Argument74【六人作文小组】第4周第5次作业

sneakerliuUID: 2481691

TOPIC: ARGUMENT74 - The following appeared in a newsletter about education policy.

"The average annual earnings of high school dropouts are significantly less than the average annual earnings of high school graduates. To address this problem, the state governor has proposed that the state should establish free vocational training programs for high school dropouts. But the availability of such programs would probably encourage some students who would otherwise have graduated to drop out in order to pursue vocational training. Hence the proposed programs would lower, not raise, the average earning potential of young people. Therefore, the state should not establish the vocational training programs but should instead focus on improving academic programs in our high schools."
WORDS: 517
TIME: 上午 12:30:00
DATE: 2009-1-30

The author of this newsletter avers that in order to maintain the average earning of young people, the government should not introduce the vocational training program based on the assumption that more students would be encouraged to drop out and eventually lower the average earning of them. The ratiocination seems reasonable at first glance. But on close examination it proves to be groundless and unconvincing.

A threshold problem involved in this suggestion is whether abolishing the program can indeed raise the average earning of the young people. Actually, the author presents little evidence to show if the drop out rate is significant or not and how many people are likely to be attracted to drop out by the program. If the number of drop out significantly outweighs the number of those potential drop-outs, lack of certain program will actually lower the average earning of the young, since we do not have any method for them to get better educated and eventually earn a decent salary. Without justify those doubts, it is too hastily for the author to conclude and this effect of the suggestion would unfortunately go the opposite as the author wishes.

Moreover, even if one were to concede that more people would be attracted to drop out by the training program compared with the number of those have-to-drop-outs, doubts still remain as if this will surely lower the average earning of the students. Since the author fails to provide related statistics to justify that the graduates of the vocational training programs earn much less than those who graduated from high school, it is highly possible that the people from the training programs have a more decent salary, as the programs are more concentrate on people's future career. Taking into considering those possible conditions, the suggestion that we should not establish certain program is unreliable.

Further, another major problem the author ignores is that if there exist any other better solution than simply abolish the new program and improve the academic programs? Since the author provides no evidence that it is necessary to improve the academic program. It is possible that the academic program is a perfect one but other factors such as the tution fees and facilities that decide the people to drop out. Furthermore, the author also fails to address the ways to fix those problems. Actually, the best method to tackle this problem is try to low the education fee and upgrade the facilities as a whole. The period could be a long one, during that period, the vocational training programs should not been abolished in order to ensure the average earning. And a better censorship is also necessary to guarantee the membership of the program.

In sum, to better bolster the author's suggestion, studies of both the rate of dropouts and the number of those who are likely to be attracted is needed. To maintain the average earning of the young, more consideration should be taken of how to maintain the membership of training programs as well as how to make our high school education available and attractive to the young.

levinshireUID: 2559564

真能写啊，又是500+。我勉勉强强凑够300字，正发愁呢。

几点儿小问题：
1.第一段正文，论证的是Abolish不能raise收入，有点儿绕。直接论证Program不能lower更直接些吧。
2.第三段，你是不是认为academic program主要是用来减少dropout的？我没太看懂这一段。（improve academic program是啥意思啊？提高学术项目？）
3.结尾段， to maintain the membership of training programs 是何意啊。。。

还有，是tuition吧，少打了个i

sneakerliuUID: 2481691

2# levinshire
第一段有两层，1被吸引退学的学生数目是否可观，不可观的话可以不考虑
2，没有方法教育那些真的要退学的学生，还是会减少收入的。的确很乱。

第三段攻击作者的policy，他说improving academic programs可以解决问题，我提出1， academic programs已经很好了，不需要提高（虽然很牵强）2，作者没有论证是不是别的原因造成退学，学费？还有教育器材（我临时瞎想的，不一定合适）3，提高教育的过程很长，在这个过程中还是有人退学，所以training作为这期间的policy是必要的。

to maintain the membership of training programs我用的不好，这其实是我三段结尾处的a better censorship

谢谢指正！

levinshireUID: 2559564

3# sneakerliu


明白了。
我也有些偏颇，光顾着攻击training programs的逻辑了，忘记还有减少dropout的考虑。