Argument174 求拍,谢谢！

vic_rainUID: 2304309

TOPIC: 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."
WORDS: 373          TIME: 00:00:33          DATE: 2008-3-3 11:22:58

By citing two survey in which most respondents in students and alumni showed their opposition to coeducation, the author recommend that Grove College(GC) should preserve its all-female education in order to improve moral among students and convince alumni to keep supporting the college financially. Although this argument seems well presented on the surface, close scrutiny on it reveals several flaws, which render it not well reasoned thus unconvincing.

First, whether the first survey showing students favoring the old all-female education is statistically reliable is open to doubt. For all we know, for a survey to be accurate, it must be random and include a broad cross-section of population. Yet the author fails to let us know anything about these respondents. Then it is quite possible that only students who opposed coeducation responded to the survey, while others who account for large percentage of the overall population of GC' students all favor coeducation over all-female one.

Secondly, the same is true with the other survey which shows most of the alumni opposed coeducation. Lacking evidence that it is possible that only very few people answered the separate survey, while the others actually support coeducation or they does not care much about the final determination and either one is ok for them.

Thirdly, even if majority of the alumni opposed coeducation in fact, this does not necessarily indicate that they would not keep supporting the college financially. Perhaps GC's high reputation, well cultivated students make that they is very proud of their college indeed, and they would continue supporting college all the same despite they are unsatisfied with new education style. Or perhaps the last alumni who did not oppose coeducation played so significant a role in financial support that the other majority does not matter. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author cannot predict that alumni would not supply financial support if GC adopts new education style.

In sum, this argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it the author must supply evidence that these two surveys are able to be representative of overall population of the alumni and students of GC. To better evaluate this argument I need more information about the detailed proportion of the alumni who provides financial support indeed.