in the psychic or physical areas. To finish such a goal, we need to take different education methods at different stage and level, according to various economic situations, human resources and the needs of society. For example, in the early stage of a child, there are some concepts needed to be impressive in their mind, like to be polite and modest, to be kind to others and kind-hearted.  In the primary schools, the basic subjects, like math , is necessary to each one. Such tasks can be accomplished in the form of teams, by one or certain teachers. On the contrary, if just following the rules of meeting the individuals' needs irrespective of the needs of their future, some might never touch the world of math and the directly terrible result in their lives are out of image.

Moreover, we have to face the fact of the real world that there could not be enough teachers to design special education for each child. The possibility of master and doctor's one-by-one education is due to the need of society,  that is the number of such researchers itself limited. Unfortunately, the population is growing alone with the steady number of professional educator. One might say there still exits some type of school in which the students enjoy the rights of individual designed care and schedule; on the other side of such school is the price of inexperienced cost. So, the achievement of public individual-designed educations means the equal cost of higher tax and unpredictable federal budget, which may bring about countless problems and such problems cannot be answered in this brief assay.

My third argument against the speaker is that education can never be measured by efficiency. Consider the goal of education, which is totally different from the process of can-making.  The life of one is a complicated web, composed by countless factors, like luck, hard-working , the help from others and so on.  The function of education takes a small part in the web and hardly can lead the way. We can never know the future of a poor-score boy in school, and can never conclude how his behavior affects the further going. Just like Edison, the one laughed at school but a great inventor. Thus, the standard of being efficient is unjustifiable.

In sum, I agree with the speaker that meeting one's needs and interests is a good method for teaching, while advocating the use of traditional class-teaching in the suitable time. Moreover, I have to point out that there never exists a efficient education, for the reason that life never depends on education.

starfishjingUID: 2420513

I agree with the speaker's broad assertion that it is a good method to teach by meeting the individual needs. However, the standard of efficiency by the speaker to measure education is unjustifiable; what is more, another contention of mine with the speaker is that we should appropriately use 感觉不太舒服the method mentioned above in certain situations while never(without) ignoring another traditional way. First of all, I concede that the method supported by the speaker has its own advantages. Actually, it is widely accepted in the advanced education today, like the master and doctor education. In a word, the higher analysis (is?), the more freedom the learner owns. On the professional teaching side, it is easy to understand the benefits of such method, for the reason that the individual has got enough professional knowledge and skills, formed a series of theory along with experience. Compared to such background, the needs and interests play a vital role in stimulating one's potential and provide the individual endless of（去掉） power, thus it may be easy to answer some researchers plunging themselves in experiments while forgetting eating and resting. However, I have to point out that the speaker's assertion is just a method, which does nothing to absolutely help the achievement of education, let alone the saying of being efficient. This point of contention infers the goal of education, which aims at nurturing a better generation, compared to their parents, no matter in the psychic or physical areas. To finish such a goal, we need to take different education methods at different stage and level, according to various economic situations, human resources and the needs of society. For example, in the early stage of a child, there are some concepts needed to be impressive (rooted) in their mind, like to be polite and modest, to be kind to others and kind-hearted.  In the primary schools, the basic subjects, like math , is necessary to each one. Such tasks can be accomplished in the form of teams, by one or certain teachers. On the contrary, if just following the rules of meeting the individuals' needs irrespective of the needs of their future, some might never touch the world of math and the directly terrible result in their lives are out of image. Moreover, we have to face the fact of the real world that 缺少连贯，比如说在理想世界中是怎样，然而现实.... In the  perfect world......,yet in reality there could not be enough teachers to design special education for each child. The possibility of master and doctor's one-by-one education is due to the need of society,  that is the number of such researchers itself limited. Unfortunately, the population is growing alone with the steady number of professional educator. One might say there still exits some type of school in which the students enjoy the rights of individual designed care and schedule; on the other side of such school is the price of inexperienced cost. So, the achievement of public individual-designed educations means the equal cost (on some level amounts to ?我想的，感觉地道一点） of higher tax and unpredictable federal budget, which may bring about countless problems and such problems cannot be answered in this brief assay. My third argument against the speaker is that education can never be measured by efficiency. Consider the goal of education, which is totally different from the process of can-making.  The life of one is a complicated web, composed by countless factors, like luck, hard-working , the help from others and so on.  The function of education takes a small part in the web and hardly can lead the way. We can never know the future of a poor-score boy in school, and can never conclude how his behavior affects the further going. Just like Edison, the one laughed at school but a great inventor. Thus, the standard of being efficient is unjustifiable.　感觉这一段比较跑题，只需要讨论interest 和efficiency的关系，至于efficiency是否能衡量教育应该不需要讨论，这只是我们的审题问题　想问下老兵理解的efficiency是什么意思 In sum, I agree with the speaker that meeting one's needs and interests is a good method for teaching, while advocating the use of traditional class-teaching in the suitable time. Moreover, I have to point out that there never exists a efficient education, for the reason that life never depends on education.

感觉结构挺好，非常清楚 语言流畅，但是有些表达不太地道．我的体会是：尽量用出现过的词组或句式，最好自己少搭配．有些不是错，只是不那么native 句式多点变化更好 论证结构我不行，所以不妄下结论

zephyrqqUID: 2260290

I agree with the speaker's broad assertion that it is a good method to teach by meeting the individual needs. However, the standard of efficiency by the speaker to measure education is unjustifiable; what is more, another contention of mine with the speaker is that we should appropriately use the method mentioned above in certain situations while never ignoring another traditional way.感觉有点抽象 呵呵，这个开头是和北美范文学的 First of all, I concede that the method supported by the speaker has its own advantages. Actually, it is widely accepted in the advanced education today, like the master and doctor education. In a word, the higher analysis, the more freedom the learner owns. 我没有看懂这句话，不好意思On the professional teaching side, it is easy to understand the benefits of such method, for the reason that the individual has got enough professional knowledge and skills, formed a series of theory along with experience. Compared to such background, the needs and interests play a vital role in stimulating one's potential and provide the individual endless of power, thus it may be easy to answer some researchers plunging themselves in experiments while forgetting eating and resting. However, I have to point out that the speaker's assertion is just a method, which does nothing to absolutely （does not necessarily)help the achievement of education, let alone the saying of being efficient. This point of contention infers the goal of education, which aims at nurturing a better generation, compared to their parents, no matter in the psychic or physical areas  (not only mentally but also physically). To finish(attain不要太中式了喔^^) such a goal, we need to take different education methods at different stages and levels, according to various economic situations, human resources and the needs of society. For example, in the early stage of a child, there are some concepts needed to be impressive in their mind, like to be polite and modest, to be kind to others and kind-hearted.  In the primary schools, the basic subjects, like math , is necessary to each one. Such tasks can be accomplished in the form of teams, by one or certain teachers. On the contrary, if just following the rules of meeting the individuals' needs irrespective of the needs of their future, some might never touch the world of math and the directly terrible result in their lives are out of image. Moreover, we have to face the fact of the real world that there could not be enough teachers to design special education for each child. The possibility of master and doctor's one-by-one （one-to-one才是一对一） education is due to the need of society,  that is the number of such researchers itself limited. Unfortunately, the population is growing alone with the steady number of professional educator. 这句话说明什么？One might say there still exits some type of school in which the students enjoy the rights of individual designed care and schedule; on the other side of such school is the price of inexperienced ？cost. So, the achievement of public individual-designed educations means the equal cost of higher tax and unpredictable federal budget, which may bring about countless problems and such problems cannot be answered in this brief assay. My third argument against the speaker is that education can never be measured by efficiency. Consider the goal of education, which is totally different from the process of can-making.  The life of one is a complicated web, composed by countless factors, like luck, hard-working , the help from others and so on.  The function of education takes a small part in the web and hardly can lead the way. We can never know the future of a poor-score boy in school, and can never conclude how his behavior affects the further going. Just like Edison, the one laughed at school but a great inventor. Thus, the standard of being efficient is unjustifiable. In sum, I agree with the speaker that meeting one's needs and interests is a good method for teaching, while advocating the use of traditional class-teaching in the suitable time. Moreover, I have to point out that there never exists a efficient education, for the reason that life never depends on education. 对于这一道题目，我的看法是个人兴趣和需要不能混为一谈，个人需要不仅仅只是主观需要，还包括客观需要。不是what the individual want 而是what the individual really need whether he or she concede or not. 这个是我写的i51，欢迎你们拍哦 https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=797452&page=1&extra=page%3D1#pid1771383917

Rainy1423UID: 2315816

I agree with the speaker's broad assertion that it is a good method toteach by meeting the individual needs. However, the standard ofefficiency by the speaker to measure education is unjustifiable; whatis more, another contention of mine with the speaker is that we shouldappropriately use the method mentioned above in certain situationswhile never ignoring another traditional way.
按照提纲，开头应该提出保留的反对论点，按照作者的字面翻译过来就是：
我同意说话人提出的教育方法．我的另一个论点是依据个人兴趣进行的教育应该用于某些情况下，并不能完全忽略传统教育．
很显然，这个论点不仅不够醒目，而且不够明确．
ＧＲＥ最注重的就是开头有一个明确的论点，而作者论点显然不够明确，而且也不是保留的反对观点，看上去更像保留的同意论点．

First of all, I concede that the method [what is the method?最好用个从句说清楚，还是那句话，论点一定要明确。]supported by the speaker hasits own advantages. Actually, it is widely accepted in the advancededucation today, like the master and doctor education. In a word, thehigher analysis, the more freedom the learner owns. On the professionalteaching side, it is easy to understand the benefits of such method,for the reason that the individual has got enough professionalknowledge and skills, formed a series of theory[theories] along with experience.Compared to such background, the needs and interests play a vital rolein stimulating one's potential and provide the individual endless of[删掉]power, thus it may be easy to answer some researchers plungingthemselves in experiments while forgetting eating and resting.[研究员不一定因为兴趣或需要才没日没夜地做研究，可能也是被迫的。而且这跟教育关系不大。这个例子有点不能说服我~]

However, I have to point out that the speaker's assertion is just amethod, which does nothing to absolutely help the achievement ofeducation, let alone the saying of being efficient. This point ofcontention infers the goal of education, which aims at nurturing abetter generation, compared to their parents, no matter in the psychicor physical areas. To finish such a goal, we need to take differenteducation methods at different stages and levels, according to variouseconomic situations, human resources and the needs of society[“按照”后面的内容有点含混，而且对象不一，不同经济状况的可能是学生，而拥有不同人类资源的可能是社会，有社会需要的可能是学校吧，我也不太确定~]. Forexample, in the early stage [age] of a child, there are some concepts neededto be impressive in their mind, like[such as] to be polite and modest, to bekind to others and kind-hearted.  In the primary schools, the basicsubjects, like math , is necessary to each [every]one. Such tasks can beaccomplished in the form of teams, by one or certain teachers. On thecontrary, if just following the rules of meeting the individuals' needsirrespective of the needs of their future, some [one] might never touch theworld of math and the directly[副词不能形容result,似乎形容terrible也不太合适~我也不清楚~] terrible result in their lives are outof image.

Moreover, we have to face the fact of the real world that there couldnot be enough teachers to design special education for each child. Thepossibility of master and doctor's one-by-one [one-by-one似乎是一个接一个的意思，而不是“一对一”] education is due to theneed of society,  that is [why] the number of such researchers itself[is] limited. Unfortunately, the population is growing alone with the steadynumber of professional educator. One might say there still exits sometype of school in which the students enjoy the rights of individualdesigned care and schedule; on the other side of such school is theprice of inexperienced cost. So, the achievement of publicindividual-designed educations means the equal cost of higher tax andunpredictable federal budget, which may bring about countless problemsand such problems cannot be answered in this brief assay.[具体的problem的列举能够帮助你的论点更加有说服力，只要列举一两个问题就好了]
这一段很明显，缺少分论点。作者无非是想通过各种假设来证明一点，按照兴趣来的教育是有代价的，比如学生首先要具备基本的知识，还有付得起高昂的学费等。那么最重要的就是把分论点写在段首，这样考官也方便看~
个人再龟毛一下，如果这一段是作者的反对观点的话，那么就不应该再以让步形式假设这种教育的存在，应该多攻击“兴趣教育”的可怕后果，而不是把重点放在提出那些现存的“兴趣教育”的特殊性上。

My third argument against the speaker is that education can never bemeasured by efficiency. Consider the goal of education, which istotally different from the process of can-making.  The life of one is acomplicated web, composed by countless factors, like luck, hard-working, the help from others and so on.  The function of education takes asmall part in the web and hardly can lead the way. We can never knowthe future of a poor-score boy in school, and can never conclude howhis behavior affects the further going. Just like Edison, the onelaughed at school but a great inventor. Thus, the standard of beingefficient is unjustifiable.
这一段有一些论据我不能同意。
首先，作者既然提到教育是有目的性的，那么任何有目的性的行为都应该尽量提高效率，为的是更快地达到目标。这是教育的“效率”需要存在的意义。
其次，作者以个人为坐标原点，将教育纳为个人生命的一小部分，但是事实上，真正想论证教育跟效率无关的话，应该以教育本身为坐标，通过论述学生的成就与教育的效率不成正比来论证自己的观点。很显然，作者后面的一系列论述都显得很无力，即使教育在人生中占的比例再小，也没有理由不用效率来衡量它。
再次，如果作者真的很想证明出“教育是不能用效率来衡量”的话，首先就要提出一个观点那就是真正可以用来衡量教育的是什么，再根据你给出的新论点加以证明，不过这很费脑筋，不适合在考场上想~~

In sum, I agree with the speaker that meeting one's needs and interestsis a good method for teaching, while advocating the use of traditionalclass-teaching in the suitable time. Moreover, I have to point out thatthere never exists a efficient education, for the reason that lifenever depends on education.
结尾和开头的问题差不多，观点太多，不够精炼，且“保留的反对”的态度没体现出来。

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
总结一下：
作者的思路很明确，段落很规整。
但是因为不愿花费过多语句复述题干导致论述中常常出现“论点，说法，观点”等抽象名词，本人建议在这些抽象名词后用从句形式把题干内容附加上，免得考官看得晕。
另外，作者在具体的论述中也要注意在段首提出明确的观点，方便自己论述，也方便考官阅读。当然，这个问题不是很严重。因为作者每段的内容都很集中。
（完毕，擦汗中~~~~~）

wy86917UID: 2335014

谢谢楼上三位的批改，我会再把语言和结构修改一下

再次表示感谢

michael_1984UID: 2327441

1有保留的反对
2承认专才教育的优势
3反对一：得不同时间用不用的方法，一些基础的科目即使小孩不愿学也得学
4反对二：正视人力财力有限的事实，需要权衡从小专才教育的代价
5反对三：用EFFECTIVE衡量education就不合适，人生不完全取决于教育，故看不到结果的不能用EFFECTIV衡量（个人这段有点扯，起码摆放的位置不好）
6总结

I agree with the speaker's broad assertion that it is a good method to teach by meeting the individual needs. However, the standard of efficiency by the speaker to measure education is unjustifiable; what is more, another contention of mine with the speaker is that we should appropriately use the method mentioned above in certain situations while never ignoring another traditional way.（开头经典，可看出文章欲从两方面进行论证，一是标准的不公正，另一个是不能忽视传统方式。值得学习）

First of all, I concede that the method supported by the speaker has its own advantages. Actually, it is widely accepted in the advanced education today, like the master and doctor education. In a word, the higher analysis, the more freedom the learner owns. On the professional teaching side, it is easy to understand the benefits of such method, for the reason that the individual has（此处用完成时感觉有些不妥） got enough professional knowledge and skills, formed a series of theory along with experience. Compared to such background, the needs and interests play a vital role in stimulating one's potential and provide the individual endless of power,（endless power） thus it may be easy to answer some researchers plunging themselves in experiments while forgetting eating and resting.(感觉研究人员置身于实验中，并没有体现出作者所说的专才教育的优势，只是说明了兴趣和需要的作用。不知作者是否想表达的是：专才教育迎合兴趣和需求，使得受教者更乐于受教，并将自身真正投入到受教的过程中，从而得到更有效的受教效果。如果是，感觉最后一个例子好像不太合适)

However, I have to point out that the speaker's assertion is just a method, which does nothing to absolutely help the achievement of education, let alone the saying of being efficient. This point of contention infers the goal of education, which aims at nurturing a better generation, compared to their parents, no matter in the psychic or physical areas. To finish such a goal（finish用的不好吧，似乎attain好一些）, we need to take different education methods at different stages and levels, according to various economic situations, human resources and the needs of society. For example, in the early stage of a child, there are some concepts needed to be impressive (impressed) in their mind, like to be polite and modest, to be kind to others and kind-hearted.  In the primary schools, the basic subjects, like math, is (are) necessary to each one. Such tasks can be accomplished in the form of teams, by one or certain teachers. On the contrary, if just following the rules of meeting the individuals' needs irrespective of the needs of their future（他们“未来的需求”也是属于“他们的需求”，这里感觉有些矛盾，）, some might never touch the world of math and the directly terrible result in their lives are out of image.（感觉这句话说得别扭，不知这句行不行“and undergo  terrible results in their lives”）

Moreover, we have to face the fact of（感觉in好像更合适一些） the real world that there could not be enough teachers to design special education for each child. The possibility of master and doctor's one-by-one（one on one） education is due to the need of society,  that is the number of such researchers itself limited.(这句作者想补充说明那句呢？感觉不是对“可能性的存在是由于社会需要”的补充) Unfortunaely, the population is growing alone with the steady number of professional educator. One might say there still exits some type of school in which the students enjoy the rights of individual designed care and schedule; on the other side of such school is the price of inexperienced cost. So, the achievement of public individual-designed educations means the equal（equal不要感觉更好一些） cost of higher tax and unpredictable federal budget, which may bring about countless problems and such problems cannot be answered in this brief assay.

My third argument against the speaker is that education can never be measured by efficiency. Consider the goal of education, which is totally different from the process of can-making.  The life of one is a complicated web, composed by countless factors, like luck, hard-working , the help from others and so on.  The function of education takes a small part in the web and hardly can lead the way. We can never know the future of a poor-score boy in school, and can never conclude how his behavior affects the further going. Just like Edison, the one laughed at school but a great inventor. Thus, the standard of being efficient is unjustifiable.（这段很模糊，既没有给出教育的目的是什么，也没有明确有效的标准是什么。不知作者是否想表达教育的作用对于个人的成就或能力的影响不是很大？不给出效用的标准，让人无法将能力、成就与之相联）

In sum, I agree with the speaker that meeting one's needs and interests is a good method for teaching, while advocating the use of traditional class-teaching in the suitable time. Moreover, I have to point out that there never exists a efficient education, for the reason that life never depends on education.（作者在文中并没有给出life 和efficient之间的关联呀？还是我没有找到呢？）

总体感觉行文流畅，语言和句式也都还不错。但似乎在用例子说明问题的时候，例子用的不够确切，或者说是有些牵强。
第一次批改，不当之处，还请海涵！

有空来拍拍我的，https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=798323&extra=page%3D1


[ 本帖最后由 michael_1984 于 2008-2-7 23:00 编辑 ]