- 最后登录
- 2010-11-10
- 在线时间
- 0 小时
- 寄托币
- 365
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2006-6-4
- 阅读权限
- 15
- 帖子
- 4
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 288
- UID
- 2219543

- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 365
- 注册时间
- 2006-6-4
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 4
|
发表于 2006-8-11 00:04:13
|显示全部楼层
61The 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: 1average not equates to all students
2no evidence sufficient
3no causal relation: quantity of computer not equates to the proficiency of students
4 incomplete thought: computer needs to be updated,
The speaker makes the decision not to spend the school’s budget on computer or other technology in the next few years based on the assumption that the computers’ quantity is enough which is a conclusion the speaker drawn on a national statistic. However, after a careful examination, we would find this argument doubtful as it stands.
In the first place, the arguer falsely asserts that all students have access to and can use the computer daily according to a national average computers to students ratio, which is quite ungrounded. An average ratio may indicate an unbalanced distribution of the computers, and thus it stands a good chance that in one city, the ratio may be 1:1 while in another it may be 1:15, which can not assure every student’s daily access to the computer. Before a more thorough survey being taken, the arguer can not assess all the students’ access to the computers.
Secondly, there is no direct evidence showing that a ratio 1:7 could also provide the students enough chance to use the computers. The mere national statistic and the educators’ comments can at best illustrate that a ratio of 1:7 is not too bad to offer some computer education among students. Besides, there is no causal relationship between the quantity of computers and the proficiency of the students who are being educated. It is entirely possible that provided enough computers, the students who do not wish to learn or even refuse to learn due to their rebellion still can not possess any skill to adopt to the computer technology after graduation, or even there may be not enough teachers who can instruct the students well in computer technology, which will also result in a poor computer education of the students. Before ruling out these possibilities, I can not be convinced that all the students graduated from high school could be truly proficient in computer technology.
Last but not the least, based on the poor assumption that the computers now is sufficient in Eylria’s schools, the arguer makes the decision not to put any budget into it in the next few years, without considering the quick development of the technology. Now the computer technology is among the fastest growing ones in the world which may be changed every minute. In order to equip the students with sufficient and proficient knowledge of computer, the schools need to up date their computer as well as other technology every month or every certain period. In the absence of consideration taking into account the real situation, it is impossible to make a right decision about the budget distribution.
To sum up, this argument makes some doubtful assumptions on the survey results and does not take into account some status quo. To improve it, more evidence showing the sufficiency of the computer is required and a comprehensive analysis about the computer education is needed.
480字
30分钟 |
|