ARGUMENT61 互拍留链接哈！

TARZAN_1982UID: 2142821

------题目------
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.'
------正文------
In this report, the arguer recommends that there are enough computers to the students from kindergarten to K-12 and the schools do not have to spend more money on computers and other technology in the next few years. These conclusions deduced by the arguer seems reasonable, however, close scrutiny of these evidence; it is not difficult to find that they lend little credible support to the conclusions.

In the first place, whether all students could use computers daily in their classrooms is open to doubt. The author claims that 1:5 is a good ratio, but we must notice that it is the average ration, so it is entirely possible that some grads have more computers than they need while others might have very few computers. Moreover, the arguer does not give any relevant information about this. In this circumstance, the author cannot ensure that every student could use computers daily.

In the second place, even grant that the ration 1:7 is still sufficient to ensure Eyleria's K-12 schools' students to use; it is also unreasonable to assume that when they graduate from high school, they would be fully proficient in the use of computer technology. Perhaps the teachers who teach computer science are so poor in experience that could not let the students to learn well. Or perhaps the number of teacher is too small to meet the need of the students. Without this information, the arguer could not convince me that all the students would be proficient in the use of computer technology when they graduate.

Last but not least, even if there are enough teachers and they are quite excellent. The arguer hastily assumes that there is no need to spend any of the schools' budget on computers or other technology in the next few years. It is possible that there are more and more students in these schools. Or perhaps the computers are out of date or broken, so buying the new ones need this money. At the same time, the arguer rules out the possibility that the schools would need other technology.

To sum up, the arguer fails to convince me that the computers are enough to all the students and there is no need to buy the new ones in their future. To well evaluate the recommendation, the arguer should provide more evidence to demonstrate every student could use computer daily and the teachers are full of experience etc.

小室黄瓜UID: 2155213

占！！今天写论文，明天来改！

小室黄瓜UID: 2155213

In this report, the arguer recommends that there are enough computers to the students from kindergarten to K-12 and the schools do not have to spend more money on computers and other technology in the next few years. These conclusions deduced by the arguer seems reasonable, however, （这个前面不用动词么？）close scrutiny of these evidence; it is not difficult to find that they lend little credible support to the conclusions. （嗯，开头不错，我知道怎么写了，呵呵）

In the first place, whether all students could use computers daily in their classrooms is open to doubt. The author claims that 1:5 is a good ratio, but we must notice that it is the average ration, so it is entirely possible that some grads have more computers than they need while others might have very few computers. Moreover, the arguer does not give any relevant information about this. 可以再说一下相关的信息是什么？举例子！还有为什么需要这些信息。In this circumstance, the author cannot ensure that every student could use computers daily. 虽然挑出来了，但是感觉说的不够充分！我觉得还是应该多说一下啊~

In the second place, even grant that the ration 1:7 is still sufficient to ensure Eyleria's K-12 schools' students to use; it is also unreasonable to assume that when they graduate from high school, they would be fully proficient in the use of computer technology.你的分论点都说得挺好的！ Perhaps the teachers who teach computer science are so poor in experience that could not let the students to learn well. Or perhaps（换成maybe吧） the number of teacher（s） is too small to meet the need of the students. Without this information, the arguer could not convince me that all the students would be proficient in the use of computer technology when they graduate. 这段分析的正好！

Last but not least, even if there are enough teachers and they are quite excellent. 这两句应该连起来为一句吧？要不然even if没说完啊。你再看看~The arguer hastily assumes that there is no need to spend any of the schools' budget on computers or other technology in the next few years. It is possible that there are more and more students in these schools. Or perhaps the computers are out of date or broken, so buying the new ones need this（this这个词用得不好，换成the吧） money. At the same time, the arguer rules out the possibility that the schools would need other technology. 最后这句没有说完，这段结不了尾的。因为你这段的论点是computer的数量和技术，而你只说了电脑数量没有从技术方面辩驳，这段问题比较大哦！

To sum up, the arguer fails to convince me that the computers are enough to all the students and there is no need to buy the new ones in their（the） future. To well evaluate the recommendation, the arguer should provide more evidence to demonstrate every student could use computer daily and the teachers are full of experience etc.结尾把技术加进去吧！这样严密些！
Ps：查了一下，你的字数还是太少了，即使这样能写完，但是感觉不够严谨和充分，思路是很清晰，其实你的论点是很好展开的，只要再说一些就完美了~~有争议的地方咱们一起讨论吧！水平有限，希望意见对你有用哦！！