Argument61 Smile B 第9次作业 有拍必回

zhy5186612UID: 2167373

Agument61
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."

Outline
1 In the first place, the comparison between two ratios is invalid for some obvious reasons.
2 Another fallacy the arguer committed is that he/assumes that there would not be other applications of computers except for students and all the computers would be in good condition in the next few years.
3 Further more, the arguer asserts groundlessly that other technology is yet not necessary to buy in the net few years.

In this argument, firstly based on a comparison between the national ratio of computers to the students in kindergarten trough grade 12 and that of K-12 schools in Eylria, the arguer assert that the ratio of K-12 schools is sufficient to make all high school graduates in Eylria be proficient with computers; then he/she concluded that it is not necessary to spend budget on computers and other technology in the next few years. However, careful examination would reveal several fallacies in this argument.

In the first place, the comparison between two ratios is invalid for some obvious reasons. For one thing, the ratio of 1:7 in K-12 schools in Eylria is smaller the national average ratio. This would lead to students in K-12 schools of Elyria getting less access to use computers in classroom. Therefore they may not be proficient with but only familiar with computers when they graduate from high school. For another thing, the ratio 1: 7 in K-12 schools dose not necessarily means the ratio in all high schools in Eylria is also 1:7. Ratio of some high schools may be far less than this ratio. In this case, students in high school of Eylria would be inferior in computer use compared with national average level.

Another fallacy the arguer committed is that he/assumes that there would not be other applications of computers except for students and all the computers would be in good condition in the next few years. It is possible that more computers should be ordered for teaching stuff and administrator in high schools of Eylria in next few years. It is equally possible that more computers for student study need be changed with the fast development of computer technology and the problems during operation in the next few years. If so, the credibility of the arguer's conclusion would be dramatically diminished.

Further more, the arguer asserts groundlessly that other technology is yet not necessary to buy in the net few years. There is not any relevant information mentioned in his/her argument. It is likely that other new technology such as projector should be adopted to promote the efficiency of teaching; it is also likely that there would be some expenditure for the improvement and maintenance of the technology existing in k-12 school at present. Without detail information about this, we can not be convinced that it is not necessary to spend some money for other technology in the next few years.

To some up, unless the arguer makes a comprehensive investigation and a convincing conclusion, more computers and other advanced technology should be ordered for high schools in Eylria in next few years, which would make students more proficient with computers.

[ 本帖最后由 zhy5186612 于 2006-8-10 19:16 编辑 ]