argument174 [0710G ＋U Aug小组]第17次作业

cofeebeanUID: 2289548

不好意思，因为上次把a174错写成a38了，这次正好借机修正会来，把a174补上，麻烦修改的同学了。
而且写得真是不好，想限时，结果不但超时，还写的想吐，自己想拿块砖头砸自己了。

题目：ARGUMENT174 - 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."

In this argument, the arguer suggests keeping the college all-female in order to improve morale among students and gain financial supporting from alumni. In order to solidify the conclusion, the arguer cites the results of two surveys on both students and alumni. The argument suffers several crucial flaws as following:

The first evidence the arguer cites is the survey on students by the student government which is very vague in some aspects. How many students were involved in this survey? Can they represent the whole attitude of all the students? The arguer also doesn't provide enough information about how the survey was conducted. Since most girls are too shy to express their disagreement, certain measures should be taken to ensure the validity of their despondence. Granted that most students advocate separate education, we cannot highlight the survey as the key factor to draw the conclusion since the attitude and opinions of students are premature and limited by their age and knowledge.

The argument is based on the other survey on alumni over a half of whom opposed coeducation. However, we are not informed that how many alumni we re surveyed but did not respond. If 1000 alumni were surveyed among which only 300 responded, the conclusion should be highly suspected. Moreover, the argument is mainly based on the groundless assumption that alumni would not support the college financially since coeducation. In fact, it is not necessarily the case that alumni stop financing just because they oppose coeducation. It is also possible that most financial supports come from those alumni who advocate coeducation.

The auger makes a hasty conclusion that keeping the college all-female will improve morale among students which has no evidence to support. The arguer fails to take other factors which have a good effect on students.

In sum, what the arguer advocates is neither well-reasoned nor sound. To make the conclusion more acceptable, the arguer should provide more information about both of two surveys. Before suggesting what to do, the arguer should do more research on what kind of measures can do good to students and gain the support of alumni.