argument61 [simle-B组] 第九次作业， 不吝赐教！～

applehattieUID: 2195344

Argument 61
The arguer raises the conclusion that there is no reason to spend any of the schools' budget on computers or other technology in the next few years, by citing the national average computers to students ratio 1:5 is a good ratio and the ratio in Eyleria is 1:7. This argument seems to be reasonable at first glance, but after careful examination, we would find this argument suffers from several flaws.

In the first place, the evidence that the arguer provides is insufficient to support the allegation that all of the Eyleria's students, by the time they graduate from high school, will be fully proficient in the use of computer technology. For one thing, the Eyleria's K-12 schools ratios of computers to students is 1:7 does not necessarily mean that the overall high schools in Eyleria area's ratio 1:7, maybe other school cannot ensure the 1:7 level and some school's ratio is far more lower than the ratio in K-12 schools. For another thing, even if the ratio in all schools of Eyleria is 1:7, we cannot not ensure that all the students would be fully proficient in the use of computer. Maybe some of the Eyleria's students do not like the computer and they refuse to practice it. And maybe some of them just focus their interests on the computer games even cannot use the other basic software in the computer at all.

Secondly, the allegation that there is no reason to spend any of the budget on computers or other technology in the next few years is open doubt. Granted that the ratio of computers to students is sufficient to ensure that all the students of Eyleria would be fully proficient in the use of computer technology, we are not well informed about the other technology and whether some of the computers need repaired. Maybe the equipment in the laboratory should be replaced with an advanced one. If true, this case would serve as good disapproval against the arguer’s assertion.

Before I come to my final conclusion, I would like to point out that the assumption that the national ratio 1:5 is a good very good ratio, and this means all the students have access to and can use computers daily in their classrooms is gratuitous. The arguer fails to consider the differences between every area across the country. It might be the case that because of the limited economy condition the schools in some areas cannot not afford so many computers to satisfy their students’ need. The average ratio cannot represent the accurate computers to students ratio.

In sum, this argument lacks credibility because the arguer fails to provide substantial evidence to prove the conclusion. To strengthen the analysis, the arguer needs to provide sufficient information of the computer use situation in the Eyleria.
限时失败！：（感觉错误找不准啊，而且超时很多，真的不知道该怎么办了～

zhy5186612UID: 2167373

Argument 61
The arguer raises the conclusion that there is no reason to spend any of the schools' budget on computers or other technology in the next few years, by citing the national average computers to students ratio 1:5 is a good ratio and the ratio in Eyleria is 1:7. This argument seems to be reasonable at first glance, but after careful examination, we would find this argument suffers from several flaws.

In the first place, the evidence that the arguer provides is insufficient to support the allegation that all of the Eyleria's students, by the time they graduate from high school, will be fully proficient in the use of computer technology. For one thing, the Eyleria's K-12 schools ratios of computers to students is 1:7 does not necessarily mean that the overall high schools in Eyleria area's ratio 1:7, maybe other school cannot ensure the 1:7 level and some school's ratio is far more lower than the ratio in K-12 schools. For another thing, even if the ratio in all schools of Eyleria is 1:7, we cannot not ensure that all the students would be fully proficient in the use of computer. Maybe some of the Eyleria's students do not like the computer and they refuse to practice it. And maybe some of them just focus their interests on the computer games even cannot use the other basic software in the computer at all.后面一个理由不很好，如果像你说的，花再多钱买电脑也没有用，所以作者说不花钱也没有错。其实比例有两个问题，一个是比例小（1:7），另一个是你第一点说的K-12的1:7并不能保证高中都是1：7。

Secondly, the allegation that there is no reason to spend any of the budget on computers or other technology in the next few years is open doubt. Granted that the ratio of computers to students is sufficient to ensure that all the students of Eyleria would be fully proficient in the use of computer technology, we are not well informed about the other technology and whether some of the computers need repaired [语法]. Maybe the equipment in the laboratory should be replaced with an advanced one. If true, this case would serve as good disapproval against the arguer’s assertion. 这一段挺好，其时computer和 other technology可以分开写，他们一个是证据不足一个是无据假设。

Before I come to my final conclusion, I would like to point out that the assumption that the national ratio 1:5 is a good very good ratio, and this means all the students have access to and can use computers daily in their classrooms is gratuitous. The arguer fails to consider the differences between every area across the country. It might be the case that because of the limited economy condition the schools in some areas cannot not afford so many computers to satisfy their students’ need. The average ratio cannot represent the accurate computers to students ratio. 这个比例我觉着没有问题，即使有问题你攻击的也不大好，

In sum, this argument lacks credibility because the arguer fails to provide substantial evidence to prove the conclusion. To strengthen the analysis, the arguer needs to provide sufficient information of the computer use situation in the Eyleria.

错误都找到了的，比我还多找一个哈，但是错误展开的有些少，模版用的也挺好
加油！