0906G同主题活动第一期－－Argument168

liyue24UID：2350787

096G的同主题活动又开始了，今天是第一期活动。

从版面上板油的反馈来看，0806G和0810G的AW成绩都不是很好，很多板油觉得自己能有4＋的结果，但是下来也就只有3分。作文版的斑竹也在思考到底是什么原因导致大家的AW成绩普遍上不去。不可否认还是有板油能有5＋的好成绩但是毕竟是个案，因此我们觉得如果大家都把目光集中在6分范文上，会不会起到邯郸学步的效果？

在这一期活动中，我们来看下面这个argument。

Argument168
Typically, as people age, their bone mass decreases, making them more vulnerable to bone fractures. A recent study concludes that the most effective way to reduce the risk of fractures in later life is to take twice the recommended dose of vitamin D and calcium daily. The three-year study followed a group of French women in their eighties who were nursing-home residents. The women were given daily supplements of twice the recommended dose of vitamin D and calcium. In addition, the women participated in a light weightlifting program. After three years, these women showed a much lower rate of hip fractures than is average for their age.

大体翻译如下：
很明显，随着年纪增长，人的骨骼组织会减少，使得人们更容易骨折。最近一项研究显示最有效降低晚年骨折风险的方法是每日摄入两倍推荐量的维他命D和钙。一项三年的研究是针对法国八十岁以上年纪女性的，她们都是在家居住且有护士照顾。这些老太太每天都摄入两倍推荐量的维他命D和钙。此外，这些老太太平时也做一些适度的锻炼。三年后，这些老太太的髋骨骨折率比同龄人要低很多。


这个argument和ETS的官方argument范文有一些相像，都是一个survey带出一个suggestion的。我们这一期的同主题活动的主要目的不仅仅是大家练笔，同时我们也要做一个专题活动：就像ETS那个官方范文里面的5分范文一样，对这个argument我们就谈一两点，比比看谁能把一个小的地方说明白说清楚说详细说具体。



可能有不少板油做过这个习作了，但是这里我还是希望参与本期同主题的童鞋们能抛开自己原来的思路，细细研读一下ETS给的argument的5分范文，看看如何写详细一点。我们也不要什么开头结尾，也不要什么三段式说几个点，我们就争取一段或是两段文字，把某一个事情说清楚，练习一下自己这个能力。



不积硅步，无以致千里。我们如果平时练习的时候都写不好4、5分的范文，越过这一步直接瞄准6分来操作，是否能有好的效果很难讲。这次我们就一步一步来，操作好一点我们再练习三点，拿下5分我们再瞄准6分。



在这期的活动中我会根据后面童鞋的习作来添加点评对照ETS的官方rater，也希望大家能多多体会，仿照样子做练习。活动中我也会带着大家读范文体会评分标准，摸清ETS的脉路，希望能给大家有所帮助。





ETS的官方范文如下：
Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after rollerskating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment. Within this group of people, 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots were not wearing any protective clothing (helmets, knee pads, etc.) or any light-reflecting material (clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist pads, etc.). Clearly, these statistics indicate that by investing in high-quality protective gear and reflective equipment, rollerskaters will greatly reduce their risk of being severely injured in an accident.


其中benchmark5的范文如下：

Benchmark 5

The argument presented is limited but useful. It indicates a possible relationship between a high percentage of accidents and a lack of protective equipment. The statistics cited compel a further investigation of the usefulness of protective gear in preventing or mitigating roller-skating related injuries. However, the conclusion that protective gear and reflective equipment would 'greatly reduce...risk of being severely injured' is premature. Data is lacking with reference to the total population of skaters and the relative levels of experience, skill and physical coordination of that population. It is entirely possible that further research would indicate that most serious injury is averted by the skater's ability to react quickly and skillfully in emergency situations.

Another area of investigation necessary before conclusions can be reached is identification of the types of injuries that occur and the various causes of those injuries. The article fails to identify the most prevalent types of roller-skating related injuries. It also fails to correlate the absence of protective gear and reflective equipment to those injuries. For example, if the majority of injuries are skin abrasions and closed-head injuries, then a case can be made for the usefulness of protective clothing mentioned. Likewise, if injuries are caused by collision with vehicles (e.g. bicycles, cars) or pedestrians, then light-reflective equipment might mitigate the occurences. However, if the primary types of injuries are soft-tissue injuries such as torn ligaments and muscles, back injuries and the like, then a greater case could be made for training and experience as preventative measures.

其评语如下：

Reader Comment on 5

This strong response gets right to the work of critiquing the argument, observing that it "indicates a possible relationship" but that its conclusion "is premature." It raises three central questions that, if answered, might undermine the soundness of the argument:

What are the characteristics of the total population of skaters?

What is the usefulness of protective or reflective gear in preventing or mitigating rollerskating-related injuries?

What are the types of injuries sustained and their causes?

The writer develops each of these questions by considering possible answers that would either strengthen or weaken the argument. The paper does not analyze the argument as insightfully or develop the critique as fully as the typical "6" paper, but the clear organization, strong control of language, and substantial degree of development warrant more than a score of "4."

本期规则：

1.每个发同主题的GTER，请按照正确的发帖格式发帖https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=208286&extra=page%3D1。格式不正确者，版主和板油都有权利不修改其习作。

2.回帖只留下链接和中文提纲（中文提纲有利于互相修改时候浏览和参阅），不需要回复全文。

3.请第一个参与同主题的GTER修改下一个参与的，依次类推，保证每个参与者的作文都能够得到修改。斑竹将修改第一篇习作。e.g.第一楼回帖的iq28贴了习作，第二楼的pippo没有贴习作，第三楼的星夜贴了习作。则iq28修改星夜的。

4.每个回帖的GTER，如果你参与了互改小组，请说明你的互改小组。

5.请不要一楼贴超过一篇习作。斑竹有权力删除或者修改。不允许占楼不贴习作的，这样自己的习作会被延误修改。楼上的GTER可以直接跳过占贴楼修改。





请大家看2楼同学的习作修改内容～～

goingeastUID：2439824

貌似大虾还没出来。我先抛个砖。。就拿我开刀吧。。。
对了 我看 有些Issue6分的文章 一个例子写的很长 很广 很啰嗦 这是不是算 impressively developed 。。。

https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-915823-1-1.html

1 对作者说的 两种药都吃 提出疑问
2 三年间 除吃药外的其他因素 提出疑问

done~~ by liyue24

IthakaUID：2511650

题目的翻译好像有问题。In addition, the women participated in a light weightlifting program意思应该是老太太们都参加一个轻量级的提重物练习。

cadgetUID：2565428

哎~~！没赶上，已经考过了

小涯子^^UID：2601042

参加！~
提纲
1. 错误假设骨折跟骨质疏松有关。
2. 样本的选择不具代表性
   女人 80 法国 有人照顾 还参加锻炼，太特殊鸟。
3. study的过程存在问题：
   a.实验结果没有说服力，髋骨不能说明其它骨头。
   b.即使有效也没有排除其它更有效的方案，两倍量是否最有效？
   c.三年很短，过量有没有副作用？


https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-916642-1-1.html

不会就停在这里了吧。。。。。楼主没有说最后一个人改谁的作文诶

goingeastUID：2439824

改过啦。。 请版友继续。。:) 跟帖 好机会。。。

ntmlgszUID：2235666

差不多一年都没看到同主题了~~来支持一下~:loveliness:

finkeUID：2173184

来看看这个```欢迎拍砖阿！

In this argument, author reached a conclusion that to avoid the risk of fracture in older age, a planet supplement of Vitamin D and calcium is necessary. To provide evidence and support the recommendation, author cited the three-year experiment of one group with composed by eighties French women, and shown that according to the suggestion dose, the rate of hip fracture is less than the average level. Although author positively provided one possible way  to bring Gosper to alder people, several vital logic faults left author's argue into a invailiable questioned situation.

First all, author ignore the limit of experiment. According to the result of the experiment described by author, it is plausible to consider a higher amount supplement of vitamin D and calcium may help people who are in the later life to conquer the potential risk of bone fracture. However, the experiment is nothing than a proof that planet vitamin D and calcium is useful in 3 year and only helpful for the candidates who are 80 years old women. Author's solution did not provide any guarantee that the recommendation is available even in 3 year later. Moreover, it is also totally possible that twice supplement treatment only work for French ladies instead of all old people.

Secondly, during the experiment, additional requirement that candidates not only received vitamin D and calcium, but also exercise during that experimental period, might change the circumstance, and thus influence the credibility of the result. I would carious about the usage and purpose of light weightlifting program. In general acknowledge, a good exercise is benefit to people, and strengthen their bone and muscle system, which prevent a potential risk of fracture of bones.

In sum, author used a fault methodology of the experiment to provide evidence of the effect of vitamin D and calcium. I would suspend my decision to believe the treatment for the old people, unless author can provide additional information about the effectiveness for a longer time span and wider people scale. Moreover, a lower rate of hop fractures in the experiment is not because of additional exercise, which is only help the receiving of extra vitamin D and calcium.

小涯子^^UID：2601042

我重新写了一遍，请大家指教~~
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-916642-1-1.html

randomlyUID：2616465

ARG 168

中文提纲：
1.调查类错误，样本人群范围小，不具有代表性.
2.因果关系错误,不能证明一定是vitamin D 和 calcium 作用结果


https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=929257&extra=

sugarbeetUID：129281

ARG 168

中文提纲：
1.研究对象不一致
2.研究时间没有定位好。
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-915823-1-1.html  不会连接文章。写在别人的后边了。
我还是写了首段和尾段。