argument174 jingjing作业（kito）

jingjingtousUID: 2164820

TOPIC：ARGUMENT 174 - The following recommendation was made by the president and administrative staff of Grove College, a private institution, to the college's governing committee.

"We recommend that Grove College preserve its century-old tradition of all-female education rather than admit men into its programs. It is true that a majority of faculty members voted in favor of coeducation, arguing that it would encourage more students to apply to Grove. But eighty percent of the students responding to a survey conducted by the student government wanted the school to remain all female, and over half of the alumni who answered a separate survey also opposed coeducation. Keeping the college all-female, therefore, will improve morale among students and convince alumni to keep supporting the college financially."

提纲：
1 作者引用的两个调查的样本缺乏随机性和代表性，因此作者基于调查的结论不可信。
2 校友的资助取决于很多方面，与是否实行男女同校并无因果联系。
3 作者没有提供任何证据表明保持女校学生的士气会提高，且作者忽略了男女同校可能带来的好处.

In this memo, the arguer concludes that Grove College should keep its century-old tradition of all-female education. To support this conclusion the arguer cites two surveys respectively: one is that 80% of the students responding to a survey consisted the traditional policy, and the other that over 50% of alumni also have the same view. The arguer further predicted that preserving the traditional all-female education would encourage students' morale and moreover convince alumni to donate to the college. This argument is fraught with several logical flaws.

To begin with, the arguer's conclusion based on the two surveys is quiet unreliable. First, the arguer provides no evidence that the students who responded to the survey are representative of the overall students in general. It is highly possible that the 80% students who responded to the survey are inclined to the traditional all-female education than other who are not. Second, consider the alumni who responded to the survey, the arguer similarly fails to account for the sample's representation and randomness of the survey. Therefore, without ruling out these and other scenarios, the arguer cannot persuade me that the conclusion depending on the two surveys is warranted.

Even if the reliability of the two surveys is substantiated, the arguer's assumption that keeping the traditional policy is helpful for persuading Grove's alumni to donate is still unwarranted. Opposing the coeducation is not a good indication of financial support. Perhaps those alumni who are against the new policy donate far more than those who prefer the traditional policy. Besides, the arguer fails to consider other factors that might affect the support of Grove's alumni, for example, Grove College's academic status, it s accomplishments of the researches, its management systems and so forth. Moreover, no comparison is provided by the arguer that the social status, and financial confirmation, the background of those who opposed coeducation and those who did not. Without considering and ruling out all these and other possibilities, the arguer cannot convince me that Grove's alumni would keep their patronage under the old policy of all-female education.

Last but not least, the arguer hastily assumes that through preserving the traditional measure the students' morale would be encouraged. However, the arguer provides no evidence to prove that it is the truth. There is no causal relationship between the students' morale and the all-female education. On the contrary, the arguer overlooks some other approaches to improve the students' morale, for example, enhancing the instruction of staff, adding more activities, giving more scholarship to encourage good academic performers and etc. Besides, the arguer also neglects the benefits of the coeducation. it is entirely possible that the implement of the new policy would attract more and more students to apply for Grove College and therefore give rise to its greater reputation.

In sum, the argument is problematic in several respects. To bolster it the arguer should provider stronger evidence that the result of the two surveys is reliable and that Grove's alumni would continuously support it since it keeping the traditional policy. To better assess it, I would need to know why students' morale will be facilitated due to the old all-female education and I would also need to know whether the coeducation can bring some benefits or freshness to Grove College or not.

智恩UID: 2160717

In this memo, the arguer concludes that Grove College should keep its century-old tradition of all-female education. To support this conclusion the arguer cites two surveys respectively: one is that 80% of the students responding to a survey consisted the traditional policy, and the other that over 50% of alumni also have the same view. The arguer further predicted that preserving the traditional all-female education would encourage students' morale and moreover convince alumni to donate to the college. This argument is fraught with several logical flaws.

To begin with, the arguer's conclusion based on the two surveys is quiet unreliable. First, the arguer provides no evidence that the students who responded to the survey are representative of the overall students in general. It is highly possible that the 80% students who responded to the survey are inclined to the traditional all-female education than other who are not. Second, consider the alumni who responded to the survey, the arguer similarly fails to account for the sample's representation and randomness of the survey. Therefore, without ruling out these and other scenarios, the arguer cannot persuade me that the conclusion depending on the two surveys is warranted.

Even if the reliability of the two surveys is substantiated, the arguer's assumption that keeping the traditional policy is helpful for persuading Grove's alumni to donate is still unwarranted. Opposing the coeducation is not a good indication of financial support. Perhaps those alumni who are against the new policy donate far more than those who prefer the traditional policy. Besides, the arguer fails to consider other factors that might affect the support of Grove's alumni, for example, Grove College's academic status, it s accomplishments of the researches, its management systems and so forth. Moreover, no comparison is provided by the arguer that the social status, and financial confirmation, the background of those who opposed coeducation and those who did not. Without considering and ruling out all these and other possibilities, the arguer cannot convince me that Grove's alumni would keep their patronage under the old policy of all-female education.

Last but not least, the arguer hastily assumes that through preserving the traditional measure the students' morale would be encouraged. However, the arguer provides no evidence to prove that it is the truth. There is no causal relationship between the students' morale and the all-female education. On the contrary, the arguer overlooks some other approaches to improve the students' morale, for example, enhancing the instruction of staff, adding more activities, giving more scholarship to encourage good academic performers and etc. Besides, the arguer also neglects the benefits of the coeducation. it（大写） is entirely possible that the implement of the new policy would attract more and more students to apply for Grove College and therefore give rise to its greater reputation.

In sum, the argument is problematic in several respects. To bolster it the arguer should provider （去掉r）stronger evidence that the result of the two surveys is reliable and that Grove's alumni would continuously support it since it keeping the traditional policy. To better assess it, I would need to know why students' morale will be facilitated due to the old all-female education and I would also need to know whether the coeducation can bring some benefits or freshness to Grove College or not.
alumni是男校友的意思，而这里是all－female colledge所以要用女校友，不知道这里是不是ETS弄错了
你输了液回来写的文章还是没有退步哦！看了以后没发现什么错误